That’s exactly my point.
Looking back at the statistical vote vs count.
More votes for trump than voting Republicans.
It wasn’t so much Trump as it was a big “just no” to HRC.
Which is why he lost in 20.
A carefully crafted limited engagement campaign protected Biden from the public eye. Those that just wanted something else not the status quo didn’t get to see behind the curtain.
The mistake they lean towards now is the potential of running here again.
The stubborn stupidity is going to put, maybe Trump, but likely far worse, in total power.
I’m no fan of the Republican Party. And definitely dislike, to the extreme, the far right.
But I’d vote for nearly anyone over here.
I’d explain the independent hatred of her, if you really don’t follow. But the fact is where it comes to some politicians—she’s one— we’d rather watch the world burn.
While I agree with 2 I find 1 to be lacking. You see this site has a tendency to support free speech.
But to do so with meaning, you must defend all speech. No matter how repugnant.
It’s without real meaning if one’s defence stoops at what is generally acceptable.
Where would we be today if everyone did that.
We have freedoms in literature because people fought for Canterbury Tales and Lady Chatterly.
We have freedom in film today because people stood up for Scarface back in the 30s as expression. From child Bride to Taxi. From Scarface to Saw.
Where would we be today if political speech was so easily cast aside. For this country was founded by casting aside the government across the sea with little care than its next paycheque of taxes.
As you side on what you think is an acceptable limit… I remind you of the Blacklist of the Cold War. Be careful where you draw your lines.
Should you one day wind up on the other side of someone else’s line.
I made a point of calling out the creator of a headline that clearly cheers on the deplatforming of a voice simply because they disagree with it.
Regardless of what the contents of the article discussed. It could have been about patriot jellybeans or communist card games or two headed talking fish from outer space.
It's never "OANN is a valid news source that has been treated unfairly because X", it's always "but mommy, MSNBC does the bad things tooooo!"
Well, that would be because I’ve seen nothing to say that OAN is a valid news source. Not having access to the station hinders any legitimate research.
If OAN is as bad as it is reported to be than it is an accurate comparison to make with MSNBC.
Note I didn’t mention CNN. Like Fox News CNN may have a strong bias but they still report news outside of the prime time-ish lineup of commentary.
What is it with people like you
Always having to immediately place anyone you don’t agree with in some termed class.
Because ‘people like me’ don’t get along well with the “people like you” group any more than we do in your group.
Ok… you can’t read a thread,
Or,
Your an idiot…
Maybe both.
The entirety of my post under this article is the author’s glowing joy and glee at the event.
I have made no comment, nor opinion, as to DT’s choice.
Only as to the writer of the title and less than unbiased wording of the article author as well. If they are not the same.
Though I’ve said before hiding beyond “Anonymous” Dora make you a “Coward”.
One thing, above all else: I don’t hide my views.
I study all and make my own opinion. Fuck anyone who demands I walk a party line.
(Fuck in the figurative sense unless they are willing and consenting; and supply std testing verification: papers please!).
“DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel’s Reach”
finally
That’s a key word there. One not necessary for the title unless it’s intended to be an addendum to the statement. An addition.
A declaration!
‘It has finally come to pass’
An non-biased title would be “DirectTV chooses not to renew OAN contract.”
But even as is, the dislike of the channel could have been without the speech aspect if finally, was left out.
The choice of word makes it clear there is joy in the non-renewal.
And never would a champion of free speech says ‘finally dumps’.
Then, you appear to have ignored their entire history.
Most of it; anyway.
It left, was dropped, whatever, Xfinity before it became a name in mainstream media enough to have known it was even a station.
From what I have read it’s just a right wing version of MSNBC spewing out conspiracies and commentary with no real news coverage.
Knee jerk?
I see an author praising the silencing of an opinion.
A statement in direct opposition to free speech. I didn’t say anything relating to Trump. And honestly have no clue what he has to do with OAN.
Other than OAN is reported to be a supporter of the stolen election myth.
The only time I've seen anything similar is in people so disappointed Bernie wasn't given the candidacy they went for Trump hoping once the US burns it'll take the corruption in both parties with it.
Your not far off. But there’s also the group that would never vote for HRC. Ever!
But for the Sanders block it wasn’t that he wasn’t “given” the election but that the DNC literally made sure he could not get it. Not once but twice.
There may not have been wide spread fraud in 16 and 20 but there was definitely wide spread corruption in the DNC in 15, 16, 19, and 20.
Are you similarly up in arms every time a TV show gets cancelled…
Well, no. Not usually. TV show cancellations don’t get news articles that often.
But I was up in arms over Enterprise and Stargate, both Atlantis, and Universe.
It still stings the way Primeval was cut.
Chicago Justice had a lot of promise!
Boston Legal died too soon.
But I’m not “up in arms” at all. Personally it doesn’t have anything to do with me. I’ve never had access to OAN on broadcast.
Generally I know very little of their content other than what liberal writers say and how they’re defended by conservative responses.
My entry here was the headline:
DirecTV Finally Dumps
Like it’s a good thing to silence someone you don’t like. Not just ignore it.
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: millions will dump direct
That’s exactly my point.
Looking back at the statistical vote vs count.
More votes for trump than voting Republicans.
It wasn’t so much Trump as it was a big “just no” to HRC.
Which is why he lost in 20.
A carefully crafted limited engagement campaign protected Biden from the public eye. Those that just wanted something else not the status quo didn’t get to see behind the curtain.
The mistake they lean towards now is the potential of running here again.
The stubborn stupidity is going to put, maybe Trump, but likely far worse, in total power.
I’m no fan of the Republican Party. And definitely dislike, to the extreme, the far right.
But I’d vote for nearly anyone over here.
I’d explain the independent hatred of her, if you really don’t follow. But the fact is where it comes to some politicians—she’s one— we’d rather watch the world burn.
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
While I agree with 2 I find 1 to be lacking. You see this site has a tendency to support free speech.
But to do so with meaning, you must defend all speech. No matter how repugnant.
It’s without real meaning if one’s defence stoops at what is generally acceptable.
Where would we be today if everyone did that.
We have freedoms in literature because people fought for Canterbury Tales and Lady Chatterly.
We have freedom in film today because people stood up for Scarface back in the 30s as expression. From child Bride to Taxi. From Scarface to Saw.
Where would we be today if political speech was so easily cast aside. For this country was founded by casting aside the government across the sea with little care than its next paycheque of taxes.
As you side on what you think is an acceptable limit… I remind you of the Blacklist of the Cold War. Be careful where you draw your lines.
Should you one day wind up on the other side of someone else’s line.
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I made a point of calling out the creator of a headline that clearly cheers on the deplatforming of a voice simply because they disagree with it.
Regardless of what the contents of the article discussed. It could have been about patriot jellybeans or communist card games or two headed talking fish from outer space.
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re: Stunning
That would make a great movie! 🎥 🍿
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Well, that would be because I’ve seen nothing to say that OAN is a valid news source. Not having access to the station hinders any legitimate research.
If OAN is as bad as it is reported to be than it is an accurate comparison to make with MSNBC.
Note I didn’t mention CNN. Like Fox News CNN may have a strong bias but they still report news outside of the prime time-ish lineup of commentary.
Always having to immediately place anyone you don’t agree with in some termed class.
Because ‘people like me’ don’t get along well with the “people like you” group any more than we do in your group.
We’re independents for a reason.
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Read the comment you auto-fired on.
I took issue with the false premise of a poster who was inaccurate.
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Ok… you can’t read a thread,
Or,
Your an idiot…
Maybe both.
The entirety of my post under this article is the author’s glowing joy and glee at the event.
I have made no comment, nor opinion, as to DT’s choice.
Only as to the writer of the title and less than unbiased wording of the article author as well. If they are not the same.
Though I’ve said before hiding beyond “Anonymous” Dora make you a “Coward”.
One thing, above all else: I don’t hide my views.
I study all and make my own opinion. Fuck anyone who demands I walk a party line.
(Fuck in the figurative sense unless they are willing and consenting; and supply std testing verification: papers please!).
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
“DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel’s Reach”
finally
That’s a key word there. One not necessary for the title unless it’s intended to be an addendum to the statement. An addition.
A declaration!
‘It has finally come to pass’
An non-biased title would be “DirectTV chooses not to renew OAN contract.”
But even as is, the dislike of the channel could have been without the speech aspect if finally, was left out.
The choice of word makes it clear there is joy in the non-renewal.
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
The headline says “Finally Dumps OAN”
And never would a champion of free speech says ‘finally dumps’.
Most of it; anyway.
It left, was dropped, whatever, Xfinity before it became a name in mainstream media enough to have known it was even a station.
From what I have read it’s just a right wing version of MSNBC spewing out conspiracies and commentary with no real news coverage.
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
No deductions.
Means
No deductions to abuse.
There’s nothing to “not see” in that.
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I fail to see how removing all deductions and switching to a minimum taxable base allows for exploiting deduction loopholes.
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
Knee jerk?
I see an author praising the silencing of an opinion.
A statement in direct opposition to free speech. I didn’t say anything relating to Trump. And honestly have no clue what he has to do with OAN.
Other than OAN is reported to be a supporter of the stolen election myth.
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
… protecting their right to speech as a voice?
Or that the same people who make claims of “finally” would be crying to anyone who is within earshot if it went off the air?
That the same people who jump on “finally” would be jawing about the evils of the world if a liberal network was cut?
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re:
Yes. I made no comment on DirectTV at all.
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re:
The politicised headline. “Finally”.
That fanfare for the loss of another network.
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re:
Although I support the right to be heard as long as it doesn’t come at the expense of others.
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re: Re: millions will dump direct
Your not far off. But there’s also the group that would never vote for HRC. Ever!
But for the Sanders block it wasn’t that he wasn’t “given” the election but that the DNC literally made sure he could not get it. Not once but twice.
There may not have been wide spread fraud in 16 and 20 but there was definitely wide spread corruption in the DNC in 15, 16, 19, and 20.
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re: Re:
I haven’t seen an article saying it was cancelled. That’s too bad. Yet another loss of choice.
I don’t see anywhere where the author of this article told me to be upset. Quite the opposite, he/she cheers for cancellation.
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re:
Well, no. Not usually. TV show cancellations don’t get news articles that often.
But I was up in arms over Enterprise and Stargate, both Atlantis, and Universe.
It still stings the way Primeval was cut.
Chicago Justice had a lot of promise!
Boston Legal died too soon.
But I’m not “up in arms” at all. Personally it doesn’t have anything to do with me. I’ve never had access to OAN on broadcast.
Generally I know very little of their content other than what liberal writers say and how they’re defended by conservative responses.
My entry here was the headline:
Like it’s a good thing to silence someone you don’t like. Not just ignore it.
On the post: DirecTV Finally Dumps OAN, Limiting The Conspiracy And Propaganda Channel's Reach
Re: Re: Re:
Why would they. The vast majority of politicians exploit those very loopholes.
The problem isn’t tax rates!
It’s all the ways knowledgeable people use to get out of taxes.
Next >>