The assault on the first amendment (and the return of McCarthyism)

Don’t troll …

Communist far left
Fascist far right .

Both equivalent , they both are extremist .
So when democrats called republicans fascist it’s the same dam thing as the left being called communist for decades .

But now the right is sad snif snif .
They get the treatment democrats got for decades snif snif .
I thought the right ( not you I aim at but maga ) was tough and masculine yet they cry like little baby as soon something bad happen or someone calls them names …snif snif

Of course it’s incoherent .
That is why you think the way u do ….

Once u will get it , a light bulb will light up in your brain, hopefully .

Communism isnt fascism but both communism and fascism are authoritarian cesspits.

When antifa says they are fighting fascism, they arent neccessarily fighting for more freedom. Many arent, they are fighting for their own flavor of authoritarianism that suites their ideals. Both are the power hungry shitstains of the world.

Okay but that doesn't mean the equal or even can be. Fascism allows for private property rights so it can't be equal to communism. Extremism doesn't define in that way; it's more like aggresively or how far someone is willing to push things.

Radical Left | Far Left <--> Far Right | Radical Right

That's how I see define the spectrum, with the vertical bars marking the range of Western democracies. Ultra Liberal and Ultra Conservative fall in that latter range too. In other words, you're only a radical if you need to tear up the Constitution to get your way. Since that would need to happen to implement communism or fascism, those ideologies fall on the radical left and radical right, respectively. But it's only what I'm calling the Radical Left - which is just the Left globally - that forbids the private ownership of the means production.

Yes that is what I met when they are equivalent.

Fwiw true liberalism ( possible liberal would side sometimes with unconventional allies because the threat is so great like fascism -> my enemy is your enemy ) would never side with either communism or fascism .
liberals can’t side with authoritarian.
Authoritarian hates personal civic freedom/liberties .
It’s at the core of being liberal, personal freedom .

That’s fine but you got my point right ?
Calling someone communist or fascist is too say u call someone extremist/radical , correct ?
So they are equivalent .
They are both terrible and anti freedom .
They both want to alienate any opposition and different view point .

So when I hear the maga crowd like bgnight calling liberals communist or fascism or left people fascist -> facepalm .

I get it now. But where do you draw the line from civility, like if we were arguing over some economic issue, to extremism?

They have brought people back from overseas prisons by order of the court. Of course, just saying that sentence concedes that they are doing ****ed up ****. Still, to my point, they had some kind of basis for doing so rooted in laws on the books. They aren't arresting people under "Trump doesn't like your posts". Surely you can see the difference.

No offense to Rococo, but at any level of approximation from which someone high enough to get a Governor to do their bidding would consider Rococo, there are a lot of Rococos. And, again, you have to have some kind of rationale.

No. In fact the dude is scared of Israel, an inside source has said. He's taken money and he is owned, probably being compromised from several angles by Israel. So let's take the extreme casting down a notch. Trump hasn't done anything like those examples. There are lines he hasn't crossed and it's not because he doesn't want to cross them. He hasn't even arrested Hillary or Obama yet which he could very easily do, legitimately. If he can do anything he wants why is Hillary Clinton breathing free air? She could absolutely be prosecuted under any number of statues. She put the treasury up for sale ffs.

But if you like extremes let's think of another case, the best extreme case, the Nazis. Even the Nazis had to haggle endlessly over the laws which would facilitate them rounding up and killing Jews. They had to consider cases of marriage and mixed heritage and under what departments authority would what happen. Have you ever heard of the Wannsee conference? Without law you cannot implement your will in any kind of large scale organized society. You just aren't thinking this through.

Rococo would have to be swept up in a very large dragnet, large enough to include half the adult population. And he would have to be swept under some kind of interpretation of existing law. Trump went through great pains to attempt to coerce a benign tattoo into a gang tattoo to justify removing that migrant who Trump later had to return. If Trump can do anything he wants why was he throwing a tempter tantrum when his interviewer wouldn't accept the tattoo in question as gang related? There is no law that says you can't be a lib or a lefty. Trump might try to get people accused of terrorism for saying certain things. But I don't think that is going to fly here like it has in England. Plus even in that extreme case, certain groups are designated terrorist organizations and from that interpretation people are harassed. But Trump can't just go around doing whatever he wants. If he could he would be.

I have difficulty following your question .
But if it helps , extremist thrive not on facts and evidences but on sentiments (feelings) and wishes .

About stop lying in the first place from both sides and accept an opposing view that is reasonable .

But the problem today imo is how nonsense has become the truth for many
Now Tylenol creates autism …..wtf !
I’m not sure which is worst between this and “they eat the dogs and they the cats “.
To where this charade will need to go ????

He thought the guy may have been MAGA, and he likely was a year ago, as his family is, and he was raised by a mother who liked to pose for photos carrying large guns.

When he learned that trans people weren't so scary, he changed his mind but apparently kept his sharp shooting ability handed down in the family. At least it shows that young MAGAs can sometimes be turned around from the lies by actual lived experiences.

We just have to hope that most of them are also turned around in their love of shooting people (unless, of course, they're needed in the civil war that MAGA here promise is coming).

More of them are anarchists than authoritarians. Which is also a bad position, but at least not a hypocritical one.

The claim is that antifa is a tactic of fighting fascists at the street level. This includes preemptive use of violence, like when they punched Richard Spencer. The thing is that the type of person to do this are usually anarchists and militant communists, although many of the online left will cheer when it happens.

But it does take a certain type of dedication to do something like that most don’t have the drive for, hence why the ones we see tend to be the most radical and violent.

WTF he stated the shooter was MAGA it wasn’t a joke but a political statement that was false

It seems a large number of stations say they will not broadcast him I’m sure he will get one night of great ratings

I haven't heard this, is this your own interpretation or is this a fact?
Any source?

he said and like I said before the TCC guy was wrong as chances are kimmel gets suspended anyway and no sympathy here as he celebrated Tucker and Rosanne getting fired

So I think Implied is a better statement by me

That Kimmel quote seems spot on per the details at that moment.

I guess I can't read but this doesn't read as implying.
This is very on par with what that governor was saying when he was praying and dreaming the shooter wasn't one of them.

speaking of free speech, youtube just admitted the Biden administration threatened it to ban a lot of content creators for political speech that didn't violate youtube content rules

Rep. Jim Jordan

@Jim_Jordan
YouTube also:

-Admits the Biden Admin censorship pressure was “unacceptable and wrong”

-Confirms that the Biden Admin wanted Americans censored for speech that did not violate YouTube’s policies

-Details when YouTube began rolling back its censorship policies on political speech after
@JudiciaryGOP
began its investigation

-States that public debate should NEVER come at the expense of relying on “authorities”

-Promises to NEVER use third-party “fact-checkers”

-Warns that Europe’s censorship laws target AMERICAN companies and threaten AMERICAN speech

https://x.com/Jim_Jordan/status/19704744...

And of course not a single shred of evidence that Youtube "said" that.

But luckily we are already used to old confused Neonazis lying their ass off...right Lucy?

Lozen, your explanation that kinda refers to a comedian's (satirist's) role as that of a Truth Teller is..... telling. It is as if all the Late Night hosts UP TO THIS POINT have been on the straight and narrow. lol, how absurd.

Is there someone else out here that can help lozen with a REAL explanation for the Kimmel episode? Seems to me "it" is all about the FCC and the mergers that would go against current percentage limitations of media ownership..... by DOUBLE!

Bad episode of C***sucking For Trump (mislead, misdirection)...... Should you get cancelled, lozen?

Lawyers for Alphabet (and so Youtube) admitted it in writing to the house commitee

https://judiciary.house.gov/sites/evo-su...

They admitted under subpoena that the Biden admin operated the most vicious and vile systemic violation of the 1a in american history basically.

Not that we didn't know it before, we did know it from the twitter files and SCOTUS case Murthy v Missouri (when the violations were admitted and confirmed, but it wasn't sanctioned as the only party with standing couldn't prove it was risking more future censorship).

Actually they didn’t violate the first amendment at all according to the precedent that Trump has set. He routinely asks for news stories to be taken down that he calls “fake news” or what some liberals call “misinformation”. So if all they are being accused of is that, then what is the violation?

Youtube said that Biden Admin frequently pointed out covid-19 info they thought should be taken down. Youtube said they did not take it down. So actually Youtube was not forced to take anything down at all. That’s the Republican logic now, right?

Donald Trump’s campaign of suing media companies for bribes seems a lot more egregious to me.

youtube alone is far more important than all broadcasting companies togheter are (by a huge margin), nevermind the rest of social media. That alone makes Biden attempts at censorship much worse, given social media is far far far far far more important than dying mainstream broadcasting, agreed on this?

Biden had people discussing ban lists for thousands of content creators. Talking with the companies for months constantly. That's far far far far far more censorious than point out 1 or 3 shows Trump dislikes.

Kimmel speech *has not been infringed upon by the government*, while being on a ban list the FBI pushes to social media threatening them *is infringment*

If you want to criticize Trump for violating the 1a, you have to admit Biden did it 1000x more

I watched the show and have seen clips at least 10 times since then. He did not say that AFAIK. Please share a link with that quote.

Edit - never mind, you already proved yourself wrong, lol.