Oldbear83 said:
"Unprecedented"?
Were you in a coma 2021-23?
Name 1 similar scenario.
Trump's first 100 days
767,042 Views |
14084 Replies |
Last: 7 min ago by FLBear5630
Name 1 similar scenario.
cowboycwr said:boognish_bear said:
Awkward photos...BREAKING:
— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 17, 2025
Saudi Arabia and Pakistan just signed a mutual defense agreement.
From now on, any attack on either country will be viewed as an attack on both 🇸🇦🇵🇰 pic.twitter.com/0R3GCQ9mcE
I hadn't heard about this before now and can't find much detailing it when I looked it up briefly.
Seems like an odd pair of countries to agree to this. Other than being Muslim I can't much they have in common or even how big of trade partners they are.
Saudi's have steered very clear of much of the Muslim cesspool of countries. Why they would dip their toes into this water is kinda bizarre
Facebook Groups at; Memories of Dallas, Mem of Texas, Mem of Football in Texas, Mem Texas Music and Through a Texas Lens. Come visit! Over 100,000 members and 100,000 regular visitors
Porteroso said:Oldbear83 said:
"Unprecedented"?
Were you in a coma 2021-23?
Name 1 similar scenario.
If you mean Democrats ignoring the Constitution when they don't like it, there was FDR 's relocation camps and of course the aftermath of the Palmer raids during Wilson's time.
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
Oldbear83 said:Porteroso said:Oldbear83 said:
"Unprecedented"?
Were you in a coma 2021-23?
Name 1 similar scenario.
If you mean Democrats ignoring the Constitution when they don't like it, there was FDR 's relocation camps and of course the aftermath of the Palmer raids during Wilson's time.
Oh, I was talking about what we were talking about, the feds trying to cancel TV shows they don't like.
Porteroso said:Oldbear83 said:
"Unprecedented"?
Were you in a coma 2021-23?
Name 1 similar scenario.
Biden Admin Defends Telling Fox News to Change Coverage of Biden
Not to mention the same administration trying to implement a ministry of truth.
Porteroso said:Osodecentx said:nein51 said:Porteroso said:
Ive never found Kimme funny, but there were affiliates who were telling Disney they were not going to show Kimmel's show anymore. That's why it is suspended, though now it seems he is mad, and wants out of the ABC contract.
I don't like the precedent of the White House advocating for removal of TV hosts it doesn't like. I read some of those statements as not so veiled threats which seems out of line to me.
Government action to regulate speech
It is unprecedented. Righty zealots love it because they see it as the government making late night a safe space for them. Anyone with a brain hates it because if the government will censor soeech that you hate, eventually it will censor speech you like.
But my point was that this seems to not be a result of the FCC chair's threat, but an affiliate in the South who will need FCC approval for a merger soon.
They are sucking up, not actually caving to federal pressure. Fine line, I know.
Unprecedented???? Have you ever read a history book?
Presidents, Congress, and the government in general have gone after journalists for a long time. They just used other methods to remove them instead of going on TV saying they should be fired.
Wilson used laws to get them arrested, their newspapers from being mailed, etc.
FDR banned media from press conferences of himself, his administration departments or even parts of the military. MacArthur was famous for only allowing press that was favorable to him.
Congress going after "communists."
Nixon. Obama. Biden and his only answering questions from certain agencies.
So yeah it is not unprecedented. It is just being done differently than the way your dems have done for a long time so you want to pretend it is the first time ever.
Porteroso said:Osodecentx said:nein51 said:Porteroso said:
Ive never found Kimme funny, but there were affiliates who were telling Disney they were not going to show Kimmel's show anymore. That's why it is suspended, though now it seems he is mad, and wants out of the ABC contract.
I don't like the precedent of the White House advocating for removal of TV hosts it doesn't like. I read some of those statements as not so veiled threats which seems out of line to me.
Government action to regulate speech
It is unprecedented. Righty zealots love it because they see it as the government making late night a safe space for them. Anyone with a brain hates it because if the government will censor soeech that you hate, eventually it will censor speech you like.
But my point was that this seems to not be a result of the FCC chair's threat, but an affiliate in the South who will need FCC approval for a merger soon.
They are sucking up, not actually caving to federal pressure. Fine line, I know.
They are pretending like this didn’t happen…
— Defiant L’s (@DefiantLs) September 18, 2025
pic.twitter.com/dCVKPV3jI4
— Kevin Smith 🇺🇸 (@Kevinsmithspc) September 18, 2025
Porteroso said:Oldbear83 said:Porteroso said:Oldbear83 said:
"Unprecedented"?
Were you in a coma 2021-23?
Name 1 similar scenario.
If you mean Democrats ignoring the Constitution when they don't like it, there was FDR 's relocation camps and of course the aftermath of the Palmer raids during Wilson's time.
Oh, I was talking about what we were talking about, the feds trying to cancel TV shows they don't like.
Thought you were talking about rights and limiting government, but I should have known those are sometimes convenient tools for the Left
That which does not kill me, will try again and get nastier
14 wrongs don't make a right. But the recently exposed FTC pressure tactics could definitely land in a constitutional court case. It stinks, regardless of who is doing it. You can't honor someone like Charlie Kirk who resisted censorship of his activities by taking it head on with speech and dialogue by going after the opposition in similar manner.cowboycwr said:Porteroso said:Osodecentx said:nein51 said:Porteroso said:
Ive never found Kimme funny, but there were affiliates who were telling Disney they were not going to show Kimmel's show anymore. That's why it is suspended, though now it seems he is mad, and wants out of the ABC contract.
I don't like the precedent of the White House advocating for removal of TV hosts it doesn't like. I read some of those statements as not so veiled threats which seems out of line to me.
Government action to regulate speech
It is unprecedented. Righty zealots love it because they see it as the government making late night a safe space for them. Anyone with a brain hates it because if the government will censor soeech that you hate, eventually it will censor speech you like.
But my point was that this seems to not be a result of the FCC chair's threat, but an affiliate in the South who will need FCC approval for a merger soon.
They are sucking up, not actually caving to federal pressure. Fine line, I know.
Unprecedented???? Have you ever read a history book?
Presidents, Congress, and the government in general have gone after journalists for a long time. They just used other methods to remove them instead of going on TV saying they should be fired.
Wilson used laws to get them arrested, their newspapers from being mailed, etc.
FDR banned media from press conferences of himself, his administration departments or even parts of the military. MacArthur was famous for only allowing press that was favorable to him.
Congress going after "communists."
Nixon. Obama. Biden and his only answering questions from certain agencies.
So yeah it is not unprecedented. It is just being done differently than the way your dems have done for a long time so you want to pretend it is the first time ever.
Trump: We won in 2020 big… We have already solved inflation, we solved prices pic.twitter.com/CPTMyujk8R
— Acyn (@Acyn) September 18, 2025
— Rachel Bitecofer 🗽🦆 (@RachelBitecofer) September 18, 2025
Faulkner: Speech comes with the expectation we have integrity when we use our speech. There should be consequences that are appropriate for people who are affected by it. You can't vilify one side if it is not true. Those types of things. pic.twitter.com/CGIbppmPmO
— Acyn (@Acyn) September 18, 2025
— Brendan Carr (@BrendanCarrFCC) September 18, 2025
FCC Chairman Brendan Carr: "I think it's worthwhile to have the FCC look into The View and some of those other programs." pic.twitter.com/efI9F9CvXz
— The Bulwark (@BulwarkOnline) September 18, 2025
This is a 9-0 Supreme Court decision from just last year. pic.twitter.com/CmoiGbGwJI
— Nico Perrino (@NicoPerrino) September 18, 2025
boognish_bear said:FCC Chairman Brendan Carr: "I think it's worthwhile to have the FCC look into The View and some of those other programs." pic.twitter.com/efI9F9CvXz
— The Bulwark (@BulwarkOnline) September 18, 2025
That would be a terrible message for the FCC and Trump to strongarm and threaten licenses for remarks about Charlie Kirk - who was known for being a big advocate of free speech and debating differing opinions.
MacCallum: The recent Fox polling has 52% saying the economy is worse under this administration. Unemployment at the highest rate in four years.
— Acyn (@Acyn) September 18, 2025
Trump: Fox polling—it’s the worst polling. I told Rupert Murdoch to get a new pollster because he stinks. pic.twitter.com/XHIoeiNMPt
Jack Bauer said:boognish_bear said:FCC Chairman Brendan Carr: "I think it's worthwhile to have the FCC look into The View and some of those other programs." pic.twitter.com/efI9F9CvXz
— The Bulwark (@BulwarkOnline) September 18, 2025
That would be a terrible message for the FCC and Trump to strongarm and threaten licenses for remarks about Charlie Kirk - who was known for being a big advocate of free speech and debating differing opinions.
Government will decide what speech is approved
Carr: We're going to back to that era where local TV stations, judging the public interest, get to decide what the American people think…
— Acyn (@Acyn) September 18, 2025
I don’t think this is the last shoe to drop… the consequences will continue to flow. pic.twitter.com/UFErQ9ealK
While Biden encouraged social media companies to censor Americans, President Trump is restoring our First Amendment rights.
— Brendan Carr (@BrendanCarrFCC) February 26, 2025
Now the E.U. is pressuring our tech companies to start censoring online content again. It’s important to push back on Europe’s effort to silence speech. pic.twitter.com/jYGqVhO3yG
President Biden is right.
— Brendan Carr (@BrendanCarrFCC) May 2, 2022
Political satire is one of the oldest and most important forms of free speech.
It challenges those in power while using humor to draw more people in to the discussion.
That’s why people in influential positions have always targeted it for censorship.
EatMoreSalmon said:Porteroso said:Oldbear83 said:
"Unprecedented"?
Were you in a coma 2021-23?
Name 1 similar scenario.
Biden Admin Defends Telling Fox News to Change Coverage of Biden
Not to mention the same administration trying to implement a ministry of truth.
They wrote a letter. This was the FCC chairman threatening their broadcasting license.
cowboycwr said:Porteroso said:Osodecentx said:nein51 said:Porteroso said:
Ive never found Kimme funny, but there were affiliates who were telling Disney they were not going to show Kimmel's show anymore. That's why it is suspended, though now it seems he is mad, and wants out of the ABC contract.
I don't like the precedent of the White House advocating for removal of TV hosts it doesn't like. I read some of those statements as not so veiled threats which seems out of line to me.
Government action to regulate speech
It is unprecedented. Righty zealots love it because they see it as the government making late night a safe space for them. Anyone with a brain hates it because if the government will censor soeech that you hate, eventually it will censor speech you like.
But my point was that this seems to not be a result of the FCC chair's threat, but an affiliate in the South who will need FCC approval for a merger soon.
They are sucking up, not actually caving to federal pressure. Fine line, I know.
Unprecedented???? Have you ever read a history book?
Presidents, Congress, and the government in general have gone after journalists for a long time. They just used other methods to remove them instead of going on TV saying they should be fired.
Wilson used laws to get them arrested, their newspapers from being mailed, etc.
FDR banned media from press conferences of himself, his administration departments or even parts of the military. MacArthur was famous for only allowing press that was favorable to him.
Congress going after "communists."
Nixon. Obama. Biden and his only answering questions from certain agencies.
So yeah it is not unprecedented. It is just being done differently than the way your dems have done for a long time so you want to pretend it is the first time ever.
This is unprecedented especially if what you listed were the worst examples you could find. You clearly do not have much in the think tank. Find a way to fill it back up.
boognish_bear said:While Biden encouraged social media companies to censor Americans, President Trump is restoring our First Amendment rights.
— Brendan Carr (@BrendanCarrFCC) February 26, 2025
Now the E.U. is pressuring our tech companies to start censoring online content again. It’s important to push back on Europe’s effort to silence speech. pic.twitter.com/jYGqVhO3yGPresident Biden is right.
— Brendan Carr (@BrendanCarrFCC) May 2, 2022
Political satire is one of the oldest and most important forms of free speech.
It challenges those in power while using humor to draw more people in to the discussion.
That’s why people in influential positions have always targeted it for censorship.
I remember when WaPo fact-checked an SNL skit that poked fun at Obama! These people have no humor
SNL skit suggests Obama's immigration executive action is unconstitutional - The Washington Post
Porteroso said:cowboycwr said:Porteroso said:Osodecentx said:nein51 said:Porteroso said:
Ive never found Kimme funny, but there were affiliates who were telling Disney they were not going to show Kimmel's show anymore. That's why it is suspended, though now it seems he is mad, and wants out of the ABC contract.
I don't like the precedent of the White House advocating for removal of TV hosts it doesn't like. I read some of those statements as not so veiled threats which seems out of line to me.
Government action to regulate speech
It is unprecedented. Righty zealots love it because they see it as the government making late night a safe space for them. Anyone with a brain hates it because if the government will censor soeech that you hate, eventually it will censor speech you like.
But my point was that this seems to not be a result of the FCC chair's threat, but an affiliate in the South who will need FCC approval for a merger soon.
They are sucking up, not actually caving to federal pressure. Fine line, I know.
Unprecedented???? Have you ever read a history book?
Presidents, Congress, and the government in general have gone after journalists for a long time. They just used other methods to remove them instead of going on TV saying they should be fired.
Wilson used laws to get them arrested, their newspapers from being mailed, etc.
FDR banned media from press conferences of himself, his administration departments or even parts of the military. MacArthur was famous for only allowing press that was favorable to him.
Congress going after "communists."
Nixon. Obama. Biden and his only answering questions from certain agencies.
So yeah it is not unprecedented. It is just being done differently than the way your dems have done for a long time so you want to pretend it is the first time ever.
This is unprecedented especially if what you listed were the worst examples you could find. You clearly do not have much in the think tank. Find a way to fill it back up.
The guy gave you several legitimate examples ….and you merely brushed it off.
Not remotely worth the effort to educate you.
JD Vance: "Our own government encouraged private companies to silence people...Under Donald Trump's leadership, we may disagree with your views, but we will fight to defend your right to offer it in the public square." (Feb. 2025) pic.twitter.com/cQWAIZzCV1
— Home of the Brave (@OfTheBraveUSA) September 18, 2025
cowboycwr said:boognish_bear said:
Awkward photos...BREAKING:
— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 17, 2025
Saudi Arabia and Pakistan just signed a mutual defense agreement.
From now on, any attack on either country will be viewed as an attack on both 🇸🇦🇵🇰 pic.twitter.com/0R3GCQ9mcE
I hadn't heard about this before now and can't find much detailing it when I looked it up briefly.
Seems like an odd pair of countries to agree to this. Other than being Muslim I can't much they have in common or even how big of trade partners they are.
Maybe they share a fear of Iran.
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Psalm 119:36
nein51 said:Porteroso said:
Ive never found Kimme funny, but there were affiliates who were telling Disney they were not going to show Kimmel's show anymore. That's why it is suspended, though now it seems he is mad, and wants out of the ABC contract.
I don't like the precedent of the White House advocating for removal of TV hosts it doesn't like. I read some of those statements as not so veiled threats which seems out of line to me.
Agreed. I also don't like the precedent of the govt threatening to pull licenses. Obama & Biden were bad enough but this could provide a template for worse abuses the next time the fascists get one of their own elected president.
“Incline my heart to your testimonies, and not to selfish gain!”
Psalm 119:36
Psalm 119:36
I'm almost embarassed for Swalwell...
Trump is firing comedians. That’s what happens in Russia and China. Cannot happen here. pic.twitter.com/iND054NI45
— Rep. Eric Swalwell (@RepSwalwell) September 18, 2025
BREAKING:
— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 18, 2025
The US State Department just approved Poland’s request to buy 253 Javelin anti-tank weapons & 2500+ FGM-148F Javelin All Up Rounds for $800 million
🇺🇸🇵🇱 pic.twitter.com/NqmEfXv6aq
ATL Bear said:14 wrongs don't make a right. But the recently exposed FTC pressure tactics could definitely land in a constitutional court case. It stinks, regardless of who is doing it. You can't honor someone like Charlie Kirk who resisted censorship of his activities by taking it head on with speech and dialogue by going after the opposition in similar manner.cowboycwr said:Porteroso said:Osodecentx said:nein51 said:Porteroso said:
Ive never found Kimme funny, but there were affiliates who were telling Disney they were not going to show Kimmel's show anymore. That's why it is suspended, though now it seems he is mad, and wants out of the ABC contract.
I don't like the precedent of the White House advocating for removal of TV hosts it doesn't like. I read some of those statements as not so veiled threats which seems out of line to me.
Government action to regulate speech
It is unprecedented. Righty zealots love it because they see it as the government making late night a safe space for them. Anyone with a brain hates it because if the government will censor soeech that you hate, eventually it will censor speech you like.
But my point was that this seems to not be a result of the FCC chair's threat, but an affiliate in the South who will need FCC approval for a merger soon.
They are sucking up, not actually caving to federal pressure. Fine line, I know.
Unprecedented???? Have you ever read a history book?
Presidents, Congress, and the government in general have gone after journalists for a long time. They just used other methods to remove them instead of going on TV saying they should be fired.
Wilson used laws to get them arrested, their newspapers from being mailed, etc.
FDR banned media from press conferences of himself, his administration departments or even parts of the military. MacArthur was famous for only allowing press that was favorable to him.
Congress going after "communists."
Nixon. Obama. Biden and his only answering questions from certain agencies.
So yeah it is not unprecedented. It is just being done differently than the way your dems have done for a long time so you want to pretend it is the first time ever.
Ahh I see. So no outcry when it is the left doing all the cancelling but when the right finally has had enough and starts using the lefts playbook it is wrong…
Porteroso said:cowboycwr said:Porteroso said:Osodecentx said:nein51 said:Porteroso said:
Ive never found Kimme funny, but there were affiliates who were telling Disney they were not going to show Kimmel's show anymore. That's why it is suspended, though now it seems he is mad, and wants out of the ABC contract.
I don't like the precedent of the White House advocating for removal of TV hosts it doesn't like. I read some of those statements as not so veiled threats which seems out of line to me.
Government action to regulate speech
It is unprecedented. Righty zealots love it because they see it as the government making late night a safe space for them. Anyone with a brain hates it because if the government will censor soeech that you hate, eventually it will censor speech you like.
But my point was that this seems to not be a result of the FCC chair's threat, but an affiliate in the South who will need FCC approval for a merger soon.
They are sucking up, not actually caving to federal pressure. Fine line, I know.
Unprecedented???? Have you ever read a history book?
Presidents, Congress, and the government in general have gone after journalists for a long time. They just used other methods to remove them instead of going on TV saying they should be fired.
Wilson used laws to get them arrested, their newspapers from being mailed, etc.
FDR banned media from press conferences of himself, his administration departments or even parts of the military. MacArthur was famous for only allowing press that was favorable to him.
Congress going after "communists."
Nixon. Obama. Biden and his only answering questions from certain agencies.
So yeah it is not unprecedented. It is just being done differently than the way your dems have done for a long time so you want to pretend it is the first time ever.
This is unprecedented especially if what you listed were the worst examples you could find. You clearly do not have much in the think tank. Find a way to fill it back up.
So people being arrested is not worse than getting fired????? Wow. And as usual all you have is personal attacks because you know you have lost.
boognish_bear said:BREAKING:
— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 18, 2025
The US State Department just approved Poland’s request to buy 253 Javelin anti-tank weapons & 2500+ FGM-148F Javelin All Up Rounds for $800 million
🇺🇸🇵🇱 pic.twitter.com/NqmEfXv6aq
Poland is the next leader of NATO.
If only because the Poles are willing to fight.
KaiBear said:boognish_bear said:BREAKING:
— Visegrád 24 (@visegrad24) September 18, 2025
The US State Department just approved Poland’s request to buy 253 Javelin anti-tank weapons & 2500+ FGM-148F Javelin All Up Rounds for $800 million
🇺🇸🇵🇱 pic.twitter.com/NqmEfXv6aq
Poland is the next leader of NATO.
If only because the Poles are willing to fight.
No kidding. Very impressed with those guys. Taking on Soros's Open Society is not easy in Europe
Facebook Groups at; Memories of Dallas, Mem of Texas, Mem of Football in Texas, Mem Texas Music and Through a Texas Lens. Come visit! Over 100,000 members and 100,000 regular visitors
GOP Senator Cynthia Lummis: "Under normal times, in normal circumstances, I tend to think that the First Amendment should always be sort of the ultimate right... I don't feel that way anymore." https://t.co/nLCbSPvLHR
— Taniel (@Taniel) September 18, 2025
Sen. Cynthia Lummis, R-Wyo., told Semafor that "an FCC license, it's not a right. It really is a privilege."
"Under normal times, in normal circumstances, I tend to think that the First Amendment should always be sort of the ultimate right. And that there should be almost no checks and balances on it. I don't feel that way anymore," Lummis added.
"I feel like something's changed culturally. And I think that there needs to be some cognizance that things have changed," she added. "We just can't let people call each other those kinds of insane things and then be surprised when politicians get shot and the death threats they are receiving and then trying to get extra money for security."
Free speech is the counterweight—it is the check on government control.
— Brendan Carr (@BrendanCarrFCC) December 30, 2023
That is why censorship is the authoritarian’s dream.