Yes, that does tend to get the Red Cross people mildly upset. Sort of like they got when they told me that I couldn't give blood anymore after I told them about my Prostrate Cancer. I said couldn't you just label the bag to be given to women only. They wouldn't be able to get prostate cancer. They did not see the humor in that at all.
We have a would be king threatening to pull stations license. The correct response is to stand up for what’s right, the rule of law, the constitution and FREE Speech. We are fast becoming a nation I don’t recognize. If you don’t see it then perhaps you are part of the problem. Just sayingFact: Kimmel's ratings are so low only 1.6 million view his show nightly. This has nothing to do with freedom of speech but economics. Check your facts, it is not the autocrat in DC that was the last straw, it was the local stations that told Disney they would no longer air Kimmel's show. Once again legacy media twists a story to meet their own agenda at the expense of telling the truth.
What I see is that those who are so strongly advocating for free speech are the same people who just three years ago were so busy stopping free speech. The problem is that people like you do not see the whole picture, Free speech should be allowed even if you do not agree with what is being said.We have a would be king threatening to pull stations license. The correct response is to stand up for what’s right, the rule of law, the constitution and FREE Speech. We are fast becoming a nation I don’t recognize. If you don’t see it then perhaps you are part of the problem. Just saying
We have a would be king threatening to pull stations license. The correct response is to stand up for what’s right, the rule of law, the constitution and FREE Speech. We are fast becoming a nation I don’t recognize. If you don’t see it then perhaps you are part of the problem. Just saying
You do realize that you both just said the same thing? Or you are both on the same side. What a coincidence or is it?What I see is that those who are so strongly advocating for free speech are the same people who just three years ago were so busy stopping free speech. The problem is that people like you do not see the whole picture, Free speech should be allowed even if you do not agree with what is being said.
Was the government restricting speech three years ago? No. That's the difference.What I see is that those who are so strongly advocating for free speech are the same people who just three years ago were so busy stopping free speech. The problem is that people like you do not see the whole picture, Free speech should be allowed even if you do not agree with what is being said.