• Hello, please take a minute to check out our awesome content, contributed by the wonderful members of our community. We hope you'll add your own thoughts and opinions by making a free account!

Political Thread: The Sequel

weather bubba said:
To put it plainly, cancel culture is censorship of free speech. Freedom of speech is the right of every American no matter which side of the political isle they stand. By the way, I am enjoying the back and forth of the opinions and arguments on this thread.
Click to expand...
How bout this? This meet your criteria of censorship

www.yahoo.com

Nadler urges Republicans to investigate X's restrictions on Kamala Harris' campaign account, citing censorship concerns

Rep. Jerrold Nadler urged the House Judiciary Committee to investigate whether Elon Musk’s X prevented users from following a campaign account for Kamala Harris.
www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com
 
Axios also forgets what they reported.



Readers added context they thought people might want to know

Axios previously reported on April 14 & March 24, 2021 that Kamala Harris was appointed as Border Czar:"Harris, appointed by Biden as border czar..."“President Biden is putting Vice President Harris in charge of addressing the migrant surge at the U.S.-Mexico border"
 
Downeastnc said:
Its not censorship if you wanna go say racist sexist homophobic stuff have at it....but if I own a company and want minorities, women and gay people to use my services and I see a viral video of one of my employees being racist or sexist etc guess what happens next.
Click to expand...
Always silents the things you disagree with?
Everyone is racist and or bias to some degree.. and that's a fact jack
 
Shaggy said:
How bout this? This meet your criteria of censorship

www.yahoo.com

Nadler urges Republicans to investigate X's restrictions on Kamala Harris' campaign account, citing censorship concerns

Rep. Jerrold Nadler urged the House Judiciary Committee to investigate whether Elon Musk’s X prevented users from following a campaign account for Kamala Harris.
www.yahoo.com www.yahoo.com
Click to expand...
If X is doing this then yes, it meets the criteria. One who believes in free speech allow all parties access to free speech no matter the political affiliation.
 
Wait!! Ron Filipkowski who said Axios didnt say she was the border Czar, says Kamala was appointed border Czar in 2021

 
Feel like the Oval Office address missed the mark a bit. I get it’s a third rail topic but when everyone knows you’re dropping out due to age might as well tell the story yourself.

Obviously not the time and place but at some point voters are going to tune out the “threats to democracy” talk without getting specific. It’s really a touchy thing to get into the weeds on as none of us want the government telling us how to worship if we choose to. At the same time there are plenty of elected officials on video more or less advocating for injecting theocratic obstructions into our lawmaking process so it’s plain as day who he’s referring to.
 
Last edited:
I was wrong. I assumed he'd give a reason for dropping out and that reason would be a recent health issue. He didn't. I was wrong.

This gives the right the green light to go full on "this is the biggest conspiracy of our lifetimes route". Because it is.
 
Metwannabe said:
Wars wars everywhere, I guess proxy wars don't count Joe? Geez the lies told tonight
Click to expand...
Were we at war during Reagan’s term when we armed the Afghans enough to make the Soviets give up? It’s well understood where the line is and we ain’t anywhere near it. So no, we’re not at war.
 
Bham 99 said:
He talked about supreme Court reform. Hmmm. Lawless political hacks.
Click to expand...
That is something that really does need to happen. You can argue Congress isn’t doing its job which I agree with, however there are a whole basket of issues with the USSC that need sorting.

We’ve all more or less agreed to abide by their decisions for quite a long time but it should be obvious a court SO partisan to one side (assuming T wins and appoints at minimum Sotomayor replacement meaning 7-2 conservative) is incompatible with a nation that’s roughly split down the middle. One idea I’ve seen floated is a gradual ramp of the number of jurists to match the number of Circuit Courts over say a 20 year period. That Would require legislation though.

Fun fact about the Court: Nowhere in the Constitution does it grant the court judicial review. Marbury vs Madison essentially weighted the court’s opinion above that of Congress. The recent immunity decision could be argued it further elevated their status above that of the Executive branch. The more conspiracy minded among us might call this an “unelected cabal.”
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top