No More Tweeting for Donny

#526
#526
Grand Vol said:
No, lol. I did have a pretty good ME contact at one point who let me know little tidbits here and there.

Regardless, there will be a power void in the Middle East after the inauguration.

Power void in the world really.
Click to expand...

Yes. Biden has a lot on his plate. But Biden ain't the guy making the decisions over time. I know Harris very well may take over before 4 years. I just hope the cabinet that will be in place will provide us a semblance of stability.
 
#528
#528
Yeesh, tough day.

0fnwke8i1ea61.png
 
  • Like
Reactions: BenGrimm and Orangeslice13
#529
#529
hUTch2002 said:
If Trump was so bad he tainted all the other races then why did Republicans gain so much ground in the House?
Click to expand...

Lol, didn't R's control the house when Trump took the reins? And now they don't, so?...
 
#532
#532
clarksvol00 said:
No and I've said it multiple times. During the summer the constant "denounce the violence" was going around. Now the right has to deal with it too. It is annoying as f...
Click to expand...

They struggled denouncing the group that plotted to kidnap the Mich Governor.
 
#540
#540
1972 Grad said:
They are way too big and powerful when they control the flow of information, with no recourse to address grievances.
Click to expand...

Nobody is stopping you from taking your soapbox down to the local park and telling folks they need to stop the steal. But you have no right to have your speech amplified by a private party.

To take this argument back a few hundred years, it'd be like arguing a private newspaper has to publish your letter to the editor because they published your friend's letter to the editor.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Septic
#541
#541
evillawyer said:
Nobody is stopping you from taking your soapbox down to the local park and telling folks they need to stop the steal. But you have no right to have your speech amplified by a private party.

To take this argument back a few hundred years, it'd be like arguing a private newspaper has to publish your letter to the editor because they published your friend's letter to the editor.
Click to expand...
Then they need to regulated as publishers not platforms and be held liable for EVERYTHING posted on their site.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kristy*, hUTch2002 and AM64
#542
#542
evillawyer said:
Nobody is stopping you from taking your soapbox down to the local park and telling folks they need to stop the steal. But you have no right to have your speech amplified by a private party.

To take this argument back a few hundred years, it'd be like arguing a private newspaper has to publish your letter to the editor because they published your friend's letter to the editor.
Click to expand...
The private newspaper didn’t have legal protection from the content they published.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kristy*, hUTch2002, AM64 and 1 other person
#546
#546
burntorangeVOLffle said:
View attachment 337985
Click to expand...
It’s never been a 1st Amendment issue. The problem is, their argument for maintaining 230 protection is that social media platforms would end up stifling speech to avoid being hit with lawsuits... which is what they’re now doing anyway. I’m not a fan of Don Jr, but he correctly pointed out how ridiculous it is that Twitter is shutting down accounts while allowing Isis and the Ayatollah to have access.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kristy*, Rickyvol77, AM64 and 4 others
#547
#547
evillawyer said:
Nobody is stopping you from taking your soapbox down to the local park and telling folks they need to stop the steal. But you have no right to have your speech amplified by a private party.

To take this argument back a few hundred years, it'd be like arguing a private newspaper has to publish your letter to the editor because they published your friend's letter to the editor.
Click to expand...
These places are way too big and way to powerful when they control the search for information. Google isn't a little newspaper.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Kristy*, jaybird_1981, AM64 and 3 others
#549
#549
GAVol said:
It’s never been a 1st Amendment issue. The problem is, their argument for maintaining 230 protection is that social media platforms would end up stifling speech to avoid being hit with lawsuits... which is what they’re now doing anyway. I’m not a fan of Don Jr, but he correctly pointed out how ridiculous it is that Twitter is shutting down accounts while allowing Isis and the Ayatollah to have access.
Click to expand...
Not to mention who owns these companies and influences decisions on what/who gets censored.
This Saudi prince now owns more of Twitter than Jack Dorsey does
 
  • Like
Reactions: AM64
#550
#550
GAVol said:
The problem is, their argument for maintaining 230 protection is that social media platforms would end up stifling speech to avoid being hit with lawsuits... which is what they’re now doing anyway. I’m not a fan of Don Jr, but he correctly pointed out how ridiculous it is that Twitter is shutting down accounts while allowing Isis and the Ayatollah to have access.
Click to expand...

That is fair regarding Ayatollah. They do shut down Isis accounts pretty regularly though.

FTR... I don’t care if all Social Media was shut down.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement





Back
Top