Mr.TaterSalad Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/new-york/nysdce/1:2019cv11161/527808/39/ Never forget what Fox News' own fucking lawyers argued in support of Tucker Carlson in federal court. "Fox persuasively argues, that given Mr. Carlson's reputation, any reasonable viewer 'arrive[s] with an appropriate amount of skepticism' about the statement he makes." and also . . . "The "'general tenor' of the show should then inform a viewer that [Carlson] is not 'stating actual facts' about the topics he discusses and is instead engaging in 'exaggeration' and 'non-literal commentary.' " 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 6 minutes ago, RatkoVarda said: People want this; they don't want a bunch of dorks debating policy about 32 v. 38 % marginal tax rates; the public wants professional wrestling. Same as it ever was. In Rome it was "Panem et circenses" - "Bread and Circuses" 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RatkoVarda Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 so Gym Jordan said Trump tried to deploy 10K National Guard, but Pelosi stopped him. Pelosi and Barbaro Garbey both have the same amount of control of the DCNG - none. It is amazing to me that there is literally ZERO fallout from telling such an obviously stupid lie. But I guess if you trigger a bunch of libtards, you have done a day's work. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 other serious faults with their arguments: 1) "you didn't stop us well enough" obviously is stupid as hell 2) when they say Pelosi is in charge of capitol security, the truth is it's Pelosi *AND McCONNELL* Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oblong Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 I wonder if he has to pay Heidi $10,000 every time he gets to use her name like that. Nobody likes Ted. Not his family. I don't know if he they have a dog but if they do I bet the dog hates him too. Trump doesn't like him. He doesn't respect him. Never let it be said I don't think Trump was right about something because he was spot on about Marco and Ted in 2016. 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 2 minutes ago, oblong said: I wonder if he has to pay Heidi $10,000 every time he gets to use her name like that. Nobody likes Ted. Not his family. I don't know if he they have a dog but if they do I bet the dog hates him too. Trump doesn't like him. He doesn't respect him. Never let it be said I don't think Trump was right about something because he was spot on about Marco and Ted in 2016. Lying Ted abandoned their poor dog when he fled to Cancun. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddha Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 14 hours ago, gehringer_2 said: yeah - the more I think about it the more I believe we need a shift in the way we think about speech. For most of recorded history, the resources to spread information were limited and suppression of ideas was fairly easy. That lead to legal theories biased strongly to speech protection as a fundamental guarantor of liberty. But there really has been a fundamental shift with the IT age. Today virtually nothing can be truly suppressed. Get it on the internet once and it lives forever and can go anywhere. The real problem today is the just like the industrial age polluted the physical environment in ways unthinkable in the pre-industrial era, the internet pollutes is capable of polluting the intellectual environment in ways unimagined a generation ago. And it's even reached the point where media misinformation has become a form of international warfare. It seems to me the eventual result has to be that just as pollution forced a reconsideration of and limitation of the primacy of private property rights (which used to be considered inviolate) to protect the physical earth we must share, we are going to reach a point where we will need a reasonable legal regime that recognizes the media environment we have to share is also reaching a point of pollution that demands some reasonable ways to push back against. It's going to be a hard line to find, but I think we need to stop whistling past the graveyard clinging to 18th century speech theory and start looking to find a different way forward before misinformation destroys the national polity completely. will you be on the governmental committee for misinformation prosecutions? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 5 hours ago, oblong said: I watched the Ted Cruz thing again this morning and I'm not sure we grasp yet how remarkable that is. Watch the video and understand that one guy is a US Senator, one of 100, of the 2nd largest state. He ran for President. He worked in a White House and argued cases for the Supreme Court. The other guy is a TV host. Look at the dynamic between the power and observe who has the power and upper hand. It's like Biff and Mr. McFly in Back to the Future. A couple of things: One: I remember having a conversation with my old man about Cruz back in 2018 (when he was up for reelection here).... he's always been a big fan and continues to be one, owing to his firebrand style and his archconservative politics. My response was simple: it's easy for you to say that you're a fan because you don't live here and you have two Senators (Peters and Stabenow) who, while they don't share your party preference, at least take the constituent services part of the job seriously. Because in terms of actual value delivered to the state, he's probably the most worthless Senator out there.... his only real strength seems to be going out and finding a camera. Very little else. Regardless of party, I would rather have a Workhorse Senator that takes their work on committees and legislation seriously versus one who just shows up on The Shows and Cable TV all the time. Two: Some of you maybe remember the debacle last February in Texas and how this clown abandoned ship and then, when proceeding to get caught abandoning ship, blamed his kids and wife. That's the guy in a nutshell... setting aside the debate over whether he could effectively do the job remotely (Melody from the old board made that argument frequently at the time), in terms of doing the absolute bare minimum and standing in solidarity with people here, he didn't have the sense to do the work from Texas. Just as his Senate colleague John Cornyn, who I disagree with most of the time as well, did. At the end of the day, maybe he represents the views of 50-55% of his constituents, but in terms of whether he actually cares? Fuck no, the guy only cares about himself and his political future and does everything with that in mind. This despite the fact that he's proven time and again to have some of the worst political instincts in Washington, and that he may be the only person in the United States who believes he even has a 10% chance of ever becoming President. The clip doesn't surprise me at all.... for all the tough talk, deep down he's an invertebrate. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1984Echoes Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 3 hours ago, Archie said: I agree with you that there were a few people there that actually thought they could change the outcome of the election. However, that number of people was very small. Those people must have very few brain cells and were as smart as the people that thought they could kidnap Whitmer and set her a sail in Lake Michigan. To overthrow the US gov't, to change the result of an election, would probably take a military force the size of Russia and China combined and chance of success of that without total nuclear destruction would be very small. The rest of the people were protestors and hooligans that a lot of them got out of control. It was probably more of follow the leader and people were just stupid and did stupid things. Do you really think a guy dressed in fur and horns is going to lead a group of people in a coup? I saw a video a while back of people pushing through a police barricade. A couple guy were doing all the pushing, shoving and fighting. In the process it looked like a female officer was hurt. While the couple guys kept getting violent at the side you could see other protestors attending to the female officer and helping her up. As far as Trump giving them orders that is ridiculous and there is zero proof of that. Who knows what was going through his head during the riots but there is absolutely no proof of him telling people to attack the Capitol. His exact words were "peacefully and patriotically protest." We all know that if he said to attack that would still be playing on a continuous loop on every MSM channel and CNN. This entire debacle is sensationalized by the democrats and the media. For Biden and Harris to compare this to the attack on Pearl Harbor is a travesty. Geez... You just can never stop spewing absolute horseshit... I gotta put you on ignore... I can't stomach your lies anymore. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMRivdogs Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 (edited) 17 minutes ago, mtutiger said: A couple of things: One: I remember having a conversation with my old man about Cruz back in 2018 (when he was up for reelection here).... he's always been a big fan and continues to be one, owing to his firebrand style and his archconservative politics. My response was simple: it's easy for you to say that you're a fan because you don't live here and you have two Senators (Peters and Stabenow) who, while they don't share your party preference, at least take the constituent services part of the job seriously. Because in terms of actual value delivered to the state, he's probably the most worthless Senator out there.... his only real strength seems to be going out and finding a camera. Very little else. Regardless of party, I would rather have a Workhorse Senator that takes their work on committees and legislation seriously versus one who just shows up on The Shows and Cable TV all the time. Two: Some of you maybe remember the debacle last February in Texas and how this clown abandoned ship and then, when proceeding to get caught abandoning ship, blamed his kids and wife. That's the guy in a nutshell... setting aside the debate over whether he could effectively do the job remotely (Melody from the old board made that argument frequently at the time), in terms of doing the absolute bare minimum and standing in solidarity with people here, he didn't have the sense to do the work from Texas. Just as his Senate colleague John Cornyn, who I disagree with most of the time as well, did. At the end of the day, maybe he represents the views of 50-55% of his constituents, but in terms of whether he actually cares? Fuck no, the guy only cares about himself and his political future and does everything with that in mind. This despite the fact that he's proven time and again to have some of the worst political instincts in Washington, and that he may be the only person in the United States who believes he even has a 10% chance of ever becoming President. The clip doesn't surprise me at all.... for all the tough talk, deep down he's an invertebrate. My immediate take on Cruz is that ifbhe crumbles to the likes of Trump (Mafia Boss) and a wimpy talk show host like Carlson, what's he going to do with the likes of Putin or when he faces a real crises. I realize he's not up for election for a few years, but if I were running against him I'd hammer that home. Wimpy Ted. And I miss Melody Edited January 7, 2022 by CMRivdogs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Archie Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 47 minutes ago, CMRivdogs said: My immediate take on Cruz is that ifbhe crumbles to the likes of Trump (Mafia Boss) and a wimpy talk show host like Carlson, what's he going to do with the likes of Putin or when he faces a real crises. I realize he's not up for election for a few years, but if I were running against him I'd hammer that home. Wimpy Ted. And I miss Melody If Trump really was a mob boss then I think Ted would have been clipped by now. Cruz seems to frequently jump into a steaming pile of poo with both feet. That's really not what's so bad because who cares if he goes to Cancun or where ever during a power outage. He isn't fixing the power lines or the grid. What's so bad is the blatant lies he always comes up with to try to cover his tracks. A ten year old could make up better stories. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CMRivdogs Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 (edited) You watch too many bad mob movies. This isn't 1979. edit, I guess I should have said Boss wanna be. He doesn't have the brains or discipline to be a real mob boss. Edited January 7, 2022 by CMRivdogs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mtutiger Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 (edited) 1 hour ago, CMRivdogs said: My immediate take on Cruz is that ifbhe crumbles to the likes of Trump (Mafia Boss) and a wimpy talk show host like Carlson, what's he going to do with the likes of Putin or when he faces a real crises. I realize he's not up for election for a few years, but if I were running against him I'd hammer that home. Wimpy Ted. And I miss Melody Really, the moment where Cruz showed his true colors in terms of weakness was after he made his statement in Cleveland back in 2016. It was a high stakes moment for his career and he actually took a stand for something for a change. But, like the invertebrate that he is, he reneged the moment there was any adversity to his career. That's the thing about political courage.... you kind of have to make a decision and stick with it. Reversing on something like that just projects weakness and, to use conservative terminology, makes him look like a cuck. I don't agree with Liz Cheney on much, but she gets credit for taking a stand and not reversing out of convenience. Edited January 7, 2022 by mtutiger 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 ted is so bad at failing that he also puts his opponents over when he does it. I can only recall 1 time hearing Trump say something during all of his campaigning and presidenting when I was like hell yeah man..... and that was when he trashed the hell out of Cruz when Cruz was attacking "New York mentality" or something like that. Trump totally killed him over it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tigerbomb13 Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 1 hour ago, CMRivdogs said: My immediate take on Cruz is that ifbhe crumbles to the likes of Trump (Mafia Boss) and a wimpy talk show host like Carlson, what's he going to do with the likes of Putin or when he faces a real crises. I realize he's not up for election for a few years, but if I were running against him I'd hammer that home. Wimpy Ted. And I miss Melody I finally watched the Cruz clip just now, and he seemed so small compared to Tucker. I thought he was going to cry. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 (edited) 3 hours ago, buddha said: will you be on the governmental committee for misinformation prosecutions? it doesn't necessarily have to be negative reinforcement, maybe you have a quasi-independent organizations that help do credibility ratings on sources, maybe you manipulate the economics a bit, all you really have to do is take take the profit out of telling lies on public media. If people had to pay to do their own distribution you wouldn't violate the 1st amendment but you'd stop probably 90%. The point is it's time to start thinking about what's is and isn't possible/acceptable. Like the man said, the Constitution is not a suicide pact, if/when the exercise of a 'right' begins to imperil the society, you have to stop whistling past the graveyard with comfortable absolutisms. Edited January 7, 2022 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddha Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 6 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: it doesn't necessarily have to be negative reinforcement, maybe you have a quasi-independent organizations that help do credibility ratings on sources, maybe you manipulate the economics a bit, all you really have to do is take take the profit out of telling lies on public media. If people had to pay to do their own distribution you wouldn't violate the 1st amendment but you'd stop probably 90%. The point is it's time to start thinking about what's is and isn't possible/acceptable. Like the man said, the Constitution is not a suicide pact, if/when the exercise of a 'right' begins to imperil the society, you have to stop whistling past the graveyard with comfortable absolutisms. i dont see how you put the toothpaste back in the tube unless you want to become china or russia. if you dont eliminate access to the internet, there will be places on the internet to find "misinformation." once the printing press was invented, they couldnt put martin luther back in the bottle either. this idea that you can make it unprofitable, or just "nudge" people to the "right" information will not work. you either go full china or you go home. or you stop listening to those who exaggerate the threat... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
smr-nj Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 Or you wait (impatiently) for good people to SPeAK UP. It’s all quite depressing that people won’t speak up for truth. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
romad1 Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 (edited) Its clear that we need to identify some authorities on misinformation. It needs to be done. This billionair's funhouse we have now is not working for Democracy. Edited January 7, 2022 by romad1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 (edited) 33 minutes ago, buddha said: i dont see how you put the toothpaste back in the tube unless you want to become china or russia. History has shown you can have democratic socialism without becoming the CCCP, you can have libel laws far stricter than ours and still be Merry Old England. Americans have to get over the idea that there is no other way good way to do thing than the way we happen to have done things in the past - it's just silly really. You can require responsibility as the price of freedom. If anything I would say in the the US we have actually forgotten the truth that if you don't do that you are dooming yourself. Edited January 7, 2022 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pfife Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 As president of the senate he's responsible for security at the capitol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
buddha Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 21 minutes ago, gehringer_2 said: History has shown you can have democratic socialism without becoming the CCCP, you can have libel laws far stricter than ours and still be Merry Old England. Americans have to get over the idea that there is no other way good way to do thing than the way we happen to have done things in the past - it's just silly really. You can require responsibility as the price of freedom. If anything I would say in the the US we have actually forgotten the truth that if you don't do that you are dooming yourself. you think there's no "misinformation" in the uk? sir, i direct you to my wife's favorite web site: the daily mail. and do you WANT a regime like the one in england? getting rid of american speech laws could open the door even wider to prosecuting people for "wrong speak" on all sorts of issues. do you want donald trump's doj to be able to prosecute people for saying bad things about the people he likes? or him? or evangelical religion? do you want the democrats to have a "committee of anti-racism" to judge you on your past posts and your deep thoughts on d & i provosts at michigan? i'll take my "misinformation" and rely on my ability to figure it out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gehringer_2 Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 (edited) 13 minutes ago, buddha said: you think there's no "misinformation" in the uk? I didn't say that at all - what I said was they have quite a different legal framework than we do and iI would disagree it has worked worse for them than for us in the US. In the UK Obama could have had Trump in court before he ever got his primary campaign off the ground. And within that framework the UK may ultimately have more flexibility to respond to the future than we may. In the US's case it's going to depend on 9 people pretty much completely divorced from any contact with real life re-parsing another bit of 18th century text . Sounds like a recipe for success.' Being too much in love with a failing system is one the US's biggest problems. We need to stop believing our own myths of perfection so much. Edited January 7, 2022 by gehringer_2 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motown Bombers Posted January 7, 2022 Share Posted January 7, 2022 If having a regime like the UK includes every like their health care and gun laws, than yes I would like a regime like the one in England. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.