how sad that it is neither a surprise or newsworthy when a Republican has difficulty with or complete disregard for basic facts
I doubt the Republican caucus can get behind a budget that is proposed by one of their own. McCarthy likely has no interest in putting one forward. All he’s going to do is oppose what’s in Biden’s budget.
When going for the "gotcha" moment backfires, she doesn't actually care about the 25%, she just wants to paint a bad look overall and as normal she doesn't have her facts straight.
@Os Trigonum AR is first out of the gate for a big win for Packers Sanitation. Perhaps Republicans should consider a migrant worker program to provide cheap labor for jobs that American adults are not willing to do. Labor Department fines food sanitation contractor $1.5M for child labor violations - ABC News (go.com) The Labor Department has detailed an investigation that found one of the nation's largest food safety sanitation services providers illegally employed more than 100 children in hazardous work conditions across 13 facilities in eight states. Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders is rolling back child labor protections - CBS News Arkansas is rolling back some child labor protections after Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders this week signed a new law to make it easier for children under 16 to get hired. The new law is part of a push by some states to loosen child labor rules at a time the job market remains tight, with the lowest jobless rate since 1969. In Minnesota, a bill would allow 16- and 17-year olds to get work in the construction industry, while Iowa lawmakers are considering legislation that would permit 14- and 15-year-olds to work in freezers and meat coolers, which is currently prohibited. The Arkansas law, called the Youth Hiring Act, eliminates a requirement that children under 16 obtain an employment certificate before getting hired — a document that proves the child's age, describes the work they will undertake, and gives written consent from the child's parent or guardian, according to CBS affiliate KNOE.
Republicans have only won the popular vote in one presidential election since 1992. They underperformed in recent congressional elections. Their anti-Woke strategy isn't going to win national elections and may hurt in Senate elections as well. They have poisoned their base against facts, science and education. They have a base that is fired up and motivated. They are fighting for what they believe is the existence of the America that they knew. Younger voters and those yet to reach voting age, don't look at it as destroying the country, but they are aware of changes that need to be made to improve and have already undertaken those. The Republican "Get off My Lawn!" strategy appeals to the base, but not to the general population. They will need to find a way to pivot if they hope to win again. Sadly, their current strategy is to drag others into the mud with them, and try to stoke fear. Again, that will work for the base but isn't a winning strategy.
What a joke, typical right-wing voter suppression, the know they can't win the popular vote so they have to limit the amount of people who CAN vote.
The Republican party is very serious about governing and free speech. House Republicans Pass Nonsense Tech Censorship Bill (gizmodo.com) House Republicans this week rammed through an ill-constructed, self-aggrandizing “anti-censorship” bill supposedly aimed at preventing federal agents from pressuring tech companies to stifle conservatives. The bill, inspired in part by Republican outrage over Twitter’s handling of the Hunter Biden laptop story and other so-called Twitter Files revelations, passed 219-206 in a straight party-line vote. The bill’s almost guaranteed to die in the Democratically controlled Senate. As written, the Protecting Speech from Government Interference Act would ban “federal employees from advocating for censorship of viewpoints in their official capacity.” That language appears directly inspired by recent Twitter Files documents, which suggest both Democrats and Republicans possessed the ability to report tweets believed to have violated company rules to Twitter and potentially have them removed. Republicans allege Democratic officials used this to disproportionately pressure allegedly left-leaning tech companies into censoring conservative viewpoints or topics. Ironically, a former Twitter safety policy team expert said former President Donald Trump used this same policy avenue to try and convince Twitter to remove a Chrissy Teigen post calling him a “p***y ass b****.” Republicans clearly love free speech. ... “This bill purports to protect free speech from government censorship,” Goldman said Wednesday. “And I agree, it’s a great idea. It’s such a good idea, in fact, that the Founding Fathers put it in the Constitution. It’s called the First Amendment.” “While I appreciate House Republicans’ apparent desire to protect Chrissy Teigen’s right to hurl insults at Trump without him weaponizing the government to silence her, I think the first amendment has it covered,” Lehrich said in an interview with Gizmodo. “It’s frustrating that rather than channeling the bipartisan momentum on everything from overhauling our antitrust laws to passing strong federal privacy legislation, these guys are devoting all their time to culture war bullshit and letting Big Tech off the hook.” Aside from being unnecessary, the bill’s targets also appear unbalanced. The recently formed Select Subcommittee on the Weaponization of the Federal Government has taken every opportunity it can to point out perceived instances of tech moderator bias against conservatives but has simultaneously remained silent following reports of now-deified Twitter CEO Elon Musk reportedly censoring content critical of Indian Prime minister Narendra Modi and blacklisting journalists.
Yes this seems like more ham handed stuff from the GOP caucus driven by perceived grievances. As noted in the article above it would also protect Chrissy Teigan’s ability to call Trump a “p***y ass b****” but it also might have national security implications. Consider if ISIS or another extremist terrorist group is using social media to recruit. This would hamper the ability of the FBI to work with social media to stop that.
Let ISIS use social media to recruit. If people are dumb enough to join ISIS or al Queda or Hamas or whatever, they can die in glorious jihad. I would prefer the government staying out of regulation of speech over whatever marginal utility is gained by allowing them to participate in regulation of speech.
I’m telling y’all, it’s all projection…it always is half these dudes got a dildo in their desk and a trans side piece hiding for dear life in the closet
Hmmm I think this is one of those things you say even though we know you don't believe in it. Of course you don't want ISIS recruiting in mass increasing the odds of terror attacks in the US. If another major Islamic extremist terror event happens like 9/11 you'll be here defending ISIS propaganda being censored in social media.
Well ISIS did recruit using social media and it caused problems not just for the US but for the UK, France and other countries. Part of the problem wasn't just them going overseas and dying in Jihad but also young women lured in who ended up becoming practically sex slaves to ISIS fighters. Also the more groups like this can recruit from Western countries the more likely those recruits will return to their countries of origins radicalized and start causing engaging in terrorist acts there. That did happen in France. Also to add what we saw with what the issues that this bill is supposedly addressing was that the government asked social media companies to restrict certain content. They weren't using laws or police powers to do it. The government does have the right to ask a private entity to do something and it not be a violation of the free speech.
Nope, I really don't care if ISIS has a twitter account and invites morons to join ISIS. If there is another major Islamic terror event in the US, that would be the fault of the terrorists, and our security failure. We should be able to beat ISIS in the marketplace of ideas, since they really, really suck. If women are stupid enough to sign up for ISIS, they can go be sex slaves. I don't think we need to protect people from their own stupidity. If you want to stick your hand in a blender, do it. I'm sure they felt totally free to tell the federal government to piss off. There is no pressure to conform to the wishes of the most powerful people in the world. I don't want my government, asking, telling, begging, pleading, or paying social media companies to regulate speech.
I respect the principled stance you're taking here. Where I disagree, however, is that an unregulated social media platform that amplifies extremist rhetoric as a consequence of optimizing engagement is not really a pure marketplace of ideas in my view. I don't like banning speech that is simply wrong or considered dangerous. That's a slippery slope. But the way these platforms function, more fundamentally, is messed up. They yield a more divided and less connected population, one that is less willing to honestly engage with opposing ideas that challenge their beliefs.
Concerted propaganda is also not a marketplace of ideas. If you can create a few hundred Twitter accounts working together to spread propaganda, it's a type of DoS attack on all other ideas. A true functional marketplace of ideas needs guardrails against propaganda, threats, violence, outright intentional lies, and so on. A completely unregulated social media platform will succumb to those who have a strong interest against an actual marketplace of ideas. A social media platform that, as you indicate, optimizes engagement (especially harmful engagement) for their benefit is better, but it is also not an open marketplace of ideas. Guardrails and regulation aren't always bad and is often necessary for the best ideas to flourish.
I doubt the marketplace of ideas even comes into play. Folks joining ISIS likely saw the ISIS "idea" and not any other "ideas" to weigh their options of which ideas are better. Social media platforms have disallowed ISIS propaganda on their own. If they hadn't, there would likely be more US citizens joining ISIS.
