Posted on 04/18/2022 9:13:32 AM PDT by ChicagoConservative27
Monday on FNC’s “Fox & Friends,” former House Speaker Newt Gingrich slammed the progressive left’s efforts to stop Tesla CEO Elon Musk from his attempt to take over social media giant Twitter.
Gingrich praised Musk for wanting to fight for free speech and said the billionaire “represents a danger” to the left “because he doesn’t follow the rules.” He argued that Musk would not only be a “genuine threat” to Twitter but also to Facebook and Google because he would open up dialogue on those platforms.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
OK..Now
I just read that Musk said he doesn’t own his own place. He crashes at friends where ever he goes.
How smart is that. No one can slip and fall on one of his sidewalk? Maybe at one of his businesses, but not a residence.
It sounds a sorta Howard Hughs-esque, but perhaps not without merit
Newt argued that Musk would not only be a “genuine threat” to Twitter but also to Facebook and Google because he would open up dialogue on those platforms.
Yep, Musk sure knows how to open up dialogues.
Is it my imagination, or are the vast majority of Teslas owned by the liberal left?
He has seven children with two women (former wife and a current girlfriend)
I could believe he does not have a current residence of his own.
Mostly owned by wealthy people in cities...
He’s cash poor, haven’t you heard?
He probably bought the wife a house, and the girlfriend is famous for something.
Recent Snapshot:
Elon Musk at “TED 2022” > Begins at 11 minute mark:
Musk is brilliant, no doubt. But also eccentric.
Bongino has a lot of good info explaining why Musk is causing such a stir with his proposed Twitter takeover.
As an example Blackrock owns over 6% of Twitter stock and is heavily invested in green new deal related industries. Turning Twitter back into a truly free speech platform, with voices critical of the GCC scam available to be heard, represents a real financial threat to them.
Basic financial self interest, even outside its woke CEOs personal ideology.
There are many other interests similarly involved as well.
They’re afraid he’s gonna expose the algorithms
I’m geniunely surprised Musk hasn’t been ‘suicided’ or ‘child-porned’.
They’re afraid he’s gonna expose the algorithms
~~~
That’s the problem with google too, and it’s probably a much more powerful influence on information that twitter. But to be intellectually honest, claiming that your relevance algorithms as a trade secret is legitimate. At least they were at one time. Without that, anyone could start a search engine to compete, no?
Actually, no.
Even if googles algorithms were transparent, that doesn’t by any means someone can just copy them and compete. At all.
Plus, google claims to adjust and augment their algorithms anyway. It’s not like it’s one constant secret locked away in a vault like the formula to coke.
All of this lack of transparency is meant to shield their corruption. Not just their social and political corruption, but their self serving monopoly over the information market.
Generally Tesla’s are owned by liberals, true.
However, they are also owned by rich people as a second car who love performance automobiles. I have a customer who has the model S plaid. He said it is more fun to drive than his Porsche 911.
It is shocking fast off the line. They are faster than a Lambourgini or Ferrari.
Another guy that had one of the first Tesla roadsters was Dean Kamen. He had one of the original Telsa roadsters that the body was made by Lotus. Dean Kamen is the American inventor that owns the company Deca. He invented the Segway, among other things. Dean also has a Porshe 911 Targa.
The Left’s greatest fears are free speech and free elections.
. . . as Musk has forced the current management of Twitter to make plain.The fundamental lesson, IMHO, is that Twitter’s evolution is an example of O’Sullivan’s First Law
An eternal truth.
By John O’Sullivan EDITOR’S NOTE: This appeared in the October 27, 1989, issue of National Review.. Twitter started life as a platform for free speech without reference to ideology. And as such it flourished - until all that free speech inconvenienced “liberals.” But Twitter followed the path of good intentions straight to its usual destination. Simply, if you think you can sustain a free speech ethos which assumes that “liberals” and conservatives are Tweedledum and Tweedledee, you will learn that “Tweedledum” is actually serious about dominating speech. Inevitably, “Tweedledum” will force you stand for or against him - and damn you as a partisan of “Tweedledee” if you don’t fully go along with him. “Tweedledee,” who is a principled advocate of free speech as part of conservatism, won’t do that. And the next thing you know, there is nothing to distinguish you from “Tweedledum.”Robert Michels — as any reader of James Burnham's finest book, The Machiavellians, knows was the author of the Iron Law of Oligarchy. This states that in any organization the permanent officials will gradually obtain such influence that its day-to-day program will increasingly reflect their interests rather than its own stated philosophy. To take a homely example, congressmen from egalitarian parties somehow end up voting for higher pay and generous expenses for congressmen. We can also catch an ironic echo of Michels's law in Stalin's title of General Secretary, as well as in the fact that powerful mandarins in the British government creep about under such deceptive pseudonyms as "Permanent Under-Secretary.” . . .
All of which is by way of introducing a new law of my own . . .I cite as supporting evidence the ACLU, the Ford Foundation, and the Episcopal Church. The reason is, of course, that people who staff such bodies tend to be the sort who don't like private profit, business, making money, the current organization of society, and, by extension, the Western world. At which point Michels's Iron Law of Oligarchy takes over — and the rest follows.
- O'Sullivan's First Law: All organizations that are not actually right-wing will over time become left-wing.
Manicheeanism at work.
Free speech for conservatives can only exist, in the long run, in a platform such as FR which is consciously conservative.
In the long run there will be “conservative” sites and “middle of the road” (actually flaming liberal) sites.
The "rules" used to be "I may disagree with what you say, but I will fight for your right to say it". The current RAT rules are "I don't like what you say, so I'm going to use any means to shut you up!"
I thought of that pic the other day but I was thinking it was Newt and madam Clinton. I got it WRONG
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.