https://winteryknight.com/2024/08/27/facebook-ceo-mark-zuckerberg-biden-harris-regime-pressured-us-to-censor/
I was going to write about this, now I don't have to. The notion that the party who wants to save democracy is being represented by one candidate who is on record as wanting to restrict free speech, and another who was part of a presidential administration that actually engaged in suppressing free speech seems inconsistent.
I guess as long as they have joy and strength, it's all good.
4 comments:
It would be easier to take your concerns about free speech more seriously IF you spoke up for it when it's been the conservatives and GOP trying to limit free speech and free thoughts.
From the book bannings in public schools to the banning of teaching certain aspects of history, to the banning of trans kids in schools (that is, not expecting that teachers actually respect the children's actual names they want to be identified as and the gender they identify as, as well as not allowing them to use the bathrooms that matches their identity, etc), to the suppression of DEI efforts... the GOP has a long and ugly history of trying to ban ideas and speech.
It seems like you're not so much supportive of free speech as it is you support it when conservatives want to say something - even something oppressive, vulgar and/or non-factual - but not so much when the free speech is in support of teaching actual history or support for LGBTQ or simple efforts to be inclusive and equitable.
The difference is, we're not talking about banning books or free speech. We're just noting that IF the GOP has a sperm-fest at their convention and celebrate MEN, MEN, MEN and the notion of P****-grabbing and F***** H***, then there WILL be consequences. Man, if you all want to celebrate abusing women at the GOP convention (in theory), you can do it (as KR did), but there will be repercussions, God willing. In a race where women are already feeling abused and molested by the GOP, Trump's "It's a man, man, man, man's world" and KR's misogyny will only hasten their vulgar, despicable departure.
Likewise, it would be easier to take yours seriously, if you addressed the issue at hand.
Book "bannings" have happened on both sides of the ideological spectrum, with the recent examples being less about "banning" and more about setting age appropriate guidelines for books the are too obscene to be read at public school board meetings. Nonetheless, it's the difference between a local school board setting limits on access based on age and content, and the federal government pressuring Meta to censor factual news and comments in order to sway an election and push an agenda.
Because keeping boys out of girls bathrooms and locker rooms is such a horrible thing. Although it has nothing to do with limiting free speech. Again, no comparison to the federal government forcing Meta to restrict speech to influence elections and push a narrative.
I am 100% supportive of free speech no matter how offensive it might be. I have problems with the government restricting speech or forcing parents to engage (or force their kids to engage) in that which they would prefer not to. Further, I object to government employees or entities actively subverting the role of parents in the lives of their children, when the children are not in danger.
FYI, are you aware of the overwhelming data that @90% of "trans" children grow out of their "trans" period. Are you aware that this data has caused most of Europe to stop "transing" children?
The difference is the we now know that the Biden administration actively interfered with the 2020 election by pressuring Meta to push narratives that were false, and to censor free speech regarding things that were factually accurate.
But you persist in ignoring the grievous breach of the first amendment, engaged in by the current DFL presidential candidate and her running mate who doesn't believe in free speech either.
The fact that you can throw this bullshit up against the wall in order to dodge the actions of the Biden/Harris administration violating the first amendment is shameless. Especially when you seem prepared to censor Kid Rock.
It's simpler than all that Craig. Dan's just a pervert asshole who pretends what we seek to accomplish is the same as "book burning" and other free speech threats. It's an outright lie, which is Dan's forte.
The whole book burning/banning thing is hilarious. We just had a massive infringement on free speech by the Biden administration confirmed, where the Biden administration used the FBI to actually censor content to influence en election and that doesn't bother Dan. We just had the secretary of state of MN cheering on the crack down on free speech in Brazil, and Dan stays silent. Meanwhile, Steven King is bitching because his books (with explicit sexual content) are age restricted in school libraries.
Idiots like Dan don't understand the difference between age restricting books with explicit sexual themes in school libraries, and banning books.
Because they don't want parental involvement in what kids have access to.
Post a Comment