Why do democrats feel the need to censor what our political elected leaders have to say?

[Votto]

Why are democrats such Nazis when it comes to free speech, especially when it comes to the speech of people directly elected by the people?

Take Joe Biden rambling on about how he enjoys children sitting on his lap rubbing down his legs at the pool as they cut his mic.

MSN

www.msn.com

Or you could be JD Vance invited on a show to talk about immigration, but once he starts to say things they don't like, they cut his mic.

George Stephanopoulos Cuts off JD Vance Mid-Interview After He Says President Can Defy Supreme Court | Video

The GOP senator tried to defend himself as his mic was cut live on ABC The post George Stephanopoulos Cuts off JD Vance Mid-Interview After He Says President Can Defy Supreme Court | Video appeared first on TheWrap.

www.yahoo.com

Or you can stop the President of the United States from posting on Twitter.

Twitter permanently suspends President Donald Trump

"After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence," Twitter's official "Safety" account tweeted.

www.nbcnews.com

In all of these examples, is it better to shut down our elected leaders if what they are saying disturbs us, or is it better if they allow us to know what they are thinking and will do so we can better assess if they should get our vote?

Do Republicans do this? I can't think of an instance.

 

[kyzr]

Pedo Joe set the new paradigm that presidents don't do press conferences any more.

They just send out their press secretaries to lie and lie and lie.

 

[Votto]

Pedo Joe set the new paradigm that presidents don't do press conferences any more.

They just send out their press secretaries to lie and lie and lie.

We have reached a place where there are no longer Presidential debates in either party, not real ones, and when they talk to the media they cut them off.

WTF?

Government says they need to censor loons on social media for our protection, but what does it say when government has to censor elected officials as well?

And who is the person behind the curtain doing all the censoring?

 

[Votto]

If a politician gets up and says he wants to smoke pink rhinos out his ass, or they question the validity of the Constitution in any way, that is something I think as voters we should hear.

How are we better off not hearing what our elected officials have to say?

Have we moved to a place where elected officials will never again be allowed to talk directly to the voters, and instead, must rely on the media to spoon feed us what they want us to know about them?

 

[Mr. Friscus]

They do it “for the right reasons”…

Because all other totalitarian regimes in history who ended up destroying and abusing their populace also thought they were doing it “for the right reasons”…

But THIS time.. it’s different!

The seeds of the next nation to undergo a catastrophic govt takeover of the populace are being laid

 

[White 6]

Why are democrats such Nazis when it comes to free speech, especially when it comes to the speech of people directly elected by the people?

Take Joe Biden rambling on about how he enjoys children sitting on his lap rubbing down his legs at the pool as they cut his mic.

MSN

www.msn.com

Or you could be JD Vance invited on a show to talk about immigration, but once he starts to say things they don't like, they cut his mic.

George Stephanopoulos Cuts off JD Vance Mid-Interview After He Says President Can Defy Supreme Court | Video

The GOP senator tried to defend himself as his mic was cut live on ABC The post George Stephanopoulos Cuts off JD Vance Mid-Interview After He Says President Can Defy Supreme Court | Video appeared first on TheWrap.

www.yahoo.com

Or you can stop the President of the United States from posting on Twitter.

Twitter permanently suspends President Donald Trump

"After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence," Twitter's official "Safety" account tweeted.

www.nbcnews.com

In all of these examples, is it better to shut down our elected leaders if what they are saying disturbs us, or is it better if they allow us to know what they are thinking and will do so we can better assess if they should get our vote?

Do Republicans do this? I can't think of an instance.

4-month-old fake news. I listened to the new conference linked, heard nothing about the OP's fantasy.

 

[Votto]

4-month-old fake news. I listened to the new conference linked, heard nothing about the OP's fantasy.

Which story are you saying is fake, or are all of them fake?

 

[Votto]

They do it “for the right reasons”…

Because all other totalitarian regimes in history who ended up destroying and abusing their populace also thought they were doing it “for the right reasons”…

But THIS time.. it’s different!

The seeds of the next nation to undergo a catastrophic govt takeover of the populace are being laid

The more abusive regimes become, the more imperative it is to restrict free speech.

Had Musk not taken over Twitter, it would be far worse today than it is.

The Left is just waiting for Musk to die and resume their takeover of social media.

Most rich folk who could buy Twitter do not have the courage to do what he is doing.

 

[Votto]

Pedo Joe set the new paradigm that presidents don't do press conferences any more.

They just send out their press secretaries to lie and lie and lie.

All politicians lie. They all do.

So, is the answer to silence them or hold them accountable for their lies?

 

[Marener]

Or you could be JD Vance invited on a show to talk about immigration, but once he starts to say things they don't like, they cut his mic.

I hadn’t watched the videos before, but what the hell are you guys so upset about? He listened to him and didn’t interject. The interview was over and they were moving on to their next segment.

 

[Votto]

I hadn’t watched the videos before, but what the hell are you guys so upset about? He listened to him and didn’t interject. The interview was over and they were moving on to their next segment.

He did not let him make his point.

That was the whole reason to have him on, or was it?

 

[Votto]

Free speech?

No, it comes with a cost.

Seeking truth is the deadliest of endeavors.

 

[Marener]

He did not let him make his point.

That was the whole reason to have him on, or was it?

Sure he made his point. He listened politely and didn’t interrupt. At the end of Vance’s point, he indicated that the interview was over and they were moving on to the next segment.

But apparently Vance thinks that he decides when the interview is over? Is that what you guys are trying to say?

This is nothing.

 

[Votto]

Sure he made his point. He listened politely and didn’t interrupt. At the end of Vance’s point, he indicated that the interview was over and they were moving on to the next segment.

But apparently Vance thinks that he decides when the interview is over? Is that what you guys are trying to say?

This is nothing.

The article is about his mic being cut off.

Anyone can watch and judge for yourself.

 

[kyzr]

All politicians lie. They all do.

So, is the answer to silence them or hold them accountable for their lies?

If all politicians lie....there is no way to hold them accountable.

 

[Votto]

This reminds me of a time I was watching the news in Canada before an election cycle. The news cast talked about a controversial stand by a Left leaning politician for about an hour, allowing him to defend his position the entire time. It was their way of allowing apologetics to sway voters for him. However, his rival they covered only regarding his prolife stance, which he declined to comment on for whatever reason. Maybe they asked him that question because they knew that was going to be the response. The coverage of that lasted about a minute or two.

This is how the media manipulates elections.

 

[Marener]

The article is about his mic being cut off.

Anyone can watch and judge for yourself.

The segment was over, but Vance thought he could keep talking anyway.

It was quite impolite of Vance.

You guys are so entitled.

 

[Arlette]

Why are democrats such Nazis when it comes to free speech, especially when it comes to the speech of people directly elected by the people?

Take Joe Biden rambling on about how he enjoys children sitting on his lap rubbing down his legs at the pool as they cut his mic.

MSN

www.msn.com

Or you could be JD Vance invited on a show to talk about immigration, but once he starts to say things they don't like, they cut his mic.

George Stephanopoulos Cuts off JD Vance Mid-Interview After He Says President Can Defy Supreme Court | Video

The GOP senator tried to defend himself as his mic was cut live on ABC The post George Stephanopoulos Cuts off JD Vance Mid-Interview After He Says President Can Defy Supreme Court | Video appeared first on TheWrap.

www.yahoo.com

Or you can stop the President of the United States from posting on Twitter.

Twitter permanently suspends President Donald Trump

"After close review of recent Tweets from the @realDonaldTrump account and the context around them we have permanently suspended the account due to the risk of further incitement of violence," Twitter's official "Safety" account tweeted.

www.nbcnews.com

In all of these examples, is it better to shut down our elected leaders if what they are saying disturbs us, or is it better if they allow us to know what they are thinking and will do so we can better assess if they should get our vote?

Do Republicans do this? I can't think of an instance.

Why should Vance get to say lie on national TV?

 

[BluesLegend]

Because Dems are hyper INTOLERANT of any opposing viewpoint. People who have a different opinion on the issues must be SILENCED and not allowed to speak.

 

[OldFlame]

Sure he made his point. He listened politely and didn’t interrupt. At the end of Vance’s point, he indicated that the interview was over and they were moving on to the next segment.

But apparently Vance thinks that he decides when the interview is over? Is that what you guys are trying to say?

This is nothing.

No, he made a comment before he 'moved on', care to state what that comment was?