Comments 1 - 29 of 29 Search these comments
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 saysWow 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.
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??
mell saysYou 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??
Kapernick was kicked off from Twitter, Facebook, Youtube, and had Disqus and various Ad Servers refuse to service his website ?
Should also be mentioned that Infowars had Disqus and other services cancel their services on them, that were paid for..
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.
What's the difference between the NFL silencing Kapernick and Twitter refusing to post Alex Jones videos?
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.
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.
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.
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?
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.
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?
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).
Excellent. When do we completely defund PBS/NPR?
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?
You really really have a hard time with this public/private concept.
Employees don't have free speech on company time. If he chooses otherwise it's at his peril.
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).
Why should I pay to give Leftists a free microphone? If there's a market for NPR/PBS, let them raise money.
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.
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"
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"
www.youtube.com/embed/4puHukLe7Cw
I keep thinking of Jennifer Sellout Rubin pushing Mr. Wet as POTUS.