Donald I, emperor of the world.

[Ianonabike]

It's not debatable. His pronouncements are all available publicly.

Free speech is not hate speech. There is a difference.

It's debatable that Kimmel was "telling the truth". And who gets to decide what constitutes hate speech?

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

The beauty of free speech (so often mocked as "freeze peach"). Do I think Kimmel should have been fired? No. His masters did because they decided he was going to hurt their bottom line.

I don't believe free speech is being mocked, but rather those who proclaim its value/virtue whilst simultaneously trying to eradicate any ideas or debate that opposes their ideology. The fact is that throughout history, this is predominantly the preserve of authoritarians/dictators/fascists and those that support them. We are now seeing quite clearly that the idea of debate is now up for debate.

 

[CXRAndy]

Eh? Do you think we have any influence on the other stuff we rabbit on about?!?

Rightly so.

Why get so hyped up over someone when there is bugger all you can do about it.

 

[CXRAndy]

I think the line is in the US, you're free to say what you want, but it can and does come with consequences that you may not expect

 

[midlandsgrimpeur]

And who gets to decide what constitutes hate speech?

We have laws that govern it so I would have thought that is fairly clear.

 

[cookiemonster]

Why get so hyped up over someone when there is bugger all you can do about it.

Yes, there's very little we can do about it but we should all be concerned about the rise of fascism.

 

[Ianonabike]

I don't believe free speech is being mocked, but rather those who proclaim its value/virtue whilst simultaneously trying to eradicate any ideas or debate that opposes their ideology. The fact is that throughout history, this is predominantly the preserve of authoritarians/dictators/fascists and those that support them. We are now seeing quite clearly that the idea of debate is now up for debate.

Deserves its own thread, so I've done the honours.

 

[cookiemonster]

It's debatable that Kimmel was "telling the truth". And who gets to decide what constitutes hate speech?

1) Google is your friend.

2) Don't you think that ABC's lawyers would've fact checked Kimmel's monologue before broadcast considering the circumstances?

3) There's no debate.

4) Are you yet another right wing troll? I think we have enough of them here already.

 

[Stevo 666]

Stevo, I had a flash of inspiration yesterday. For a while I have been thinking of a suitable phrase to counteract your favoured "leftiebollox". Last night it hit me..... "rightyshitey" 😉

It's taken someone over 10 years to come up with an equivalent Well done MG.

 

[Stevo 666]

1) Google is your friend.

2) Don't you think that ABC's lawyers would've fact checked Kimmel's monologue before broadcast considering the circumstances?

3) There's no debate.

4) Are you yet another right wing troll? I think we have enough of them here already.

Clearly a forum can never have enough leftie trolls. Now off you go and get back under your bridge 😉

 

[cookiemonster]

Clearly a forum can never have enough leftie trolls. Now off you go and get back under your bridge 😉

Oh well. I'l leave you all to your right wing wankfest.

Enjoy!!!

 

[Ianonabike]

1) Google is your friend.

That got old a long time ago. We're probably going to get different results, for a start; never mind how we may interpret them differently.

2) Don't you think that ABC's lawyers would've fact checked Kimmel's monologue before broadcast considering the circumstances?

You'd hope so. But not being a lawyer, I don't know exactly how you fact check, for example, "Maga gang".

3) There's no debate.

In which case, welcome to the echo chamber.

4) Are you yet another right wing troll? I think we have enough of them here already.

Calling someone right wing is the insult du jour (not to be confused with insult du jure). I think "right" and "left" are past their sell-by date, being of use chiefly to stop listening and learning.

 

[Xipe Totec]

I think the line is in the US, you're free to say what you want, but it can and does come with consequences that you may not expect

What, like when a Fox News presenter says homeless people should be rounded up and given an "involuntary lethal injection. Just kill 'em" - and no-one on the right bats an eyelid. Those sorts of consequences?

 

[Gweeds]

What, like when a Fox News presenter says homeless people should be rounded up and given an "involuntary lethal injection. Just kill 'em" - and no-one on the right bats an eyelid. Those sorts of consequences?

Noooo - not *those* comments about actually killing people. They're totally fine. It's the ones where the orange turd might be offended.

 

[Psamathe]

2) Don't you think that ABC's lawyers would've fact checked Kimmel's monologue before broadcast considering the circumstances?

Companies can look to minimise damage. Might be that Kimmel going to court for damages or a big pay-off is lower impact than having Trump setting DoJ, IRS, etc. on them and their senior executives and his own legal cases he's start as he declared they've "defamed" him, etc.