Rights, people should be allowed to do this. I would say that by Banning Jones and by shadow banning many others, facebook and others are now effectively becoming a publisher, and that means because they are taking editorial decisions come they should be open to being sued as other Media Organizations are. Tammy now i would argue, we are all trying to find some balance here because we clearly see its unfair and it ranges from congressman being shadow band, we are trying to find a free market, especially with the Mainstream Media being 85 liberal. We see that push. But we are the content and social media which gives us an edge. We would suggest though that some of the argument by twitter, they are saying that some of these comments violate standards. If we open it up to lawsuits for libel, wouldnt that make it even more difficult to have speech . Wouldnt more people be banned
and more people be suspended . No. If you are a platform for all ideas, you are not a part professional. On the
A look at the latest news and headlines of the day features discussions of politics and culture, analysis of Political Correctness in Campus Craziness and. The internet. Lets give people access lets give people rights and if we cant get that, lets make sure we know we defined facebook, youtube and twitter as publishers who are libel, as our fox news or the Wall Street Journal or anybody else for the content they put out. Tammy again, weve got to find a way to push back and one of the strengths we have here is that we are the content, there is a sense also that we are willingth to put up with anythig because our lives now are so intertwined with twitter, with facebook, social media in general. Its the new modern way to communicate and my concern, of course, is that we dont want them to go away and yet ironically they are private public companies, they are not p government. They can do what they please, but i think the power as an example, this conversation, being able to have a Point Of
questions and press cavanaugh on that but it seems to be a bit out of perspective for me. that seems to be a theme though, i think there are plenty of people who think under certain circumstances, abortion ought to be legal. i imagine there are some circumstances where it ought to be allowed but not on board with abortions for selection or third trimester abortion. there ought to be common sense limits on it but that s not the position of the party anymore. the party has moved quite a bit on this issue but it s been a relatively recent move. it used to be that democratic party throughout the party, people called for abortion to be safe, legal and rare. barack obama called as president for the number of abortions to be reduced. we saw the abortion rate in this country to reach its all-time
questions and press cavanaugh on that but it seems to be a bit out of perspective for me. that seems to be a theme though, i think there are plenty of people who think under certain circumstances, abortion ought to be legal. i imagine there are some circumstances where it ought to be allowed but not on board with abortions for selection or third trimester abortion. there ought to be common sense limits on it but that s not the position of the party anymore. the party has moved quite a bit on this issue but it s been a relatively recent move. it used to be that democratic party throughout the party, people called for abortion to be safe, legal and rare. barack obama called as president for the number of abortions to be reduced. we saw the abortion rate in this country to reach its all-time
tammy: michael ware directed faith outreach efforts for the obama campaign in 2012. he just wrote an article morning that democrats are entirely too focused on abortion, and he recently spoke to tucker about that article. tucker: what did you mean when you said that, that they are too focused on abortion? while there is a range of implications of cavanaugh filling this seat, or concerns from a democratic policy perspective from immigration to voting rights to corporate power and workers protection, and yet out of the gate it looks like the only thing the supreme court was going to roll on was abortion. and you saw a major activist and even some democratic leaders say that the preeminent focus was on roe v. wade, which too many democratic voters and i think many americans, seems a bit off. certainly if you are pro-choice, you have a right to ask