Hey, I thought the left were about "freedom of speech."

[bripat9643]

Wasn't that their whole theme last week and their screams about the poor millionaire blacks in the NFL being "forced to stand" during the Anthem?

Yes, as a matter of fact. The NFL (Trump of course) being crushed for fining players for their FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT.

Of course we are saying that freedom of speech does not protect you on work time. They called us racist for that.

Well, Rosanne made a comment, not on work time and they are standing in solidarity and supporting ABC/ESPN for firing her immediately.

They are such losers.

Authoritarians on all sides only believe in rights that they like or benefit them. If those rights don't or won't, then they'll take those rights out back like they were Old Yeller.

The left doesn't like guns so they're quite eager to get rid of the right to bear arms. The religious right doesn't believe in gayness so they're quite happy to prevent gays from marrying.

And Trump doesn't believe in 1st Amendment protection for the press. He would love to be able to kill the 1st Amendment. (It's the Hitler in him!)

When has Trump ever said a single thing about abolishing the First Amendment? Leftists, on the other hand, have abolishing it as a man plank of their agenda.

 

[dudmuck]

Wasn't that their whole theme last week and their screams about the poor millionaire blacks in the NFL being "forced to stand" during the Anthem?

Yes, as a matter of fact. The NFL (Trump of course) being crushed for fining players for their FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT.

Of course we are saying that freedom of speech does not protect you on work time. They called us racist for that.

Well, Rosanne made a comment, not on work time and they are standing in solidarity and supporting ABC/ESPN for firing her immediately.

They are such losers.

Authoritarians on all sides only believe in rights that they like or benefit them. If those rights don't or won't, then they'll take those rights out back like they were Old Yeller.

The left doesn't like guns so they're quite eager to get rid of the right to bear arms. The religious right doesn't believe in gayness so they're quite happy to prevent gays from marrying.

And Trump doesn't believe in 1st Amendment protection for the press. He would love to be able to kill the 1st Amendment. (It's the Hitler in him!)

When has Trump ever said a single thing about abolishing the First Amendment? Leftists, on the other hand, have abolishing it as a man plank of their agenda.

You could take this threat as example.

 

[jc456]

What Roseanne said was outright offensive; no question. Comparing anyone to an animal is offensive. That said, I don’t believe she is racist nor was it her intent. I think much of the reaction is to play this up as a racial incident from the stakeholders (race hustlers) that need to keep racism alive and make America believe that this is 1968 not 2018.

and it's ok to call the president an orangutan. right?

 

[buckeye45_73]

Wasn't that their whole theme last week and their screams about the poor millionaire blacks in the NFL being "forced to stand" during the Anthem?

Yes, as a matter of fact. The NFL (Trump of course) being crushed for fining players for their FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT.

Of course we are saying that freedom of speech does not protect you on work time. They called us racist for that.

Well, Rosanne made a comment, not on work time and they are standing in solidarity and supporting ABC/ESPN for firing her immediately.

They are such losers.

Authoritarians on all sides only believe in rights that they like or benefit them. If those rights don't or won't, then they'll take those rights out back like they were Old Yeller.

The left doesn't like guns so they're quite eager to get rid of the right to bear arms. The religious right doesn't believe in gayness so they're quite happy to prevent gays from marrying.

And Trump doesn't believe in 1st Amendment protection for the press. He would love to be able to kill the 1st Amendment. (It's the Hitler in him!)

When has Trump ever said a single thing about abolishing the First Amendment? Leftists, on the other hand, have abolishing it as a man plank of their agenda.

You could take this threat as example.

Yep not for it, but if they aren't getting it correct, why do they have a license, what is the license for?

 

[jc456]

Wasn't that their whole theme last week and their screams about the poor millionaire blacks in the NFL being "forced to stand" during the Anthem?

Yes, as a matter of fact. The NFL (Trump of course) being crushed for fining players for their FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT.

Of course we are saying that freedom of speech does not protect you on work time. They called us racist for that.

Well, Rosanne made a comment, not on work time and they are standing in solidarity and supporting ABC/ESPN for firing her immediately.

They are such losers.

Authoritarians on all sides only believe in rights that they like or benefit them. If those rights don't or won't, then they'll take those rights out back like they were Old Yeller.

The left doesn't like guns so they're quite eager to get rid of the right to bear arms. The religious right doesn't believe in gayness so they're quite happy to prevent gays from marrying.

And Trump doesn't believe in 1st Amendment protection for the press. He would love to be able to kill the 1st Amendment. (It's the Hitler in him!)

Hyberbole alert!

Trump actually does believe in a free press as evidenced by his lack of effort to attempt governmental action against the outlets he doesn't like. A "right" as identified by the government only affords you protection from being persecuted/punished by the government for what the right protects. So, the government can't come down the press he doesn't like. He's the president, and the president has more power than anyone to get away with attempting legal action or some form of governmental punishment if Trump truly didn't believe in the first amendment.

The first amendment however does not protect you from criticism for what you say or how you conduct yourself. Ergo, Donald Trump criticizing their speech and their actions. You don't have to agree with him, and you're free to lie as well, but you're not free to not have your false statements go uncorrected.

huh?

 

[jc456]

you didn't even read the Nfl rule. funny, way to go off campus jack.

 

[BlindBoo]

What Roseanne said was outright offensive; no question. Comparing anyone to an animal is offensive. That said, I don’t believe she is racist nor was it her intent. I think much of the reaction is to play this up as a racial incident from the stakeholders (race hustlers) that need to keep racism alive and make America believe that this is 1968 not 2018.

and it's ok to call the president an orangutan. right?

Of course it is (you can call a President a c*nt too). You could even call a president a secret Muslim, non-American who's goal is to destroy America, (why else would a president found a group like ISIS anyway?).

Furthermore, you shouldn't get fired for it. This is American, home of the free, not home of the feckless ....ummm....whiners....

 

[Baron]

Wasn't that their whole theme last week and their screams about the poor millionaire blacks in the NFL being "forced to stand" during the Anthem?

Yes, as a matter of fact. The NFL (Trump of course) being crushed for fining players for their FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT.

Of course we are saying that freedom of speech does not protect you on work time. They called us racist for that.

Well, Rosanne made a comment, not on work time and they are standing in solidarity and supporting ABC/ESPN for firing her immediately.

They are such losers.

Freedom of THEIR speech, not yours.

Only lefts know the Truth!Who does not agree with get killed.

Leftist Freedom of Speech!

Russia already knows it.

 

[TheParser]

Re: the thread title

Many liberals/progressives explain that they DO believe in complete freedom of speech when it comes to political matters.

E.g., Liberals/progressives are happy to permit open discussion about (let us say) whether or not we should abolish the electoral college.

*****

But most liberals/progressives say that there should be NO freedom of speech about social matters. They sincerely feel that it is reprehensible to have views that differ from theirs.

E.g., I have just heard this morning that the Obama administration wanted more diversity in air traffic controllers, so it loosened the very strict requirements in order to become one. If you object to that policy, liberals/progressives feel that they have the right to shut you up. They argue that diversity is so important that all opposition to it must be stamped out.

 

[jc456]

What Roseanne said was outright offensive; no question. Comparing anyone to an animal is offensive. That said, I don’t believe she is racist nor was it her intent. I think much of the reaction is to play this up as a racial incident from the stakeholders (race hustlers) that need to keep racism alive and make America believe that this is 1968 not 2018.

and it's ok to call the president an orangutan. right?

Of course it is (you can call a President a c*nt too). You could even call a president a secret Muslim, non-American who's goal is to destroy America, (why else would a president found a group like ISIS anyway?).

Furthermore, you shouldn't get fired for it. This is American, home of the free, not home of the feckless ....ummm....whiners....

I agree with you. I was asking the poster since he said it. Hypocrites

 

[LeftofLeft]

What Roseanne said was outright offensive; no question. Comparing anyone to an animal is offensive. That said, I don’t believe she is racist nor was it her intent. I think much of the reaction is to play this up as a racial incident from the stakeholders (race hustlers) that need to keep racism alive and make America believe that this is 1968 not 2018.

and it's ok to call the president an orangutan. right?

Of course it is (you can call a President a c*nt too). You could even call a president a secret Muslim, non-American who's goal is to destroy America, (why else would a president found a group like ISIS anyway?).

Furthermore, you shouldn't get fired for it. This is American, home of the free, not home of the feckless ....ummm....whiners....

I agree with you. I was asking the poster since he said it. Hypocrites

You can call anyone any names. Today, the president is mocked as an orangutan or Cheeto cheetah caricature and people laugh. If someone did that to Obama, the person would lose their job. Jarrett was compared to an animal by Roseanne and took a major hit while Samantha Bee calls Ivanka a **** and gets wrist slapped. Roseanne got the backlash because it was combination of Jarrett being black and the power she wields in an all-too complicent media for her side.

 

[jknowgood]

'Hey, I thought the left were about "freedom of speech."

What gave you that idea?

Obama vowing to jail - and then jailing - an American citizen for exercising his freedom of speech by filming / posting a video after he blamed the citizen for the terrorist attack in Benghazi, part of the simultaneous Middle East-wide terrorist attacks on 9/11/12.

Obama sending out his criminal US AG to threaten Judicial punishment against any Americans who dared to exercise their Constitutional Right of Free Speech by talking negatively about Islamic Extremists after the terrorist Obama let into the country killed 7 Americans in California - should have showed you the Left is NOT about 'freedom of speech'.

Let's not forget about the rodeo clown that got banned from the rodeo after wearing an Obama mask. Even though in the past he wore a Bush and Clinton mask.

 

[jc456]

What Roseanne said was outright offensive; no question. Comparing anyone to an animal is offensive. That said, I don’t believe she is racist nor was it her intent. I think much of the reaction is to play this up as a racial incident from the stakeholders (race hustlers) that need to keep racism alive and make America believe that this is 1968 not 2018.

and it's ok to call the president an orangutan. right?

Of course it is (you can call a President a c*nt too). You could even call a president a secret Muslim, non-American who's goal is to destroy America, (why else would a president found a group like ISIS anyway?).

Furthermore, you shouldn't get fired for it. This is American, home of the free, not home of the feckless ....ummm....whiners....

I agree with you. I was asking the poster since he said it. Hypocrites

You can call anyone any names. Today, the president is mocked as an orangutan or Cheeto cheetah caricature and people laugh. If someone did that to Obama, the person would lose their job. Jarrett was compared to an animal by Roseanne and took a major hit while Samantha Bee calls Ivanka a **** and gets wrist slapped. Roseanne got the backlash because it was combination of Jarrett being black and the power she wields in an all-too complicent media for her side.

You mean, hypocritical double standards

 

[LeftofLeft]

What Roseanne said was outright offensive; no question. Comparing anyone to an animal is offensive. That said, I don’t believe she is racist nor was it her intent. I think much of the reaction is to play this up as a racial incident from the stakeholders (race hustlers) that need to keep racism alive and make America believe that this is 1968 not 2018.

and it's ok to call the president an orangutan. right?

Of course it is (you can call a President a c*nt too). You could even call a president a secret Muslim, non-American who's goal is to destroy America, (why else would a president found a group like ISIS anyway?).

Furthermore, you shouldn't get fired for it. This is American, home of the free, not home of the feckless ....ummm....whiners....

I agree with you. I was asking the poster since he said it. Hypocrites

You can call anyone any names. Today, the president is mocked as an orangutan or Cheeto cheetah caricature and people laugh. If someone did that to Obama, the person would lose their job. Jarrett was compared to an animal by Roseanne and took a major hit while Samantha Bee calls Ivanka a **** and gets wrist slapped. Roseanne got the backlash because it was combination of Jarrett being black and the power she wields in an all-too complicent media for her side.

You mean, hypocritical double standards

Yes

 

[abrere]

plus, jarret IS a ******* tyrannical pos monkey, while Ivanka is a lady.

 

[easyt65]

Let's not forget about the rodeo clown that got banned from the rodeo after wearing an Obama mask. Even though in the past he wore a Bush and Clinton mask.

'Double-Standards'....

Sorta like how Obama (and Bill Clinton) illegally spied on Americans, reporters, the media, US Senators, USSC justices, and an opposing party's Presidential candidate during an election yet was neither Impeached nor punished in any way...

Sorta like how Liberal extremists / snowflakes have initiated / instigated / taken money from Russians to initiate division and violence yet they and the media blame the violence on Conservatives...like this 'violent' Trump supporter...

Sorta like how Mueller's Political hit squad has failed to find any crimes / evidence of crimes by the President and keeps digging but has show extreme prejudice / bias by refusing to acknowledge or investigate any of the large number of crimes committed by Liberals / Democrats / Obama Cabinet Members and Agency Directors....

Yeah, 'Double Standards' are a real bit@h..

 

[NightFox]

Apparently you missed the episode of "Daffy Don's Neighbor" where the star of the show publicly threatened to take away press "credentials" from News Outlets he didn't like.

1. Threatened but didn't.

Same difference, a threat from POTUS has a chilling effect on the freedom of the press just like carrying out said threat, only the degree varies.

2. No government punishment for anything, just restriction of access.

Uh-huh, restriction of access only for outlets that are critical of the sitting POTUS....

Can i start a company called "Cool Media 'n Stuff" and automatically get press credentials at the White House? Probably not. So there's some criteria being applied to who does and doesn't get press credentials. Just because someone has press credentials today doesn't necessarily mean that they should maintain them tomorrow. It would depend on what the criteria is.

Non-sequitur analogy, since the media outlets that were threatened already held credentials, the threat amounted to "don't publish stories that we don't like or you'll lose those credentials", it didn't have anything to do with meeting or not meeting the circulation/viewership thresholds for attaining the credentials in the first place.

The POTUS can't just decide he doesn't like the news stories XYZ outlet publishes and start threatening them with sanctions without causing severe damage to the fundamental principles behind the freedom of the press.

 

[Some Guy]

Can i start a company called "Cool Media 'n Stuff" and automatically get press credentials at the White House? Probably not. So there's some criteria being applied to who does and doesn't get press credentials. Just because someone has press credentials today doesn't necessarily mean that they should maintain them tomorrow. It would depend on what the criteria is.

Non-sequitur analogy, since the media outlets that were threatened already held credentials, the threat amounted to "don't publish stories that we don't like or you'll lose those credentials", it didn't have anything to do with meeting or not meeting the circulation/viewership thresholds for attaining the credentials in the first place.

The POTUS can't just decide he doesn't like the news stories XYZ outlet publishes and start threatening them with sanctions without causing severe damage to the fundamental principles behind the freedom of the press.[/QUOTE]
Obviously he can threaten them, and you can see if as a threat to the freedom of the press if you want to but it wouldn't make you correct. The fact of the matter is that freedom of speech only protects someone or some entity from governmental punishment. So having access to be there in the room doesn't infringe on freedom of speech or freedom of the press at all, it just prevents them from asking questions of them directly.

Which goes back to my original point. If i said i wanted white house press credentials and they didn't give them to me, is that a restriction of my free speech or freedom of the press? Nope. I'm free to write about how the White House only wants to grant access to certain press outlets that are favorable to the president in their coverage and doesn't want to grant access to ones that are critical of him. Pretty simple stuff really.

 

[Bruce_T_Laney]

Wasn't that their whole theme last week and their screams about the poor millionaire blacks in the NFL being "forced to stand" during the Anthem?

Yes, as a matter of fact. The NFL (Trump of course) being crushed for fining players for their FIRST AMENDMENT RIGHT.

Of course we are saying that freedom of speech does not protect you on work time. They called us racist for that.

Well, Rosanne made a comment, not on work time and they are standing in solidarity and supporting ABC/ESPN for firing her immediately.

They are such losers.

They agree with your freedom of speech as long as you say what they want to hear and if not, well I guess you know how they will react...

 

[easyt65]

Yup....'tolerant' liberals are all for protecting THEIR freedom of speech...not those who do not parrot their opinions / views.

TWO of the biggest examples of Obama & Democrats opposed true Freedom of Speech had to do with their protecting Islamic Extremists:

1. After the Benghazi attack - 1 of the many middle east-wide terrorist attacks on U.S. Embassies and compounds on 9/11/12 - Barry and Hillary blamed a U.S. film-maker and a video he had made for the attack. Barry vowed (to the Extremists to appease them and to attempt to fool idiots who bought his BS) arrest / jail the man...and did.
-- So much for defending our Constitutional Rights ... and taking responsibility for his own F*-up!

2. After at terrorist Obama let into the country killed 7 Californians in a terrorist attack, Barry sent out his criminal US AG to threaten Americans with judicial punishment if they decided to exercise their Right of Free Speech by talking negatively about Islamic Extremism and the terrorist who had killed the 7 Americans.