Winners only.

[RobGMN Premium Member]

IMHO, falsehoods are better countered with facts rather than by silencing them. Youtube, Facebook, et al could simply modify their algorithms in manner where opposing political views also feed into people accounts.

I remember seeing a “fact-check” overlay at one point, where it would tell you the underlying post was BS, and why.
Reminded me of a comedy skit where the guy giving a speech was hooked up to a lie detector. It’d buzz constantly as he tried to BS his way though.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

How is there a profit, since the funds go into the budget which is in the red???

If the funds actually went into the budget. Man, you two seem to be hung up on if Dem's are running the government that everything is being done ethically and by the book. lol cute.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Agreed. He should be allowed to speak his peace, and suffer whatever consequences that may be a result of doing so.

If there are consequences then it is NOT free speech.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

If there are consequences then it is NOT free speech.

It sure is. Exercising a freedom can have consequences. That doesn’t mean you’re not free to exercise them.

You’re free to jump off a building. Does that mean there won’t be consequences? Absolutely not.
You’re free to go out in the desert and try and break a land speed record. Does that mean if you crash nothing’s going to happen to you?
You’re free to drink gasoline if you choose to. Consequence-free? Unlikely.
You’re free to embezzle from your employer if you choose to. Consequence-free? Unlikely if you get caught.

Don’t confuse the freedom to act with being free from the consequences of your actions.

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

Aren't you exaggerating Trump's popularity just a tiny bit??? In the end, I suspect Trump will be on all 50 states ballots and even if he isn't, it'll only be States like Maine and Colorado that Trump was never going to win anyway.

No, I don't think I am. He had much better relationships with world leaders than Biden did, or at least he has much more respect.

Hard to feel bad for Alex Jones. He's complaining about (the court's) financial experts didn't review his financial docs, but the a-hole won't comply with the court and gets himself defaulted. And he comes on here whining and crying, when we could all watch he non-compliance on clips on Youtube. Nevertheless, I don't think his freedom of speech of should be denied.

Are all judges pure and free of bias? Do you expect news outlets to report fairly on their biggest competitors?

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

If the funds actually went into the budget. Man, you two seem to be hung up on if Dem's are running the government that everything is being done ethically and by the book. lol cute.

I don’t think anyone is proclaiming that. But it is interesting how you always act as if Democrats are the only dirty ones, even to the point of wanting Biden locked up but not Trump, when they BOTH utilized the SPR.

Do you think Republicans exist under different laws than Democrats?

 

[Buck 5,000+ posts]

It sure is. Exercising a freedom can have consequences. That doesn’t mean you’re not free to exercise them.

You’re free to jump off a building. Does that mean there won’t be consequences? Absolutely not.
You’re free to go out in the desert and try and break a land speed record. Does that mean if you crash nothing’s going to happen to you?
You’re free to drink gasoline if you choose to. Consequence-free? Unlikely.
You’re free to embezzle from your employer if you choose to. Consequence-free? Unlikely if you get caught.

Don’t confuse the freedom to act with being free from the consequences of your actions.

None of what you listed are actions done by speech, so it's not even the same comparison. Speech affects people's emotions, and people's emotions are subjective, unlike most of the objective comparisons you made, which nullifies any point that you were trying to make.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

No, I don't think I am. He had much better relationships with world leaders than Biden did, or at least he has much more respect.

You’re joking, right? It’s a known fact that Trump was a joke on the world stage, and made our country a laughingstock.

Are all judges pure and free of bias? Do you expect news outlets to report fairly on their biggest competitors?

We know they aren’t. Clarence Thomas is a great example. He claimed no bias, and then made biased decisions to appease a constituency.

Media outlets are not state-run. They get to report on whatever they choose to. Even on the Kardashians, of all things.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

I don’t think anyone is proclaiming that. But it is interesting how you always act as if Democrats are the only dirty ones, even to the point of wanting Biden locked up but not Trump, when they BOTH utilized the SPR.

Do you think Republicans exist under different laws than Democrats?

Well, if history shows us anything it's that we have had more Dem's in the white house than Republicans so Ipso facto have had more opportunity.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

It sure is. Exercising a freedom can have consequences. That doesn’t mean you’re not free to exercise them.

You’re free to jump off a building. Does that mean there won’t be consequences? Absolutely not.
You’re free to go out in the desert and try and break a land speed record. Does that mean if you crash nothing’s going to happen to you?
You’re free to drink gasoline if you choose to. Consequence-free? Unlikely.
You’re free to embezzle from your employer if you choose to. Consequence-free? Unlikely if you get caught.

Don’t confuse the freedom to act with being free from the consequences of your actions.

"First Amendment​

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances."

You are using the word "Free" when you should use the word "able" and you are confusing yourself and others by using the wrong word.

My freedom of speech is such that I can voice my opinions peacefully and not have the government try to silence my opinions because they do not agree with me.

"The most basic component of freedom of expression is the right to freedom of speech. Freedom of speech may be exercised in a direct (words) or a symbolic (actions) way. Freedom of speech is recognized as a human right under article 19 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. The right to freedom of speech allows individuals to express themselves without government interference or regulation. The Supreme Court requires the government to provide substantial justification for interference with the right of free speech when it attempts to regulate the content of the speech. Generally, a person cannot be held liable, either criminally or civilly for anything written or spoken about a person or topic, so long as it is truthful or based on an honest opinion and such statements."

Freedom of speech and the ability to do something are not the same thing as your post attempts to portray them.

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

None of what you listed are actions done by speech, so it's not even the same comparison. Speech affects people's emotions, and people's emotions are subjective, unlike most of the objective comparisons you made, which nullifies any point that you were trying to make.

Are you suggesting that speaking is not an action, or that speech is the only action that can affect other people?

Afraid that’s not the case. Freedom of speech is a freedom to act.
You have the right to bear arms. A freedom to commit the act of beating arms.
Try it in NYC without a carry permit. Let me know how it goes.
You have the right to travel freely in the US. The freedom to commit the act of traveling. Try it across someone’s private property against their wishes. Try it across Groom Lake (or wherever Area 51 is).

Stop thinking freedom to act means freedom from consequences of that act.

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

Are you suggesting that speaking is not an action, or that speech is the only action that can affect other people?

Afraid that’s not the case. Freedom of speech is a freedom to act.
You have the right to bear arms. A freedom to commit the act of beating arms.
Try it in NYC without a carry permit. Let me know how it goes.
You have the right to travel freely in the US. The freedom to commit the act of traveling. Try it across someone’s private property against their wishes. Try it across Groom Lake (or wherever Area 51 is).

Stop thinking freedom to act means freedom from consequences of that act.

You are conflating different meanings, different terminologies.

 

[spokey9 5,000+ posts]

Hmmm, he’s associated with a known racist, Trump IS a known racist.

Nothing to “try”.

Nah...you showing that you live in a bubble...and love that bias feedback..


Anybody with even a minimally honest political take can see biden has repeatedly said racist sh!t...and that's not even getting into his track record of voting as a rep...

 

[RobGMN Premium Member]

Nah...you showing that you live in a bubble...and love that bias feedback..


Anybody with even a minimally honest political take can see biden has repeatedly said racist sh!t...and that's not even getting into his track record of voting as a rep...

So, Trump ISN’T a racist?

 

[ThxOne Premium Member]

So, Trump ISN’T a racist?

Everyone is racist. Why is it even a topic of discussion.