JDHillFan Posted September 16 Posted September 16 12 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: But I wonder if we're going to establish a thought police and speech police how many people are going to get swept up in it. Moments ago you went the whatabout routine over eggs and bird flu, so allow me to do the same here. I suspect you raised zero objections to the last administration trying to create something called the Disinformation Governance Board with Nina Jankowicz leading the charge. Do I have that right?
JFKjr Posted September 16 Posted September 16 4 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: Not the issue. Why are Kirk comments cancelable, but Don Jr.'s comments about Pelosi not? There were some unfortunate details with the Pelosi incident, including him opening the door for the police, not expressing any alarm, walking back TO the attacker (which likely caused police confusion as to what was going on) and the fact that he had a cocktail glass in his hand. All of that, AND the fact that it didn't result in murder, creates a difference between the two incidents. But I'm okay with Don Jr's employer doing whatever they want to about it. Fire him or don't. 1
AlBUNDY4TDS Posted September 16 Posted September 16 6 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: Not the issue. Why are Kirk comments cancelable, but Don Jr.'s comments about Pelosi not? The people getting fired are doing so because of policy violation. You want to fire anyone who made really distasteful comments regarding the Minnesota incident? I'm on board. This shouldn't fly on either side. 4
T master Posted September 16 Posted September 16 9 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: Not the issue. Why are Kirk comments cancelable, but Don Jr.'s comments about Pelosi not? Well Charlies case was pretty cut and dry Murder - Pelosi as I said was basically swept under the rug after the initial report WHY ? Which did DJ say he deserved it that it was okay for a guy to come into his house and hit him with a hammer ? What were his Exact words that was 2 years ago and to me Premeditated Murder is much more of a sensitive matter especially when it was senseless . Or is it just some more TDS ?
SectionC3 Posted September 16 Author Posted September 16 8 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said: The people getting fired are doing so because of policy violation. You want to fire anyone who made really distasteful comments regarding the Minnesota incident? I'm on board. This shouldn't fly on either side. This is exactly the point I'm making. The thought police appears to be in formation right now. I don't know if it's a good idea, and I have no dog in the fight in the private arena. But if the government is going to put its thumb on the scale, then . . . it shouldn't, and it should reconsider, but if it's gonna do it anyway, it's gotta go both ways. 1
JFKjr Posted September 16 Posted September 16 3 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: This is exactly the point I'm making. The thought police appears to be in formation right now. I don't know if it's a good idea, and I have no dog in the fight in the private arena. But if the government is going to put its thumb on the scale, then . . . it shouldn't, and it should reconsider, but if it's gonna do it anyway, it's gotta go both ways. "Political correctness" has been a thing since the mid-1980s. So get back to us 2065.
AlBUNDY4TDS Posted September 16 Posted September 16 9 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: This is exactly the point I'm making. The thought police appears to be in formation right now. I don't know if it's a good idea, and I have no dog in the fight in the private arena. But if the government is going to put its thumb on the scale, then . . . it shouldn't, and it should reconsider, but if it's gonna do it anyway, it's gotta go both ways. Why should the government not want to rid themselves of employees who cheer murder?
Commsvet11 Posted September 16 Posted September 16 28 minutes ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said: Why should the government not want to rid themselves of employees who cheer murder? Now this is a good point, a liability issue, it’s disturbing to cheer a murder, I wouldn’t wouldn’t even say some of the things that have been posted on social media to a therapist if one doesn’t have the awareness to keep their disturbing thoughts to themselves what else can be expected ? Best to severe ties. 1 1
Big Blitz Posted September 16 Posted September 16 2 hours ago, SectionC3 said: So they all supported or joked about a violent felony assault perpetrated against the husband of the former Speaker of the House? Would DTJ had said anything had Paul had a bullet go thru his neck and a fountain of blood gush out for the world to see? Go F off. All of you are freaking deranged lunatics. You own this. But by all means keeping playing whataboutism. 1
JDHillFan Posted September 16 Posted September 16 53 minutes ago, SectionC3 said: This is exactly the point I'm making. The thought police appears to be in formation right now. I don't know if it's a good idea, and I have no dog in the fight in the private arena. But if the government is going to put its thumb on the scale, then . . . it shouldn't, and it should reconsider, but if it's gonna do it anyway, it's gotta go both ways. https://firstamendment.mtsu.edu/article/disinformation-governance-board/ It didn’t go over well when your party tried it. Let’s hope it’s a failure now as well.
Niagara Bill Posted September 16 Posted September 16 1 hour ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said: What reaction does cheering murder deserve? Do you agree with people being fired for actively cheering Charlie's murder? I am not sure that firing a person for commenting negatively on a murder is a good thing. When the drug dealer on the corner gets assassinated and the restaurant owner who lost business because of the druggies coming around, if he says something like..tough but he deserved it...should he be penalized. When the lefties in Minn were *****, I am sure many people in a pub had nothing kind to say. Kirk was important to maga, and his family, but no more important than the family of the Minn couple. You may say that some negative comments are hate speech. The slope is slippery. It is a different issue than yelling fire. If a career soldier, in some terrible location, passes a comment like, "so what, never liked his views anyway", should he be squealed on and kicked out because of his views? To me, this bares a lot of intelligent thought, not political action. Yes, speaking ill of the dead is wrong...period.
AlBUNDY4TDS Posted September 16 Posted September 16 1 minute ago, Niagara Bill said: I am not sure that firing a person for commenting negatively on a murder is a good thing. When the drug dealer on the corner gets assassinated and the restaurant owner who lost business because of the druggies coming around, if he says something like..tough but he deserved it...should he be penalized. When the lefties in Minn were *****, I am sure many people in a pub had nothing kind to say. Kirk was important to maga, and his family, but no more important than the family of the Minn couple. You may say that some negative comments are hate speech. The slope is slippery. It is a different issue than yelling fire. If a career soldier, in some terrible location, passes a comment like, "so what, never liked his views anyway", should he be squealed on and kicked out because of his views? To me, this bares a lot of intelligent thought, not political action. Yes, speaking ill of the dead is wrong...period. Bill if you are unemployed then by all means say whatever terrible things you want. The contract you sign with your employer says otherwise. This applies to govt positions and people that deal with the public as well. Bottom line if conservatives were cheering a murder everyone would want them removed, myself included. Context should also matter. This isn't a drug dealer that was killed. A person was killed for trying to extend a bridge to the people who disagreed with him. 1
SectionC3 Posted September 16 Author Posted September 16 50 minutes ago, Big Blitz said: Would DTJ had said anything had Paul had a bullet go thru his neck and a fountain of blood gush out for the world to see? Go F off. All of you are freaking deranged lunatics. You own this. But by all means keeping playing whataboutism. So, it was acceptable for DJT to mock and laugh at an old man getting assaulted with a hammer?
JFKjr Posted September 16 Posted September 16 24 minutes ago, Niagara Bill said: I am not sure that firing a person for commenting negatively on a murder is a good thing. When the drug dealer on the corner gets assassinated and the restaurant owner who lost business because of the druggies coming around, if he says something like..tough but he deserved it...should he be penalized. When the lefties in Minn were *****, I am sure many people in a pub had nothing kind to say. Kirk was important to maga, and his family, but no more important than the family of the Minn couple. You may say that some negative comments are hate speech. The slope is slippery. It is a different issue than yelling fire. If a career soldier, in some terrible location, passes a comment like, "so what, never liked his views anyway", should he be squealed on and kicked out because of his views? To me, this bares a lot of intelligent thought, not political action. Yes, speaking ill of the dead is wrong...period. It's delicious to watch Lefties like you squirm over Uno Reverse Cancel Culture.
Niagara Bill Posted September 16 Posted September 16 3 hours ago, AlBUNDY4TDS said: Bill if you are unemployed then by all means say whatever terrible things you want. The contract you sign with your employer says otherwise. This applies to govt positions and people that deal with the public as well. Bottom line if conservatives were cheering a murder everyone would want them removed, myself included. Context should also matter. This isn't a drug dealer that was killed. A person was killed for trying to extend a bridge to the people who disagreed with him. So, in the end who chooses who can you comment on and you cannot..
Niagara Bill Posted September 16 Posted September 16 3 hours ago, JFKjr said: It's delicious to watch Lefties like you squirm over Uno Reverse Cancel Culture. I am not a lefty, but I do cherish free speech. I do not think that a clerk, a cop, foreman, a fireman, should be fired for a crude remark. If maga is doing this for retribution...that is not leadership.
JDHillFan Posted September 16 Posted September 16 22 minutes ago, Niagara Bill said: I am not a lefty, but I do cherish free speech. I do not think that a clerk, a cop, foreman, a fireman, should be fired for a crude remark. If maga is doing this for retribution...that is not leadership. If a cop or fireman has enough hate in his heart and not enough self control to stop himself from celebrating a politically motivated murder for the world to see, are the citizens he is charged with protecting safe from him? Particularly those that share the thinking of Charlie Kirk?
Tenhigh Posted September 17 Posted September 17 7 hours ago, Niagara Bill said: Is anyone concerned about government investigation into your opinions..ie on this site or others, and potential punishment or increased surveillance. When the vp states that organizations of left leaning political views will be investigated, does that affect anyone here. Could you lose a job over expressing your concerns? Maybe you should start deleting your posts. When you become a resident of the 51st state, Trump is going to be scanning these boards! 😀
SectionC3 Posted September 17 Author Posted September 17 11 hours ago, JDHillFan said: If a cop or fireman has enough hate in his heart and not enough self control to stop himself from celebrating a politically motivated murder for the world to see, are the citizens he is charged with protecting safe from him? Particularly those that share the thinking of Charlie Kirk? What about the MAGA security guard who had enough misguided rage in his heart to enter the Capitol on J6? Should he carry a gun at work? Are the “liberals” he protects safe from him?
Recommended Posts