They have disrupted his feed with their obnoxious responses. So he blocked them, it is analogous to removing protestors from a speech at a real world venue. Their behavior cost them their access, but it is NOT an infringement of their rights. Their rights end when it begins infringing on his rights and the rights of others.
Caving: The so called government shutdown the left likes to try to pin on Junior Senators Cruz and Lee from the then minority party of the Senate.
The House put forward a budget bill that repealed the ACA, of course the left wasn't going to let it pass. Reid wouldn't even let it on the Senate floor. And the shut-down began. The House then passed multiple additional budget bills each time reducing the demands, but Reid refused to let the bills onto the Senate floor for debate let alone for a vote. They tried the negotiation path, but seeing that Reid was successfully blocking them they caved rather than stand firm and forcing a negotiation. They were more afraid of the media lies than pushing the truth and forcing negotiations and compromise. And they've kept on doing the same.
Yes they do CAVE, and have done so repeatedly. Yes Trump is very centrist, he's been a Democrat at times. It makes the objections of the left rather amusing because they really couldn't have asked for a more malleable Republican President out of the candidates. Gov Christie might have been about on par. But their non-stop outrage has pushed him quite a ways to the right on many issues.
If the GOP Establishment would use the majorities they have in both houses and actually push an agenda they could accomplish a lot, but they cave time and again, resulting in nothing happening. Repeal the ACA and then invite the left to negotiate a replacement with compromises. But no, they just Cave or worse, they try to do the same thing the Dems did when they passed the ACA in the first place, keep it hidden and then bring out a massive bill and not give sufficient time to digest and evaluate it before demanding a vote.
As to Trump's fiscal policies, I really don't care. The House sets the budget and fiscal policy, not the President.
No. If a Sitting President is Impeached and convicted by the Senate with a 2/3rds majority vote (67 guilty votes). Then he is removed and his Vice President is elevated to the Office of the President. If the VP should somehow be removed in an unprecedented (and questionable) double impeachment then the seat goes to the Speaker of the House (Paul Ryan). He would be followed by the President Pro-tem of the Senate (Sen Orrin Hatch) and then down through the Cabinet.
In no parallel Universe operating under our Constitution does Hillary or any Democrat get the Presidency through anything but the next election in 2020.
Apples and oranges. ATT was not made not private. In fact just the opposite, it used to be a Monopoly backed by the government in other words it was less private because it had the government backing it up with laws and regulations forcing us to use their services and nobody else's. We made it more private by breaking it up and getting the government out of it. (It was illegal to hook a non AT&T phone to a phone line).
Your line of argument is totally off topic and shows you don't understand the situation at all.
First of all Twitter didn't block or ban anyone. Their rules and functionality allow a user to block others. It's their forum they don't have to change it for special users. Twitter is not a part of the Government, there are no laws requiring us to use twitter as the only approved social media platform, thus Twitter allowing a user, in this case DT, to block others is not a violation of the 1st Amendment.
Twitter's role in this in not relevant. And citing the break-up of AT&T proves you don't understand the situation at all. That other s are citing that Twitter is a private forum is also only vaguely relevant to the discussion. Again they are not the ones blocking the users. Their only involvement is that A: it's happening on their forum and B: Their forum rules and design allows any Tweeter, including the Tweeter in Chief, to block users who annoy them.
As to Trump's role. Yes he is the President, he is an agent of the government. But just as at a speech he can call for a disruptive individual to be removed from the venue, so can he block a disruptive individual from his feed. That person earned the block by their behavior, and the block is the consequences. But unlike in the real world scenario where once you are booted you are not going back in. These individuals can just use another account to refollow the President, and even resume insulting him until the new profile is booted as well.
And nobody is canceling their services. Twitter isn't banning anyone. Use a different twitter means a different twitter account, not an imaginary different service. You are trying to blame Twitter, they have nothing to do with this except that they are the venue.
You mentioned the Virtual town hall concept.
Yes Twitter can be seen here as a virtual town hall. If you are too rude and obnoxious in your responses to the President he will block you from his feed. You still have full access to all the rest of the Twitterverse, you can create a new account and re-follow the President and resume being rude and obnoxious until he blocks you again, repeat ad-nauseum. Your rights have not been infringed
Now compare that to a real Town Hall meeting. The President is speaking, and taking questions. You jump up, grab the mic and unleash a stream of foul obscenities contributing nothing to the debate or discussion, so he asks you to hand the mic to someone else, you refuse so the police remove you from the venue for disturbing the police. You have been blocked, your own behavior earned you the block. This is what happened to the individuals who filed this suit. They got so offensive and obnoxious that the President said 'Enough' and blocked them due to their behavior.
Unlike Twitter's Virtual Town Hall, with a real world Town Hall meeting, you can't change clothes and re-enter the venue, you have been kicked out and cannot re-enter. Yet your rights have still not been infringed. It was your actions that intruded onto the freedom of speech of others that resulted in the blocking of your access. Unlike in the physical world, if you can learn to control yourself you can in fact regain access to his feed and resume commenting again quite easily. You still have your Freedom of Speech, but such does not include Freedom from consequences.
Okay then not the RINO's but rather the Washington GOP Establishment which hated him from the beginning, except for in comparison to Ted Cruz who they hated even more because he wouldn't lie to his constituents by voting for a Senate rule change that would have let the then Dominant Dems force through a bill the right was opposed to. The R's couldn't vote for it as it would outrage their constituencies, so instead they wanted to vote for a rule change (which required a unanimous vote to pass) that would let the Dems pass the bill with just a majority. Ted and one other refused to vote for the rule change, so the establishment hated him, so much they couldn't bring themselves to back him when they still had the opportunity to stop Trump.
So it is the wishy washy establishment that has caved repeatedly to the demands of the left that is insulting Trump. Not necessarily RINO's. But if they cave to the left at every turn are they not in fact RINO's?
And how are the people who have been blocked any different from protestors who repeatedly interrupt a speech and get removed from the venue? Their boorish behavior got them ejected/blocked. That is not a violation of their rights. It is a consequence of them trying to take their rights so far that they infringed on the rights of others and were therefore ejected/blocked.
Those citizens are free to create another account and resume monitoring of the feed, they can try to comment more moderately or just comment elsewhere. Or even resume the activities that got them blocked in the first place, in which case they will likely soon be blocked again. Actions have consequences, the freedom of speech is not without limits, insist on being obnoxious and disruptive and removing you from the venue to allow others to exercise their rights is not a violation of your rights.
Many areas use fencing with few if any escapes. usually two layers of fencing with sensors to report contact with (cimbing) and cutting of the fencing with motion sensors in between the two fences, as well as cameras and... Wait for it, a most radical idea: Guards who watch the fences and warn prisoners to stay away from them.
Evidently SC prisons lack all these high falutin technologicnal type features. So a prisoner can walk up to the fence and cut a hole in it and wander off without anyone realizing what has happened until they realize the "body" in his bed hasn't moved in a couple days.
The Drone is the least of their problems. Though it's also a simple problem. Tell the guards, any drone that approaches the fence-line is a skeet target. No more drone problems.
Really? My Android phone (Galaxy 4) is approaching five years old. I need to update it because it's getting a bit worn and is falling behind on Android updates (thanks Samsung), But I'm on my second battery and I've worn out two Otterbox cases. Meanwhile every Appleholic rushes out for a new device every year.
The President didn't make it. Some friend probably found it and thought it was funny and sent it to him, he saw it, thought it was funny considering how he's been battling the Media since winning the GOP nomination and he passed it on.
It's not an incitement to violence. If anything it's a commentary on how he's been fighting the media non-stop.
So what? It's called parody. And is fully legal for him to do. For CNN to threaten to dox him is unethical no matter which side of the political divide you stand.
CNN should have just feigned outrage and then laughed it off as the joke that it was.
Or they go to their local community college, pay the small Enrollment fee. And they are accepted to a college. Then once they graduate they do what ever they want. That community college will likely see the 'student' take a single class. But hey they were still accepted.
Great points, personally I'd bet that this rule results in the local community colleges see a jump in the number of HS Seniors who come in and pay their $25 enrollment fee, just so they can show that they have been accepted to a college. But who then don't actually enroll in any classes.
No, those people are free to gain some basic employment experience at a minimum wage job, then seek raises or new sources of employment at wages commensurate with their now increased experience. Minim wage jobs are not supposed to be living wages. They are entry level positions and any who wants more needs to simply look for the next job and find one that pays more.
Gun deaths did drop, Crime rates went the other way. As to registration/licensing they had already registered most of them so they knew where to collect them. But even then they only collected about a 5th of the expected national stockpile. And violent crime rates went up.
Hand guns have a very legitimate civilian use. They are poor hunting weapons but my uncle hunted from four wheeler for years with one due to injuries that made a rifle unfeasible. And more importantly they are prime defensive weapons. Nor are they prone to accidental shootings, contrary to popular opinion they are safer than rifles as no handgun made since about 1900 will go off if dropped. Simply put you have to pull the trigger to make the gun go off.
If handguns are so crappy against the military, why does the military issue so many to front line combat troops?
Funny how you quote directly from NRA safety training materials before lying about what they say and teach just to get to validate your anti-gun bona fides.
Try actually reading some NRA materials. They are all about safe firearm handling. They are the leading producer of firearm safety training materials and certification of firearm instructors. They are all about safety. Real safety, not the false 'safety' that anti-gun groups try to call gun control.
Guess again AC, the Streisand Effect is fully applicable. How many people had ever even heard of or seen her blog, until Zillow filed the C&D letter to stop her posting of their pictures? The C&D effort blew up in their face. As not only Slashdot but several other communities and even a few news agencies have carried the story, introducing millions to her previously unknown blog. Thus ensuring that millions have now seen the pictures that before would have been seen by a few thousand readers at most.
This is an excellent example of the Streisand Effect as their effort to hide or remove the photos has ensured that many, many more have now seen the pictures, in the context of the blog than would have otherwise seen them.
Standard Oil, and Ma Bell Were actual monopolies. Especially Ma Bell. Standard Oil achieve it's monopoly through business practices in theory a competitor could have arisen though it would have been very difficult. Ma Bell had the Law behind it. You had to get your phone service from them, there was no other legal option.
Dominance is still not a monopoly. They achieved dominance because they are the fastest and most comprehensive. That's how they took over the search engine market in the first place. Having the best product usually get's you into market dominance. That still does not equal a monopoly.
This is the EU crying everyone should be equal, even when they are not.
In the US I get Google Maps, Android Google maps app Official MapQuest Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies: MAPS iOS - Maps - Apple Google Maps in the iTunes app store Yahoo maps Maps.com Bing Maps
You use Google you get Google maps. You use Bing you get Bing maps, you use Apple you get Apple maps. You use Yahoo... that's right you get Yahoo maps. Why should they link to someone else's map products? Nobody else who has their own mapping sources provides links to a competitor's maps.
Now if you Google maps, you of course get Google at the top of their list, but low and behold you get mapquest and then Yahoo and then apple. They don't pretend they are the only provider. But if you do a search for something, they are going to use their resources and provide the map info with their maps.
Slashdot Mirror
A couple Anker or similar battery packs will keep them running all day long.
They have disrupted his feed with their obnoxious responses. So he blocked them, it is analogous to removing protestors from a speech at a real world venue. Their behavior cost them their access, but it is NOT an infringement of their rights. Their rights end when it begins infringing on his rights and the rights of others.
Caving: The so called government shutdown the left likes to try to pin on Junior Senators Cruz and Lee from the then minority party of the Senate.
The House put forward a budget bill that repealed the ACA, of course the left wasn't going to let it pass. Reid wouldn't even let it on the Senate floor. And the shut-down began. The House then passed multiple additional budget bills each time reducing the demands, but Reid refused to let the bills onto the Senate floor for debate let alone for a vote. They tried the negotiation path, but seeing that Reid was successfully blocking them they caved rather than stand firm and forcing a negotiation. They were more afraid of the media lies than pushing the truth and forcing negotiations and compromise. And they've kept on doing the same.
Yes they do CAVE, and have done so repeatedly. Yes Trump is very centrist, he's been a Democrat at times. It makes the objections of the left rather amusing because they really couldn't have asked for a more malleable Republican President out of the candidates. Gov Christie might have been about on par. But their non-stop outrage has pushed him quite a ways to the right on many issues.
If the GOP Establishment would use the majorities they have in both houses and actually push an agenda they could accomplish a lot, but they cave time and again, resulting in nothing happening. Repeal the ACA and then invite the left to negotiate a replacement with compromises. But no, they just Cave or worse, they try to do the same thing the Dems did when they passed the ACA in the first place, keep it hidden and then bring out a massive bill and not give sufficient time to digest and evaluate it before demanding a vote.
As to Trump's fiscal policies, I really don't care. The House sets the budget and fiscal policy, not the President.
No. If a Sitting President is Impeached and convicted by the Senate with a 2/3rds majority vote (67 guilty votes). Then he is removed and his Vice President is elevated to the Office of the President. If the VP should somehow be removed in an unprecedented (and questionable) double impeachment then the seat goes to the Speaker of the House (Paul Ryan). He would be followed by the President Pro-tem of the Senate (Sen Orrin Hatch) and then down through the Cabinet.
In no parallel Universe operating under our Constitution does Hillary or any Democrat get the Presidency through anything but the next election in 2020.
Apples and oranges. ATT was not made not private. In fact just the opposite, it used to be a Monopoly backed by the government in other words it was less private because it had the government backing it up with laws and regulations forcing us to use their services and nobody else's. We made it more private by breaking it up and getting the government out of it. (It was illegal to hook a non AT&T phone to a phone line).
Your line of argument is totally off topic and shows you don't understand the situation at all.
First of all Twitter didn't block or ban anyone. Their rules and functionality allow a user to block others. It's their forum they don't have to change it for special users. Twitter is not a part of the Government, there are no laws requiring us to use twitter as the only approved social media platform, thus Twitter allowing a user, in this case DT, to block others is not a violation of the 1st Amendment.
Twitter's role in this in not relevant. And citing the break-up of AT&T proves you don't understand the situation at all. That other s are citing that Twitter is a private forum is also only vaguely relevant to the discussion. Again they are not the ones blocking the users. Their only involvement is that A: it's happening on their forum and B: Their forum rules and design allows any Tweeter, including the Tweeter in Chief, to block users who annoy them.
As to Trump's role. Yes he is the President, he is an agent of the government. But just as at a speech he can call for a disruptive individual to be removed from the venue, so can he block a disruptive individual from his feed. That person earned the block by their behavior, and the block is the consequences. But unlike in the real world scenario where once you are booted you are not going back in. These individuals can just use another account to refollow the President, and even resume insulting him until the new profile is booted as well.
And nobody is canceling their services.
Twitter isn't banning anyone. Use a different twitter means a different twitter account, not an imaginary different service.
You are trying to blame Twitter, they have nothing to do with this except that they are the venue.
You mentioned the Virtual town hall concept.
Yes Twitter can be seen here as a virtual town hall. If you are too rude and obnoxious in your responses to the President he will block you from his feed. You still have full access to all the rest of the Twitterverse, you can create a new account and re-follow the President and resume being rude and obnoxious until he blocks you again, repeat ad-nauseum. Your rights have not been infringed
Now compare that to a real Town Hall meeting. The President is speaking, and taking questions. You jump up, grab the mic and unleash a stream of foul obscenities contributing nothing to the debate or discussion, so he asks you to hand the mic to someone else, you refuse so the police remove you from the venue for disturbing the police. You have been blocked, your own behavior earned you the block. This is what happened to the individuals who filed this suit. They got so offensive and obnoxious that the President said 'Enough' and blocked them due to their behavior.
Unlike Twitter's Virtual Town Hall, with a real world Town Hall meeting, you can't change clothes and re-enter the venue, you have been kicked out and cannot re-enter. Yet your rights have still not been infringed. It was your actions that intruded onto the freedom of speech of others that resulted in the blocking of your access. Unlike in the physical world, if you can learn to control yourself you can in fact regain access to his feed and resume commenting again quite easily. You still have your Freedom of Speech, but such does not include Freedom from consequences.
And if you jeer too obnoxiously, and disrupt the speed you will be removed from the venue. How is this any different. Thanks for the perfect example.
Okay then not the RINO's but rather the Washington GOP Establishment which hated him from the beginning, except for in comparison to Ted Cruz who they hated even more because he wouldn't lie to his constituents by voting for a Senate rule change that would have let the then Dominant Dems force through a bill the right was opposed to. The R's couldn't vote for it as it would outrage their constituencies, so instead they wanted to vote for a rule change (which required a unanimous vote to pass) that would let the Dems pass the bill with just a majority. Ted and one other refused to vote for the rule change, so the establishment hated him, so much they couldn't bring themselves to back him when they still had the opportunity to stop Trump.
So it is the wishy washy establishment that has caved repeatedly to the demands of the left that is insulting Trump. Not necessarily RINO's. But if they cave to the left at every turn are they not in fact RINO's?
And how are the people who have been blocked any different from protestors who repeatedly interrupt a speech and get removed from the venue? Their boorish behavior got them ejected/blocked. That is not a violation of their rights. It is a consequence of them trying to take their rights so far that they infringed on the rights of others and were therefore ejected/blocked.
Those citizens are free to create another account and resume monitoring of the feed, they can try to comment more moderately or just comment elsewhere. Or even resume the activities that got them blocked in the first place, in which case they will likely soon be blocked again. Actions have consequences, the freedom of speech is not without limits, insist on being obnoxious and disruptive and removing you from the venue to allow others to exercise their rights is not a violation of your rights.
Many areas use fencing with few if any escapes. usually two layers of fencing with sensors to report contact with (cimbing) and cutting of the fencing with motion sensors in between the two fences, as well as cameras and... Wait for it, a most radical idea: Guards who watch the fences and warn prisoners to stay away from them.
Evidently SC prisons lack all these high falutin technologicnal type features. So a prisoner can walk up to the fence and cut a hole in it and wander off without anyone realizing what has happened until they realize the "body" in his bed hasn't moved in a couple days.
The Drone is the least of their problems. Though it's also a simple problem. Tell the guards, any drone that approaches the fence-line is a skeet target. No more drone problems.
Cite some examples please.
Really? My Android phone (Galaxy 4) is approaching five years old. I need to update it because it's getting a bit worn and is falling behind on Android updates (thanks Samsung), But I'm on my second battery and I've worn out two Otterbox cases. Meanwhile every Appleholic rushes out for a new device every year.
The President didn't make it. Some friend probably found it and thought it was funny and sent it to him, he saw it, thought it was funny considering how he's been battling the Media since winning the GOP nomination and he passed it on.
It's not an incitement to violence. If anything it's a commentary on how he's been fighting the media non-stop.
So what? It's called parody. And is fully legal for him to do. For CNN to threaten to dox him is unethical no matter which side of the political divide you stand.
CNN should have just feigned outrage and then laughed it off as the joke that it was.
Question: Is "I'm going to veg for a couple years on my very well to do daddy's dime then decide what I want to do with my life." an acceptable plan?
What if said enabler of a father then provides a notarized letter that he is fully supportive of that plan?
Or they go to their local community college, pay the small Enrollment fee. And they are accepted to a college. Then once they graduate they do what ever they want. That community college will likely see the 'student' take a single class. But hey they were still accepted.
Great points, personally I'd bet that this rule results in the local community colleges see a jump in the number of HS Seniors who come in and pay their $25 enrollment fee, just so they can show that they have been accepted to a college. But who then don't actually enroll in any classes.
No, those people are free to gain some basic employment experience at a minimum wage job, then seek raises or new sources of employment at wages commensurate with their now increased experience. Minim wage jobs are not supposed to be living wages. They are entry level positions and any who wants more needs to simply look for the next job and find one that pays more.
Gun deaths did drop, Crime rates went the other way. As to registration/licensing they had already registered most of them so they knew where to collect them. But even then they only collected about a 5th of the expected national stockpile. And violent crime rates went up.
Hand guns have a very legitimate civilian use. They are poor hunting weapons but my uncle hunted from four wheeler for years with one due to injuries that made a rifle unfeasible. And more importantly they are prime defensive weapons. Nor are they prone to accidental shootings, contrary to popular opinion they are safer than rifles as no handgun made since about 1900 will go off if dropped. Simply put you have to pull the trigger to make the gun go off.
If handguns are so crappy against the military, why does the military issue so many to front line combat troops?
You speak with little knowledge
Funny how you quote directly from NRA safety training materials before lying about what they say and teach just to get to validate your anti-gun bona fides.
Try actually reading some NRA materials. They are all about safe firearm handling. They are the leading producer of firearm safety training materials and certification of firearm instructors. They are all about safety. Real safety, not the false 'safety' that anti-gun groups try to call gun control.
Guess again AC, the Streisand Effect is fully applicable. How many people had ever even heard of or seen her blog, until Zillow filed the C&D letter to stop her posting of their pictures? The C&D effort blew up in their face. As not only Slashdot but several other communities and even a few news agencies have carried the story, introducing millions to her previously unknown blog. Thus ensuring that millions have now seen the pictures that before would have been seen by a few thousand readers at most.
This is an excellent example of the Streisand Effect as their effort to hide or remove the photos has ensured that many, many more have now seen the pictures, in the context of the blog than would have otherwise seen them.
Standard Oil, and Ma Bell Were actual monopolies. Especially Ma Bell. Standard Oil achieve it's monopoly through business practices in theory a competitor could have arisen though it would have been very difficult. Ma Bell had the Law behind it. You had to get your phone service from them, there was no other legal option.
Dominance is still not a monopoly. They achieved dominance because they are the fastest and most comprehensive. That's how they took over the search engine market in the first place. Having the best product usually get's you into market dominance. That still does not equal a monopoly.
This is the EU crying everyone should be equal, even when they are not.
In the US I get Google Maps,
Android Google maps app
Official MapQuest
Multidisciplinary Association for Psychedelic Studies: MAPS
iOS - Maps - Apple
Google Maps in the iTunes app store
Yahoo maps
Maps.com
Bing Maps
You use Google you get Google maps. You use Bing you get Bing maps, you use Apple you get Apple maps. You use Yahoo... that's right you get Yahoo maps. Why should they link to someone else's map products? Nobody else who has their own mapping sources provides links to a competitor's maps.
Now if you Google maps, you of course get Google at the top of their list, but low and behold you get mapquest and then Yahoo and then apple. They don't pretend they are the only provider. But if you do a search for something, they are going to use their resources and provide the map info with their maps.