"Woke Authoritarianism" is a White Supremacist term for anti-hate. As you have admitted on this blog, you like pro-hate authoritarianism. And you clearly love false equivalencies.
wtf? I hate the authoritarian censorship being imposed by your fascist leader. Joe Biden, nor any president before him, thought he could sue news organizations that said things he didn't like. My strong suspicion is that you're loving King d0n0ld's censorship and will defend it.
btw, I am 100 percent behind enforcing fairness and standing up to White Supremacy. Also fact checking to counter your White Supremacist propaganda. That's what you're angry about.
And YOU are trying to impose "white guilt pride" on the Left. Via your continued insistence that this imaginary thing is real. The Left strongly opposes this imaginary thing.
Me: Did Barack Obama, as president, ever try to have the FCC pull the license of a news organization as donald trump is trying to do in regards to CBS?
Copilot: No, Barack Obama did not attempt to have the FCC pull the license of a news organization during his presidency. The FCC operates as an independent agency, and its authority is limited by the First Amendment and the Communications Act, which prohibit censorship or revoking licenses based on content disagreements.
Donald Trump, on the other hand, has made public calls for the FCC to revoke CBS's broadcasting license over reporting he deemed unfavorable. This represents a significant departure from the norms of presidential conduct regarding media independence.
Not with a d0n0ld stooge in charge? You're confident he'll do what his fascist leader tells him to?
Minus: ...a deliberate editorial falsification?
Absolutely not. As Megyn Kelly admits CBS cut down the interview with Kamala Harris, WHICH IS TYPICAL. And that the first part of her answer (which didn't air during the program) DID AIR "on Face the Nation as a tease".
What is going on here is that a fascist is going after the media. It's straight from the fascist playbook. Joe Biden, after being elected president, didn't sue any news organization that tried to use the fake laptop story to influence the election. Or encourage the FCC to take away the broadcast license of any rightturd media outlet that spread laptop lies.
In any case, the 1st amendment protects CBS re their editorial decisions.
Copilot: CBS could use this case [Jane Akre and Steve Wilson versus Fox] to argue that editorial decisions, even if controversial, are protected under the First Amendment and that there is no legal obligation to present news in a particular way.
Minus: the edits were legit, why has CBS entered mediation with Trump?
Because he's using the power of the presidency to intimidate them. You think threatening to suspend their broadcast license is something he could do as a private citizen? The case is completely without merit, except that he is the predisent.
Jon Steward speaks about YOUR love of authoritarian censorship...
[9:05] - The hypocrisy. It burns. ... See, what was the whole thing that they hated about the left on free speech? No one is saved from the left's word police. No one. What exactly would an actual government-run word police organization look like?
[9:39] The Trump administration is actively trying to purge the federal government of so-called woke initiatives. Government agencies have flagged hundreds of words to limit or avoid; words like DEI, BIPOC, anti-racism, Latinx, Native American, Black, women, seemingly random words like expression, at risk, political, and even mental health and sex. (audience laughing). What's left? (audience laughing) BIPOC and Latinx, I get that. You're not allowed to say sex? You can't say words like women or sex or #MeToo? How can a lot of your cabinet members describe their weekends?
[10:36] you can't protest in a way that offends the right, you can't teach things that the right doesn't want you to teach, you can't read things that they don't want you to read, you can't use words that they don't want you to use, but they love free speech.
Language was never invented to exchange information. It was invented to praise oneself, or G_d. Not fudge packing.
And "education" by government outsiders was supposed to be a compensation under capitalism for the division of labour. Government was never intended to censor others, it was meant to censor itself.
The Left abuses government to censor others, because it can't convince them with their ridiculous arguments otherwise.
The right abuses the truth to fool others, because it can't convince them with their ridiculous arguments otherwise.
As per Mark Twain, "A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes".
This is why you love lies and lying so much. As per your own admission, this is a fiction blog. You aren't even trying to deny it any more that your mission is to sell a false narrative.
Language was invented so people could communicate with each other.
Me: What do you think about someone who says (on one hand) they have a gay brother and a gay son and does not hate gay people, but (on the other hand) says he thinks the supreme court should overturn Lawrence v. Texas and Obergefell v. Hodges because gay people pose a public health risk by spreading disease?
Copilot: That perspective is deeply contradictory. On one hand, expressing love or acceptance for family members who are gay suggests an understanding of their humanity. On the other hand, advocating for overturning landmark Supreme Court decisions like Lawrence v. Texas and Obergefell v. Hodges -- which protect LGBTQ+ rights -- based on the unfounded claim that gay people pose a public health risk perpetuates harmful stereotypes and misinformation.
Scientific research consistently shows that sexual orientation is not inherently linked to public health risks. Diseases are spread through behaviors, not identities, and stigmatizing an entire group only fuels discrimination without addressing actual public health concerns.
It’s worth questioning whether this person’s views are shaped by misinformation or internal conflict. [end]
15 comments:
"Woke Authoritarianism" is a White Supremacist term for anti-hate. As you have admitted on this blog, you like pro-hate authoritarianism. And you clearly love false equivalencies.
You're the one who loves authoritarian censorship, not me. Cuz that's the only way you can justify imposing wokism and white guilt-pride.
wtf? I hate the authoritarian censorship being imposed by your fascist leader. Joe Biden, nor any president before him, thought he could sue news organizations that said things he didn't like. My strong suspicion is that you're loving King d0n0ld's censorship and will defend it.
btw, I am 100 percent behind enforcing fairness and standing up to White Supremacy. Also fact checking to counter your White Supremacist propaganda. That's what you're angry about.
And YOU are trying to impose "white guilt pride" on the Left. Via your continued insistence that this imaginary thing is real. The Left strongly opposes this imaginary thing.
lol!
That's "classified". BWAH!
Obama/Biden... patching the holes in Gyges cloak through Lawfare.
Me: Did Barack Obama, as president, ever try to have the FCC pull the license of a news organization as donald trump is trying to do in regards to CBS?
Copilot: No, Barack Obama did not attempt to have the FCC pull the license of a news organization during his presidency. The FCC operates as an independent agency, and its authority is limited by the First Amendment and the Communications Act, which prohibit censorship or revoking licenses based on content disagreements.
Donald Trump, on the other hand, has made public calls for the FCC to revoke CBS's broadcasting license over reporting he deemed unfavorable. This represents a significant departure from the norms of presidential conduct regarding media independence.
Independent Agency... BWAH!
ps - "deemed unfavorable"? Or a deliberate editorial falsification?
Minus: Independent Agency... BWAH!
Not with a d0n0ld stooge in charge? You're confident he'll do what his fascist leader tells him to?
Minus: ...a deliberate editorial falsification?
Absolutely not. As Megyn Kelly admits CBS cut down the interview with Kamala Harris, WHICH IS TYPICAL. And that the first part of her answer (which didn't air during the program) DID AIR "on Face the Nation as a tease".
What is going on here is that a fascist is going after the media. It's straight from the fascist playbook. Joe Biden, after being elected president, didn't sue any news organization that tried to use the fake laptop story to influence the election. Or encourage the FCC to take away the broadcast license of any rightturd media outlet that spread laptop lies.
In any case, the 1st amendment protects CBS re their editorial decisions.
Copilot: CBS could use this case [Jane Akre and Steve Wilson versus Fox] to argue that editorial decisions, even if controversial, are protected under the First Amendment and that there is no legal obligation to present news in a particular way.
If the edits were legit, why has CBS entered mediation with Trump?
Minus: the edits were legit, why has CBS entered mediation with Trump?
Because he's using the power of the presidency to intimidate them. You think threatening to suspend their broadcast license is something he could do as a private citizen? The case is completely without merit, except that he is the predisent.
Jon Steward speaks about YOUR love of authoritarian censorship...
[9:05] - The hypocrisy. It burns. ... See, what was the whole thing that they hated about the left on free speech? No one is saved from the left's word police. No one. What exactly would an actual government-run word police organization look like?
[9:39] The Trump administration is actively trying to purge the federal government of so-called woke initiatives. Government agencies have flagged hundreds of words to limit or avoid; words like DEI, BIPOC, anti-racism, Latinx, Native American, Black, women, seemingly random words like expression, at risk, political, and even mental health and sex. (audience laughing). What's left? (audience laughing) BIPOC and Latinx, I get that. You're not allowed to say sex? You can't say words like women or sex or #MeToo? How can a lot of your cabinet members describe their weekends?
[10:36] you can't protest in a way that offends the right, you can't teach things that the right doesn't want you to teach, you can't read things that they don't want you to read, you can't use words that they don't want you to use, but they love free speech.
Language was never invented to exchange information. It was invented to praise oneself, or G_d. Not fudge packing.
And "education" by government outsiders was supposed to be a compensation under capitalism for the division of labour. Government was never intended to censor others, it was meant to censor itself.
The Left abuses government to censor others, because it can't convince them with their ridiculous arguments otherwise.
The right abuses the truth to fool others, because it can't convince them with their ridiculous arguments otherwise.
As per Mark Twain, "A lie can travel halfway around the world while the truth is still putting on its shoes".
This is why you love lies and lying so much. As per your own admission, this is a fiction blog. You aren't even trying to deny it any more that your mission is to sell a false narrative.
Language was invented so people could communicate with each other.
Me: What do you think about someone who says (on one hand) they have a gay brother and a gay son and does not hate gay people, but (on the other hand) says he thinks the supreme court should overturn Lawrence v. Texas and Obergefell v. Hodges because gay people pose a public health risk by spreading disease?
Copilot: That perspective is deeply contradictory. On one hand, expressing love or acceptance for family members who are gay suggests an understanding of their humanity. On the other hand, advocating for overturning landmark Supreme Court decisions like Lawrence v. Texas and Obergefell v. Hodges -- which protect LGBTQ+ rights -- based on the unfounded claim that gay people pose a public health risk perpetuates harmful stereotypes and misinformation.
Scientific research consistently shows that sexual orientation is not inherently linked to public health risks. Diseases are spread through behaviors, not identities, and stigmatizing an entire group only fuels discrimination without addressing actual public health concerns.
It’s worth questioning whether this person’s views are shaped by misinformation or internal conflict. [end]
It's pretty obvious that Copilot is all words with no understanding of them. It thinks homosexuality is an identity and not a behaviour.
It is an identity. Have you yelled at your (alleged) gay son and told him to stop choosing to be gay? You're the one who lacks understanding.
Post a Comment