Most of the left are stupid enough to call a ban on 7 countries that doesn't affect 87% of the muslims in the world a "muslim ban". Worrying about what perceptions people like that have is pointless, their perceptions are not based on reality to begin with.
Reddit tolerates pretty much anything as long as it matches their political leanings. Not sure why anyone who values a neutral platform would visit the site.
Minor like classifying c02 as a pollutant? Trump is rolling back the EPA to where it was before Obama. There's nothing wrong with that, elections have consequences.
"As the old saying goes, reality has a liberal bias." Is it really not obvious to you that the only people that say or believe that are liberals? It's basically equivalent to "My mom thinks I'm a good person"?
Russia rigged the election for Trump by revealing that the DNC rigged the election for Hillary. What's sad is people are actually buying into that. Which goes to show how easy it is to manipulate a large segment of American society.
If you are going to blame me for imagined transgressions that Trump may commit in the future may I blame you for the actual hits on freedom committed by the the Obama administration?
With Obama's position on freedom of speech it seems it's more like just a partisan bloviation.
CNN's Tapper: Obama has used Espionage Act more than all previous administrations
The federal criminal charges filed against National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden make it seven times that the Obama administration has used the Espionage Act against government workers who shared information with the press. In at least two instances, the government’s investigations have delved into the practices of reporters and news organizations and put reporters in legal jeopardy.
This has raised red flags among defenders of the media. In a vigorous exchange on CNN’s The Lead, host Jake Tapper asserted to Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post that "the Obama administration has used the Espionage Act to go after whistleblowers who leaked to journalists... more than all previous administrations combined."
http://www.politifact.com/pund...
What you probably do not know is that a decade ago, Hillary Clinton called for similar harsh punishments. Then a United States Senator for New York, Clinton co-sponsored the Flag Protection Act of 2005. Senator Robert Bennett, a Republican from Utah, introduced the bill to the Senate in October 2005.
“The flag of the United States is a unique symbol of national unity and represents the values of liberty, justice and equality,” the bill said. “Abuse of the flag,” it continued, “causes more than pain and distress to the overwhelming majority of the American people and may amount to fighting words or a direct threat to the physical and emotional well-being of individuals.” If intended to incite violence, the bill stated, destroying a flag went beyond political speech and therefore was not protected under the First Amendment, as the Supreme Court had ruled it was in 1989 and 1990.
For “any person” who burns a flag or causes one to be burned in order to incite violence, the bill called for a maximum fine of $100,000 or one year imprisonment, or both. If the desecrated flag belonged to the U.S. government, the maximum penalties would rise to $250,000 and two years behind bars.
Except that's not correct:
In Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Taylor, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 892 at 902, the Supreme Court said hate propaganda denotes any expression that is "intended or likely to circulate extreme feelings of opprobrium and enmity against a racial or religious group".[6] The Supreme Court of Canada, by a bare 4-3 plurality, upheld the constitutionality of section 319 in R. v. Keegstra [1990] 3 S.C.R. 697.[7]
New Brunswick's Human Rights Act[38] forbids discrimination upon various grounds which depend upon the circumstances. An adjudicator (Board of Inquiry) may order a respondent "inter alia" to compensate a complainant "for any consequent emotional suffering, including that resulting from injury to dignity, feelings or self-respect, in such amount as the Board considers just and appropriate".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
If you ignore the fact that it's liberals calling for limits on freedom of speach, liberals that support *safe spaces* where dialog is not allowed, liberals that have been caught beating people up for voting. I guess as long as you ignore all available evidence you might have a point.
I'm sure the president elect, a man worth billions, graduated in the top of his class in both high school and university, who's succesfully started over a hundred multimillion dollar companies worries that some basement dweller thinks he's smarter. News flash, you're not.
Juliet Eilperin, The Washington Post’s White House bureau chief, emailed several people close to Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta, to give him a “heads up” that his name would appear in a pending article about lobbyists, according to Wikileaks.
Throughout the email exchange uncovered by Wikileaks, Eilperin tried to reassure Podesta that his place in the pending story is just “one line” buried late in the story. She also reached out to several people to make sure that it did not catch Podesta “off guard.”
The Wikileaks emails revealed that The Washington Post hosted a joint fundraiser with the Clinton campaign, although the Post was unlisted at the fundraiser. “We were never going to list since the lawyers told us we cannot do it,” DNC Finance Director Jordan Kaplan wrote to DNC Election Strategies Adviser Anu Rangappa.
http://observer.com/2016/08/wi...
Twitter, Google and Facebook are nothing more than arms of the democratic party. Now they are upset that inspite of their best efforts to rig the election they failed. And they realize they are on the way to being an irrelevant scrap in the scrapbook of history.
Slashdot Mirror
"But Europe's supposed to be more civilized than us Americans" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/... Ok.
It's permitted if your politics match those of the reddit admins.
Most of the left are stupid enough to call a ban on 7 countries that doesn't affect 87% of the muslims in the world a "muslim ban". Worrying about what perceptions people like that have is pointless, their perceptions are not based on reality to begin with.
Reddit tolerates pretty much anything as long as it matches their political leanings. Not sure why anyone who values a neutral platform would visit the site.
Minor like classifying c02 as a pollutant? Trump is rolling back the EPA to where it was before Obama. There's nothing wrong with that, elections have consequences.
Only in Hawaii?
"As the old saying goes, reality has a liberal bias." Is it really not obvious to you that the only people that say or believe that are liberals? It's basically equivalent to "My mom thinks I'm a good person"?
Or maybe conservatives spent their time campaigning and voting (say President Trump b_tch) instead of spending time uselessly on liberal social media?
Russia rigged the election for Trump by revealing that the DNC rigged the election for Hillary. What's sad is people are actually buying into that. Which goes to show how easy it is to manipulate a large segment of American society.
"And when you factor in that there are strong indications that the Trump campaign was hacked". Citation needed.
Nothing about assault should inspire press censorship. But in the EU it most certainly does.
All the popular vote says is that Trump spent his efforts on winning by the rules, nothing more.
If you are going to blame me for imagined transgressions that Trump may commit in the future may I blame you for the actual hits on freedom committed by the the Obama administration?
With Obama's position on freedom of speech it seems it's more like just a partisan bloviation. CNN's Tapper: Obama has used Espionage Act more than all previous administrations The federal criminal charges filed against National Security Agency leaker Edward Snowden make it seven times that the Obama administration has used the Espionage Act against government workers who shared information with the press. In at least two instances, the government’s investigations have delved into the practices of reporters and news organizations and put reporters in legal jeopardy. This has raised red flags among defenders of the media. In a vigorous exchange on CNN’s The Lead, host Jake Tapper asserted to Ruth Marcus of the Washington Post that "the Obama administration has used the Espionage Act to go after whistleblowers who leaked to journalists ... more than all previous administrations combined."
http://www.politifact.com/pund...
What you probably do not know is that a decade ago, Hillary Clinton called for similar harsh punishments. Then a United States Senator for New York, Clinton co-sponsored the Flag Protection Act of 2005. Senator Robert Bennett, a Republican from Utah, introduced the bill to the Senate in October 2005. “The flag of the United States is a unique symbol of national unity and represents the values of liberty, justice and equality,” the bill said. “Abuse of the flag,” it continued, “causes more than pain and distress to the overwhelming majority of the American people and may amount to fighting words or a direct threat to the physical and emotional well-being of individuals.” If intended to incite violence, the bill stated, destroying a flag went beyond political speech and therefore was not protected under the First Amendment, as the Supreme Court had ruled it was in 1989 and 1990. For “any person” who burns a flag or causes one to be burned in order to incite violence, the bill called for a maximum fine of $100,000 or one year imprisonment, or both. If the desecrated flag belonged to the U.S. government, the maximum penalties would rise to $250,000 and two years behind bars.
Except that's not correct: In Canada (Human Rights Commission) v. Taylor, [1990] 3 S.C.R. 892 at 902, the Supreme Court said hate propaganda denotes any expression that is "intended or likely to circulate extreme feelings of opprobrium and enmity against a racial or religious group".[6] The Supreme Court of Canada, by a bare 4-3 plurality, upheld the constitutionality of section 319 in R. v. Keegstra [1990] 3 S.C.R. 697.[7] New Brunswick's Human Rights Act[38] forbids discrimination upon various grounds which depend upon the circumstances. An adjudicator (Board of Inquiry) may order a respondent "inter alia" to compensate a complainant "for any consequent emotional suffering, including that resulting from injury to dignity, feelings or self-respect, in such amount as the Board considers just and appropriate". https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/...
If you ignore the fact that it's liberals calling for limits on freedom of speach, liberals that support *safe spaces* where dialog is not allowed, liberals that have been caught beating people up for voting. I guess as long as you ignore all available evidence you might have a point.
This is why there will not be a recount.
This *should* be the end of Reddit. No post can ever be reliably attributed to it's author again.
Is that what liberals tell themselves to keep their minds off of their irrelevancy?
I'm sure the president elect, a man worth billions, graduated in the top of his class in both high school and university, who's succesfully started over a hundred multimillion dollar companies worries that some basement dweller thinks he's smarter. News flash, you're not.
Juliet Eilperin, The Washington Post’s White House bureau chief, emailed several people close to Hillary Clinton’s campaign chairman, John Podesta, to give him a “heads up” that his name would appear in a pending article about lobbyists, according to Wikileaks. Throughout the email exchange uncovered by Wikileaks, Eilperin tried to reassure Podesta that his place in the pending story is just “one line” buried late in the story. She also reached out to several people to make sure that it did not catch Podesta “off guard.”
The Wikileaks emails revealed that The Washington Post hosted a joint fundraiser with the Clinton campaign, although the Post was unlisted at the fundraiser. “We were never going to list since the lawyers told us we cannot do it,” DNC Finance Director Jordan Kaplan wrote to DNC Election Strategies Adviser Anu Rangappa. http://observer.com/2016/08/wi...
Twitter, Google and Facebook are nothing more than arms of the democratic party. Now they are upset that inspite of their best efforts to rig the election they failed. And they realize they are on the way to being an irrelevant scrap in the scrapbook of history.
Israel could wipe out the Palestinians any time they want.