patrick.net

Wow what a soyboy sell-out Rubio is - it's almost as if he secretly joined the democratic party. Glad that Trump took office. You can say and think whatever you want about Jones, but he is a true champion for the 1st amendment.

mell says

Wow what a soyboy sell-out Rubio is - it's almost as if he secretly joined the democratic party. Glad that Trump took office. You can say and think whatever you want about Jones, but he is a true champion for the 1st amendment.

Yes, he's out there defending Kapernick at every opportunity!! Of wait, no he's not....

LeonDurham says

mell says

Wow what a soyboy sell-out Rubio is - it's almost as if he secretly joined the democratic party. Glad that Trump took office. You can say and think whatever you want about Jones, but he is a true champion for the 1st amendment.

Yes, he's out there defending Kapernick at every opportunity!! Of wait, no he's not....

You are not arguing rationally. Nobody has taken away Kap's right to free speech. Alex Jones does not advocate his opinions on someone else's payroll. It's not that hard to grok that important difference. Alex Jones is championing everyone's free speech.

mell says

You are not arguing rationally. Nobody has taken away Kap's right to free speech. Alex Jones does not advocate his opinions on someone else's payroll. It's not that hard to grok that important difference. Alex Jones is championing everyone's free speech.

Wait, I thought that's what all the Trump cultists on here were doing? Saying that a private company MUST allow Alex Jones to have the right to air his views. How is that different from a private company not allowing Kapernick to air his views??

LeonDurham says

Wait, I thought that's what all the Trump cultists on here were doing? Saying that a private company MUST allow Alex Jones to have the right to air his views. How is that different from a private company not allowing Kapernick to air his views??

Kapernick was kicked off from Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, and had Disqus and various Ad Servers refuse to service his website ?

LeonDurham says

mell says

You are not arguing rationally. Nobody has taken away Kap's right to free speech. Alex Jones does not advocate his opinions on someone else's payroll. It's not that hard to grok that important difference. Alex Jones is championing everyone's free speech.

Wait, I thought that's what all the Trump cultists on here were doing? Saying that a private company MUST allow Alex Jones to have the right to air his views. How is that different from a private company not allowing Kapernick to air his views??

Very different because AJ is a paying client to them, not their employee. It's like a restaurant refusing to serve paying black people. It's fine if you want to advocate for the former, but then you also have to be cool with the latter. Everything else is obtuse and hypocritical.

Should also be mentioned that Infowars had Disqus and other services cancel their services on them, that were paid for..

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

Kapernick was kicked off from Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, and had Disqus and various Ad Servers refuse to service his website ?

What's the difference between the NFL silencing Kapernick and Twitter refusing to post Alex Jones videos?

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

Should also be mentioned that Infowars had Disqus and other services cancel their services on them, that were paid for..

Sounds like Infowars didn't have very good lawyers read their agreements with Disqus.

mell says

Very different because AJ is a paying client to them, not their employee. It's like a restaurant refusing to serve paying black people. It's fine if you want to advocate for the former, but then you also have to be cool with the latter. Everything else is obtuse and hypocritical.

So, according to the above logic, you're saying it's OK for a restaurant to fire someone because of their race then?

And it's apples and oranges anyway. Race is a protected class. Alex Jones' stupidity is not protected.

LeonDurham says

What's the difference between the NFL silencing Kapernick and Twitter refusing to post Alex Jones videos?

Is this question serious?

Kapernick is an employee on employer's dime. An entertainer expected to perform and at the very least not interfere with the trappings of a Football Game, such as the National Anthem. He deliberately insulted the Anthem on Company Time and caused a scandal and anger among paying customers and advertisers for that business by violating those standards.

Alex Jones operates Infowars, a private business. He paid for web services, such as Disqus, who quit citing vague, poorly defined 'standards' without naming specific acts. Social Media orchestrated in a silencing campaign with only a vague reference to "community standards", without specific acts mentioned.

Kapernick - Employee on Employer's Dime, Sports Entertainer Aggravating Paying Customers by a Concrete, Televised Specific Action
Alex Jones - Business Owner, Free Service, Political Bloviator that Service Providers Dropped without a Specific Action

mell says

Alex Jones does not advocate his opinions on someone else's payroll. It's not that hard to grok that important difference. Alex Jones is championing everyone's free speech.

Jones is free to speak all he wants. No one is required to pass it on or to do business with him. Seriously it's not a hard concept.

bob2356 says

Jones is free to speak all he wants. No one is required to pass it on or to do business with him. Seriously it's not a hard concept.

Excellent. When do we completely defund PBS/NPR?

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

Kapernick is an employee on employer's dime. An entertainer expected to perform and at the very least not interfere with the trappings of a Football Game, such as the National Anthem. He deliberately insulted the Anthem on Company Time and caused a scandal and anger among paying customers for that business by violating those standards.

OK good--we're getting somewhere now. So, you're OK with employers silencing the free speech of their employees then? And firing them because of it?

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

Alex Jones operates Infowars, a private business. He paid for web services, such as Disqus, who suddenly up and quit. Social Media orchestrated in a silencing campaign with only a vague reference to "community standards", without specific misdeeds mentioned.

And now you're saying private companies MUST do business with all people then? Regardless of what the owners believe? Is that correct?

LeonDurham says

OK good--we're getting somewhere now. So, you're OK with employers silencing the free speech of their employees then? And firing them because of it?

Only on company time.

It think it should be ILLEGAL to fire employees for free speech made outside company time.


LeonDurham says

And now you're saying private companies MUST do business with all people then? Regardless of what the owners believe? Is that correct?

We've been over this. Family owned single bakery, sure. Wonderbread as part of a huge corporation, no. This is protection for investors, to make sure executives are looking to maximize income and market share, not impose personal values via the company they manage (not own).

If Social Media is going to police non-criminal content, it should be held legally responsible for all the content.

We're not getting rid of Closely Controlled and Concentrated Legacy Media based in NY to replace it with Closely Controlled and Concentrated Big Tech in Silicon Valley.

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

We've been over this. Family owned single bakery, sure. Wonderbread as part of a huge corporation, no. This is protection for investors, to make sure executives are looking to maximize income and market share, not impose personal values via the company they manage (not own).

If Social Media is going to police non-criminal content, it should be held legally responsible for all the content.

We're not getting rid of Closely Controlled and Concentrated Legacy Media based in NY to replace it with Closely Controlled and Concentrated Big Tech in Silicon Valley.

lol--yes, we have. I just wanted you to reiterate the ridiculous hoops you have to jump through to try not to look like an obvious hypocrite.

"Social Media" is not doing anything. A private company is deciding who it wants to do business with. And you're, in effect, telling all private businesses that they can no longer make that decision--the Federal Government will make it for them.

LeonDurham says

lol--yes, we have. I just wanted you to reiterate the ridiculous hoops you have to jump through to try not to look like an obvious hypocrite.

So - you agree that Kapernick should have been fired, not merely not signed?

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

So - you agree that Kapernick should have been fired, not merely not signed?

No I don't agree that he SHOULD have been. I agree that his employer has the right to release him (and still abide by the terms of his contract).

LeonDurham says

No I don't agree that he SHOULD have been. I agree that his employer has the right to release him (and still abide by the terms of his contract).

Do you think Content Creators should have a successful channel pulled after years of being on a content streamer (and providing free revenue generating content and traffic to the platform) based on no specific reason?

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

Excellent. When do we completely defund PBS/NPR?

You really really have a hard time with this public/private concept.

LeonDurham says

OK good--we're getting somewhere now. So, you're OK with employers silencing the free speech of their employees then? And firing them because of it?

Employees don't have free speech on company time. If he chooses otherwise it's at his peril.

bob2356 says

You really really have a hard time with this public/private concept.

Oh, I understand subsidizing political speech.

Why should I pay to give Leftists a free microphone? If there's a market for NPR/PBS, let them raise money.

There's no problem with Media setting up an Internet Format. Obsolete, get rid of it.

This comment was sponsored by: Exxon, Running with Valdez, Smooth and Easy - Stop Nuclear Power. And by, The George Soros Open Societies. Immigrants are better than Americans.

bob2356 says

Employees don't have free speech on company time. If he chooses otherwise it's at his peril.

So you agree Kaepernik could have been fired, unless his contract specifically prevented that, yes?

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

We've been over this. Family owned single bakery, sure. Wonderbread as part of a huge corporation, no. This is protection for investors, to make sure executives are looking to maximize income and market share, not impose personal values via the company they manage (not own).

No difference at all. Been over this. It's between management and the stockholders. Period. Not anyone else's business, especially yours.

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

Why should I pay to give Leftists a free microphone? If there's a market for NPR/PBS, let them raise money.

Because your elected representative voted to fund it. Don't like it call your congressman. A little rusty on what was taught in american government 101?

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

Do you think Content Creators should have a successful channel pulled after years of being on a content streamer (and providing free revenue generating content and traffic to the platform) based on no specific reason?

I think the free market dictates that companies will maximize profit. If channel is profitable to stream, then someone will stream it.

LeonDurham says

I think the free market dictates that companies will maximize profit. If channel is profitable to stream, then someone will stream it.

Excellent, so you're for 100% Privatization of NPR and PBS?

I can't think of one reason, in the age of streaming media, Netflix, Hulu, Youtube, etc. why a channel needs to be set aside for "Public Broadcasting"

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

Excellent, so you're for 100% Privatization of NPR and PBS?

I can't think of one reason, in the age of streaming media, Netflix, Hulu, Youtube, etc. why a channel needs to be set aside for "Public Broadcasting"

I don't care either way. Get rid of them if it makes you feel better.

Rubio is gay?

TwoScoopsOfSpaceForce says

Excellent, so you're for 100% Privatization of NPR and PBS?

I can't think of one reason, in the age of streaming media, Netflix, Hulu, Youtube, etc. why a channel needs to be set aside for "Public Broadcasting"

Apparently your elected representatives can. Since it bothers you so much then why don't you call them up and ask what it is then report back to us.

I must compliment you on your mastery of strawmen and circular reasoning. Really first class.