The Death of Dilbert and False Claims of White Victimhood

NiftyNiblick said:
Of course I'm not saying that a privately owned operation should be forced to carry anything.
Newspapers who wish to terminate syndication deals obviously have the right to do so. Why wouldn't they?

I'm just saying that as we focus on cancelling out a racist cartoonist of minor consequence,
the people who enjoyed his cartoon in their morning paper also got cancelled without having done anything wrong.

I suppose I don't think of internet outlets because I'm from a previous generation.
Click to expand...
For what it's worth, I agree with your sentiment and I'm glad someone is saying it.

I have to nitpick two minor things that do not detract from your point:

1. Referring to Adams as "racist" is using the wrong word because Adams never injured any race. The correct word would be "bigot" if it were actually the case that Adams did what was claimed in this thread ... which is not likely... explaining why all the claims are completely unsupported. Note how ThatOwlCoward never needs anything be supported to just believe as ordered and to immediately demonize like an attack dog that hates on command.

2. Newspapers aren't dropping Adams because they believe he is a bigot, but because they believe their readers believe he is a bigot.

Great point.
 
JesusAI said:
there are many fine jews.

they're just like any other group of assholes.
Click to expand...
Nice backpedal. Too bad for you that you have a long, long history on JPP of antisemitism and racism, Fredo.

Odd too since you are a lapsed Catholic wop. LOL
 
QP! said:
FREE SPEECH. FREE SPEECH. FREE SPEECH.


Florida bill would make bloggers who write about governor register with state
Rules for bloggers who write about elected officials raise First Amendment concern.


A proposed law in Florida would force bloggers who write about Gov. Ron DeSantis and other elected officials to register with a state office and file monthly reports or face fines of $25 per day. The bill was filed in the Florida Senate Tuesday by Senator Jason Brodeur, a Republican....
Click to expand...

Free speech does not mean free from consequences
 
Jarod said:
Free speech does not mean free from consequences
Click to expand...

As Scott Adams sadly found out last weekend.

So just how does FL think it can even enforce this First Amendment-violating proposed law? Are they going to force blog platforms to divulge the personal info of their users? Will the platform itself be fined? What if the blogger isn't even in Florida? Will donation-dependent sites like Wonkette be forced to divulge donors' names and personal info? If the blogger derives his/her income from ads on his/her page, how will that work?

I have a feeling that more rational minds will prevail and this information-stifling bill will die.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
As Scott Adams sadly found out last weekend.

So just how does FL think it can even enforce this First Amendment-violating proposed law? Are they going to force blog platforms to divulge the personal info of their users? Will the platform itself be fined? What if the blogger isn't even in Florida? Will donation-dependent sites like Wonkette be forced to divulge donors' names and personal info? If the blogger derives his/her income from ads on his/her page, how will that work?

I have a feeling that more rational minds will prevail and this information-stifling bill will die.
Click to expand...

It’s impossible, like most of what Santos does is for headlines, reality doesn’t matter.
 
QP! said:
No. I am not an idiot like you.

I think the small family business diner in Florida serving a retirement community should be able to decide their terms of service with DeSantis telling via gov't what to say and do.
I think the Cruise lines and other businesses should be able to do same with DeSantis and gov't telling them what to say and do.
I do not think Trump and his White House should be telling Twitter what to say or do.
I do not think Trump and his White House should be telling Jimmy Kimmels bosses what to say or do.


I support Freedom of Speech and association. And i can choose for myself and you, yourself and a forum like this can decide what rules it wants and no one like Trump or DeSantis should bring the weight of gov't in to try and change that.

You maga morons see what i just posted above about the push now to REGISTER anyone who might criticize DeSantis and applaud all the while pretending you care about the 1st amendment. YOu are jokes.
Click to expand...

The way the wording on this bill goes, if you are a blogger and merely report that "Brodeur introduces bill to require bloggers to register," you're in violation. Brodeur wants to claim that bloggers are word-lobbyists. They are not. A lobbyist by definition represents some other entity and tries to influence elected officials to consider legislation favoring that entity. Someone who merely writes about elected people, whether positive or negative, whether paid or not, is not a lobbyist.

The actual intent of this bill is to stifle criticism and thus, freedom of speech. It is unconstitutional on its face.
 
Jarod said:
Free speech does not mean free from consequences
Click to expand...

It does mean being free of government interference and consequences.

The "consequences" you speak of are person to person. You say a thing that society finds abhorrent, that is your right and free speech. On the consequence side people or your employer say, 'you are not welcome here'. That is a consequence within free speech that IS free speech. The gov't saying 'you must REGISTER' and 'Pay a fine if you SPEAK without registering first', is not free speech because it is the government impacting your ability to speak.

So many maga morons have no clue what free speech and the 1st amendment mean. Free from GOVERNMENT interference.
 
Last edited:
ThatOwlWoman said:
The way the wording on this bill goes, if you are a blogger and merely report that "Brodeur introduces bill to require bloggers to register," you're in violation. Brodeur wants to claim that bloggers are word-lobbyists. They are not. A lobbyist by definition represents some other entity and tries to influence elected officials to consider legislation favoring that entity. Someone who merely writes about elected people, whether positive or negative, whether paid or not, is not a lobbyist.

The actual intent of this bill is to stifle criticism and thus, freedom of speech. It is unconstitutional on its face.
Click to expand...

Yup, any pretense these maga morons have ever been in favor of Free Speech or Free Association is shown to be a complete lie. They cheer on fascist leaders around the world as the model of what they want in America and admire them, just as Trump did. Trump said more kind words about Xi, Putin and Jong-Un then he ever said about any leaders in the West. Today they welcome and celebrate Viktor Orbán and his hate with standing ovations. They celebrate and welcome Jair Bolsonaro in Florida.

This is a naked intimidation attempt to force any one who might 'comment' on gov't to 'register' and face fines and other intimidation techniques. It is 100% fascist.
 
QP! said:
It does mean being free of government interference and consequences.

The "consequences" you speak of are person to person. You say a thing that society finds abhorrent, that if your right and free speech. On the consequence side people or your employer say, 'you are no welcome here'. That is a consequence within free speech that IS free speech. The gov't saying 'you must REGISTER' and 'Pay a fine if you SPEAK without registering first', is not free speech because it is the government impacting your ability to speak.

So many maga morons have no clue what free speech and the 1st amendment mean. Free from GOVERNMENT interference.
Click to expand...
Worse, and more hypocritically, they only cite their rights to protect things they like but seek to use the full weight of the Federal government to crush things they don't like....especially if it involves anyone who is not a Euro-American male.
 
QP! said:
Yup, any pretense these maga morons have ever been in favor of Free Speech or Free Association is shown to be a complete lie. They cheer on fascist leaders around the world as the model of what they want in America and admire them, just as Trump did. Trump said more kind words about Xi, Putin and Jong-Un then he ever said about any leaders in the West. Today they welcome and celebrate Viktor Orbán and his hate with standing ovations. They celebrate and welcome Jair Bolsonaro in Florida.

This is a naked intimidation attempt to force any one who might 'comment' on gov't to 'register' and face fines and other intimidation techniques. It is 100% fascist.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is. Many bloggers prefer to use pseudonyms as well, which is a long-respected way to express oneself w/o fear of reprisals from the government. Obviously this will not be possible should this bill pass.

Meanwhile, Reichwingers are busily rolling back other freedoms with their bizarre fixation on LGBTQ issues, the non-existent teaching of CRT in public schools, banning books and drag shows, and completely ignoring children's freedom to attend school without fearing they'll be gunned down by some gun-humping MAGAT.
 
QP! said:
It does mean being free of government interference and consequences.

The "consequences" you speak of are person to person. You say a thing that society finds abhorrent, that if your right and free speech. On the consequence side people or your employer say, 'you are no welcome here'. That is a consequence within free speech that IS free speech. The gov't saying 'you must REGISTER' and 'Pay a fine if you SPEAK without registering first', is not free speech because it is the government impacting your ability to speak.

So many maga morons have no clue what free speech and the 1st amendment mean. Free from GOVERNMENT interference.
Click to expand...

The constitution guarantees you a right against government imposed consequences. That is all. You can have consequences from a business or other people without violating the constitutional doctrine of free speech.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
The way the wording on this bill goes, if you are a blogger and merely report that "Brodeur introduces bill to require bloggers to register," you're in violation.
Click to expand...
Hey coward, guess what you forgot to post.

That's right, you forgot to provide the wording from the bill that makes that a violation. I'm assuming there is no such wording because all you post are the lies you are told to regurgitate, not the reality that exposes your lies.
 
ThatOwlWoman said:
The way the wording on this bill goes, if you are a blogger and merely report that "Brodeur introduces bill to require bloggers to register," you're in violation. Brodeur wants to claim that bloggers are word-lobbyists. They are not. A lobbyist by definition represents some other entity and tries to influence elected officials to consider legislation favoring that entity. Someone who merely writes about elected people, whether positive or negative, whether paid or not, is not a lobbyist.

The actual intent of this bill is to stifle criticism and thus, freedom of speech. It is unconstitutional on its face.
Click to expand...

A lobbyist gets paid. There are a few here who may fit that bill, but almost all are amateurs having a diversion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top