ADVERTISEMENT

POLITICAL THREAD

How will they rule ??!

  • YES - Qualified

    Votes: 41 82.0%
  • NO - Disqualified

    Votes: 9 18.0%

  • Total voters
    50
  • Poll closed .
Just saw on FOX, that Mexico is sending 6k troops to their southern border. Trump's tax threat is working!! Screw you, you liberal asshats!
And screw the Republicans that didn't back him!

Amazing how simple that was...

Now, if only we would protect our border. Crazy concept!

“Mexico is allowing millions of people to walk across their border! That can’t happen!”

....that’s exactly what America is doing. Literally greeting them, and giving them food and shelter, etc.

Great political win for Trump though. Amazing how good he is at business/politics. Mexico either protects their southern border (and becomes racist...) or they start losing jobs to America. Win-win.

So now that Mexico is officially racist nazi asses, can we build that damn wall???!
 
San Francisco is more interested in supporting Gay Pride than they are enforcing laws and the safety of their citizens. I will never, ever go back to that hell hole of a city.

62254165_374392330099987_1508201362540724224_n.jpg
 
Companies have every right to regulate speech within their business you brain dead jizz stain. only state actors cannot regulate speech. And even they can if its porn, hate, obscenities, defamation, etc. The 1st amendment is what allows companies to regulate speech within their business. Use some common sense dumbass. Since SCOTUS ruled that corporations are people that solidified their right to controlling speech within their business even more. You don't have a right to twitter or facebook because you don't even have a right to the internet. You have to pay for access. You are free to go stand outside their HQ and say whatever the **** you want within your 1st amendment rights. If SCOTUS ever rules that twitter has become a public forum they can just add a pay wall and back to censoring. If you want an example of a company that is very restrictive of what speech it allows within its platform look at apple. Some states like Maine have passed laws to provide for more speech protections online but nothing has happened at the federal level. Companies cannot discriminate access to their product against protected classes but they can damn well tell you exactly how you are allowed to use their product, aka ToS. I can't believe a conservative is even trying to argue this, it is a fundamental pillar of the free market.

https://corporate.findlaw.com/law-l...-workplace-the-first-amendment-revisited.html
https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech...wars-and-not-break-first-amendment/922636002/

The only jizz stain is on your mouth, you cuck.

You cannot regulate free speech as a publisher. Your brains aren't made of shit, they're made of diarrhea
 
Eric Swalwell: "I don't jog..."

months earlier: "Hey guys, so I'm running...about three more miles"





This guy is quite the weirdo
What? Someone changed their story? Surely not? Kinda like President Heel Spurs saying he knew nothing about the $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels, and then a month later Trump Revisionist Giuliani saying that Cheeto Man knew about the general arrangement and had approved Cohen making the payment?
 
Yes. They have to do something because Democrats are killing babies in the womb that would have been Democrat voters. When blacks kill more than are born the Democrats have to replace that vote. So they look South of our border for the uneducated masses that can fill that void. If they are not eligible, their children will be.
Black women have more abortions than live births? If true, that is an amazing statistic. Link?
 
  • Like
Reactions: homeytheclown
The only jizz stain is on your mouth, you cuck.

You cannot regulate free speech as a publisher. Your brains aren't made of shit, they're made of diarrhea
what the **** are you even talking about? EA is a publisher, they heavily regulate speech within their brands. Disney is a publisher and heavily censors speech across its brands. School newspapers have tons of censorship rules. Anything that is not considered a public forum or a state actor can be censored. Milo Yiannopoulos' publisher canceled his book deal because they didn't like his youtube videos. Trump tried to censor Macmillian when they published Fire & Fury but they told him to **** off as is their right. Publishers cannot be censored by the goverment (they can if the feds declare it against national security) but can most definitely censor anything they publish. The market is free to censor its goods and also free to lose lots of money if they take it beyond what the public is willing to accept. You do know we still ban books in the US?
Some dipshit got this "publisher" word stuck in your head even though it means jack shit.

In Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, the high court ruled that school officials can censor school-sponsored publications if their decision is “reasonably related to a legitimate pedagogical purpose.” This means school officials must show that they have a reasonable educational reason for censoring the material.
 
What? Someone changed their story? Surely not? Kinda like President Heel Spurs saying he knew nothing about the $130,000 payment to Stormy Daniels, and then a month later Trump Revisionist Giuliani saying that Cheeto Man knew about the general arrangement and had approved Cohen making the payment?
Wait are you blindly taking up for Swawell...lololololololol. you'll support anything with a D beside it. Hes the same guy that went on a rant that said the constitution was a shame bc it didnt say the word "woman" in it. Unfortunately it also doesnt say man either. It says PEOPLE. So swalwell doesnt think women are people. You probably bought into the pandering tho.

Same guy that said hes so facist he would nuke everyone if they disagreed with him.

Also the same guy that hung a rainbow flag outside his door and claimed he flew it 24/7...even tho he clearly just unfolded it and a picture from a day before it was nowhere to be found. You're so easily led along.
 
San Francisco is more interested in supporting Gay Pride than they are enforcing laws and the safety of their citizens. I will never, ever go back to that hell hole of a city.

62254165_374392330099987_1508201362540724224_n.jpg
My god, when the nazis sent the Jews to the gas chambers they would tell the, everything is fine just go in there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Gassy_Knowls
Bushrod is another one of our resident stage 4 TDS sufferers. I wouldn't be surprised if he stabs himself in the stomach soon. He's so stupid that he complains about problems caused by liberal policies and when you point it out he disappears, then later resurfaces only to spew "orange man bad"!

Typical dumbass lib. They never learn.
 
what the **** are you even talking about? EA is a publisher, they heavily regulate speech within their brands. Disney is a publisher and heavily censors speech across its brands. School newspapers have tons of censorship rules. Anything that is not considered a public forum or a state actor can be censored. Milo Yiannopoulos' publisher canceled his book deal because they didn't like his youtube videos. Trump tried to censor Macmillian when they published Fire & Fury but they told him to **** off as is their right. Publishers cannot be censored by the goverment (they can if the feds declare it against national security) but can most definitely censor anything they publish. The market is free to censor its goods and also free to lose lots of money if they take it beyond what the public is willing to accept. You do know we still ban books in the US?
Some dipshit got this "publisher" word stuck in your head even though it means jack shit.

In Hazelwood School District v. Kuhlmeier, the high court ruled that school officials can censor school-sponsored publications if their decision is “reasonably related to a legitimate pedagogical purpose.” This means school officials must show that they have a reasonable educational reason for censoring the material.

This is seriously one of the worst posts that derailed from the point that is being brought up. The mental gymnastics it took you to come up with a 300 page thesis that has nothing to do with social media's ability to regulate free speech.

I should be shocked, but it is you. So I'm not surprised in the least.

Social media has no right to censor free speech.

https://www.city-journal.org/html/platform-or-publisher-15888.html
 
San Francisco is more interested in supporting Gay Pride than they are enforcing laws and the safety of their citizens. I will never, ever go back to that hell hole of a city.

62254165_374392330099987_1508201362540724224_n.jpg

I like how San Fran is just known as the “gay city.” That’s literally been their thing for decades.

Super expensive, tons of crime, tons of homeless, lots of gays.
 
This is seriously one of the worst posts that derailed from the point that is being brought up. The mental gymnastics it took you to come up with a 300 page thesis that has nothing to do with social media's ability to regulate free speech.

I should be shocked, but it is you. So I'm not surprised in the least.

Social media has no right to censor free speech.

https://www.city-journal.org/html/platform-or-publisher-15888.html
Did you even read your article? It very clearly states they have every right to filter their content. The only argument made is that Congress should take away their extreme libel protections if they choose to heavily censor content. Which is a mostly stupid argument. Congress gave them those protections partly so they couldn't be sued Everytime they remove content just as much to protect them from being sued for people posting copyrighted content. It's the same protections newspapers and book stores get and they censor their content. This is a free market, the government doesn't tell companies what content they have to provide, the market tells them with their $$$$. If you are a conservative you should try thinking like one. If whiny little bitch conservatives don't like Facebook and Twitter than they better #learntocode and make their own platforms.
 
Interesting convo on the right of a company like Twitter to control content. I don't know where it falls and am not going to take the word of a message board poster (sorry Plat and Willy.) I'll have to read up more on this tomorrow after golf. It SEEMS that a company which requires you to sign up and agree to TOS would have the right to manage content any way they want to, but things aren't always as they seem.
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT