Page #20
Pages: #1... #15 #16 #17 #18 #19 #20 #21 #22 #23 #24 ...#55
New Comment Rating: -3 Similar topics: 1.TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME 2.No Collusion. 3.TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME analysis. 4.democrats and associated press close believeallwomen twitter account after Biden sexual assault case came to light 5.Ok,here is a thread for discusson regarding Biden Comments: | ||
You must be logged in to post here. Log in
Past generations were taught to default to the masculine pronoun he, called the “generic” or “neutral” he. The idea was that the generic he could represent either a male or female person.
only registered users can see external links
Sure, Trump supporters, keep pretending you care about free speech.
When you say, "Person x did this and is this", you should have to show where the info came from and be held accountable.
I mean really< just last week you 2 were talking about how great it was that a internet commentator was sued and is expected to pay 9 billion dollars. Now you are bitching because someone wants reporters held acccountable?
You can try to have it both ways but in the end it won't WORK.
says something.
Second: It's the right-wing media that misuses the first amendment way more.
Fox'News' is literally spouting Nazi hate-speech on a daily basis.
Third: The first amendment should protect journalist exactly from what Trump suggests.
He's a fascist who doesn't give a damn about your constitution and amendments.
He only accuses the media of lying, when they fact check his lies.
Fourth: Lying is not limited by the first amendment. That's why Fox'News' is just allowed to make up 'facts' to suit their narrative and because it's cheaper than doing actual journalism.
There are limits to free speech, they are clearly described, you should read it sometimes. But protection of sources is a irreducible freedom of the press right.
It's crazy how you compare Alex Jones to journalists. Alex Jones obliterated the
limits on free speech, and acted in harassment, incitement to illegal conduct and imminent lawless action, true threats. He also violated the limits on commercial speech, but he's not being dealt with for that apparently.
The press protecting their sources is the most important right of free speech.
There are two sides to this. Are you completely ignorant about the law or what?
[US law does recognize a number of important restrictions to free speech. These include obscenity, fraud, child pornography, harassment, incitement to illegal conduct and imminent lawless action, true threats, and commercial speech such as advertising, copyright or patent rights.] SEE? NOTHING ABOUT LYING!
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
Anyway, lies degrade peoples reputations, guilt or innocent, once a lie is out there ,that person is negatively affected.
Aint that why alex is being expected to pay 9 million?
Well what is the difference of the media outlets telling lie's and ruining people reputations?
NONE. so media SHOULD be held accountable. Law? MAKE 1. Folks don't seem to mind making them for same sex marriage and killing babies .So make 1 protecting people reputations by holding media responsible for their lies.
George Bush was called that,Trump was called nazi, obamma was called nazi. Truth is, the people calling em nazi's wouldn't know a nazi if 1 slapped them on the ass with a 2x4.
only registered users can see external links
White replacement theory (also known as white genocide theory or “the great replacement”) has its roots in antisemitic ideology.
only registered users can see external links
The Long, Ugly Antisemitic History of "Jews Will Not Replace Us"
only registered users can see external links
MILLIONS of illegals are being allowed to come into the US. For what other reason would the democrats have of letting them in,if their party,and their cause,could not gain from it?
I am not going by alex jones or anyone else. I am simply looking at the border crisis as a citizen and deducing for my self what the cause and effects are of what is going on.
The meaning of 'illegal' is: 'not allowed'.
The Democrats did not in any way hinder border security.
It's true that Democrats give more immigrants legal status.
They still have the opinion that the US benefits from growth,
because your economy has a labor shortage.
Democrats also have the opinion that refugees are welcome.
You're just jealous that those immigrants get some help to build a life.
You could accept some help yourself, but it's your own opinion that
you are not worth any help and therefore you vote Republican.
Because you think the only people who deserve help are those 'job providers'
and everyone should just work like slaves, to earn whatever scraps they allow.
Your idea is that immigrants would vote for Democrats out of some gratitude for being let in the country or because Democratic policies help them thrive. That might both be true. But how long does that effect last? Do you think they will keep being grateful to Democrats, when, as you think, their policies hurt people? Or is it just that those new Americans don't vote for Republicans, because they didn't get indoctrinated for decades to think what you think. They understand that working people are better off with Democrats. And that's what you don't like.
You keep voting for team Republicans, because you are committed to them.
But especially in your situation it's totally against your own best interest.
And the only reason you have to fuck over yourself, is that Republicans also fuck over those non-white people, who just try to make a better life for themselves.
some white person is kicked out?
That's what replacement means. Right?
White people are not replaced, non-white people are added.
You are correct that non-white people are coming to your country.
That's a fact, I agree. However, hating that fact and using the rhetoric
of the KKK to spread fear about that fact and hatred towards those people,
is "white supremacy". Because you think those non-white people are inferior.
only registered users can see external links
Can you give an example of Democrats' anti-white rhetoric?
By the way, this topic started about Donald Trump proposing throwing reporters in jail, if they don't give up their source in the Supreme Court, who leaked that right-wing judges were preparing to overturn Roe vs Wade.
No, it's not the lying, that Alex was accused of. You could answer that question for yourself, with a simple internet search.
Lying in general is your free speech right, but lying to demonize specific people, intentionally to gain from it yourself and causing your target harm is illegal speech according to your laws.
"So make 1 protecting people reputations by holding media responsible for their lies." IT ALREADY EXISTS!!! It is called 'defamation law'.
only registered users can see external links
Free speech doesn't protect 'defamation'; 'communication of a false statement that harms the reputation of another'. Your examples, if the media would lie about those subjects, do not harm the reputation of a specific person or a specific small group of people, and cannot be proven to cause specific damages to specific people.
However, the for example, Matt Walsh was attacking Boston Children's hospital,
for 'cutting up children', and implying that people should do something about it,
causing crazy people to 'protest' that hospital and making bomb threats.
That could be a 'defamation' case, if plaintiffs could give evidence that the 'protesters' were encouraged by Matt Walsh, suffered damages and Matt Walsh should have known what he said is not true. Since Matt Walsh is doing 'journalism', he has the obligation to investigates claims about wrongdoing, before he accuses specific people of wrongdoing. There is a difference between the responsibilities of random Twitter users and someone like Matt Walsh, who is a political commentator, author and columnist for The Daily Wire.
only registered users can see external links
What is also important to know, is that Alex Jones did not lose his case, because the judge decided his speech was really 'defamation', but because Alex Jones didn't provide the information that was requested from him by the judge and opposition lawyers.
In a defamation lawsuit, the 'innocent until proven guilty' part works differently, because it's a civil trial and not a criminal trial. If the plaintiffs have a strong case and the defendant doesn't defend themself convincingly, the judge will side with the plaintiffs. You could say it isn't even a free speech matter, it's a damages matter.
only registered users can see external links
thinking he will turn Twitter in the free speech Valhalla for right-wingers.
Have you ever considered how that affects Trump? He has a lot of money invested
in Truth Social. What do you think will happen with Truth Social if there is no reason
to be there anymore? It's not like Trump's other businesses are doing great.
He needs the money, you know.
Or how about poor Kanye West who wants to buy Parler, if even he is crazy enough.
Money is made by investing in start up companys and selling them.All the ground work is laid.
only registered users can see external links
--------------------------------------- added after 88 seconds
well. maybe not kill him.. but certainly put his life in danger
only registered users can see external links
Only gullible people believed he actually had any legitimacy as TV doctor, of which actual professionals said: "No other show on television can top The Dr. Oz Show for the sheer magnitude of bad health advice it consistently offers, all while giving everything a veneer of credibility.".
The only people who think his career as TV doctor gives him legitimacy as politician
are the only people who still believe such scammers; the Republican voters.
a liberal democrat.
So if she trusted him enough to put him on tv,what does that say about her? Can you trust her?
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
You learn from your mistakes. That's something you righ wing Trump supporters haven't learned yet.
only registered users can see external links
or thinking about 'stuff'. She's intelligent, but pretty ignorant.
Oprah Winfrey has long insisted that she is apolitical.
She has endorsed Barack Obama, but off course, that was expected of her.
Her political views on 'The View' are a mixed bag. Some of her views were praised by conservatives. Most of the time that I saw her speak on the view, I just found her very ill-informed. But, she did surprise me with some liberal ideas once or twice, so sure, you can call her a liberal Democrat, but she is surely not a progressive. And I found they idea that she would run for president ludicrous, because she would have no idea how to run the country. I bet her campaign would just be completely devoid of ideas and just focus on; 'I'm Oprah, you like me, don't you? So, vote for me!'.
So, you can trust her to be nice, but no one should trust her political instincts.
Pennsylvania is fucking poor and the people want someone who understands them and is honest, not some snake-oil salesman from New Jersey.
Here is a documentary about poverty in Pennsylvania.
What the Hell Happened to Pennsylvania? Episode 1 - Chester, PA
only registered users can see external links
Or just watch a 2 minute video of John Fetterman telling about Braddock, where he was mayor for 10 years. Tell me if it is anything like videos of Republicans. Actually,
I would love to see a video of a Republican who actually shows some caring about working class people, without just saying so. But I'm sure you cannot find one where they don't blame the Democrats in the first 30 seconds.
only registered users can see external links
Here is John Fetterman explaining the challenges of a town like Braddock on TEDx:
only registered users can see external links
He has been a mayor for 10 years and during that time, improved the city of Braddock a lot. You're just showing how shallow and partisan you are.
If a nice suit impresses you, you are a prime target for scammers.
But your political choices show that you are poor judge of character.
I advice improving your judgement skills, because it could hurt your business.
'the democrats way of doing business'? You mean bring jobs back to your city?
Because that's what John Fetterman did.
And Dr. Oz is just a medical professional who sold his reputation
to the highest bidders.
Here are articles about Dr. Oz, from long before he ever thought about politics.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
If he didn't save a person who was having medical problems,
while he was around, he would loose his medical license. It's his job.
But he probably sold them same snake-oil afterwards.
But I hope it doesn't help him win, because that will cause lots of suffering.
Because he still is a rich scamming quack who doesn't care about normal Americans, but only about rich people like him.
is calling people who you disagree with 'loony'.
at the end. Those 'questions' cannot be answered without corrections of
your madness or indicating that your comments are lacking substance.
When I don't answer a 'question' that is not clear, than that's not dodging.
If I don't answer your attempt to change the subject, that's not dodging.
If you call every Democrat or Democratic candidate 'loon', than it's not clear who you are referring to. I have not heard about John Fetterman giving a speech, so were you talking about Biden?
only registered users can see external links
He will probably save the tie for very special occasions.
He's explaining his aphasia from his stroke in this short video:
only registered users can see external links
Debate with closed caption? Really? How will he address a group? will he be able to make logical decisions under pressure?
only registered users can see external links
If he wants to be a community activist or something go for it,but the people need a able bodied man with a clear brain to serve public office.
YOu don't want Fetterman to catch the same hell biden catches do you? He will and and it won't be unfounded.It is sad the man had a stroke,but he needs to understand his limitations.
anything positive to say about the snake-oil salesman Dr. Oz.
Dr Oz has a history of lying himself into riches.
I know you trust conmen, but most people are smarter.
only registered users can see external links
'Compassion, Generosity, and Hard Work' Are those dirty words to you?
Only the first two, I imagine.
Wearing a hoodie in alot of the photos I found of him like some of those street rioters and punks that walk down the streets at night that have uzi's under their sweaters.
IF you are going to run for a office,at least try to look decent when in front of the people.You are representing them.Look good and look PROFESSIONAL.
He looks like he just got off from work as a janitor at the local biker bar.
So who is seeking approval from punks with uzi's under their sweaters?
Oh, I see,... it's the sweaters you are worried about.
People should wear their uzi's under their three piece suits.
You're just showing that you are shallow and don't care about values.
Dr. Oz was on Oprah and wears suits, John Fetterman has tattoos, so.....
I support Peter Kwint, because of his ideas and values. He's a real socialist.
He was reprimanded for wearing an open t-shirt, showing his tattoos.
'Mister Kwint, where is your jacket?'
only registered users can see external links
I also support Lilian Marijnissen and Renske Leijten, because of their ideas and values, not for being good looking ladies who always dress impeccably.
only registered users can see external links
only registered users can see external links
I don't support a slick looking grifter like Thierry Baudet (who is lying about his support of Putin, for money), because of his ideas and values.
only registered users can see external links
Maybe you see a guy in a nice suit. I see he's lying, just by his body language.
(He is arguing that Russia is no threat to us, while calling people naive).
only registered users can see external links
On his left arm he wears a tattoo of the zip code of Braddock.
On his right arm he wears tattoos of the people who got killed by gun violence,
while he was mayor of Braddock. He wanted to remember those victims,
so they would act as a constant reminder to improve safety in his community.
only registered users can see external links
Know any Republicans who care that much?
Building the 'socialist dream' requires diligently working for people.
Building the 'capitalist dream' requires sitting back and letting the wealthy and corporations take control, destroy the unions even further and destroy democracy.
Or do you think deregulation and cutting taxes requires any effort?
It's not even necessary, just sit back while corporations violate pollution and
job safety regulations. Just sit back while corporations and the wealthy cheat
on taxes. Just cut the EPA and IRS and the 'capitalist dream' is that much closer.
only registered users can see external links
Maybe you don't smoke, I don't either, but do you agree that people should not be disqualified from a job application because they smoke?
NOT fair to the workers.
BUT I do feel like their health insurance should be higher and if their second hand smoke harms others they should be held liable.
Smokers already pay for their own costs. They pay lots of taxes and die younger, which saves a lot on social security. The government loves smokers.
I agree that second hand smoke should be minimized. That's why I'm glad smoking is banned in public places and in work places. I don't think you can ban people smoking at home and poisoning their children. We can only ask smoking parents to not be idiots. There is a level of child abuse society allows, like teaching your children religion or right-wing conservatism. Unfortunately it's just up to the children to eventually recover from those forms of child abuse. We can only do our best
to have education provide an antivenom. Sadly, you support the venom.
And apparently you would also trust him to uphold his values.
Dr. Oz is not transparent about who he is and what he would do at all.
He can only be trusted to plunge the people of Pennsylvania in further misery.
Sucks for you if people democratically elect a senator, who is completely open about
his values, which you call socialism. People either understand that it's not socialism
or they like socialism. At least it looks like his 'socialism' is doing pretty well.
Or Pennsylvanians just don't like scamming TV-doctors from New Jersey.
So, if people like what YOU are calling 'socialist BS', than you are telling people
they can trust John Fetterman to do what he promises to do.
only registered users can see external links
John Fetterman once voted to release a man sentenced to life in prison for killing a man with garden shears in a parking garage.
The convict, Charles "Zeke" Goldblum, also attempted to hire a hitman to kill his accomplice in the brutal murder.
He murdered a man with shears, that is brutal,he had to stab and stab,blood gushing,he coulda stopped at one or 2 but no 26 times. And this fetterman wanted him loose on the streets to kill again. Fucking liberals and thier softness on crime. IF only the liberals were the victums and they had to feel the pain,the loss, maby then they would look at things realistically and leave bad people LOCKED UP>
Innocent people are convicted all the time.
John Fetterman is convinced he was innocent and I'm sure he investigated it
better than you have.
That is how the justice system works. Unless there was new evidence that cleared the shadow of a doubt criteria, leave him locked up. 1 old bald hippies opinion should not be all that is required to free a killer.
Oh really? Wow, I didn't know that.
And off course it never makes mistakes then.
Just before he died, the victim said that someone else did that to him.
That statement is known in the law as a “dying declaration.” It is typically given significant evidentiary weight, as it is presumed that a person on his deathbed will tell the truth. Nonetheless, the jury believed the defense of the person accused by the victim, over the defense of Charles Goldblum and he was sentenced to life imprisonment for the murder, plus 15 to 30 years on other charges.
If you think this is a clear-cut case, you are just biassed.
And even if he was guilty, after 45 years in prison, he had served his debt to society and they concluded that he was no threat to anyone.
I would have also agreed if Trump had signed his pardon.
However Trump still kept calling for the executions of the Central Park 5,
when they were exonerated by DNA evidence.
so I guess you want to see this guy get turned loose to?
"''we — the families, the survivors, and people that were at the school, and the whole community — were given a life sentence by the shooter and didn't have the opportunity to get a second chance, a reduced sentence."
And I'm not interested in doing that. That was Fetterman's job however.
It's just 100% predictable that Republicans would try to use that against him.
Gov. Wolf commuted Charles Goldblum’s life sentence after almost 45 years in prison. Goldblum is 71 and has health issues. Lt. Gov. John Fetterman, former mayor of Braddock, chairs the state’s Board of Pardons. Fetterman said that it served no purpose for Goldblum to remain behind bars.
“I think it’s important that mercy must be a partner to justice,”
only registered users can see external links
That's what the pardon system was intended for, not for having a president preemptively pardoning his partners in crime.
Lack of compassion for the victim.
Are you even afraid of a 71 year old with bad health? Jeesh!
I think real life sentences are cruel and unusual punishment.
The need for a fair justice system outweighs the wishes of victims.
You think the victims wishes are of no consequence?
The victim had no choice. The crook DID. The crook did not have to commit the crime.They had a choice. That is the issue.
Read this qoute again.
"
"''we — the families, the survivors, and people that were at the school, and the whole community — were given a life sentence by the shooter and didn't have the opportunity to get a second chance, a reduced sentence."
YES, EXACTLY! Punishment is decided by the judicial system, not the victims.
Are you still living in 1750 BC Babylon? Like all republicans, you have no idea what 'law and order' means. Try to actually understand The Constitution.
The judge should take into account how much suffering the perpetrator has caused and then decide the punishment accordingly.
Than there is the state’s Board of Pardons who decides that punishment has been served, after 45 years. If you are against the Board of Pardons, that's your opinion, but that has nothing to do with John Fetterman, unless you can show that he violated the principles of the Board of Pardons. If not, than he just did his job.
You think 45 years in prison is not a deterrent?
Your right-wing policies are forcing people into crime, because people
cannot live on the low wages right-wing policies create.
Every country with more liberal justice than yours has lower crime rates.
His home town newspaper is asking him to disclose his medical records. If he is fit for duty,what the hell would he be hiding if he doesn't?
I suffered brain damage from impacts to the head from a accident. I would love to run for a political office and do my part to improve my community,state or more. BUT knowing I have health issues that are brain related,I would NOT willing put myself in a situation that it might cause hardship from a bad decision.
Think back to when Dale Earnhart jr had his brain injury. He retired from racing for safety. similar to this fetterman fellow, even if his intentions are good,he may not be fit for office.
He's out talking to people and recording ads.
Everyone can hear he's fumbling up a word sometimes.
He even made a joke about it recently:
only registered users can see external links
It is absolutely clear that his mind is not affected by his stroke.
The people in Pennsylvania know what is their problem.
They have been lied to by grifters like Dr. Oz all their life.
That's why they are poor as fuck and why they demand a change.
John Fetterman will give them that change, because he cares about them.
Dr. Oz only cares to scam them, because that is how he became rich.
only registered users can see external links
Looks like a conflict of interest.
The voters decide who's OK to work. It's called democracy.
If voters can say Trump and Biden are OK to work as president,
than there is absolutely no issue with John Fetterman becoming senator.
Especially considering the alternative.
this is not a bad leg or arm,this is a BRAIN issue.
Join a volunteer group to raise awareness of brain injury and stroke or something.but not be in government,
no legs ,no problem. etc.
it is the brain with fetterman that is in doubt.
And the fact we have the current 'resident ,Captain Dunsel in the white house proves that democrats do not rate brain function as a necessary trait for the position of President. So I guess it doesn't matter for lower offices.
fetterman can't communicate or comprehend as a normal person and is having to use a screen to get the messages said to him.Will it improve with time? or will it get worse?
to quoute Clint Eastwoods Dirty Harry, "sometimes a mans gota know his limiations"
only registered users can see external links
Crazy there is no work limits.
only registered users can see external links
"This week, NBC News’s Dasha Burns said that Fetterman seemed unable to participate in preinterview small talk conducted without closed captioning,"
question is,will this improve or get worse?
If he is having trouble understanding and responding to questions,at the very least,his issues will slow down a already painstakingly slow process of government
New Comment Go to top