[semimojo]

...my position is that nobody should be imposing their opinions on anyone else, least of all communications companies that require public usage to make their business operate.

No sale.

Like it or not these "communications companies" are private entities entitled to constitutional protections, including the right to decide what messages they want to publish on their private property.

You want to destroy them because you don't agree with their politics, which is certainly your right and I'd probably support you in much of that.

The problem comes when you want to use the power of the government to defeat your political enemy by trampling their rights.

[DiogenesLamp]

Like it or not these "communications companies" are private entities entitled to constitutional protections, including the right to decide what messages they want to publish on their private property.

Don't care. They are a threat, and they need to be destroyed by any means possible. And you cannot call it their private property when the entire business model relies on public participation. If they want to operate without access to the public, i'm okay with that, but they won't make much money if they can't get access to the public.

So long as they keep doing their illegal censoring, they need to be denied access to the public.

The problem comes when you want to use the power of the government to defeat your political enemy by trampling their rights.

Nobody has a right to censor the public. Anyone who tries needs to be smashed with a nuclear sledgehammer.