Here is a link to a political column about free speech, censorship, and how financial pressures cause some publishers to withhold information. Its a good column, but I thought the comments were even more interesting than the column itself. Below the link is one of the comments.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/09/14/AR2009091402705.html?wpisrc=newsletter
Both political extremes are functioning well at this point in this country. They are both heard well in the press, but the great majority of people in this country are not being heard, have not been heard, and probably will never be heard. These problems will continue until moderate conservatives and progressives begin to work together to control the extremes. If they don't, we are in deep trouble.
You don't have much room to talk about censorship after the way you treated that one poster you were debating religion with. You deleted all his posts because you couldn't win the debate fair and square.
ReplyDeleteI deleted the entire argument, including my own posts. The poster was copying and pasting material from another site as an argument.
ReplyDeleteI do have the right to delete whatever I choose to delete.
You deleted it becaus eyou said some dumb things.
ReplyDeleteIt is your blog, just don't preach about the First Amendment and censorship when you are practicing it.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteEveryone has a right to start their own free blog and say what they wish. I am not so sure that you have a "right" to post whatever you like, or say whatever you like, on someone elses blog.
ReplyDeleteWhat do other people think?
Do you all think a person has a "right" to say anything they want on someone elses blog?
I don't mind reading or hearing opposing opinions, or those who wish to present their side of an argument or even promote agendas!
ReplyDeleteBut, when it becomes so obvious that the party or parties involved won't ever reach agreement and continue to present their case - What is the point?
Move on and choose to disagree - nobody said everyone had to agree or even win - just that they should have the RIGHT to participate!
I agree JJ, you have a right to moderate your own blog - it doesn't mean they don't have a right to free speech.
ReplyDeleteJust ask Joe Wilson. You can't run around yelling, writing or proclaiming whatever you want, whenever you want.
"If they don't, we are in deep trouble." Don't look now, jj, we've been in deep trouble for a long time. Consider: Van Jones. Interesting how none of the main media thought it was "newsworthy". Washingtonpot.com says "we were understaffed at that time" ha. (misspelling intentional) Consider: ACORN employees caught on video inciting prostitution of underage girls. Interesting how NONE of the main media thought it was coverage worthy. Consider: the main media is in the tank for left-wing stuff so bad that truth is swept aside. Consider: how a local editor was blackballed & almost frog-marched out. The so-called plagiarism was NOT the real issue. The REAL issue was that there was finally found a way to do the deed that was planned long ago. Why? VALUES & ideology. We've been in trouble a long time jj. Truth doesn't matter anymore. All that matters is who has the most $$ & can get to the camera first. Journalism?...What's that? Sheesh!!! ---BTW, sure you are the control point on your blog. Wouldn't be right to let someone else do it would it?
ReplyDeleteYes ideology was a huge part of it. Different sides of the culture war and all that.
ReplyDeleteI just hate that I provided them with the bullet. :)
But, I did win my appeal on unemployment. The adminstrative law judge ruled that i was not fired for cause.
But, in Kansas you can fire anyone for any reason, or for no reason at all, and that is true in most states. So what they did was not illegal, but, what I did wasn't a crime either.
BTW, i did not plagarize.
I never claimed anything was my own work.
that's crap. You copied and pasted. Own it already and move on. Stop making excuses.
ReplyDeleteHey, pipe down D. I never mentioned for purposes of drudging up old bones. Pls. reread my post. I was speaking on the death of truth. (trying to be nice here) I do not believe for 1 minute jj intentionally intended to own another's work as his own. I'm anonymous so, in no way do I need to curry favor with jj or anyone else. I know what I meant and meant what I said. Contrary to what some people think, all of us out here are not mindless robots. I can hear, I can read, and I know when someone is done wrong, simply because they happen to believe a bit differently than someone else. IDEOLOGY. Sorry, you missed my point altogether...ho hum
ReplyDelete@ ILBR
ReplyDeleteI think what Rep. Wilson did was reckless and disrespectful but I didn't see a racist element. I am afraid some D's are taking his actions out of context and in my opinion they need to dial the rhetoric back.
Just ask Joe Wilson. You can't run around yelling, writing or proclaiming whatever you want, whenever you want.
ReplyDelete------------
The problem is that in the present day political arena they don't always present all the facts and write their bills with open ends that get closed later on or somewhere else.
I think Joe knew what the difference was and called Obama straight out!
Too bad they can't just say what they mean and mean what they say!
I knew Joe when i lived in S.C., he is definitely not a racist.
ReplyDeleteBut he spoke out against Obama, so he must be racist! At least according to the Democrats.
ReplyDeleteYes, that is as ridiculous as it sounds.
Isn't the accusation itself rather racist?
ReplyDeletei'm getting a headache from this one.(joe) don't agree with what he did. can't say what he said was wrong either. but not right way to do it. d. not same d as D !
ReplyDelete