Roughly a year ago, social media giants began to pay a lot more attention to the content of the material their users post. This has taken many forms: throttling the spread of COVID misinformation like the Plandemic video; slapping a disclaimer on posts thought to be misleading about the election results; banning Parler from AWS; blocking the New York Post from posting anything at all after their articles about Hunter Biden’s emails came out; even banning the President of the United States. Regardless of what you think about these actions–my own thoughts are a little complicated–one thing is abundantly clear: they are all legal.
Conservative responses to these events have varied. Some, like rising star Josh Hawley, have gone full horseshoe and decided that Elizabeth Warren’s antitrust ideas are not only good but insufficient. Others have gone further and called for outright nationalization. Future Ohio Senate candidate J.D. Vance (remember him?) has suggested other remedies, against all sorts of companies, for daring to engage in speech he disagrees with. There are even conservatives who think tech companies’ obviously-legal actions ought to remain so, though I can’t find one at the moment. (This is not meant as an insult; they just don’t inspire the same degree of hate-bookmarking. I’ll happily update this if you share a good one in the comments.)
But leave it to Florida governor Ron DeSantis to be the first in the nation to, in response to this “problem”, sign a bill that criminalizes protected speech. It bans a wide variety of common content moderation practices, all of which are protected under the First Amendment and Section 230. (What is Section 230? Glad you asked.) Essentially, this new Florida law says that Internet companies must allow content produced by (or relating to) candidates for office to stay on their sites unmolested. In other words, it tells property owners that they must allow wide swaths of speech on their private property, which is generally not a thing we do in this country. (I’m trying to imagine a similar law about churches, and… can’t.)
Like most tech regulation bills, it was clearly drafted by people who have no idea what they’re talking about.
Florida’s no-deplatforming bill has an insanely broad definition of censorship. https://t.co/DI292pc3nc pic.twitter.com/U1QRbyCt7J
— Timothy B. Lee (@binarybits) April 30, 2021
(Follow below the fold to learn more…)
It seems to ban, er, search engines?
The bill also seems to be fundamentally confused about what a search engine does. The whole point is to place some content ahead of other content. (It goes on to ban post-prioritization of content related to political candidates.) pic.twitter.com/N1PCCywqSj
— Timothy B. Lee (@binarybits) April 30, 2021
You are however exempt if you own a theme park, because of course you are.
The whole thing is a godawful unconstitutional mess. More amusingly, it’s also self-negating, containing a clause that as far as I can tell means “haha just kidding”:
13/ Even if the bill wasn’t unconstitutional, it would still be preempted by #Section230, which expressly prohibits any state-level liability that is inconsistent with 230’s protection: pic.twitter.com/4kqoOdFOUN
— Ari Cohn (@AriCohn) May 3, 2021
15/ The Florida legislature acknowledges as much in the bill’s text, which is either an explicit admission that the bill is purely performative, or a weak-as-hell attempt at a savings clause. Might as well have written “this bill may not be enforced.” pic.twitter.com/9cggdnvmNv
— Ari Cohn (@AriCohn) May 3, 2021
Cohn’s entire thread is worth reading, as is his op-ed, which covers most of the same ground.
If I were Twitter, I’d be tempted to respond with some sort of capital strike. No politicians from Florida allowed, if that passes muster. Failing that, no users from Florida. But I am not Twitter, which is probably for the best. Maybe the bill won’t be in effect long enough to make any protest worth it. This thing is just so goddamned stupid, I can’t figure out what to do beyond point and laugh.
Betty Cracker
It’s unconstitutional, unenforceable, a joke, etc., but it stokes the wingnut grievance machine, which is the entire point, I think. The question I have is at what point stoking the wingnut grievance machine becomes counterproductive, i.e., alienates more unaffiliated voters than keeps base lunatics on board. We’re about to find out on multiple fronts.
Baud
Not to defend this law in any way, but this statement is a bit broad. For example, net neutrality/open internet is intended to require property owners to allow certain type of speech on their “tubes.” That’s what non-discrimination is all about. There are other examples not related to the Internet. Property ownership is not a per se defense to speech regulations.
Brachiator
This is very true. But what makes this worse is that there are some in the tech world who like to play Tech God Philosopher King. They want to protect the tech world from any regulation and so refuse to co-operate in crafting reasonable legislation. Of course I believe that all right wing attempts at regulation are bullshit.
True, but I also think that some of these GOP goobers are hoping that the present Supreme Court loves crazy and stupid.
Yeah, I want these clowns shut down. They want to make sure that right wing nonsense, no matter how false or toxic, can get maximum spread on social media platforms.
Major Major Major Major
@Baud: Net neutrality is legal because it treats ISPs as common carriers, which makes them less ‘private’ in this regard. I said ‘generally’ for a reason…
PaulB
“This thing is just so goddamned stupid, I can’t figure out what to do beyond point and laugh.”
And this differs from other Republican initiatives how, exactly?
Baud
@Major Major Major Major:
I saw the “generally,” but that can get lost. The central issue really isn’t about property ownership — property ownership is simply an incidental fact because how a lot of corporate speech is carried out.
ETA: In fact, I think the bigger risk here is that right-wing judges use the abusive nature of this law to expand corporate speech doctrine beyond what we would like.
comrade scotts agenda of rage
@Betty Cracker:
My feeling is this is not unlike Peak Wingnut: never reached.
Gravenstone
@Betty Cracker: I say we just cut the physical backbone at the FL border. But we’d miss you and Adam something fierce.
Joe Falco
@Betty Cracker:
I’m surprised they didn’t try to put it on the ballot as a constitutional amendment to try and gin up support for Republican candidates a la 2004 and the push for anti-gay marriage constitutional amendments in several states then.
VeniceRiley
I’m going to comment more often so I can qualify for the threadkiller contest.
Republicans are so very weird. Do I even have a gob to smack left?
hells littlest angel
DeSantis is going to love the “RON DESANTIS IS A JERKOFF” billboard I’m having installed on his front lawn.
Mike in NC
Republicans are going to launch their War on the Bill of Rights just in time for the 2022 midterms.
Major Major Major Major
@Baud: I frame it as a property issue so that people can see the direct connection to their personal first amendment rights.
Cacti
@Baud:
Except that it pretty much is, and was affirmed as such by SCOTUS in Lloyd Corporation v. Tanner (1972), and reaffirmed in PruneYard Shopping Center v. Robbins (1980).
Major Major Major Major
@Cacti: the Cohn link includes further examples that apply to things like the law’s disclosure requirements.
Betty Cracker
@comrade scotts agenda of rage: Well, Trump was not reelected, so we have something of a test case? Maybe I just tell myself that because, if it’s true there’s no limit to unaffiliated voters’ tolerance for authoritarian behavior, we’re doomed as a country, and I don’t want to believe that.
Cacti
@Major Major Major Major:
The simplest explanation I can think of is this:
You don’t have a protected free speech right to set up your soapbox in my front yard without my consent.
Major Major Major Major
How many more comments before I get called an apologist…
@Cacti: That’s a good one.
Ruckus
@Betty Cracker:
Isn’t their entire point stoking the wingnut grievance machine?
Isn’t that entirely counterproductive to actual governance?
IOW isn’t creating an alternative reality the entire point of conservative politics? A reality where a few gain all the power and money and screw everyone else, especially those who stand in the way. We have a government that supposedly gives all of us equal power that has limits (free speech but you can’t yell fire in a theater if it isn’t, it creates panic) We don’t have free speech, we have free speech as long as it doesn’t take away the very freedoms we say we have. Harm is the basis of our restrictions. Or at least that is what the basis of our laws are supposed to be. We have the right to keep and bear arms but we don’t have the right to shoot other people because we feel like it. And it mostly worked, until someone found out that money could be made from advocating harm to others and hate is stronger than just an emotion.
Benw
It’s not every day that a state with 21.5M people in it confesses that it has less power than Twitter. SAD
Enhanced Voting Techniques
The Second Amendment was basically an attempt to crowdsource the military so the rich to didn’t have suffer the indignity of paying for soldiers who protected them.
Baud
@Major Major Major Major:
It’s a libertarian framing, rather than a liberal one. Long term, I think it does more harm than good.
@Cacti: Pruneyard wouldn’t have been decided the way it was if property was an automatic defense to speech regulation.
Kay
Missouri’s anti-woke law:
“No state agency, school district, charter school, online instruction funded in any manner by the Missouri legislature, or personnel or agent of such state agency, school
district, charter school, or online instruction shall teach, use, or provide for use by any
pupil any curriculum, instructional materials, or assignments designed to teach
components of critical race theory as part of any curriculum, course syllabi, or instruction
in any course or program of study.”
They’re putting them in all over the country.
The free speech defenders are planning a nationwide witch hunt to find anyone saying “critical race theory” in any public school.
Good job, anti-wokesters! Are we going to get a 5000 word substack essay on how the “anti-woke” laws ban certain political speech?
Major Major Major Major
@Baud:
1. The two ideologies have significant overlap, especially when it comes to speech rights
2. This is how the courts frame it
trollhattan
@Betty Cracker:
It’s hard to unseat the incumbent, and after tossing out Ford as not being elected to begin with I can cite Carter and Bush 1 as the only other times during my life.
The lasting effects of Trump’s failure are unknown and seeing the poison darts thrown at Cheney and Romney tells me it’s undecided.
Baud
Let me put it this way. If the Dems want to pass a law telling Google it can’t discriminate based on race or sex in its search results, Google doesn’t (shouldn’t) have a defense to that law based on the fact that it’s servers are its property.
trollhattan
@Kay:
A hilarious thing is “critical race theory” is just a lazy label. How about legislation banning “cancel culture.” That would be fun to enforce.
Another Scott
@Betty Cracker: Wednesday might be a good day to see if there’s such a thing as Anti-RWNJ Grievance Day.
https://juanitajean.com/trump-back-on-facebook-just-no/
Wouldn’t it be great if a few billion people dropped their FB accounts if/when they let TFG back on??
[sigh]
Cheers,
Scott.
Baud
@Major Major Major Major:
In terms of results, yes. Not in terms of the analysis on how to get to that result.
Courts will not frame this in terms of property ownership. The critical questions will be whether the Internet company has free speech rights that the law is violating, does the law regulate content and is there a compelling governmental interest, and does the law discriminate among speakers.
Baud
@Kay:
Time to refer to it as complimentary race theory.
Major Major Major Major
@Baud:
I’ll take that bet.
Another Scott
In other news, …
I believe this (moving sexual assault cases out of the control of commanders) is one of the things that Gillibrand has been pushing for for years.
Good, good.
Cheers,
Scott.
Baud
@Major Major Major Major:
Looking back at your title, I see that you view this is a compelled speech case. I don’t think it is. I think it’s primarily a restriction on speech. But that line is a little fuzzy here.
Ken
Are we sure this is because of the actions of the tech companies, and not to (purely hypothetical here, you understand) provide an escape clause when one or more Florida politicians are found to have been using their official accounts to exchange photos of underage girls that they’ve paid for sex?
Ken
@Baud: Or “history”.
NotMax
Cases aplenty that zoning regulations have no applicability when it comes to where someone decides to build a church.
Also too, take a look at what’s printed on all U.S. currency.
Major Major Major Major
@Baud: content moderation is often understood as a form of speech, so outlawing it would be censorship, except that it also requires you to let other people use your megaphone, which is compelled speech? I can see both angles but this is the one I personally like.
Betty Cracker
@trollhattan: I agree it’s still up in the air. Gotta hand it to Liz Cheney — she posted this on Twitter today:
She’s exactly right, but as we see, that’s not where most Republicans are. I hope her view eventually prevails, but who knows?
Anyhoo, I’m curious to see how this plays among the unaffiliated voters who, dog help us, decide many elections. If they don’t hold Republicans accountable for the big lie, support for insurrection, etc., it’s hard to be optimistic.
Ken
“You say you are banning cancel culture, but that means you are cancelling it, but you are banning cancelling, but — illogical illogical please explain only RWNJs can explain their behavior….”
“I am not programmed to respond in that area.”
Mary G
?
sab
@Betty Cracker: I do respect her for saying this quite clearly and outspokenly. Is any Republican outside of Wyoming listening?
NotMax
Thing is, being a candidate does not bestow some sacrosanct imprimatur. Any yahoo with a clipboard and a pen can (and often does) gather enough signatures to qualify for a place on a ballot.
Matt McIrvin
@Ken: Logic is a bouquet of pretty flowers that smell bad!
Major Major Major Major
@Matt McIrvin: @Ken:
randy khan
The theme park exemption (there, of course, at the instigation of Big Mouse, but which incidentally also protects Comcast and whoever owns Sea World) is what makes it a comedy gem.
Baud
@randy khan:
Yeah, that’ll probably be the easiest way to strike down this law.
Ken
@Major Major Major Major: You mean computers don’t explode when you enter bad data?
(That’s the only thing that takes me out of the moment in that scene of War Games. Well, and the computer breaking the access code one character at a time. And…)
Ken
@Baud: Or get around it, by buying up a failed amusement park. There are plenty to go around.
Baud
@Ken: Text of law:
Section 509.103
A little work needed to use the exemption. Not worth it because it’s really a slam dunk in court.
Ken
@Baud: “We count insects as visitors….”
Betty Cracker
@sab: I think the last stat I read on the issue is that 70% or so of Republicans believe the big lie, so no? Honestly, I think we have to write off anyone who voted for Trump in 2020 as a prospective voter. I mean, we want every vote, of course, and we hope some come to their senses / benefit from Dem policies so they don’t vote for another fascist. But if I ran the zoo, I’d say don’t invest a lot in chasing those voters. We need to hold our base together, motivate them to turn out and pull unaffiliated voters in. That latter effort might include disciplined messaging about Republican corruption, lies and allegiance to an unpopular authoritarian figure.
Delk
Like most
tech regulationbills, it was clearly drafted by people who have no idea what they’re talking about.James E Powell
@Ken:
So you’re saying my computer won’t go crazy if I ask it to compute pi to the last decimal?
Ken
@James E Powell: No, it will follow its program, and kill you so that it can go back to looking at cat memes.
sdhays
@James E Powell: No, it will just run up your power bill and you won’t have any BitCoin to show for it.
Another Scott
@sab: Doesn’t look like anyone in Wyoming is listening so far.
Casper Star-Tribune – top story is two Boy Scouts councils merging.
Cheers,
Scott.
Brachiator
@Baud:
This “exception” is so mind-numbingly obvious and stupid that only a Republican could think they might get away with it.
Major Major Major Major
@Delk: tough but fair!
japa21
@Another Scott: Mrs. Japa is seriously considering it.
Ruckus
@Enhanced Voting Techniques:
Yes but that wasn’t the basic point.
Roger Moore
@Enhanced Voting Techniques:
No. The Founders were rightly afraid of having a large enough standing army to defend the country, because they knew a large standing army could be used by a would-be dictator*. They saw a militia as the bulwark against that. A militia would massively outnumber the small standing army, and it would consist of voters whose rights would be threatened by a military takeover.
*It’s good to remember that Cromwell was closer in time to the framing of the constitution than Grant and Lee were to today.
Another Scott
More tech news and issues… BusinessWire:
(Emphasis added.)
It’s interesting that small players beat out the big names – again. America is still great at that.
Cutting through the jargon, I’ve always envisioned AI as having a team with decades of experience whispering in my ear. A team that is always learning, at rates I have no hope of matching.
AI has the potential to be a breakthrough on the scale of movable type. If it’s used for more than figuring out ways to make us buy more stuff…
Cheers,
Scott.
Yutsano
@japa21: I haven’t done the formal dump yet. I haven’t been on since I don’t know when and I don’t miss it, but the actual GBCW hasn’t happened. I’m not gonna necessarily use his return as the impetus, but nothing says I can’t.
Major Major Major Major
@Another Scott: nice! Yeah, an AI shop is somewhat easy to bootstrap, for novel problems at least, until Alphabet buys you. I’m happy to see an increased role for AI in healthcare (within reason) and your whispering-expert analogy is dead on. (There are also whispering-dreamer applications for art and writing but we don’t want our doctors using those!)
Amir Khalid
Wow. Bill and Melinda Gates are getting a divorce.
Another Scott
“Edward” isn’t making friends there.
I assume that’s not even the most ridiculous example, just one that was easily documented.
(via nycsouthpaw)
Cheers,
Scott.
Dan B
@Major Major Major Major: Apologist isn’t a label I’d apply. There is room to discuss some restrictions on the technosphere so they are not tools for dismantling democracy and for silencing different opinions. At the moment it feels like the tech giants are leaning towards extreme libertarianism. There are unintended consequences to all regulation but resisting any regulation is a reactionary response.
What’s the right touch? What are possible strategic touches? What are we willing to give up? What rights are most critical to maintain?
It seems to me we are close to losing democracy and human dignity worldwide and people like Zuckerberg do not care.
RedDirtGirl
Saw a great tweet today from someone who saw a woman out on the street throw a book in to a garbage can. He was curious what book it was…Hillbilly Elegy?.
Amir Khalid
@Another Scott:
I have not been to a Starbucks, or Coffee Bean & Tea Leaf, or any similar establishment, in years. I have nothing against baristas, but I am a happier person for it.
Major Major Major Major
@Dan B: limiting a corporation’s power is much, much better than limiting its speech. Not my fault everybody is trying to do the latter! In my ideal world, content moderation wouldn’t be a threat to democracy because the corporations aren’t big enough to make it one.
bluehill
The other big lie:
https://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/tim-scott-defends-america-not-racist-remark
Jeffro
Even that other 30%??
We don’t have to do anything to go get their vote – we certainly shouldn’t compromise on our progressive agenda, one supported by large, bipartisan majorities. But I’ll gladly put the choice to them in 2022 and 2024: “are y’all LIKING what you’re seeing from Ted Cruz, Josh Hawley, and Ron DeSantis? No? What do you think about not-all-that-scary Uncle Joe? Think you can help us fight off the seditionist loons for another cycle or two?”
Anything to peel off those votes.
Meanwhile, Jennifer Rubin puts out a hugely pro-Kamala piece. Try telling that to our 2010 selves 0_0
If we can just get 10% of the GOP, the ‘establishment’ types, to line up behind the Biden-Harris administration like this…we’ll win, handily.
Another Scott
Another Big Biden Deal, this time for the people of Michigan.
If there are going to be deductibles, policies like these should be nationwide.
Cheers,
Scott.
John Revolta
@RedDirtGirl: Hopefully it was “thrown with great force”!
Jeffro
What debate is being ‘dishonestly’ shut down, Senator Scott? Please let us know more about that, in detail.
NotMax
@Amir Khalid
Some Windows updates more complex than others.
Le Comte de Monte Cristo, fka Edmund Dantes
@Major Major Major Major:
I’m always going to be for stomping on neo-nazi, white supremacist, Aryan ‘action or similar speech. Germany became a much better place for such restrictions.
If the fuckers want to litigate, there’s no shortage of RWNJ morons (including Greenwald) that will happily pick up the cudgel. The ACLU should actually stand down and say “we disapprove of the aims of your speech, so you guys are on your own. Fuck you”.
Dan B
@Major Major Major Major: Thanks for the clarification. I have imagined a partially independent commission that checks disinformation that platforms allow to proliferate. That gets risky if people with malign intent gain control. But we’re seeing exactly that with the GQP.
VeniceRiley
@Amir Khalid: Did not see that one coming.
Danielx
Made me remember: this past Sunday I was driving through what passes for an entertainment district. I made a right hand turn onto the main drag and could hear some sort of fuss from about a block away. I get closer and see it’s some nutcase with a microphone and a dj-type powered speaker, who is going on about God, Jesus, and Sodom and Gomorrah at a high decibel level. First nice weekend in May, outside bar seating (about eight in a two block distance) packed, people all over, and this asshole is screaming about Sodom and Gomorrah. I was idly speculating on how long it would be before a) somebody clocked him on general principles or b) the cops arrested him for being an asshole and then it hit me – he was doing his guerrilla preaching in front of a business that was closed on Sundays. If he’d started that bullshit in front of one of the bars, the bouncers would have kicked his ass into kindling wood right along with his gear.
Eta: was about 4 pm. Also, maybe he had personal reasons, I’m pretty sure a couple of those bars have hot and cold running stds.
Jim, Foolish Literalist
waspuppet
So basically, the question of whether this law applies to you comes down to who you are, who you know and what kind of lawyers you can afford. Exactly not what America is about, and exactly what conservatives want.
dmsilev
@Jim, Foolish Literalist:
Very good news. I assume Moderna’s vaccine will likewise be authorized in the near future. We’re probably a few months away from being able to protect kids under 12 though; those trials started later.
Brachiator
@dmsilev:
I hope someone is asking whether it is really necessary to vaccinate younger children.
Even more than with other age groups, we are getting to the point where we are vaccinating children primarily to control the spread of the disease, not to protect the children themselves against illness or death.
debbie
@Danielx:
Something similar happened at the local Starbucks on a really nice day last week. Apparently, lots of people were sitting outside enjoying themselves when these clowns came by and began hectoring them about abortion. Turns out there’s a new group in a nearby town angling to become the new Westboro Church. ?
Ken
@Jim, Foolish Literalist: Oh, sure, the kids are guaranteed Pfizer, I got stuck with Moderna..
(EDIT: Kidding, kidding! This is great news.)
Ken
You mean the “Go be obnoxious at people, hoping someone throws a punch so you can sue them” church?
dmsilev
@Brachiator: Cutting off potential carriers is important, especially since the rate of vaccinations among adults is slowing down. Since it’s only of indirect benefit to the kids, assuring that it’s safe is even more important, so waiting a few more months to let the trials progress seems very prudent.
Ken
@dmsilev: Also, it’s only of indirect benefit to the kids until a mutation arises that is deadly in kids, then it’s of very direct benefit. And yes, that mutation might only be one chance in a hundred trillion, but how many new viruses are being generated every day?
debbie
@Ken:
Yes, them.
WaterGirl
@Brachiator:
Hmm. I wouldn’t say that at all. Listen to what some of the parents on this thread are saying, like Suzanne. The adults are all vaccinated but she wants her kids to be protected to keep them safe. She’s not looking for her kids to get vaccinated to keep herself safer.
Uncle Cosmo
Well, crap, aren’t you always apologizing for something anyway??
No, wait, I’m sorry – that’s Goku, the American Baka. Sorry. I get yinz confoozled…
Major Major Major Major
@Uncle Cosmo: heh, I’m not quite that young!!
Hoppie
@Amir Khalid: Probably from arguing over how to program the microchips in Covid vaccine shots…
Dan B
@Le Comte de Monte Cristo, fka Edmund Dantes: Thanks for the reminder. The Libertarian view of limited regulation has always seemed naive to the point of being dangerous. Germany without propaganda bans could go south quickly. 4M makes his points well but those of us who grew up in the aftermath of WWII don’t want a war to persuade people that propaganda that promotes violence towards people is far over the line. Propaganda that promotes lies invites the same.
Ken
@Hoppie: “Bill, you could use this to control the world!”
“Mel, honey. I already do.”
Another Scott
@Brachiator: Eh?
No age group is immune.
https://gis.cdc.gov/grasp/covidnet/COVID19_5.html
There were stories out of China early on about newborns being hospitalized for around 2 months.
Everyone needs to be vaccinated.
Everyone. (Or as close to everyone as humanly possible as long as there is community spread.)
Cheers,
Scott.
Major Major Major Major
@Dan B:
I mean the first one as we know is already illegal and I think that’s great. And I’m not a libertarian! But I am trained as a librarian so I sound similar on speech issues.
As for promotion of lies, it’s not really the government’s place to decide what’s true and false in situations like this.
Subsole
@Ruckus:
The Real Galt’s Gulch was all in our heads.
debbie
@Another Scott:
A newborn in my GP’s practice died when he was 8 days old. His father unwittingly exposed his son to COVID.
Subsole
@Betty Cracker: Life is good now.
They’ll go back to sleep.
The “good” news is the prez is white again, so at least they won’t actively put on armbands and vote against us this time.
Brachiator
@Another Scott:
Largely true, but not the whole story. Not by any means.
Probably true. But I noted before that the head of one of the ER’s in Orange County noted that under certain circumstances, he might not recommend that a younger person get vaccinated. He was specifically talking about this in the context of a few people showing an increased risk of blood clots from one of the vaccines.
Again, I am not even an amateur virologist, but just wondering whether the question should be asked.
Subsole
@Betty Cracker: How many people ID as republiQan now?
Is this like Pharoah Dubya’s reign, where 90% of republicans supported him, but only
40%35%26%23% claimed to be republican?The Pale Scot
@Baud:
“Property owners” refers to ISP and network infrastructure. Comcast has a huge incentive to throttle and hinder Netflix and other streaming services. Google has an incredible amount control over what gets listed. Not just preferring paying customers over others in the list sequence, but making sure that superior products compared to the ad buyers or information detrimental to them or their customer gets circular filed. Should JC and Watergirl be required to post articles by Ben Shapiro or Ken Ham? The internet is infinite, there’s no obstacle to buying server time, hiring programmers, paying google to put your site at the top.
WaterGirl
@debbie: That’s really awful. What a terrible loss. I wonder how long that marriage will last.
The Pale Scot
If I was running a 700+billion dollar company, I’d say OK Bucko, I’ll play your game. Put every decent lawyer in Florida on retainer preventing them from working for the GQP. Contest every case, flood the zone with motions and demands for recusal. Hire P.I.’s to investigate every GQP operative with a microscope and publicize the results. Run mouse traps like that O’keefe creep does to ruin GQP politician’s lives. Throw money at at every GQP primary race to help the shit rise to the top. Put major donors on that list too. FaceJerk said “we need to make Apple feel pain” (funny as hell). So lets see what he’s got.
J R in WV
@Major Major Major Major:
I have a cousin who was a medical systems librarian, enjoyed the work helping save lives via research. Now retired, I suspect to Martha’s Vineyard, which I know they loved. Lived and worked in NE Ohio when I knew them, in the long ago, now.
Gvg
@Brachiator: good lord, there is no difference. Controlling the spread of the disease is a great thing, for all, including the children. Do you know any orphans? How about kids bringing home the disease to any of their own relatives or friends and figuring it out or being told that they were “to blame for killing….” by some malicious idiot? The disease is a problem for society. It gets solved by collective action.
Kids are getting it too, and more are getting some of the new varients.
misterpuff
Except in red states where you can “Stand Yer Ground” over Skittles.