Sure they are. If I want to say something in my off time that I know that my employer will not like and will fire me if I state it, is a censor of speech.

TexasAggie73 said:

---

Sure they are. If I want to say something in my off time that I know that my employer will not like and will fire me if I state it, is a censor of speech.

---

Your employer is the state? Your employer can fire for almost any action you do thats not consistent with their values. HTH

Buck Turgidson said:

---

We're in a war. Pick a ****ing side or get off the battlefield.

---

The vast majority of the people you consider to be your enemies are just trying to exist and live their lives in peace. You are on a fringe extreme, looking at a few on the opposite fringe extreme, and claiming everyone between you are also combatants.

We are not, and you and those like you on both sides are the only real enemies in this war.

Apollo79 said:

---

TexasAggie73 said:

---

Sure they are. If I want to say something in my off time that I know that my employer will not like and will fire me if I state it, is a censor of speech.

---

Your employer is the state? Your employer can fire for almost any action you do thats not consistent with their values. HTH

---

That's true, but my point was that if I know a statement would could get me fired, I'm not going to say it. That's censorship. They can't fire me for what I think.

TexasAggie73 said:

---

Apollo79 said:

---

TexasAggie73 said:

---

Sure they are. If I want to say something in my off time that I know that my employer will not like and will fire me if I state it, is a censor of speech.

---

Your employer is the state? Your employer can fire for almost any action you do thats not consistent with their values. HTH

---

That's true, but my point was that if I know a statement would could get me fired, I'm not going to say it. That's censorship. They can't fire me for what I think.

---

no that's not censorship that's you adhering to the terms of your employment no one is forcing you to work somewhere...You could quit and say what you want under your own identity.

Apollo79 said:

---

TexasAggie73 said:

---

Apollo79 said:

---

TexasAggie73 said:

---

Sure they are. If I want to say something in my off time that I know that my employer will not like and will fire me if I state it, is a censor of speech.

---

Your employer is the state? Your employer can fire for almost any action you do thats not consistent with their values. HTH

---

That's true, but my point was that if I know a statement would could get me fired, I'm not going to say it. That's censorship. They can't fire me for what I think.

---

no that's not censorship that's you adhering to the terms of your employment no one is forcing you to work somewhere...You could quit and say what you want under your own identity.

---

Both of us could be right.

Queso1 said:

---

The left wants to censor speech. The right wants to censor speech. People on the right decried cancel culture and yet here they are cancelling away. You know who you are.

I have always voted conservative because I saw it as the best option to avoid authoritarianism. I dismissed people saying the right was authoritarian. But, after the last few days and Bondi's statement, I really don't know anymore. To hear a conservative AG spew **** about hate speech sent a chill up my spine. Sure I despise the left and what they say, but they have the right to say it.

I'm sure many will reply with "are you concerned?" and the standard braindead mocking replies. Others will engage in ad hominem attacks. People will say that private companies have the right to censor - sure they do…and I'd probably have bought that argument until I heard what Bondi said. I've been outspoken about the leftists, but if you support this stuff, **** YOU TOO.

If you support this, you are no better than the leftists that quelled free speech the last decade.

I feel like a dog without a home.

---

What we need is less spineless leaders in the private sector. Stand with your convictions and quit placating the latest outrage. Stand for SOMETHING.

The public will vote with our pocket books and exercise free speech. If the leadership in the private sector chose wrong, let them go down with the ship and determine if they should have been more introspective. They should not cave so easily to our pushback if they truly support employees celebrating an innocent person's assassination, etc.

I would love to think they are responding to their conscience, but in reality most only care about profits and sway with the wind. Not our fault.

Here is the interview section of Carr where he makes the comments: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOtv3mSEsRL/

Quote:

---

"The broadcasters have a license granted by us at the FCC and that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest. [...] Frankly, when you see stuff like this. I mean look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct and take action, frankly on Kimmel, or there will be additional work for the FCC ahead".

---

Full interview:

This is a regulator making a threat. Not cool.

Jbob04 said:

---

OP sounds "concerned"

---

The OP has a solidly conservative posting history and I get what he is saying. Where i disagree is his point the right is now censoring speech. True, the left started this and ran with it so hard they broke the Union. Unfortunately this is now a war and for now its verbal.

The OP's mistake is the idea we can share a political entity with this version of the left. THAT IS NOT POSSIBLE. Anyone that thinks it is is ignoring history and reality. After the nightmare Biden years its seems clear a victory for the right is victory for the America as founded. The left today is nothing like the left of 1960, or 1970, or even 1990. They are completely alien to the American experience. Co-existence is not longer possible

These people would grind us to powder if they could. Sorry Queso the days you are thinking of died around 2012 to 2014ish

Queso1 said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

Queso1 said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

Queso1 said:

---

Why do people keep focusing on Kimmel? I don't know enough about the Kimmel issue. But since people keep bringing it up: if the administration and the FCC pressured ABC to cancel him, that is censorship - the same as when the Biden admin pressured social media. Neither are acceptable in our republic. But I don't have evidence of that right now, so I'm not going down that rabbit hole. If it was a private company doing private things, I don't care and I'll laugh at Kimmel. I haven't liked him since the Man Show.

I really don't care about the private companies firing people for offensive tripe.

My biggest issue is what Bondi said. I don't care if she walked it back or not. She said it and she meant it.

---

We are all against government censorship...and many are not happy with Bondi, for multiple reasons. What do you want from us?

---

Did I make a call for action? I don't think I did. I'm not asking anything of you or from anyone on this board. I posted a topic for discussion. Chill out.

---

How about you take a look at the grotesque nature of your modern democrat freakshow party. How about the unprecedented and tyrannical "vaccine mandates"?

How about how 90% of liberals thought I should be fired and my family should suffer immensely? 60% wanted me forced by government into lockdown until I complied. THIRTY PERCENT wanted my children taken away.

How about focus on the deviant and hate fueled freakshow that is the modern left? It is an absolute carney show of deranged freaks. They HATE free speech...they HATE our second amendment.

---

You don't need to read all my post history. But at least have the courtesy to read the post you are replying to. How about you read my post? Especially the point where I clearly stated that I vote conservative. HTH

---

Agree. This is a very important point people. That said, as stated above I respectfully disagree with your current conclusions. But I do understand.

Good post!

I also understand where Queso coming from.
As I said above, no one's being canceled right now. And while the current government has not done anything unconstitutional,Bondi & Carr need to be more careful with their words'!


Free speech is more important now than any time. It must be protected, and when people on our side, say things against free speech, we need to all be willing to speak out.

Republican Sen. Ted Cruz says that recent statements from the Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission (FCC), Brendan Carr, prior to and after Jimmy Kimmel Live! was removed from air by ABC, are “dangerous as hell,” stating that Carr explicitly threatened to revoke ABC’s… pic.twitter.com/m9sXg6s40T

— OSINTdefender (@sentdefender) September 19, 2025

Queso1 said:

---

The left wants to censor speech. The right wants to censor speech. People on the right decried cancel culture and yet here they are cancelling away. You know who you are.

I have always voted conservative because I saw it as the best option to avoid authoritarianism. I dismissed people saying the right was authoritarian. But, after the last few days and Bondi's statement, I really don't know anymore. To hear a conservative AG spew **** about hate speech sent a chill up my spine. Sure I despise the left and what they say, but they have the right to say it.

I'm sure many will reply with "are you concerned?" and the standard braindead mocking replies. Others will engage in ad hominem attacks. People will say that private companies have the right to censor - sure they do…and I'd probably have bought that argument until I heard what Bondi said. I've been outspoken about the leftists, but if you support this stuff, **** YOU TOO.

If you support this, you are no better than the leftists that quelled free speech the last decade.

I feel like a dog without a home.

---

Could you provide any specific examples of when any Republican has actively used the government to violate the laws and the 1st Amendment?

this I can agree with.

Eso si, Que es said:

---

I agree. The right should not censor speech.


Show me the censorship and I will shout it down

---

Trump, yesterday, on Air Force One: "I have read some place that the networks were 97% against me, again, 97% negative, and yet I won and easily [in last year's election]," the president said. They give me only bad publicity [and] press. I mean, they're getting a licence. I would think maybe their licence should be taken away."

This following the upcoming cancellation of Colbert. Sure, the shows were in the red. They were also not even considered for cancellation until both parent companies received threats from the Administration while waiting for FCC approval of multi-billion dollar mergers.

The administration has threatened to withhold federal funding from universities that do not comply with its policies. And has instigated actions against several, essentially blackmailing them to become compliant with the Administration's vision of allowable information.

Book bans.

Rewriting and/or erasing history that informs that the greatness of America also has its dark side, including museums emphasizing slavery as being such a bad thing.

Retaliatory actions taken against law firms that had lawyers who took part in legal actions against Trump.

Purge of FBI agents and federal prosecutors who were just doing their job, when that job was investigating charges against Trump or January 6 defendants.

Lawsuits against several media outlets for no reason other than Trump was butt hurt about things that were said or written about him.

Start shouting.

AggiePops said:

---

Eso si, Que es said:

---

I agree. The right should not censor speech.


Show me the censorship and I will shout it down

---

Trump, yesterday, on Air Force One: "I have read some place that the networks were 97% against me, again, 97% negative, and yet I won and easily [in last year's election]," the president said. They give me only bad publicity [and] press. I mean, they're getting a licence. I would think maybe their licence should be taken away."

This following the upcoming cancellation of Colbert. Sure, the shows were in the red. They were also not even considered for cancellation until both parent companies received threats from the Administration while waiting for FCC approval of multi-billion dollar mergers.

The administration has threatened to withhold federal funding from universities that do not comply with its policies. And has instigated actions against several, essentially blackmailing them to become compliant with the Administration's vision of allowable information.

Book bans.

Rewriting and/or erasing history that informs that the greatness of America also has its dark side, including museums emphasizing slavery as being such a bad thing.

Retaliatory actions taken against law firms that had lawyers who took part in legal actions against Trump.

Purge of FBI agents and federal prosecutors who were just doing their job, when that job was investigating charges against Trump or January 6 defendants.

Lawsuits against several media outlets for no reason other than Trump was butt hurt about things that were said or written about him.

Start shouting.

---

none of that is censorship try again.

RangerRick9211 said:

---

Here is the interview section of Carr where he makes the comments: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOtv3mSEsRL/

Quote:

---

"The broadcasters have a license granted by us at the FCC and that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest. [...] Frankly, when you see stuff like this. I mean look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct and take action, frankly on Kimmel, or there will be additional work for the FCC ahead".

---

Full interview:

This is a regulator making a threat. Not cool.

---

dont ABC, NBC, and CBS pay a license to broadcast on bands owned by the govt? The pay a nominal fee to be able to utilize bands that can reach every household for free. And they make a tone of money from it. The government should be able to pull those licenses at anytime. That would force these companies to pay for cable broadcasting like every other channel.

TexasAggie73 said:

---

Apollo79 said:

---

TexasAggie73 said:

---

Apollo79 said:

---

TexasAggie73 said:

---

Sure they are. If I want to say something in my off time that I know that my employer will not like and will fire me if I state it, is a censor of speech.

---

Your employer is the state? Your employer can fire for almost any action you do thats not consistent with their values. HTH

---

That's true, but my point was that if I know a statement would could get me fired, I'm not going to say it. That's censorship. They can't fire me for what I think.

---

no that's not censorship that's you adhering to the terms of your employment no one is forcing you to work somewhere...You could quit and say what you want under your own identity.

---

Both of us could be right.

---

getting fired for something that you said (or did) that counters your employers code of conduct is not censorship. In any form. you are not right.

RangerRick9211 said:

---

Here is the interview section of Carr where he makes the comments: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOtv3mSEsRL/

Quote:

---

"The broadcasters have a license granted by us at the FCC and that comes with it an obligation to operate in the public interest. [...] Frankly, when you see stuff like this. I mean look, we can do this the easy way or the hard way. These companies can find ways to change conduct and take action, frankly on Kimmel, or there will be additional work for the FCC ahead".

---

Full interview:

This is a regulator making a threat. Not cool.

---

The police should not investigate and prosecute crimes. That wouldn't be cool.

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

knoxtom said:

---

Here is just how bad it really is...

Kimmel didn't really say a bad word about Kirk. When it happened he tweeted about how bad murder was and how Kirk's killing should not have happened.

In his "joke" Kimmel also didn't say anything bad about Kirk. He said Magas were trying to change the facts, then he said Trump was asked about it and started talking about the ballroom instead. There was literally nothing EVER said by Kimmel about Kirk himself.


So what is this really about?

Trump hates Kimmel because Kimmel has made his living by making fun of Trump. This is a fact.
Nexstar wants to merge and create the largest station ownership group in America. This is a fact.
In order to exceed 39% ownership of stations in America an ownership group must get FCC approval. This is a fact.
Trump told his FCC to block the merger unless they got rid of Kimmel. This is a fact.
The FCC boss told Nexstar that it would be blocked if they didn't get rid of Kimmel. Again - fact
Nexstar sidelined Kimmel and won't let him back until Trump says he has kissed the ring enough. This is not a fact, but is obvious enough. Nexstar gave Kimmel a list of demands before they will put his show back on. It is a silly vague list that no one could ever comply with. "Make a significant personal donation to Kirk's family" How vague is that? What will be enough to be significant? It is silly.


I have no idea what people are all up in arms about with Kimmel. He literally never made fun of Kirk, he made fun of Trump and Magas. In addition, Kimmel went out of his way to discuss just how bad this murder was.

---

BS...why is it part of your freakish religion to lie?

Quote:

---

"We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them, and doing everything they can to score political points from it," the host said.

---

He is literally blaming MAGA republicans for his death.

And again, Kimmel SHOULD HAVE BEEN fired when he openly fantasize about hospitals refusing medical treatment to the unvaccinated and letting them die horrific deaths.

But again, why is every living breathing modern liberal a childish, pathological liar?

---

You have ran with the narrative that Kimmel was sidelined for being awful to Kirk, but now you are posting it is for being nasty to MAGA? Wow, you are such a childish pathological liar.

Here is everything Kimmel said about Kirk, it was in an instagram post, not twitter. I guess this mistake makes me a childish pathological liar, right? Isn't that what you just said, all libs are childish pathological liars. Weird that you are changing your story and also calling others liars.

Kimmel - "Instead of the angry finger-pointing, can we just for one day agree that it is horrible and monstrous to shoot another human?" he posted on Instagram. "On behalf of my family, we send love to the Kirks and to all the children, parents, and innocents who fall victim to senseless gun violence."


This entire thing has nothing to do with Kimmel and Kirk, Kimmel was quite respectful to Kirk. This is Trump being Trump and using his mob tactics to take out a perceived enemy.

MooreTrucker said:

---

Freedom of speech is a fundamental right.

Also, companies/corporations have the right to fire folks who speak in a way that reflects poorly on their employers, on either side.

Already posted, but can't be said enough, because some people are too dumb to get it:

Freedom of speech is NOT freedom from responsibility and consequences.

---

Freedom is the will to be responsible for ourselves. It is to preserve the distance which separates us from other men. To grow more indifferent to hardship, to severity, to privation, and even to life itself.

Friedrich Nietzsche

AggiePops said:

---

Eso si, Que es said:

---

I agree. The right should not censor speech.


Show me the censorship and I will shout it down

---

Trump, yesterday, on Air Force One: "I have read some place that the networks were 97% against me, again, 97% negative, and yet I won and easily [in last year's election]," the president said. They give me only bad publicity [and] press. I mean, they're getting a licence. I would think maybe their licence should be taken away."

This following the upcoming cancellation of Colbert. Sure, the shows were in the red. They were also not even considered for cancellation until both parent companies received threats from the Administration while waiting for FCC approval of multi-billion dollar mergers.

The administration has threatened to withhold federal funding from universities that do not comply with its policies. And has instigated actions against several, essentially blackmailing them to become compliant with the Administration's vision of allowable information.

Book bans.

Rewriting and/or erasing history that informs that the greatness of America also has its dark side, including museums emphasizing slavery as being such a bad thing.

Retaliatory actions taken against law firms that had lawyers who took part in legal actions against Trump.

Purge of FBI agents and federal prosecutors who were just doing their job, when that job was investigating charges against Trump or January 6 defendants.

Lawsuits against several media outlets for no reason other than Trump was butt hurt about things that were said or written about him.

Start shouting.

---

That post is delusional.

Logos Stick said:

---

knoxtom said:

---

Here is just how bad it really is...

Kimmel didn't really say a bad word about Kirk. When it happened he tweeted about how bad murder was and how Kirk's killing should not have happened.

In his "joke" Kimmel also didn't say anything bad about Kirk. He said Magas were trying to change the facts, then he said Trump was asked about it and started talking about the ballroom instead. There was literally nothing EVER said by Kimmel about Kirk himself.


So what is this really about?

Trump hates Kimmel because Kimmel has made his living by making fun of Trump. This is a fact.
Nexstar wants to merge and create the largest station ownership group in America. This is a fact.
In order to exceed 39% ownership of stations in America an ownership group must get FCC approval. This is a fact.
Trump told his FCC to block the merger unless they got rid of Kimmel. This is a fact.
The FCC boss told Nexstar that it would be blocked if they didn't get rid of Kimmel. Again - fact
Nexstar sidelined Kimmel and won't let him back until Trump says he has kissed the ring enough. This is not a fact, but is obvious enough. Nexstar gave Kimmel a list of demands before they will put his show back on. It is a silly vague list that no one could ever comply with. "Make a significant personal donation to Kirk's family" How vague is that? What will be enough to be significant? It is silly.


I have no idea what people are all up in arms about with Kimmel. He literally never made fun of Kirk, he made fun of Trump and Magas. In addition, Kimmel went out of his way to discuss just how bad this murder was.

---

Source?

---

How about Ted Cruz a couple posts down talking about how dangerous it is to use the FCC licensure process to stop objective speech. Although I guess he is a lib now. How about you just google Nexstar merger?

knoxtom said:

---

El Gallo Blanco said:

---

knoxtom said:

---

Here is just how bad it really is...

Kimmel didn't really say a bad word about Kirk. When it happened he tweeted about how bad murder was and how Kirk's killing should not have happened.

In his "joke" Kimmel also didn't say anything bad about Kirk. He said Magas were trying to change the facts, then he said Trump was asked about it and started talking about the ballroom instead. There was literally nothing EVER said by Kimmel about Kirk himself.


So what is this really about?

Trump hates Kimmel because Kimmel has made his living by making fun of Trump. This is a fact.
Nexstar wants to merge and create the largest station ownership group in America. This is a fact.
In order to exceed 39% ownership of stations in America an ownership group must get FCC approval. This is a fact.
Trump told his FCC to block the merger unless they got rid of Kimmel. This is a fact.
The FCC boss told Nexstar that it would be blocked if they didn't get rid of Kimmel. Again - fact
Nexstar sidelined Kimmel and won't let him back until Trump says he has kissed the ring enough. This is not a fact, but is obvious enough. Nexstar gave Kimmel a list of demands before they will put his show back on. It is a silly vague list that no one could ever comply with. "Make a significant personal donation to Kirk's family" How vague is that? What will be enough to be significant? It is silly.


I have no idea what people are all up in arms about with Kimmel. He literally never made fun of Kirk, he made fun of Trump and Magas. In addition, Kimmel went out of his way to discuss just how bad this murder was.

---

BS...why is it part of your freakish religion to lie?

Quote:

---

"We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them, and doing everything they can to score political points from it," the host said.

---

He is literally blaming MAGA republicans for his death.

And again, Kimmel SHOULD HAVE BEEN fired when he openly fantasize about hospitals refusing medical treatment to the unvaccinated and letting them die horrific deaths.

But again, why is every living breathing modern liberal a childish, pathological liar?

---

You have ran with the narrative that Kimmel was sidelined for being awful to Kirk, but now you are posting it is for being nasty to MAGA? Wow, you are such a childish pathological liar.

Here is everything Kimmel said about Kirk, it was in an instagram post, not twitter. I guess this mistake makes me a childish pathological liar, right? Isn't that what you just said, all libs are childish pathological liars. Weird that you are changing your story and also calling others liars.

Kimmel - "Instead of the angry finger-pointing, can we just for one day agree that it is horrible and monstrous to shoot another human?" he posted on Instagram. "On behalf of my family, we send love to the Kirks and to all the children, parents, and innocents who fall victim to senseless gun violence."


This entire thing has nothing to do with Kimmel and Kirk, Kimmel was quite respectful to Kirk. This is Trump being Trump and using his mob tactics to take out a perceived enemy.

---

Can you not read? He said he was fired for lying about the perp being MAGA.

You respond "Kimmel was not awful to Kirk".

Wtf are you talking about?!

knoxtom said:

---

Logos Stick said:

---

knoxtom said:

---

Here is just how bad it really is...

Kimmel didn't really say a bad word about Kirk. When it happened he tweeted about how bad murder was and how Kirk's killing should not have happened.

In his "joke" Kimmel also didn't say anything bad about Kirk. He said Magas were trying to change the facts, then he said Trump was asked about it and started talking about the ballroom instead. There was literally nothing EVER said by Kimmel about Kirk himself.


So what is this really about?

Trump hates Kimmel because Kimmel has made his living by making fun of Trump. This is a fact.
Nexstar wants to merge and create the largest station ownership group in America. This is a fact.
In order to exceed 39% ownership of stations in America an ownership group must get FCC approval. This is a fact.
Trump told his FCC to block the merger unless they got rid of Kimmel. This is a fact.
The FCC boss told Nexstar that it would be blocked if they didn't get rid of Kimmel. Again - fact
Nexstar sidelined Kimmel and won't let him back until Trump says he has kissed the ring enough. This is not a fact, but is obvious enough. Nexstar gave Kimmel a list of demands before they will put his show back on. It is a silly vague list that no one could ever comply with. "Make a significant personal donation to Kirk's family" How vague is that? What will be enough to be significant? It is silly.


I have no idea what people are all up in arms about with Kimmel. He literally never made fun of Kirk, he made fun of Trump and Magas. In addition, Kimmel went out of his way to discuss just how bad this murder was.

---

Source?

---

How about Ted Cruz a couple posts down talking about how dangerous it is to use the FCC licensure process to stop objective speech. Although I guess he is a lib now. How about you just google Nexstar merger?

---

Show me the source of your claim that Nexstar took Kimmel off to garner favor for their merger. Thanks.

WTH do you call it? I'm conservative but I don't want an echo chamber of a country. The far left and right have the loudest voice right now bc most everyday folks are wanting to co-exist. We should be working as a "union of the people" but that hasn't happened for the last 5 years and it's not on track to do so the next 4. If we cannot figure out a way to work together, understand who we are, etc, wtf is the point of a Constitutional Republic

The left is jailing people over speech all over the world. The right is arguing that actions have consequences.

Good thing the government didn't take Kimmel off the air like they silenced conservatives.

You can say whatever you want, but if you have a job that utilizes public airwaves to communicate what you say, there very well may be consequences. The networks decided they would not carry Kimmel and if you have not heard, rather than planning an apology, he planned to go on a rant and explain that he was misunderstood - sorry, no one is believing that hog wash. Where was your disgust when the left came for Tucker Carlton's job? However, these are totally different. In Tuckers case, the Biden admin essentially insisted he be fired but with Kimmel, the broadcast partners decided his message was no longer something that their viewers were interested in and that have that right. If Disney wants to continue to broadcast him to a minuscule subset of viewers, that is their choice. Instead they decided it wasn't in their best interest - probably due to his decreasing viewership. He fked around - now he gets to find out.

"This following the upcoming cancellation of Colbert. Sure, the shows were in the red. They were also not even considered for cancellation until both parent companies received threats from the Administration while waiting for FCC approval of multi-billion dollar mergers."

You can't possibly know this. You are making stuff up.

austinrb10 said:

---

WTH do you call it? I'm conservative but I don't want an echo chamber of a country. The far left and right have the loudest voice right now bc most everyday folks are wanting to co-exist. We should be working as a "union of the people" but that hasn't happened for the last 5 years and it's not on track to do so the next 4. If we cannot figure out a way to work together, understand who we are, etc, wtf is the point of a Constitutional Republic

---

The far right has no influence at all. The left is "far left". There is no moderate left. I have nothing in common with the left. So no, I'm not interested in working as a union of people. The left is killing conservatives.

titan said:

---

Taking licenses away is excessive and would rightly be risky. Would much prefer a fine system for definite lies and physical violence peddling. Not protracted cases --- you just get dinged in a way you feel every way want to talk like an a---. And it might lose its attraction.

---

Slander and libel laws need to be thoroughly re-examined.

austinrb10 said:

---

WTH do you call it? I'm conservative but I don't want an echo chamber of a country. The far left and right have the loudest voice right now bc most everyday folks are wanting to co-exist. We should be working as a "union of the people" but that hasn't happened for the last 5 years and it's not on track to do so the next 4. If we cannot figure out a way to work together, understand who we are, etc, wtf is the point of a Constitutional Republic

---

let me know when citizens are being thrown in jail for speech or not allowed to speak their voice, I seem to recall there were huge No Kings protests a few month ago. So Im not seeing MUH FredOOM of sPPEECh BeING CEnsored


Also, only censorship I see was Charlie Kirk being killed for his speech...ill hang up and listen.

You illustrated my point. You see no one on the left that actually has more in common with a conservative than their left brethren bc you fail to see it or you are simply further right than you claim to be. They are there. They just have their heads in the sand. One of my employees told me after Kirk's death that he inspired her to vote more conservative (she's in the heart of Virginia/DC). She's not straight ticket but she is getting there. That is where our focus needs to be

It's been a loooooong time since I was happy for my Ted Cruz vote.

Good job Ted. Let em have it.

HTownAg98 said:

---

TheEternalOptimist said:

---

Queso1 said:

---

The left wants to censor speech. The right wants to censor speech. People on the right decried cancel culture and yet here they are cancelling away. You know who you are.

I have always voted conservative because I saw it as the best option to avoid authoritarianism. I dismissed people saying the right was authoritarian. But, after the last few days and Bondi's statement, I really don't know anymore. To hear a conservative AG spew **** about hate speech sent a chill up my spine. Sure I despise the left and what they say, but they have the right to say it.

I'm sure many will reply with "are you concerned?" and the standard braindead mocking replies. Others will engage in ad hominem attacks. People will say that private companies have the right to censor - sure they do…and I'd probably have bought that argument until I heard what Bondi said. I've been outspoken about the leftists, but if you support this stuff, **** YOU TOO.

If you support this, you are no better than the leftists that quelled free speech the last decade.

I feel like a dog without a home.

---

The founding fathers intended for citizens to be able to get on TikTok and perform macabre celebrations of an innocent American citizen's public murder.

They also wanted Texas St students to be able to crash a vigil and mockingly re-enact that murder as well while calling other students 'N*****R'.

That is what you are saying.

---

I'll say it. Yes, that's what they said. I'm not sure if there were other mitigating factors in the Tx State situation, but making fun of people doing a vigil is definitely protected speech, regardless of how distasteful anyone feels it is.

---

First Amendment


Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

Just where in this amendment does say companies can not fire people?