Trump To Ban Tik-Tok

[TedKennedy]

[

Blustering and Tweeing LOL.... Hell of a strawman comment you have there. I'll leave you with it.

Is that a strawman comment?

If you care to back up your propaganda comment line by line in those accomplishments, I'm all ears.

In true Trump style, you attempt to overwhelm with hollow BS, citing things that may or may not have resulted from DJT's actions, as well as citing " understands the importance of education..." WOW - what an insightful man!


If you want to dumb everything down to civil liberties and limiting government then great, he's done far more than any "conservative" president I've seen in quite some time.

I must ask, with all the whining you do about government, from LE to Trump, I must ask again...... why don't you put your hat in the ring? You seem to have a perfect solution to government. Why not step up to the plate and see how easy it is? Seems someone could get pretty far on platform limiting government and expanding civil liberties.

I'll pull one from your list, simply because it's a blatant lie -

"The President signed a historic Executive Order that promotes and protects free speech on college campuses"
What DJT signed was an EO that would withhold federal funds for a college that participates in boycotting Israel. That suppresses free speech, quite the opposite of your screed above.

 

[TedKennedy]

Didnt get a stimulous check? I doubt that.
I gave mine away to a needy family but I wont lie about receiving one, I did.
If tweeting is whats got you hating DT and none of his many accomplishments matter to you then we cant change your mind.

If I got one, I'd have cashed it. I didn't get one. I may be a hateful SOB, but I'm not a liar.

 

[Glocktogo]

Didn't get one, but I'd sure cash it if I had since it would be a fraction of what is already stolen from my paycheck.

Not sure what propagandist site you got that wall of text from, but BRAVO!

I care about two main things in a candidate -

Individual liberties, and limiting government.

If bluster and tweeting and attempting to make life comfortable for Americans is how you gauge a president's worth, I can't change your mind.

So just to confirm, between Lil' Joey Two-Barrels and Orange Man Bad, you'll hold you nose and vote OMB? I ask because you know very well that the latter has done more to limit government than the last 5 presidents combined, or at least had the biggest offsets against .gov encroachments.

I also don't get why you and someone else are shilling for the CCP? I mean I get not wanting the .gov to interfere with private enterprise, but the the CCP is NOT private enterprise. They are without question the biggest external threat the US has faced since the Cold War ended. But hey, if you want the CCP in your home and on your loved one's personal devices, have at it!

 

[SMS]

Shilling for the CCP. That’s funny.

Supporting government censorship of information platforms via the “banning” of said platforms is more in line with the CCP than arguing against such a move is. (But we won’t get into the fact that he can’t actually ban the app, unless he really wants to enter new territory and block the IP or other measures)

That fact that otherwise intelligent adults can’t see that because they just can’t argue against anything Trump does is pretty sad.

Supporting such a move out of the same mouth that criticizes Facebook and other social media for their censorship is just plain hypocritical.

 

[TedKennedy]

So just to confirm, between Lil' Joey Two-Barrels and Orange Man Bad, you'll hold you nose and vote OMB? I ask because you know very well that the latter has done more to limit government than the last 5 presidents combined, or at least had the biggest offsets against .gov encroachments.

I'll know what I'll do when the time comes - why does it matter, Trump's got this in the bag. lol. Doesn't he?


I also don't get why you and someone else are shilling for the CCP? I mean I get not wanting the .gov to interfere with private enterprise, but the the CCP is NOT private enterprise. They are without question the biggest external threat the US has faced since the Cold War ended. But hey, if you want the CCP in your home and on your loved one's personal devices, have at it!

I'm secretly hoping that trade will open up and Trump will bring back SKS and AK surplus rifles, as well as 7.62 for a hundo per case.

 

[JD8]

[


I'll pull one from your list, simply because it's a blatant lie -

"The President signed a historic Executive Order that promotes and protects free speech on college campuses"
What DJT signed was an EO that would withhold federal funds for a college that participates in boycotting Israel. That suppresses free speech, quite the opposite of your screed above.

Speaking of propaganda lol.....

"The order directs 11 federal agencies that make research and education grants “to ensure institutions that receive Federal research or education grants promote free inquiry, including through compliance with all applicable Federal laws, regulations, and policies.”

Keep going.

Get back to me on running for office.

 

[JD8]

Shilling for the CCP. That’s funny.

Supporting government censorship of information platforms via the “banning” of said platforms is more in line with the CCP than arguing against such a move is. (But we won’t get into the fact that he can’t actually ban the app, unless he really wants to enter new territory and block the IP or other measures)

That fact that otherwise intelligent adults can’t see that because they just can’t argue against anything Trump does is pretty sad.

Supporting such a move out of the same mouth that criticizes Facebook and other social media for their censorship is just plain hypocritical.

Ah yes..we go from strawman to ad hominem.

Because if someone disagrees with you on Trump, they aren't intelligent. Where have I heard that before?

Criticizing Facebook and considering a ban on an app to shown significant security risks, harvesting of data, and possibly direct ties to the Chinese Government is apples to oranges to say the least.

 

[TedKennedy]

"Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), 42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq., prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving Federal financial assistance. While Title VI does not cover discrimination based on religion, individuals who face discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin do not lose protection under Title VI for also being a member of a group that shares common religious practices. Discrimination against Jews may give rise to a Title VI violation when the discrimination is based on an individual’s race, color, or national origin.

It shall be the policy of the executive branch to enforce Title VI against prohibited forms of discrimination rooted in anti-Semitism as vigorously as against all other forms of discrimination prohibited by Title VI."

Sec. 3. Additional Authorities Prohibiting Anti-Semitic Discrimination. Within 120 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency charged with enforcing Title VI shall submit a report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, identifying additional nondiscrimination authorities within its enforcement authority with respect to which the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism could be considered.

Sec. 4. Rule of Construction. Nothing in this order shall be construed to alter the evidentiary requirements pursuant to which an agency makes a determination that conduct, including harassment, amounts to actionable discrimination, or to diminish or infringe upon the rights protected under any other provision of law.

The education EO you quoted was a different EO than I referred to -

This one would strip funding from schools that fail to silence anti-Israel voices, and comparison of Israel Palestinian policy to Apartheid. Agree or disagree, silencing voices with the force of the state is a bad deal.

I'll let you know if I run for office, can I count on your support?

 

[SMS]

Ah yes..we go from strawman to ad hominem.

Because if someone disagrees with you on Trump, they aren't intelligent. Where have I heard that before?

Criticizing Facebook and considering a ban on an app to shown significant security risks, harvesting of data, and possibly direct ties to the Chinese Government is apples to oranges to say the least.

I said otherwise intelligent. That doesn’t mean not intelligent. An intelligent person would understand my point there, but again, perhaps you are blinded by Pro-TDS.

Pro-TDS is just as rampant and entertaining as TDS.

 

[JD8]

"Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 (Title VI), 42 U.S.C. 2000d et seq., prohibits discrimination on the basis of race, color, and national origin in programs and activities receiving Federal financial assistance. While Title VI does not cover discrimination based on religion, individuals who face discrimination on the basis of race, color, or national origin do not lose protection under Title VI for also being a member of a group that shares common religious practices. Discrimination against Jews may give rise to a Title VI violation when the discrimination is based on an individual’s race, color, or national origin.

It shall be the policy of the executive branch to enforce Title VI against prohibited forms of discrimination rooted in anti-Semitism as vigorously as against all other forms of discrimination prohibited by Title VI."

Sec. 3. Additional Authorities Prohibiting Anti-Semitic Discrimination. Within 120 days of the date of this order, the head of each agency charged with enforcing Title VI shall submit a report to the President, through the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy, identifying additional nondiscrimination authorities within its enforcement authority with respect to which the IHRA definition of anti-Semitism could be considered.

Sec. 4. Rule of Construction. Nothing in this order shall be construed to alter the evidentiary requirements pursuant to which an agency makes a determination that conduct, including harassment, amounts to actionable discrimination, or to diminish or infringe upon the rights protected under any other provision of law.

The education EO you quoted was a different EO than I referred to -

This one would strip funding from schools that fail to silence anti-Israel voices, and comparison of Israel Palestinian policy to Apartheid. Agree or disagree, silencing voices with the force of the state is a bad deal.

I'll let you know if I run for office, can I count on your support?

Yeah, that's quite a stretch. Seems to me you can't say certain things on a college campus while other religions or demographics are fair game.

Would I support you? It depends. I have no idea what your platform is and the logistics you would entail to get there. You just bark out about how things should be concerning several aspects of society, but I've yet to see any real world solutions.