When did 'liberals' stop believing in free speech?

[FA_Q2]

So what this story is isn't censorship, it's man who isn't qualified to do job who may be told to stop doing job and kicking up a fuss because he wants to keep doing that job.

Lol, 'not qualified' is the new 'verboten thought' label used by leftwing fascists to silence those they disapprove of?

How interesting.

It's also funny how the state defines "qualified"

Usually it means they got a 70 on a standardized test.

Sorry but I don't think a guy who could only get a C (average) grade is qualified to give advice to anyone

But he can still post on the Internet

And give "advice" to people that might cost them their life's savings

If that was supposed to be some sort of dig I;ll have you know I never got a C in any subject.

When I took my licensing tests for Insurance, and securities I didn't score under 90% on any test.

I think we should let the public see the scores on licensing tests so they can really choose the best people

No real reason to. Those standardized tests do not necessarily pertain to the qualifications of the one taking it. I have known many very good contractors that cannot pass the states bull shit test. They were still damn good at what they did though.

Those tests and continual 'educational requirements' often end up being nothing more than a theft operation. We had to meet several such requirements when we owned a daycare. The 'education' was a ******* joke and was essentially a requirement to pay the state a few hundred bucks for no reason.

 

[bripat9643]

Ramsey makes a lot of money peddling financial advice, but financial advisers are required by law to meet standards that he doesn't meet. It works the same way with medical advice. I thought right wingers believed in obeying the law.

I'm libertarian. We believe the government has no business deciding who is qualified and who isn't.

 

[Moonglow]

This is exactly what happens when 'liberals' get to decide what can be said about anything. These people are doing a radio talk show and they give advice. The shows are fun and informative but all of sudeen 'liberals' have decided they are not official experts or qualified to give advice thus they shouldn't give any at all. This would mean that anyone, your mother, your father, the guy down the street, and anyone can't speak freely about what you should be doing with your life even if you ask them.

The worst part about this is this is really born out of an attitude average people aren't qualified to have qualified opinions on anything. Only designated experts are allowed to do such things. Who are these noble people that are suppose to know what we should do with our lives? Should we at least get to choose who our expert is going to be or does the government have the only say over that as well?

The worse part is that the whole thing is rather political in nature. Most of these people are kind of 'conservative' which means some 'liberal' discovered a clever argument to silence them. The argument is that they are not qualified therefore they shouldn't be allowed to give advice because of some obscure XYZ rule.


How Fiduciary Rule May Censor Financial Broadcasters Like Dave Ramsey

How can a fiduciary rule stop you from getting advice about acne?

 

[Wildman]

Never, it's required...

only for themselves....

 

[BULLDOG]

Ramsey makes a lot of money peddling financial advice, but financial advisers are required by law to meet standards that he doesn't meet. It works the same way with medical advice. I thought right wingers believed in obeying the law.

I'm libertarian. We believe the government has no business deciding who is qualified and who isn't.

And just as soon as libertarians start making the laws, you can put a stop to all that, but as long as you are such a small minority, I guess you need to suck it up and quit whining.

 

[bripat9643]

Ramsey makes a lot of money peddling financial advice, but financial advisers are required by law to meet standards that he doesn't meet. It works the same way with medical advice. I thought right wingers believed in obeying the law.

I'm libertarian. We believe the government has no business deciding who is qualified and who isn't.

And just as soon as libertarians start making the laws, you can put a stop to all that, but as long as you are such a small minority, I guess you need to suck it up and quit whining.

Or, we can petition President Trump to tell them to stuff it.

You're knee-jerk desire to lick bureaucrat boots is disgraceful

I guess you can just tell the parents who need child care to quite whining.

So much for Democrat compassion and concern for the middle class.

 

[regent]

I guess the first time free speech was declared unlawful was back in 1798 when the conservative Federalist party passed the free speech act, and It became illegal to criticize the president or others in the Federalist government. People were arrested and when Jefferson became president most of the sedition laws were dropped. It may have been a major factor in killing off the first conservative party the Federalists.

 

[bripat9643]

I guess the first time free speech was declared unlawful was back in 1798 when the conservative Federalist party passed the free speech act, and It became illegal to criticize the president or others in the Federalist government. People were arrested and when Jefferson became president most of the sedition laws were dropped. It may have been a major factor in killing off the first conservative party the Federalists.

The Federalists were the pro-government party. The modern equivalent would be the Democrat party, not the Republican party.

 

[BULLDOG]

Ramsey makes a lot of money peddling financial advice, but financial advisers are required by law to meet standards that he doesn't meet. It works the same way with medical advice. I thought right wingers believed in obeying the law.

I'm libertarian. We believe the government has no business deciding who is qualified and who isn't.

And just as soon as libertarians start making the laws, you can put a stop to all that, but as long as you are such a small minority, I guess you need to suck it up and quit whining.

Or, we can petition President Trump to tell them to stuff it.

You're knee-jerk desire to lick bureaucrat boots is disgraceful

Sounds like a plan. All you need to do is get past the GOP who is dead set on destroying Trump. The Democrats will probably help a little bit too if needed.

 

[bripat9643]

Ramsey makes a lot of money peddling financial advice, but financial advisers are required by law to meet standards that he doesn't meet. It works the same way with medical advice. I thought right wingers believed in obeying the law.

I'm libertarian. We believe the government has no business deciding who is qualified and who isn't.

And just as soon as libertarians start making the laws, you can put a stop to all that, but as long as you are such a small minority, I guess you need to suck it up and quit whining.

Or, we can petition President Trump to tell them to stuff it.

You're knee-jerk desire to lick bureaucrat boots is disgraceful

Sounds like a plan. All you need to do is get past the GOP who is dead set on destroying Trump. The Democrats will probably help a little bit too if needed.

They both look rather impotent for the task.

 

[TeaBagger]

This is exactly what happens when 'liberals' get to decide what can be said about anything. These people are doing a radio talk show and they give advice. The shows are fun and informative but all of sudeen 'liberals' have decided they are not official experts or qualified to give advice thus they shouldn't give any at all. This would mean that anyone, your mother, your father, the guy down the street, and anyone can't speak freely about what you should be doing with your life even if you ask them.

The worst part about this is this is really born out of an attitude average people aren't qualified to have qualified opinions on anything. Only designated experts are allowed to do such things. Who are these noble people that are suppose to know what we should do with our lives? Should we at least get to choose who our expert is going to be or does the government have the only say over that as well?

The worse part is that the whole thing is rather political in nature. Most of these people are kind of 'conservative' which means some 'liberal' discovered a clever argument to silence them. The argument is that they are not qualified therefore they shouldn't be allowed to give advice because of some obscure XYZ rule.


How Fiduciary Rule May Censor Financial Broadcasters Like Dave Ramsey

When will cons figure out that rights come with responsibilities?

 

[BULLDOG]

Ramsey makes a lot of money peddling financial advice, but financial advisers are required by law to meet standards that he doesn't meet. It works the same way with medical advice. I thought right wingers believed in obeying the law.

I'm libertarian. We believe the government has no business deciding who is qualified and who isn't.

And just as soon as libertarians start making the laws, you can put a stop to all that, but as long as you are such a small minority, I guess you need to suck it up and quit whining.

Or, we can petition President Trump to tell them to stuff it.

You're knee-jerk desire to lick bureaucrat boots is disgraceful

Sounds like a plan. All you need to do is get past the GOP who is dead set on destroying Trump. The Democrats will probably help a little bit too if needed.

They both look rather impotent for the task.

Could be. This is the first time the two parties actually worked together in a long time. They might actually be able to get something done this time.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

"When did 'liberals' stop believing in free speech?"

When will conservatives understand what a loaded question fallacy is – this thread's premise is an example of one, and it fails as a consequence.

 

[bripat9643]

This is exactly what happens when 'liberals' get to decide what can be said about anything. These people are doing a radio talk show and they give advice. The shows are fun and informative but all of sudeen 'liberals' have decided they are not official experts or qualified to give advice thus they shouldn't give any at all. This would mean that anyone, your mother, your father, the guy down the street, and anyone can't speak freely about what you should be doing with your life even if you ask them.

The worst part about this is this is really born out of an attitude average people aren't qualified to have qualified opinions on anything. Only designated experts are allowed to do such things. Who are these noble people that are suppose to know what we should do with our lives? Should we at least get to choose who our expert is going to be or does the government have the only say over that as well?

The worse part is that the whole thing is rather political in nature. Most of these people are kind of 'conservative' which means some 'liberal' discovered a clever argument to silence them. The argument is that they are not qualified therefore they shouldn't be allowed to give advice because of some obscure XYZ rule.


How Fiduciary Rule May Censor Financial Broadcasters Like Dave Ramsey

When will cons figure out that rights come with responsibilities?

They don't come with government regulations, fool.

 

[TeaBagger]

This is exactly what happens when 'liberals' get to decide what can be said about anything. These people are doing a radio talk show and they give advice. The shows are fun and informative but all of sudeen 'liberals' have decided they are not official experts or qualified to give advice thus they shouldn't give any at all. This would mean that anyone, your mother, your father, the guy down the street, and anyone can't speak freely about what you should be doing with your life even if you ask them.

The worst part about this is this is really born out of an attitude average people aren't qualified to have qualified opinions on anything. Only designated experts are allowed to do such things. Who are these noble people that are suppose to know what we should do with our lives? Should we at least get to choose who our expert is going to be or does the government have the only say over that as well?

The worse part is that the whole thing is rather political in nature. Most of these people are kind of 'conservative' which means some 'liberal' discovered a clever argument to silence them. The argument is that they are not qualified therefore they shouldn't be allowed to give advice because of some obscure XYZ rule.


How Fiduciary Rule May Censor Financial Broadcasters Like Dave Ramsey

When will cons figure out that rights come with responsibilities?

They don't come with government regulations, fool.

OK asshole go to a rally and threaten Hillary's life the way Beck threatened Trump's life and see how fast you are on the ground with a gun against the side of your head retard.

Speech has regulation you moron cum drinker. Go out with a bull horn at 11pm and start ranting you usual BS at the top of your lungs and then complain to the cops that they are violating you rights and how the city noise regulations infringe on your right to be an asshole.

You CON trash whine about your rights but you don't give a **** about the rights of others.

You are indeed a dumb ****.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

This is exactly what happens when 'liberals' get to decide what can be said about anything. These people are doing a radio talk show and they give advice. The shows are fun and informative but all of sudeen 'liberals' have decided they are not official experts or qualified to give advice thus they shouldn't give any at all. This would mean that anyone, your mother, your father, the guy down the street, and anyone can't speak freely about what you should be doing with your life even if you ask them.

The worst part about this is this is really born out of an attitude average people aren't qualified to have qualified opinions on anything. Only designated experts are allowed to do such things. Who are these noble people that are suppose to know what we should do with our lives? Should we at least get to choose who our expert is going to be or does the government have the only say over that as well?

The worse part is that the whole thing is rather political in nature. Most of these people are kind of 'conservative' which means some 'liberal' discovered a clever argument to silence them. The argument is that they are not qualified therefore they shouldn't be allowed to give advice because of some obscure XYZ rule.


How Fiduciary Rule May Censor Financial Broadcasters Like Dave Ramsey

You have two 'worst parts,' which makes no sense.

Otherwise, your thread premise is a lie – the issue has nothing to do with 'liberals'; if you bothered to read your own linked article you'd learn that this is a rule being proposed by the Department of Labor, it is not currently in effect, and its intent is not to 'restrict' anyone's 'free speech.'

In addition to being a loaded question fallacy, your thread fails as a speculation fallacy.

 

[bripat9643]

This is exactly what happens when 'liberals' get to decide what can be said about anything. These people are doing a radio talk show and they give advice. The shows are fun and informative but all of sudeen 'liberals' have decided they are not official experts or qualified to give advice thus they shouldn't give any at all. This would mean that anyone, your mother, your father, the guy down the street, and anyone can't speak freely about what you should be doing with your life even if you ask them.

The worst part about this is this is really born out of an attitude average people aren't qualified to have qualified opinions on anything. Only designated experts are allowed to do such things. Who are these noble people that are suppose to know what we should do with our lives? Should we at least get to choose who our expert is going to be or does the government have the only say over that as well?

The worse part is that the whole thing is rather political in nature. Most of these people are kind of 'conservative' which means some 'liberal' discovered a clever argument to silence them. The argument is that they are not qualified therefore they shouldn't be allowed to give advice because of some obscure XYZ rule.


How Fiduciary Rule May Censor Financial Broadcasters Like Dave Ramsey

When will cons figure out that rights come with responsibilities?

They don't come with government regulations, fool.

OK asshole go to a rally and threaten Hillary's life the way Beck threatened Trump's life and see how fast you are on the ground with a gun against the side of your head retard.

Speech has regulation you moron cum drinker. Go out with a bull horn at 11pm and start ranting you usual BS at the top of your lungs and then complain to the cops that they are violating you rights and how the city noise regulations infringe on your right to be an asshole.

You CON trash whine about your rights but you don't give a **** about the rights of others.

You are indeed a dumb ****.

Threatening someone's life is a crime, moron. It's virtually the same as assault. Comparing that with talking about personal finances on the radio is the purest form of idiocy. No one has a right to good financial advice.

Ranting on a bull horn at 1 P.M. is disturbing the peace. The content of your speech isn't the issue. It's simply the time and the volume that's the issue.

What a complete ******* douche.

 

[FA_Q2]

Ramsey makes a lot of money peddling financial advice, but financial advisers are required by law to meet standards that he doesn't meet. It works the same way with medical advice. I thought right wingers believed in obeying the law.

I'm libertarian. We believe the government has no business deciding who is qualified and who isn't.

And just as soon as libertarians start making the laws, you can put a stop to all that, but as long as you are such a small minority, I guess you need to suck it up and quit whining.

Interesting that you purport to not be against free speech and yet here you are telling him that he needs to shut up...

No, libertarians, communists, totalitarians, anarchists and everyone in between does not need to 'stop whining.' They need to continue whining because that is where change starts - with using your speech to spread the ideas you think are best for the nation.

 

[Maryland Patriot]

So what this story is isn't censorship, it's man who isn't qualified to do job who may be told to stop doing job and kicking up a fuss because he wants to keep doing that job.

Lol, 'not qualified' is the new 'verboten thought' label used by leftwing fascists to silence those they disapprove of?

How interesting.

It's also funny how the state defines "qualified"

Usually it means they got a 70 on a standardized test.

Sorry but I don't think a guy who could only get a C (average) grade is qualified to give advice to anyone

not sure what degree or state certificate you are talking about but I can tell you that in order to become even a social worker in the state of Maryland you have to carry at minimum a 3.0 average ( B ) in all of the classes you take. If you get a 4.0 in every class but one, and that one class is less than a 3.0, you have to retake it before you can get certified.

 

[frigidweirdo]

This is exactly what happens when 'liberals' get to decide what can be said about anything. These people are doing a radio talk show and they give advice. The shows are fun and informative but all of sudeen 'liberals' have decided they are not official experts or qualified to give advice thus they shouldn't give any at all. This would mean that anyone, your mother, your father, the guy down the street, and anyone can't speak freely about what you should be doing with your life even if you ask them.

The worst part about this is this is really born out of an attitude average people aren't qualified to have qualified opinions on anything. Only designated experts are allowed to do such things. Who are these noble people that are suppose to know what we should do with our lives? Should we at least get to choose who our expert is going to be or does the government have the only say over that as well?

The worse part is that the whole thing is rather political in nature. Most of these people are kind of 'conservative' which means some 'liberal' discovered a clever argument to silence them. The argument is that they are not qualified therefore they shouldn't be allowed to give advice because of some obscure XYZ rule.


How Fiduciary Rule May Censor Financial Broadcasters Like Dave Ramsey

So, is it free speech to say whatever you like, no matter how wrong it is?

If I give the advice for a headache to jump off a very high cliff, is this free speech and is it protected by the constitution? Or is it only protected in some cases and not in others?