honey look, freedom of expression and the right to protest in America just
gotdropped.Let’s not keep making the mistake of assuming Trump’s tweets have force of law. He’s just talking out of his ass again, just like he’s not actually invading greenland and canada. Notice how he’s talking about at least 4 different actions here, I’m pretty sure none of which he can actually do. 5 if you count thanking us for our attention to this matter (?). If Trump tries to do anything in this regard no judge* will uphold it.
*Obligatory other than Clarence Thomas
People in power do what he says. His word is de facto law, even if it’s illegal. It literally does not matter. You are in denial if you think he’s not going to get away with this.
Let’s not keep making the mistake of assuming the rule of law matters at this point. If he does something and nobody stops it, its legality or lack there of is moot. If he says to do something and people do it and nobody stops him (or judge’s rulings about it are ignored), then it doesn’t matter that it was illegal.
I know you’re just trying to get people to calm down, but at this point, people are right to be scared and right to think these things could actually come to pass considering it has happened before. Maybe it won’t get that far… But plenty has already happened that should never have happened, and the US currently has a president who is illegally, specifically unconstitutionally, holding office and was allowed to be sworn in anyway, so it’s probably not a good idea to assume this won’t happen just because it’s also unconstitutional.
Hey remember that wall that didn’t get built?
The fact that no one is trolling him about it shows how people are weirdly compliant about all this.
I swallowed my misgivings and voted Democrat, just like I’ve done at each election since I turned 18, but handwaving away valid criticisms is not how you get people to side with you. Pressure needs to be put on the democrats to be better, too.
I’m 100% for valid criticisms—I don’t even consider myself a Democrat and I have no compunctions about criticizing them when I think they are wrong. But I’m pretty sure that meme is directed at those who withheld their vote.
It would be in theory, but mostly it’s just spread around as how any protest against Israel cost the democrats the US election (despite how it was considered widely unpopular to support Israel’s genocide by most democrats).
The problem is that those people (leftist prostest not-voters) most likely wouldn’t have changed the results.
No, I agree. There weren’t enough single-issue Gaza voters to have changed the outcome. It’s still an idiotic position to have taken.
Not voting for them has never once, in the history of history, gotten them to change. It actually causes them to pull further right.
Yeah, they probably think, well the right is doing so well so that’s probably what the country wants. We need to move further right!
Exactly.
Yep. Every time they’ve pulled farther right and lost, they’ve blamed the leftists for it for being too extremist in their policy demands or claiming that their issues aren’t as important, like in the case with Millennials and housing costs, student debt, climate change, etc. Despite trying to make some headway on those issues, they’ve always refused to campaign on them.
deleted by creator
The argument, was the least bad between two bads. This is way worse than the alternative would ever get
handwaving away valid criticisms
If you look carefully, you’ll find statements about how “neither option affects [this particular thing] but we have the best chance of fixing it after the election if we still have a country”.
It was never handwaved. It was the least-worse option with some kind of hope given that issue and a thousand others. How many times this has fucking been fucking explained and not fucking understood.
Uh yes it was definitely hand-waved away by some “if you look carefully”. It was only the “least-worse option” because so many were successfully manipulated by the system into being placated with crumbs so they wouldn’t revolt at the thousands of other reasons we’ve had for years to fight back against this shit, pushing the Overton window to the right in increments and leading folks to not use or even possess or be taught in the first place the critical thinking skills required to inform oneself and take steps to make positive change, in this system designed to intentionally misinform and mislead us and pit us against each other so we vote for the same rich white men responsible for perpetuating this system and the harm it brings to all of us, especially marginalized communities.
I would recommend to you (and anyone who is interested in informing themselves on what is being done to us) to read “The Shock Doctrine” by Naomi Klein. It details this process of incremental change, and some of the strategies and parties previously and currently involved in taking control of our government (or at this point more like what’s left of it).
(For clarity: I’m not saying both parties are the same, although their goals, tactics, and policies seem less different to me as time passes; I’m not making any general statement passing blame to any group of voters or non-voters in this comment, because I believe the bulk of the responsibility lies on the system and those who hold sway over large parts of it in the form of currency or legislation, for example; I’m not denying or invalidating that you may feel this way and/or believe it is true, I’m taking issue with your statement that “it was never handwaved”, because I most certainly saw that happen and know people who to this day are clinging to that sentiment; I’m not saying harm reduction isn’t the move or good policy, it is but there has to simultaneously be work being done on reducing or removing the source of that harm)
Edit: sorry for run-on sentences. working on it gradually and open to feedback
Pressure needs to be put on the democrats to be better, too.
They’re already 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000x better than Republicans. So someone would have to be pretty goddamn stupid not to vote for them when the options are them or Republicans.
The majority of the fault isn’t on Democrats. It’s on goddamn stupid braindead asshole American voters for being goddamn stupid braindead assholes.
They’re already 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000x better than Republicans. So
how can this be quantified?
I’m not American so nobody got my vote, but seems to me like the issue is with the swathes of people choosing facism rather than progressives who chose not to vote.
Choosing how to act in a world like ours is tricky, anyone following a sense of right and wrong (even if I disagree with their judgement) instead of fear, hate, greed or whatever gets a gold star in my book.
Inaction is still a choice, though. I totally understand the sentiment behind that choice and even agree that we shouldn’t be forced to choose genocide, but the alternative that we got is a man who not only wants the same genocide, but wants to accelerate it, put American boots on the ground to assist in it, and then turn the bloodied ground into resorts while also wanting to worsen life across the globe. So, by refusing to act, they didn’t oppose that man getting into power. They cared so much about genocide that, ironically, they enabled making that genocide worse by not acting against that possibility.
The biggest issue, though, is with the people who couldn’t be bothered enough to vote. Some, what, 40% of Americans never vote? Of course, there’s plenty there who can’t due to things like gerrymandering, but there’s a huge swathe of white suburbanites who simply prefer the status quo to actually improving things.
by refusing to act, they didn’t oppose that man getting into power.
you can refuse to vote for a Democrat and still oppose the man getting into power.
But thanks to the two party system, what effect does it have? And I’m specifically talking about the voting day of the presidential election here, not primaries or other elections. Because that’s where those efforts will have the most impact. Not that the Dems deigned to give us even the illusion of a primary this election (or in 2016, truthfully), but so many of these people seem to shake their fist once every 4 years and then go to sleep like cicadas awaiting the next presidential election.
I don’t blame people for hating the weak candidates that the Dems consistently push forward to maintain the old guards’ leadership positions, but I do blame them for looking at the alternative and saying “I’m okay with the possibility of that man winning if I don’t vote or vote third party.” The chance of a Trump victory and all that it entailed was a line in the sand that they were willing to cross.
As a trans woman, I blame them for saying, “Your life is not worth biting the bullet for.”
As a trans woman, I blame them for saying, “Your life is not worth biting the bullet for.”
I don’t believe voting for Democrats is an effective way to save anyone’s life.
The chance of a Trump victory and all that it entailed was a line in the sand that they were willing to cross.
that chance was thrust upon all of us. accepting reality doesn’t make him acceptable.
Yet refusing to accept the reality of mathematics that showed that, in a FPTP system, not voting for a viable candidate opposing a fascist only helps the fascist is acceptable? Nah. The blood is on the hands of both dems and non-voters. Non-voters/protest voters don’t give a fuck about trans people, as shown by their actions.
Non-voters/protest voters don’t give a fuck about trans people
prove it
So it seems like you fully understand the flaws of First past the post voting. Have you done anything to fix it? Are the democrats doing anything to fix it? Nows the time. Not during the election
refusing to accept the reality of mathematics
support your claim
looking at the alternative and saying “I’m okay with the possibility of that man winning if I don’t vote or vote third party.”
whether I vote for Dems or no, I’m not ok with republican candidates.
The biggest issue, though, is with the people who couldn’t be bothered enough to vote. Some, what, 40% of Americans never vote?
Sounds like First-past-the-post voting doesn’t properly represent the population. Let’s try a new electoral system to fix this. The people of Alaska switched to Ranked Choice and they had a referendum last election to go back to FPTP voting, and they didn’t want to.
Videos on alternative voting systems
First Past The Post voting (What most states use now)
Videos on alternative electoral systems we can try out.
I absolutely agree, though I know of at least one other place that tried it and had issues because nobody knew who the candidates were or what their positions were, but IIRC, there was some context to it that made it a “well, of course they had problems” situation instead of people just being too lazy to read up on the candidates (though that is a very real but solvable issue). Like there were 10 districts on the ballot with 6 open seats in each, and they had about 30 candidates per district or something crazy like that.
Biden also surpressed student protests. This isn’t the gotcha you think it is
Putting Genocide Joe in scare quotes. Libs are going fully mask-off in this thread.
Blue MAGA
If the Democrats wanted me to vote for their candidate they should have picked one that didn’t suck balls
Why are we still talking about this? It’s over, and we can’t undo the results.
I feel a lot of people do a lot to justify stupid behaviour. “Saving is too hard” or “exercise is too hard”. There’s legit reasons to not be able to save, or exercise or being able to vote 🤨.
However there’s a lot of bullshit that people were spouting. It’s either a coordinated campaign or just dumb shit. What annoys me is everyone piling on Joe and then they did what people wanted and swapped to Kamala and they’re still upset that the Dems “don’t listen”. Whatever, they’re all full of it.
I fucking hate the Democrats but you have to be completely psycho to justify not-voting for them.
To be clear, I’m Canadian and I’m directly impacted by this now. So fuck all of those people.
While I did vote blue conservative (for the last time), they were not worthy of that vote because they did not represent me. That’s how representative democracy works. What you advocate for is not representative democracy, it is a hostage situation and should be treated like the crisis that that entails.
Why are you okay with people being underrepresented at the voting booth? Are you actively working to replace First Past the Post voting in your state? People should have the freedom to vote for the candidates they believe are best, while still ensuring their votes count against those they don’t want in office.
It’s not as though democrats are just now learning of the mathematical flaws of FPTP. Every election I’ve seen the same bullshit excuses to take people’s inalienable right to vote how they want. Democrats in blue states made a choice to leave a huge portion of the population unrepresented, all for safe states and easy elections.
We don’t need to wait for a miracle from Congress, we can pass election reform one state at a time. Should we have more elections, we must remove the democratic monopoly on this fight against the republicans. Don’t worry, blue conservative, you will be free to vote for your preference under a more representative electoral system. Because who would want to deny someone the right to vote for the person they feel is best? You apparently.
Alaska has already abolished FPTP voting. After Ranked Choice Voting kept Sarah Palin out of office, Alaskan Republicans tried to pass a referendum to revert to FPTP, but the people voted to keep Ranked Choice. Why would you want to use the same voting system that Republicans favor? Do you support democracy, or do you get off on forcing people unrepresented in government to vote for your preference?
Videos on alternative voting systems
First Past The Post voting (What most states use now)
Videos on alternative electoral systems we can try out.
Nobody pushing genocide is worthy of votes or support.
It was incumbent on Dems to EARN votes, and they failed spectacularly. You’re wrong to try blaming voters for failings of our corrupt politicians.
So this includes trump for his support of two separate groups that have demonstrated willingness to commit genocide.
Will you still be saying that when Trump puts a resort in Gaza?
Trump has made it crystal clear: He plans for the complete and total ethnuc cleansing of Gaza. All Palestinians will be killed or removed
That’s what Arab and Palestinian Americans chose when they voted for Trump
So according to you, the palestinians voted for trump and therefore deserve to be genocided???
Tell me, how exactly would arab and palestinian people have been able to vote for trump? And why would they do that?
Of course you dont have proof either because votes are secret, so, because you suspect some palestinians of voting for trump you want them all genocided???
Will you still be saying that when Trump puts a resort in Gaza?
Yes. Will you refuse to demand electoral reform in your state so the people of this nation can vote outside the two party system without a spoiler effect? Will you refuse to do anything about those who are without representation? Will you refuse democracy?
Virtue signaling doesn’t wash blood off your hands sweetie
Your comment’s downvotes = how many profoundly stupid people who STILL haven’t learned from their mistake there are out there.
Refusal to hold themselves accountable for their own actions/inactions is a trait they share with mainline MAGA.
I can’t be accountable for other people’s votes.
At the time I read your comment.
Imagine thinking 5 people on the internet caused Trump to win.
zuck, Elon, bezos… those three are on the internet. got 2 more?
“…illegal protest…”?
Oh right, the US Constitution doesn’t exist any more.
Next time an american speaks about “muh first amendment”, “USA only free speech country in the world” bullshit, show them this
The problem is it cuts both ways. The Democrats saying they want hate speech to not be protected and Nazi propaganda to be censored is just the flipside of the same coin.
Either you have free speech or you don’t
Either you have free speech or you don’t
Lots of countries have free speech with limits on it. It’s not uncommon and doesn’t mean Citizens don’t have freedom of speech.
For example:
deleted by creator
deleted by creator
If it has a limit, it’s not free
If I can’t do a Nazi salute, then I can’t say “I want to shoot Donald Trump in the face”
If it has a limit, it’s not free
“Free bread sticks”
“I’ll take 100”
“Um… No. You can’t have that many.”
“iF tHeRe’S a LiMiT iT’s NoT fReE!”
Don’t be pedantic. A limit would be “free breadsticks only if you decide to pray to our god in front of us.”
If you say unlimited and then put a limit on it, that is illegal, as Verizon and AT&T found out in court
If you say unlimited and then put a limit on it
When did the American Constitution promise “Unlimited Speech”?
If it has a limit, it’s not free
Don’t be pedantic
Bruh… your pedantry started this
So should there be any penalty for lying under oath?
No, because it is unconstitutional to put someone under oath
By definition, it means a solemn promise that is beholden to a deity therefore it is illegitimate in court and law by the First Amendment.
You probably also think it should not be legal to kill people that break into your house to steal your TV.
Fair enough. I think the discussion ends there; I cannot use reason to dissuade you from a position that you clearly did not use reason to get yourself into.
Scream “Fire” at a theater. Obviously you cannot.
The phrase “shouting fire in a crowded theater” is outdated and legally irrelevant to modern free speech discussions. Its origin from Schenck v. United States (1919) was overturned by Brandenburg v. Ohio (1969), which set a much higher standard for restricting speech. Modern First Amendment doctrine protects almost all speech unless it directly incites imminent violence or crime.
Modern First Amendment doctrine protects almost all speech unless it directly incites imminent violence or crime.
So you are saying there is a limitation
So there no free speech afterall 🤔
If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them. In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols. We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal. (Karl Popper)
Nah.
oh look, a literal “free speech absolutist.”
Wrong platform
There is a massive difference between allowed to say my government is doing something wrong, and being allowed to say “gas all the removed”. One is criticism of authority, which is good. The other is hate speech, which is bad. You can absolutely have one without the other.
Yeah, and an allied soldier in WW2 was just the flipside of a Wehrmacht soldier, so both were the same, right?
Hate speech is not free speech, boo.
Free speech isn’t intended to supercede criminal law. Advocating for hurting people is a crime. If they want to do it and have it be covered as “free speech”, they need to start by changing the law.
One Question:
Do you think the government should ban CSAM (Child Sexual Abuse Materials)?
If yes, then you are already okay with limits the First Amendment and your argument is invalid
If no, you’re a pedophile and you need to GTFO
this isn’t about fringe democratic congressmen addressing hate speech, this is about a sitting president threatening to punish protests.
You are not wrong. The Supreme Court finding presidential immunity and then allowing an insurrectionist to run in contravention of the 14th amendment seems to have finally put the old document to rest.
We live according to royal decree now.
now you’re catching on! You’ll be head of a department in no time under drumpf’s regime!
Correct
lol it never has the united states has a long history of killing, maiming, and imprisoning protestors
I mean just to be fair isn’t it illegal to have a huge protest without informing the authorities first? Also violent protests would be illegal too, right?
These assumptions are based on similar laws from other countries. But I don’t really believe Trump is talking about those protests or just planning to forbid them from getting permission to happen.
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
1st ammendment to the constitution since conservatives love to claim they support it
Ah! But it says “congress shall make no law,” not that “the president shall tweet no bullshit!”
The constitution also didn’t say “the president shall give a shit about the law”
Rookie mistake, IMO
It literally did, minus your contemporary idiom:
he shall take Care that the Laws be faithfully executed,
(It’s called the “take care clause” and is part of Article II, Section 3, in case anybody wants to look it up.)
Not that it matters anymore, after Trump v. United States.
It was the first time they were writing a constitution. Obviously they were rookies
Second. The Articles of Confederation was first and failed.
tbh, the founding fathers did fuck this up quite bad, by not including this
Bold of you to assume that the US is a country still under the rule.of law.
Laws only matter if they are enforced.
The right wing doesn’t care about law or consistency. They care about in-groups to protect and out groups to bind.
If “how do treat strangers” is a viable metric for assessing if someone is a good person or not, the the right wing are not good people.
Oh, we don’t use that outdated piece of paper any more, haven’t you heard?
Yeah, it’s way too woke. Same with Jesus.
Yeah but they’re gonna rewrite the constitution, it’s gonna be the best constitution the founding fathers will be jealous they didn’t come up with this thing it’s gonna be airtight and on the blockchain
Congress isn’t making a law. Instead, the President is committing treason while his party pretends not to notice and the other party flops around like a dead fish.
That’s not a problem if executive orders are treated as law; the first amendment doesn’t curtail the president’s power.
Mask up. Leave your phones at home. Break shit.
What’s an illegal protest? I thought first amendment speech covered that
Also, how can he expel a student from a school he doesn’t control? or does he mean expel students from the country?
This happened before: https://en.m.wikiquote.org/wiki/Sophie_Scholl
a German student and anti-Nazi political activist, active within the White Rose non-violent resistance group in Nazi Germany. She was convicted of high treason after having been found distributing anti-war leaflets at the University of Munich(LMU) with her brother, Hans.
“Such a splendid sunny day, and I have to go. But how many have to die on the battlefield in these days, how many young, promising lives… What does my death matter if by our acts thousands are warned and alerted. Among the student body there will certainly be a revolt.”
She’s bae.
RIP hero
Somebody, after all, had to make a start. What we wrote and said is also believed by many others. They just don’t dare express themselves as we did.
Also, happening right now in russia with any anti-war protests
I’m more of a Black Orchestra but big props to the White Rose
The amount of times I’ve heard salty right wing grifters complain about Orwellian censorship on literally everything. But I guess it’s just fine if cult leader Trump does it, because he stands for what’s right and sticks it to those progressive plebs, right?
He didn’t win by being consistent. Hypocrisy is WHY people voted for him. They thought he was the only one who would “do the hard things” by being cruel to the people who are hurting everyone. That’s the narrative at least, and while you can literally write libraries on the flaws, inconsistencies and logical discrepancies in Trump and the Republican narratives, the fact remains that most people are vulnerable to storylines.
Not moral flaws. Not character. Not record or experience. The only thing people largely, as a group, care about is JUST how someone makes them feel in that moment. And a lot of poorly educated, mentally unwell people saw and heard Trump lying to the people they believe were the cause of all our woes, and that’s why they voted for him.
If we ever want another democracy that works, we have to understand that our population is genetically and physically identical to the beings who were clubbing each other’s heads in during ten thousand years of ice age glaciers and primitive hardship. We survived those times by forming tight-knight groups and telling ourselves stories for how to survive. We’re doing the same things right now, but someone else is guiding those stories. Either we stop the storytellers or we make better stories that people will want to repeat. Those are our only options.
Either we stop the storytellers or we make better stories that people will want to repeat.
We do have better stories: the stories or class conflict and workers solidarity. It’s just that the people in power would rather fascists win than let those stories reach the people that need to hear them.
If the stories aren’t working, they’re not better.
“Better” here is going to be a highly loaded word, and revolves a lot around what results you’re seeking. Humans connect with stories that connect with their feelings, it’s how they got exploited to get us here. Decades of people signing away their own rights in service of stories that momentarily scared them, and here we are in the culmination of all these tiny stories and resulting policies that have been made to steer people to this place and time.
You can’t just tell people now “Trump is the bad guy, trans people aren’t threatening us, we have to help Ukraine, the wealthy elite are our real enemies.”
It doesn’t matter if the story is true, that story doesn’t move people. It’s just lecturing to the toddler-mind that makes up the bulk of our population. You can’t make the people better. We HAVE to abandon this idea that everyone wants to “do the right thing” on some level. No we fucking don’t. People want to feel validated. Not even feel good, that’s less important to people than feeling heard and validated. Our stories need to make individuals feel something, individuals who view everything outside of their immediate sphere of awareness as abstractions and theory, not reality. You can’t make these people feel sympathy or care for others, so we have to make them feel something else.
hey, just chiming in to say I really do appreciate your perspective – Narrative therapy is a real tool that can help people. and yet i think by implying that a narrative is “worse” if it doesn’t “work”, you’re overlooking the force of other systemic factors. just think about the logistics of these stories reaching people’s ears. who has command over our attention? what narratives are people exposed to on a day-to-day basis? where does the power lie behind those messages? the idea that the best narrative is the one that thrives is akin to meritocratic thinking – a demonstrably flawed system.
the idea that the best narrative is the one that thrives
I was pretty clear that the effectiveness of a narrative is dependant on the results you’re seeking. I think you can turn a narrative loose into the world and it will run autonomously to a degree, and you could use a story’s ability to thrive and survive as a measure of at least how attractive and engaging it is, but no, I don’t think that is what makes a story effective for the purposes of influencing a large amount of people to make better choices, to have more curiosity, to think more about things they don’t normally think about.
Social engineering like this does take deliberate work. It takes effort and work to keep a story alive and growing. The problem is we already have tons of people doing this work for their own agendas. Sometimes they’re good stories, sometimes they’re terrible stories, but it almost doesn’t matter the “quality” of the narrative, since our brains are designed to hook into narratives to explain the world even if the explanation doesn’t even make a lick of sense. See: anti-vax doctors and flat earthers.
I cannot upvote this comment as much as I would want to upvote it.
Can you give examples of what you think might be working stories?
Can you give examples of what you think might be working stories?
It’s really hard to create a narrative with the sheer power and influence of stories using fear and hate, because we all respond much stronger to fear and anger than we do more abstract ideas like charity and empathy as a matter of survival. I genuinely have no idea how you fight this. It’s literally an exploitation of all of our survival responses and it will always work on some segment of any given population, and once it starts to work on a few people, the effect will snowball. My prescription here is that we can’t let hate speech start in the first place. We have held the sanctity of bad ideas in too much regard for too long, other nations don’t fuck around with this shit because they know how contagious hate and fear is.
There is however one great example of successful, working populism I can think of though, and that’s Bernie Sanders. He’s been effective in messaging to both right and left for decades because he’s consistent, he validates our problems and keeps his focus laser-tight and narrow on one talking point: which is how the wealthy oligarchs are hoarding our wealth. That’s all, and he’s held the same talking point for decades and it works on both sides of the political spectrum. It’s just a shame that we’re in a place where power has already been ceded to the corporate interests and people like Bernie are muzzled long before they get real power.
Thank you 🙏
Bravo!
It’s just them wanting to a) be right (when it’s usually not the case) and 2) the other viewpoint to be silent immediately. They fuckin love censorship because first amendment only applies to them and theirs.
All federal funding will stop
That’s the only part here anyone needs to know.
He’ll threaten to pull funding for his stupid pet issues first, then pull it anyways for everyone else.
Therefore, fucking ignore his threats, nothing you can do will ever appease him and he will go back on his own word like it’s a bodily function.
Ill do whatever the fuck I want removed, shut the fuck up and go suck Elons dick.
Does “NO MASKS” mean that choosing to wear a mask to protect your health is now forbidden at colleges or is there another meaning that I don’t understand? It is so random and has nothing to do with the rest of the post except for being “woke”.
Probably making wearing any mask while protesting illegal, regardless of the legality of the protest itself.
deleted by creator
There’s a lot of things he’s not supposed to be able to do.
Until America actually does anything about it; he’s got free rein to do whatever the hell he wants.
I live in the SW, where bandanas are part of our cultural heritage. I should go pass out bandanas at our state colleges and universities.
He’s not supposed to be able to. We’ll see if the administration follows his orders or the existing law, or if they’ll listen to court orders. My hopes are, unfortunately, not high.
Unless it’s the proud boys with their uniforms, obviously.
Yeah a lot of states passed “you must carry a doctor’s note to wear a mask in public” laws during COVID.
I’ve written to my Republican state lawmaker only to receive a form reply.
Wouldn’t surprise me if they were STILL removed about having been forced to wear masks 5 years ago lmaooo
Not random, masks make it harder for the facial recognition cameras.
Masks are for hiding your identity.
But perhaps the double context is intentional.
For loads of clinically vulnerable people, the right to protest is dependent on the right to mask. You can only risk going to a crowded protest if you’re allowed to use protective measures to prevent infections.
Ah yes, that free speech that Musk is always taking about.
Hey Muricans, this is what you wanted and voted for (or could’t be bother voting to prevent)… enjoy
or, hit the streets and remove the fascist gov you elected
Boy, you really told those rednecks who have no idea how to use the internet outside of Facebook! I’ll bet they won’t make that mistake again!
Plenty of people here had declared not voting because of some lme excuse
Everyone who is a US citizen and didn’t vote, comment “HERE” please
