Free speech rights don’t end when the GOP vice presidential nominee is profiting off hate speech.
So that means that people who have noticed that JD Vance is profiting off hate speech against America have the right to say it out loud.
Sorry, conservatives.
But if you don’t agree that normal people have the right to speak up and disagree with JD Vance, keep voting for people like JD Vance. They’ll take care of it.
According to Google, there are DOZENS of them. People, are weird. Not the creepy weird couch fucker kind of weird, but the amusing for their eccentricity weird.
"Double standards, it’s the only kind they’ve got!" Just like all of their arguments are rooted in bad faith strawman BS. It only works because mass media equivocates and sells it as if there's no impartial way to tell who's full of shit. Lazy bastards are going to get 1/3 of us in a jam.
Don't want to be associated with a site's content? It's pretty easy. withdraw all financial support, sell your shares in the company that supports it to stop making money from it, don't support them in any way. Why hasn't he done this yet?? Financial support and taking profits from it, yes you are at least not averse to the content.
I sure with the US could pass a law like they have in Germany which prohibits publicly denying the Holocaust and disseminating Nazi propaganda, both off- and online. However, the 1A forbids this.
Nope he'd be promoting his people's skillset; 'the hand-pieced quilts, handwoven coverlets, split oak egg baskets, and other “necessary” crafts once common to every remote household. In the Appalachian mountains of East Tennessee, art was often the result of need. The nonindustrialized Appalachian people were self-reliant, making do with materials at hand, crafting the cabins they lived in and all the furnishings, growing the flax and raising the sheep for the carding, spinning, and weaving of cloth for their clothing, and making any needed household implements, farming tools, toys, and bedding from the materials at hand'
"It’s a dishonest straw man to suggest that just because someone believes in free speech rights online that they also personally endorse that speech."
No, it's not dishonest. if you allow the speech, it definitely means you endorse it. You don't have to agree with it but you're endorsing it to be part of the public discourse. These morons don't know what the First Amendment is.
HAHHAHAHAHAHA! "Human Adobe pinch tool Charlie Kirk"
Ta, Marcie. Yes, double standards are the only kind they've got, and even they are sub standard.
It's a good thing they have a double standard because otherwise they would have no standards at all.
He's got a point. If the Washington Post doesn't filter out Nazi propaganda, why should Rumble?
If you are not going to filter out the shit that's fit to print from the shit that's not then all you get is bull shit.
Wow. JD has really adopted the patented 'just when you thought he couldn't be worse' ethos from PAB.
God these beings are horrible dumpster fires.
Free speech rights don’t end when the GOP vice presidential nominee is profiting off hate speech.
So that means that people who have noticed that JD Vance is profiting off hate speech against America have the right to say it out loud.
Sorry, conservatives.
But if you don’t agree that normal people have the right to speak up and disagree with JD Vance, keep voting for people like JD Vance. They’ll take care of it.
You'd think someone with his history with couches would realize that free speech has its limits.
"...just because someone believes in free speech rights online that they also personally endorse that speech."
I don't hear a denouncement of any particular speech on Rumble, so we're going to assume you endorse it until you say otherwise, Mr Couch Fucker.
There's a blog about tea towels?! ;D
According to Google, there are DOZENS of them. People, are weird. Not the creepy weird couch fucker kind of weird, but the amusing for their eccentricity weird.
All about the eccentric weird stuff!
"Double standards, it’s the only kind they’ve got!" Just like all of their arguments are rooted in bad faith strawman BS. It only works because mass media equivocates and sells it as if there's no impartial way to tell who's full of shit. Lazy bastards are going to get 1/3 of us in a jam.
Don't want to be associated with a site's content? It's pretty easy. withdraw all financial support, sell your shares in the company that supports it to stop making money from it, don't support them in any way. Why hasn't he done this yet?? Financial support and taking profits from it, yes you are at least not averse to the content.
Because the GOP slogan is “I’ve got mine, so fuck you”. As long as it makes money, it’s all good.
Right? And the dems are "You got yours? It's ours now."
So, Vance's position that supporting sites for First Amendment reasons doesn't mean he automatically agrees with that site's content?
Good. Have him cough up $100,000-$250,000 to Wonkette. I hear they're pretty free-speechy.
I read that " have him Couch up" $100,000 etc..
1st Amendment? So you're okey-dokey with child porn if y'all's put money on the church plate?
And pay your taxes?
I sure with the US could pass a law like they have in Germany which prohibits publicly denying the Holocaust and disseminating Nazi propaganda, both off- and online. However, the 1A forbids this.
Nope he'd be promoting his people's skillset; 'the hand-pieced quilts, handwoven coverlets, split oak egg baskets, and other “necessary” crafts once common to every remote household. In the Appalachian mountains of East Tennessee, art was often the result of need. The nonindustrialized Appalachian people were self-reliant, making do with materials at hand, crafting the cabins they lived in and all the furnishings, growing the flax and raising the sheep for the carding, spinning, and weaving of cloth for their clothing, and making any needed household implements, farming tools, toys, and bedding from the materials at hand'
Very 'hands-on' work, and time consuming. No time left for video games? MOM!
"It’s a dishonest straw man to suggest that just because someone believes in free speech rights online that they also personally endorse that speech."
No, it's not dishonest. if you allow the speech, it definitely means you endorse it. You don't have to agree with it but you're endorsing it to be part of the public discourse. These morons don't know what the First Amendment is.
JD is what I call my morning poop. Just Dumped.
Lookin' forward to mine, I mean, today.
I started calling him CF Vance, because I can never remember what the J and D stand for.
Link Wray would not approve.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucTg6rZJCu4
Woah!!!