@Kidsandliz I have a couple friends who live off his gospel. I tried to listen to the guy and just couldn’t. I don’t say he doesn’t occasionally make a valid point, but his ability to connect dots that are simply too far apart, and just his rambling nature make it easy for me to not listen to him. I do not support banning (or “shadow banning”) anyone. In our country, opposing viewpoints are not only welcomed, but should be celebrated (I think of the old saying that went something like, “I may not agree with you, but will defend to the death the right to your opinion”). The marketplace will decide if a person or their set of ideas will make it. There’s no need for social media, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc. to place bans on anyone. I would of course make an exception for calls of violence or espousing physical or psychological harm based on ethnicity/sex/etc.
@Kidsandliz@tohar1 I think calling the Sandy Hook shooting fake is what pushed it over the edge. That may not be psychological harm based on ethnicity or sex but it really hurt a lot of parents out there. And they’re suing him.
The clip from John Oliver says he makes up things like the idea that pollution makes frogs gay to sell stuff like water filters.
I’m opposed to censorship too- this is America after all, but I might make an exception for fearmongering to sell a product.
@Kidsandliz@sammydog01 You & I are responsible for the words we use, and so is Mr. Jones. I’m not saying he’s right (by any stretch) and he will perhaps end up paying for his views in a court of law. As far as John Oliver goes, I guess I’d go with, “consider the source”. I wouldn’t be willing to give him any more credence than I would Alex Jones. Clipping up what might have been a one-hour diatribe, I’m guessing one could make anyone sound like a complete nut job. IMHO: Some people just make it easier than others to perform said function.
@Kidsandliz@sammydog01@tohar1 fearmongering to sell a product?? Say it ain’t so! What does the entire home security system market rely on? How about “the club”? etc.
Jones sells lies in order to sell more lies. He has zero intellectual honor. In fact, he has, and is, the opposite.
As far as John Oliver goes, I guess I’d go with, “consider the source”. I wouldn’t be willing to give him any more credence than I would Alex Jones.
Oliver is a satirist and presents himself as such. This is a long honored and respected intellectual practice. It is not the same as trying to sell people on lies.
Oliver does present with reliable intellectual honor, whether you happen to agree with his reasoning, and his pov, or not.
If you really equate Oliver and Jones as commentators, then I question your methods of weighing these issues and these people and their methods.
(I do expect you to operate your own brain without my assistance, however. )
("I may not agree with you, but will defend to the death the right to your opinion”).
That’s an old and gracious and should-be-valid comment out of our long political traditions.
But the selling of lies has changed. Personally, and in social media, and in politics, and from $ interests. And from trolls. And from US enemies. And from everywhere.
This “new” practice of drowning out the good with the bad is trying to infect science. It’s gotten some ground.
(It already had toeholds in academia, from many sources)
When we (as a culture) can’t discern what a “fact” is, or what “honor” is, let alone how to reason amid complexity, and we prefer taglines and feel-good slogans to sober reflection and possible truth and hard knowledge, we are, as a culture, I fear, in deep trouble.
@f00l@Kidsandliz@tohar1 The thing with Alex Jones is that he isn’t spouting his opinion- he is saying shit he knows to be untrue to rile people up and sell his products. I guess politicians do that too.
@f00l I definitely don’t put John Oliver in the same class as Alex Jones, but I can’t agree that he presents with intellectual honor. You can justify it as being satire, but he definitely uses things like ad hominem attacks to ridicule positions he disagrees with.
He was one of my favorite correspondents on The Daily Show, but from what I’ve seen, his stuff on Last Week Tonight super heavy-handed and only really seems to hold up of you already agree with what he’s going to tell you. He’s as selective about what he chooses to present as any of the other political pundits he criticized.
I really use all this to say that John Oliver is never a valid source for backing a point, even if that point is as clearly apparent as “Alex Jones sucks.”
@f00l@Kidsandliz@sammydog01 I guess my issue, and what I was trying to say in equating the two individuals is that too many people take what these guys are saying as news journalism or reporting instead of taking it as what it is, opinions. Opinions, even in the guise of satire, these untruths can be just as dangerous & damaging as any of the ridiculous ideas Alex Jones can say, especially when multiplied by the audience size. I treat them both the same way…by either changing to another channel/source or just turning them off altogether.
@tohar1 I ignore pretty much all of the talking heads, but I think it’s still fair to draw some distinctions. Alex Jones is closer to Art Bell than Rush Limbaugh or John Oliver. Except that Alex Jones might actually believe what he’s saying, and it has actual political ramifications.
@f00l@tohar1 I see what you mean. My kids love John Oliver because he’s funny even though what he says is very one-sided. From what I’ve seen though, those are reasonable opinions and factually made, not that there aren’t differing opinions that are just as reasonable. I don’t think that’s true with Jones.
he (Oliver) definitely uses things like ad hominem attacks to ridicule positions he disagrees with.
Yes. That’s satire. In straight argument you don’t do that.
Oliver also often picks pretty easy and obvious targets to go after.
I like him for himself - because he’s funny and smart and literate and good with a quip. I don’t think of him as “the source of truth and reasonableness”.
Tell the truth, I’m rarely bothering with any of all that. My media for politics is normally print.
i think alex jones is very screechy and bat shit but not any more bat shit crazy than https://www.scientology. or the mega churches that beg for money or the infomercials that are on tv and the net with the snake oil salesmen selling creams or supplements and a bunch of other fake stupid shit. i think folks should be able to decide for themselves what they want to support, whether i agree with it or not. i don’t support censorship because i don’t want our freedoms taken away .
@mick I love (sarcasm) how the one mega preacher justifies being over the top wealthy, keeping most of the donations for himself, twisting the bible to do so.
@Kidsandliz@mick “God wants me to have another jet.” These parasites obviously don’t actually believe in the religion they are selling or they’d be scared shitless of the fiery pit they belong in.
Duplantis said God told him he needed the plane “in one of the ‘greatest statements the Lord ever told me.’” “He said, ‘Jesse, you wanna come up where I’m at?’” according to Duplantis.
“And I said, ‘What do you mean?’”
“He said, 'I want you to believe in me for a Falcon 7-X.”
“So, I said, ‘OK.’ But the first thing I thought of: ‘Well, how am I going to pay for it?’”
The answer was to get his congregation to foot the bill for a 4th jet. Prosperity gospel preachers are Gordon Gecko reimagined as a televangelist.
@mick Alex Jones harasses Sandy Hook victims. He also has a pointed threat towards Robert Muller (the guy investigating Trump) – he gets away with it only because he is a notable figure. If you or I do that, we get arrested.
This guy is a major scumbag, and it should have happened much sooner.
Televangelists have always been scammers. Pulled my father-in-law in back in the 60s/70s (Garner Ted Armstrong) and when the family started changing the church laws to fit their lavish lifestyle, it broke his father’s heart.
@lisaviolet I’m not sure Garner Ted Armstrong was a scammer. Both him and his father had different opinions about the doctrine of the Bible so they split ways (Herbert actually excommunicated his son).
Herbert kept the World Wide Church of God and Gardner started his own called Church of God International.
They did take money from church goers but I really believe the money was put to good use. They had a college on campus in Pasadena, they had a magazine that they published and gave away for free. He had a TV and radio show, The World Tomorrow that was paid for with that money and worked with AT&T to create the first WATTS line so church members could staff the phones to answer questions people had during the show. Very expensive and innovative for that time.
The real problem with the church was that it closely resembled a cult. Yes you could leave but you were sort of questioned if you just stopped in to listen to the surmon. Not cool. They were a fundamentalist religion sort of mixing Christian and Jewish views. But still, I don’t see them as a scam in any way at all.
@blaineg i think it is. we have the right to be offended and voice our opinions about how offended we are about some stupid shit we found offensive. truly though, in order to have free speech for all, it has to included speech and ideas we find stupid or offensive. we all don’t think exactly the same and folks who don’t think just the same as we do, still have the right to speak. that is what freedom of speech means, to me.
“I can’t remember where I heard this, but someone once said that defending a position by citing free speech is sort of the ultimate concession; you’re saying that the most compelling thing you can say for your position is that it’s not literally illegal to express.”
@cengland0 I’m just going by what my husband remembers. His dad gave his all to that church, but then he’d told me that his dad found out what kind of lifestyles they were living when they wanted their members to tithe so much of what they had. And then it was okay to divorce and things like that. He just remembered how hard this stuff was for his dad to adjust to. Maybe they weren’t scammers, honestly, I see most organized religion (I know they all aren’t) as some sort of scam. I was raised Catholic, even went to parochial school when we were in Pennsylvania.
When my dad was stationed in Athens, we stopped at my mom’s relatives on the way over, stayed in my grandmother’s house (Dublin, Ireland). We went to church and they had the collection plate out when you walked in the door, passed it around during the mass, and had it out when you left. I was only thirteen, but that made an impression. I will say the church did take care of it’s parishioners, but they paid for it in the long run. My aunt had fourteen children (well, there were more than that, but they all didn’t live) and they were okay.
I’m not a fan of organized religion either. Actually, not a fan of religion – period. Although I do not try to change anybody’s beliefs, for myself I’m more evidence based on what I think is true versus faith based.
@blaineg@lisaviolet I once watched Creflo Dollar give a sermon on whether one should tithe 10 percent of one’s gross or net income. (He said it should be 10 percent of the gross)
/image creflow dollar airplane
@eonfifty Personally, I do tithe, but I’ve got reasonable assurance that it’s being used well, and not making anyone rich.
I fully agree that these profiteering scumbags are going to be in for an unpleasant surprise on the other side!
Some fundamental tenants of our faith are:
"He commandeth that there shall be no priestcrafts; for, behold, priestcrafts are that men preach and set themselves up for a light unto the world, that they may get gain and praise of the world; but they seek not the welfare of Zion.
But the laborer in Zion shall labor for Zion; for if they labor for money they shall perish." (With Zion referring to the followers of God, not any in Zionist/Zionism sense.)
I also tithe on the gross, but that’s because I figure I need the gross blessings, not the net blessings.
@mick I agree with you that freedom of speech is critically important, especially speech we disagree with. And the Supreme Court has said that even sedition and incitement to violence is protected as long as it’s not an imminent threat.
But I also agree with Randall Munro (the author of xkcd) that the First Amendment protection is from the government. And that a speaker isn’t guaranteed an audience or immunity from consequences.
@Calabama nope. i feel like i am defending dumb ass alex… shit… lol
i don’t like sites banned. i don’t want the media moguls to be able to determine what can be said on the net for their own political/money reasons. just let all us folks talk and figure things out. we have way more in common than our differences.
@mick I feel you sister!
I do believe in free speech and do not want to ban this right. I do not believe in Big Brother deciding what people watch or listen to, I would defend him on that.
I just do not like the man, he is a fake, full of show.
He makes me nervous, lol.
But I know I never have to listen to him, so I have never worried about him.
But this can set a dangerous trend to oust anyone who offends the right people.
@Calabama@mick Most hate speech is constitutionally protected but banned by Facebook. It’s not like he’s gone from the internet. You can even follow him on Twitter.
@Calabama@mick I think to some extent there’s liability concerns when you get people pandering preposterous ideas that could be considered incendiary in a time when people are so divided. It’s a little akin to the old adage about free speech not permitting you to yell fire in a crowded theater. Only in this case the theater is showing the Towering Inferno, and people are really primed to hear that word “fire”.
@mick@moondrake True.
There is a FINE line on free speech, the forefathers did not know how far people would take that free speech. There would have been more guidelines.
I do not care personally where he is.
What I have heard is not sticking to facts and saying facts are not true. I see him as a hateful man, sorry TRJ!
I deplore anyone who is negative and cannot work together for the good of mankind.
I dislike hateful rants from anyone(but myself!), any political, religious zealots or any group.
To not like someone because of their political and personal views is not the way it should be.
It solves no problems but divides the people in this country and it is worse than ever.
I want this to be The United States!
Dang, ya know ya never supposed to talk about religion and politics!
To me the bigger problem than right vs. left, or whatever vs. whatever, is the incivility, divisiveness, and rancor that has become the order of the day.
Whatever happened to disagreeing without being disagreeable?
At least let’s climb up to the level of British political insults. But that would require wit and humor, wouldn’t it?
@blaineg Yes, I believe civility is just something I taught my students in school. Devisiveness has been akin to success and rancor burns in their hearts.
We tell kids not to fight, to work out their differences with talking and working together.
We teach children to compromise and to share.
Nothing is solved with violence and harsh words.
They would be admonished in class for the same actions that adults display everyday.
I do not deal well with negative aspects of anything, negativity and the inability to compromise, will not solve the most important problems we have.
Some people feed on negative.
I run from it.
Civility being key.
Do we have to?
@Thumperchick Nope.
I guess I won’t ask then who is Alex Jones. LOL
@Kidsandliz Don’t even look him up. Don’t. You’re head will explode. Or pretty close to it.
@lisaviolet thanks for the warning. The news is stressful enough without knowing about more asshats (or worse).
@Kidsandliz Don’t worry, you’ll get to know him when he replaces Sarah Sanders as White House Press Secretary.
@moondrake You mean it can get worse?
(not), 
@Kidsandliz @moondrake Well, if you haven’t noticed yet – we are headed towards American Fascism. It’s already very bad.
@Kevin @Kidsandliz @moondrake
@Kevin @Kidsandliz Preaching to the choir, dude.
@Kidsandliz I have a couple friends who live off his gospel. I tried to listen to the guy and just couldn’t. I don’t say he doesn’t occasionally make a valid point, but his ability to connect dots that are simply too far apart, and just his rambling nature make it easy for me to not listen to him. I do not support banning (or “shadow banning”) anyone. In our country, opposing viewpoints are not only welcomed, but should be celebrated (I think of the old saying that went something like, “I may not agree with you, but will defend to the death the right to your opinion”). The marketplace will decide if a person or their set of ideas will make it. There’s no need for social media, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, etc. to place bans on anyone. I would of course make an exception for calls of violence or espousing physical or psychological harm based on ethnicity/sex/etc.
@Kidsandliz @tohar1 I think calling the Sandy Hook shooting fake is what pushed it over the edge. That may not be psychological harm based on ethnicity or sex but it really hurt a lot of parents out there. And they’re suing him.
The clip from John Oliver says he makes up things like the idea that pollution makes frogs gay to sell stuff like water filters.
I’m opposed to censorship too- this is America after all, but I might make an exception for fearmongering to sell a product.
@Kidsandliz @sammydog01 You & I are responsible for the words we use, and so is Mr. Jones. I’m not saying he’s right (by any stretch) and he will perhaps end up paying for his views in a court of law. As far as John Oliver goes, I guess I’d go with, “consider the source”. I wouldn’t be willing to give him any more credence than I would Alex Jones. Clipping up what might have been a one-hour diatribe, I’m guessing one could make anyone sound like a complete nut job. IMHO: Some people just make it easier than others to perform said function.
@Kidsandliz @sammydog01 @tohar1 fearmongering to sell a product?? Say it ain’t so! What does the entire home security system market rely on? How about “the club”? etc.
@gspitman @Kidsandliz @tohar1 Those guys are more into exaggeration than flat out making shit up.
@Kidsandliz @sammydog01 @tohar1
Jones sells lies in order to sell more lies. He has zero intellectual honor. In fact, he has, and is, the opposite.
Oliver is a satirist and presents himself as such. This is a long honored and respected intellectual practice. It is not the same as trying to sell people on lies.
Oliver does present with reliable intellectual honor, whether you happen to agree with his reasoning, and his pov, or not.
If you really equate Oliver and Jones as commentators, then I question your methods of weighing these issues and these people and their methods.
(I do expect you to operate your own brain without my assistance, however.
)
@Kidsandliz I found a picture
/image steaming pile of shit
@Kidsandliz @sammydog01 @tohar1
That’s an old and gracious and should-be-valid comment out of our long political traditions.
But the selling of lies has changed. Personally, and in social media, and in politics, and from $ interests. And from trolls. And from US enemies. And from everywhere.
This “new” practice of drowning out the good with the bad is trying to infect science. It’s gotten some ground.
(It already had toeholds in academia, from many sources)
When we (as a culture) can’t discern what a “fact” is, or what “honor” is, let alone how to reason amid complexity, and we prefer taglines and feel-good slogans to sober reflection and possible truth and hard knowledge, we are, as a culture, I fear, in deep trouble.
I don’t have a solution.
@f00l @Kidsandliz @tohar1 The thing with Alex Jones is that he isn’t spouting his opinion- he is saying shit he knows to be untrue to rile people up and sell his products. I guess politicians do that too.
@f00l I definitely don’t put John Oliver in the same class as Alex Jones, but I can’t agree that he presents with intellectual honor. You can justify it as being satire, but he definitely uses things like ad hominem attacks to ridicule positions he disagrees with.
He was one of my favorite correspondents on The Daily Show, but from what I’ve seen, his stuff on Last Week Tonight super heavy-handed and only really seems to hold up of you already agree with what he’s going to tell you. He’s as selective about what he chooses to present as any of the other political pundits he criticized.
I really use all this to say that John Oliver is never a valid source for backing a point, even if that point is as clearly apparent as “Alex Jones sucks.”
@f00l @Kidsandliz @sammydog01 I guess my issue, and what I was trying to say in equating the two individuals is that too many people take what these guys are saying as news journalism or reporting instead of taking it as what it is, opinions. Opinions, even in the guise of satire, these untruths can be just as dangerous & damaging as any of the ridiculous ideas Alex Jones can say, especially when multiplied by the audience size. I treat them both the same way…by either changing to another channel/source or just turning them off altogether.
@tohar1 I ignore pretty much all of the talking heads, but I think it’s still fair to draw some distinctions. Alex Jones is closer to Art Bell than Rush Limbaugh or John Oliver. Except that Alex Jones might actually believe what he’s saying, and it has actual political ramifications.
@f00l @tohar1 I see what you mean. My kids love John Oliver because he’s funny even though what he says is very one-sided. From what I’ve seen though, those are reasonable opinions and factually made, not that there aren’t differing opinions that are just as reasonable. I don’t think that’s true with Jones.
@Limewater @tohar1 Did you hear what his lawyer said during his divorce? It’s all for show?
Same thing I used to tell my husband when he spent hours on the road for his job and listened to the angry, white, man hate radio talk shows.
“They get their listeners all riled up and they’re laughing all the way to the bank.”
http://time.com/4743025/alex-jones-infowars-divorce-donald-trump/
@Limewater
Yes. That’s satire. In straight argument you don’t do that.
Oliver also often picks pretty easy and obvious targets to go after.
I like him for himself - because he’s funny and smart and literate and good with a quip. I don’t think of him as “the source of truth and reasonableness”.
Tell the truth, I’m rarely bothering with any of all that. My media for politics is normally print.
The frogs were already gay!
You mean this?
@sammydog01 Now that is funny. I really did laugh out loud on that. A preemptive banning. Love it!
@cengland0 @sammydog01 I like to keep certain people out of my restrooms, so I understand. SALUTE! wE NEED TO KEEP PEOPLE IN THEIR PLACE!
i think alex jones is very screechy and bat shit but not any more bat shit crazy than https://www.scientology. or the mega churches that beg for money or the infomercials that are on tv and the net with the snake oil salesmen selling creams or supplements and a bunch of other fake stupid shit. i think folks should be able to decide for themselves what they want to support, whether i agree with it or not. i don’t support censorship because i don’t want our freedoms taken away .
@mick I love (sarcasm) how the one mega preacher justifies being over the top wealthy, keeping most of the donations for himself, twisting the bible to do so.
@Kidsandliz @mick “God wants me to have another jet.” These parasites obviously don’t actually believe in the religion they are selling or they’d be scared shitless of the fiery pit they belong in.
Duplantis said God told him he needed the plane “in one of the ‘greatest statements the Lord ever told me.’” “He said, ‘Jesse, you wanna come up where I’m at?’” according to Duplantis.
“And I said, ‘What do you mean?’”
“He said, 'I want you to believe in me for a Falcon 7-X.”
“So, I said, ‘OK.’ But the first thing I thought of: ‘Well, how am I going to pay for it?’”
The answer was to get his congregation to foot the bill for a 4th jet. Prosperity gospel preachers are Gordon Gecko reimagined as a televangelist.
@mick Is it really censorship?
@mick Alex Jones harasses Sandy Hook victims. He also has a pointed threat towards Robert Muller (the guy investigating Trump) – he gets away with it only because he is a notable figure. If you or I do that, we get arrested.
This guy is a major scumbag, and it should have happened much sooner.
@Kidsandliz @mick @moondrake Remember “Creflo Dollar”?
Televangelists have always been scammers. Pulled my father-in-law in back in the 60s/70s (Garner Ted Armstrong) and when the family started changing the church laws to fit their lavish lifestyle, it broke his father’s heart.
https://www.cnn.com/2015/03/13/living/creflo-dollar-jet-feat/index.html
@lisaviolet I’m not sure Garner Ted Armstrong was a scammer. Both him and his father had different opinions about the doctrine of the Bible so they split ways (Herbert actually excommunicated his son).
Herbert kept the World Wide Church of God and Gardner started his own called Church of God International.
They did take money from church goers but I really believe the money was put to good use. They had a college on campus in Pasadena, they had a magazine that they published and gave away for free. He had a TV and radio show, The World Tomorrow that was paid for with that money and worked with AT&T to create the first WATTS line so church members could staff the phones to answer questions people had during the show. Very expensive and innovative for that time.
The real problem with the church was that it closely resembled a cult. Yes you could leave but you were sort of questioned if you just stopped in to listen to the surmon. Not cool. They were a fundamentalist religion sort of mixing Christian and Jewish views. But still, I don’t see them as a scam in any way at all.
@blaineg i think it is. we have the right to be offended and voice our opinions about how offended we are about some stupid shit we found offensive. truly though, in order to have free speech for all, it has to included speech and ideas we find stupid or offensive. we all don’t think exactly the same and folks who don’t think just the same as we do, still have the right to speak. that is what freedom of speech means, to me.
@blaineg @mick I think I love you sir.
@mick How about the “right” to yell “Fire!” in a crowded theater? I think he crossed that line a while back.
@therealjrn Blush!
The alt-text from that xkcd:
“I can’t remember where I heard this, but someone once said that defending a position by citing free speech is sort of the ultimate concession; you’re saying that the most compelling thing you can say for your position is that it’s not literally illegal to express.”
@lisaviolet The guy’s a scumbag, but the name Creflo Dollar seems amazingly honest. Get those dollars flowing!
@cengland0 I’m just going by what my husband remembers. His dad gave his all to that church, but then he’d told me that his dad found out what kind of lifestyles they were living when they wanted their members to tithe so much of what they had. And then it was okay to divorce and things like that. He just remembered how hard this stuff was for his dad to adjust to. Maybe they weren’t scammers, honestly, I see most organized religion (I know they all aren’t) as some sort of scam. I was raised Catholic, even went to parochial school when we were in Pennsylvania.
When my dad was stationed in Athens, we stopped at my mom’s relatives on the way over, stayed in my grandmother’s house (Dublin, Ireland). We went to church and they had the collection plate out when you walked in the door, passed it around during the mass, and had it out when you left. I was only thirteen, but that made an impression. I will say the church did take care of it’s parishioners, but they paid for it in the long run. My aunt had fourteen children (well, there were more than that, but they all didn’t live) and they were okay.
I’m just not a big fan of organized religion.
@lisaviolet
I’m not a fan of organized religion either. Actually, not a fan of religion – period. Although I do not try to change anybody’s beliefs, for myself I’m more evidence based on what I think is true versus faith based.
@blaineg @therealjrn ditto. from the very first moment i saw you, with your ruby red lips and your sparkly green boots.
@blaineg @lisaviolet I once watched Creflo Dollar give a sermon on whether one should tithe 10 percent of one’s gross or net income. (He said it should be 10 percent of the gross)
/image creflow dollar airplane
@eonfifty Personally, I do tithe, but I’ve got reasonable assurance that it’s being used well, and not making anyone rich.
I fully agree that these profiteering scumbags are going to be in for an unpleasant surprise on the other side!
Some fundamental tenants of our faith are:
"He commandeth that there shall be no priestcrafts; for, behold, priestcrafts are that men preach and set themselves up for a light unto the world, that they may get gain and praise of the world; but they seek not the welfare of Zion.
But the laborer in Zion shall labor for Zion; for if they labor for money they shall perish." (With Zion referring to the followers of God, not any in Zionist/Zionism sense.)
I also tithe on the gross, but that’s because I figure I need the gross blessings, not the net blessings.
@mick I agree with you that freedom of speech is critically important, especially speech we disagree with. And the Supreme Court has said that even sedition and incitement to violence is protected as long as it’s not an imminent threat.
But I also agree with Randall Munro (the author of xkcd) that the First Amendment protection is from the government. And that a speaker isn’t guaranteed an audience or immunity from consequences.
@Calabama Abso-fucking-lutely.
@therealjrn Heh, I rejoined. Your worst nightmare is back!
@Calabama nope. i feel like i am defending dumb ass alex… shit… lol
i don’t like sites banned. i don’t want the media moguls to be able to determine what can be said on the net for their own political/money reasons. just let all us folks talk and figure things out. we have way more in common than our differences.
@mick I feel you sister!
I do believe in free speech and do not want to ban this right. I do not believe in Big Brother deciding what people watch or listen to, I would defend him on that.
I just do not like the man, he is a fake, full of show.
He makes me nervous, lol.
But I know I never have to listen to him, so I have never worried about him.
But this can set a dangerous trend to oust anyone who offends the right people.
@Calabama @mick Most hate speech is constitutionally protected but banned by Facebook. It’s not like he’s gone from the internet. You can even follow him on Twitter.
@Calabama @mick I think to some extent there’s liability concerns when you get people pandering preposterous ideas that could be considered incendiary in a time when people are so divided. It’s a little akin to the old adage about free speech not permitting you to yell fire in a crowded theater. Only in this case the theater is showing the Towering Inferno, and people are really primed to hear that word “fire”.
@mick @moondrake True.
There is a FINE line on free speech, the forefathers did not know how far people would take that free speech. There would have been more guidelines.
I do not care personally where he is.
What I have heard is not sticking to facts and saying facts are not true. I see him as a hateful man, sorry TRJ!
I deplore anyone who is negative and cannot work together for the good of mankind.
I dislike hateful rants from anyone(but myself!), any political, religious zealots or any group.
To not like someone because of their political and personal views is not the way it should be.
It solves no problems but divides the people in this country and it is worse than ever.
I want this to be The United States!
Dang, ya know ya never supposed to talk about religion and politics!
@Calabama United? What’s that?
To me the bigger problem than right vs. left, or whatever vs. whatever, is the incivility, divisiveness, and rancor that has become the order of the day.
Whatever happened to disagreeing without being disagreeable?
At least let’s climb up to the level of British political insults. But that would require wit and humor, wouldn’t it?
@blaineg Yes, I believe civility is just something I taught my students in school. Devisiveness has been akin to success and rancor burns in their hearts.
We tell kids not to fight, to work out their differences with talking and working together.
We teach children to compromise and to share.
Nothing is solved with violence and harsh words.
They would be admonished in class for the same actions that adults display everyday.
I do not deal well with negative aspects of anything, negativity and the inability to compromise, will not solve the most important problems we have.
Some people feed on negative.
I run from it.
Civility being key.
Wit would be a delightful diversion!
@mfladd not yet dear.
What did I miss?
@AlexJones HA HA HA. Smart ass
@AlexJones
When you tried to stick your head above ground and see what was going on, you MISSED.
You seem to have gotten your head stuck up your ass - way way way up your ass - instead.
I bet that hurts. Ouchie.
Y’all need to quit fucking with ma buddy.
Is Tuck Buckford also banned?
@blaineg from someone wiser than me.
After Being Destroyed, Trump’s Walk of Fame Star Multiplies