So over on Twitter, conservative and liberty-minded users are pretty constantly complaining about the bias of Twitter, the company. They accuse Twitter of “silencing” and “censoring” non-progressive viewpoints. Of “shadow-banning” conservative users. Of suspending or deleting accounts willy-nilly for various unwoke infractions. Of being “non-transparent.”
Yes, this is highly likely.
Ben Shapiro said this about the ‘shadow banning’ allegations:
And Jim Hanson wrote an opinion piece including this:
What about the First Amendment, guaranteeing freedom of speech? Like it or not, it protects us all – from the far right to the far left and everyone in between. Whether because of an inadvertent computer glitch or by design, shadow banning is wrong and, frankly, un-American. If Twitter means what it says, I look forward to the quick end to this dangerous and abhorrent practice.
Here is the First Amendment to the United States Constitution:
Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
And here are some additional court findings.
What about the Twitter Terms of Service? The TOS include this:
Our Services evolve constantly. As such, the Services may change from time to time, at our discretion. We may stop (permanently or temporarily) providing the Services or any features within the Services to you or to users generally. We also retain the right to create limits on use and storage at our sole discretion at any time. We may also remove or refuse to distribute any Content on the Services, suspend or terminate users, and reclaim usernames without liability to you.
Twitter is a private enterprise. They are not the government. They do have the ability to limit who uses their (free!) platform and how it is used.
Don’t like it? Don’t be on Twitter.
Go ahead. Convince me otherwise.
Comments
252 responses to “Twitter: Private Enterprise or Public Platform?”
I dont twitter.
For the same reason I refuse to Skype or LinkedIn. I dont agree with their TOS, so they can find someone to take my place.
Ive done likewise.
Indeed!
However, most people will not even read the TOS before agreeing to all sorts of things.
To be fair, a lot of TOS boilerplate is deliberately written to be abstruse enough as to make you not want to read it.
True. But I am anal enough (or paranoid enough) to read them all anyway.
I do too. Also, on a related note, I can’t believe people do not read contracts in entirety before signing. When we bought our last car, the salesman and finance guy stared at me in amazement while I was reading. They told me I was the only person they have ever seen actually read through the contract and cross-check every number.
Same when I rented apartments in college. The woman just laughed as I read though the lease and asked what I was doing in bewilderment.
The last car I bought I did this in the finance office (aka the fraudroom) and caught them charging me $200 for ‘microengraving’ the VIN on the windows, not a line item on a bill either, buried then totaled in with number in tax and title section. Since I had spent 4 hours patiently repeating “I’m not interested in talking about payments or terms. I will write a check for the full amount and I am willing to pay $x, yes or no” the last ditch attempt to add $200 to x pissed me off badly.
Lazy lawyering. The
secondthird best class I took in law school was a contracts drafting class. The prof pretty much said if your grandma can’t understand it, don’t use it. Lazy lawyers copy boilerplate. Good lawyers anticipate problems and handle them in the contract.EULAs and TOSs are highly regulated by the courts, so you’re not gonna walk into something insane.
For me, with Skype, it was their announcement that on May 1st they would monitor for “offensive language”. As you would expect, they never clearly defined the parameters. And since Im fundamentally offensive (and abrasive, and largely repellent) it took me only a second or two to realize that wasnt a platform I needed to continue using.
So now I either use a paid service, or Gchat. After all, I expect Google to record every conversation of mine, and thats part of the contract going in.
SUP SALLY!
Wont work. I’m like a polymer with terminated sulfate ester groups and OH end-groups.
That’s pretty funny, Sally!
Oh, go play with your hose and maltese cross, fireman.
Heh, heh, heh…
It’s always worked for me.
This.
I’m surprised I haven’t been blocked by Preet Bharara yet. For some reason, the emails Twitter sends me with “interesting” tweets include some of his, so I always respond to them with a woodchipper reference.
Ted S. is on Preet’slist
Why would you anger a future president?
Calling something “un-American” to win an argument is un-American.
If bakers have to bake the fucking cake than Twitter should have to twat the fucking twits or whatever.
That example was in my first draft.
There’s also something of a realpolitik versus a idealist situation here. In theory I prefer the 1st Amendment. But it’s a dead letter and protected classes have killed it. There’s a desire to turn those guns on the lefties and make them play by their own standards that also ties into a fundamental American desire for fairness. So as a practical matter, finding some way to torch them seems perfectly cromulent.
I mean, James Gunn is a good example. I fully endorse the utter destruction of his career. He decided to play the game, it is completely legitimate to make him play by the same rules he uses.
But I’ve always been a guy who thought when the heel cheap shots the face, the proper reaction isn’t complaining to the ref so he can do it again, it’s to turn around and cheap shot him harder.
I should note that is the best argument I can make, not necessarily one I agree with.
My personal opinion is that the more of an echo chamber they make it, the faster they are going to implode. Short their stock and wash your hands of it.
I’m not worried about Twitter specifically, but I am worried about a culture that is increasingly hostile to free speech and opinions from people they don’t like. Politics is downstream from culture, and how long before the First Amendment is in serious jeopardy because politicians get put in office by a bunch of millennial snowflakes that think a run of the mill conservative like Ben Shapiro is a Nazi?
What if President Harris reinstates Net Neutrality and the idiots that run Twitter are now political appointees at the FCC, deciding what people can say on the internet?
That’s why we have a Supreme Court– to wave the Constitution in Congress’ face every once in a while.
Yeah, but when people worse than Justice Penaltax get appointed….
If Trump gets two or three more appointments and doesn’t fuck them up, we should be good for a couple decades at least.
I’m only Luke warm on Kavanaugh. He’s good on some stuff but I expect he’ll continue to do his part raping the 4th amendments dead carcass.
Really – he would be “raping” the 4th amendment? I don’t see that reading his case history.
Everyone says this but if the dems take the legislative and executive what stops them from packing the court? 9 isn’t set in stone
What’s stopping the GOP from doing it preemptively now? Could you imagine the liberatti cranial mushroom clouds if Trump decided that SCOTUS needed 15 justices instead of 9?
I worry about that too.
While state enforced censorship is the biggest evil concerning free speech, hyper sensitivity to opinions that fall a tad outside the Overton window can have basically the same effect.
While this is certainly true, I don’t see how we can fight for the basic innate rights of liberty by using state power against what is basically progressives using their innate rights of expression and association (which includes the right not to associate). I find the whole witch hunt, mob mentality, deplatforming, shadow banning, shunning thing that is going on appalling, but as long as they stop short of violence, the state has no business forcing them to change.
The state forcing people to change is what is causing most of the alienation in the first place. I mean, if it can turn Frodo…
Very well said.
I don’t Instabook, Facegram, or Twit. I don’t like being datamined(more than I already am), and most of those places are shallow cesspools of humanity.
What do you do with all your selfies?
i would say I’ve taken five selfies since they’ve become a thing. I’m annoyed when a picture of me pops up on my wife’s Facebook page.
I was on the bus the other day and looked at the large, rectangular rear view mirror above the driver. “There’s some creepy foreigner on the bus”, I thought to myself. “Oh, that’s me.” Yeah, no selfies for me either.
I’m like twice their target age so yeah I don’t either. It would be a bigger statement if I actually gave a shit about my peers’ brain farts.
Meh, they are what you make of them, I use twitter and facebook to keep up with distant family and friend or to get alert from authors and artist and musicians I dig. I’m lucky tho because my mouse has this wheel in the middle and if I spin it I zoom right past all the stupid shit I don’t want to see. I don’t know how I got to be one of the few people with this feature, but I think it’s has something to do with the fact that I am also one of the few people who have turn signals on their car.
“one of the few people who have turn signals on their car.” So you’re the other guy? By any chance, were you in Wilmington, DE yesterday, making a left turn off 202? Sitting there with your turn signal on and some jackass runs right into your trunk?
Way to bury the lede.
Damn. Dinner tonight was epic. Miso glazed black cod, Japanese style pickled cucumbers, carrots pan roasted with butter and a touch of miso glaze rounded out with a couple of slices of stellar local baguette.
I haven’t had a stogie in a couple of days, I think tonight is the night to go Cuban.
So….Desi Arnaz ?
He was a handsome man.
I made pork schnitzel with lettuce and tomatoes salad. It was delicious.
I find Twitter often very entertaining. Which is something I have never said about Facebook, who to everyone’s surprise just coughed up a huge portion of their overall wealth. Yeah, no one saw that coming.
Twitter will follow soon. This bubble will make the late 90s “tech” bubble look like… umm, a tinier bubble.
The 90s tech crash?
What’s your @?
No Twitter account, no anything social media account. I just enjoy reading some stuff on Twitter.
Well, damn!
I have email! It’s like… magical mail.
Why does magical mail think I need updates every hour from every store I have ever traded with?
I want the answer to this also.
Are they owned by Mozilla? Oh sorry, Firefox need an update every 3 minutes, not every hour, my bad.
Lights HM signal .
Would.
The words… ‘over prescribed’ comes to mind. Or OD’d on fix a flat.
That got bourbon through he nose.
She looked better before the surgery.
Kinda reminds me of a cartoon-ish Yolandi Visser
What? Yolandi Visser weighs less than 120 lbs., easy.
I read that as a cartoon Yasser Arafat.
Agreed it’s way out of proportion just looks weird.
Don’t click that.
Wha…???
That’s not even the first British paper with an article featuring a woman with a titanic ass and in the sidebar a story about some kid with a horrible medical condition that I’ve seen this week.
No. Hell no. Not even with your dick.
Don’t like it? Don’t be on Twitter.
I tried to be a twat. I was really bad at it. I like Iowahawk and Michael Russo, so I go directly to them. Otherwise, my only Twitter time is thanks to You People.
You would be bad at being a twat. That Minnesoda nice thing oozes from you. Cheers to that.
Minnesoda nice is a myth.
Now you’re just trolling them to prove your point. Let’s see if they bite.
Texas and Minne, on average, provide the nicest people on the planet.
If you disagree, I’m happy to drop the gloves.
My completely unscientific survey (or vacation as some might call it) placed North Dakota as nicest, Wyoming as most considerate drivers, and unsurprisingly Illinois as run by modern day Caligula
My patch of Illinois is very polite you #$%&ing @#$%!!!!!!
Oh please, as a Minnesodan, you would just not talk to him at the next church potluck. All other Minnesodans would know you were snubbing him.
^^One of us^^
Stop having consistent principles, SP.
The important thing is to own the libs and neo-cons. That’s what libertarianism is all about.
How many fucking times do I have to say it. Libertarianism is about meeting chicks.
What the hell is wrong with you, man?
I thought it was all about once determining once and for all if Caddyshack or Blazing Saddles is the greatest comedy film of all time (SPOILER: It’s actually Airplane!)
Some Like It Hot
Wrong.
Slapshot wasn’t a documentary?
It was. The comedy part was a happy coincidence.
It’s Ghostbusters.
Which one?
That’s not even a question.
It’s an insult.
Caddyshack…errr…Blazing Saddles…
Duck Soup
None of the above. It’s A Gift.
Young Frankenstein
Libertarianism is about meeting chicks.
Damn, I must be doing it wrong.
4 of the founders, no, 6 of the founders did it right.
What?
So what you’re saying is, I’m not doing it wrong, instead I’m doing it so wrong that I should commit seppuku?
#cathynewmanquestions
So you are saying you’re Japanese?
Turning Japanese, I think I’m turning Japanese, I really think so.
No, what I’m saying is, I shouldn’t quit my day job because my jokes are so shitty.
Off to bed… I need to be up early. Have fun folks!
It’s bad anyway, so you’re ok. Every time I meet chicks, I get in trouble with the wife and this is bad.
I thought it was about alienating all potential allies on specific policy points and then floating above all of them.
That’s why I’m here.
Progress!
This is most definitely a step forward. Into a pile of shit. Errr, I Mean nothing could possibly go wrong.
The places pushing for it tell me everything I need to know.
Always consider the source, first.
Permanent residents have the prerogative to vote in Hong Kong public elections.
Permanent resident, non-citizens that is.
Why do you want America to be ruled by the Triads, Pomp?
Are Chinese gangsters demonstrably worse than Congress?
Fair point.
With barely a month to go, here’s an NCAA BIG10football update.
“Don’t like it? Don’t be on Twitter.”
The other option is to criticize, berate, expose, ridicule, and embarrass @jack.
Now, if he just came out and said that his platform favors leftists that would be one thing. But he likes to talk like he is being fair and unbalanced, while doing the opposite.
And it’s not just Twitter. It’s Facebook, YouTube, Paypal, Patreon, Tumblr, LiveJournal, that either ban or pull sneaky shit against users with non-leftist views.
um, fair and balanced
Twitter is private and can do what they want. Twitter is being dishonest and shady. You’re absolutely right that these two are not mutually exclusive.
Patron? I thought a number of people being screwed by YouTube chose Patreon as a workaround.
How hard is it to make a Twitter alternative? I have no clue how computers work.
#Meneither
Well…that is…something?
Men either what?
If you click, you get to choose.
Gab
#getongab
gab.ai
also minds.com (facebook alternative)
I don’t use any of that stuff. I was just curious why if you don’t like it, why don’t you take your business elsewhere? Unless it’s realky hard to compete
Once the market share is embedded like a tick, it does seem pretty hard to compete (see vid.me or dailymotion) – facebook has tied itself into a LOT more sites/formats/etc than myspace ever did and a lot faster too from what I can tell – 1/2 the news sites I check out require a facebook login to comment (hell no I’m not doing that).
Gab.
I thought I posted this before, but it never showed up.
I have twice now linked to Gab, but the comment didn’t post. Is G a b another Site That Shall Not Be Named?
I think the .ai is just a fishy looking extension that isn’t widely recognized yet.
I was thinking earlier today that Trump should just take his business to Gab and watch everyone’s head explode.
Oh, I remember why – that asshole Tony was going on about how “nobody uses it”.
Tony who?
TOS Tony – noted troll.
Oh, him.
And then a number of those people got thrown off Patreon.
and I think hatreon got shut down. But check razorfist and styxhexenhammer666 – I think there are a few more alternative funding sites now – bitchute, etc.
That’s why Hatreon become a thing, right?
Also, anyway to prevent autoplay every time this page is refreshed?
Don’t shoot your computer.
I’m not getting any auto-play.
Or any play!
Hey-oh!
Install an adblocker? I just see a black square.
Racist!
+1 banana in the tail pipe
…I ain’t fallin for that
Finally a Furry I understand.
Your search history is a superfund site.
Dude.
How long has HM been hanging on to that one for the old, “Banana in the tailpipe” line?
Flak 36/37 1/72 sacale.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/9k4BUWe6dr3EkcFA8
or scale….
Nice!
1/72 is a bitch……..
Looking good.
I just use twitter for Hat and Hair stuff and tweeting funny photoshop pictures.
As for regulating it, not something I agree with, but they opened that can of worms with that decision on Trump’s account. If everyone has a right to read the President’s tweets why don’t I have the right to read tweets from other politicians (assuming any of them are shadowbanned or what ever.) And from there, with politicians being regular people, why would a have a right to read their tweets but not other people’s? This is why using precedent set by shit rulings shouldn’t be a thing.
I agree. “Hey, I know a judge got it wrong 200 years ago, but rules is rules.” *shrug*
Twitter culture needs to adopt a Mulligan system. You get one for every twenty or so tweets.
Well it’s all well and good for them to claim to be a private company…but then the court rules that Trump can’t block people from following him as a function of “Freedom of Speech”. How does that work again?
I know….let’s have some federal court rule that twitter and other social media sites need to be regulated like a Public Utility!
Go Mussolini!
*Thinks twice about making a woodchipper joke*
HI Preet!
I cant wait to we get on the SLPC list AND the Family Friendly Certification, I see “Scanners” in the Future
Minds Blown!!!!!!!
Was that Trump’s personal account or was it his official account? I have no problem with making public statements available to everyone, If we’re paying for it we get to see it.
He only posts on his personal account – he doesn’t use the @president twitter that was [presumably] created for Obama, etc. But since it’s the “only” format he uses, it’s apparently unconstitutional/illegal to block folks – who only want to be the first person to respond to his crap because it ups their “journalistic” profile/credentials/etc – talk about absolut ™ BS.
Admittedly getting into the weeds here, but is it on his private phone and is he or his private staff doing the tweeting, yes the president has a right to his private life and can associate with whomever he chooses but if he’s using government resources it should be available to the public.
Well, that was the argument with Bill Clinton gettin hummers in the Oval Office. We were told “its a private matter” and to “respect the family’s privacy”.
Twitter can do what it wants, and follow Facebook into the shitter.
Faster, please.
Whoa. 100 billion loss in a single day.
This is getting to be a pet peeve of mine, this habit of financial reporters to report all price movements in terms of market cap change for the giant scare headline. It is sensationalist nonsense.
A friend of mine had $400k tied up in Facebook stock. I told him to sell it all ASAP. Hope he did, or else he just got a huge haircut.
Well, but if the courts are going to rule that Trump’s tweets are a matter of public record, and under 1A he cant ban people, they’ve already imposed the judiciary on a private (viewable by the public) messaging platform.
Why not go full Mussolini ? What difference, at this point, does it even make?
that was my reply to You upthread,
Sup Tres!
HEY YUFUS
I don’t’ think they said Twitter has to post Trump’s tweets, just that if they are official tweets he can’t pick and choose who gets to see them. Setting aside, of course, the fact that every one of his tweets is retweeted and reported on and even if you don’t have twitter you can’t help but hear about them. It’s an imperfect analogy but imagine if the State of the Union was only broadcast on certain channels at the presidents choosing.
They said that Trump isn’t allowed to block anyone from following him – which would technically prevent them from seeing his tweets (OUTSIDE the fact that they can open up a second browser from a random account – or even a non-account – view them in full there and then copy/paste/etc from their account). It’s such BS coming from jagoffs you expect to know how to use the site.
It’s a private business. It’s Twitter. There’s no goddamn such a thing as an official tweet. Just ask CNN or any of the MSM, that’s not real news. No, you do not get to have your cake and eat it.
Why not? If the president is using his office and staff to send out tweets, that’s as official as if he was sending out a press release. Public statements should be available to anyone who requests them, how that could be a matter of debate on a libertarian social media platform is quite honestly baffleing.
So then, maybe, I could either watch it on a state-sanctioned channel, or choose to watch something else that hasn’t been pre-empted by un-necessary pageantry that Ill read about for a week after anyhow?
Where do I sign up for this?
You and I may not want to watch, but it’s goings to be watched and giving the government a monopoly on who gets to broadcast it is not a good idea.
The Twitter model is ass backwards. Blocking someone should be you don’t see what the blocked person is spewing, not blocking someone prevents them from seeing your public posts.
Of course, so federal judge somewhere would quickly rule that Trump blocking someone under that method is denying them the right to seek redresses from the government and their elected leaders.
“Muting” does that. You don’t see their crap but they can still see your posts.
I agree with the principle,
or at least how i think you might understand it.
iow, there is no disputing this point:
the problem is i don’t think you articulate any principle at all , when i suspect you do actually have one.
saying, ‘the first amendment is the law; and this law doesn’t apply here’…. ; this is just a statement of fact. isn’t really a philosophical argument about what ‘should be’.
iow, when JS Mill wrote:
…he wasn’t saying, “what we need is a well-written law”. he’s advancing an idea. And its not an idea that leave an easy out for “if you don’t like it, fuck off”
Which is why i don’t think “Don’t like it? don’t use twitter” … is necessarily the right conclusion. Or a necessary-conclusion.
Assuming you agree w/ Mill, at least.
(*convincing twitter that a relatively ‘hands-off’ policy is in the best interests of its users (and itself) is probably closer. )
Well, how about this- you have a Twitter and a FaceBook, which are both very privately owned, yet publicly used, encouraging the use of their services by elected officials. That also includes cities, municipalities, law enforcement…
When you provide a privately-owned, very public, platform, that’s used by public entities….there ya have your problem.
I dont remember Oren Hatch or Robert Byrd fighting over who had more Myspace followers.
*Orrin
**there is a second point to be made about the “problem” of de-facto monopoly on the intertubes, which your comment touches on.
Exactly that, too. For as much as they get worked-up over anti-trust and monopolies, who run bartertown?
That is where Tucker Carlson is hanging his hat on. You’re going to have to win the idea battle with the public at some point. “But it’s a monopoly” doesn’t help you win that battle and, in fact, means you’re willing to dismiss one principle in favor of protecting another.
Exactly. That idea isnt going to resonate with all the deplorables, because they’re products they use everyday. It would be like making an anti-trust case against GM in the 60s.
re: ‘the specifics of how Youtube / twitter enforce their policies’…
i don’t think i’ve seen anything so far to get very worked up about, to be honest.
iow, i don’t think any of the “censorship” or “shadowbanning” (in its strictest sense) complained about is particularly real, or, where there is some obvious squelching of content, particularly bad. “Yet”
(e.g. in the case of Gun Channels on YT, which i’ve followed closely)
i think there ARE some insidious practices being used to limit the growth of channels/content/accounts that Twitter / YT doesn’t like.
What makes them insidious is, like the idea of shadowbanning, is that they’re not really “Censorship” at all, they’re just subtly restricting/minimizing your ability to reach more people. and because these practices aren’t visible, you aren’t aware that you’re being treated differently.
they want you as a user to keep using their platform! they just don’t want anyone to know that they’re restricting certain points of view.
if you don’t know you’re being censored, how, exactly, are you supposed to fuck off and not use it? as per SP’s instructions…
and what if every other similar outlet does the same things? giving you the impression that no one is treating you differently, but quietly sending your comments to a “Short Bus” reserved for a cloitered minority-audience?
I think there are some questions far more-technical, and involving more-complex notions of law, than the simple “Its a Private Business the 1st amendment don’t apply!” -argument adequately covers.
That’s why I’m sympathetic to the arguments that they are violating their TOS and would defer to a lawyer to go through them and make the case. If you look at a twitter account like this, you can see where the real monopoly exists. They put the threats out there and are welcome by twitter. Other people, especially the wrong people, who put out threats are booted. I agree that ending it at 1st amendment doesn’t apply! is really not saying much. Most people I respect on the topic don’t stop there. I mentioned below that I wouldn’t force the bigot cake maker to make the cake even if he was the only baker within a hundred miles. The monopoly argument contradicts the principle that you own your own body and the fruits of your labor.
it has long been noted that they suspend/block accounts for behavior which they completely tolerate/ignore from millions of others.
e.g. ‘sargon’, f.i., got completely removed from their platform; over shit that kiddy-tankies do 1000 times a day. it wasn’t even stuff that would get anyone else temporarily suspended.
but that sort of thing (‘inconsistent application of their terms’) not really even my worry; what my worry is that the real significant stuff is simply in throttling content delivery and reducing someone’s reach.
iow,
tweets by X person reach 100% of their audience
tweets by Y person… reach 10% of their audience… and if those people recirculate it? it only reaches 10% of theirs… such that it simply doesn’t have time to bloom and provoke the sort of viral discussion which twitter generates.
basically, it serves to ‘slow down’ certain kinds of content, and the consequences of doing so can have massive second+third order effects
and what makes this all the worse is its not ever clear who is being affected. this is what makes “let the market fix it”-answers insufficient: there’s no transparency.
Yep. They want the ability to mold public opinion, the ability to do it legally and the ability to disguise what they’re doing. Make TOS that is incomprehensible to the average person and then use the legalese to defend their throttling of wrong thought. It’s dishonesty and eventually that dishonesty will doom them. straffintweet: We are not accountable for the content of posted material and will only remove tweets that contain direct threats or illegal behavior. Otherwise, have at it and defend yourself. Making twitter take responsibility for the content of it’s users is like holding apple responsible for conversations on your Iphone. Eventually, twitter won’t be cool anymore and people will hold them to a higher standard in re to censorship be it soft or hard.
It’s recreating the MSM narrative in social media.
+1
I’m going to go with public platform although I’m too drunk to back that up in any way.
My thinking has changed over time. Basically I don’t give a shit anymore. The progs will keep using the state against you, and the libertarians and conservatives will keep polishing their principles and lose every single issue.
I don’t care if the government cuts them up, hands out the pieces, or burns them to the ground. I know, “what if it were the other way around, what if your enemies have that power instead of you?” They do have that power and they do use it against us and the courts won’t protect us. They will tear your business down, and beat you in the streets with bats. They will send the lawyers after you until you lose your house and everything you’ve ever had. They hate you.
After we win we can write the rules. Until then you are playing fair while sitting at the table with someone cheating. All that will accomplish is losing, again, for 50+ straight years.
There you go, we’re observing the Marquess of Queensberry Rules while they’re using a chainsaw. You can’t win if your enemy is has no scruples and you play by a set playbook.
The progs will keep using the state against you, and the libertarians and conservatives will keep polishing their principles and lose every single issue.
The progs succeed due to their higher IQ’s. I am told that is the key marker for success. The poster child for that being the former bartender and soon to be Congresswoman from NY, Ocasio-Cortez.
The main thing that makes Twitter worthwhile is Thoughts of Dog.
Shouldn’t it be D_g ?
Kelev
There’s all sorts of imagery in your book about animal representations of YHWH.
Zechariah 13:7 does a good job.
And Isiah 56:10. I just learned something new.
I’m kind of partial to the part about Esther and the donkey.
You’re getting into HM material.
Two pesos, senor, very cheep.
I actually saw that show in Juarez, in the early 90s
BRING BACK JEWSDAY TUESDAY!
L’chaim!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uMK0prafzw0
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HcXNPI-IPPM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XXlZfc1TrD0
“If there are other cake shops around willing to bake the bake cake, then you don’t force bigot to bake one. If there aren’t any around, you force him to make it.” IIRC, that was Heritage Foundation Epstein’s argument. Seemed a stupid argument at the time for a libertarian to make and now seems even worse when dealing with Twitter.
But that cake argument impunes ‘bigotry’, also. If I own a bakery, and I follow a religion that feels that _______ behavior is immoral, because I dont want to do business with that person/those people doesnt make me a bigot. They run contrary to my beliefs. Free association. I dont bake that item, but I also dont get paid for a potential job.
..and that kids, is where capitalism teaches tolerance. Everyone’s money is the same color.
(calling on edit faerie to inset moreyouknow.gif here)
Tattoo that on your ass, Tres. The truest truism of all time.
I just have a W on either cheek. When I bend over it says WOW.
Upside-down, its MOM.
+Tenac
iuosD
Not my money, but I ran out of toilet paper in the men’s room today
You were in Venezuela ?
Mike Veeck – owner of the St. Paul Saints – was on the radio and told a story about his old man showing him the all the money that he collected from one game when he was a kid.
Bill Veeck pointed at the mound of cash and asked him which of the bills came from white customers and which from black customers. When Mike said he couldn’t the old man’s reply was “and don’t you ever forget that.”
Great story.
If that (fill in the blank) said, “inter racial marriage”, would you still not call it bigotry?
Again, I wouldn’t use the state to correct “bigotry”, but I would still call it out when I see it.
I based that on religion, which is a low bar. But I see your point, and Id still go back to Free Association. And stand by my lost-income argument.
It bugs me when religion gets a special carve out. “Deeply held belief” has to be based on a religious belief and not a rational objection. I don’t have anything against religious people, but the law giving them special rights (yeah, I know there are historical reasons for that) doesn’t square with my philosophy. As for free association, absolutely that is the standard.
Grinds me too.
It used to really bug me when I lived in Memphis. A very religious town that would allow any podunk church to hire an off duty cop to direct traffic on Sunday morning to allow their flock to leave the parking lot in a expeditious manner.
Fuck those assholes. Either take a right and go the long way home, or have your doG miraculously create a gap in traffic for your left turn out of the parking lot. Don’t have a cop stop me on my way to get some beer for the football game.
And why can believers get to not serve a person for their silly (imo) beliefs, but I can’t deny the person “just because”.
Is that any different than concerts or sporting events hiring security folks to direct traffic for folks leaving? Not like they’re asking for volunteers to do it – paid service, etc.
Is that any different than concerts or sporting events
Just as a matter of scale, tens of thousands of people all leaving at prime time on Friday or Saturday night may cause gridlock, I imagine some venues are probably forced by the city to hire traffic cops to avoid that. One hundred people leaving a church on Sunday afternoon, not so much.
Straff are you at risk for the typhoon on Sat-Sunday? I’ll be in Japan on Monday and in Tokyo 3-4th of August.
I’ll be drinking some Whiskey.
Didn’t know one was coming. To be honest, they don’t bother me at all because they are just a small inconvenience for the most part. Windy and rainy. I can handle it. Mustang mentioned he’d be up for getting together when you get here. Let either of us know if you’re game.
I’m game. I’ll hit you all up some time over this weekend.
What’s the point of running your website if you cannot ban and censure anyone you don’t like?
*snap
“The whole point of starting a club is to keep out the people that wouldn’t let you in their club.”
“I won’t join any Club that would have me as a Member”
,Groucho Marx
I occasionally do the twitters and yes have an account, and you haters can fuck right off. It is in preparation for the worlds best tweet that I know I will come up with someday. When I opened it I followed all the news agencies and every politician recommended to me because, wtf did I know sure I will follow them. On the rare occasion when I check it, I do find it interesting that the suggestions of important shit tweeted is almost all Dem women politicians. Aside from Glibs that is. I have never had a news feed of a Rand Paul tweet, and even the Prez is not recommended in my feed. Kamala Harris is everywhere.
In fairness, Kamala Harris is a bright shining light that will lead us to salvation.
Goodnight, Missus Calabash. Wherever you are.
I understand that the First Amendment doesn’t apply to private entities. But it grinds my gears that supposedly liberal Americans don’t hold the values expressed by the First Amendment as their own.
That’s because most of them are insincere. There are important notable exceptions (e.g. Glenn Greenwald) who will uphold the principal at all times. But most of them are tribalists who will use whatever is expedient to advance their own agenda.
The purpose of the Bill Of Rights was to force the government to hold to the values of the American people. That’s why this is an issue. That point has been buried in the dustbin of history, intentionally.
Jonathan Haidt is quickly becoming one of my favorite academics.
That was terrific. Was that a class lecture or something else?
I think he was a guest speaker at Duke for that one.
Good for Duke for inviting him. I wonder if the SJWs came out in force to protest his talk.
Roseanne and Hannity have a normal conversation. The end times are here.
I’m afraid to click the link. It sounds like a trap.
Social media is a cancer.
Don’t support cancer.
Not often you find a recipe that you can jive to.