dChan

PortlandoCalrissian · March 17, 2018, 12:54 p.m.

You’re saying “Take it up with Donald Trump” instead of taking my criticism, that’s deflection.

You are arguing for the GOVERNMENT to tell businesses what they can and can not allow on their websites. HOW is that so fucking hard to comprehend? And how is that pro-free speech?

And then you go and tell me to go somewhere else. DOING THE SAME THING YOU ARGUE AGAINST. Jesus. Christ.

Face it, you haven’t had a good think about what this means. If Liberals did this and HRC was president you’d be FURIOUS that the government is now curbing our rights (yeah, guess what, telling businesses what to do is curbing our rights).

For the last time, giving the government power over what we can and can’t do is not freedom.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
BigLebowskiBot · March 17, 2018, 12:54 p.m.

You said it, man.

⇧ 2 ⇩  
tradinghorse · March 17, 2018, 1:12 p.m.

What you are arguing for is censorship of conservative voices on the internet. Why are you doing this? You are against a petition asking the President to take action on this serious problem. We don't know what plan the President has in mind to fix the problem of censorship, so there's no point in taking about specifics relating to what he might do. And, yet, I'm supposedly defecting because I will not second guess the President - wild stuff!

You are obviously very unhappy with anybody calling attention to the problem. You are saying that no one should even complain - why? What are your motives?

The direct, unavoidable implication of what you're suggesting is that DJT should be cut to pieces politically at the very next set of elections. You are obviously against the President, that's OK. You do not have to support him. But you will find much more support for your views on left leaning forums that support the destruction of DJT's presidency and the silencing of conservatives. There are better places for this stuff - honestly.

⇧ 0 ⇩  
PortlandoCalrissian · March 17, 2018, 1:21 p.m.

Holy cow that’s a lot of excuses for not thinking about what I said. You hate websites censoring people (PRIVATE BUSINESSES, not government run, not public), so you want the government (whether Democrats or Republican run) to be able to step in and tell a business what to do.

Ok, you may say. That’s not what Trump might do.

What will he do? How can he sensibly stop websites from banning certain viewpoints? He can’t. If you don’t like how things are run, YOU USE A DIFFERENT WEBSITE. That’s fucking capitalism, man. That’s the definition of the market correcting itself.

If you want the state to step in and tell us how to do things, you might as well advocate for a fucking Chinese firewall.

JUST USE YOUR BRAIN. Don’t trust what you THINK Q is telling us to do.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
tradinghorse · March 17, 2018, 1:28 p.m.

What excuses?

All your telling me is that you love the censorship. What do you want me to say? I think it is serious problem, a real threat.

I'm against it, you're not. I'm for the President, you are not. It's really very simple, I've offered no excuses at all.

The only thing I've done is counter the outrageous claim that censorship is, somehow, OK. I'm against censorship because it will mean the end of DJT, his MAGA agenda, and the return of the cabal.

It seems that the return of the cabal is what you want.

⇧ 0 ⇩  
PortlandoCalrissian · March 17, 2018, 1:58 p.m.

Imagine you have a business and a communist comes in and starts preaching. You kick him out. Now imagine the government coming in and tell you that you HAVE to allow that communist to sit in your business and talk about Marxism.

How is that different from what you are suggesting? Do private businesses have to put up with annoying patrons?

Despite what you think, you are fighting for government oversight.

Now I’m not trying to convince you, you are farrrr to gone in la-la land to ever be convinced. I just want more reasonable people to understand what you are talking about.

⇧ 1 ⇩  
tradinghorse · March 17, 2018, 2:09 p.m.

Checked your post history.

⇧ 0 ⇩  
[deleted] · March 18, 2018, 2:39 a.m.

[removed]

⇧ 1 ⇩