***Official Political Discussion Thread***

Lost in the shuffle today is a little something of potential interest to free speech enthusiasts, if the least principled among them can tear themselves away from harassing people who’ve used their own free speech to criticize the likes of Joe Rogan or Dave Chappelle:


Beyond the obvious chilling effect on media outlets (including, ironically, Fox News and anyone running Swift Boat style attack ads), there are potentially major ramifications here for social media platforms when taken in concert with conservatives’ ambition to amend Section 230 of the CDA and treat platforms as publishers.

I wonder if Facebook is beginning to regret their part in this.

Methodical Management Methodical Management I didn’t read any part of your most likely insulting reply. Keep it to yourself and enjoy your political party thread.

Peace.

Did-that-go-the-way-you-thought-The-Other-Guys.gif


My, an insulting reply, you say? By what standard: the one you apply to Rusty or the one you apply to yourself?
I guess you'd have to actually read my post to find out, so it seems we'll never know. That's a shame.

Rest assured that all due consideration will be granted to your unsolicited suggestions.

Perhaps the next time you feel the urge to take some petty swipe at me, you'll take your own advice, keep it to yourself, and continue to enjoy your NikeTalk experience.


But what was their response time for the phrase “shut up?”
 
Lost in the shuffle today is a little something of potential interest to free speech enthusiasts, if the least principled among them can tear themselves away from harassing people who’ve used their own free speech to criticize the likes of Joe Rogan or Dave Chappelle:

Beyond the obvious chilling effect on media outlets (including, ironically, Fox News and anyone running Swift Boat style attack ads), there are potentially major ramifications here for social media platforms when taken in concert with conservatives’ ambition to amend Section 230 of the CDA and treat platforms as publishers.
I'll never stop arguing that Clarence Thomas never stopped being the guy he was in college.


Maybe, he just figured that instead of being a black nationalist, he would just become a nationalist. The authoritarian - and legal arsonist - urges remain the same.

Thomas dissented to denial of certiorari in Coal Ridge Ministries Media v Southern Poverty Law Center with an opinion giving us more than a hint of precisely what he has in store. Freedom of the press has a rightwing target on its back. Thomas wrote that the court should “revisit” the landmark free press case of the 20th century, New York Times v Sullivan.


“Revisit” is judicial talk for “overrule”.

Thomas asserted that “New York Times and its progeny have allowed media organizations and interest groups ‘to cast false aspersions on public figures with near impunity’.” He offered no evidence and made no argument in defense of his claim that the existing burdens on those who sue for defamation are indeed excessive, given the competing interests at stake.

Make no mistake. Overruling Times v Sullivan to make it much easier for public figures to sue their critics would strangle the media’s ability to report freely and speak critically about public figures, especially elected officials.

L B Sullivan was a city police commissioner in Montgomery, Alabama, who sued the Times and 60 eminent Americans over a full-page 1960 ad they had placed to raise money for Martin Luther King Jr’s budding civil rights movement. The ad called police actions against nonviolent protestors in Montgomery “an unprecedented wave of terror”.

The history of 20th century totalitarianism tells us that to rule absolutely, strongmen need to destroy the press to keep truth from the public. Thomas’ dissent is effectively inviting litigants like Sarah Palin, who is appealing her loss, to help him pave that road to American carnage.

Thomas’ signal is a warning. There is comfort in the fact that he signed his dissent alone and in the prospect that a people alert to dangerous signs can keep their republic if they keep up their guard.

My heart wants to agree with the optimistic tone of the conclusion, but my eyes and ears disagree.
 
Welp EPA power struck down. Those people living in red states enjoy your dirty water and cancer. 🤦‍♂️
This is wild, Red States sued before any rules were put in place. This is ****ing ridiculous

But population and greenhouse gases don't respect state lines, so yeah, everyone will suffer.

Things are so bleak that I am low-key happy they didn't destroy the entire Administrative State today like they could
 
This is wild, Red States sued before any rules were put in place. This is ****ing ridiculous

But population and greenhouse gases don't respect state lines, so yeah, everyone will suffer.

Things are so bleak that I am low-key happy they didn't destroy the entire Administrative State today like they could

Really need to move to Hawaii. mplsdunk mplsdunk was onto something.
 
Back
Top Bottom