Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

2401

Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration

« on: March 19, 2019, 06:21:18 PM »

As for the Shining City on the Hill, on top of exporting White Supremacy, the US, through Trump, is also now promoting the suppression of journalists/media and free speech in other countries:

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2019/03/19/trump-bolsonaro-fake-news-bts-nr-vpx.cnn/video/playlists/this-week-in-politics/

We should be so proud. Sure looks like Trump is.

2402

Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration

« on: March 19, 2019, 04:00:37 PM »

kiidcarter8 is hopeless.  He can't defend his bad position, so he pretends he isn't.  But repeating a position over and over while ignoring contrary evidence is arguing.  The only kind he knows, in fact.

Not the first time I've genuinely lamented the inability of the conservative side here to actually defend their position.  bambu is garbage, kiidcarter8 out of his depth (even here) and REDSTATEWARD gets lost when forced to stray from the path the Wall Street Journal Editorial Page laid out for him.

If an argument has merit, give us the facts that support it!  Otherwise, why do you think your ramblings should have value to anyone else?

2403

Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration

« on: March 19, 2019, 02:41:58 PM »

Yeah..... saw that.

Trump more concerned that the other party is getting free air time.  Doesn't wish it to be criminalized - but regulated.  Wants the election commission to get involved.

How does one define "free air time" or otherwise political advertising being "given" to a political party?
An editorial in the New York Times?
A Washington Post reporting on the "President's" Russia ties that he calls "fake news?"
That absurd segment I saw on FOX "News" this morning accusing Elizabeth Warren of wanting to abolish the Constitution?

I didn't get an answer to the question I asked yesterday on this subject, and I don't expect to get one now.  But the slippery slope here is obvious. 

And even if one were to define a SNL parody of the President as political advertising, the Supreme Court (in a ruling that Conservatives applauded) has already spoken on the Government's ability to regulate it.

To be clear, calling political satire "free air time" for a party is absurd on its face.  I play along here, for a second, in an attempt to demonstrate why that is.

I in no way expect kiidcarter8 to understand.

Again.......

my comments were to show that Trump's position has little to do with suppressing free speech.  That is all.

I have no idea if he will get anywhere with it.

Glad to hear you are arguing that it is only a little bit suppression of free speech, but you still haven't explained how SNL satire is, in your view, only a "little" protected.

2404

Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration

« on: March 19, 2019, 02:40:12 PM »

On the subject, Trump says just this afternoon about the Nunes lawsuit ie. social media posts that are critical of Conservatives:

Trump says there "is collusion" going on between social media and his opponents. "Something has to be going on," he says. "It's collusive and it's very fair to say that we have to do something about it."

Very hard to see how that admonition is kosher with the First Amendment.   kiidcarter8?

2405

Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration

« on: March 19, 2019, 02:37:05 PM »

Yeah..... saw that.

Trump more concerned that the other party is getting free air time.

You mean like he does?  Yeah, that really should be "regulated."  Just report what the President and Republican leaders say.  The Democrats can take out ads in the papers.

Point is that it isn't about free speech.

If that was your point, you didn't make it.

Try this format: Politicized content on television isn't protected by the First Amendment because ___________

2406

Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration

« on: March 19, 2019, 01:25:10 PM »

......or that something published or spoken publicly is FAKE NEWS

Glad we agree.

When did anyone say that anyone can't question the veracity of a news story??  Not the issue.  The issue has been the right to factcheck what any politician says, and if it proves to be a lie, call him on it.  Without fear of reprisals, slanderous attacks against the reporter, physical threats, or blocking access to a public press conference. 

And, this should be obvious, if you accuse a news outlet of fake news, you must provide EVIDENCE if you want to be taken seriously. 


Glad we agree.

This isn't about whether or not something is accurate.

The point made by anti-Trumpers is that even if the news IS fake, they have the FREE SPEECH and Trump has to deal with it.  They say Trump, by criticizing, is trying to shut down their rights to this speech.  Not so.  They can say it - and Trump can call it what he wants.

Same leeway must be given from both sides.  You dont lose the right to free speech when elected.

When the “President” incited or encouraged violence against media outlets, calls them “the enemy of the people” and threatens to use tax law to punish the owner of a newspaper he doesn’t like, those are threats against free speech.

You disagree?

The "President" on twitter today called the news media "the absolute Enemy of the People and our Country itself!"

Words like that coming from a President could not be considered attempted suppression of free speech?  Certainly, no way they could be used to justify violence against critical media outlets?  Nothing like that has happened yet, right?

2407

Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration

« on: March 19, 2019, 12:11:48 PM »

Yeah..... saw that.

Trump more concerned that the other party is getting free air time.  Doesn't wish it to be criminalized - but regulated.  Wants the election commission to get involved.

How does one define "free air time" or otherwise political advertising being "given" to a political party?
An editorial in the New York Times?
A Washington Post reporting on the "President's" Russia ties that he calls "fake news?"
That absurd segment I saw on FOX "News" this morning accusing Elizabeth Warren of wanting to abolish the Constitution?

I didn't get an answer to the question I asked yesterday on this subject, and I don't expect to get one now.  But the slippery slope here is obvious. 

And even if one were to define a SNL parody of the President as political advertising, the Supreme Court (in a ruling that Conservatives applauded) has already spoken on the Government's ability to regulate it.

To be clear, calling political satire "free air time" for a party is absurd on its face.  I play along here, for a second, in an attempt to demonstrate why that is.

I in no way expect kiidcarter8 to understand.

2408

Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration

« on: March 19, 2019, 12:09:31 PM »

Yeah..... saw that.

Trump more concerned that the other party is getting free air time.  Doesn't wish it to be criminalized - but regulated.  Wants the election commission to get involved.

How does one define "free air time" or otherwise political advertising being "given" to a political party?
An editorial in the New York Times?
A Washington Post reporting on the "President's" Russia ties that he calls "fake news?"
That absurd segment I saw on FOX "News" this morning accusing Elizabeth Warren of wanting to abolish the Constitution?

I didn't get an answer to the question I asked yesterday on this subject, and I don't expect to get one now.  But the slippery slope here is obvious. 

And even if one were to define a SNL parody of the President as political advertising, the Supreme Court (in a ruling that Conservatives applauded) has already spoken on the Government's ability to regulate it.

2409

Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration

« on: March 19, 2019, 11:57:55 AM »

The lawsuit currently filed against Devin Nunes' Cow is, IMO, udderly without merit.  If Nunes' has a beef with his opposition, he is free to answer "his cow" and other critics in the same medium they employ.  This is probably a publicity stunt, and Nunes will milk the situation for all its worth.

It’s actually probably a strategic abuse of our courts to suppress free speech by burying a few select critics under legal fees, and thereby discourage others.

Who is paying Nunes’ legal fees?

2410

Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration

« on: March 18, 2019, 03:49:47 PM »

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1106634711290531840

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1106634712871784448


https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1106520743855251456

My post stands:  Trump's most substantive response to the murder of 50 Muslims in NZ was to tweet support for a talk show host who was rebuked for Islamophobic remarks a week earlier.

Milquetoast "best wishes" followed by a tweet storm urging FOX and their followers to stay strong and keep broadcasting exactly the kind of rhetoric that has mainstreamed the hate that led to this White Supremacist Terror Attack.

...Trump so big on naming "Islamic Terror" for what (he says) it is, yet his response hasn't named the source of this terror attack...

A President would always, always, call out the hateful ideology and pledge solidarity and support for the victims.  This "President" never does when the victims are Muslim, the perpetrators White Supremacists.  Wonder why that is.

And there is his adviser on TV telling everyone they should read the white supremacist manifesto of the attackers...

Unreal.

2411

Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration

« on: March 18, 2019, 01:43:16 PM »

Imagine if Obama had encouraged violence in the way Trump did in his recent Oval office ramblings about "second amendment people" and Bikers for Trump.

Trump's most substantive response to the murder of 50 Muslims in NZ was to tweet support for a talk show host who was rebuked for Islamophobic remarks a week earlier.   He followed that by retweeting a purveyor of the pizza-gate conspiracy that led to a shooting.  This morning a spokesperson of his is encouraging Americans to read the white supremacist propaganda put out by the killer....

We are well past "Imagine if Obama..." to illustrate the hypocrisy and enabling being performed by today's GOP.  By the standards of any period in US History this administration is a dark smear on our honor.

We should be ashamed of electing this man.

2412

Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration

« on: March 18, 2019, 09:08:12 AM »

......or that something published or spoken publicly is FAKE NEWS

Glad we agree.

When did anyone say that anyone can't question the veracity of a news story??  Not the issue.  The issue has been the right to factcheck what any politician says, and if it proves to be a lie, call him on it.  Without fear of reprisals, slanderous attacks against the reporter, physical threats, or blocking access to a public press conference. 

And, this should be obvious, if you accuse a news outlet of fake news, you must provide EVIDENCE if you want to be taken seriously. 


Glad we agree.

This isn't about whether or not something is accurate.

The point made by anti-Trumpers is that even if the news IS fake, they have the FREE SPEECH and Trump has to deal with it.  They say Trump, by criticizing, is trying to shut down their rights to this speech.  Not so.  They can say it - and Trump can call it what he wants.

Same leeway must be given from both sides.  You dont lose the right to free speech when elected.

When the “President” incited or encouraged violence against media outlets, calls them “the enemy of the people” and threatens to use tax law to punish the owner of a newspaper he doesn’t like, those are threats against free speech.

You disagree?

2413

Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration

« on: March 15, 2019, 04:54:27 PM »

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/111313938/live-terror-attack-video-christchurch-mosque-shooting-muslims-new-zealand?cid=facebook.post.111313938

40 dead in a mosque in Christchurch, NZ. A second mosque was shot at. IEDs were found outside the first one. The shooter streamed the attack.

The US under Trump has become a country whose primary ideological export is hate over freedom, but kiidcarter8 will keep tweeting about how Beto was once in a band.

Hate over freedom?

I think Mr Trump greatly favors freedom for US citizens.

A sad limitation that tells you quite a lot about Trump. If Jimmy Carter and Ronald Reagan felt that way the Soviet bloc would be extant and intact.

Reagan: "These visitors to that city on the Potomac do not come as white or black, red or yellow; they are not Jews or Christians; conservatives or liberals; or Democrats or Republicans. They are Americans awed by what has gone before, proud of what for them is still… a shining city on a hill."

Now, our "President" is, according to the New Zealand shooter “a symbol of renewed white identity and common purpose.”

2414

Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration

« on: March 15, 2019, 04:49:27 PM »

Instead of bending over backwards to find some sort of justification, wouldn't it be easier, Bambu, if you came out and said that you were okay with the terrorism that took place in New Zealand?

I was waiting for that from someone here, it happens to be you.
Of course I'm not ok with what took place in NZ, as I'm not ok with all the terror attacks by Muslims and others.
Shooter's justification is written in his manifesto.
His actions cannot be justified in any way.

Then stop trying to justify them.

Is that what authorities are trying to do in NZ and here in US?

"Good people on both sides."

Asked by a reporter if he sees an increase in white nationalism, Trump said: “I don’t really. I think it’s a small group of people.”

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-newzealand-shooting-trump-nationalism/trump-says-he-does-not-see-white-nationalism-rising-idUSKCN1QW2R6

2415

Previous Administration / Re: Trump Administration

« on: March 15, 2019, 08:59:16 AM »

https://www.stuff.co.nz/national/111313938/live-terror-attack-video-christchurch-mosque-shooting-muslims-new-zealand?cid=facebook.post.111313938

40 dead in a mosque in Christchurch, NZ. A second mosque was shot at. IEDs were found outside the first one. The shooter streamed the attack.

The US under Trump has become a country whose primary ideological export is hate over freedom, but kiidcarter8 will keep tweeting about how Beto was once in a band.

Pretty sure the "band" part isn't what folks find puzzling.

But if this is your nominee, rock on with it.

Whoever you choose has an excellent opportunity but a road lined with mines.

https://mobile.twitter.com/GoAngelo/status/644657789047017472