American Politics

[Chris P]

You know Tooms does not even live in the USA? He reads this biased left wing crap and then spews all this nonsense about how he knows what is best for a country he does not live in.

Yeah, typical limousine liberal. Like all those shitlibs in nice, peaceful, prosperous, 95% white Vermont or Martha's Vineyard saying how much they support the illegals pouring across the southern border thousands of miles away.

But when some illegals were sent to Martha's Vineyard, they called in the army and had them dragged away within two days.

Do as I say, not as I do.

[Chris P]

You know how ISG deleted your post on 10-19-22 because you violated their policy. They can do that. Just as Twitter deleted a whole bunch of people who violated their terms of agreement.

The first difference is that in no way can ISG be considered "the public square". Its user base is far too small. Twitter, by contrast, is extremely widely used, and cited and seen even by people who don't have accounts. It is the online public square.

The second matter is that it was not just leftists working at Twitter who were censoring rightwing users (which would be bad enough). It was that they were doing so in collusion with the Washington alphabet agencies and leading democrats, aka the deep state / the swamp.

[ChuchoLoco]

Checkmate, I am giving you one more chance and then I am done.

I am not talking about whether the executive branch has the right to make the law. They do. I think you are so dumb you do not even get what the first amendment is .

The Executive Branch doe not make laws in the USA. That is the job of Congress, Senate and House of Representatives. The Executive may or may not sign it into law but does not make the laws. The President can issue Executive Orders but they are not law. The First Amendment is about the Government censorship or whatever you want to call it with regard to Free Speech and Religion and not what private entities may or may not do.

The First Amendment may protect your right to call someone dumb in public but does not prohibit a private entity such as ISG from not allowing such language. In this case ISG does not seem to care and allows it but that is their choice not the government's.

[JustTK]

You said China was banished from the world economic community. I showed you it was not.

No, you showed me that China was slling rubber ducks to Japan. You gave a non-sequitor.

Venezuela is not poor because of the USA TK. You went there and said that very thing. Venezuela is poor because their leader Hugo Chavez said it was okay to steal. Period. And he did not just steal from the USA. He stole from Europe, Russia, and China. But you go there and you say it is all the USA.

My opinion on Vnzla has nothing to do with my visit there. I formed my opinion based on economic and political evidence prior to that. I don't agree with you at all. Vnzla has been a poor country for the vast majority of its citizens since time immemorial. It has been run by rich and corrupt oligarchs since they discovered oil. They enriched themselves and were allowed to do it bcos they allowed the USA and other resource seeking countries to expropriate its oil. Whether Chavez did or did not steal money has not been proven and I doubt it would make any difference. It would hardly be a drop in the ocean compared to the hardship born by its people due to the murderous sanctions of the USA govt.

You demonize the USA when Americans are working deals where we get rich and the country we visit gets rich too.

Not at all. It would be great if that were ever true. I demonise the USA govt bcos it overthrows govts that will not allow the USA to exploit its resources, when it imposes puppet regimes that oppress the local people so that they can enrich themselves.

[CheckMate1]

Checkmate, I am giving you one more chance and then I am done.

I am not talking about whether the executive branch has the right to make the law. They do. I think you are so dumb you do not even get what the first amendment is about.

Are the people who make the laws allowed to censor those parties that are critical of them? Yes or no. If you answer yes, we are done and you are a clueless moron.

Did that happen with Twitter? Did executive branch officials ask that Twitter censor individuals? Yes or no. If you answer no, you are VERY ill informed, and I am done with you.

The constitution varies? And who are those damaged supposed to sue? Federal officials have immunity, and Elon Musk has taken over and aired all the crap that the previous ownership did wrong. Suing the federal government and winning via Bivens lawsuit is nearly impossible and costly to boot and the former Twitter employees who engaged in censorship are gone.

Again, you do not know what you are talking about. https://www.texastribune.org/2022/09...ial-media-law/.

A Texas law prohibiting large social media companies from banning users' posts based on their political viewpoints will go into effect after a federal appeals court on Friday lifted a block placed on the statute.

NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association sued Texas after the law, known as House Bill 20, was passed last year, arguing that internet companies have a First Amendment right to curate content posted on their platforms and decide which types of speech they saw fit to be there.

In its ruling, the 5th USA Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed with the plaintiffs' argument that the law was unconstitutional, saying they were seeking protection to "muzzle free speech. ".

Today we reject the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say," the ruling says.

The CCIA said the ruling forced tech companies to give equal treatment to all manners of speech, including extremist views.

You are contradicting yourself here. You said they can do whatever they wanted. Then you said they can do whatever they want within the parameters of the law, but you just admitted that you do not even know what all the state laws are.

So why are you posting corporations can do whatever they want when you do not even know what the laws are that regulate them?

And what am I supposed to think? You think it is okay that the bureaucrats and Twitter employees censored Republicans? And now you are saying you are a former Dem?

Come on man. You labeled yourself with that crap.

1. You should really read what you wrote. "Did executive branch officials ask that Twitter censor individuals?" Executive branch official ASKING is not the same as law making. (examples: Trump administration asked Twitter to take down Chrissy Teigen post, or Biden administration asked Twitter to take down posts) Executive branch doesn't make laws, they do, however make certain ruling based on what Congress have given them the power to do, ie. Enforce the borders as they see fit. This is how you get different enforcement codes (rules) from one administration to another.

"The ruling Friday from the 5th USA Circuit Court of Appeals likely means the case, which could have wide implications for online speech, will go before the USA Supreme Court again. " This is at the very top of the article below the headline.

You know how ISG deleted your post on 10-19-22 because you violated their policy. They can do that. Just as Twitter deleted a whole bunch of people who violated their terms of agreement. Then, Elon bought the Twitter, and changed the policy, which is his perogative. See how I don't jump up and down when policy changed, because it is not my property.

I wrote "US constitution and state laws can vary. " You read and replied, "The constitution varies?" As in Mr Phillips case, he sued the state through the Federal Court system.

You are correct that I do NOT know ALL the laws, in every state. I'm willing to bet you don't either. I can cite and comment on what the current laws that I know exist. Let's assume you've read more laws than me.

And it's funny that you asked "what am I supposed to think?"

You wrote this on 2-22-22, "Is that what happened? Damn right it did. You must be one of these dumb libs with your heads buried in the sand and have never heard of the Twitter files."

You do you. I can't help another grown man think.

I actually don't need you to give me chances on ISG forum. You have the right to express your opinions. If you choose not to interact with me or others, it's just a click away. But, I won't ever call you dumb, as you have expressed many times about me and others. This is a tactic usually employed by Bullies who want to be heard or get things his / her way.

Life is short, enoy it. Turn that frown upside down.

[PVMonger]

Only the douchiest dem doofus would claim "censorship" for a tweet that wasn't taken down (and is probably still there today), but look the other way when the entire Twitter account of one of America's biggest newspapers is suspended in order to prevent them publicising the Biden crime family laptop story.

Only a Repub would call somebody a "douche" after complaining about name calling.

Only a Repub would say that Twitter blocking the NY Post for violating Twitter's "hacked materials policy" was wrong. "Twitter initially said the Post stories ran afoul of its "hacked materials" policy, as the Rupert Murdoch-owned paper claimed the source for its Biden exposés was info supplied by Trump personal lawyer Rudy Giuliani, who allegedly obtained it from a MacBook Pro of unknown origin that had been abandoned in computer-repair shop in Delaware. " They had a policy and the NY Post violated it. You are upset that Twitter gave Repubs a big middle finger. https://variety.com/2020/digital/new...ls-1234820449/.

Having a discussion with a Repub is like playing chess with a pigeon. The pigeon just knocks all the pieces over. Then shits all over the board. Then struts around like it won.

[EihTooms]

You know Tooms does not even live in the USA? He reads this biased left wing crap and then spews all this nonsense about how he knows what is best for a country he does not live in.

You boys and girls have been making personal value judgements about Dems and Repubs with that "good" vs "bad" obsession of yours.

I rarely if ever use those words to describe any politician, much less entire political parties. But you boys and girls trot out those value judgements all the time.

Very telling.

See, I only point out the irrefutable historical facts regarding Dems passing the legislation I have listed under certain conditions, producing and presiding over every major recovery, economic expansion and historic job gains and none of the Great Depressions / Great Recessions and Massive Jobs Destruction of the past 100 years while Repubs have passed nothing of note under the same conditions, produced and presided over every Great Depression, Great Recession and Massive Job Losses, etc.

Yep, it seems historical data and the actual record of results for America is the same no matter where you verify and cite it. Even in a different country, it remains the same, totally unchanged by ones proximity to the unbiased record sources.

You seem to have concluded those Dem results are "good" and the Repub results are "bad."

Well, those are your value judgements based on the facts but I have never really expressed such a thing either way.

Ya' know: I Report, You Decide.

The big difference is, unlike Faux News, what I have reported for you to pass judgement on is true, I know it to be true and so do you and everyone else.

Interesting that most of you have decided "Dems good and Repubs bad" based solely on the data and actual record of results, definitely not based on me telling you which is which. LOL. Obviously, a lot of Repub voters think those Great Repub Depressions, Great Repub Recessions and Massive Repub Job Losses are "good" and keep voting for them and that those Great Dem Recoveries and Historic Job Gains are "bad."

Again, those are personal value judgements.

[Elvis 2008]

I have this image of someone (definitely not Tooms, mods!) setting up a soapbox on a street in democrat San Francisco in democrat California to livestream one of his rants about how great the democrats are, and in the background a bunch of homeless junkies are lying strung out on the sidewalk. One of them wakes up, stumbles over and relieves himself on not-Tooms's shoes, but not-Tooms doesn't notice because the stink of human excrement is already so strong everywhere in the city.

You know Tooms does not even live in the USA? He reads this biased left wing crap and then spews all this nonsense about how he knows what is best for a country he does not live in.

[Elvis 2008]

Suffice to say I don't agree with anything you say, and I haven't the time to go thru and address each one of your Gish Gallop. Striaght out, the first thing you wrote is a non-sequitor. Every country in the world has a no 1 trading partner. It says absolutely zero about whether a country is banished from / throttled in the world economic community or not. Even if a country sold 1 rubber duck to another country, it would have a nr 1 trade partner. Total nonsense from the getgo Elvis.

You said China was banished from the world economic community. I showed you it was not. I do not get what your problem is with the USA.

Venezuela is not poor because of the USA TK. You went there and said that very thing. Venezuela is poor because their leader Hugo Chavez said it was okay to steal. Period. And he did not just steal from the USA. He stole from Europe, Russia, and China. But you go there and you say it is all the USA.

You demonize the USA when Americans are working deals where we get rich and the country we visit gets rich too. That is what happened with me in Colombian and Chile. Argentina, Bolivia, and Venezuela ripped me off, and all their countries are in the shitter. If your say stealing is okay, in the long term, your country is going to get fucked.

Yes, Americans have fucked over third world countries, but in your imagination, you think they have not done the same or worse to us. Do you know how many Latin countries have defaulted on their debt and screwed people who lent them money? The USA has never defaulted on its debt ever. That should tell you something right?

[Elvis 2008]

Checkmate, I am giving you one more chance and then I am done.

1. Covid testing. Any sovereign country can make rules on entering the country as they wish. Executive branch is in charge of this aspect. Non sequitor (1st Amendment -free speech).

I am not talking about whether the executive branch has the right to make the law. They do. I think you are so dumb you do not even get what the first amendment is about.

Are the people who make the laws allowed to censor those parties that are critical of them? Yes or no. If you answer yes, we are done and you are a clueless moron.

Did that happen with Twitter? Did executive branch officials ask that Twitter censor individuals? Yes or no. If you answer no, you are VERY ill informed, and I am done with you.

US constitution and state laws can vary. When it does, a person or organization can address their grievances through the court system.

The constitution varies? And who are those damaged supposed to sue? Federal officials have immunity, and Elon Musk has taken over and aired all the crap that the previous ownership did wrong. Suing the federal government and winning via Bivens lawsuit is nearly impossible and costly to boot and the former Twitter employees who engaged in censorship are gone.

Political Affiliation is not a category that is not a thing because it is easily changeable.

Again, you do not know what you are talking about. https://www.texastribune.org/2022/09...ial-media-law/.

A Texas law prohibiting large social media companies from banning users' posts based on their political viewpoints will go into effect after a federal appeals court on Friday lifted a block placed on the statute.

NetChoice and the Computer & Communications Industry Association sued Texas after the law, known as House Bill 20, was passed last year, arguing that internet companies have a First Amendment right to curate content posted on their platforms and decide which types of speech they saw fit to be there.

In its ruling, the 5th USA Circuit Court of Appeals disagreed with the plaintiffs' argument that the law was unconstitutional, saying they were seeking protection to "muzzle free speech. ".

Today we reject the idea that corporations have a freewheeling First Amendment right to censor what people say," the ruling says.

The CCIA said the ruling forced tech companies to give equal treatment to all manners of speech, including extremist views.

I have NOT said corporations can do whatever they want. Within the parameters of the law is how these corporations will operate.

These are private businesses (not state owned) and can or can not publish whatever they wish, and are NOT related to First Amendment free speech protection.

You are contradicting yourself here. You said they can do whatever they wanted. Then you said they can do whatever they want within the parameters of the law, but you just admitted that you do not even know what all the state laws are.

So why are you posting corporations can do whatever they want when you do not even know what the laws are that regulate them?

Also don't label people you don't know.

And what am I supposed to think? You think it is okay that the bureaucrats and Twitter employees censored Republicans? And now you are saying you are a former Dem?

Come on man. You labeled yourself with that crap.

[Spidy]

Why the sudden interest in test scores in a particular city? Interest in a certain laptop computer or Hillary Klingon's server and emails waning? But wait. KKKarlson has gobs of videos of citizens strolling through Das Kapital. Not interested in classified documents roaming Willy Nilly or impending criminal indictments?

What's just as egregious, is Fucker Carlson, the on-air court jester of "Cancel Culture", when it comes to "owning" the libs, but not so much when it comes to himself.

In more bombshell emails and texts, he was caught and outed, in a Dominion Voting System (DVS) court filing emails, advocating and went as far as to demand, that the company fire a FOX reporter, who had the audacity to fact check a tweet from Trump, that falsely accused the DVS of fraudulent voting machines.

Tucker Carlson (in a text to Sean Hannity):
"Please get her fired.
Seriously...What the F***? I'm actually shocked...It needs to stop immediately, like tonight.
It's measurably hurting the company.
The stock price down.
Not a joke."

Under pressure from the top brass at FOX and fear of being fired, the FOX reporter the next morning, deleted her tweet.

[Spidy]

What the moron brigade will do is say that this is all "fake news". That's why it is so easy to be a Repub. If something doesn't conform to your warped worldview, you just scream LŰGENPRESSE at the top of your lungs and the rest of the moron brigade just nods.

Seriously, folks; sleep well in the knowledge that every kid in Baltimore can tell you what the square root of 8 is inside of five seconds. That hurdle has been surmounted now and forever into the future with the help of that little calculator / selfie device stuffed in their hip pocket.

But if they're fed and believe the America-hating horse shit shoveled down the throats of Faux News viewers and most other winger sources viewers, the country is doomed.

More "lying press", from the Dominion Voting System (DVS) court filing emails and in an exchange of text/emails, between those at the top of Foxy Muse and their on-air star pundits, that think their Sh*t don't stink.

Tucker Carlson:
"Sidney Powell is lying by the way. I caught her. It's insane."

Laura Ingraham:
Sidney is a complete nut. No one will work with her. Ditto with Rudy {Giuliani}"

Tucker Carlson:
"It's unbelievably offensive to me. Our viewers are good people and they believe it."

Insane, lying, complete nut: How Fox News stars rejected Trumps election conspiracies while network pushed them
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/w...-b2285051.html

In other instances Tucker Carlson, referred to Sidney Powell as a, "crazy person", "lunatic", "unguided missile", "dangerous as hell", "nutcase" and "poison". And in one text message to his producer (Alex Pfeiffer), even called her (Sidney Powell), an "F***ing b*****"

And even Sean Hannity, "...that whole narrative that Sidney was pushing, I did not believe it for one second."

But the bitter-sweet irony is...you then have to wonder, who's worst?

Is it:
a) Sidney Powell, the lying "F*ing b*****", nutjob conspirator, who thinks it was fraud by way of an Italian satellite DVS machine hack? Or;

b) Fucker Carlson, Laura "shut up and dribble" Ingraham and Sean Hannity, the lying "F*ing on-air hypocrites", who then takes those lies, falsehoods and misinformation, and knowingly, boldface spews and peddles it, to the (gullible) "good people" watching, FOX nation?

So, is it A or B?

[Chris P]

the "D-bag" word

Haha! Is "the the-word" the new "and-word"? Will leftist snowflakes be reduced to screeching, tearful meltdowns, trembling and rocking in a ball in the corner, if anyone says it in their vicinity?

[Chris P]

Tooms' posts are so Dems good, Republicans bad, no one needs to read what he says. Every post is the same. He is like Bagdad Bob in the Iraq war.

I have this image of someone (definitely not Tooms, mods!) setting up a soapbox on a street in democrat San Francisco in democrat California to livestream one of his rants about how great the democrats are, and in the background a bunch of homeless junkies are lying strung out on the sidewalk. One of them wakes up, stumbles over and relieves himself on not-Tooms's shoes, but not-Tooms doesn't notice because the stink of human excrement is already so strong everywhere in the city.

Then as he continues with his Bagdad Bob speech ("the republicans are committing suicide in their tanks! When a bunch of thugs raid the Apple store behind him, and make off with tens of thousands of dollars of gear. There are a group of police outside but they do nothing, partly because the democrat mayor has ordered them not to risk criminals' wellbeing by chasing them, and partly because they don't want to be stabbed, shot, or George Floyded while defending themselves.

Instead the cops approach not-Tooms and arrest him for making a speech on public property without a permit. Not-Tooms protests that it is his First Amendment right, but they don't seem to know what the First Amendment is. As they handcuff him, not-Tooms slips on a patch of human shit and lands facefirst in the yellow river streaming down the street from the junkie who earlier pissed on his shoes.

As the cops pick him up and push him into the squad car, his last action is to scream "Long Live the Democrat Party!

[Chris P]

My goodness indeed...kkkk! It that your fancy way off saying I don't know what top and bottom of the illiteracy and literacy rate tables look like.

Spin it any way you want. I think most people know what the bottom and top of a chart looks like, never mind the percentages you care to spin.

Red states like Mississippi and Louisiana are commonly at the bottom illiteracy and literacy rate tables. Period.

I have already debunked this. The literacy rate correlates perfectly with the percentage of white people in the state. The over 90% white limousine liberal states like Vermont and New Hampshire obviously have higher literacy rates than places like Mississippi and Louisiana which are a third black.

The state that has got much worse (in literacy and everything else) is California, courtesy of decades of open borders.