America - The Official Thread

[baldgye]

Blocking people on a your own personal twitter account is not the equivalent to shutting down free speech, that is a bad fail of a comparison if I've ever seen one.

So that's two false comparisons you've made, one more to go mate and you'll have reached the magic number.

 

[DDastardly00]

So that's two false comparisons you've made, one more to go mate and you'll have reached the magic number.

Dumb comment, I'm not the one making comparisons here.

 

[McLaren]

Just FYI I think maybe it's time for an avatar (37k posts seems like enough). At first I confused your post (quoted here) for the guy with 19 posts who is going on and on about Nazis.

Same here.

Haha, alright. It has been a while since I’ve had one.

So if the dems take back the house which even fox news is now saying will happen , will they go for impeachment ?

Or will they focus on stopping Trumps agenda till 2020?

Depends on what they feel they can impeach for and if there’s enough support.

Remember, they had a member try to push an impeachment process and it failed. Nanci Pelosi had even told them don’t try it at the time.

And Don Lemon, Cuomo are on a roll again this week, trying to 1up the racist Kanye comments from last week. I guess CNN is the racist news network now.

Eh, racist low brow comments against whites seems to be a pass these days. I think most whites ignore the comments anyway for some reason.

What irks me is the defense that the comments, if from an African American, can’t be racist because they have no political/whatever power like whites.

 

[PocketZeven]

@PocketZeven

Being critical of the press is not limiting them in any way, shape, or form. Has CNN, the NYT, and ABC stopped reporting negative stories about Trump? Of course they haven't. In fact, if anything Trump emboldened them even more.

Do you really not see the difference between being "critical" and labeling "the enemy of the people". Or are you delibirately ignoring this?
a brief history of the term: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enemy_of_the_people

I can understand using fake news or the media being unfair or inaccurate or accuse them of lying. But labeling them the enemy of the people, is putting them above all supposed enemies.

Notice the gravitas of the term and its most famous users.

 

[baldgye]

Dumb comment, I'm not the one making comparisons here.

You compared a normal citizen to the president, then said that the president blocking communication with you via twitter (his primary form of direct communication) is the same as taking away free speech.

You gona make my evening and give us the magic number then?

 

[DDastardly00]

Do you really not see the difference between being "critical" and labeling "the enemy of the people". Or are you delibirately ignoring this?
a brief history of the term: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enemy_of_the_people

I can understand using fake news or the media being unfair or inaccurate or accuse them of lying. But labeling them the enemy of the people, is putting them above all supposed enemies.

Notice the gravitas of the term and its most famous users.

Trump makes dumb comments but none of them have limited free speech. The claim made is that Trump is limiting free speech which is false.

 

[DDastardly00]

You compared a normal citizen to the president, then said that the president blocking communication with you via twitter (his primary form of direct communication) is the same as taking away free speech.

You gona make my evening and give us the magic number then?

Does it stop any of these people from having their own personal twitter account and saying what they want? No it does not, so that is a false equivalence you are pushing there.

 

[Northstar]

But he does have a lot of similarities with totalitarian dictators.

I struggle to think of a president that hasn't done dictatorish type things.

 

[baldgye]

Does it stop any of these people from having their own personal twitter account and saying what they want? No it does not, so that is a false equivalence you are pushing there.

What are you chatting lad?
I literally only said that he was the president... unless he isn't the president nothing I have said is false.

The president, blocking you (an American), isn't the same as an accountant from Bloxwich called Steve with 3 followers (two of which are his mum) blocking you.

 

[DDastardly00]

What are you chatting lad?
I literally only said that he was the president... unless he isn't the president nothing I have said is false.

The president, blocking you (an American), isn't the same as an accountant from Bloxwich called Steve with 3 followers (two of which are his mum) blocking you.

OK, but it still isn't preventing free speech or any of these people from having their own twitter accounts to say whatever they like about Trump, therefore it's a false equivalence.

 

[baldgye]

OK, but it still isn't preventing free speech or any of these people from having their own twitter accounts to say whatever they like about Trump, therefore it's a false equivalence.

Something, I never did... when did I even mention free speech?!

...so I'm still waiting for no.3!

 

[PocketZeven]

Trump makes dumb comments but none of them have limited free speech. The claim made is that Trump is limiting free speech which is false.

I did not make that claim. I was stating that Trump has similarities to totalitarian dictators. Vilifying and declaring the media as the enemy of the people is not limiting free speech, but actually attacking it. It was so serious that the Senate needed to adopt a resolution:
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/senate...ing-the-press-is-not-the-enemy-of-the-people/

Yet he keeps using the term, even after the bombthreats . Without explicitely saying it, he is blaming the media instead taking responsibility as president.

What if Justin Bieber starts proclaiming that taylor swift is "the enemy of the people". And some crazy person decides to carry out an murder attempt. Do you think that Bieber holds any responsibility? I would agree that it would be the act of an individual, but would it be more or less likely have happened if he didnt make that statement?

 

[DDastardly00]

Something, I never did... when did I even mention free speech?!

...so I'm still waiting for no.3!

So you were quoting my posts for no reason then? You are not making sense. Either you are a part of this conversation or you're not. Ok, I will ask you directly then, and you can answer the question for yourself. Is Trump blocking Twitter users from his own personal twitter account shutting down free speech?

 

[baldgye]

So you were quoting my posts for no reason then? You are not making sense.

You compared THE PRESIDENT to a normal Twitter user, that comparison is inane and wrong, I pointed that out with my original response to your post.

k, I will ask you directly then, and you can answer the question for yourself. Is Trump blocking Twitter users from his own personal twitter account shutting down free speech?

I don't know, so I'd go with this.

 

[Rallywagon]

So you were quoting my posts for no reason then? You are not making sense. Either you are a part of this conversation or you're not. Ok, I will ask you directly then, and you can answer the question for yourself. Is Trump blocking Twitter users from his own personal twitter account shutting down free speech?

To be fair, SCOTUS doesnt seem to follow your logic either...

 

[PocketZeven]

I struggle to think of a president that hasn't done dictatorish type things.

Which "dictatorish type things" do you mean? And which presidents?

 

[DDastardly00]

You compared THE PRESIDENT to a normal Twitter user, that comparison is inane and wrong, I pointed that out with my original response to your post.

I don't know, so I'd go with this.

No I didn't, I said it is the president's personal twitter account. The claim was and still is that he is shutting down free speech by blocking people and that claim is wrong. These people are free to create their own accounts and say whatever they like.

To be fair, SCOTUS doesnt seem to follow your logic either...

I read the link provided, the case was appealed in June after the users that sued Trump were unblocked, the case is now in New York Appeals court, 2nd circuit I think. It has not been referred to SCOTUS and it may never make it there depending on what happens next.

 

[huskeR32]

There is bad comparisons, then there is this.

So one family of one person who died doesn't represent everyone at the synagogue, he was welcomed there by the Rabbi, his daughter is Jewish and so is his Son in law, it's not exactly uncommon for a president to pay their tributes in a disaster such as this.

Not everything is political, it's absurd to think it is.

The mayor is a Democrat do you honestly think it isn't political reasons why he says he isn't welcome, Trump is going to get protests where ever he goes because that is what happens when your a Leader with strong opinions.

Outrage culture, always looking for a finger to point at.

Did you manage to keep a straight face while typing those two thoughts one after the other?

---

This^, so this^

I mean I don't like the guy either but come on, enough with the drama queen, diva hyperbole Hitler stuff. Trump isn't trying to nationalize businesses and corporations. Though he has been critical of the press, he isn't trying to limit free speech. But let's look at who is trying to do those things, Democrats (nationalized healthcare, Medicaid for all) and the Antifa (trying to quell free speech on college campuses and elsewhere), whom are nothing more than modern day brown shirts out in force.

How about you? Certainly you cracked a smirk when, right after scoffing at Trump/Hitler comparisons, you compared Antifa to Storm Troopers.

 

[TexRex]

So Trump can't block people on his personal twitter account but you and everyone else can, seems fair.

I neither stated explicitly nor suggested any such thing, and I feel like you knew that prior to attributing such a sentiment to what I presented.



You didn't establish any particular degree to which Trump "isn't trying to limit free speech" and I was able to provide an instance where his actions were determined by a judge to be precisely that.

I really don't care about Twitter, as a rule, but that doesn't render it nonexistent and it doesn't stop the individual who is supposed to represent me and my country at the highest level possible from using it as a pocket pulpit to address the public. It's his use of the platform--what his legal representation for the matter equated to holding a press conference, and I believe Trump himself has made a similar comparison--that I believe makes his attempts to silence responses an act against the First Amendment.

 

[Johnnypenso]

So in other words... Trump is a criminal and a thug.

Worse, he's Hitler.

So if the dems take back the house which even fox news is now saying will happen , will they go for impeachment ?

Or will they focus on stopping Trumps agenda till 2020?

Can Hitler be impeached? He is a dictator after all. Can't he just tweet his way out of it?

Personally I do agree he is not Hitler reincarnated. But he does have a lot of similarities with totalitarian dictators.
Which worldleaders current and from the past have vilified the press and certain minorities as the current president of the USA has? He is limiting the free press by doing anything he can by labeling them as fake news and proclaimed them the enemy of the people. And which former worldleaders have proclaimed to be a nationalist?

"Basket of deplorables" Many U.S. Presidents battled with the press, this is nothing new. I've put up examples a couple of weeks ago. Obama went on....and on....and on....and on....and on...about Fox News. His Department of Justice secretly spied on AP reporters, obtaining two months' worth of telephone records in an attempt to crack down on internal leaks in his own administration. That's different though right? Abraham Lincoln issued an executive order entitled, "Arrest and Imprisonment of Irresponsible Newspaper Reporters and Editors" after two New York newspapers published a forged presidential proclamation. Aka Fake News. He also imprisoned some reporters basically for not speaking positively about the war effort.

 

[mustafur]

Did you manage to keep a straight face while typing those two thoughts

Yes, it's clear I'm saying Trump going to the synagogue isn't political but the democrat Mayor is trying to make it as such.

 

[DDastardly00]

I neither stated explicitly nor suggested any such thing, and I feel like you knew that prior to attributing such a sentiment to what I presented.



You didn't establish any particular degree to which Trump "isn't trying to limit free speech" and I was able to provide an instance where his actions were determined by a judge to be precisely that.

And why should I have to establish anything? This is starting to feel very strawman here. I'm not the one making a false claim that Trump is shutting down free speech by blocking people on Twitter, but if you want to establish that for yourself then it's as simple as heading on over to Trump's Twitter account where you will see hundreds of anti-Trump replies on a daily basis. If that is truly his aim, then Trump is doing a very bad job of it.

 

[huskeR32]

Yes, it's clear I'm saying Trump going to the synagogue isn't political but the democrat Mayor is trying to make it as such.

Trump is doing what literally any president would do, and that's not political? And it's impossible that the mayor has personal misgivings about Trump, and instead, his actions are purely cynical politics?

How are you so sure about both of these conclusions? Oh, wait, it's the word in bold. Got it.

 

[DDastardly00]

Charles Schulz was right. The great pumpkin is very controversial indeed . Happy Halloween ladies and gentlemen.

“There are three things I have learned never to discuss with people... Religion, Politics, and The Great Pumpkin. ”

― Charles Schulz

 

[Northstar]

Which "dictatorish type things" do you mean? And which presidents?

Trump - Military action without congressional approval
Obama - Military action without congressional approval
W. - Military action without approval, bribing journalists, surveillance program.
Clinton - So we have 1 so far.
H. - Military action without congressional approval, Iran-Contra pardons
Reagan - Military action without congressional approval
Cater - So 2 in 41 years.
Ford - He pardoned Nixon
Nixon - Watergate
LBJ - Military action without approval
Kennedy - Some sketchy things, but nothing too bad. We're up to 3!
Eisenhower- Military action without approval

I could go on, but I think I've illustrated the fact U.S. presidents have a knack for getting in touch with their inner dictator no matter their party and usually at the cost of human lives and ridiculous amounts of money.

 

[Sanji Himura]

@baldgye Let me throw out a hypothetical here...

Suppose that I have a personal twitter account that I use on almost a daily basis. Then I have a twitter account for my business stuff. Now company policy says that I can't block anybody on my business account, but mentions nothing about a personal account. Now I block somebody on my personal account and that person calls my HR department to complain that I blocked him on my personal account. Do I have a case that this is proper and that the complaint has no merit because the account that I blocked this person is my personal account and not my business account?

 

[Biggles]

I mean I don't like the guy either but come on, enough with the drama queen, diva hyperbole Hitler stuff. Trump isn't trying to nationalize businesses and corporations. Though he has been critical of the press, he isn't trying to limit free speech. But let's look at who is trying to do those things, Democrats (nationalized healthcare, Medicaid for all) and the Antifa (trying to quell free speech on college campuses and elsewhere), whom are nothing more than modern day brown shirts out in force.

I can't tell if you're being serious here? Democrats promoting the idea of universal healthcare, Medicaid for all - something that every other western democracy has - is somehow evidence of a fascist agenda? Give me a break.

As far as attacking the press is concerned, all Presidents have had their issues with the press - it goes with the job. Being critical of the press is fine - I don't remember ANY prior US president calling the press "the enemy of the people", but it is something that dictators often say.

That's sort of the point: Trump may not be a dictator - the established institutions of government in the US should act to prevent that. However, Hitler wasn't a dictator either ... before he was. People had all kinds of complimentary things to say about him until the extent of his personal & political agenda became clear. This is not something that the US should slip towards by degrees & Trump has stepped well over the line already.

 

[Danoff]

Trump - Military action without congressional approval
Obama - Military action without congressional approval
W. - Military action without approval, bribing journalists, surveillance program.
Clinton - So we have 1 so far.
H. - Military action without congressional approval, Iran-Contra pardons
Reagan - Military action without congressional approval
Cater - So 2 in 41 years.
Ford - He pardoned Nixon
Nixon - Watergate
LBJ - Military action without approval
Kennedy - Some sketchy things, but nothing too bad. We're up to 3!
Eisenhower- Military action without approval

I could go on, but I think I've illustrated the fact U.S. presidents have a knack for getting in touch with their inner dictator no matter their party and usually at the cost of human lives and ridiculous amounts of money.

I'm not so sure we're up to 3 if that's how you're counting. I think the number is probably closer to zero.

 

[Johnnypenso]

As far as attacking the press is concerned, all Presidents have had their issues with the press - it goes with the job. Being critical of the press is fine - I don't remember ANY prior US president calling the press "the enemy of the people", but it is something that dictators often say.

Abraham Lincoln issued an executive order entitled, "Arrest and Imprisonment of Irresponsible Newspaper Reporters and Editors" after two New York newspapers published a forged presidential proclamation. Aka Fake News. He also imprisoned some reporters basically for not speaking positively about the war effort.

 

[mustafur]

Trump is doing what literally any president would do, and that's not political? And it's impossible that the mayor has personal misgivings about Trump, and instead, his actions are purely cynical politics?

How are you so sure about both of these conclusions? Oh, wait, it's the word in bold. Got it.

Do people vote politicians on personal misgivings or on policies or because they are red or blue?

Trump didn't say anything political when he went, not the same can be said about bluey mayor.