I’d go a bit further back than 12 year, but yes.
1 Like
Held your hand enough, see above, Norwood v Harrison, if you can’t take it from there…
Dicta from an entirely irrelevant case isn’t precedent.
1 Like
Do I trust this WH and big tech to control “disinformation”? 
This WH and big tech are the biggest generators of disinformation that have ever existed. 
2 Likes
During WWII. the government asked corps to do all sorts of things to help our war efforts.
Out of line?
That would be in line with the 10th Amendment.
Unlike all progressivism at the federal level, which only persist because of Arbitrary governance.
Who do you trust to police “misinformation” and how have they earned your trust?
2 Likes
How have they earned your trust?
Was the effect to limit or silence third party speech?
During WWII, the government also “asked” Japanese Americans to move to and reside in specific locations. So I’m not sure government actions during that time period should be held as a high water mark in way of individual rights. Not to mention, I hear tell that the government was an institutional racist evil entity during that time frame.
Build back better…right?
2 Likes
I think you’re a little assed backwards here. You’re making this a competition to determine which politicians lie the most. News flash. The all lie. Bigly.
The point isn’t sinking in at all. Only one party is seeking to limit what their opposition can say. There is no credible movement on the right to shut down the opinions of those on the left.
Who do you trust to be in charge of speech and why do you trust them so much?
3 Likes
In one sentence you claim that they all lie and chastise me for choosing one over the other.
Then you claim that the left is limiting the right speech.
You clearly chose a side.
Why do YOU trust the right so much?
Stupid assumption. I said no such thing. I told you my concern and you totally ignored it.
Don’t overthink it. Read the bolded…Again.
The point isn’t sinking in at all. Only one party is seeking to limit what their opposition can say. There is no credible movement on the right to shut down the opinions of those on the left.
2 Likes
Fine. I’ll play this dumb game.
- only one party is seeking to limit voting by minorities
- only one party is gerry mandering redistricting to take votes away from opposition
That there is not true at all.
Blue states gerrymander redistricting to silence the rural voters in blue states.
Only dems are seeking to limit the rights of states to hold fair and honest elections by putting elections under the control of the fed to make it easier for the leftist to cheat.
Wrong on both counts. Both sides absolutely will gerrymander in order to get votes. Your vision of fair minded, democratic angels is a figment of your imagination. 
And…
Give me one example of how election security only effects minorities. In fact, give me the name of one single person who will be prevented from voting.
You drank the Koolaide.
1 Like
So you are saying both sides do it, yet you choose to support one side. That’s your choice. I’ll support the other. We both have our own reasons.
Nope. Not saying that at all. You just made that up. I’ll give you two examples. And if these go over your head, then we’re just gonna have to move on. Fair enough?
The republicans are not trying to limit the free speech of their opposition. We are not trying to cancel you.
I think we should go back to the Trump border policy because Biden’s policy is a nightmare.
There. Understand yet?
2 Likes
