Hi, Shrewd!        Login  
Shrewd'm.com 
A merry & shrewd investing community
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd
Search
Shrewd'm.com Merry shrewd investors
Search
Best Of PoliticsBest OfAll BoardsThe Shrewd’m WeeklyLearn to InvestHow to Become Shrewd


The week's question
In December 2024, in the thread "Re: BRK: Why Not XOM?", BreckHutHigh asked the members: "What about the long road trips with kids?" This week it is put to everyone again. The button below opens the small thread re-asking it - read what others have said so far, then give your own answer as an ordinary reply.
Answer this questionContinue to Shrewd'mThis note won't appear again
Halls of Shrewd'm / US Policy
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (35) |
Author: commonone   😊 😞
Number: of 84350 
Subject: Re: Murthy vs Missouri , for the legal scholars
Date: 04/08/24 7:31 AM
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
No. of Recommendations: 7
hclasvegas: Is RFK crazy?

Yes.

hclasvegas: WHO is the greatest threat to free speech?

If, by "WHO," you're referring to the interrogative pronoun, why have you changed your claim from democracy to free speech?

And if you're referring to the interrogative pronoun, then the answer is: a second Trump administration.

Bannon, just this week said that during a second Trump administration promises to go after a free press were “not just rhetoric” and that they are “absolutely dead serious” about seeking revenge against journalists. Kash Patel, who is rumored to be at the top of the list for Attorney General in a second Trump administration, told Bannon that a re-empowered Trump would indeed “come after” the press.

As for Bhattacharya, his co-authored paper, advancing the theory that people could achieve herd immunity against COVID-19 without vaccines, was widely criticized for statistical and methodological errors. In the law suit he joined, Murthy v. Missouri, the 5th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that a range of government agencies, including the Health and Human Services Department, the State Department, and cybersecurity officials, were prohibited from influencing social media companies’ content-moderation policies and is now on the U.S. Supreme Court docket.

At the time, Google, a private company, wrote: “We have strict publisher policies that prohibit content promoting anti-vaccine theories, Covid-19 misinformation, and false claims about the 2020 U.S. Presidential elections.”

Stay tuned. We'll see the court's ruling this summer.

But yeah, for most dangerous to democracy, freedom of speech, and the world at large, I still go with the finger rapist who is guilty of business fraud, encouraged Russia to invade the EU, stole and refused to return top secret military intelligence, quotes Hitler, and says that Jews who don't vote for him hate Israel and their religion.
Post New | Post Reply | Report Post | Recommend It!
Print the post
Members reply directly to commonone here — and replies get answered. Reading is free; so is joining the conversation. Join Shrewd'm »
This community has written 84,309 posts about US Policy. The article-length ones it recommended most:
It's going to get worse · 33 recs · 2025
G’day Donny · 30 recs · 2026
Old Related Story · 28 recs · 2026
HCR is a national treasure · 27 recs · 2025
Fascism in America · 27 recs · 2025
Unthreaded | Threaded | Whole Thread (35) |


Announcements
US Policy FAQ
Contact Shrewd'm
Contact the developer of these message boards.

Best Of Politics | Best Of | Favourites & Replies | All Boards | Followed Shrewds | Open Questions | Moving a community