US US Politics General 2 - Discussion of President Trump and other politicians

  • 🔧 At about Midnight EST I am going to completely fuck up the site trying to fix something.
General Trump Banner.png

Should be a wild four years.

Helpful links for those who need them:

Current members of the House of Representatives
https://www.house.gov/representatives

Current members of the Senate
https://www.senate.gov/senators/

Current members of the US Supreme Court
https://www.supremecourt.gov/about/biographies.aspx

Members of the Trump Administration
https://www.whitehouse.gov/administration/
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Again it's not hard to completely block porn with your ISP's help if you're that worried about it, Schools and Libraries do it all the time. Will shit slip through the cracks? probably but it's better than just asking Big Brother to do it for you
I'm going to double post because this emphasizes my point: Filtering has existed for decades at this point, but it's only now being discusses on a governmental level because parents have failed at parenting. Again, if we can get parents to do their singular duty, raising a child, society wouldn't have a generations of maligned retarded manchildren and narcissistic incompetent women.
 
When it's someone pointing out something like, oh I don't know, the fact that the Patriot Act had the exact same beat-for-beat 'you're with us or you're with the terrorists'/'if you have nothing to hide you have nothing to fear' bullshit behind it only for it to fifteen years later be the legal apparatus through which the spying on Donald Trump's campaign, and debanking dissidents, was made possible, all of a sudden this completely batshit mental line of guilt by association reasoning is totally okay.
It's so telling that literally not a single person in favor of these retarded bans is capable of arguing in good faith and actually addressing the points being made, it's always ad-homs and desperately scrambling around to try to make the discussion about anything else. Almost like the facts aren't on their side, weird!

Less shitposty answer: why are we not putting the onus on parents? It's because of parents that the schools and tranny issues became extra retarded, it's because of parents that they're also becoming less retarded.
I still maintain that allowing minors unrestricted internet access is a form of child abuse and should be treated as such. The idea that the internet needs to be child proofed and fundamentally changed for the adults in the room is deeply flawed.
 
I'm going to double post because this emphasizes my point: Filtering has existed for decades at this point, but it's only now being discusses on a governmental level because parents have failed at parenting. Again, if we can get parents to do their singular duty, raising a child, society wouldn't have a generations of maligned retarded manchildren and narcissistic incompetent women.
Nah we just need the government to issue new parents to children what could go wrong.
 
It's interesting how when liberals call cuckservatives racist for wanting to stop illegal immigration, closeted faggots for not wanting gay marriage, or misogynists/incels for not wanting abortion to be legally unlimited in scope using the same logic it's easy as anything for you types to see that it's illogical horseshit.
I did say the logic of the argument itself probably holds up. My comment is that the difference is that the porn thing draws in people with one-track mindsets who only vociferously talk like that about the porn thing. By contrast, the things you cited were usually multi-topic orators and the attacks were thus disingenuous.

Yet they were effective, were they not? Especially the "gay closeted thing" as astroturfed as that was, which is another thing I mentioned.

The core difference is that there really does exist a subset of people who only seem to care about free speech to defend their fetish material. It provides incredibly easy ammunition for opponents of free speech in general. That is why these debates are awful, there is an entire social dimension that often gets kind of, well, glazed over.
 
The core difference is that there really does exist a subset of people who only seem to care about free speech to defend their fetish material. It provides incredibly easy ammunition for opponents of free speech in general.
Plenty of racists, closeted faggots, and misogynists/incels are one-issue voters.

Try again without making a false division. Or I'll just assume you're a closeted racist faggot who hates women.
 
I did say the logic of the argument itself probably holds up. My comment is that the difference is that the porn thing draws in people with one-track mindsets who only vociferously talk like that about the porn thing. By contrast, the things you cited were usually multi-topic orators and the attacks were thus disingenuous.

Yet they were effective, were they not? Especially the "gay closeted thing" as astroturfed as that was, which is another thing I mentioned.

The core difference is that there really does exist a subset of people who only seem to care about free speech to defend their fetish material. It provides incredibly easy ammunition for opponents of free speech in general.
Sadly most people only care about free speech to the extent that it impacts them as long as they can say what they like and buy the art they like every one can go hang as far as they care. Most people fundamentally have a fuck you got mine attitude about it.
 
Plenty of racists, closeted faggots, and misogynists/incels are one-issue voters.
I'll take your word for it, but I cannot say that I have noticed. I'd say that usually those three categories have a combo of issues they go ham on - usually that exact combination, funny enough.

Sadly most people only care about free speech to the extent that it impacts them as long as they can say what they like and buy the art they like every one can go hang as far as they care. Most people fundamentally have a fuck you got mine attitude about it.
That's what I'm saying; the problem here is that in this specific kind of topic the tendency is extremely prominent.
 
Your problem here is that only certain types of pornography actually fail (or pass) the Miller test.
The miller test describes 90% of porn on the internet, i'm willing to start with that. The only way to say it doesn't is if you're being incredibly dishonest.
 
  • Agree
Reactions: Sneedifarms
Sadly most people only care about free speech to the extent that it impacts them as long as they can say what they like and buy the art they like every one can go hang as far as they care. Most people fundamentally have a fuck you got mine attitude about it.
If you want to speak you have to physically fight for the speaking stick. This is how society should work, the right of strength rules all!
 
Back