[Right Wing Vegan]

Okay, maybe not so much news as it is simply entertaining to read these degener-crat responses on social media.

[mewzilla]

But why did the WSJ allow Trump to do that?

We need the answer to that question.

[Skywise]

Leftists hate free speech.

Instead of showing how Trump is wrong for being censored they’re attacking WSJ for not censoring him.

[rightwingcrazy]

“’Future generations will marvel when we tell them the Wall Street Journal was once considered a serious, thoughtful newspaper,’ the user wrote.”

IOW, “I’m so smart, that whomever I disagree with is evil or stupid.” That’s quite a persuasive argument.

[Red Badger]

Must be Over the target....................

[capydick]

"And again, reminding me why I canceled my WSJ subscription," one user quipped.

Yet you still feel the need to read and post, got it.

[Brian Griffin]

"A version of the CDA had passed through the Senate pushed by Senator J. James Exon (D-NE). A grassroots effort in the tech industry reacted to try to convince the House of Representatives to challenge Exon's bill. Based on the Stratton Oakmont decision, Congress recognized that requiring service providers to block indecent content would make them be treated as publishers in the context of the First Amendment and thus become liable for other illegal content such as libel, not set out in the existing CDA. Cox and fellow Representative Ron Wyden (D-OR) wrote the House bill's section 509, titled the Internet Freedom and Family Empowerment Act, designed to override the decision from Stratton Oakmont, so that service providers could moderate content as necessary and did not have to act as a wholly neutral conduit. The new Act was added the section while the CDA was in conference within the House."

"The overall Telecommunications Act, with both Exon's CDA and Cox/Wyden's provision, passed both Houses by near-unanimous votes and was signed into law by President Bill Clinton by February 1996. Cox/Wyden's section became Section 509 of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 and became law as a new Section 230 of the Communications Act of 1934."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230

[Brian Griffin]

“Section 230 has frequently been referred to as a key law that has allowed the Internet to flourish”

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Section_230

[FlyingEagle]

Communist Totalitarians hate to have their tyranny exposed in cold light of day, wicked satanic prowlers that they are.

[GOPJ]

In effect, Big Tech has been illegally deputized as the censorship arm of the U.S. government. This should alarm you no matter your political persuasion. It is unacceptable, unlawful and un-American."

If we had had creepy press toadies back when Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone, they would applaud Bell FOR ONLY allowing people of HIS political persuasion to use the telephone.

Hard to believe the Tech of our time are such little mean spirited control freaks... Guess that's what happened when cultures push grown men to think of themselves as 17 year old boys.

[GOPJ]

In effect, Big Tech has been illegally deputized as the censorship arm of the U.S. government. This should alarm you no matter your political persuasion. It is unacceptable, unlawful and un-American."

If we had had creepy press toadies back when Alexander Graham Bell invented the telephone, they would applaud Bell FOR ONLY allowing people of HIS political persuasion to use the telephone.

Hard to believe the Tech of our time are such little mean spirited control freaks... Guess that's what happeneds when cultures push grown men to think of themselves as 17 year old boys. Tech and press toadies at the WSJ, Washington Post and New York Times...

[romanesq]

The commies are out of control.

The upside is they expose themselves for the totalitarians they are.