I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter. You've got a person who's interested in the study of disinformation and current topics related to it. She seems well qualified. She's a Democrat, and she's on Twitter, neither of which is surprising. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.Doc Holliday said:He's the only politician I actually like.Sam Lowry said:
Rand is making an ass of himself as usual.
Your opinions are straight up the same as legacy media. What's going on man?
Ministry of Truth
34,943 Views |
650 Replies |
Last: 2 mo ago by Cobretti
Sam Lowry said:I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter. You've got a person who's interested in the study of disinformation and current topics related to it. She seems well qualified. She's a Democrat, and she's on Twitter, neither of which is surprising. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.Doc Holliday said:He's the only politician I actually like.Sam Lowry said:
Rand is making an ass of himself as usual.
Your opinions are straight up the same as legacy media. What's going on man?
Bull$#it. The only correct thing you said there was that she's a democrat.
No one here would be upset with a "Ministry of Truth?" I disagree. I cannot imagine even Trump having the Govt censor speech.Sam Lowry said:I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter. You've got a person who's interested in the study of disinformation and current topics related to it. She seems well qualified. She's a Democrat, and she's on Twitter, neither of which is surprising. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.Doc Holliday said:He's the only politician I actually like.Sam Lowry said:
Rand is making an ass of himself as usual.
Your opinions are straight up the same as legacy media. What's going on man?
I can see him call it Fake News.
I can see him suing
I can see him pushing out a competing narrative
What I cannot see is having some women behind the curtain censoring what is said.
I don't see Biden doing that either.RMF5630 said:No one here would be upset with a "Ministry of Truth?" I disagree. I cannot imagine even Trump having the Govt censor speech.Sam Lowry said:I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter. You've got a person who's interested in the study of disinformation and current topics related to it. She seems well qualified. She's a Democrat, and she's on Twitter, neither of which is surprising. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.Doc Holliday said:He's the only politician I actually like.Sam Lowry said:
Rand is making an ass of himself as usual.
Your opinions are straight up the same as legacy media. What's going on man?
I can see him call it Fake News.
I can see him suing
I can see him pushing out a competing narrative
What I cannot see is having some women behind the curtain censoring what is said.
Sam: "I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter"
Anyone with an IQ over 60 and a real job believe that statement for even a second?
Anyone with an IQ over 60 and a real job believe that statement for even a second?
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Y'all are as hysterical about Biden as the left was about Trump. Yes, he's a terrible president. No, he's not going to censor your speech.Oldbear83 said:
Sam: "I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter"
Anyone with an IQ over 60 and a real job believe that statement for even a second?
Sam Lowry said:I don't see Biden doing that either.RMF5630 said:No one here would be upset with a "Ministry of Truth?" I disagree. I cannot imagine even Trump having the Govt censor speech.Sam Lowry said:I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter. You've got a person who's interested in the study of disinformation and current topics related to it. She seems well qualified. She's a Democrat, and she's on Twitter, neither of which is surprising. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.Doc Holliday said:He's the only politician I actually like.Sam Lowry said:
Rand is making an ass of himself as usual.
Your opinions are straight up the same as legacy media. What's going on man?
I can see him call it Fake News.
I can see him suing
I can see him pushing out a competing narrative
What I cannot see is having some women behind the curtain censoring what is said.
What do you mean, he did.
Sam Lowry said:Y'all are as hysterical about Biden as the left was about Trump. Yes, he's a terrible president. No, he's not going to censor your speech.Oldbear83 said:
Sam: "I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter"
Anyone with an IQ over 60 and a real job believe that statement for even a second?
Really. How much we gonna bet?
Facebook did it when they didn't like what was being said. Twitter did it. Yahoo shut down comments.
You really think he instituted an office to truth check and they are going to stay hands off?
I say the over/under is 60 days before the first story comes out that some right winger put out fake news and they shut it down
Not that anyone's been able to point out. I've been asking for nearly ten pages, and so far nothing.RMF5630 said:Sam Lowry said:I don't see Biden doing that either.RMF5630 said:No one here would be upset with a "Ministry of Truth?" I disagree. I cannot imagine even Trump having the Govt censor speech.Sam Lowry said:I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter. You've got a person who's interested in the study of disinformation and current topics related to it. She seems well qualified. She's a Democrat, and she's on Twitter, neither of which is surprising. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.Doc Holliday said:He's the only politician I actually like.Sam Lowry said:
Rand is making an ass of himself as usual.
Your opinions are straight up the same as legacy media. What's going on man?
I can see him call it Fake News.
I can see him suing
I can see him pushing out a competing narrative
What I cannot see is having some women behind the curtain censoring what is said.
What do you mean, he did.
Bull*****Sam Lowry said:
. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.
I guess the "Committee of Public Information" and the "Disinformation Governance Board" are just social clubs? They aren't really in existence to do anything. Just write a white paper, nothing more...Sam Lowry said:Not that anyone's been able to point out. I've been asking for nearly ten pages, and so far nothing.RMF5630 said:Sam Lowry said:I don't see Biden doing that either.RMF5630 said:No one here would be upset with a "Ministry of Truth?" I disagree. I cannot imagine even Trump having the Govt censor speech.Sam Lowry said:I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter. You've got a person who's interested in the study of disinformation and current topics related to it. She seems well qualified. She's a Democrat, and she's on Twitter, neither of which is surprising. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.Doc Holliday said:He's the only politician I actually like.Sam Lowry said:
Rand is making an ass of himself as usual.
Your opinions are straight up the same as legacy media. What's going on man?
I can see him call it Fake News.
I can see him suing
I can see him pushing out a competing narrative
What I cannot see is having some women behind the curtain censoring what is said.
What do you mean, he did.
My favorite so far is Obama's speech at Stanford? "People are dying from misinformation. If censorship can save 1 life?" He is back in his community activist role... It is coming...
On that note, it is time to start drinking...
I posted links to some of the anti-disinformation programs under the Trump administration. I don't remember you saying anything at the time.Robert Wilson said:Bull*****Sam Lowry said:
. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.
But it's different, you'll say.
How so? I've asked you three or four times now.
Sam, you have made it plain to everyone here that your honesty is on a level with Biden's mental acuity.Sam Lowry said:Y'all are as hysterical about Biden as the left was about Trump. Yes, he's a terrible president. No, he's not going to censor your speech.Oldbear83 said:
Sam: "I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter"
Anyone with an IQ over 60 and a real job believe that statement for even a second?
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Biden may not, but it's coming. With government, it may start small, but it won't remain that way.Sam Lowry said:Y'all are as hysterical about Biden as the left was about Trump. Yes, he's a terrible president. No, he's not going to censor your speech.Oldbear83 said:
Sam: "I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter"
Anyone with an IQ over 60 and a real job believe that statement for even a second?
That is unless of course, you're dumb enough to believe big gov't and politicians don't expand their power - ever.
I'm sorry to say that means very little coming from one of the most dishonest posters on the board.Oldbear83 said:Sam, you have made it plain to everyone here that your honesty is on a level with Biden's mental acuity.Sam Lowry said:Y'all are as hysterical about Biden as the left was about Trump. Yes, he's a terrible president. No, he's not going to censor your speech.Oldbear83 said:
Sam: "I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter"
Anyone with an IQ over 60 and a real job believe that statement for even a second?
bookmarking this one for later..Sam Lowry said:Y'all are as hysterical about Biden as the left was about Trump. Yes, he's a terrible president. No, he's not going to censor your speech.Oldbear83 said:
Sam: "I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter"
Anyone with an IQ over 60 and a real job believe that statement for even a second?
Yes, some of us would. The mere belief in mass disinformation is a real problem. What is ignored by you and others is that in conjunction with the idea of bad or misleading information spreading quickly is that the counter to it does as well. Unless you have behemoth operations like the US government using its bully pulpit to overwhelm the narrative regardless of truth. It's absolutely unnecessary.Sam Lowry said:I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter. You've got a person who's interested in the study of disinformation and current topics related to it. She seems well qualified. She's a Democrat, and she's on Twitter, neither of which is surprising. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.Doc Holliday said:He's the only politician I actually like.Sam Lowry said:
Rand is making an ass of himself as usual.
Your opinions are straight up the same as legacy media. What's going on man?
We already have multiple agencies dealing with foreign actors trying to infiltrate and manipulate the information space. This insidious concept that's been taking hold the past couple of years is a direct counter to US citizens and their free expression. You are free to say dumb or misleading things without the government needing to "check you" on it. And the reality that has been arising is that it's become more and more subjective in the content versus basis in facts. In other words, a disagreement in perspective or opinion, not actual disinformation.
I just wish you'd come out and say COVID and the Jan. 6 "big lie" are driving your trust of government in this situation. You've shown a continual progression to hand over power under these two scenarios, and your continued defense of this is a likely another extension of that. Objectively and non partisanly, this is a horrible idea no matter who is in charge.
He didn't say "if censorship can save one life." He was right about misinformation killing people. I disagree with his proposal to reform Section 230. I also find it ironic that most posters here agree with the idea, as long as it doesn't come from a Democrat.RMF5630 said:I guess the "Committee of Public Information" and the "Disinformation Governance Board" are just social clubs? They aren't really in existence to do anything. Just write a white paper, nothing more...Sam Lowry said:Not that anyone's been able to point out. I've been asking for nearly ten pages, and so far nothing.RMF5630 said:Sam Lowry said:I don't see Biden doing that either.RMF5630 said:No one here would be upset with a "Ministry of Truth?" I disagree. I cannot imagine even Trump having the Govt censor speech.Sam Lowry said:I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter. You've got a person who's interested in the study of disinformation and current topics related to it. She seems well qualified. She's a Democrat, and she's on Twitter, neither of which is surprising. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.Doc Holliday said:He's the only politician I actually like.Sam Lowry said:
Rand is making an ass of himself as usual.
Your opinions are straight up the same as legacy media. What's going on man?
I can see him call it Fake News.
I can see him suing
I can see him pushing out a competing narrative
What I cannot see is having some women behind the curtain censoring what is said.
What do you mean, he did.
My favorite so far is Obama's speech at Stanford? "People are dying from misinformation. If censorship can save 1 life?" He is back in his community activist role... It is coming...
On that note, it is time to start drinking...
Again, corrected for accuracy.Sam Lowry said:I'm sorry to say that means very little coming from one of the most annoying yetOldbear83 said:Sam, you have made it plain to everyone here that your honesty is on a level with Biden's mental acuity.Sam Lowry said:Y'all are as hysterical about Biden as the left was about Trump. Yes, he's a terrible president. No, he's not going to censor your speech.Oldbear83 said:
Sam: "I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter"
Anyone with an IQ over 60 and a real job believe that statement for even a second?dishonest posters on the board.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
This is not a partisan issue. It is authoritarianism 101 to have the government tell you what to believe and not to believe, especially in regards to issues that are far from settled.
Sam Lowry said:He didn't say "if censorship can save one life." He was right about misinformation killing people. I disagree with his proposal to reform Section 230. I also find it ironic that most posters here agree with the idea, as long as it doesn't come from a Democrat.RMF5630 said:I guess the "Committee of Public Information" and the "Disinformation Governance Board" are just social clubs? They aren't really in existence to do anything. Just write a white paper, nothing more...Sam Lowry said:Not that anyone's been able to point out. I've been asking for nearly ten pages, and so far nothing.RMF5630 said:Sam Lowry said:I don't see Biden doing that either.RMF5630 said:No one here would be upset with a "Ministry of Truth?" I disagree. I cannot imagine even Trump having the Govt censor speech.Sam Lowry said:I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter. You've got a person who's interested in the study of disinformation and current topics related to it. She seems well qualified. She's a Democrat, and she's on Twitter, neither of which is surprising. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.Doc Holliday said:He's the only politician I actually like.Sam Lowry said:
Rand is making an ass of himself as usual.
Your opinions are straight up the same as legacy media. What's going on man?
I can see him call it Fake News.
I can see him suing
I can see him pushing out a competing narrative
What I cannot see is having some women behind the curtain censoring what is said.
What do you mean, he did.
My favorite so far is Obama's speech at Stanford? "People are dying from misinformation. If censorship can save 1 life?" He is back in his community activist role... It is coming...
On that note, it is time to start drinking...
It isn't the good ideas the come up, its the rest of the package and how they respond to it.
No one is qualified for this job. Democrat, Republican or Independent.Sam Lowry said:I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter. You've got a person who's interested in the study of disinformation and current topics related to it. She seems well qualified. She's a Democrat, and she's on Twitter, neither of which is surprising. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.Doc Holliday said:He's the only politician I actually like.Sam Lowry said:
Rand is making an ass of himself as usual.
Your opinions are straight up the same as legacy media. What's going on man?
RMF5630 said:Sam Lowry said:Y'all are as hysterical about Biden as the left was about Trump. Yes, he's a terrible president. No, he's not going to censor your speech.Oldbear83 said:
Sam: "I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter"
Anyone with an IQ over 60 and a real job believe that statement for even a second?
Really. How much we gonna bet?
Facebook did it when they didn't like what was being said. Twitter did it. Yahoo shut down comments.
You really think he instituted an office to truth check and they are going to stay hands off?
I say the over/under is 60 days before the first story comes out that some right winger put out fake news and they shut it down
Obama censored hundreds of conservative groups. Is sam wanting anyone to take him seriously?
Harrison Bergeron said:
This is not a partisan issue. It is authoritarianism 101 to have the government tell you what to believe and not to believe, especially in regards to issues that are far from settled.
The science is settled. One of americas greatest thinkers told us that
He didn't censor them. He discriminated against them and others in their applications for tax-exempt status. He was also the most aggressive president since Nixon in terms of spying on journalists and prosecuting leakers.Fre3dombear said:RMF5630 said:Sam Lowry said:Y'all are as hysterical about Biden as the left was about Trump. Yes, he's a terrible president. No, he's not going to censor your speech.Oldbear83 said:
Sam: "I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter"
Anyone with an IQ over 60 and a real job believe that statement for even a second?
Really. How much we gonna bet?
Facebook did it when they didn't like what was being said. Twitter did it. Yahoo shut down comments.
You really think he instituted an office to truth check and they are going to stay hands off?
I say the over/under is 60 days before the first story comes out that some right winger put out fake news and they shut it down
Obama censored hundreds of conservative groups. Is sam wanting anyone to take him seriously?
Really? Sam, you are now being a literalist. He didn't say "threat to public safety," talk about Govt regulation to protect us? Analogy to hot dog production and meat inspectors? There is too much to put the whole speech up there. But this guy has some dangerous ideas for our Republic and views the Constitution as software that can be patched at will by activist. There are some problematic quotes because he views the US system of government as fluid beyond making participation more inclusive, even down to the nuts and bolts:Sam Lowry said:He didn't say "if censorship can save one life." He was right about misinformation killing people. I disagree with his proposal to reform Section 230. I also find it ironic that most posters here agree with the idea, as long as it doesn't come from a Democrat.RMF5630 said:I guess the "Committee of Public Information" and the "Disinformation Governance Board" are just social clubs? They aren't really in existence to do anything. Just write a white paper, nothing more...Sam Lowry said:Not that anyone's been able to point out. I've been asking for nearly ten pages, and so far nothing.RMF5630 said:Sam Lowry said:I don't see Biden doing that either.RMF5630 said:No one here would be upset with a "Ministry of Truth?" I disagree. I cannot imagine even Trump having the Govt censor speech.Sam Lowry said:I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter. You've got a person who's interested in the study of disinformation and current topics related to it. She seems well qualified. She's a Democrat, and she's on Twitter, neither of which is surprising. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.Doc Holliday said:He's the only politician I actually like.Sam Lowry said:
Rand is making an ass of himself as usual.
Your opinions are straight up the same as legacy media. What's going on man?
I can see him call it Fake News.
I can see him suing
I can see him pushing out a competing narrative
What I cannot see is having some women behind the curtain censoring what is said.
What do you mean, he did.
My favorite so far is Obama's speech at Stanford? "People are dying from misinformation. If censorship can save 1 life?" He is back in his community activist role... It is coming...
On that note, it is time to start drinking...
That speech leads to only one direction, more Government oversight of information and free speech. Afterall, the 1st Amendment only applies to the State, not you and me.
We certainly need to be vigilant. We don't need to deal in wild exaggerations like the media did with Trump.RMF5630 said:Really? Sam, you are now being a literalist. He didn't say "threat to public safety," talk about Govt regulation to protect us? Analogy to hot dog production and meat inspectors? There is too much to put the whole speech up there. But this guy has some dangerous ideas for our Republic and views the Constitution as software that can be patched at will by activist. There are some problematic quotes because he views the US system of government as fluid beyond making participation more inclusive, even down to the nuts and bolts:Sam Lowry said:He didn't say "if censorship can save one life." He was right about misinformation killing people. I disagree with his proposal to reform Section 230. I also find it ironic that most posters here agree with the idea, as long as it doesn't come from a Democrat.RMF5630 said:I guess the "Committee of Public Information" and the "Disinformation Governance Board" are just social clubs? They aren't really in existence to do anything. Just write a white paper, nothing more...Sam Lowry said:Not that anyone's been able to point out. I've been asking for nearly ten pages, and so far nothing.RMF5630 said:Sam Lowry said:I don't see Biden doing that either.RMF5630 said:No one here would be upset with a "Ministry of Truth?" I disagree. I cannot imagine even Trump having the Govt censor speech.Sam Lowry said:I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter. You've got a person who's interested in the study of disinformation and current topics related to it. She seems well qualified. She's a Democrat, and she's on Twitter, neither of which is surprising. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.Doc Holliday said:He's the only politician I actually like.Sam Lowry said:
Rand is making an ass of himself as usual.
Your opinions are straight up the same as legacy media. What's going on man?
I can see him call it Fake News.
I can see him suing
I can see him pushing out a competing narrative
What I cannot see is having some women behind the curtain censoring what is said.
What do you mean, he did.
My favorite so far is Obama's speech at Stanford? "People are dying from misinformation. If censorship can save 1 life?" He is back in his community activist role... It is coming...
On that note, it is time to start drinking...
That speech leads to only one direction, more Government oversight of information and free speech. Afterall, the 1st Amendment only applies to the State, not you and me.
Sam Lowry said:We certainly need to be vigilant. We don't need to deal in wild exaggerations like the media did with Trump.RMF5630 said:Really? Sam, you are now being a literalist. He didn't say "threat to public safety," talk about Govt regulation to protect us? Analogy to hot dog production and meat inspectors? There is too much to put the whole speech up there. But this guy has some dangerous ideas for our Republic and views the Constitution as software that can be patched at will by activist. There are some problematic quotes because he views the US system of government as fluid beyond making participation more inclusive, even down to the nuts and bolts:Sam Lowry said:He didn't say "if censorship can save one life." He was right about misinformation killing people. I disagree with his proposal to reform Section 230. I also find it ironic that most posters here agree with the idea, as long as it doesn't come from a Democrat.RMF5630 said:I guess the "Committee of Public Information" and the "Disinformation Governance Board" are just social clubs? They aren't really in existence to do anything. Just write a white paper, nothing more...Sam Lowry said:Not that anyone's been able to point out. I've been asking for nearly ten pages, and so far nothing.RMF5630 said:Sam Lowry said:I don't see Biden doing that either.RMF5630 said:No one here would be upset with a "Ministry of Truth?" I disagree. I cannot imagine even Trump having the Govt censor speech.Sam Lowry said:I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter. You've got a person who's interested in the study of disinformation and current topics related to it. She seems well qualified. She's a Democrat, and she's on Twitter, neither of which is surprising. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.Doc Holliday said:He's the only politician I actually like.Sam Lowry said:
Rand is making an ass of himself as usual.
Your opinions are straight up the same as legacy media. What's going on man?
I can see him call it Fake News.
I can see him suing
I can see him pushing out a competing narrative
What I cannot see is having some women behind the curtain censoring what is said.
What do you mean, he did.
My favorite so far is Obama's speech at Stanford? "People are dying from misinformation. If censorship can save 1 life?" He is back in his community activist role... It is coming...
On that note, it is time to start drinking...
That speech leads to only one direction, more Government oversight of information and free speech. Afterall, the 1st Amendment only applies to the State, not you and me.
Congress shall make no law…. abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…
If there is any enforcement mechanism at all that can be used against US citizens under the guise of "dis/mis-information", that action would be unconstitutional. Full stop.
Sam Lowry said:We certainly need to be vigilant. We don't need to deal in wild exaggerations like the media did with Trump.RMF5630 said:Really? Sam, you are now being a literalist. He didn't say "threat to public safety," talk about Govt regulation to protect us? Analogy to hot dog production and meat inspectors? There is too much to put the whole speech up there. But this guy has some dangerous ideas for our Republic and views the Constitution as software that can be patched at will by activist. There are some problematic quotes because he views the US system of government as fluid beyond making participation more inclusive, even down to the nuts and bolts:Sam Lowry said:He didn't say "if censorship can save one life." He was right about misinformation killing people. I disagree with his proposal to reform Section 230. I also find it ironic that most posters here agree with the idea, as long as it doesn't come from a Democrat.RMF5630 said:I guess the "Committee of Public Information" and the "Disinformation Governance Board" are just social clubs? They aren't really in existence to do anything. Just write a white paper, nothing more...Sam Lowry said:Not that anyone's been able to point out. I've been asking for nearly ten pages, and so far nothing.RMF5630 said:Sam Lowry said:I don't see Biden doing that either.RMF5630 said:No one here would be upset with a "Ministry of Truth?" I disagree. I cannot imagine even Trump having the Govt censor speech.Sam Lowry said:I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter. You've got a person who's interested in the study of disinformation and current topics related to it. She seems well qualified. She's a Democrat, and she's on Twitter, neither of which is surprising. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.Doc Holliday said:He's the only politician I actually like.Sam Lowry said:
Rand is making an ass of himself as usual.
Your opinions are straight up the same as legacy media. What's going on man?
I can see him call it Fake News.
I can see him suing
I can see him pushing out a competing narrative
What I cannot see is having some women behind the curtain censoring what is said.
What do you mean, he did.
My favorite so far is Obama's speech at Stanford? "People are dying from misinformation. If censorship can save 1 life?" He is back in his community activist role... It is coming...
On that note, it is time to start drinking...
That speech leads to only one direction, more Government oversight of information and free speech. Afterall, the 1st Amendment only applies to the State, not you and me.
Yeah, hyperbole is gonna bring us down...
Trump saying "biggest crowd" "greatest economy" or "never done before" is more of a problem than Biden in general. (Sam, has he done anything right?)
OR
Obama sending pallets of cash to Iran. Or, Obama apologizing around the world for the US.
OR
Bush invading Iraq for that matter.
Yeah, hyperbole will do us in, threat to Democracy.
so true! We need the media to stop wildly exaggerating what Trump did.. starting with the travel ban from 6 out of 55 muslim countries and calling it a muslim ban. Four years of false narratives and a few straight up lies.Sam Lowry said:We certainly need to be vigilant. We don't need to deal in wild exaggerations like the media did with Trump.RMF5630 said:Really? Sam, you are now being a literalist. He didn't say "threat to public safety," talk about Govt regulation to protect us? Analogy to hot dog production and meat inspectors? There is too much to put the whole speech up there. But this guy has some dangerous ideas for our Republic and views the Constitution as software that can be patched at will by activist. There are some problematic quotes because he views the US system of government as fluid beyond making participation more inclusive, even down to the nuts and bolts:Sam Lowry said:He didn't say "if censorship can save one life." He was right about misinformation killing people. I disagree with his proposal to reform Section 230. I also find it ironic that most posters here agree with the idea, as long as it doesn't come from a Democrat.RMF5630 said:I guess the "Committee of Public Information" and the "Disinformation Governance Board" are just social clubs? They aren't really in existence to do anything. Just write a white paper, nothing more...Sam Lowry said:Not that anyone's been able to point out. I've been asking for nearly ten pages, and so far nothing.RMF5630 said:Sam Lowry said:I don't see Biden doing that either.RMF5630 said:No one here would be upset with a "Ministry of Truth?" I disagree. I cannot imagine even Trump having the Govt censor speech.Sam Lowry said:I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter. You've got a person who's interested in the study of disinformation and current topics related to it. She seems well qualified. She's a Democrat, and she's on Twitter, neither of which is surprising. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.Doc Holliday said:He's the only politician I actually like.Sam Lowry said:
Rand is making an ass of himself as usual.
Your opinions are straight up the same as legacy media. What's going on man?
I can see him call it Fake News.
I can see him suing
I can see him pushing out a competing narrative
What I cannot see is having some women behind the curtain censoring what is said.
What do you mean, he did.
My favorite so far is Obama's speech at Stanford? "People are dying from misinformation. If censorship can save 1 life?" He is back in his community activist role... It is coming...
On that note, it is time to start drinking...
That speech leads to only one direction, more Government oversight of information and free speech. Afterall, the 1st Amendment only applies to the State, not you and me.
Sam Lowry said:He didn't censor them. He discriminated against them and others in their applications for tax-exempt status. He was also the most aggressive president since Nixon in terms of spying on journalists and prosecuting leakers.Fre3dombear said:RMF5630 said:Sam Lowry said:Y'all are as hysterical about Biden as the left was about Trump. Yes, he's a terrible president. No, he's not going to censor your speech.Oldbear83 said:
Sam: "I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter"
Anyone with an IQ over 60 and a real job believe that statement for even a second?
Really. How much we gonna bet?
Facebook did it when they didn't like what was being said. Twitter did it. Yahoo shut down comments.
You really think he instituted an office to truth check and they are going to stay hands off?
I say the over/under is 60 days before the first story comes out that some right winger put out fake news and they shut it down
Obama censored hundreds of conservative groups. Is sam wanting anyone to take him seriously?
Ipso facto censored
This kinda **** is why I don't even respond to you anymoreSam Lowry said:
He didn't censor them. He discriminated against them
Unbelievable
Canon said:Sam Lowry said:We certainly need to be vigilant. We don't need to deal in wild exaggerations like the media did with Trump.RMF5630 said:Really? Sam, you are now being a literalist. He didn't say "threat to public safety," talk about Govt regulation to protect us? Analogy to hot dog production and meat inspectors? There is too much to put the whole speech up there. But this guy has some dangerous ideas for our Republic and views the Constitution as software that can be patched at will by activist. There are some problematic quotes because he views the US system of government as fluid beyond making participation more inclusive, even down to the nuts and bolts:Sam Lowry said:He didn't say "if censorship can save one life." He was right about misinformation killing people. I disagree with his proposal to reform Section 230. I also find it ironic that most posters here agree with the idea, as long as it doesn't come from a Democrat.RMF5630 said:I guess the "Committee of Public Information" and the "Disinformation Governance Board" are just social clubs? They aren't really in existence to do anything. Just write a white paper, nothing more...Sam Lowry said:Not that anyone's been able to point out. I've been asking for nearly ten pages, and so far nothing.RMF5630 said:Sam Lowry said:I don't see Biden doing that either.RMF5630 said:No one here would be upset with a "Ministry of Truth?" I disagree. I cannot imagine even Trump having the Govt censor speech.Sam Lowry said:I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter. You've got a person who's interested in the study of disinformation and current topics related to it. She seems well qualified. She's a Democrat, and she's on Twitter, neither of which is surprising. If she were a Republican in a Republican administration doing the same kind of thing, no one here would be upset.Doc Holliday said:He's the only politician I actually like.Sam Lowry said:
Rand is making an ass of himself as usual.
Your opinions are straight up the same as legacy media. What's going on man?
I can see him call it Fake News.
I can see him suing
I can see him pushing out a competing narrative
What I cannot see is having some women behind the curtain censoring what is said.
What do you mean, he did.
My favorite so far is Obama's speech at Stanford? "People are dying from misinformation. If censorship can save 1 life?" He is back in his community activist role... It is coming...
On that note, it is time to start drinking...
That speech leads to only one direction, more Government oversight of information and free speech. Afterall, the 1st Amendment only applies to the State, not you and me.
Congress shall make no law…. abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press…
If there is any enforcement mechanism at all that can be used against US citizens under the guise of "dis/mis-information", that action would be unconstitutional. Full stop.
Careful. Not with the deep intellectual thinkers Obama and Biden quid pro Joe killed marines in Afghanistan with humans hangin from planes taking off being so weak putin annexes another country like under Obama can't even remember who his granddaughter of a stripper is while triple or quad your gas bill in a year are putting on the supreme court.
No, it isn't.Robert Wilson said:This kinda **** is why I don't even respond to you anymoreSam Lowry said:
He didn't censor them. He discriminated against them
If you had anything, you'd bring it.
As an advocate of free speech, I prefer to think that censorship actually means something. As usual I'm in the minority.Fre3dombear said:Sam Lowry said:He didn't censor them. He discriminated against them and others in their applications for tax-exempt status. He was also the most aggressive president since Nixon in terms of spying on journalists and prosecuting leakers.Fre3dombear said:RMF5630 said:Sam Lowry said:Y'all are as hysterical about Biden as the left was about Trump. Yes, he's a terrible president. No, he's not going to censor your speech.Oldbear83 said:
Sam: "I'm just trying to look at it without the partisan filter"
Anyone with an IQ over 60 and a real job believe that statement for even a second?
Really. How much we gonna bet?
Facebook did it when they didn't like what was being said. Twitter did it. Yahoo shut down comments.
You really think he instituted an office to truth check and they are going to stay hands off?
I say the over/under is 60 days before the first story comes out that some right winger put out fake news and they shut it down
Obama censored hundreds of conservative groups. Is sam wanting anyone to take him seriously?
Ipso facto censored