A Vote for Kamala Is a Vote for Tyranny

[Jarhyn]

I'm not sure what the solution is either because I want free speech and not tyranny. The people who seem to have the best ideas IMO say that we should encourage more speech in order to put down bad ideas better.

And I do believe it was better in the old days when there was regulation to provide both sides of an argument.

But what Harris says in her interview government taking down a social site is horrible IMO. That is the exact opposite of providing more free speech.

The problem is you don't recognize free speech when you see it.

Musk is most certainly not for free speech. He's for MAGA speech.

Facebook, likewise, is using a very conservative organization to identify "disinformation" and taking down leftist things on the flimsiest of pretexts.

I expect that very few people to the right of the aisle would be for free speech if they actually knew what it was.

I think a lot of right wingers' understandings of stuff begins and ends with themselves.

To be fair, Musk and Zuckerberg are under no obligation to provide their users access to free speech. They are private platforms... However the non-neutral nature of their platforms would exempt them from the "common carrier" sorts of protections that idemnify them as platforms from the actions of their users. At that point their lack of neutrality creates a liability that would be more than enough to act as cause to take the platform down, and I would argue should be used as cause.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

I'm old enough to remember when news media was regulated a lot.

That is because it used the public airwaves - a regulated resource - to provide its news.

Cable doesn't do that. It might be argued that the Internet does, at least in part...

Public airwaves are a regulated resource because they are an inherently limited resource. You simply can't have more than a certain number of stations in an area. Neither cable nor internet has any such hard limit and therefore doesn't warrant the sort of regulation that is applied to anything on the radio spectrum. That's why our older cellular devices got bricked--the more modern standards allow more data to flow over a given amount of spectrum.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

What's the answer though? There is no simple solution to this massive problem. It could start with the Fairness Doctrine being reinstated and applied not just to news media, but to social media sites as well. Rigorous education of our young people regarding the dangers and misinformation spread by social media could be another part of a more wide ranging effort to protect our democracy. The counter argument, and it's a legitimate one, is that overreach could and would almost certainly would happen in some instances. To me though, the potential problems with overreach is a much lesser threat than letting things continue as they are.

I don't think there's a true solution. However, I think digital signatures could be a big help. News sources should sign everything and signature verification should always be available without paywalls. (You put in what you want to test and the URL it supposedly came from. The site must respond with a yes/yes-but-quote/revised/deleted/no even if you are not a subscriber. It may respond with more, such as noting that it is being taken out of context. Yes-but-quote would mean they were saying someone else said it, it would apply to any material on the page that was not their statement.)

 

[Loren Pechtel]

HARRIS: -- that he has lost his privileges and it should be taken down. The bottom line is that you can't say that you have one rule for Facebook and you have a different rule for Twitter. The same rule has to apply, which is that there has to be a responsibility that is placed on these social media sites to understand their power. They are directly speaking to millions and millions of people without any level of oversight or regulation, and that has to stop.

Harris saying Trump should have his privilege removed for sure. But it is still unclear to me if she wants X taken down or Trump taken down. "It" can either be Trump or X.

That quote is in English and by a native speaker. In English the word "he" is never used in reference to a corporation. I can think of no case where it's used to refer to anything which never is living and male. (We can use "he" for things that were once living and for things which will someday be living (say, referring to plans for what a son will do), but I can't think of anything nonliving. Ships can be "she".)

Shitter is clearly not a he. Thus this quote must be referring to The Felon.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Trump calls for modifying 25th Amendment to make it possible to remove a vice president​

Ya gotta wonder why he's saying all of this shit if he doesn't want to be a dictator. Is pretty weird.

 

[Ford]

Trump calls for modifying 25th Amendment to make it possible to remove a vice president​

Ya gotta wonder why he's saying all of this shit if he doesn't want to be a dictator. Is pretty weird.

I read a couple articles today on Rawstory (both by the same reporterr). One suggested that Trump was cracking under the pressure and the other that he's lashing out because he knows he's losing it.

Donald Trump's recent admission that his speeches and answers to questions are larded with digressions and off-ramps into odd and often irrelevant anecdotes is a sign that he knows that he is slipping mentally, suggests one of his biographers who has known him for years.


In a column for the Guardian, Chris McGreal wrote that Trump's excuse at a speech that he "weaves" stories together to make a greater point should raise suspicions that he is— as McGreal put it — "losing it."


“The reason he’s now offering these convoluted explanations of his speech patterns in his public appearances is because he’s hyper-aware that people have noted that he’s making even less sense than he used to,” O'Brien explained. “What we’re seeing now is a reflection of someone who’s very troubled and very desperate.”

He then added, "He’s a serial liar and a serial fabulist. So much of that comes out that by the time you start to fact-check a statement or a tale, eight others have already landed. I don’t think it’s strategic, I just think it’s Trump being Trump. It protects him from greater accountability because it wears people down trying to keep up with him."

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Trump calls for modifying 25th Amendment to make it possible to remove a vice president​

Ya gotta wonder why he's saying all of this shit if he doesn't want to be a dictator. Is pretty weird.

I read a couple articles today on Rawstory (both by the same reporterr). One suggested that Trump was cracking under the pressure and the other that he's lashing out because he knows he's losing it.

Donald Trump's recent admission that his speeches and answers to questions are larded with digressions and off-ramps into odd and often irrelevant anecdotes is a sign that he knows that he is slipping mentally, suggests one of his biographers who has known him for years.


In a column for the Guardian, Chris McGreal wrote that Trump's excuse at a speech that he "weaves" stories together to make a greater point should raise suspicions that he is— as McGreal put it — "losing it."


“The reason he’s now offering these convoluted explanations of his speech patterns in his public appearances is because he’s hyper-aware that people have noted that he’s making even less sense than he used to,” O'Brien explained. “What we’re seeing now is a reflection of someone who’s very troubled and very desperate.”

He then added, "He’s a serial liar and a serial fabulist. So much of that comes out that by the time you start to fact-check a statement or a tale, eight others have already landed. I don’t think it’s strategic, I just think it’s Trump being Trump. It protects him from greater accountability because it wears people down trying to keep up with him."

It just seems like an oddly specific thing to bring up though, for someone who is completely losing it.

 

[Ford]

Trump calls for modifying 25th Amendment to make it possible to remove a vice president​

Ya gotta wonder why he's saying all of this shit if he doesn't want to be a dictator. Is pretty weird.

I read a couple articles today on Rawstory (both by the same reporterr). One suggested that Trump was cracking under the pressure and the other that he's lashing out because he knows he's losing it.

Donald Trump's recent admission that his speeches and answers to questions are larded with digressions and off-ramps into odd and often irrelevant anecdotes is a sign that he knows that he is slipping mentally, suggests one of his biographers who has known him for years.


In a column for the Guardian, Chris McGreal wrote that Trump's excuse at a speech that he "weaves" stories together to make a greater point should raise suspicions that he is— as McGreal put it — "losing it."


“The reason he’s now offering these convoluted explanations of his speech patterns in his public appearances is because he’s hyper-aware that people have noted that he’s making even less sense than he used to,” O'Brien explained. “What we’re seeing now is a reflection of someone who’s very troubled and very desperate.”

He then added, "He’s a serial liar and a serial fabulist. So much of that comes out that by the time you start to fact-check a statement or a tale, eight others have already landed. I don’t think it’s strategic, I just think it’s Trump being Trump. It protects him from greater accountability because it wears people down trying to keep up with him."

It just seems like an oddly specific thing to bring up though, for someone who is completely losing it.

Well he's latched onto the one thing that makes sense in his addled mind.

Right now, he's looking for something...ANYTHING...that will remove Harris from standing in his way. He very much wants to run against Joe Biden and not Kamala, because he needs to win in order to pardon himself and become President for Life. Somewhere he heard (probably when his own Cabinet members were discussing using it on him) that the 25th Amendment was a way to remove someone from office. But he's got it backwards. If Biden really were unable to continue his duties as President, the 25th would be available, but it doesn't apply to a VP. He just doesn't understand how things work at the Executive Branch level. Odd...considering that he once was in charge of the whole thing.

I put his call for "modifying the 25th Amendment" in the same bucket as his suggestion that shoving a light up someone's ass might cleanse them of COVID. He heard something once, misinterpreted it, and decided he'd bring it up as a possible solution to whatever ails him.

 

[thebeave]

When did Trump suggest "shoving a light up your ass" as a remedy for Covid? I musta missed that one.

 

[ideologyhunter]

When did Trump suggest "shoving a light up your ass" as a remedy for Covid? I musta missed that one.

Google it -- the video is hilarious. It was 4/23/20, at the WH coronavirus task force briefing. Trump of course hogged the mic, while behind him the lady (forgot her name) who supplied some stats to the press sat with a frozen smile as Trump tried to sound like a professor but made a complete ass of himself.
They had stated previously that the virus dies fast in direct sunlight, so Trump started riffing: "So supposing we hit the body with a tremendous, whether it's ultraviolet or just a very powerful light...And then I said, supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or some other way, and I think you said you're going to test that, too."
If I'm not mistaken, this was also the briefing where he opined on injecting disinfectants into the body. You know, like embalming therapy.

 

[Patooka]

When did Trump suggest "shoving a light up your ass" as a remedy for Covid? I musta missed that one.

There are 2 possibilities here.

1. You did miss that during 2020, in which case "do your own research"

2. You are being obtuse and not acting in good faith.

I know which way I'd bet...

 

[Ford]

When did Trump suggest "shoving a light up your ass" as a remedy for Covid? I musta missed that one.

.And then I said, supposing you brought the light inside the body, which you can do either through the skin or some other way, and I think you said you're going to test that, too."
If I'm not mistaken, this was also the briefing where he opined on injecting disinfectants into the body. You know, like embalming therapy.

To be 100 percent fair, he did not say the word "ass" or the phrase "up your ass." All he said was that you can bring "the light inside the body."

Maybe he was talking about shoving the light up your nose? A light in either ear? I mean, I had a light in my abdomen last month while I was having laproscopic surgery. Very powerful lights. I have pictures!

Oh shit...does that mean I'm immune to Covid now?! I guess I won't have to schedule that vaccine appointment at CVS! Give me an Ivermectin Z-Pack (seriously they're selling this on pro-Trump media) and I'll be invincible to the China virus!!!

 

[ideologyhunter]

To be 100 percent fair

Scrupulous accuracy, when it pertains to #45, is a misplaced virtue.

 

[Toni]

No I don't think Trump is a good choice either. For mostly different reason than you do though.

Have you take note yet that the “information” you quoted in your OP was fraudulent?

No

WTF? You just quoted the relevant post that SHOWS YOU she was talking about Trump, not X!

After looking into this further this is what I think. It was bad communication by Harris that can be taken either way. You can take it that she was talking about Trump or that she was talking about X. I also believe at this point that the video I posted was not fake but it was also purposefully not allowing speech that should have been heard before it started.

So anyway that it what I think so far. But as I look into it more my opinion might change again.

As for thanking everyone, yes everyone deserves a huge thank you for pointing this out to me.

No, you can only ‘take it that way’ if you are dishonest with yourself. Harris’s communications skills are very good. She is easy to understand and her reasoning is easy to follow.

Unless you don’t want to. Which is different than disagreeing with her. I have zero problems with people disagreeing with anyone but misrepresenting them and claiming your own dishonesty was really a problem with someone else’s communication is flat out dishonesty. You can pretend it’s something else all you want but no one else is required to buy your delusion.

 

[Ford]

To be 100 percent fair

Scrupulous accuracy, when it pertains to #45, is a misplaced virtue.

I was being a little sarcastic with that.

On my way home from errands this morning, I listened to a story on this very topic on the local public radio affiliate. They called it "sane-washing," but at least they covered it. (audio link)

Here & Now

 

[Swammerdami]

When did Trump suggest "shoving a light up your ass" as a remedy for Covid? I musta missed that one.

You can find it in this compilation:


Ms. Cooper has preserved other Teachings of the Orange Messiah in her Youtubes, e.g.

 

[robnisch]

JD Vance repeats baseless claim Haitian immigrants are eating pets as Ohio officials say there is no evidence

The viral claim about Haitian immigrants in Springfield, Ohio, has garnered millions of views on X.

www.cbsnews.com

It's all Kamala's fault, cause she is the boarder czar!

 

[barbos]

So Darth Vader and his daughter supports Kamala.

 

[Henry-Finland]

A Vote for Trump is a Vote for Russia!​

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

When did Trump suggest "shoving a light up your ass" as a remedy for Covid? I musta missed that one.

You didn't miss it. He didn't say that. He said things that were just slightly less stupid, as noted below.

So, supposing we hit the body with a tremendous - whether it's ultraviolet or just very powerful light, and I think you said that hasn't been checked but you're going to test it. And then I said, supposing you brought the light inside of the body, which you can do either through the skin or in some other way. And I think you said you're going to test that too. Sounds interesting,

And then I see the disinfectant where it knocks it out in a minute. One minute. And is there a way we can do something like that, by injection inside or almost a cleaning? So it'd be interesting to check that. I'm not a doctor. But I'm, like, a person that has a good you-know-what. *pointing to his head*

Don't take my word for it though, take Dr. Birx's physical reaction.

Spoiler