Popehat's response was, if it's legal speech it's good, no matter what. I'm exploring whether that principle has any limits. This is what lawyers do.
-
-
This was a pretty uncharitable response to Ken's point to be fairhttps://twitter.com/baseballcrank/status/1118671407779667968?s=19 …
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
He's one of what appeared to be one of the few rational, sane people on here until recently. Don't get it.
-
He's a stale "blogger" from the olden days who lost it.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
If I don’t agree with you precisely, I don’t support the free exchange of ideas. That’s what I mean by “hack.”
-
I'm advancing a pro-speech position, but it must be your way or the highway? At least admit that the stance you're advocating for is that more speakers should be driven out of business in order to assure that their opinions are not heard.
- Show replies
New conversation -
-
-
You’re a hack dan.
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
Dan I need this, DO NOT STOP
End of conversation
-
-
-
No, he's angry because you're being a pedantic, argumentative, strawmanning, disingenuous partisan with his head up his own ass. You're gonna corncob yourself into a singularity. ...or that was what read like to me, at least.
-
Correct. Except exactly backwards. Check your signs.pic.twitter.com/YeVKoPPjG9
This media may contain sensitive material. Learn more
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.