White House drafting executive order to

[Imaginarynumber1]

16 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

God damn man think about this for a second. You think a private company is censoring "your people" so youre willing to cheer on the government putting the tools for massive censorship in place.

p*** on the constitution because you think , despite the evidence, that companies are mean to your people?

Wow.

And Then is a zealot. There is no reason to bother engaging with his hysterics

[Imaginarynumber1]

2 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

it's about free speech being censored by social media outlets. 

You mean those PRIVATE companies that aren't the government who can decide what they do and do not allow on their platforms?

[+Hammerclaw]

Just now, Imaginarynumber1 said:

And Then is a zealot. There is no reason to bother engaging with his hysterics

Of course not, they're too busy engaging in their own.

[Farmer77]

Just now, Hammerclaw said:

You should stop promulgating falsehoods. This fanciful document is about censoring free speech, it's about free speech being censored by social media outlets. How typical of the Left to try and silence dissenting voices and be terrified of the idea of getting a dose of their own medicine. They find the idea of the Right treating the Left the way the Left treats the Right absolutely appalling. Just more of their sick, guilt-ridden, nightmare fantasies.

And you need to think these things through, perhaps start thinking of the good of America rather than chasing "wins" over the other side. Look at the rhetoric you just posted here. Youre OK with giving the government the tools for controlling online speech because it will make the other side angry.

You trust the government to be the arbitrator of free speech. There is very little more anti American than that. No matter how much you want to spin it because it makes you feel good.

[+Hammerclaw]

2 minutes ago, Imaginarynumber1 said:

You mean those PRIVATE companies that aren't the government who can decide what they do and do not allow on their platforms?

You mean like private companies who choose not to serve people based on their beliefs? I thought you guys were against that.

[+Hammerclaw]

3 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

And you need to think these things through, perhaps start thinking of the good of America rather than chasing "wins" over the other side. Look at the rhetoric you just posted here. Youre OK with giving the government the tools for controlling online speech because it will make the other side angry.

You trust the government to be the arbitrator of free speech. There is very little more anti American than that. No matter how much you want to spin it because it makes you feel good.

I'm not losing any sleep over hysterical nonsense spread by the least watched news network in the country. You go ahead since it makes you feel so light-headed.

[Farmer77]

Just now, Hammerclaw said:

I'm not losing any sleep over hysterical nonsense spread by the least watched news network in the country. You go ahead since it makes you feel so light-headed.

Ahh the appeal to popularity. Because why listen to the message when you can create a way to ignore the messenger??

Stunning. Simply stunning

[+Hammerclaw]

Just now, Farmer77 said:

Ahh the appeal to popularity. Because why listen to the message when you can create a way to ignore the messenger??

Stunning. Simply stunning

You mean like social media tries to do to the Right? So much for free speech. Only a Government of the People by the People and for the People can do that. I expect no less from any US Government whatever party is in. Maybe you guys should form your own militias to protect you from the Guvment. You can always run up and bleed on'em.

[Imaginarynumber1]

10 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

You mean like private companies who choose not to serve people based on their beliefs? I thought you guys were against that.

Who are "you guys"?. I've never commented on the cake thing because I dont give a ****, but if Twitter wants to boot people for being white supremacist pos, I'm all for it. And is some (all) of those *******s are Republicans, well boo-****in-hoo

Edited August 12, 2019 by Imaginarynumber1

[Farmer77]

Just now, Hammerclaw said:

You mean like social media tries to do to the Right? So much for free speech.

It isnt actually happening......but lets just set that aside for a second and pretend that it is.

So A private company on the internet is censoring those on the right.

Do you understand the difference between a private company and the US government?

Do you understand the difference as it relates to the constitution? I.e the term Free Speech?

Those are the really big points but there are a couple of more

Have you heard of the free market?

Did you know that conservatives can start their own social media platforms,not that they need to because they arent being censored, but if they were did you know they could create their own platforms?

 

[+Hammerclaw]

1 minute ago, Imaginarynumber1 said:

Who are "you guys"?. I've never commented on the cake thing because I dont give a ****, but if Twitter wants to boot people for being white supremacist pos, I'm all for it. And is some (all) of those *******s are Republicans, well boo-****in-hoo

Didn't know Mitchell was a White Supremist. They can boot all of if they like, as long they include Democrat Leftist Antifa Fascists as well.

[Farmer77]

13 hours ago, Dumbledore the Awesome said:

At last he's beginning to make a start on abolishing opposition media. This is a step in the right direction at last; that's usually the first thing any self-respecting dictator does. Next would surely be outlawing opposition parties. 

Look at how Antifa and Democrat being ran together as if one in the same has become the norm when Trumpians and their medias speak.............Of course Antifa being the "terrorist organization" and of course those are illegal soooo

Edited August 12, 2019 by Farmer77

[+Hammerclaw]

5 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

It isnt actually happening......but lets just set that aside for a second and pretend that it is.

So A private company on the internet is censoring those on the right.

Do you understand the difference between a private company and the US government?

Do you understand the difference as it relates to the constitution? I.e the term Free Speech?

Those are the really big points but there are a couple of more

Have you heard of the free market?

Did you know that conservatives can start their own social media platforms,not that they need to because they arent being censored, but if they were did you know they could create their own platforms?

 

Won't happen, because those companies won't want take that big a drop in revenue. Why don't YOU face the fact that you are AGAINST free speech and FOR censorship. That's your mantra: JUST SHUT UP, WE DON'T WANT TO HEAR IT!

Edited August 12, 2019 by Hammerclaw

[Farmer77]

Just now, Hammerclaw said:

Won't happen, because those companies won't want take that big a drop in revenue. Why don't YOU face the fact that you are AGAINST free speech and FOR censorship. That's your mantra: JUST SHUT UP, WE DON'T WANT TO HERE IT!

Man that is the weirdest form of gas lighting i've ever seen in my life.

Do the caps make you feel better for getting called out on being anti American though?

Honestly, its cool, ill be your emotional punching bag if thats what it takes for you people to wake the **** up and stop cheering on the destruction of our country.

 

 

[+Hammerclaw]

1 minute ago, Farmer77 said:

Man that is the weirdest form of gas lighting i've ever seen in my life.

Do the caps make you feel better for getting called out on being anti American though?

Honestly, its cool, ill be your emotional punching bag if thats what it takes for you people to wake the **** up and stop cheering on the destruction of our country.

 

 

I'm not the one in this thread promoting the concept of dividing the country up into two waring camps. You bought into CNN Leftist propaganda, hook, line and sinker and are unaware of how sick and frothing at the mouth you sound. I pity you and anyone like you.

[Farmer77]

Just now, Hammerclaw said:

I'm not the one in this thread promoting the concept of dividing the country up into two waring camps. You bought into CNN Leftist propaganda, hook, line and sinker and are unaware of how sick and frothing at the mouth you sound. I pity you and anyone like you.

So I cant help but notice you didnt answer any of the questions posed to you above. Why is that?

Could it be because by removing emotion and focusing on logic you see the huge problems with giving the government the ability to decide whose speech gets heard and whose doesnt?

Oh and BTW it was Politico that broke the story

 

[Imaginarynumber1]

18 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Didn't know Mitchell was a White Supremist. They can boot all of if they like, as long they include Democrat Leftist Antifa Fascists as well.

They do, YOU GUYS just won't listen when you're told that.

[+Hammerclaw]

Just now, Farmer77 said:

So I cant help but notice you didnt answer any of the questions posed to you above. Why is that?

Could it be because by removing emotion and focusing on logic you see the huge problems with giving the government the ability to decide whose speech gets heard and whose doesnt?

Oh and BTW it was Politico that broke the story

 

I don't see anything in that probably fake document that does that. You seem to be reading your own fears into it. I see the government the guarantor of free speech, while you promote private censorship of free speech. I don't trust corporations myself. They have the tendency of promoting their own self interests to the detriment of society as a whole. 

[+Hammerclaw]

1 minute ago, Imaginarynumber1 said:

They do, YOU GUYS just won't listen when you're told that.

Actually, we always listen, you're the ones who are loathe to do that. We listened for eight years--now it's your turn.

[Farmer77]

1 minute ago, Hammerclaw said:

I don't see anything in that probably fake document that does that.

Well first this is a trial balloon  much like the previous discussion about altering the 1st Amendment. So the public response could theoretically have an effect on what the actual EO looks like, or even if there is one at all.

But here is the dangerous part

Quote

The draft order, a summary of which was obtained by CNN, calls for the FCC to develop new regulations clarifying how and when the law protects social media websites when they decide to remove or suppress content on their platforms.

Although still in its early stages and subject to change, the Trump administration's draft order also calls for the Federal Trade Commission to take those new policies into account when it investigates or files lawsuits against misbehaving companies. Politico first reported the existence of the draft.

So the government will be the arbitrators of how and when social media companies can control content on their sites. Shortest term scenario youre looking at 4 years of a party in charge having the ability to manipulate those regulations to benefit their party.

Because the head of the FCC serves at the whim of the POTUS right? Do you really not see the danger in that?

 

[Farmer77]

7 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Actually, we always listen, you're the ones who are loathe to do that. We listened for eight years--now it's your turn.

If you did you would comprehend that the "censorship" you are railing about is imaginary.  Its classic victimhood propaganda.

[+Hammerclaw]

1 minute ago, Farmer77 said:

Well first this is a trial balloon  much like the previous discussion about altering the 1st Amendment. So the public response could theoretically have an effect on what the actual EO looks like, or even if there is one at all.

But here is the dangerous part

So the government will be the arbitrators of how and when social media companies can control content on their sites. Shortest term scenario youre looking at 4 years of a party in charge having the ability to manipulate those regulations to benefit their party.

Because the head of the FCC serves at the whim of the POTUS right? Do you really not see the danger in that?

 

Obviously, you don't want free speech, you want unhindered repression of free speech by public venues owned by private corporations. Anything you find politically incorrect should expunged.  The FCC is subject to laws and regulations and enforces laws and regulation. You've already slipped and admitted it's not about government censorship, but what you see as some corporate right to censor on a whim, so come off your high horse. Yeah, I'll trust the government over big business, any day of the week.

[+Hammerclaw]

12 minutes ago, Farmer77 said:

If you did you would comprehend that the "censorship" you are railing about is imaginary.  Its classic victimhood propaganda.

You mean like you've been carrying on about, the last few pages? Those, poor, pitiful corporations being victimized by the bad ole guvment? 

Edited August 12, 2019 by Hammerclaw

[Farmer77]

Just now, Hammerclaw said:

Obviously, you don't want free speech, you want unhindered repression of free speech by public venues owned by private corporations. Anything you find politically incorrect should expunged.  You've already slipped and admitted it's not about government censorship, but what you see as some corporate right to censor on a whim, so come off your high horse.

Strawman to the rescue!!!!!!

2 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

Yeah, I'll trust the government over big business, any day of the week.

Like any good conservative!!! Isnt that their platform? Big government with a heavy focus on intruding in the free market?

Do you not see how the cult of personality has twisted you guys?

Hey speaking of the free market why is it again that conservatives cant just make their own social media and need the government to intercede in the free market on their behalf?

[Farmer77]

2 minutes ago, Hammerclaw said:

You mean like you've carrying on about, the last few pages? Those, poor, pitiful corporations being victimized by the bad ole guvment? 

LOL sure im worried about the corporations and not the people whose voices are heard through those corporations