Shut Up

[subgenius]

Speaking of controlling speech. Ref Ghouliani’s insane presser:

On the president's official YouTube page, the livestream of the conference featured an unfortunate hot mic incident, when someone could be heard saying "You see f***ing see Rudy's hair dye dripping down his face?"

A Motherjones reporter noted that when the Trump team noticed the error, they muted the audio, which led to Live Chat conspiracy theories about "big tech censorship."

The idea that Conservatives are actual pro-1st Amendment types is laughably absurd. Go to virtually any Conservative news site, subreddit, or some other forum and they’re just as moderated or curated as Liberal forums. Hell, Conservatives have historically ignored the 1st Amendment to shut down concerts, comedians, rallies, and various other groups to squash dissent.

- Doc

are you trying to justify censorship via your juvenile display of whataboutism?
The point isn't that private companies can moderate their content but rather should the government be censoring any/all private entities?
I know you're deeply entrenched with your #tds, but give it a rest.

[subgenius]

I have made it obvious on most occasions that I favor the ability for private entities (people, businesses) to onduct their activities with liberty. As such, this thread approached the idea of how the power of government should be restrained, restricted, or even removed.
Censorship is almost always a Liberal method in this country and while many of you may believe there is no difference between public and private Censorship, i do.
For example, YouTube has made the following announcement:
Yesterday was the safe harbor deadline for the U.S. Presidential election and enough states have certified their election results to determine a President-elect. Given that, we will start removing any piece of content uploaded today (or anytime after) that misleads people by alleging that widespread fraud or errors changed the outcome of the 2020 U.S. Presidential election, in line with our approach towards historical U.S. Presidential elections. For example, we will remove videos claiming that a Presidential candidate won the election due to widespread software glitches or counting errors. We will begin enforcing this policy today, and will ramp up in the weeks to come.


I don't have an issue with their policy because I believe it is their right to dictate what product they buy and sell - within the boundaries of our Nation's Constitution etc.
While the topic of this censorship is certainly amicable to many posters here, I can't help but notice that election conspiracy from 2016 still remains free range.
But hypocrisy is a right and iften is the cost of doing business.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Continually saying something is a thing, doesn’t make that thing a thing. You damned mini Goebbels and the way you play around with lies is disgusting. Trump’s campaign openly requested help from the Russians, they met with them regarding the election, and you people keep saying that wasn’t collusion. Trump openly stated years before this election that he’d claim fraud, despite this election being objectively the best-ran and most secure election in American history, and now you’re trashing our democracy because you’re undemocratic pieces of crap.

Wake me up when you start whining about Fox, Rush, Levin, OANN, Parler, 4chan, and the thousands of other right-wing outlets that play with the truth like it were an abstraction and inconvenient.

Also, you suck major mushroom cock you thirsty little bitch. Screw you. “F” Xanax. Screw you seditious, lying sacks of GOP crap. I legitimately hope you unpatriotic pieces of filth catch the hoax and have your lightbulbs go off as you’re being intubated. Thank you for coming to my TED Talk.

- Doc

[Res Ipsa]

So, Trump is going to rein it in to maintain his credibility with his base any day now, right? Any day now..

[canpakes]

As such, this thread approached the idea of how the power of government should be restrained, restricted, or even removed.
...
For example, YouTube has made the following announcement: ...

Hey, subs. You do understand that YouTube isn’t ‘the government’, right?

You can’t even stay on message within a single post.

[subgenius]

As such, this thread approached the idea of how the power of government should be restrained, restricted, or even removed.
...
For example, YouTube has made the following announcement: ...

Hey, subs. You do understand that YouTube isn’t ‘the government’, right?

You can’t even stay on message within a single post.

were confused by my rather blunt and blatant statement of how private and public are distinct? Geez, not like we are talking about bakeries.
Point being, sometimes (in adult conversations) a point can be discussed with context that is contrary. Compare and contrast is a common method for critical thinking - you might find such things entertaining.

[canpakes]

...critical thinking ...

Yes, critical thinking. You abandoned that back on the first page when you lazily defaulted to the statement that there are never circumstances that should infringe on free speech unless someone else made a law stating so.

Anyhow, carry on.

[subgenius]

...critical thinking ...

Yes, critical thinking. You abandoned that back on the first page when you lazily defaulted to the statement that there are never circumstances that should infringe on free speech unless someone else made a law stating so.

Anyhow, carry on.

abandoned? was that when i said "honestly, at no point"...or is that your inference from my notion for "consider under law.." ?
Nevertheless, glad you abandoned your intended, but misconceived, path of private v. government from 2 posts up.

[subgenius]

"FREE SPEECH IS BEING WEAPONIZED": COLUMBIA DEAN AND NEW YORKER WRITER URGES MORE CENSORSHIP

https://www.zerohedge.com/markets/free- ... to+zero%29