1 1
Guest

Biden Team Member Advocates Thought-Crime Laws

Recommended Posts

Guest
2 hours ago, olofscience said:

I'd put this with the "Edinburgh is being overrun with mosques" file.

Anyone in DC care to back this up?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, markharju said:

No I won't. I'm angry that some leftist piece of shit even dared to challenge the Bill of Rights.

Dude, the only person challenging the US Constitution lately is Trump.  It's "fake" remember?

Your tacit support of him makes your crocodile tears over this (or perhaps crocodile rage) somewhat silly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
3 minutes ago, billvon said:

Dude, the only person challenging the US Constitution lately is Trump.  It's "fake" remember?

Your tacit support of him makes your crocodile tears over this (or perhaps crocodile rage) somewhat silly.

Al Gore contested in 2000. Did you beef about that?

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, markharju said:

Al Gore contested in 2000. Did you beef about that?

No Al Gore did not 'contest' the US Constitution.

This is why few people take your posts seriously.  Almost everything you post, from mosques taking over cities to a ban on reporting violence to "Gore contested the Constitution" is a lie.  I understand why you lie; it advances your agenda and few people you speak to regularly question you.  But it also means I pretty much assume that anything you post is dishonest.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
11 minutes ago, billvon said:

No Al Gore did not 'contest' the US Constitution.

This is why few people take your posts seriously.  Almost everything you post, from mosques taking over cities to a ban on reporting violence to "Gore contested the Constitution" is a lie.  I understand why you lie; it advances your agenda and few people you speak to regularly question you.  But it also means I pretty much assume that anything you post is dishonest.

Okay, I didn't say constitution,I  fell into the trap of not reading. Did Gore contest the 2000 election, or not?

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
23 minutes ago, billvon said:

Since I have seen it, your statement is yet another false one.

Wow - even with firsthand video evidence....amazing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, markharju said:

Okay, I didn't say constitution,I  fell into the trap of not reading. Did Gore contest the 2000 election, or not?

Yes, he did.  Which makes sense - since depending on how the votes were counted, Gore or Bush won, and in each case by less than 1000 votes.

Should it be "clear intent of the voter?"  Then Gore won.  Should it be the strictest interpretation of (not the letter of) the law?  Then Bush won.  That seems worth a contest.
 

Quote

Wow - even with firsthand video evidence....amazing.

If you took video, by all means, post it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
16 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

Mark,

Are you in the military stationed in Germany?

Joe

Joe,

No, I'm not. Retired and living on the economy (and paying German taxes though I do get a senior break. Lots of us over here). Does it matter? If you're thinking about doxxing me you're SOL.

mh

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, markharju said:

Joe,

No, I'm not. Retired and living on the economy (and paying German taxes though I do get a senior break. Lots of us over here). Does it matter? If you're thinking about doxxing me you're SOL.

mh

I guess we can add paranoia to your list of cognitive infirmities. Were you military, I would next have asked if mindsets like yours were prevalent in your unit. Now I know it's much simpler: you are just an angry old man, unhappy with your lot in life, who finds validation in lashing out bitterly at make believe enemies. The internet and this forum give you a channel to behave as abysmally homophobic and prejudicial as you like without fear of retribution. I'll further guess that in your little circle at home you take pains to be well behaved lest you be left without even the pretense of friends. Old age is a time for mellowing out and enjoying the days you have left not hating ever more intensely. Go find some good in something.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, markharju said:

Okay, I didn't say constitution,I  fell into the trap of not reading. Did Gore contest the 2000 election, or not?

 

1 hour ago, billvon said:

Yes, he did.  Which makes sense - since depending on how the votes were counted, Gore or Bush won, and in each case by less than 1000 votes.

Should it be "clear intent of the voter?"  Then Gore won.  Should it be the strictest interpretation of (not the letter of) the law?  Then Bush won.  That seems worth a contest.

In 2000, the Florida race was very close.
By the end, with all the other states counted, whoever won Florida was going to win the election.

So there were recounts. As the process calls for. 
Then there were some weird happenings with the actual ballots (hanging chads). 

And it got silly.
Then Roger Stone (that name might ring a bell) pulled a few tricks and the Supreme Court stopped the recounts with Bush ahead. (look up "Brooks Brothers Revolution"). 

Currently, Georgia is recounting all the ballots. 4.9 million of them. By hand.
The final tally was close enough that the recount was automatically triggered. As the process calls for. 

However, there are reports out there that Republican officials are pressuring the SecState in Georgia to toss out ballots that were legally cast.

That's NOT what the process calls for.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/georgia-secretary-state-raffensperger-says-sen-graham-asked-him-about-n1247968

And as far as free speech and the bill of rights goes, there are lots of exceptions to free speech. You can't say 'just anything'. Some speech has consequences. Some speech can be prosecuted. 

Many of the other Amendments to the BoR have been altered from how they were originally intended. 2nd, 4th, 5th, 10th. That's how that goes. (hint: look up the definition of the word 'amendment').

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
5 minutes ago, wolfriverjoe said:

 

In 2000, the Florida race was very close.
By the end, with all the other states counted, whoever won Florida was going to win the election.

So there were recounts. As the process calls for. 
Then there were some weird happenings with the actual ballots (hanging chads). 

And it got silly.
Then Roger Stone (that name might ring a bell) pulled a few tricks and the Supreme Court stopped the recounts with Bush ahead. (look up "Brooks Brothers Revolution"). 

Currently, Georgia is recounting all the ballots. 4.9 million of them. By hand.
The final tally was close enough that the recount was automatically triggered. As the process calls for. 

However, there are reports out there that Republican officials are pressuring the SecState in Georgia to toss out ballots that were legally cast.

That's NOT what the process calls for.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/georgia-secretary-state-raffensperger-says-sen-graham-asked-him-about-n1247968

And as far as free speech and the bill of rights goes, there are lots of exceptions to free speech. You can't say 'just anything'. Some speech has consequences. Some speech can be prosecuted. 

Many of the other Amendments to the BoR have been altered from how they were originally intended. 2nd, 4th, 5th, 10th. That's how that goes. (hint: look up the definition of the word 'amendment').

Never disagreed with the 1st being not absolute. No right is. Some speech can and should be prosecuted (such as incitement - this has been upheld over and over), but not just because some pussy's feewings got hurt.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
52 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

I guess we can add paranoia to your list of cognitive infirmities. Were you military, I would next have asked if mindsets like yours were prevalent in your unit. Now I know it's much simpler: you are just an angry old man, unhappy with your lot in life, who finds validation in lashing out bitterly at make believe enemies. The internet and this forum give you a channel to behave as abysmally homophobic and prejudicial as you like without fear of retribution. I'll further guess that in your little circle at home you take pains to be well behaved lest you be left without even the pretense of friends. Old age is a time for mellowing out and enjoying the days you have left not hating ever more intensely. Go find some good in something.

I should because I'm certainly not seeing anything good in here. Always with the personal attacks. I guess I'm supposed to be butthurt or something, hanging my head in shame and self-loathing. Heh

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, JoeWeber said:

I guess we can add paranoia to your list of cognitive infirmities. Were you military, I would next have asked if mindsets like yours were prevalent in your unit. Now I know it's much simpler: you are just an angry old man, unhappy with your lot in life, who finds validation in lashing out bitterly at make believe enemies. The internet and this forum give you a channel to behave as abysmally homophobic and prejudicial as you like without fear of retribution. I'll further guess that in your little circle at home you take pains to be well behaved lest you be left without even the pretense of friends. Old age is a time for mellowing out and enjoying the days you have left not hating ever more intensely. Go find some good in something.

I have no idea if that's right about markharju, but your description fits an acquaintance of mine here in the UK very closely. And yes, he's full of hate, bitterness and regret. And to him BBC is "fake news" while he parrots RT and the Daily Mail.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, markharju said:

This motherfucking Biden staffer is pushing for it at THE NATIONAL LEVEL.

Meh, your current president offered to pardon anybody willing to break the law. But that was against brown people, so you had no problem with it. You would prefer a world without brown people anyways, and would give up your constitution in a heartbeat to make that happen.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, markharju said:

but not just because some pussy's feewings got hurt.

And yet your current administration isn't committed to a democratic, peaceful transfer of power because the pussy in chief got his feewings hurt.

 

Maybe trump was right with the losers and suckers comment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, olofscience said:

I have no idea if that's right about markharju, but your description fits an acquaintance of mine here in the UK very closely. And yes, he's full of hate, bitterness and regret. And to him BBC is "fake news" while he parrots RT and the Daily Mail.

I know a few people like that here as well.  One of them gets so angry his face actually turns red.  And he is always careful to point out "I am NOT ANGRY!  I am laughing at all the libs doing XXX.  LAUGHING!  Haha."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, olofscience said:

I'm not quite sure you know what "first-hand video evidence" means :rofl:

Hey, it worked for Trump's lawyers. "We have firsthand evidence from a reliable source!...Who told another poll worker about it who repeated the claim to our witness."

Oh wait... no. It didn't work for them either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, markharju said:

I should because I'm certainly not seeing anything good in here. Always with the personal attacks. I guess I'm supposed to be butthurt or something, hanging my head in shame and self-loathing. Heh

You're supposed to behave like a rational adult with respect for other human beings.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, markharju said:

This is how incrementalism works. Please educate yourself.

You've made a pretty big leap between him writing an article debating actionable legislation regarding hate speech and him calling for penalties for thought crimes.  The first ammendment and for that matter no law is so absolute as to ignore it's implication regarding public safety and nation security.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
4 hours ago, DJL said:

You've made a pretty big leap between him writing an article debating actionable legislation regarding hate speech and him calling for penalties for thought crimes.  The first amendment and for that matter no law is so absolute as to ignore its implication regarding public safety and nation security.

My big problem is subjectivity. No right is absolute, but given how quickly the thought police move in social media, what is acceptable today ("Good morning!") will be classed as "hate speech" tomorrow. In other words, it's what thought police say it is. Witness how those miserable, worthless fucks in the Senate (read: Hirono) continually moved the goalposts during the Barrett hearings. And attacking the female nominee, just because she was politically incorrect and for absolutely no other reason (other than that Barrett was nominated by the Bad Orange Man). I see incrementalism going this way: abolish the Electoral College (or subvert it with the IPV), revoke the 2nd Amendment. Revoke the 1st Amendment. The Bill of Rights has to be watched closely and defended fiercely, or the risk is catastrophic: some slick-assed snake in politics will convince people that it's "for the children". Education would go a long way towards this, but teaching adolescent schoolkids about buttsex instead of civics seems to be the way things are going from now on.

Edited by Guest

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, markharju said:

Your non-sequitor makes no sense to me. Incitement is already unlawful under US constitutional test. To nationalize thought crimes is Orwellian. I'm an American and will therefore say what I fucking well please, thank you very much (to the Founders).

It will never work. Everyone knows right wing racists don't think. They are safe.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

1 1