Trump called Roseanne Barr to congratulate her on huge ratings success

#126
#126
lawgator1 said:
I loved BBT when it first came on and did for a number of years. But it long ago jumped the shark, imo, when it changed the focus from Sheldon's eccentricities and Penny's hotness to Malik what's-her-name and to Wallowitz when it wasn't Sheldon related.


Have you watched Young Sheldon? Pretty funny. I think the actress playing the sister has some very clever lines throughout, they've done a good job with her character.


Modern Family used to be really good, too. Now. the kids have gotten too old to be funny.


Blackish was good, but I cannot seem to find a consistent day/time for it. It just sort of pops up here and there.


Over on HBO, there have been some good ones. Flight of the Conchords was great. Silicon Valley was too, until they lost the stoner character. Now its crap.
Click to expand...

Tracy Morgans OG is pretty good. I think it's on TBS.
 
#127
#127
Weezer said:
Whether or not she meant them to be so(she claims she didn't), Roseanne's comments were abhorrently racist.

Not defending her actions in the least, but here's my question. The comments were from her twitter. By firing her for said comment, is ABC impeding her First Amendment right of free speech? I know the typical left response will probably be along the lines of suggesting I'm condoning her words. I'm not. It's really a simple question. Does free speech only apply when the person speaking is saying things you agree with? What are the actual limits you set on free speech?

And twisting this around to something a little different, like I said, she did this on twitter, not while on the job. And yet most people feel ABC is well within their rights to cancel her show. Contrast that with NFL players acting out while on the job but certain people feel punishing them would infringe upon their right to protest. Seems like "rights" are being selectively defended.


My personal opinion, genuine racism is abhorrent. I in no way support it, though I'm sure some will suggest I do. You can look at this simply, or you can look at the actual complexities involved. When it comes to "rights", who gets to draw the lines?
Click to expand...
114, Luther, Mick, Teen Tom, Outer Lips, LG, etc.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#129
#129
Weezer said:
Whether or not she meant them to be so(she claims she didn't), Roseanne's comments were abhorrently racist.

Not defending her actions in the least, but here's my question. The comments were from her twitter. By firing her for said comment, is ABC impeding her First Amendment right of free speech? I know the typical left response will probably be along the lines of suggesting I'm condoning her words. I'm not. It's really a simple question. Does free speech only apply when the person speaking is saying things you agree with? What are the actual limits you set on free speech?

And twisting this around to something a little different, like I said, she did this on twitter, not while on the job. And yet most people feel ABC is well within their rights to cancel her show. Contrast that with NFL players acting out while on the job but certain people feel punishing them would infringe upon their right to protest. Seems like "rights" are being selectively defended.


My personal opinion, genuine racism is abhorrent. I in no way support it, though I'm sure some will suggest I do. You can look at this simply, or you can look at the actual complexities involved. When it comes to "rights", who gets to draw the lines?
Click to expand...

They aren't impeding her right to free speech. However, they are free to impose consequences. She can still say what she wants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#130
#130
GAVol said:
5 years ago, she was a member of the Green Party. She's just a straight up publicity seeking nut.
Click to expand...

With her tweets today, Vegas oddsmakers have her as a 2:1 to challenge donny dotard for the oval office.

Mouthbreathers love this kind of hostile, zero decorum, unfiltered tweeting.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 people
#131
#131
Weezer said:
Whether or not she meant them to be so(she claims she didn't), Roseanne's comments were abhorrently racist.

Not defending her actions in the least, but here's my question. The comments were from her twitter. By firing her for said comment, is ABC impeding her First Amendment right of free speech? I know the typical left response will probably be along the lines of suggesting I'm condoning her words. I'm not. It's really a simple question. Does free speech only apply when the person speaking is saying things you agree with? What are the actual limits you set on free speech?

And twisting this around to something a little different, like I said, she did this on twitter, not while on the job. And yet most people feel ABC is well within their rights to cancel her show. Contrast that with NFL players acting out while on the job but certain people feel punishing them would infringe upon their right to protest. Seems like "rights" are being selectively defended.


My personal opinion, genuine racism is abhorrent. I in no way support it, though I'm sure some will suggest I do. You can look at this simply, or you can look at the actual complexities involved. When it comes to "rights", who gets to draw the lines?
Click to expand...

Lol employers can still fire you fo saying/doing something stupid. That’s not impeding her rights.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 people
#132
#132
114VOL said:
Negative comments and criticism of Trump are in response to something inappropriate and/or offensive he's said
99.999999999999999999999% of the time. Her comments were preemptive hate speech
Click to expand...

So, Sarah H Sanders is "fair game"????
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#133
#133
Weezer said:
Whether or not she meant them to be so(she claims she didn't), Roseanne's comments were abhorrently racist.

Not defending her actions in the least, but here's my question. The comments were from her twitter. By firing her for said comment, is ABC impeding her First Amendment right of free speech? I know the typical left response will probably be along the lines of suggesting I'm condoning her words. I'm not. It's really a simple question. Does free speech only apply when the person speaking is saying things you agree with? What are the actual limits you set on free speech?

And twisting this around to something a little different, like I said, she did this on twitter, not while on the job. And yet most people feel ABC is well within their rights to cancel her show. Contrast that with NFL players acting out while on the job but certain people feel punishing them would infringe upon their right to protest. Seems like "rights" are being selectively defended.


My personal opinion, genuine racism is abhorrent. I in no way support it, though I'm sure some will suggest I do. You can look at this simply, or you can look at the actual complexities involved. When it comes to "rights", who gets to draw the lines?
Click to expand...

1st Amendment only applies to government action, not the action of private parties.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 people
#138
#138
Weezer said:
Whether or not she meant them to be so(she claims she didn't), Roseanne's comments were abhorrently racist.

Not defending her actions in the least, but here's my question. The comments were from her twitter. By firing her for said comment, is ABC impeding her First Amendment right of free speech? I know the typical left response will probably be along the lines of suggesting I'm condoning her words. I'm not. It's really a simple question. Does free speech only apply when the person speaking is saying things you agree with? What are the actual limits you set on free speech?

And twisting this around to something a little different, like I said, she did this on twitter, not while on the job. And yet most people feel ABC is well within their rights to cancel her show. Contrast that with NFL players acting out while on the job but certain people feel punishing them would infringe upon their right to protest. Seems like "rights" are being selectively defended.


My personal opinion, genuine racism is abhorrent. I in no way support it, though I'm sure some will suggest I do. You can look at this simply, or you can look at the actual complexities involved. When it comes to "rights", who gets to draw the lines?
Click to expand...

No. Your first amendment rights only guarantee that you can't be prosecuted by law.

How people feel is irrelevant. The NFL owners have an absolute right to cut any player they wish. They've chosen not to do so with the exception of Colin Kaepernick. He actually didn't do anything as vile as Roseanne, but it looks like he'll never play in the league again and he's definitely good enough to be on a team. He may not be starter quality anymore, but he's sure much better than many of the back-ups
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#140
#140
volfanjustin said:
you are exactly right, now try telling some of the libs that with respect to the NFLs new kneeling policy
Click to expand...

This is a fair point. The NFL isn't a government organization. They can impose consequences for what they feel is inappropriate. That said, they clearly didn't think the kneeling was inappropriate until revenue dropped.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#141
#141
MSNBC says Valarie Jarrett is an African-American......lmfao. How so if she was born in Iran?

The ole narrative because she’s dark I guess.
 
#145
#145
AirVol said:
Where was the Lefts outrage?
Click to expand...

There was none because Byrd renounced and profusely apologized for the KKK five decades before that picture. Byrd went on to be a champion of Civil Rights and would be described by the NAACP as a "stalwart supporter" and who would be "sorely missed" when he died.

This sort of thing is what rational people take into consideration when forming an opinion.

Fail.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 12 people
#148
#148
roosterjbh said:
Lol employers can still fire you fo saying/doing something stupid. That’s not impeding her rights.
Click to expand...

I disagree. If you have to watch what you say in fear of being fired for it, how exactly is that free speech? Again, I don't support what she said. I disagree with it strongly. If she wanted to make a point, she should have stayed with factual criticism rather than crossing the line she did. But it seems she is being punished because people didn't like what she had to say. So where is the line on free speech?
 
#149
#149
Septic said:
There was none because Byrd renounced and profusely apologized for the KKK five decades before that picture. Byrd went on to be a champion of Civil Rights and would be described by the NAACP as a "stalwart supporter" and who would be "sorely missed" when he died.

This sort of thing is what rational people take into consideration when forming an opinion.

Fail.
Click to expand...

Rosanne apologized too. People should forgive her now right?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top