dr rowen, one of your best articles. clear and concise and fact filled. excellent. yes, it is not called the "first" amendment for nothing. if that amendment is somehow bypassed and digital currency forced upon us, it's game over and rome will have fallen again.
actually, that analogy is not correct. rome had nothing like our "of, for, and by the people", but it was the most powerful empire ever, and tho not technically an empire, watching the u.s. being destroyed during my lifetime does remind me of rome burning. bill diehl
“I think we need to push back on this. There’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy.”
Kamala:
"And the bottom line is that you can’t say you have one rule for Facebook and you have a different rule for Twitter. The same rule has to apply, which is that there has to be a responsibility that is placed on these social media sites to understand their power. They are directly speaking to millions and millions of people without any level of oversight or regulation. And that has to stop."
...and NO fact checkers commented when Walz said that the "Supreme Court Test" for free speech was yelling fire in a crowded theater. That is absolutely NOT, and had never been, a Supreme Court test for free speech. That was dicta (a non-binding side comment) by Oliver Wendell Holmes in a 1919 case about the Espionage Act, which was overturned anyway in the 60's. It's EXTREMELY disturbing that a governor would not know about the First Amendment.
More concerning... my comment is not simply a fact check, it's a glimpse into the entire paradigm, philosophy of Walz and Kamala. Think for a moment about WHY they believe in the "greater good", making decisions "for your own good", etc. This is extreme paternalism, some of the favorite phrases used by fascists throughout history. In other words, they are justified (indeed, morally obligated) to censor or outlaw anything they think might be bad for the "masses" (they don't care about YOU, how the individual may get trampled in this process. It's a Machiavellian math question, not a question of individual freedoms or liberties, etc). Censor social media & beyond, deny medical autonomy, take away gas cars, issue a national property tax, etc. And of course this can change from moment to moment - like California mandating formaldehyde in mattresses, then later banning formaldehyde in mattresses. But facts are not important either - the only thing that's important is that ever-present paternalistic hand guiding us through our lives because we're incapable of making our own decisions about our autonomy.
And by the way, I do define myself as a classic liberal. But as RFK has said many times, the Democratic party is NOT the party it used to be. And if JFK were alive today he would be booted out of the Democratic party with prejudice, and labeled a right-wing nut job by the media.
What Kerry says here is scary. You don’t need to any particular side to worry about someone like him with his background saying this. Btw the Forbes Family of which John Kerry Forbes is a member, made their fortune with opium and tea.
Glad to have people of your esteem to be keeping the right mindset fresh, lest people forget when it's easier to do so until the next time. Never forget
Well Dr. Rowan. Trump is recently on record as saying that critics of the Supreme Court should be jailed - not censored, jailed. How does that fit with the first amendment?
My hope is that RFK and others will help reign in Trump during a second term. Trump has expressed sincere interest in a unity government , and has expressed sincere regrets about his first term (though not publicly, though I wish he would). There is no doubt Trump is a blowhard, and morally challenged. But the alternative is a sinister force - not simply defective personalities but people who pose existential threats to democracy. Not to mention, Trump will help end wars, whereas the neo-lib left will just find new wars for us to fight.
dr rowen, one of your best articles. clear and concise and fact filled. excellent. yes, it is not called the "first" amendment for nothing. if that amendment is somehow bypassed and digital currency forced upon us, it's game over and rome will have fallen again.
actually, that analogy is not correct. rome had nothing like our "of, for, and by the people", but it was the most powerful empire ever, and tho not technically an empire, watching the u.s. being destroyed during my lifetime does remind me of rome burning. bill diehl
other quotes:
Walz::
“I think we need to push back on this. There’s no guarantee to free speech on misinformation or hate speech, and especially around our democracy.”
Kamala:
"And the bottom line is that you can’t say you have one rule for Facebook and you have a different rule for Twitter. The same rule has to apply, which is that there has to be a responsibility that is placed on these social media sites to understand their power. They are directly speaking to millions and millions of people without any level of oversight or regulation. And that has to stop."
...and NO fact checkers commented when Walz said that the "Supreme Court Test" for free speech was yelling fire in a crowded theater. That is absolutely NOT, and had never been, a Supreme Court test for free speech. That was dicta (a non-binding side comment) by Oliver Wendell Holmes in a 1919 case about the Espionage Act, which was overturned anyway in the 60's. It's EXTREMELY disturbing that a governor would not know about the First Amendment.
More concerning... my comment is not simply a fact check, it's a glimpse into the entire paradigm, philosophy of Walz and Kamala. Think for a moment about WHY they believe in the "greater good", making decisions "for your own good", etc. This is extreme paternalism, some of the favorite phrases used by fascists throughout history. In other words, they are justified (indeed, morally obligated) to censor or outlaw anything they think might be bad for the "masses" (they don't care about YOU, how the individual may get trampled in this process. It's a Machiavellian math question, not a question of individual freedoms or liberties, etc). Censor social media & beyond, deny medical autonomy, take away gas cars, issue a national property tax, etc. And of course this can change from moment to moment - like California mandating formaldehyde in mattresses, then later banning formaldehyde in mattresses. But facts are not important either - the only thing that's important is that ever-present paternalistic hand guiding us through our lives because we're incapable of making our own decisions about our autonomy.
And by the way, I do define myself as a classic liberal. But as RFK has said many times, the Democratic party is NOT the party it used to be. And if JFK were alive today he would be booted out of the Democratic party with prejudice, and labeled a right-wing nut job by the media.
What Kerry says here is scary. You don’t need to any particular side to worry about someone like him with his background saying this. Btw the Forbes Family of which John Kerry Forbes is a member, made their fortune with opium and tea.
Glad to have people of your esteem to be keeping the right mindset fresh, lest people forget when it's easier to do so until the next time. Never forget
Well Dr. Rowan. Trump is recently on record as saying that critics of the Supreme Court should be jailed - not censored, jailed. How does that fit with the first amendment?
I agree with you. SCOTUS must be open to criticism as well. No argument from me. I don't l ike to hear anyone challenging one's right to speech.
My hope is that RFK and others will help reign in Trump during a second term. Trump has expressed sincere interest in a unity government , and has expressed sincere regrets about his first term (though not publicly, though I wish he would). There is no doubt Trump is a blowhard, and morally challenged. But the alternative is a sinister force - not simply defective personalities but people who pose existential threats to democracy. Not to mention, Trump will help end wars, whereas the neo-lib left will just find new wars for us to fight.
However, please listen to this SCOTUS justice:
https://rumble.com/v4kjnv6-us-supreme-court-justice-laments-first-amendment.html
This is coming from a member of the Supreme Court itself. Very scary to me.