Florida Gov. DeSantis Has Just Signed A Bill Into Law That Would Allow Everyday Floridians To Sue Big Tech Platforms For Monetary Damages

[kaz]

The question is why they are exempted from lawsuits.

They're not exempted from lawsuits. 230 just establishes that they're not liable for what people post.
I've been clear that I think they should repeal 230. It's unnecessary. But that won't give you want you want (petty revenge on the big tech companies who booted Trump). And when it doesn't, you'll be reaching for some other big government solution to your problems. You guys aren't arguing from principle, you're just pissy because your troll hero got banned. Too bad.

Only if they function as a "common carrier." They aren't doing that when they censor content because they disagree with it.

Can't care.

We already know you don't care about the facts.

He's saying the system works for Democrats. He's good

Back to the shrieking.

Do what you're good at!

So answer a serious question. Do you think Democrats are open to arguments and people they disagree with? Is that something you observe on the board?

Most aren't. What's your point?

You don't know, do you? LOL

 

[bripat9643]

The question is why they are exempted from lawsuits.

They're not exempted from lawsuits. 230 just establishes that they're not liable for what people post.
I've been clear that I think they should repeal 230. It's unnecessary. But that won't give you want you want (petty revenge on the big tech companies who booted Trump). And when it doesn't, you'll be reaching for some other big government solution to your problems. You guys aren't arguing from principle, you're just pissy because your troll hero got banned. Too bad.

All I am saying is the key part of the law grants to individuals a cause of action. That's it.

The part about mandatory platforming of a candidate is somewhat suspect under the 5th and 14th Amendments, but an account is free and costs social media no more to platform, so it's a difficult claim.

I'm not particularly interested in the legal technicalities. It's the overarching goal that bothers me. Government shouldn't be dictating to media companies. Period.

Of course you're not "interested in the legal technicalities." The system is working for Democrats and against Republicans as it is. You're happy. Freeze it where it is

Trump has LOST most of his 4,000 lawsuits over the years and stiffs his lawyers.. He'll never get top tier legal representation. Just like US banks won't touch him.

What a load of crap, your typical fare. Doesn't the smell bother you?

Challenge the facts, dearie.. Why do you think Wilbur Ross of the Bank of Cyrus (Russian money) became Secretary of Commerce? LOL

You didn't post any facts, dearie.

 

[dblack]

So answer a serious question. Do you think Democrats are open to arguments and people they disagree with? Is that something you observe on the board?

Most aren't. What's your point?

You don't know, do you? LOL

I true. I really don't. I can rarely find a discernible point in your posts. Usually you just get flustered and call me a Nazi or a Democrat or something.

 

[bripat9643]

The question is why they are exempted from lawsuits.

They're not exempted from lawsuits. 230 just establishes that they're not liable for what people post.
I've been clear that I think they should repeal 230. It's unnecessary. But that won't give you want you want (petty revenge on the big tech companies who booted Trump). And when it doesn't, you'll be reaching for some other big government solution to your problems. You guys aren't arguing from principle, you're just pissy because your troll hero got banned. Too bad.

Only if they function as a "common carrier." They aren't doing that when they censor content because they disagree with it.

Can't care.

We already know you don't care about the facts.

He's saying the system works for Democrats. He's good

Back to the shrieking.

Do what you're good at!

Lying and pretending to be a libertarian is what you're good at. I take that back. You aren't good at it, but you do it all the time.

Bingo. That is exactly what stands out. That dblack is with the Democrats EVERY TIME.

Democrats also have zero tolerance for anyone who disagrees with them on every subject and they LOVE HIM. Democrats love a guy who stands for small government. That just never happens.

And yet libertarian and leftist are polar opposites

I just don't give a shit what you choose to label me, that's all.

Sure you do, that's why you go around telling people that you're a libertarian, and all the libertarians say "no you aren't."

 

[surada]

Should people be able to buy ads for one candidate without recognizing it as a contribution to that candidate? If so, why should companies be able to provide direct political benefits without recognizing that as a contribution?

You never addressed his point

Yeah, I don't really care. That kind of campaign finance regulation is just another way for the state to suppress dissent. People and companies should be allowed to contribute to political campaigns however the like.

Of course you don't care. If you read your posts, every argument is literally based on this. When the current system works for Democrats, you throw out some libertarian sounding BS justifying the current system. You only want it changed if it isn't working for Democrats, then you throw out libertarian sounding BS to justify "fixing" it ... for Democrats.

Every argument you make follows that logic.

EVERYONE sees that, which is why Democrats love you and everyone else doesn't. The only person who doesn't see your crap for what it is would be you

Quit being stupid. It is the Republicans that are the moral relativists. For instance, it is perfectly fine for a company, like say "My Pillow", to step into the political arena and broadcasts their beliefs. But damn first time a company stands up against, say the Georgia election law, you got Republicans like Ted Cruz threatening to punish them. That is hypocritical. Just like this bullshit from little boy DeSantis. Because make no mistake about it, he is a tiny little boy.

He wants to force media companies, especially social media, to air his bullshit. But first time someone starts broadcasting about his tiny little pecker he will be screaming for censorship. You Trumpsters have no morals, ZIPPO. You stand for absolutely nothing, your ethics are as fluid as a overflowing river. It would be sad really, if it were so damn dangerous. You have not made America Great again, you have made America a damn cesspool, and you are more than willing to wallow around in that shit like a pig, regardless of how much you stink up the place.

Desantis is ambitious, but not smart.. He thinks he can ride in on Trump's coatails.. Law school didn't make him intelligence .

I have seen this before at Yale.. Good with book learning but missing out in character and morality.

 

[kaz]

Should people be able to buy ads for one candidate without recognizing it as a contribution to that candidate? If so, why should companies be able to provide direct political benefits without recognizing that as a contribution?

You never addressed his point

Yeah, I don't really care. That kind of campaign finance regulation is just another way for the state to suppress dissent. People and companies should be allowed to contribute to political campaigns however the like.

Of course you don't care. If you read your posts, every argument is literally based on this. When the current system works for Democrats, you throw out some libertarian sounding BS justifying the current system. You only want it changed if it isn't working for Democrats, then you throw out libertarian sounding BS to justify "fixing" it ... for Democrats.

Every argument you make follows that logic.

EVERYONE sees that, which is why Democrats love you and everyone else doesn't. The only person who doesn't see your crap for what it is would be you

Quit being stupid. It is the Republicans that are the moral relativists. For instance, it is perfectly fine for a company, like say "My Pillow", to step into the political arena and broadcasts their beliefs. But damn first time a company stands up against, say the Georgia election law, you got Republicans like Ted Cruz threatening to punish them. That is hypocritical. Just like this bullshit from little boy DeSantis. Because make no mistake about it, he is a tiny little boy. He wants to force media companies, especially social media, to air his bullshit. But first time someone starts broadcasting about his tiny little pecker he will be screaming for censorship. You Trumpsters have no morals, ZIPPO. You stand for absolutely nothing, your ethics are as fluid as a overflowing river. It would be sad really, if it were so damn dangerous. You have not made America Great again, you have made America a damn cesspool, and you are more than willing to wallow around in that shit like a pig, regardless of how much you stink up the place.

LOL, "Winston" grooving with Big Brother. Funny stuff.

Mike Lindell stating his views and social media cutting accounts are entirely different things. No one is criticizing Mark Dorsey for simply saying he supports Democrats. You'd think a guy calling himself "Winston" would grasp that.

That said, Mike Lindell should have stayed out of it, everyone in his company is going to suffer for it that he didn't. Just like Coke, Delta and others should stay out of politics for their shareholder's and employee's benefits

 

[bripat9643]

Social Media can still do what they want, as long as they come out and disclose to all users that "we are ******* commies and we will monitor and remove anything that does not support the goals of global communism and the CCP."

Ahh.. so they can do what they want except that they can't. Makes a lot of sense. Do you want government to run everything in society? Or just social media?

So you want to abolish Rule 230?

Yep. It's just one of those convenience laws. Removing it will shake things up for a little while. It will ****** smaller websites (like this one) that don't have an army of lawyers at their disposal. But in the end, precedents will be set, EULA's will be massaged, and life will go on. Removing 230 won't be the silver bullet you're hoping. It won't harm FB and Twitter.

All Desantis is doing is disabling rule 230. So how can you attack Desantis when you claim to oppose Rule 230?

The law prohibiting them from suspending political candidates has exactly nothing to do with 230 and is a radical abuse of state power.

The rest of the bill has everything to do with rule 230, and focusing on the rule about politicians is just a diversion.

 

[bripat9643]

Should people be able to buy ads for one candidate without recognizing it as a contribution to that candidate? If so, why should companies be able to provide direct political benefits without recognizing that as a contribution?

You never addressed his point

Yeah, I don't really care. That kind of campaign finance regulation is just another way for the state to suppress dissent. People and companies should be allowed to contribute to political campaigns however the like.

Of course you don't care. If you read your posts, every argument is literally based on this. When the current system works for Democrats, you throw out some libertarian sounding BS justifying the current system. You only want it changed if it isn't working for Democrats, then you throw out libertarian sounding BS to justify "fixing" it ... for Democrats.

Every argument you make follows that logic.

EVERYONE sees that, which is why Democrats love you and everyone else doesn't. The only person who doesn't see your crap for what it is would be you

Quit being stupid. It is the Republicans that are the moral relativists. For instance, it is perfectly fine for a company, like say "My Pillow", to step into the political arena and broadcasts their beliefs. But damn first time a company stands up against, say the Georgia election law, you got Republicans like Ted Cruz threatening to punish them. That is hypocritical. Just like this bullshit from little boy DeSantis. Because make no mistake about it, he is a tiny little boy.

He wants to force media companies, especially social media, to air his bullshit. But first time someone starts broadcasting about his tiny little pecker he will be screaming for censorship. You Trumpsters have no morals, ZIPPO. You stand for absolutely nothing, your ethics are as fluid as a overflowing river. It would be sad really, if it were so damn dangerous. You have not made America Great again, you have made America a damn cesspool, and you are more than willing to wallow around in that shit like a pig, regardless of how much you stink up the place.

Desantis is ambitious, but not smart.. He thinks he can ride in on Trump's coatails.. Law school didn't make him intelligence .

I have seen this before at Yale.. Good with book learning but missing out in character and morality.

How would you know whether he's smart?

 

[kaz]

Trump has LOST most of his 4,000 lawsuits over the years and stiffs his lawyers.. He'll never get top tier legal representation. Just like US banks won't touch him.

What a load of crap, your typical fare. Doesn't the smell bother you?

Challenge the facts, dearie.. Why do you think Wilbur Ross of the Bank of Cyrus (Russian money) became Secretary of Commerce? LOL

I don't need to challenge facts you made up.

I have no opinion of Wilbur Ross either way. What do your Democrat conspiracy sites say about him? That he's a lizard creature from another galaxy?

Blind denial. Keep it up..

Saying I don't follow and want to debate every rat hole you go down is not denial. You're just stupid

 

[surada]

So answer a serious question. Do you think Democrats are open to arguments and people they disagree with? Is that something you observe on the board?

Most aren't. What's your point?

You don't know, do you? LOL

I true. I really don't. I can rarely find a discernible point in your posts. Usually you just get flustered and call me a Nazi or a Democrat or something.

Yeah.. I'm afraid they cannot admit that they hve been bamboozled by a carny barker.. Its hard to be wrong.. Takes courage.

 

[dblack]

The question is why they are exempted from lawsuits.

They're not exempted from lawsuits. 230 just establishes that they're not liable for what people post.
I've been clear that I think they should repeal 230. It's unnecessary. But that won't give you want you want (petty revenge on the big tech companies who booted Trump). And when it doesn't, you'll be reaching for some other big government solution to your problems. You guys aren't arguing from principle, you're just pissy because your troll hero got banned. Too bad.

Only if they function as a "common carrier." They aren't doing that when they censor content because they disagree with it.

Can't care.

We already know you don't care about the facts.

He's saying the system works for Democrats. He's good

Back to the shrieking.

Do what you're good at!

Lying and pretending to be a libertarian is what you're good at. I take that back. You aren't good at it, but you do it all the time.

Bingo. That is exactly what stands out. That dblack is with the Democrats EVERY TIME.

Democrats also have zero tolerance for anyone who disagrees with them on every subject and they LOVE HIM. Democrats love a guy who stands for small government. That just never happens.

And yet libertarian and leftist are polar opposites

I just don't give a shit what you choose to label me, that's all.

Sure you do, that's why you go around telling people that you're a libertarian, and all the libertarians say "no you aren't."

Listen - labels aside, just know that I'm opposed to your bullshit. Whatever it is you are thinking of when you call yourself a "libertarian", has nothing to do with the word as I know it. Frankly, I think you're just really dumb and incapable of understanding the core ideas of libertarian ideology. I'm sure you see it differently, and that's ok. As long as we're clear we're on opposite sides.

 

[kaz]

So answer a serious question. Do you think Democrats are open to arguments and people they disagree with? Is that something you observe on the board?

Most aren't. What's your point?

You don't know, do you? LOL

I true. I really don't. I can rarely find a discernible point in your posts. Usually you just get flustered and call me a Nazi or a Democrat or something.

Correct, little if ever do I agree with Democrats. You find that totally confusing

 

[kaz]

So answer a serious question. Do you think Democrats are open to arguments and people they disagree with? Is that something you observe on the board?

Most aren't. What's your point?

You don't know, do you? LOL

I true. I really don't. I can rarely find a discernible point in your posts. Usually you just get flustered and call me a Nazi or a Democrat or something.

Yeah.. I'm afraid they cannot admit that they hve been bamboozled by a carny barker.. Its hard to be wrong.. Takes courage.

LOL. Do dblack. Right after I asked if you find Democrats agreeing with you to be at all normal and asked how often you see that, and you responded you didn't grasp my point, a leftist comes in and answers the question for you.

You still don't get it, do you?

 

[colfax_m]

Sorry, but you have proven yourself to be a ******* moron.

You are constantly getting facts confused and demonstrate very little grasp of the topic.

You have about a level of understanding no more than a grade schooler and it’s embarrassing to watch.

 

[dblack]

You still don't get it, do you?

Not really. You just don't make any sense.

To be fair, I don't spend much time trying to understand you idiocy, so there's that.

 

[kaz]

Bingo. That is exactly what stands out. That dblack is with the Democrats EVERY TIME.

Democrats also have zero tolerance for anyone who disagrees with them on every subject and they LOVE HIM. Democrats love a guy who stands for small government. That just never happens.

And yet libertarian and leftist are polar opposites

I just don't give a shit what you choose to label me, that's all.

Sure you do, that's why you go around telling people that you're a libertarian, and all the libertarians say "no you aren't."

Listen - labels aside, just know that I'm opposed to your bullshit. Whatever it is you are thinking of when you call yourself a "libertarian", has nothing to do with the word as I know it. Frankly, I think you're just really dumb and incapable of understanding the core ideas of libertarian ideology. I'm sure you see it differently, and that's ok. As long as we're clear we're on opposite sides.

It's pretty funny how someone who thinks he's a libertarian and is consistently on the side of socialists thinks we don't really know what libertarian means. That's classic

 

[colfax_m]

Of course, we all know the real reason you oppose this law is that you are a ******* NAZI who likes having the opposition censored and doesn't give a damn about freedom of speech.

This isn’t about free speech. It’s about government forcing industry to serve the interests of a political party.

Which is, wait for it, a little fascist.

 

[kaz]

You still don't get it, do you?

Not really. You just don't make any sense.

To be fair, I don't spend much time trying to understand you idiocy, so there's that.

dblack: I don't get it kaz. I'm a libertarian. Why wouldn't socialists agree with me?

No, you don't get it. The one thing you're right about

 

[dblack]

Bingo. That is exactly what stands out. That dblack is with the Democrats EVERY TIME.

Democrats also have zero tolerance for anyone who disagrees with them on every subject and they LOVE HIM. Democrats love a guy who stands for small government. That just never happens.

And yet libertarian and leftist are polar opposites

I just don't give a shit what you choose to label me, that's all.

Sure you do, that's why you go around telling people that you're a libertarian, and all the libertarians say "no you aren't."

Listen - labels aside, just know that I'm opposed to your bullshit. Whatever it is you are thinking of when you call yourself a "libertarian", has nothing to do with the word as I know it. Frankly, I think you're just really dumb and incapable of understanding the core ideas of libertarian ideology. I'm sure you see it differently, and that's ok. As long as we're clear we're on opposite sides.

It's pretty funny how someone who thinks he's a libertarian and is consistently on the side of socialists thinks we don't really know what libertarian means. That's classic

Like I said - whatever it is you mean by "libertarian", I ain't it. So, I think we're on the same page!

 

[surada]

Should people be able to buy ads for one candidate without recognizing it as a contribution to that candidate? If so, why should companies be able to provide direct political benefits without recognizing that as a contribution?

You never addressed his point

Yeah, I don't really care. That kind of campaign finance regulation is just another way for the state to suppress dissent. People and companies should be allowed to contribute to political campaigns however the like.

Of course you don't care. If you read your posts, every argument is literally based on this. When the current system works for Democrats, you throw out some libertarian sounding BS justifying the current system. You only want it changed if it isn't working for Democrats, then you throw out libertarian sounding BS to justify "fixing" it ... for Democrats.

Every argument you make follows that logic.

EVERYONE sees that, which is why Democrats love you and everyone else doesn't. The only person who doesn't see your crap for what it is would be you

Quit being stupid. It is the Republicans that are the moral relativists. For instance, it is perfectly fine for a company, like say "My Pillow", to step into the political arena and broadcasts their beliefs. But damn first time a company stands up against, say the Georgia election law, you got Republicans like Ted Cruz threatening to punish them. That is hypocritical. Just like this bullshit from little boy DeSantis. Because make no mistake about it, he is a tiny little boy.

He wants to force media companies, especially social media, to air his bullshit. But first time someone starts broadcasting about his tiny little pecker he will be screaming for censorship. You Trumpsters have no morals, ZIPPO. You stand for absolutely nothing, your ethics are as fluid as a overflowing river. It would be sad really, if it were so damn dangerous. You have not made America Great again, you have made America a damn cesspool, and you are more than willing to wallow around in that shit like a pig, regardless of how much you stink up the place.

Desantis is ambitious, but not smart.. He thinks he can ride in on Trump's coatails.. Law school didn't make him intelligence .

I have seen this before at Yale.. Good with book learning but missing out in character and morality.

How would you know whether he's smart?

You have to be smart to get into Harvard, but smart isn't enough. I have friends, classmates and relatives who went to Harvard. Sadly, if you can make the cut academically they can't get rid of you. The same is true at Yale.