• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Debates commission plans to cut off mics if Trump or Biden break rules

Can you quote the part of the Statute that indicates Congress anticipates that sites would censor content based on the political opinion expressed and that it would be allowed or can't you.
Can you quote the part of the statute that indicates your opinion/approval is required before any political content is censored?
 
Yep, you have told me, and every other member who reads this thread, that you are dishonest and ignore facts that don’t support your opinions.
Reality has kicked you in the butt.
Social media censors.
Jack Dorsey admitted it but you still hang on to your fantasy.
Good luck widdat.
 
Reality has kicked you in the butt.
Why are you continuing to embarrass yourself?

Your lies have been completely busted.

The language of Section 230 doesn’t support any of the lies you’ve been spouting.
 
Why are you continuing to embarrass yourself?

Your lies have been completely busted.

The language of Section 230 doesn’t support any of the lies you’ve been spouting.
Jack Dorsey admitted Twitter does what you keep denying they do.
Everyone else realizes it now.
You've got a serious problem, my friend.
 
I hope they really do this.
 
Social media censors.
This is new to you?
Jack Dorsey admitted it ...
Jack Dorsey acknowledged that his company follows the law as outlined in Section 230.

Tell ya what, you can keep on lying about Section 230 here in this thread. The proof is posted, so that other members who aren’t familiar with the statute can read it for themselves.


I’ll see you in the next thread where you lie about Section 230. (y)
 
Jack Dorsey admitted Twitter does what you keep denying they do.
Everyone else realizes it now.
You've got a serious problem, my friend.
1. I haven’t denied that Twitter censors. It is their legitimate legal right.

You should learn to deal with that fact.

2. You don’t speak for anyone but yourself.

3.
(a) Lying is your problem.
(b) I’m not your friend. I have no use people who lie.
 
1. I haven’t denied that Twitter censors. It is their legitimate legal right.

You should learn to deal with that fact.

2. You don’t speak for anyone but yourself.

3.
(a) Lying is your problem.
(b) I’m not your friend. I have no use people who lie.
If the Law was crafted to give Twitter the legal right to censor political speech and still retain legal immunity, why did Dorsey scramble so fast to admit they made a mistake in order to keep Twitter's legal immunity?
To paraphrase Sen. Feinstein, Denialism lives loudly within you.
 
If the Law was crafted to give Twitter the legal right to censor political speech and still retain legal immunity, why did Dorsey scramble so fast to admit they made a mistake in order to keep Twitter's legal immunity?
To paraphrase Sen. Feinstein, Denialism lives loudly within you.
^^ More unsupported fiction.
 
^^ More unsupported fiction.
Ah, yet another question to be added to the list of those you dare not answer honestly.

Look, you made a mistake misreading the Law because you were driven by partisanship and you thought you were expected to take the position you did. It's understandable on that level.
You see it happen a lot around here when ideology overrides common sense.
But your simple mistake turned into a huge rolling blunder when you kept insisting it wasn't a mistake, and since then you've done nothing but compound your error.
Current events should have driven that point home like a nail gun to the temple. Okay ... maybe that's overly dramatic.
Just say you misinterpreted the intent of Section 230 and there'll be no need to say any more about it.
 
Ah, yet another question to be added to the list of those you dare not answer honestly.

Look, you made a mistake misreading the Law because you were driven by partisanship and you thought you were expected to take the position you did. It's understandable on that level.
You see it happen a lot around here when ideology overrides common sense.
But your simple mistake turned into a huge rolling blunder when you kept insisting it wasn't a mistake, and since then you've done nothing but compound your error.
Current events should have driven that point home like a nail gun to the temple. Okay ... maybe that's overly dramatic.
Just say you misinterpreted the intent of Section 230 and there'll be no need to say any more about it.
If you actually believed your own lies you would post proof (like I have) instead of more empty partisan blathering.
 
If you actually believed your own lies you would post proof (like I have) instead of more empty partisan blathering.
Your proof ... wasn't.
That's why your answers to what I asked ... haven't been.
And unfortunately for you, real life events have closed in around you as proof you have been wrong.
Are you aware of those events?
 
Your proof ... wasn't.
That's why your answers to what I asked ... haven't been.
And unfortunately for you, real life events have closed in around you as proof you have been wrong.
Are you aware of those events?
You’re going to tell me about real life events? You, the same person who repeatedly has made claims, offering zero evidence?

Pass.
 
Last edited:
You’re going to tell me about real life events? You, the same person who repeatedly has made claims, offering zero evidence?

Pass.
Well ... that's another question for the list of questions you're too afraid to answer honestly.
Ain't good for your mental health, my friend.
 
Well ... that's another question for the list of questions you're too afraid to answer honestly.
Ain't good for your mental health, my friend.
Try a new approach. Post facts supported by links, like I have.
 
I am looking forward to the debate. I hear it is on foreign policy. If so, Trump's loaded for bear. And I am sure he will take the opportunity to point out how Biden handled things. You know everywhere Biden and Hunter went Hunter was the vacuum cleaner sucking up all the quid pro quos to enrich his family. Should be a hoot!
 
I am looking forward to the debate. I hear it is on foreign policy. If so, Trump's loaded for bear. And I am sure he will take the opportunity to point out how Biden handled things. You know everywhere Biden and Hunter went Hunter was the vacuum cleaner sucking up all the quid pro quos to enrich his family. Should be a hoot!
Good Robot!


 
Good Robot!



Yes the vacuum cleaner line is Trump's latest and that is why I used it. And I have no doubt he will work it in during the debate.
 
So if they do the final debate, in person, together, do you think they'll employ the mike cut-off option?

I really hope so, I'd love to see it. I bet The Donald would stomp off stage.
 
Try a new approach. Post facts supported by links, like I have.
Oh yes. I should have thanked you for posting confirmation of what I was trying to tell you - even though you still don't realize it. Is that what you wanted to hear? Friends again?
 
Oh yes. I should have thanked you for posting confirmation of what I was trying to tell you - even though you still don't realize it. Is that what you wanted to hear? Friends again?
More fiction.
 
More fiction.
Geez.
You're not even aware that what you posted disproved your own hypothesis.
I guess then I shouldn't be surprised that you're also not aware that Twitter is in trouble for doing what you say is not a problem.
 
Geez.
You're not even aware that what you posted disproved your own hypothesis.
I guess then I shouldn't be surprised that you're also not aware that Twitter is in trouble for doing what you say is not a problem.
Are you ever going to stop blathering and post proof of your beliefs.

Oh, that’s right, you can’t, because none exists.
 
Back
Top Bottom