Free Speech for Me, but Not For Thee

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

Speaking of free speech:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/04/us/p ... nsure.html

The Republican Party has passed a motion to censure Trump critics Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger over their criticisms of former president Donald Trump as well as their membership of the committee investigating the 6 January attack on the US Capitol — which was termed “legitimate political discourse” by the party.

So, they’re censuring Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger for their “free speech”, while legitimizing the insurrection as legitimate “free speech.”

If you’re a GOPher you are legitimately a fascist.

- Doc

[huckelberry]

except for I showed a video of hippies burning books, records and a batting cage. So there was that.

Your youtube linked to the Disco Demolition of 1979 which had nothing to do with the Democrats. If anything, the rage against disco likely had more to do with the perception of it being Black music (Soul Train) or gay music (Village People). Gee, I wonder who would be involved in that kind of protest. But the fact that you had to dig back 42 years for some smidgen of a counter-example, kinda reinforces the point that "both sides" are hardly doing the "same thing."

I saw a silly radio promotion stunt expressing a specific music preference. To late for there to be hippies, and little connection to soul train or village people. Disco more Rod Stewart , "don't you think I'm sexy?"or however that went, it was quite a while back.

[Binger]

Speaking of free speech:

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/04/us/p ... nsure.html

The Republican Party has passed a motion to censure Trump critics Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger over their criticisms of former president Donald Trump as well as their membership of the committee investigating the 6 January attack on the US Capitol — which was termed “legitimate political discourse” by the party.

So, they’re censuring Liz Cheney and Adam Kinzinger for their “free speech”, while legitimizing the insurrection as legitimate “free speech.”

If you’re a GOPher you are legitimately a fascist.

- Doc

Hey communist.

I do not think you found the gotchya that you think you got.

Have you considered what "censure" even means? It does not mean censor. If anything, anyone who thinks that an act to censure is anything more than a stupid show of nothingness is probably either a communist or a pussy or both.

[Doctor CamNC4Me]

[Binger]

Oh, I see. If you make a bigger ass of yourself for misunderstanding insurrection, then maybe people will not notice that you did not understand censure?

Cool. Good job with the insurrection distraction, and good job skipping over the censure/censor eff up. Good Job!!!!

[Morley]

I think authoritarianism is a good way to look at the entire situation. I find myself reading this essay from 1964 from time to time to help put current events into context. This essay by Hofstadter and his book "The True Believer" are excellent, I think, in showing how a democracy can be driven into authoritarianism. https://harpers.org/archive/1964/11/the ... -politics/

For what it's worth, I think you've got your Hofs all mixed up, counselor. The True Believer was Eric Hoffer's--and I think he espoused a philosophy that was quite different from Hofstadter's.

[K Graham]

Hey communist.

I do not think you found the gotchya that you think you got.

Have you considered what "censure" even means? It does not mean censor. If anything, anyone who thinks that an act to censure is anything more than a stupid show of nothingness is probably either a communist or a pussy or both.

So much ignorance and irony in such a small post.

1. Doc never said censure meant censor.
2. Censure doesn't need to be synonymous with censor in order for his point to be valid.
3. By passing a motion to censure Cheney and Kinzinger for merely expressing their opinions that are actually well grounded and based on fact, they're telling us exactly what they think about freedom of speech. Freedom of speech is great so long as you're singing Donald Trump's praises. Otherwise you're going to be maligned in the worst way.
4. Only a moron would think Doc was saying Cheney and Kinzinger could be literally censored!
5. You need to start dealing with what people say and not what they don't, otherwise you come across as a jackass and moron.
6. You haven't even begun to show Doc doesn't understand what insurrection means, but it seems you're taking Tucker Carlson's cue. Nice job at further destroying whatever credibility you think you had here. Tell us more about how you don't watch FOX.
7. Oh, and you're a fool for throwing out big words you don't understand (communist!)

[canpakes]

https://www.jns.org/opinion/the-only-on ... theorists/

tl;dr - Leftists ban books in school districts all the time

After spending the last few years banning Dr. Seuss, …

Just to be clear, unless it’s something like porno that minors can access, I’m not a fan of banning, censoring, or removing access to any books. I get school districts can only teach so many books in a school year to students, so hard choices have to be made, but straight up banning or burning books, or denying curriculum based on the criteria of race, ethnicity, or creed is wrong, in my opinion.

We're 100% in agreement. But various individuals or groups criticizing books is not the same as "banning" them. I'll agree that both "sides" denounce books from time to time. That's just us exercising our free speech. Actually banning books or removing them from libraries is a whole different thing.

Arguments over curriculum are a different sort of issue. Making a book inaccessible is entirely different from deciding which books should be taught in a curriculum. And "trigger warnings" in no way are equivalent to censorship or banning a book. The quoted piece is dripping with false equivalency.

As well, the article immediately gets off to a bad start, as Dr. Seuss books were not ever ‘banned’ …

https://www.inquirer.com/opinion/commen ... utType=amp

Regardless, I’m not sure that the issue of banning books quite rises to the level of what the legislation in the OP attempts to do, regarding snuffing out discussion of ‘positions’.

[canpakes]

Oh, I see. If you make a bigger ass of yourself for misunderstanding insurrection, then maybe people will not notice that you did not understand censure?

Cool. Good job with the insurrection distraction, and good job skipping over the censure/censor eff up. Good Job!!!!

As the word insurrection never appeared in that post, it looks like we have you to thank for that distraction.

[MeDotOrg]

January 6th was legitimate political discourse.
War is peace.
Slavery is freedom.
We have always been at war Eastasia.

I think a class in Newspeak is essential for understanding the language of the modern GOP.

Imagine if there were no Trump flags, no American Flags, No Confederate Flags, no Swastikas...That on January 6th you could not identify the political motivations of the demonstrators. Imagine if you could only identify them by their actions. How many people would say that the demonstrators constituted "legitimate political discourse"?

I don't know when the Republican Party officially took leave of its senses, but "legitimate political discourse" could serve as a bon voyage party.

by the way, here's Webster on the definition of discourse:

the use of words to exchange thoughts and ideas
[examples]
It's a word that doesn't have much use in ordinary discourse. [=conversation]
He likes to engage in lively discourse with his visitors.
public/political discourse

...so I guess January 6th was all about the use of words. Tell that to the dead and wounded.