Propaganda - and Social Media - and Free Speech

Which current law requires social media sites to not censor posts?

 

LOL. The irony of this your latest in a string of perpetual ad homs is thick like country pudding.

Fallacy. But I'll give you a chance to support your fallacious argument: On what legal basis do you believe the above?

The 14th Amendment begs to differ.

Your lack of language precision does not translate to my lack of understanding.

 

The one he's going to make up out of thin air...

 

None that I know of .. do you know of one ?

 

LOL ... you have no clue what a fallacy is .. then run around claiming language precision .. what a joke.

The 14th amendment differs how .. back up your naked claim

and do try to figure out that if Congress wants to make a law protecting free speech from the actions of a Monopoly - thay can do so.

 

So you know of no such laws yet you made the claim below…

If you know of no such laws then how can you claim it’s a “statement of fact that any entity can be legally required not to censor free speech”???
Do you ever remember what you post?

 

Just because Congress has yet to make a law - does not mean they can not do so in the future. Congress has the power to make law -- did you not know this ?

Do you need it to be proved that Congress has the power to make law ? what kind of silliness is this ?

 

Oh look at you changing your story. Hahahaha. You’re all over the place.

 

I know you literally just posted one.

The joke is your horrific use of the language and then turning around to harangue your readers, blaming them for your barely-decipherable screeds.

I'm not doing your homework for you. But I'll give you a hint: The 14th Amendment contains the phrase equal protection.

And be slapped down by the USSC within milliseconds of the brief landing on their docket.

 

They no longer behave as private entities and in fact are no more private than Pravda was. They are simply just another propaganda arm for the Democratic party with the power to regulate speech on behalf of same..

 

Nonsense. You are free to post all day every day on any social media site. Stop with the hysterics.

 

You realize of course that refusing to see the obvious makes it no less on ious to others...

 

I can’t help if you refuse to see the obvious. That’s on you to deal with.

 

Not to put too fine a point on it, but the Democratic Party is a private entities. So what you are really suggesting is that two private entities are cooperating. I suppose that could be considered in-kind support in violation of campaign finance laws.

 

It is sir you that refuses to note the obvious.

 

I am totally aware that you refuse to note the obvious. Don’t you worry yourself over that.

 

At the least...

 

Another laughable joke of a post -- nothign but unsupported accusations - and some gibberish about the 14th amendment being a factor but no explanation of how. .. and this is your homework not mind, .. you brought up the 14th amendment.

Then you pretend to be able to predict that actions of Scotus - about a topic of which you have absolutely no clue .. as demonstrated previously by you not being able to figure out the difference between essential liberty and acts of violence or harm against another person - yet to figure out that walking up to some black person in a bar and calling them the N-Word -- has a good chance of you getting a punch in the face.

Nope .. don't think we put much weight in that prediction Padawon. --- no go get an argument .. or need we teach you what that is as well ?

Did you need the "What is an Argument" lesson ?

 

I told you why you're wrong. That you don't like my answer is not my problem. But what else should I expect from a government-loving hard left statist authoritarian... you have not failed to disappoint me in that regard.

 

@ECA I see you didn't dare address that post. I wonder why that is.......

 

Might you point me towards that part of the US Constitution that mentions corporations?

Do you favor that sophistry known as 'corporate personhood'? Wasn't Mitt Romney the politician who introduced us to that term?

 

Corporations are made up by people. Corporations, made up of people, are also protected by the Constitution. The citizen does not waive his rights by forming a corporation.

 

I've owned several corporations in my life. Corporation is a useful tool.

Corporations owned and controlled by moral men can achieve good things. Corporations owned and controlled by amoral or immoral men can achieve wicked things.

I've read the US Constitution many times, and do not recall any mention of corporations at all. I cannot find anything to support your claim that they are 'protected' by the document. Maybe you can help me with that?

 

And state capitalism is anti-free market.
Probably why Lenin, and now the CCP, chose state capitalism as an economic model.

 

It is the best way to organize capital while limiting liabilities of individual stakeholders. I have founded, dissolved, or sold several corporations as well.

OK.

OK.

OK.

The Constitution also doesn't reference chocolate cake. But you have a right to eat chocolate cake. Please remember, the Constitution doesn't exist to tell the citizen (or a group of them as in a corporation) what he may do; it exists to tell the state what it may not do.

Mitt Romney didn't introduce the concept of corporate personhood, sorry. It has been a concept in law since the beginnings of the nation. The many and various laws regarding corporations -- much of it now flowing from the various revisions of the MBCA -- treat a corporation as a legal person. The only place where this differs significantly from a living person is in civil liability and taxation. Each state has the authority to set its own statutes regarding corporations, thus they vary widely from state to state as I'm sure you know. But the laws of every state treat a corporation as a legal person. Facebook -- incorporated in Deleware -- is a legal person as far as the law is concerned. As such, it enjoys the same constitutional protections as you and I.

Was that enough help? I have to get back to running my corporation.