Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Just minutes into the congressional hearing about government censorship the democrats on the committee tried to have Robert Kennedy Jr silenced and removed from the hearings.

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/democrats-censor-remove-rfk-jr-hearing-censorship-despicable-comments

Triple G

There are a few others who need to be censored in the House like MTG yesterday. Why have censoring rules if they are not to be used? Do you think all speech should be aired even if it is inflammatory, inaccurate, antisemitic?

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Twisting Robert Kennedy's prior statements into the category which you just described would definitely require an extremely creative imagination not to mention a lack of critical analysis of exactly what it was that he said.

What was really interesting is that in his opening remarks he set aside his prepared remarks and gave an impassioned and touching speech about the need to stop the vitriol and hear one another even though our ideas and thoughts may be contrary to each other.... The democrats on the committee wasted no time at all in pissing all over that idea.

Triple G

He's a nutcase just like any other street corner preacher and fits right in with all the other conspiracy driven idea population like Giuliani, Powell, etc. He has individual free speech rights, but his being censored by social media is perfectly within private company's SOP.

The House, however, should not have any censoring rules for witnesses. Witnesses are invited and censoring or preferential treatments are built into the witness se******n process. The House censoring an invited guest is against 1st amendment rights and there should be unfettered speech allowed.

Tex-s

I disagree. Unless people are openly advocating for violence, let the morons have the mic. Record the stupid and, with evidence, refute it. If Kennedy is way wrong, or if MTG said something ‘inflamatory’, call it out. Silencing anyone only makes them a martyr and you a tyrant, and both of these effects move public opinion towards supporting the one silenced. This is true no matter if it’s RFK Jr gaining support within the DEM party or if it was the rousing swell of opposition that was seen after Maxine Waters actually DID promote physical confrontation, stupidly, on camera.

https://youtu.be/tJCDe7vdFfw

Triple G

See my later note. I agree with you in principle. But, under current House procedures, censoring is being used as partisan cudgels.

.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Yes, Facebook, Twitter, Threads... They can all censor as you are correct they are privately held companies but to do so at the governments urging or request is arguably a 1st Amendment violation.

Triple G

So when are bills coming to create a formal law structure? GOP all talk? Without those, it will always be the Wild West.

https://hbr.org/2021/01/are-we-entering-a-new-era-of-social-media-regulation

Tex-s

Not arguably, surely. It is illegal censorship by proxy. The H****r laptop story alone, by its suppression, and by exit polling data, seems to have ‘blinded’ a large enough bloc to have swung several swing states. I will have to hunt for the published polling data on my laptop, but from memory, some 2/3 of those in exit polls who said they v**ed Biden were unaware of at least one of the following:

H****r Laptop

H****r’s employ in Ukraine oil and Joe’s PUBLIC boasting of getting a Ukrainian investigator fired

Kamala Harris’ extremely radical v****g record (rated the most l*****t in the Congress).

Of those unawares, about 1/3, or roughly 16 percent of the Democrat v**e, and 8 percent of the nation said, in those exit polls, that these unknown stories would have changed their v**e. With the v**e in the swing states not reaching 3% in most cases, 8 percent switching sides is a 16 percent shift.

There is no doubt that social media censorship r****d the outcome in 2020, and did so by quashing particular information, illegally, at the behest of governmental people / forces / threats.

Triple G

yep - wild wild west and used by any and all "enemies" (or political opponents) whether domestic or foreign.

DennyT Loc: Central Missouri woods

“””H****r’s employ in Ukraine oil and Joe’s PUBLIC boasting of getting a Ukrainian investigator fired
“”””
I suggest you look at the timing

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

I do believe that is what these hearings are about? Are congressional hearings not designed to inform future legislation?

Triple G

Not usually when there have already been several bi-partisan bills proposed. This is all political theater. As with other things pointed out to you, if you do not see it for what it is, you are too far gone for reason.

Blurryeyed Loc: NC Mountains.

Says the guy who is too far gone... I suppose that you have not seen any evidence of the government infringing on the first amendment over the last few years. The whole point of the first amendment is to protect speech that the government does not want spoken, the way to combat dangerous speech is not with censorship but rather to combat it with better speech that that illustrates the t***h and the fallacy of the speech that the government finds offensive.

"Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety." - Benjamin Franklin.

Racmanaz Loc: Sunny Tucson!

What did you expect from F*****t Democrats?