astonmartin708 said:

I have long compared the pandemic to war time in terms of the needs of the nation for alignment and cooperation for the safety of the nation. The fact that Congress couldn’t get their head out of their butts long enough to come to terms with that shows how screwed up our government really is.

I don’t agree that the clear and present danger doctrine has wholly been supplanted. Even in Brandenburg the justices acknowledge the need to limit speech which will imminently cause harm. (They reference Holmes’ fire in a crowded theater analogy) The main difference being what is considered imminent.

Again, I think I’m more open to what should be considered an imminent threat to safety than what the current government considers.

I do agree with Holmes in subsequent cases that things like proposing strike dates aren’t inherent threats to public safety and shouldn’t be regulated in the same way as disinformation about pandemics or inflammatory remarks that maliciously detriment public safety.

Click to expand...

lawpoke87 said:

Holmes was specifically speaking of times of war AND legislation enacted by Congress limiting speech during such times. The Clear and Present Danger Doctrine has also largely been supplanted except in military environments. Here we had no war and no restrictions enacted by Congress. The fact a President restricted speech without Congressional action makes this action even more chilling. History supports as much. The fact the Dem party now supports such broad censorship with zero Congressional oversight shows how far that party has transformed from its civil rights days. Disappointed your partisanship won’t allow you to see the dangers here.

Click to expand...

astonmartin708 said:

I believe in the clear and present danger doctrine of Oliver Wendell Holmes (a Teddy Roosevelt appointee) and I view it, and the federal government’s responsibility to enforce it fairly liberally.

I know that that jurisprudence isn’t really in effect any more after brandenburg, but applying it to this situation, tens of thousands had already died from the covid pandemic… it represented a real tangible danger to the wellbeing Americans (including my family) and misinformation about it contributed to that danger.

I do concede that it was unfortunate that some true information may have been wrapped up in those censorships, but ultimately the ends justified the means in my opinion.

Click to expand...

lawpoke87 said:

They censored scientists who suggested the origin of Covid might have been a lab leak among others…but ok. Hard to believe the party of civil rights and free speech now support the federal governments censorship of its people. The parties have flipped in many ways. History is full of examples of governments who sought to silence dissenting views. Usually doesn’t turn out well for the people of said governments.

Click to expand...

lawpoke87 said:

They censored scientists who suggested the origin of Covid might have been a lab leak among others…but ok. Hard to believe the party of civil rights and free speech now support the federal governments censorship of its people. The parties have flipped in many ways. History is full of examples of governments who sought to silence dissenting views. Usually doesn’t turn out well for the people of said governments.

Click to expand...

Larry Lewis said:

I feel I should comment about Berry Tramel. When I was covering TU for the Oklahoman, Berry was terrific to work for. He gave me great assignments. He was the sports editor my first 2 years there in 2000-2001. He was pushing for expanding coverage for TU and in the Tulsa area, and the Oklahoman covered more Tulsa stuff then than any other time I know of. After he quit being the sports editor there to just write, which he prefers, coverage for TU slowly started to go down. By the my last year there in 2006, it has whittled down to next-to-nothing.

Berry was at the press conference Monday. He didn't have to be. He could have watched the online feed. He lives in OKC.

Click to expand...

astonmartin708 said:

Facebook has been for a long time a cesspool of ridiculous speech, and there was much content showed about Covid that was dangerous to the public health. I'm not fully onboard with Brandenburg to the extent that speech which promotes certain action (or inaction) and materially endangers the health or wellbeing of others should deserve protection.

Its one of the few rulings from that era that I think the court flubbed.

Click to expand...

lawpoke87 said:

Zuck admits to succumbing to Administration pressure and censoring speech. The Federal Government censoring the speech of its citizens is something I thought I would never see in the U.S.

Login to view embedded media

Click to expand...

Gmoney4WW said:

Hopefully our OL dominates Northwestern St, such that we have room to run and make completions. If they are dominant, it will give me hope that they might be able to open up running lanes and pass protect by the skin of their teeth for the rest of the season.

I don't think I realized he lost his brother before he became academically ineligible. That definitely explains the reason for that. It's tough to lose someone close and keep your thoughts and actions on your studies. Must have been devastating after he lost his father. I lost a close friend in my sophomore year in college. It was really tough for a month or two, to keep my focus on my studies. Must have been doubly tough on him, being a family member that affected his family as well.

Click to expand...

aTUfan said:

never in my lifetime did I think that Americans would embrace Communisim. I guess if package it right, it can sound good

Click to expand...

quincy101 said:

I apologize. The reason Chris couldn't find a pix is because it's chicken, not steak. I don't think Smoke even serves a cfs. Please don't ban me from future threads related to foodstuffs. (It's still really tasty, though)

Click to expand...