The Former Guy sues the internet

vantexan

Well-Known Member
So he did dodge the draft and doesn’t have bone spurs.
No doubt he did but check Box Ox's post above concerning Biden. What about Bill Clinton? George W. at least joined the Air National Guard if I remember right. Let's not be selective. What I care about is how our commander-in-chief views the military as well as how he handles the economy. You just want to sneer and smear. It seems all you ever do is sneer and smear. Do you care about the integrity of our country or do you feel the sooner we tear it apart the better? What happens if rioting in the streets doesn't achieve political aims? What's the next step? Large scale killing? It's a dangerous game y'all are playing.
 

oldngray

nowhere special
No doubt he did but check Box Ox's post above concerning Biden. What about Bill Clinton? George W. at least joined the Air National Guard if I remember right. Let's not be selective. What I care about is how our commander-in-chief views the military as well as how he handles the economy. You just want to sneer and smear. It seems all you ever do is sneer and smear. Do you care about the integrity of our country or do you feel the sooner we tear it apart the better? What happens if rioting in the streets doesn't achieve political aims? What's the next step? Large scale killing? It's a dangerous game y'all are playing.
What about Obama's military service? He missed the years for the draft but still could have volunteered. But being a community organizer was more important to him.
 

DriveInDriѵeOut

Inordinately Right
Public square argument?
On April 5, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas kicked off a new round of debate on the right way to regulate social media companies with a thoughtful and creative piece of legal scholarship. His key point is that First Amendment review by the courts might very well uphold a state or federal statute that treated social media platforms as common carriers or places of public accommodation and restricted their ability to remove content on their systems based on political point of view.
 

oldngray

nowhere special
On April 5, Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas kicked off a new round of debate on the right way to regulate social media companies with a thoughtful and creative piece of legal scholarship. His key point is that First Amendment review by the courts might very well uphold a state or federal statute that treated social media platforms as common carriers or places of public accommodation and restricted their ability to remove content on their systems based on political point of view.
Its about the section 230 protection social media platforms currently have. The issue is if they get political and start filtering content they become a publisher and should lose that protection.
 
Top