Happy New Tangent--From Political Memes Thread

The government has the right to speak, as well. That includes saying to a company "You should remove these kinds of posts because they are harmful." Doing that alone does not begin to violate anyone's First Amendment Rights until it crosses the line into "You should remove these kinds of posts because they are harmful or else." Then you start to get in a gray area, where the details matter. What was the type of the speech the government was trying to prevent? What was the rationale behind it trying to prevent it? How serious and immediate was the threat? Numerous other factors might come into play.

For instance, if a city says "We're not going to give you a permit to hold a protest in front of the mayor's house. If you protest there, you will be arrested." that could be deemed an appropriate limitation on someone's free speech rights, as the courts have approved reasonable time/place/manner restrictions.

Public health is one of the areas where the government's powers of curbing speech is the strongest.

So even though there were a couple statements from press people to the effect of "If the social media companies don't do more to stop the spread of misinformation about Covid, perhaps we will have to look at re-examining the regulations that govern their use," that is a pretty weak example of your "jawboning."

Wow 5 memes in the last page, such content much political

Harmful to Pfizer's stock value isn't necessarily harmful to the population. And none of that responds to the censoring of speech that was NOT "misinformation," concerning questions about the effectiveness of masks or the safety of rushed vaccines. Johnny Ten Followers on Twitter saying "My whole family got triple boosted and wear masks 24/7, and then my teenaged son died of myocarditis" is anecdotal and not proof, but neither is it misinformation. What it is, is inconvenient to those who saw a pandemic as an opportunity to grab power and profit. Arguing publicly about whether it was engineered from a lab or contracted from a fucking pangolin is not "misinformation," it's a conversation. If you find yourself at odds with free expression and the free dissemination of inconvenient facts and contemplating censorship of citizens on that basis, you have lost your way. The ends do not justify the means.

I can't speak to the various things that the government supposedly pushed social media platforms to clamp down on off the top of my head. Can you give specific examples with links? If so, we can talk about those.

I think a previous time that we discussed the topic, FF linked to this article that talked about "jawboning" from a right-wing think-tank:

https://www.cato.org/briefing-paper...tail-government-social-media#censorship-proxy

As even that article admits, "Finally, not all government requests are constitutionally objectionable."

We've already been through that in the Twitter Files. Government agents in direct contact with a social media employees to muzzle certain opinions, people and subjects on behalf of big pharma. It happened. It is a fact. But nobody cared, so I'm not bothering again.

Nobody ever talks about the misinformation that they spread like Biden himself saying that if you get the vaccine, you can’t get infected. The Taliban is on Twitter and they weren’t banned from misinformation. They targeted conservatives and people they didn’t like because that’s what fascist s do.

Pretty sure that neither Biden nor anyone from his administration said that if you get the vaccine, you can't get infected.

Please point to any link or video clip in which Biden or anyone in his administration said that a vaccine would eliminate any chance of infection or anything close to that ballpark.

If you look at that full town hall, and the statements that he put out before and after, it's pretty clear that he acknowledges that you can get COVID despite being vaccinated. Indeed, what he was in the process of saying was that with the variants, including Delta, that it's not clear if shots were going to work. It seemed like he got the thought garbled.

https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/biden-if-vaccinated-wont-get-covid/

He certainly set the record straight that you can get COVID despite being vaccinated in various places.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing...nt-biden-on-fighting-the-covid-19-pandemic-3/

So yes, it looks like if you take that clip in isolation, Biden misspoke and deserves to be taken to task for that, as Snopes and others have done. But in terms of deliberately lying to people to make them think that vaccines are going to offer absolute immunity, that's not the approach he took.

Ok. So you’ve posted a clip of some Democrat saying something you find “unconstitutional”.

…. So, why do you dismiss when others do the same with trump?

Even more important, why do you say you are not a trump supporter but do that?

Thank you for your service.

Ok. Yea, that’s a totally drunk post.

Still, you get the intent of the post.

Can you answer whe you know I’m asking?

New tangent!!! More than meets the eye!!
Autobots wage their battle to!! Destroy the evil forces of!! The Decepticons!!!

If this tangent was done in person is some red state dive bar it would mean Sham and Dian were going to have a theesome with an underage drunk boy.

Thank god this is only WF, and not your normal night at some townie shithole in a flyover state.