I don’t care what side of the political fence you are on – using state resources to silence the press will have a chilling impact on free speech rights:
A Missouri newspaper told the state about a security risk. Now it faces prosecution
Exploring what can happen when people think for themselves.
I don’t care what side of the political fence you are on – using state resources to silence the press will have a chilling impact on free speech rights:
A Missouri newspaper told the state about a security risk. Now it faces prosecution
I don’t think that people with $600 are the ones cheating on their taxes…
Yellen on $600 IRS reporting requirement: ‘There’s a lot of tax fraud and cheating that’s going on.’
So why do you think the government is so interested in your $600 bank account, particularly when most Americans can’t even handle an unexpected $500 expense? Could this simply be an excuse to expand government oversight and control of our lives? Perhaps it’s a sign that they intend to tax those with $600 for the benefit of those who don’t?
Isn’t this the same prosecutor who gave Jussie Smollett a walk?
Chicago gang shooting: Lightfoot asks feds to review evidence after prosecutor Foxx files no charges
Now she claims that because these shooters were “mutual combatants” they are not criminally liable for their actions? Are you kidding me?!?
Who is she working for? Because it definitely isn’t the people of Chicago…
…will never smell like a rose.
OK, while I agree that this site’s function is reprehensible, they should not be silenced simply because the woke left control most of the Internet speech platforms:
GoDaddy Is Booting A Site That Sought Anonymous Tips About Texas Abortions
This is the functional equivalent of the phone company refusing to provide phone service for a pro-life lobbying group. A company offering a service to the general public – particularly one whose service is effectively the dissemination of speech – should not be allowed to discriminate based on the content of that speech.
For those of you who believe that the censorship of speech with which you disagree is a perfectly acceptable practice: don’t worry; your time is coming. Once censorship is allowed in the public forum of the Internet it won’t be too long before full censorship is attained. The result will be the same as it has always been: the elimination of free speech, the establishment of propaganda centers and the rise of tyranny. Joseph Stalin, Adolf Hitler, Moa Tse Tung, Karl Marx, Vladimir Lenin, Suddam Hussein – all of them used censorship to gain and keep power. Do you not see the danger we are facing, even when only the voices with which you disagree are silenced? Where do you think it will end?
Does anyone really think that freedom of speech being guaranteed in the 1st Amendment was only a coincidence?
Liberals want prisoners to be counted as residents where they last lived, rather than residents of where the prison that incarcerates them resides. The reason: doing so increases the population – and thus the representation – of Democrat-leaning areas. Apparently, prisons are in more Republican-leaning areas, while criminals reside in more Democrat-leaning areas (?!?).
Most Prisoners Can’t Vote, But They’re Still Counted In Voting Districts
But here’s the real hypocrisy: Illegal aliens, who typically migrate to left-leaning areas where they have both financial and political support, are counted as residents where they illegally reside. But using the same left-leaning logic as for prisoners, shouldn’t they be counted as residents of their home country and not as residents of the Unites States?
Talk about gerrymandering…
Two white ASU students were allegedly harassed into leaving the ASU “multicultural” center by students who insisted that their skin color and political views were not welcome in that space:
College students confront White peers with ‘Police Lives Matter’ sticker: ‘You are racist’
Watch the video for yourself here or here.
It seems hypocritical to me that someone is being called a racist because of the color of their skin. As for the student’s political views, why should their views be censored over any others? The right to free speech is central to liberty; the fact that some speech makes you “uncomfortable” is a necessary byproduct of that liberty. It is not a reason to silence the voice of those with whom you disagree.
Harassment of any student for any reason cannot be tolerated. The harassing students should be harshly punished for their blatant attack on these two students simply for the color of their skin and political beliefs.
When the government uses a health crisis to exert control – to dictate to us our dating habits – perhaps they’ve gone a bit too far:
Oregon health officials say you can kiss on dates — if both vaccinated
What’s next? Will they start dictating who we can date? What about sporting activities in which we are “allowed” to indulge, based on their inherent danger? Why not ban rock climbing, hang gliding, target shooting, hunting or other dangerous activities under the guise of the “public good”? They’ve already effectively banned smoking; what if they decide to return to the era of prohibition in the name of “public health”? Where is the individual right to live one’s life as they see fit, without interference from the government or others? This level of control is very Orwellian, very dangerous, and should be resisted fervently.
There is, however, some humor in the situation. It is expressed in the secondary title of the article:
During the beginning of the pandemic, state health officials declared ‘you’ as your safest sex partner
Probably have to use hand sanitizer and wear a mask, though….
Sometimes you’ve just got to laugh (even when it’s more sad than funny):
Influencers of the last 100 years
I feel like we’re getting dumber by the minute…
And I’ll bet we’ll never know when we are being evaluated by such a system:
iPhones may soon detect depression, autism, and cognitive decline: report
What if Apple is already using iPhones to evaluate us for other traits? Are we being evaluated for our willingness to be lemmings and follow government mandates or societal pressure? Are we being used as guinea pigs to test political propaganda? Could it be that we are being evaluated and manipulated in support of a particular political party or dogma in an effort to sway an election? Are we being tested by Apple, or perhaps by Apple on behalf of the government or some other 3rd party?
Anyone want to buy an iPhone?
Liberals have been quick to claim an “education gap” between conservative and liberal voters, which they use to assert the moral high ground as the informed, intellectual class. Unfortunately, being educated today doesn’t necessarily make one smart. The classical “liberal” college degree, once meant to impart a well-rounded general education onto its graduates, now only serves to provide proof of indoctrination into the liberal agenda and a blind adherence to its dogma. Here’s a perfect example where the “educated” left are ignorant to reality, instead choosing to churn out tired old leftist cliches learned during their indoctrination:
Residents in AOC’s district say how much they think the rich pay in taxes
Here are the more interesting quotes from the news article linked above:
“We’re paying too much taxes,” a woman named [redacted] told Fox News. “The lower and middle classes, we’re working our butts off and we’re paying so much taxes, and then you’ve got the upper class and they’re not paying anything.”
But this is far from the truth. In 2018, the top 1.6% of earners paid 38.4% of all income taxes. In fact, the top 8.3% of earners paid fully 61.6% of all income taxes – more than the remaining 91.7% combined!
The wealthiest people are “definitely paying the bare minimum if any,” he continued. “I would assume it’s about 5%, if that.”
Interesting, but false. The top 0.5% of earners in America paid a marginal tax rate of 37%.
“They should be paying the same amount of taxes as the middle and lower class are,” [redacted] said. “That way it gives us equal share and no one is feeling singled out.”
Finally, something we can all agree on – a flat tax. The real benefit to this plan, however, is detrimental to Congress: it means that we all have to pay for the indulgences of our political leaders, making it more difficult for Congress to buy the votes of their favored constituents with other people’s money. This, of course, would be a boon for freedom and democracy – but a bust for politics as usual.
In any event, thank Dog for the “educated” class. How else would we learn just how stupid people can be?