Tim Walz: “There is no guarantee to free speech”.

[westwall]

If you're in my place of business, I don't have to listen to you. Furthermore, I can have you trespassed and removed.

Sure. No problem with that. But you don't get to assault someone for saying something you don't like.

Especially if they are in public.

And do remember those restaurants that kicked Trump people out have all failed.

Actions certainly do have ramifications.

 

[Foxfyre]

No one wants to make either moot. This is your projection.

Ending free speech and confiscating guns from law abiding citizens makes both the First and Second Amendments moot. That's a fact. And most Democrats are okay with both.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

Sure. No problem with that. But you don't get to assault someone for saying something you don't like.

Especially if they are in public.

And do remember those restaurants that kicked Trump people out have all failed.

Actions certainly do have ramifications.

Actually that should work both ways. If I owned a business and some queer or tranny came in spouting their crap I can kick them out? Stumbles didn't think this through

 

[M14 Shooter]

Has any Democrat ever read the Constitution? It’s clear neither Harris or Walz has.

And leftists agree, with vigor.

 

[Hum Dinger]

The First Amendment belies you

Nope. Even SCOTUS has made that clear. No right is an unlimited right.

Is that too complex for your tiny little pea brain to comprehend?

 

[M14 Shooter]

You don't get to say whatever the fuck you want with no consequence.

You do, however, have the right to say things which run contrary to the leftist narrative.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Your rights end where mine begin.

You do not have the right to be free from exposure to "misinformation".

 

[MisterBeale]

No one wants to make either moot. This is your projection.

This is demonstrably untrue. Establishment elites are now explicitly stating that the Constitution is a problem for them.

WATCH: John Kerry at WEF Literally Calls for End of First Amendment Speech Rights

pjmedia.com

At World Economic Forum, John Kerry Calls for End to American Freedom of Speech​

John Kerry, who is currently living off his second wife's first husband's trust fund, believe American free speech is too dangerous to democracy.

At World Economic Forum, John Kerry Calls for End to American Freedom of Speech

President Joe Biden’s specially selected Envoy for Climate, former Mass. Senator and failed presidential candidate John Kerry, wants a way to curb free speech and has suggested that the next administration should end or alter the First Amendment. [RELATED: Regulation of Social Media Censorship...

www.themainewire.com

 

[DGS49]

All the First Amendment means (w/r/t "free speech") is that you cannot be punished for criticizing the government or elected officials.

Censorship was routine and accepted - indeed most people considered it beneficial - until the USSC was compromised. Now, between NYT v Sullivan and the Supreme Court's turn, about the only thing you can't say is "Fire" in a crowded theater (presuming there is no fire).

The true enemy of democracy and civilization is the prevalence of lies and gross distortion in the name of "advocacy." And as always with the Left, if you want to know what they are up to, look at what they are accusing their enemies of. Hell, the lies told about Trump are monumental compared to the relatively few things he has actually lied about - none of which are significant in the big picture.

Walz' remarks mock the cornerstone of free speech. THe Left has sought to criminalize criticism of Government, and especially their compromised "justice" system.

This is repeated every four years, but this time...This is the most important election of any of our lifetimes. You MUST vote for Trump!

 

[Dogmaphobe]

Libs used freedom of speech in the 1960s to gain positions of authority

Positions which they now use to limit free speech

I am talking ACTUAL liberal political philosophy and not the actions of those who call themselves liberal

 

[BackAgain]

Like so many of our libs, Timmy Walz doesn’t grasp much about our Constitution. And what he does grasp, he fights against.

 

[MisterBeale]

Nope. Even SCOTUS has made that clear. No right is an unlimited right.

Is that too complex for your tiny little pea brain to comprehend?

This is true.

However. . . if you listen to everything Walz said, he is dead wrong about the types of speech he wishes to regulate.

What Does Free Speech Mean?

Among other cherished values, the First Amendment protects freedom of speech. Learn about what this means.

www.uscourts.gov

 

[westwall]

Nope. Even SCOTUS has made that clear. No right is an unlimited right.

Is that too complex for your tiny little pea brain to comprehend?

They very narrowly delineated what is not protected by the 1st though. Which your tiny fascist brain ignores.

You may not incite riots, or yell "fire" in a theater, when there is no fire.

In other words, nazi, you aren't allowed to verbalize things that will lead to immediate harm of others.

 

[cnm]

Fire!

 

[bendog]

Has any Democrat ever read the Constitution? It’s clear neither Harris or Walz has.

He's right cause assholes like you want to lie and take it away.

Out-of-Context Edited Tim Walz Interview Clip Goes Viral in Conservative Media | Video

The misleading video implies Kammala Harris' vice presidential pick, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, doesn’t understand the Constitution.

www.thewrap.com

 

[Dogmaphobe]

These uneducated leftists think 1984 is an operating manual instead of a cautionary tale.

 

[SassyIrishLass]

He's right cause assholes like you want to lie and take it away.

Out-of-Context Edited Tim Walz Interview Clip Goes Viral in Conservative Media | Video

The misleading video implies Kammala Harris' vice presidential pick, Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz, doesn’t understand the Constitution.

www.thewrap.com

The right wants to take free speech away? What bizzaro world do you live in

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

But that is an entirely different argument and discussion. Try to understand what the OP posted and is saying. Waltz is WRONG about our Constitutional rights, vis-à-vis the government.


This is what is being debated here. . . .

"Governor Tim Walz: NO RIGHT TO FREE SPEECH if the government decides it is misinformation or hateful"

Tim Walz Is DEAD WRONG—Hate Speech, Misinfo Are PROTECTED Speech: Robby Soave​

Oct 3, 2024



What you are now doing, is deflecting from the initial observation, by distorting the conversation into an argument that is not being made. That is a straw man fallacy.

The argument of first amendment rights is entirely misconstrued in this country by magaturds. They believe their free speech should be consequence free on private platforms. Magaturds don't seem to protest redress of grievances towards their government. They just distort their own accountability for their own speech when government has no involvement.

 

[Tumblin Tumbleweed]

Ending free speech and confiscating guns from law abiding citizens makes both the First and Second Amendments moot. That's a fact. And most Democrats are okay with both.

I'm not okay with either. I'm not a democrat. You're entire response is moot.

 

[MisterBeale]

The argument of first amendment rights is entirely misconstrued in this country by magaturds. They believe their free speech should be consequence free on private platforms. Magaturds don't seem to protest redress of grievances towards their government. They just distort their own accountability for their own speech when government has no involvement.

That is not what the thread is about though.