Jump to content

POLITICS SCHMALITICS


romad1

Recommended Posts

15 minutes ago, oblong said:

the tweets that were "banned" referred to Hunter Biden's penis.  

 Apples and some Oranges.

This comment makes me feel like you've read and studied the left's talking points.  Hunter Biden's penis certainly was tabloid fodder, but the reason why the left wants to keep the story tied to his dick is because they don't want anyone to question the emails.  

Anyway, why would you care about this story anyway?  Didn't 50 intelligence officers state this was Russian disinformation? 

15 minutes ago, oblong said:

I've been asking all over... who was unjustly banned according to the right wingers?  

Again, it wasn't specific people that were banned by the previous Twitter regime, it was entire ideas.  Rather you think one is worse than the other, I simply contend both are bad.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, ewsieg said:

Safe to assume with this response you've completely bought into the idea that Taibbi and Weiss are right wing fanatics and therefore you should ignore everything they say.

Also safe to assume you think the lab leak theory is equivalent to a conspiracy theory?

Lot of assumptions for a simple question asking who. I didn’t remember, it’s why I asked.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

This comment makes me feel like you've read and studied the left's talking points.  Hunter Biden's penis certainly was tabloid fodder, but the reason why the left wants to keep the story tied to his dick is because they don't want anyone to question the emails.  

Anyway, why would you care about this story anyway?  Didn't 50 intelligence officers state this was Russian disinformation? 

Again, it wasn't specific people that were banned by the previous Twitter regime, it was entire ideas.  Rather you think one is worse than the other, I simply contend both are bad.  

I'm not keeping score.  Just wondering why the right wingers are calling for congressional investigations and targeting advertisers who choose not to do business with a site that's sympathetic to nazis.  They are the ones who seem to think it's a big deal.

I've asked who was banned that has the right wingers upset and you answered "nobody" so that settles it as far as I am concerned.  The whole 'both sides' argument is non existent.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said:

this is non-sequitor. You can't ban an idea, it has no account. EIther people were banned for what they posted or they weren't. If they were they have identities.

We now know what most people assumed was true, that Twitter shadow banned people and topics (ideas).  Specific accounts were noted in the Twitter Files.  Banning outright wasn't the previous regimes M.O..  They worried about the Streisand effect whereas Musk doesn't care and has outright shut them down.

I simply contend both are bad.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

26 minutes ago, romad1 said:

Wait, so banning Alex Jones was because of his ideas? 

I was waiting for someone to jump to one of the extremist.  BTW, Jones is still banned under Musk.  

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya was one of those mentioned in the Twitter files and he was shadow banned because he warned that the lockdowns would cause great harm on children and their education.  I mean, that's right up there with Nazi's and Alex Jones though, so I guess I'm just proving myself wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, ewsieg said:

I was waiting for someone to jump to one of the extremist.  BTW, Jones is still banned under Musk.  

Dr. Jay Bhattacharya was one of those mentioned in the Twitter files and he was shadow banned because he warned that the lockdowns would cause great harm on children and their education.  I mean, that's right up there with Nazi's and Alex Jones though, so I guess I'm just proving myself wrong.

Is Trump still banned? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, oblong said:

I'm not keeping score.  Just wondering why the right wingers are calling for congressional investigations and targeting advertisers who choose not to do business with a site that's sympathetic to nazis.  They are the ones who seem to think it's a big deal.

I've asked who was banned that has the right wingers upset and you answered "nobody" so that settles it as far as I am concerned.  The whole 'both sides' argument is non existent.

When I asked, I was strongly admonished with Taibbi and Weiss as examples. Although I don't think either were banned. So I don't know what that answer was meant to accomplish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, chasfh said:

When I asked, I was strongly admonished with Taibbi and Weiss as examples. Although I don't think either were banned. So I don't know what that answer was meant to accomplish.

Weiss was banned for a bit...  she asked Musk for comment about the Doxxing bannings so he banned her.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, oblong said:

Weiss was banned for a bit...  she asked Musk for comment about the Doxxing bannings so he banned her.

 

I see, OK. But probably not during the dark days of @jack's liberal Twitter during which bots and their human minions spewed COVID disinfo and got banned for it, to the horror of MAGAnation?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, ewsieg said:

This comment makes me feel like you've read and studied the left's talking points.  Hunter Biden's penis certainly was tabloid fodder, but the reason why the left wants to keep the story tied to his dick is because they don't want anyone to question the emails.  

Anyway, why would you care about this story anyway?  Didn't 50 intelligence officers state this was Russian disinformation? 

Again, it wasn't specific people that were banned by the previous Twitter regime, it was entire ideas.  Rather you think one is worse than the other, I simply contend both are bad.  

Pretty incorrect.

The complaint by the Biden administration, released by Taibbi in twitter files #1 contained 4 specific links to tweets.   The wayback machine was used and all 4 were hunters dong. 

That's not a "talking point", that's what happened.

Furthermore, the idea of hunters laptop wasn't banned.   A specific article by Nypost was banned.   This also is what happened. 

 

Edited by pfife
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said:

Could someone explain to me like a third grader why this would be bad?

 

He accidentally said one of those quiet parts out loud. The kids weren't supposed to be listening.

"Light has come into the world, but people loved darkness instead of light because their deeds were evil."

Edited by gehringer_2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have over 50 tax returns in my history. There isn't a thing in any of them from which I need protection from disclosure. How did my life go so wrong?

The only reason I would have any concern is that the information in a tax return may be useful to people attemping cyber identity theft, not over any of the facts themselves.

Edited by gehringer_2
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/19/2022 at 9:07 AM, ewsieg said:

Again, it wasn't specific people that were banned by the previous Twitter regime, it was entire ideas.  Rather you think one is worse than the other, I simply contend both are bad.  

I use Twitter frequently and I have always been able to see all kinds of extremist right wing rhetoric   None of their ideas were banned.  

Link to comment
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.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...