Brave New Silicon Valley World

Brave New Silicon Valley World
  • 309
  • 114
  • 11

My Recent Posts

Today, President Trump called out the tech titans.  This rebuke was long overdue, as Silicon Valley is infected with sordid types who will take money from anyone, and if it came down to selling out America for a profit, they would do it.   If China owned Silicon Valley and set their guidelines, there would be little difference.  The only real difference would be that those speaking conservative opinions would be beaten, whipped, and put in camps instead of just shadow banned, censored, and blocked.  There are three areas to explore.  My personal experience with Facebook and why I deleted my account completely, Google's algorithms that skew the truth, coupled with what search engine should be used in it's place, and why the First Amendment applies not only to the government, but also to Silicon Valley.

 

July of 2013 was when I first logged into FB.  Having been warned, rightly so, about the garbage that was on FB from my wise and vigilant church, I stayed off.  But when my church and I parted ways, due to my tendency to always comply with orders that part way with reason:), I ventured on to FB, to join a site that publicized the solutions to the problem I had just encountered.  FB was one huge arena.  Very soon, it became apparent that not all ideas, thoughts, and posts were equal.  Suddenly, after commenting with conservative opinions, I discovered difficulties with my login.  Nonplussed, I tried again, only to discover I had earned my first of many trips to the FB jail, where Americans are sent for re education.  We are being trained on how to be good comrades and how we will be punished and dehumanized if we dare state an opinion Big Brother FB does not like.  After leaving FB in January of 2015, Trump's election moved me to rejoin in November of 2016, and this last hurrah ended in January of 2018, terminating with the termination of my account in June of 2018.  There were massive contradictions.  Full blown prostitution ads were tolerated, as were pictures of alluring women who practically had not a stitch of clothing on, but conservaspeak was severely restricted and often banned.  In an attempt to give the overzealous FB censors something worthwhile to work on, I reported every last instance I could find of immodest and provocatively dressed women.  That way, I could busy them up and they'd be distracted from their Jihad on conservative speech.  There were many friends met on FB, but none like those in real life, which talked face to face.   In retrospect, Facebook was a near complete waste of time for two and a half years of my life.  It doesn't matter how profound one's opinion may be, FB can censor and block you for no reason at all, and is not even in the habit of explaining exact reasons for their crackdowns.  Not only does one have to wonder when the tyrants block on FB can happen, if one is a conservative, one also has to deal with algorithm's which stifle and discourage the spread of conservative views, and promote and encourage the spread of liberal nonsense.  Facebook seemed to be an excellent example of exactly why the Founders of America were not fans of Democracy. They realized that with lots of uninformed people running around making decisions, bad things nearly always happen.  We have this right here on WB, where the 13 liberals, Mufasa, Aaron, Travil the Satanist, Michka, Green, Gregory, Bugs, Bill H., Stone, Opher, Hunter, Kelly, and Logical Man, constantly come to the wrong conclusions on nearly every topic that is introduced.  They can't help it, they see as they are. 

 

Moving on to Google.  Back in 2008, when I watched CNN and television, read the newspaper, watched YouTube and googled Obama, I was enraptured with Obama.  I thought he was the second coming.  I didn't vote, but I went to Las Vegas to visit when he gave a speech two days before he was elected.  He seemed to be the perfect answer for America.  Then, I escaped my liberal bubble, and boy did reality smack me hard.  I had to come to the realization that I supported the man who was the most wicked president in American history.  That was a very painful understanding.  I felt better when I realized at least I recognized my error. There are tens of millions of liberals who still don't, and many of them are far older than my 38 years.  Hopefully they find their way out of their delusions sooner, rather than later.  Back then, it didn't cross my mind that the results I searched for were being rigged to get me to think and do the things the people who paid Google wanted me to think and do.  It's a massive indoctrination effort.  Google has a system in place similar to Russian's Siberia.  Whereas in Russia, if you opposed the party line, you were liable to be taken 100 miles away, to Siberia, and separated, with Google, whatever you search for, the conservative results are liable to be at least 100 search results deep. Google does this with their algorithms, knowing that the average search hones in on the top 5-20 search results and ignores everything after that.  Using this method, a massive re education program is under way even as I type this.  To any logical person, Google search results go left.  The leftist media is furiously at work as I type this to discredit this and to claim Google is perfectly impartial, when any fool can tell they definitely are not.  A recent search of 'Trump' on Google revealed 96% of the news sites that followed in the top 100 were liberal.   It's not hard to tell.  The reader can find any liberal or conservative and key them into Google.  The results will skew towards favoring the liberal every single time.  The argument will be made that traffic to the websites and money influences the search results.  That is total nonsense, as Breitbart is one of the highest ranked and trafficked political websites in the world, and it rarely shows up on Google searches.  The search engines that should be used in Google's place are Brave and DuckDuckGo.  Neither spy on users and neither use tricky algorithms to steer users to do and believe what Google and Google's investors want them to do and believe.   

 

Lastly, Trump made an excellent suggestion, quickly jumped on by Larry Kudlow, that Silicon Valley may need to be regulated.  The libertarians and liberals are appalled at this, as they look upon this as an assault on the First Amendment and an assault on private companies right to determine their own destiny. But this is different, it would seem.  When the tech companies have the power to sway tens of millions of votes and they are engaging in behaviors that suppress speech and can sway elections, the First Amendment applies directly.  If we say our government must tolerate free speech, then does it not automatically follow that entities which have the power to shape our government dramatically must also tolerate free speech, or are we willing to admit we are slaves, and that we must submit to the will and dictates of those with money and power? 

 

In conclusion, we have a serious problem.  The internet is not the wonderchild it was made out to be.  Our nation is far less virtuous and wise than we were in 1993 when the internet was first introduced, and if we do not hurriedly restore the virtue and wisdom we had prior to the internet, the nation we were born into, for those of us born prior to 1980,  will be lost forever, never to be regained.  The indoctrination with disinformation of tens of millions of Americans cannot occur without severe consequences that are likely irreparable.  70% of all internet usage is for porn.  If we fail to speedily restore marriages and the church, the two backbones of the American Revolution, then we Americans will all die in a world far worse than the one in America we were born in.   May we profit from the examples of history, and wisely choose.  Either we choose life or death, success or failure, glory or shame, good or evil. 

Comments

Johnny Fever Added Aug 29, 2018 - 4:16am
It is never a good thing when government intrudes into the private sector.  Here's a novel idea that doesn't require any legislation, if you don't like Google, find a different search engine.  Isn't freedom wonderful!
FacePalm Added Aug 29, 2018 - 8:19am
Ryan-
Yelling at them is one thing; going after them with Anti-Trust legislation will get their attention.
In America, the operation of a corporate entity is a privilege, not a right; i would propose that another tool in the box of both the president and prosecutors would be to go after the corporate charter, threatening to YANK it and put their asses right the hell out of business if they keep on discriminating against conservative, libertarian, pro-American, and Republican voices.
 
There is precedent for the antitrust move, as well; courts have consistently ruled that when a company grows so big that it is effectively a monopoly, it can be - and SHOULD be - broken up.  Don't know if you're old enough to remember "Ma Bell," or not - AT&T was the effective monopoly which was broken up back in the day.
 
Personally, i think that some google and apple execs should be prosecuted for treason, as well, for re-locating to China and giving them the tech they want to enact their "Big Brother" scenario of complete governmental surveillance and punishment for "wrongthink" via their "social credit rating," which they also hope to impose world-wide, the very DEFINITION of the satanic NWO/OWG.
Thomas Sutrina Added Aug 29, 2018 - 9:18am
Do not expect antitrust since Google is a major swamp player so all the hands are greased.   And Google can point to dozens of competitors.    
 
This is an opportunity for any of these search engine competitors to use Google bias as a marketing tool to get more users and thus ad money.  The candidates are Dog pile, DuckduckGo, Gibiru, Wolfram_Alpha.  But they need to step up their search engines.
 
Twitter has blocked me for contacting many GOP representatives about taxes and health care during those debts.
FacePalm Added Aug 29, 2018 - 9:34am
Trump has made it plain that he wants a level playing field, especially internationally; why should he change his mind about domestic matters?
 
i DO expect antitrust legislation to break them the hell up; between facebook, google, twitter and a few others, these leftist Silicon Valley ideologue corporate entities control 90% of internet traffic, and influence much more.  Since they're engaging in OBVIOUS discrimination, they're subject to regulation whether they like it or not.
 
Bribes won't mean a damn thing to Trump, and based on his Dec 21 2017 EO and Dec. of Emergency, doesn't much care for corruption, either, whether in gov't OR the private sector.
 
Wait and see.
 
In the meantime, i avoid most google platforms except youtube, and NEVER use their search functions.  Not a FB or twitter guy, either, though i monitor Trump's tweets; he's a sharp guy, IMO, and sometimes hilarious, to boot.
 
 
Ryan Messano Added Aug 29, 2018 - 9:44am
If the government does not uphold the Constitution Johnny, who will?  While I agree that that government governs best that governs least, the fact is Google sways elections with its practices, and that is intolerable.  Blocking information you don’t like, and spreading information you like by force, is unconstitutional.  It’s one thing if Google advertises it and is held liable for their behavior, but they don’t and aren’t.  Pretending to be an open platform to be immune from lawsuits, while acting as a publisher and getting rid of information they don’t like is totally bogus behavior by the tech giants.
Ryan Messano Added Aug 29, 2018 - 9:49am
Very much agree, Facepalm! Their existence ought to be threatened over their suppression of conservative views, while blandly publicly proclaiming no such suppression exists.  It boils my blood that I’ve been blocked by FB at least six times for thirty days each for conservaspeakcrime, and I watch Massa Zuckerberg get up before Congress and claim FB has no bias.  
 
Amen to anti-trust legislation, I’m not old enough to remember the Ma Bell breakup, but I have heard and read much about it.
 
Yes on treason charges for certain Google executives.  How a company can help China censor and refuse to help the American military is flat out treasonous.  
Ryan Messano Added Aug 29, 2018 - 9:52am
Google certainly has a lot of hands greased, Thomas.  
 
Alternative search engines to Google are wise, however, Google needs to be forced to either stop it’s smothering of conservative views, or at least be forced to honestly advertise its behavior.  They currently claim your search is bias free, when any fool can see that is not so.
 
Wow, you were blocked by Twitter? Very disturbing.  I’ve never used it in my life.
Lindsay Wheeler Added Aug 29, 2018 - 11:31am
It is funny that the once "revolutionaries", i.e. the American revolutionaries that used "free speech" to undermine the rule of King George---are in turn denied "free speech" by more radical revolutionaries. Hah, Hah, Hah. 
 
I enjoy the schadenfreude.
 
While liberals attacked Christendom and destroyed the shepherds of the Christian flocks, i.e. Throne and Altar, the hard left is attacking and denying soft liberals their "free speech". 
 
All quite funny now!, ain't it!!!!!
 
Prudence is a Virtue, is it not?  Is it Prudent to let subversives speak?
Bill H. Added Aug 29, 2018 - 11:36am
 
Hello- Ryan's number 8 listed Commie Liberal Pinko Socialist Here!
I will agree with Ryan that Google and any other search/social media sites that use "custom personalization algorithms" should be avoided to both protect your privacy and to assure that you are not getting information that is "bubbleized" to meet your comfort requirements.
As Wikipedia accurately states:
"A filter bubble is a state of intellectual isolation that can result from personalized searches when a website algorithm selectively guesses what information a user would like to see based on information about the user, such as location, past click-behavior and search history. As a result, users become separated from information that disagrees with their viewpoints, effectively isolating them in their own cultural or ideological bubbles. The choices made by these algorithms are not transparent. Prime examples include Google Personalized Search results and Facebook's personalized news-stream.".
 
 
 
Contrary to what is being stated lately, this affects people on both "sides".
I have witnessed many examples of this during actual evaluations of search engine algorithms when I was employed in the communications sector. The Left get "Lefter" and the Right get "Righter", and those in the center wonder why there is nothing logical to find anymore.
And we wonder why people these days seem to not only have extreme views, but are unable to discuss or reason their own.
Jeff Michka Added Aug 29, 2018 - 12:01pm
Sorry about your lower "Ryan ranking," Bill H.  Ryan just can't prioritize his enemies list with any accuracy, despite his religious fervor.  You just won't admit to rightists there is only "one side," their side.
Ryan Messano Added Aug 29, 2018 - 12:10pm
Yes, Lindsay, except, the Founders understood you don’t use drugs, watch porn, or waste nine years watching television.  Today’s revolutionaries are moral midgets in comparison.
Ryan Messano Added Aug 29, 2018 - 12:11pm
I completely agree, Bill H., with the exception that you believe both sides make valid points, and I believe the Founders clearly pick small government, low taxes, and low regulations, and the left does not stand for this.
Ryan Messano Added Aug 29, 2018 - 12:13pm
That’s right, Jeff.
 
”The heart of the wise inclined to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left”
Ecclesiastes 10:2 NIV.
 
The Bible said it thousands of years ago.
Bill H. Added Aug 29, 2018 - 12:53pm
I don't believe that the Founders had access to TV, Porn, or any drugs other than opium back in the day.
Ryan Messano Added Aug 29, 2018 - 1:23pm
They didn’t, Bill H., and were better off for it.  Not only do we engage in these damaging behaviors, but tens of millions of Americans are stupidly proud about it and think it makes them superior.  Outrageous hubris.
FacePalm Added Aug 29, 2018 - 3:32pm
Benjamin Franklin is well-known for his participation in the "Hellfire Club," which involved many prostitutes.  As ambassador to France, he also had many "liaisons," to put it somewhat circumspectly.  Didn't stop him from being a genius, or inventing many useful things while promoting "American values" abroad...
 
Who knows how many others of the F&F were also libertines?  Hard to say, though Jefferson is now well-known for having a long-term adulterous relationship with Sally Heming, one of his slaves.  Wonder how Mrs. Jefferson felt about that?
 
Generally speaking, it's not a good idea to harshly judge your fellows, unless, of course, you've prepared yourself to BE judged just as harshly - and just as swiftly - as you've done to "others."
 
Ryan-
To answer your question about who will uphold the Constitution, i propose that the People do so via their State representatives.  We cannot do so directly, as none of "The People" are parties to the Constitution.  My suggestion is this.  The FIRST time any rep. votes for anything outside the boundaries he agreed to abide by IAW his/her Oath of Office, complain en masse to your State's legislators and advocate for an immediate arrest for felony perjury (oathbreaking); convict just THREE in well-publicized cases, and the rest will fall in line rather swiftly, i expect.
 
The same principle should apply to anyone in the Executive branch, especially those currently using the awesome surveillance power of the intelligence agencies to compile "profiles" of us without a warrant or even probable cause, not to mention our knowledge or consent; they swore to "preserve, protect, and defend" the 4th Amendment(along with the rest) "against ALL enemies, foreign AND DOMESTIC," meaning, in this case, themselves, right?  If they're not held to account for their betrayal of the public trust, the bullying will simply continue, and if history is any guide, get worse. 
 
Likewise, with the Judicial branch; i think that since only Congress has the power to modify the Constitution in any way(conditioned on presidential approval), any SCOTUS ruling which has that effect should be immediately struck down, and everyone who voted for such a Usurpation be put on trial for felony perjury, as well.   They (SCOTUS judges) claim the right to "interpret" the Constitution; oh, yeah?  Read Article 3, and show me "interpret."  Not a delegated power; it's been ASSUMED/arrogated to themselves unlawfully.
 
That said, i've just thought of an exception; a Convention of the States can propose a Constitutional Amendment, which resolution would pass if 2/3'rds of the States vote in favor; at that point, 3/4's would have to ratify it to make it positive law, whether Congress agrees/likes it or not.  Term limits, for example, might have to be imposed this way, as Congress surely won't vote for THAT.
 
Here's another proposed law i think should draw the attention of the States, as well, since Congress absolutely refuses to even vote on it:
 
“In each new Congress since 1995, Rep. John Shadegg (R-AZ) has introduced the Enumerated Powers Act (HR 1359)... Simply put, if enacted, the Enumerated Powers Act would require Congress to specify the basis of authority in the U.S. Constitution for the enactment of laws and other congressional actions. HR 1359 has 28 co-sponsors in the House of Representatives. When Shadegg introduced the Enumerated Powers Act, he explained that the Constitution gives the federal government great, but limited, powers. Its framers granted Congress, as the central mechanism for protecting liberty, specific rather than general powers. The Constitution gives Congress 18 specific enumerated powers, spelled out mostly in Article 1, Section 8. The framers reinforced that enumeration by the 10th Amendment, which reads: ‘The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved for the States respectively, or to the people.’ Just a few of the numerous statements by our founders demonstrate that their vision and the vision of Shadegg’s Enumerated Powers Act are one and the same... I salute the bravery of Rep. Shadegg and the 28 co-sponsors of the Enumerated Powers Act. They have a monumental struggle. Congress is not alone in its constitutional contempt, but is joined by the White House and particularly the constitutionally derelict U.S. Supreme Court.”
 —Walter E. Williams
 
The only possible reason to oppose such a law that i can think of is that Congresscretins LIKE being able to vote on any damn thing they please, and make "law" concerni
FacePalm Added Aug 29, 2018 - 3:34pm
ng it, too...as long as there's no enforcement of their legally binding Oath of Office, their perfidy will just continue.
Gregory S. McNeill Added Aug 29, 2018 - 7:02pm
Trump is a hypocrite. He has used Social Media to elevate himself in the past. He isn't entitled to have respect because he has disrespected others in the past. 
Ken Added Aug 29, 2018 - 7:32pm
If China owned Silicon Valley and set their guidelines, there would be little difference. 
 
In a way, China DOES own silicon valley.  Part of the Chinese problem Trump is trying to solve.  China requires anyone who wants to do business with them to partner with a local company (government owned of course), and it must share its technology.  Virtually everything Apple has created is wide open to the Chinese, just as an example.
Thomas Sutrina Added Aug 29, 2018 - 9:03pm
Gregory McNeill, so let me understand this statement <<Trump is a hypocrite. He has used Social Media to elevate himself in the past. >> You go on to say that he is disrespectful which has noting to do with the first part because a lot of people that have not standing in the media are disrespectful to the same degree as those in the media.
 
So as I said let me understand your statement.  Every person that is on an TV series has elevated themselves so are they then hypocrite?  That is the relationship that your pointing out?    Or in addition your requires disrespect.  The next group are sport figures and actors that have also elevated themselves in the public's eye.  There are many that are disrespectful.  So Gregory they also are then by my understanding of your words must be a hypocrite?   NOW I UNDERSTAND.
FacePalm Added Aug 29, 2018 - 9:08pm
Gregory-
Trump is a hypocrite. He has used Social Media to elevate himself in the past. He isn't entitled to have respect because he has disrespected others in the past.
 
Dig deeply enough into ANYone's life, and you'll find hypocrisy eventually.
Personally, i'm more interested in what someone DOES than in what they SAY.  Words are words.  Deeds speak far louder.
Ryan Messano Added Aug 29, 2018 - 11:34pm
Facepalm, despite the vast amount of similarities between our views, I must quibble with your characterization of Ben.  He did have a child out of wedlock, and that son actually fought on the side of the British.  However, I’ve never heard of his involvement in the ‘hellfire club’.  Also, the primary sources on his time in France do speak of him receiving much admiration from the French women, and their courtesans, but never detail physical relations.  Franklins writing in his Autobiography, reveal that he understood the dangers of venery outside of marriage. 
 
Also, Jefferson’s relationship with Sally Hemings is far from established fact.  ‘The Jefferson lies’ is a great book on the topic.
 
Excellent ideas on how to uphold the Constitution, I especially like reining in the judicial branch, which has strayed far outside the jurisdiction of the Founders vision for their role in government.
Ryan Messano Added Aug 29, 2018 - 11:35pm
Gregory, I’m curious, can you please name seven conservative and liberal news websites on line?
Ryan Messano Added Aug 29, 2018 - 11:36pm
Excellent point, Ken.
Ryan Messano Added Aug 29, 2018 - 11:36pm
Quite true, Thomas, well said!
Ken Added Aug 29, 2018 - 11:37pm
Dig deeply enough into ANYone's life, and you'll find hypocrisy eventually.
Personally, i'm more interested in what someone DOES than in what they SAY. 
 
First, I agree with you, and Trump has been raked over the coals more than any other president EVER.  It is interesting how the left will constantly talk about how evil every republican president is.  There hasn't been one that has been "legitimately elected" in the last 30 years.  And "shockingly" Every republican is worse for Americans than the last.  Even in the past week while talking about impeachment, they are saying "And Pence will be even worse"
 
It is the sickness of the left.  they don't even care about qualifications, only ideology.  RBG was a 96 out of 100 vote - does anyone think the entire senate agreed with her ideology?  No, they just agreed she was qualified and that was ok.  Same with Sotomayor and Kagan, many republican votes, not because they agreed with them but thought they were qualified (although Sotomayor is  a hack and an entirely different topic). 
 
Yet the left is entirely partisan and doesn't give a damn about qualification of someone proposed by a republican, they are ideologically against them so they automatically vote no.  To hell with the constitution. 
 
On the second point - This is why I was so against Trump at first.  I couldn't stand what he said.  I thought he was a lying crony capitalist and would veer left to be a typical NY liberal he had been most of his life.
 
He has, in fact, shockingly been exactly the opposite, and has built incredible credibility with his pragmatism.  He isn't an ideologue left or right at all, but while I think his protectionist policies are misguided, He clearly is doing what he sees as best for America, and is guiding us back to the heights we should be at.
Ryan Messano Added Aug 29, 2018 - 11:39pm
Yes, Facepalm, the idea the Democrats have anything at all to say about Trump is an outrage.  They really think American voters are too stupid to remember all the Clinton and Obama scandals they covered up, but we are supposed to sit up and pay attention to when they talk about Republican ones.
Ken Added Aug 29, 2018 - 11:54pm
I believe it was a CNN person just in the past 2 days that said "the only scandal Obama had was that he wore a terrible brown suit to a press conference"
 
ugh....Thank God there was no hillary to keep this buried, but as slowly and inefficiently as government works, the worst scandal and abuse of power in American history is slowly being exposed
Michael B. Added Aug 29, 2018 - 11:57pm
Funny, recently I was in a situation where I was "pressured" to join FB...I've always said, and I always will say, that I'd rather clip a homeless person's toenails than to go on FB, lol. As if the smarmy and smug visage of its dart-board-target and bottom-of-bird-cage-lining founder wasn't enough to put me off from the get-go, the (total and predictable) scandals at the heart of its heartless "soul" left me with the rare taste of vindication. I wonder what General William T. Sherman would think of FB, lol.
 
Ryan Messano Added Aug 30, 2018 - 12:11am
Lol, Michael! 
Especially @ clip a homeless persons toenails.  
 
So true, Ken, the FUSION GPS dossier is easiest the biggest scandal in American history, and the culprits are hollering the loudest about Trumps ‘crimes’.
Ken Added Aug 30, 2018 - 12:29am
Actually, the fusion GPS dossier isn't even the bulk of it.  That is just one part, there was a lot more going on long before and after that.  I would write an article about it all, but the facts are still fluid to most and there are still a lot of holes.  It is clear where it leads, but there is no complete "evidence trail" at this point that can take step to step through it
Ryan Messano Added Aug 30, 2018 - 1:09am
It’s a tangled web the Dems weave, when first they practice to deceive.
 
Its a disgrace that we have befuddled Republicans too dimwitted not to see the entire Mueller investigation is illicit and bogus.
Cullen Kehoe Added Aug 30, 2018 - 4:09am
It's a little tricky with social media like Facebook. 
 
But Google, it's easier. The government could force them to add a disclaimer that they are not, in fact, doing an actual search of the Internet and providing you with results. But rather filtering them the way they feel like and as a result, purposefully skewing your results. That seems fair. 
Thomas Sutrina Added Aug 30, 2018 - 8:29am
Google is just a leading indicator of the problems in Silicone Valley.  Recall that James Damore was fired after posting a 10 page note on the internal discussion board in July 2017 about 'unconscious bias' regarding women.  He defined that a stereotype existed and was fired for "'perpetuating gender stereotypes.'"  He had worked for Google for four years.  The document cited purported principles of evolutionary psychology to argue that women are unsuited to be good engineers because they are more interested in people than ideas.  (He was pointing out that women as all mammal females are care givers to their offspring and typically any offspring of their spices.  A fact that is well documented.) 
 
The engineer's memo detailing the alleged left-wing bias of the company and their intolerance of certain viewpoints.  Obviously firing is another indicator of intolerance.
Dino Manalis Added Aug 30, 2018 - 9:09am
 All ideas should be shared and debated on the Internet, while Silicon Valley ought to spread throughout America with numerous jobs!
Ryan Messano Added Aug 30, 2018 - 9:23am
That seems like a fair solution, Cullen.
Ryan Messano Added Aug 30, 2018 - 9:25am
Yep, Thomas, the Damore fiasco was one of the early concrete proofs of what nonsense was going on at Google.
Ryan Messano Added Aug 30, 2018 - 9:25am
Great point, Dino.
Bill H. Added Aug 30, 2018 - 11:13am
As I have stated before, if you use Google as your search engine and have so on the same computer for some time and you lean to the "left", you will get mostly "left" results. If you lean to the "right", you will get mostly "right" results. I have done this experiment in real-time on many occasions and proved it to be so. Doing the same experiment using either Startpage or DuckDuckGo produced the same results for both using the same search terms. Doing searches on my super-conservative brother in law's computer always results in mostly conservative results on a constant basis.
If you insist on using Google, always clear your cache and cookies to avoid results that are based on previous searches.
Ryan Messano Added Aug 30, 2018 - 11:37am
Not true, Bill.  Go to the library, it leans left.
Ryan Messano Added Aug 30, 2018 - 11:38am
I just Googled Trump and 9/10 news results were liberal.
Bill H. Added Aug 30, 2018 - 12:35pm
Try Googling "Trump's Accomplishments" on your computer and truthfully list your first 10 results.
Ryan Messano Added Aug 30, 2018 - 1:16pm
That’s a loaded search.
Thomas Sutrina Added Aug 30, 2018 - 1:29pm
The government have given Google, twitter, etc. because they are a platform for the public to express themselves no LIABILITY FOR THE CONTENT THAT IS PLACED ON THEIR PLATFORM.   This is a very important.   That means that a person can  use the web to draw your child into a situation they has kills someones child and the parents CAN NOT HOLD THE PLATFORM LIABLE.   Porn of minors, terrorist training and recruitment, etc. all happen on the their platforms and THEY ARE NOT LIABLE. 
 
The platforms like Google and Twitter are not keeping their side of the agreement by the filtering algorithms they now employ.   They are liable for the algorithms and the result.  They are liable for removing access to their platform and blocking others from accessing content on their platform. 
 
Advertising that pay them or that receives income from the platform is not the same as the exemption from liability for content provided by access.  The companies approve of all advertising individually so they are liable for the content of the ad.   This is the same situation that TV broadcasters and printed media operate under because they choose the advertising that appears on their media.
 
Telephone companies have the same exemption from liability when they provide communications channel.  You do not have the line go dead because you talking about committing a crime.  Law enforcement must get a warrant with an express reason and limits on the subject matter to listen in to the communications on the telephone platform of a telephone company.  Criminal activity that go to court from what is obtained does not result in liability to the platform provider.  
 
What filtering does a phone company use?  NONE, they have the same agreement that has been extended to Google, Twitter, etc.  Should we not expect the same lack of filters for us to use their platform?
Law suits would shutter them all without the exemption from liability.   Their are two sided to the coin to provide this
Ryan Messano Added Aug 30, 2018 - 2:37pm
Exactly right, Thomas. They don’t want to be treated as publishers, but they censor information on their platforms.
The Burghal Hidage Added Aug 30, 2018 - 6:50pm
I am a critic of what they do, but accepting regulation is a sort of Trojan horse all its own. I've little doubt that there is already collusion between these information giants and the intelligence apparatus. Placing it under "regulation" is just a means of further obscuring the collusion.
Another suggestion might be to learn to tailor your message in a manner that it does not put up so many powerful magnets for the PC algorithms to find and strike down. 
Gregory S. McNeill Added Aug 30, 2018 - 8:40pm
Ryan,
Trump has used The National Enquirer to dig dirt on his enemies and that is coming out. They also have dirt on Trump and its on the news. Don't believe me? Check for yourself and hear is something that people like Trump and yourself forget Ryan. 
 
This is from the 1st Amendment:
 
1st Amendment.
 

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. 
Thomas Sutrina Added Aug 30, 2018 - 9:47pm
Gregory, National Enquirer digging up dirt is pail compared to using the FBI that Hillary and Obama used to dig up dirt on the opposition political party.   The is an order of magnitude higher level problem that by their action rates criminal level.   So Gregory did Trump authorize the National Enquirer to commit crimes to dig up dirt.   Private individual Donald Trump is not that stupid.  
 
So what is the point of including the First amendment.  You may think Trump followers is a religion but it doesn't pass the test for creating a religion.  It he created a religion then every movie star and sports star have created a religion.
 
Trump has not restricted freedom of speech by the media or an individual like you.  Stating his opinion on the speech is his right to free speech as is your rants against him. 
 
Trump has not disobeyed the decisions of the courts or sent in troop to breakup up freedom of peaceful assembly.
 
 
FacePalm Added Sep 1, 2018 - 3:14am
Ryan-
we have befuddled Republicans too dimwitted not to see the entire Mueller investigation is illicit and bogus.
 
Just tonight, i heard info from Greg Jarrett that Weissman - Mew-ler's top dog - was up to his neck in a conspiracy with Ohr and his wife and Steele about the now-infamous Trump dossier - but that fits Weissman's pattern; he, like Mew-ler, takes a perverse delight in prosecuting and convicting people they KNOW to be innocent.  What a better pair of imps and demons to be working on the "soft-coup" of Trump, eh?
 
Reminds me of a scene from a Bogart detective movie; he was brought in to police HQ, and the chief "explained" a few things about how Bogart needed to stop his investigation: the chief then said "Get the picture?"  Bogart replied, "Nope, but i see the frame."
 
At any rate, i think that right now, Mew-ler is running scared, which is why he's dragging out the investigation - he knows that for him and his biased team, the jig is just about up, and the hunters are about to become the hunted.
 
BTW, when it comes to the F&F, it's always good to keep an open mind about their true natures; all men have flaws, and history is often too kind to heroes.   When the truth is revealed, it can be a shock if one has thought too highly of them.
 
If you're a Lincoln fan, for example, a read of DiLorenzo's "The Real Lincoln" will take the shine off the halo most Public Fool system kids were taught about him. including me.
 
It's like the story about the kid selling democratic kittens on the path where D'OhBama would take his morning jog; he was trying to sell them for $5 ea., and D'OhBama complimented him on his enterprising ways.
A couple of weeks later, he was about to pass the same kid, when he saw that the sign had changed; now, he was offering Republican kittens for $15 ea. 
When D'OhBama remarked, "Hey!  Aren't those the same kittens you were trying to sell a couple of weeks back?"
"Yep," the kid replied.
"Well," D'OhBama wanted to know, "How'd they become Republicans?"
"Oh, that's easy; their eyes are open, now."
Johnny Fever Added Sep 2, 2018 - 5:25am
I’m all for the Constitution being upheld, that’s the point of my comment.  Free speech means we can say/write whatever it is we like and there is nothing the government can do about it.  That right applies to corporations like Facebook and Google.  If you don’t like the fact they are biased one way or another, stop using Facebook and Google.  The last thing are Fore Founders wanted was for the government to come in and decide what speech is acceptable. 
 
As for Facebook and Google being immune from lawsuits, they get sued all the time for all sorts of things.  As a defender of the Constitution and freedom, you should fight for their right to run their business however they damn well please. 
Dex Triumph Added Sep 2, 2018 - 6:30am
Johnny Fever,
 
Facebook and Google as well as Twitter are essentially the public square today. Therefore they should be regulated as such, mandating they allow free speech. Without them your speech is not heard in today's world, just as without access to the town square and the soap box you did not have a voice in the 19th Century.
 
It is easy to say that if you don't like them then don't use them. It is akin to saying that your local public utility company has the right to deny electricity to you - after all you can just use candles or oil lamps if you don't have access to the public utility's services.  
Johnny Fever Added Sep 2, 2018 - 7:31am
@ Dex
 
I can’t believe you’re making the “public utility” argument as it relates to a search engine.  One can easily select alternative search engines by simply typing something different.  Deciding you don’t like your electricity supplier would require you to install your own alternative electrical grid. 
 
As for the “public square argument,” all of these companies are not public property.  Furthermore, unlike the public square all of us can easily avoid Facebook, Twitter and Google.  When it was learned that the MSM leaned left the private sector brought us Fox News.  The same thing will happen for every other concern raised in this article.  So go ahead and bitch, but spare me the call for the government to interject itself in the private sector any more than it already has.  The more I think about it, the more you sound like a liberal in thinking the government can solve your problems.    
Thomas Sutrina Added Sep 2, 2018 - 8:01am
John Fever, you missed my argument, Google, twitter, etc. were given relief from liability for the content that is placed on their platform.   They are not responsible for the content, however; the second they state to screen the content and removed or limit access by shadowing or giving a poor placement then they start to take some responsibility.    
 
The relief was given by the government so the giver may ask as China is doing, demand that they screen per the government's parameters.  Google, Twitter, etc. have not presented the public with this argument or the government told us  they placed screening requirement on them. 
 
John Fever, have I missed American or European governments placing such a requirement on them for relief from liability?   Yes, there are alternatives to Google: Dog pile, DuckduckGo, Gibiru, Wolfram_Alpha.   And a similar list of alternatives to Twitter but these alternative also focus on different audiences and provide differing services.
John Howard Added Sep 2, 2018 - 1:30pm
I base most of my opinions about what is going on in our society on the premise that we live under fascism, characterized by stringent regulation of the economy and especially of communication. Under such a regime, the line between private and public is so blurred as to become merely a paper nuance.
 
I do not for a moment believe that Google, Facebook, Twitter, or any major media dispensing information or entertainment to a large audience is free or private, no matter what the documents may say. All information is monitored and interfered with if it threatens the rulers. Whether it is the CIA or the NSA or the FBI or whatever, the parasites in power control communication and have since before the invention of the radio. This is nothing new.
 
Therefore, when people argue that these social media platforms should be forced to change their ways by the government, I have to translate this as a call for the controllers to control more.
 
The problem with conservatives, and even more so with Libertarians, is that they are seeking less government. And it is that particular goal which is not going to be tolerated by government.
I think the call for government to DO SOMETHING about censorship is a wasted effort. Government is a progressive disease. It will only ever grow bigger and more evil. The only hope is to call for government to DO LESS.
 
I don't fear that Americans can be swayed all that easily by liberal nonsense.  Trump was elected in spite of the best efforts of the MSM, Hollywood, and the entire government- education establishment.
 
I suspect that for the small-government crowd, a far greater danger than rigged social media blab-fests or "news" outlets, are the electronic voting machines, the ultimate solution to the serious problem of freedom-minded voters.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 2, 2018 - 2:19pm
Except when Google and FB are deliberately suppressing information that shifts elections, Johnny, that’s a different story.  The Founders didn’t foresee the internet, but the principles still apply.  Just as the First Amendment applies to the government, it applies to companies who control speech to control the government. 
 
You are focusing on the letter of the First Amendment and you need to learn about the Founders so you can understand the spirit.  The spirit was to ensure free and open communication so no ones voice was suppressed to promote political ideas that were corrupt and wicked.  That is exactly what is happening today.  You seriously need to read five biographies of the Founders because you are way off base.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 2, 2018 - 2:22pm
Exactly right, Thomas!  They pretend they are open platforms to avoid regulation as publishers, and then delete and suppress content they don’t like, meaning they are publishers, and subject to regulation.  
Ryan Messano Added Sep 2, 2018 - 2:23pm
John, the government was created for a moral and a religious people.  Only a moral and a religious people can have a small government, because they are able to govern themselves.  You argue for small government, but neglect the only factor that makes that possible.
John Howard Added Sep 2, 2018 - 3:00pm
Ryan, morality - when defined by me - discourages government.  And religion - when defined by me - encourages it.
 
I oppose both religion and government because I do not believe that law trumps morality or that faith trumps reason.
John Howard Added Sep 2, 2018 - 3:00pm
No one should be regulating publishers.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 2, 2018 - 3:05pm
Very well said, Dex Triumph! 
Ryan Messano Added Sep 2, 2018 - 3:20pm
A publisher can be regulated when it falsely advertises itself as a free platform open for all, and then arbitrarily ahd tyrannically deletes and suppresses information it doesn’t like.   I’ve been blocked 6 times for 30 days by FB for no clear reason, and my posts were suppressed.  So, if FB is going to do that, fine.  Announce your exact rules, or stop blocking people.  Be transparent.  You can’t advertise yourself as an open platform, and then secretly get rid of ideas you don’t like.  That is big time false advertising.  
 
Further, John, you are a Sophist.  You don’t believe in absolute truth, but think that you are the arbiter of what is true or not.  Well, let me clue you in, you aren’t.  No individual is.  So those who know the patterns of history the best, can best tell the future.
 
Until you can name five biographies of the Founders of America, which you definitely can’t, you do not need to be commenting on politics, or voting.  There are 14 liberals on here who have the same problem.  Their cockamamie ideas are due to gross ignorance of the past, and they are in no hurry to do anything about it.  Apathy and pride are married.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 2, 2018 - 3:20pm
*which you’ve read.
John Howard Added Sep 2, 2018 - 3:49pm
Ryan, a sophist is one who offers false - yet beguiling - arguments.  You tell me that no individual is the arbiter of truth.  I agree with you.  We must all decide for ourselves, then, yes?  
 
I happen to think that the founders were not great thinkers and that the constitution is not a great document.  Therefore I should not be commenting, right?
 
I should decide for myself, but keep my opinions to myself unless I agree with you about the greatness of the founders, yes?
 
But I do not need to read biographies in order to understand the problems with the constitution.
 
You are attempting to debate by protocol rather than argument.  Even the founders knew better than that.  What are you so afraid of?
John Howard Added Sep 2, 2018 - 3:52pm
We do not need to know history in order to know right from wrong.
John Howard Added Sep 2, 2018 - 4:02pm
Dex Triumph,
 
I think your analogy is flawed.  Public utilities have a government-granted monopoly that these social media platforms do not.  You do not have an alternative source for the utilities; you do have other platforms to broadcast your views.  That you want to use this platform and not that one doesn't matter.  They are not commons (owned by all) just because they are common (popular). 
Ryan Messano Added Sep 2, 2018 - 4:23pm
We agree on the definition of a sophist, John. However, I believe in absolute truth, and you believe in subjective truth.  So I look for objective facts to prove my conclusions, or I discard them, and you simply see what you believe.  
 
You believe the Founders were not great, and neither was the Constitution.  So what five biographies of the 204 Founders have you actually read on your own?  Critical thinking means comparing a body of information you already have, and coming to conclusions.  If you don’t know much about the Founders, which your writing indicates you do not, then it is impossible for you to evaluate them or their ideas. It’s like a kindergartener evaluating calculus, it’s nonsense. 
 
Its wonderful if you disagree with me, and I respect that, if you have honestly researched it and arent lazily discarding information you’ve never looked into.  
 
You do need to read the biographies.  You can never hope to understand the spirit of the laws unless you understand the lives of the men who wrote them.  This is impossible if you haven’t read just five of the 204 biographies of the Founders.
 
Wise people never arrogantly offer their opinion on topics they have a light familiarity with.  But, humility and pride are two topics atheists aren’t noted for being familiar with.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 2, 2018 - 4:27pm
You do need to know history to know right from wrong.  The Founders knew a ton of history and that’s why we have the Constitution.  They knew, as Lord Acton said, ‘Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely’.  
 
Harry Truman said ‘The only thing new is the history you don’t know’.  
 
And Michael Crichton said, ‘If you don’t know history, you don’t know anything at all.  You are like a leaf, that doesn’t know its part of a tree’. 
 
wsucram15 Added Sep 2, 2018 - 9:02pm
Ryan..this isnt about you and FB.
But tech giants never thought about what they SHOULD HAVE BEEN DOING in the moral sense only the legal since they built these new platforms.   Although to some degree the law was built on a theory of Natural law adopted by the founders, namely Alexander Hamilton, James Madison and John Jay.  Natural law has a basis from Aristotle who believed in the Golden Rule, so there is an expectation of median behavior.
The problem with these "giants", was there was nothing there before..so there was no moral highroad to travel.  The laws on the platforms are iffy and Congress is too old a body and def not tech savvy enough to understand even basics like terms of service.  Let alone how these platform function which are protected by law.
They all sell your data, all of them, except perhaps Apple and I cant swear to that.  What data they have and what is done with it is anyone's guess.
So it will have to be regulated...there is no choice at this point. Self regulation doesnt work when it comes to money.  Better yet whose morals are the correct ones?  
 
Ryan Messano Added Sep 2, 2018 - 9:18pm
If they had a conscience, it wouldn’t have been hard for them, Jeannie, but they clearly don’t.  It doesn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out you don’t give preferential treatment to people you like, Block people you don’t like, delete ideas you don’t agree with, don’t advertise that you do this and hide it, and then claim to be surprised when people challenge you saying you are an open platform.  They are deceitful, conniving, liars, just like the liberals on here, who have zero standards, but will gleefully shout if they find the weaknesses of a conservative.
Thomas Sutrina Added Sep 2, 2018 - 9:35pm
Ryan you do not have it right<<They pretend they are open platforms to avoid regulation as publishers, and then delete and suppress content they don’t like, meaning they are publishers, and subject to regulation.>>  Google and Twitter ARE NOT PUBLISHERS.  They are providers of a service, a platform or if you like a bulletin board. 
 
You can not take them to court as a candidate or business if the take down your information.  They are doing measurable harm in money and position.   Or if a terrorist use the plans to build a pressure cooker bomb you can not take them to court for the harm having the plans on their bulletin board. 
 
This is a perk give to them by the government because they have told government that they are not screening the content of the bulletin board.  They are only providing this platform.   So the only screening they can do is that which is directed by Government.  They can not do their own screening.
 
This suggest two situations.  The first is that they are opening themselves up to law suits for them making choices for what is screened.   The government perk does not cover their actions.
 
The second is that the 'DEEP STATE' actors have defined, directed the platform provider to screen the bulletin board.   And what is happening is that they are not telling us who and when the government gave them a directive.  And to explain why these are still valid directives?  Who choice to follow the 'DEEP STATE' rather then President Trump.  Maybe President Trump has not requested a change.    Ryan we do not know which of these two or more options is true.
 
 
 
Ryan Messano Added Sep 2, 2018 - 10:06pm
You are right, Thomas.  They are definitely publishers, though they lie and say they aren’t.  They delete information they don’t like.
 
Id never really considered the two options you describe.  
 
The second one is really frightening, and I don’t doubt for a second that Democrats would direct Google and FB to suppress and delete ideas they don’t like.
John Howard Added Sep 2, 2018 - 10:45pm
Ryan,
 
One does not need to know history nor even to have ever heard of the founders in order to have valid opinions about right and wrong.
 
The founders had not read books about the founders when they formulated their opinions.
 
I can read the constitution and judge it while knowing nothing of its authors.
John Howard Added Sep 2, 2018 - 10:48pm
Ryan,
 
I am an objectivist, not a subjectivist.  You are lying again.  You need to stop that.  It makes you look bad.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 1:12am
You sound like another clueless millennial, John.  We will have to set you straight after decades of indoctrination.  Put on your seatbelt for cognitive dissonance.  This will hurt, but you’ll be better for it.
 
One does need to know of the Founders and history to know right and wrong.  Santayana said, ‘those who don’t know history are doomed to repeat its mistakes’.
 
You are right, the Founders did not need to read books on the Founders.  But they did know all of works history far better than any American today does. Plutarch, Herodotus, Thucydides, Pericles. Livy, Tacitus, and many others were well known to the Foinders.  I doubt you’ve read even one of the authors.  Too busy with drugs, porn, and hellivision, likely enough.  You ought to be ashamed of yourself, you impudent nitwit.
 
NO, DUNCE, YOU CANNOT KNOW THE CONSTITUTION WITHOUT KNOWING THE FOUNDERS.  PUT THAT IN YOUR PIPE AND SMOKE IT! The sheer arrogance of your type is mind blowing.  
 
 
Johnny Fever Added Sep 3, 2018 - 8:47am
My point is that because Google and FB are private corporations they should be allowed to suppress information or not suppress information.  It’s not our right or the government’s right to tell them how to run their business.  We infringe on their right to speak freely when we decide what information they must display and where it should be displayed.  Once again, I get the fact liberals are always looking to the government to interfere in the affairs of the private sector, when conservatives (or whatever you wish to call yourself) do it, you’re being a massive hypocrite.  I think it's high time you re-read the Constitution.  
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 9:41am
Johnny, as Thomas said, they have an open platform, and get many benefits from this. When you start deleting ideas you don’t like, you are now a publisher, and subject to the regulation that publishers are subject to.  That’s what conservatives are saying.  Don’t pretend you are an open platform to avoid regulation, and then delete content in secret but still pretend you are not a publisher.  
 
They completely lie when they say they are all about the spread of ideas.  Well, they aren’t, and they need to be held legally liable for the lying and gross abuse of power they do.
 
They have the power to shift the government by getting rid of ideas they don’t like.  That is too much power, 
wsucram15 Added Sep 3, 2018 - 10:54am
Ryan..the are simply no regulations for this.  On the subject of you however, I can see where they might have deleted your content or comments.
You really dont see how your comments are to the FAR Christian right? Which by some legal entities are considered extremists, perhaps the words you use are "key words" which cause the platform to isolate you,  which btw, most of the accounts on hold or even deleted are done by the system, not people.   The investigations that are done are rarely for a person or over one account.  You flatter yourself too much, these companies are huge.
 
Honestly..if regulated, in some ways, the government would do it also to you. Any extreme pov is something they trace so if it comes up, its part of the record.  
 
Your anger at society  for its shortcomings is going to be alarming to most people. You should look at this from the perspective of a governing body and not a singular body.
 
You do have rights, no doubt..but if you think anyone on this or any other page that expresses an extreme view, especially a foreign person, isnt tracked..you have lost your mind.
 
 
FacePalm Added Sep 3, 2018 - 10:55am
Ryan-
Have you ever heard the phrase "Be the change you want to see in the world"?
Seriously, dude, you should read some of your posts as if they were written directly to YOU, and check yourself before you wreck yourself. 
Or have the phrases, "As ye sow, so shall ye reap," "Give, and it will be given unto you," "As ye would that men do unto you, do also unto them," "With the measure that ye mete, it shall be measured unto you again," and "Love your enemies, do good to those who hate you, bless those who curse you, pray for those who abuse you" all fallen on deaf ears?
John Howard Added Sep 3, 2018 - 10:59am
Ryan writes:
 
"NO, DUNCE, YOU CANNOT KNOW THE CONSTITUTION WITHOUT KNOWING THE FOUNDERS.  PUT THAT IN YOUR PIPE AND SMOKE IT! The sheer arrogance of your type is mind blowing."
 
Poor Ryan of the blown mind.  Reduced to name calling and all caps to insist on the patently false notion that the constitution is so poorly written that it can't be understood or judged on its own merits.
 
I differ.  I think the constitution is fairly well written and generally quite clear but that it is poor philosophy.   Of course, I do not expect ever to have a debate about philosophy with Poor Ryan, whose intellectual talents appear to be mainly devoted to evasion, insults, and telling everyone they are not qualified to have opinions that differ from his (fine well-read Christian fellow that he is).
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 11:58am
Jeannie,
That is a terrible outlook.  There is nothing that I’m saying that’s different from the virtue and wisdom the  Founders of this nation stood for.  For you to say they were justified in deleting my comments highlights the fact that you, like most women voters, do not understand the history of our nation, and, like many women, you think your feelings are the truth and hate to be corrected.  Well, facts don’t care about your feelings.  And, you haven’t come across a man who will correct you when you need it.  Further complicating the matter, you hold onto the mistreatment you experienced in the past as a reason why you don’t need to listen to ALL men.  That’s not how it works. You certainly have every right to resent the gross injustice done you as a girl, and I share your resentment at a brute that would harm an innocent child.  But, you do not have the right to direct that resentment at innocent parties.
 
I have nothing to apologize for.  If you troubled yourself to read the biographies of the Founders, which it’s obvious you haven’t read even five, you’d realize the liberty and freedom we have today are based upon the virtue the Founders and I propound.  
 
Blackstone was very influential in the laws made in America and he agrees with me.  Well, the key words I use are not close to being vulgar or profane, so their evaluation method is badly skewed.
 
‘The Constitution was created for a moral and a religious people, it can govern no ofher’
John Adams
Frankly, The Constitution was created for virtuous and wise people, and the Founders trustees you to be that, and you are letting them down.  So you don’t deserve the freedom and liberty you inherited.
 
Indignation at societal ills is natural.  I feel them for myself at times too.  It’s what leads me to change.  The Satanist feels no indignation, and stays wicked.
 
No one should accept an infringement of their rights.  As I am not a slave, I don’t.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 12:08pm
Facepalm, 
 
The best way to completely learn truth is to teach others.  You’ll find out quickly about your mastery of the topic.  I do teach myself constantly.  But, the conservative movement is full of the apathetic, and your type does not like to see virtue taught.   Some of the greatest sinners became the greatest saints.  
 
Like most lukewarm Christians, you have this whole love and believe doctrine perverted.  The Gospel is law and love combining.  ‘Open Rebuke is better than secret love’.
 
’A rod for the fools back’
 
’Rebuke before all that all may fear’
 
Ezekiel 33 says if you don’t warn sinners, their sins are on your soul.  You have quite a few sins on yours.  
 
So please study what the difference between Eli and Phinehas was.  Why did God destroy the latter, and love the former?
 
You need to study your whole Bible, and stop cherry picking verses. 
 
You have many good ideas, but if the virtue of Scripture doesn’t appeal to you, you have issues.
 
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 12:11pm
Howard, please confirm your age.  Your next comment without listing those biographies you’ve read will get you deleted, I’ve put up with enough of your nonsense.  Your type normally only responds to force.
 
You can’t debate the Constitution because you don’t know the men who wrote it.  Stop talking and start reading.
Johnny Fever Added Sep 3, 2018 - 12:52pm
There are not special laws which force publishers to publish everything.  They are free to pick and choose those works deemed worthy of being published.  The same is true for Facebook and Google.
 
Furthermore, you contradict yourself when you say Facebook is a open platform, while at the same time complaining about it limiting speech.  The fact if the matter is that Facebook can pretty much do whatever it likes and you are free to not use Facebook.  Isn’t freedom wonderful!  
 
Or are you again advocating government restrict more of our freedoms?
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 1:06pm
Johnny, Thomas Sutrina addressed this on the comment above, which I’ll repost.
 
The government have given Google, twitter, etc. because they are a platform for the public to express themselves no LIABILITY FOR THE CONTENT THAT IS PLACED ON THEIR PLATFORM. This is a very important. That means that a person can use the web to draw your child into a situation they has kills someones child and the parents CAN NOT HOLD THE PLATFORM LIABLE. Porn of minors, terrorist training and recruitment, etc. all happen on the their platforms and THEY ARE NOT LIABLE.

The platforms like Google and Twitter are not keeping their side of the agreement by the filtering algorithms they now employ. They are liable for the algorithms and the result. They are liable for removing access to their platform and blocking others from accessing content on their platform.

Advertising that pay them or that receives income from the platform is not the same as the exemption from liability for content provided by access. The companies approve of all advertising individually so they are liable for the content of the ad. This is the same situation that TV broadcasters and printed media operate under because they choose the advertising that appears on their media.

Telephone companies have the same exemption from liability when they provide communications channel. You do not have the line go dead because you talking about committing a crime. Law enforcement must get a warrant with an express reason and limits on the subject matter to listen in to the communications on the telephone platform of a telephone company. Criminal activity that go to court from what is obtained does not result in liability to the platform provider.

What filtering does a phone company use? NONE, they have the same agreement that has been extended to Google, Twitter, etc. Should we not expect the same lack of filters for us to use their platform?
Law suits would shutter them all without the exemption from liability. Their are two sided to the coin to provide this
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 2:01pm
Like most atheists, and corrupt types, you have a hard time listening, Howard. I said don’t comment without  those biographies, or you’d be deleted.  
 
We will go on all day, because you are an arrogant know nothing.  Go educate yourself, then we can have a conversation.
FacePalm Added Sep 3, 2018 - 2:06pm
Well, Ryan, i warned you.
Now, you're going to have to suffer the consequences of being a hard-head who prefers his own counsel to that of the Christ you claim to follow, yet disobey.
 
Christ gives you - and everyone - two choices in this life: humble yourselves, or BE humbled.  You appear to have chosen the latter, and your humiliation is on it's way.  Prepare.
 
i'll not reply to you again.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 2:28pm
Read your Bible.
 
Especially the part about Haman, in Esther.
 
Those who seek to destroy others, often destroy only themselves.
wsucram15 Added Sep 3, 2018 - 2:30pm
Ryan..
I dont know why after your little tirade, but I am the only person on this site that continues to try to talk to you, you know being a woman and all.
First, for the third time...stop belittling women and more specifically me by misspelling my name.  My name is Jean..not Jean e.  It is spelled like Je' Anne (jeanne)   I have told you that prior to this and explained it like I would to a third grader, if YOU want respect..you must also GIVE respect.
 
As far as how you feel, its alright to feel that way.  But I promise you, what you think you are entitled to..you are not. The founders are long gone and since that time bad things have happened to our nation and laws have been changed...(oh my and by BOTH liberals AND conservatives in unison). It may go back that way at some point, but it cant right now, the forefathers didnt imagine this world and there is too much at stake. We can argue this at another time.
 
My mistreatment by men made me smart, not weak. It made me able to hold my own in a boardroom with a group of Canadian French guys who not only disregard women but don't have a taste for Americans.  Don't give me your moral high ground crap and don't use my past against me.  I am trying to help you.
 
If you got thrown off a site..its because you posted something offensive to a person or persons who reported it and it violated terms of service OR your posts had key words and the system pulled it OR you were using a fictitious name and they caught you.  I know this because I have been through so much on here and went to someone in my family who works for one of those big tech companies.
 
On Blackstone are you referring to Sir William Blackstone? He would be more in tune with Natural Law which is the basis for the Declaration of Independence, but there is no real foundation for that, just his beliefs. But the actual foundation for that precedes Blackstone which was Aristotle.  Wasnt sure where you were going with that one.
 
Again..you feel you have some special rights above all others and I am telling you for the second time in this post..walk softly and watch your mouth.   The loudest roar might be the lion that gets caged because they cannot contain him. Just saying.  Speak you mind but do it in a way that gathers people..not offends them.
 
We arent living in the "free spirit" age anymore.  Things have happened in the past 20 years and all  people will look for accountability.
Ten people were shot yesterday...who knows why. Gang thing?  Who knows.   But they will link it to something because people want to know now.
You cannot talk to people like they are stupid or sinners because they dont believe like you do...its offensive and you are incorrect in how you handle your knowledge.
You need to practice empathy as opposed to apathy.
 
Im not trying to upset you..just get you to think about how ou approach things, generally if you feel like the world is attacking you..perhaps you need some reflection to see why.  It cannot always be everyone elses fault Ryan...not all the time.
I also stand by my statement whose morals are the right ones? Yours? I disagree with them as they make me and everyone not a white male a slave.
You are wrong Ryan and the more you offend people the less exposure you will get. Unless you are offensive in a funny way but thats not your thing, so its just something people dont want to hear..
 
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 2:31pm
Further, Moses murdered a man, and yet was used by God.  
 
The law is for the impenitent, not the penitent.  How dare you try to use someone’s past against them.  You will answer to God on judgment day for using confessions against a Christian.
 
Only the Pharisees tried to use others pasts against them.
 
The Pharisees loved power though and would stop at nothing to destroy any threats to their power.
 
Johnny Fever Added Sep 3, 2018 - 2:50pm
Facebook made no deal with the government.  The government decided on its own not to hold Facebook liable for content others post.  I get the fact you and Thomas would like to force their hand and decide what it must display, where to display it and how long it must long it must be displayed.  The rest of us in this wonderful free country we live, don’t like the sound of government making those decisions.  We also don’t think the First Amendment needs to be re-written.
wsucram15 Added Sep 3, 2018 - 2:53pm
What is the thing about the five biographies? So you know I went to school for this stuff and had to write papers right?
Ok..names of books, I would have to look them up but off the top of my head, Madison, Jefferson, Adams, Jay, Washington,  and Hamilton.  Lincoln doesnt count and numerous other presidents and figures through history. Ive been to the places where they were...and seen what they created Ryan. Not just in pictures or a movie. Ive been to the homes and seen how they lived, all that stuff. Its all around me, that history, our heritage.
Why would you ever think that you have a one up on anyone?
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 3:11pm
As I was, belay my last, Jeanne.
 
Its been a year since I last saw your name on WB.  I had to brush the cobwebs from my memory.  Please don’t flatter yourself that you are doing me a favor to talk to me.  Condescending much?  I didn’t belittle women, you belittle yourself when you take on roles you weren’t designed for.  
 
The principles of limited government, Jeanne, is what they learned from nations thousands of years before them.  Yet, you can’t learn from just a few hundred years ago?  You have a problem with pride.  Your opinion isn’t always right, and before you say it, you need to prove it, or it will be strongly objected to, and that will be your fault.  No one chose to say it but you.  It’s proud to state an opinion that you’ve not thoroughly researched, and then get angry when it’s not accepted.
 
Listen, being offensive does not mean something deserves to be deleted.  That would mean the most sensitive among us get the most power. Not how it works.  We’d have no end of victims screeching how offended they are.  The tech companies advertise themselves as open platforms, to avoid the regulations of publishers, and then act like publishers by suppressing or eradicating opinions they don’t like.Totally bogus.  False advertising.
 
Yes, Sir William Blackstone.  All law comes from God.  If you don’t acknowledge that, move to China, the worlds biggest atheist nation.  They will teach you to appreciate your Christian freedoms.
 
Truth is offensive.  Can’t be helped.  ‘No man is hated more than he who tells the truth’ Plato.  Jesus and Socrates spoke gentle truths and were still killed.  That’s why we were given the First Amendment by the wise Founders you refuse to learn about.  And no, there are no exceptions in the First Amendment for Hate Speech.  
 
You advocate sympathy, not empathy.  Empathy is loving someone enough to tell them they are wrong.  Sympathy treats them nice and never corrects them.
 
The ideals I stand for are very unpopular, so the problem is not me.  It doesn’t matter who said them, they would be disliked.
 
As a woman you consider relationships, and truth is secondary.  As a man, I consider truth, relationships be damned.
 
Please do not confuse my words.  My words do not make you and others who are not white a slave.  You are a slave only in proportion to how you refuse to learn the lessons of the past.  No one keeps you out of the library but you.
 
As for offending people, they said the same thing about Trump, and he was vulgar and crude, unlike me, yet he was elected.  
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 3:22pm
Johnny, and we get to the crux of the matter.  What five biographies of the Founders have you read?  You haven’t, had aren’t arguing from knowledge, but based on your feelings.  The intent of the Constitution was never to allow tyrannical forces that threatened free speech, which is exactly what FB does, to prevail.  I bet you were never blocked from FB.  To conform is a virtue with your type.
 
Dont talk about this wonderful free country when you aren’t willing to learn about its Creators, the spirit of its laws, or to promote the virtue that makes liberty and freedom possible in the first place.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 3:28pm
When you love something, Jeanne, you don’t do things because you have to, you do it because you want to.  You need to read those biographies outside of school and form your own opinions. 
 
If you did read the biographies of the Founders, then what was Washington’s wife’s name, and how many kids did he have?
 
What was Jefferson’s homes name?
 
What was Madison’s wife’s name, and how old was he when he married?
 
What did Jay and Hamilton write together?
 
What was Adams wife’s name, and his sons name?  What does America remember his son for?
 
If you go to Google for any of these, you are cheating.  If you are familiar with them, you ought to know this off the top of your head.  These are extremely basic details.
Johnny Fever Added Sep 3, 2018 - 3:30pm
Yes, we have gotten to the crux of the issue.  Whenever you lose an argument you accuse others of not reading those biographies.  Meanwhile, the truth of the matter is that you’re the tyrannical force the rest of us are trying to prevent from butchering the Constitution and disrespecting the wishes of our founders.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 3:34pm
I enter the conversation knowing 90% of Americans haven’t, and based on their writing, it’s pretty easy to tell who is who.  Just because you have a lot of company, doesn’t mean you are right.
 
Also, please read Plutarch.  You simply repeat what you like from the media, and don’t think for yourself, because you lack a comprehensive knowledge of the past.
 
If the slaves didn’t read history, and you voluntarily don’t read history, exactly how do you think you aren’t a slave?
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 3:36pm
If learning history is too much work for you, Johnny, then head to your local sheriffs office and ask them fur handcuffs.  You are a slave already.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 8:16pm
The wicked Satanist, Travil, created one of the most evil posts in WB history, which I RECOMMEND AUTUMN DELETE!  
 
Free speech was for virtuous speech.  We can have a second American Revolution right here on WB where we decide we will no longer be imprisoned by evil types like the Satanist, and their prurient filth, but we WILL BE FREE MEN AND WOMEN!
 
This degenerate and two faced lecher no sooner completes his post on vile porn, when he is up boasting about his loving marriages.  I don’t believe a word of it.  I think if we heard his wife and children’s side, we’d hear a different story.  Or, perhaps he has tyrannized them into abject submission.  A very sad fate for them, as a man who views porn IS A HORRIBLE HUSBAND AND FATHER, AND IS UNFIT TO BE A FATHER AND A HUSBAND.  
 
Its not bad enough he posts this filth on a website designed to be a free interchange of enlightening and ennobling ideas.  No, this lecher also deletes comments that are critical of his filth.  Unsurprisingly, the liberals who can’t think straight are on his post congratulating him.  The honorable conservatives don’t show up on the post, and abhor it.  All of us men have dealt with that filth, but apparently, not all of us have overcome our foolishness and vile affections.  
 
Since the Satanist has taken to deleting comments on his post, I’ll post them here, so his tyrannical censorship is thwarted. It never fails, good and evil cannot co exist.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 8:17pm
The Satanist and the Marxist (Michka)  get along well. Unsurprising. Devils cooperate nicely often.
I’ll be pasting my comments on my post, so all of WB can recognize you as a filthy and degenerate tyrant, Travil.
Thank you! Excellent work!
Keep deleting!
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 8:21pm
The usual suspects of WB liberals showed up to enjoy this filth.
FJ, Stone, Michka, Lock, Ian showing he’s no conservative, John Minehan, showing why he and Ian are MIA on moral issues, Bill H, Mustafa, and Green.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 8:25pm
Hallelujah, Travil, keep deleting, you are driving my post to the top of the comments. It’s amazing! The more you delete, the more attention you bring to your dastardly deeds. I’m loving it!
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 8:27pm
Uh, oh, didn’t think this one through, did you Travil?
Not really good in chess, are you, chump?
Then again, you porn users aren’t noted for your foresight.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 8:30pm
Haha, your entire post will soon be deleted, you wicked degenerate.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 8:40pm
Because you are evil and wicked, and have no standards. The First Amendment wasn’t created for your filth, you degenerate.
It was created for wise and virtuous speech. Porn is still illegal in America, heathen, because SCOTUS was never given the right to legalize it 49 years ago in the ‘Stanley vs. Georgia’ case. Learn your history, Devil.
We even have women on here, how dare you spread your filth.
DELETE TRAVILS EVIL ARTICLE!
This is why we conservatives get censored, because evil people like you, Google, and FB hate what is good, right, pure, and holy.
 
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 8:47pm
Stone, Opher, Michka, and you all should be banned from WB, you all are filthy liars.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 9:52pm
I’m not surprised to see Jeffrey Kelly here. Libertines unite!
wsucram15 Added Sep 3, 2018 - 11:02pm
Ryan...ok. OMG..ok.
Lets go over this again..on two other posts since you returned, in which you replied either on my thread or another, I have explained my name to you.
But thank you for correcting my name...I dont care for the name JeanE
and there is a reason other than a preference, sorry bout that.
Trust me I understand the bible or lack thereof in China. Thats not even funny Ryan, my church did take part in a mission there some time ago for that purpose. President Xi is not fond of the religion.
 
Plato was supposed to have said that and the truth does hurt sometimes...but I ask again, whose truth?   Whose moral code should we abide by?
You still have not addressed this...
Now on to the law...dont push me on the law...you are out gunned here my man. I have worked the law in three states and went to law school.  Give that one a rest.
 
Are you kidding?  Washington married Martha Custis (sp).  I do not remember the year.  G. Washington had no biological children.  Tricky Ryan..but I knew that one.   
Washington did raise Martha's children with her.  I took a particular interest in this story because her daughter died from an epileptic seizure and I have epilepsy.  I think there were two kids after the daughter died..?  Not sure on that total. But  if you want a figure I would say two.
 
Monticello?  I think I learned that in high school had to think about that one, took me a minute.
 
The damn federalist papers, but Hamilton wrote most of them and you are missing a person in here.  I read some letters once back and forth between the two if that helps any. 
 
I have a question- what was Jays most prestigious position? Actually there were a couple but lets see if you know any of them. BTW..Hillary loves John Jay..big fan of him in history.  True story.
 
Offhand, sorry dont know Adams wifes name for sure but think its Abigail or something like that.  Dont care one out of a few isnt bad.
But I am sure their son was John Quincy Adams.  He was either the 5th or 6th president.   I used to be really good at the numerical order of the Presidents.
 
Anything else? Look I was out all evening and I am tired. I tried to help you. No I am not in any way arrogant or better than anyone else. I was just tryin ta halpppp.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 3, 2018 - 11:23pm
The morality that this nation was founded on, which, outside of slavery and segregation, which we long ago got rid of, worked just fine.
 
If the lying and wicked Democrats had not lied about Robert Bork being appointed to SCOTUS in 1987, he would have been on the court, and contraception, porn, abortion, and homosexuality would still be illegal.  Unfortunately, the corrupt Democrats lies worked, and this resulted in Anthony Kennedy being appointed.  A total disaster.
 
I'm afraid formal education counts for little. Lincoln is proof of this.  There is nothing you learned in law school, or anyone else learned in law school, that can't be learned by a diligent reader in the library for free.  George Washington attended no college either, neither did Rockefeller or Carnegie, the two wealthiest Americans in our history.  Neither did A.P. Giannini, the Founder of B of A. 
 
That's good if you did all that from memory.  Not sure about Jay's most prominent position, but you are right, there was a third party that wrote the Federalist Papers.  You were right about Abigail Adams as well, and John Quincy was the 6th president.  I have no idea how Hillary's favorite was John Jay when he was a devout Christian and Hillary is on her way to hell.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 4, 2018 - 12:23am
What a fake conservative you are, Facepalm.

On one thread quoting scripture, on another immodestly discussing the female body. Get a grip!

I expect that from the Satanist and liberals, but you ought to know better.
Ryan Messano Added Sep 4, 2018 - 2:31am
The Hideous Burger.
A total disgrace to America.
Why dont you take your carcase to China?
You all on this thread are already slaves of your impulses, why don’t you spare the rest of us Americans your presence?
We dont appreciate libertines like you.
wsucram15 Added Sep 4, 2018 - 7:56pm
Thank you and also I rarely google and if I do, its google scholar. I cannot stand Wikipedia, which seems to be a huge source on here. 
 
Ok Ryan..now its your turn. I feel if you are going to discuss the Constitution, you should know it well and not only the framers intent. Also you should know about the court..so;
 
You like history and the law. Im going to give you hints on these because I feel they are difficult, but you cannot look them up and I trust you will be honest.
So here goes.
-Most influential Chief Justice in history and why? hint; Im going to help you by saying he did not live in our time and that he changed in one case how the supreme court became an equal branch of the government (began to come out of the basement if you will). This justice gave the courts supremacy.
 
-What Supreme Court Chief Justice created the most social change of any in history, but was nominated as a conservative?  hint; not Justice Scalia, come on now and you would know the name the second I said it.
 
Alright arguably the most  expansive Clause of the Constitution is the Vesting Clause which grants a President a wide variety of powers, although not expressly granted in specific wording.  There was a President that has the record for the most ever Executive Orders...do you know who that was?  He was quite popular.
 
Name two (any two) Executive orders that turned out to be the most important in our history, whether for better or worse? They might even have been stricken down by SC, but historical in significance to us. You should have NO problem with this one..it is a historical question.   One example -1861 Lincoln suspends Habeas Corpus, Supreme Court struck that down because civilians are not subject to military law.  Name two..and think of your education and US history, not opinion.
 
Here is an easy one..What is Article VI, Cause 2? Explain it.  Hint;
In rationale to certain things today..this is very relevant.
 
Most important - what branch did framers feel should and would be the strongest and most importantWhy?
 
Id love to say these are my former test questions..but these are easy things.
Here is a test question -What law established and organized the three tiers of the judicial branch, in what year was this established and what are they?
opher goodwin Added Sep 6, 2018 - 6:54pm
FUNDAMENTALIST ALERT!!! FUNDAMENTALIST ALERT!!! FUNDAMENTALIST ALERT!!!
WE HAVE A SITUATION!!!
THE CHILD IS TAKING OVER THE SITE!!!
The Burghal Hidage Added Sep 6, 2018 - 7:35pm
Chicken Shit Deleter 
Gregory S. McNeill Added Sep 7, 2018 - 1:44pm
Thomas and Ryan,
Trump has no right to demand respect because he has been disrespectful to others ie the late Senator John McCain. The fault isn't the tech giants, it is Donald Trump himself.