• Moderators, please send me a PM if you are unable to access mod permissions. Thanks, Habsy.

OT: American Politics

if her son really is suffering from PTSD it's really sad that she's using the pulpit to blame something that couldn't possibly be a cause, as the cause of it.

pretty descpicable.

also, ya, she worked wonders for mccain.

again, you have to win in the middle, and the republicans are going to get slaughtered there if they are forced into trump, palin and the like being the party's leaders and public voices.
 
JackBurton said:
She may have her followers, but she also torpedoed Mcain's run. Her making ridiculous comments like that do nothing to help Trump. He already got her endorsement yesterday. Today she follows-it-up with that bullshit. Her son was troubled long before he joined the military.
Her kids are a mess. That daughter that keeps getting knocked-up by different guys and telling others not to have sex is a joke.
Click to expand...

Re: McCain..that's up for debate.

She was probably more popular than McCain. Yes, to the rational individual, she comes across like a brain dead redneck, but that appeals to about 50% of the US population.

The country really is split about 50 / 50.

I've worked down here for more than a decade now, and while I don't vote or have citizenship, I think I have a bit of a read on the pulse of the people.

A lot of people like Palin. A lot of people like Bush (W) STILL.

In my opinion, people that like or support things I don't like or support have just as much of a right to voice their opinions as I do. That's what free speech is.

If you don't believe in free speech for those that offend you, then you don't believe in it at all.

This is where our society is going wrong. If you toe the party line, or the social justice line, you're everybody's friend, but if you have an unpopular opinion, like Damian Godard did, you get destroyed.

That is not how the game should be played.
 
JohnnyHolmes said:
In my opinion, people that like or support things I don't like or support have just as much of a right to voice their opinions as I do. That's what free speech is.

If you don't believe in free speech for those that offend you, then you don't believe in it at all.

This is where our society is going wrong. If you toe the party line, or the social justice line, you're everybody's friend, but if you have an unpopular opinion, like Damian Godard did, you get destroyed.

That is not how the game should be played.
Click to expand...

Here is the thing... you don't understand what free speech is.

Free Speech is that the government will not prosecute you for what you say.

Free speech is not the right to say something and be free from criticism.... She has every right to say whatever she wants. No one is stopping her from saying that she believes obama is responsible for the fact her son is a wife beater.

But here is the thing.... my own free speech... I'm allowed to say, Sarah Palin is a ****ing idiot.

My commentary (And other's commentary, and the media's commentary, and other candidates commentary) is our right to exercise our free speech, and if we want to use our free speech to call her a ****ing idiot. Thats our right, and in no way does "destroying unpopular opinions" infringe anyone's free speech.

She's allowed to say whatever unpopular thing she wants, and we're allowed to say its stupid.

Free speech 101 johnny. Free speech does not mean you are free from being critiqued on what you say.
 
Amen, BKerr.

Funny how often people seem to miss the distinction that free speech does not equal getting to say whatever the hell you want with no consequences whatsoever.
 
FWIW, Johnny does bring up a valid point regarding free speech. We've seen the development of speech police lynch mobs online over the last few years, where an unpopular opinion is expressed by someone and a raging group of SJW's aren't happy until they've shattered that persons life. This is not a positive development in free speech, or public discourse.

With that said, I have no sympathy for Damian Goddard. When you're a public figure (and even if you're not), you have to be aware of what you're putting online. If it's not in step with the values of the organization they work for, then you're going to lose your job. If you want to be a bible thumper on your own time, have at it. But when you're in front of a camera, or yes, on your keyboard on your official twitter account, you need to stick to the script if you want to keep your job. Should people (and I use the term loosely, as I really mean online SJW's) give fewer ****s about what H List sportscasters from Canada say on twitter? Absolutely. But it still takes a special kind of stupid to do what Goddard did. If he wanted to create an anonymous twitter account where he could run off at the keyboard about his faith and jesus christ being his lord and saviour...have at it my son. But then, he wouldn't have had access to all those followers he gained because Sportsnet was spraying his twitter handle on screen every time he was on air.

So basically....it wasn't an unpopular opinion that got him canned, it's how he shared the unpopular opinion. If it was posted on @ChristIsKingDG, nobody would know shit.
 
I have actually noticed the opposite.

Far too many of us say nothign when people say racist shit.
 
With regards to Damian Godard...he didn't even tweet anything offensive. It's not like he wrote "I hate fags".

He just tweeted that he supported some conservative douchebag's stance on marriage. That's it.

Getting fired for having an unpopular opinion should be human rights violation. If Damian Godard wrote that he loves queers and wants them all to get married, nobody would have said shit, and he'd still be employed by Sportsnet. Maybe.

Free speech isn't saying what you want without consequence. It's about protecting the individual's right to expression.

Saying "I don't support gay marriage" should be no different than saying "I support gay marriage".

This is why Alpha male should have never been banned from here. Silencing those that you don't agree with is fascism.

I always say that you should let those that preach hatred have enough rope to hang themselves with.

But again, in Godard's case, he didn't even go that far. All that makes sense in that scenario is that his bosses already wanted him gone, and they took the first available out they had.
 
I'm sure Alfamale has many other forums he can spread his particular form of hate on. Not sure why he needed to do it here or why it had to be tolerated.
 
JohnnyHolmes said:
With regards to Damian Godard...he didn't even tweet anything offensive. It's not like he wrote "I hate fags".

He just tweeted that he supported some conservative douchebag's stance on marriage. That's it.

Getting fired for having an unpopular opinion should be human rights violation. If Damian Godard wrote that he loves queers and wants them all to get married, nobody would have said shit, and he'd still be employed by Sportsnet. Maybe.

Free speech isn't saying what you want without consequence. It's about protecting the individual's right to expression.

Saying "I don't support gay marriage" should be no different than saying "I support gay marriage".

This is why Alpha male should have never been banned from here. Silencing those that you don't agree with is fascism.

I always say that you should let those that preach hatred have enough rope to hang themselves with.

But again, in Godard's case, he didn't even go that far. All that makes sense in that scenario is that his bosses already wanted him gone, and they took the first available out they had.
Click to expand...

You're allowed to say whatever you want without fear of prosecution (provided that you're not inciting violence, or hurting people, yada yada yada). But a company does have the right to decide if the people who represent the face of the company represent their values.

If Sportsnet wanted to maintain an anti-gay marriage stand, then if one of their commentators tweets out in support of gay marriage, they should be allowed to fire them for that, just like if they want to maintain a tolerant stance having the right to fire someone who is against their values.

Now, it does come down to how much of a public face that figure is. If it's some random intern, they're not really a face of the company, so you can likely get away with it. But if you are a visible representative, then yeah, everything you do in public comes under your contract's terms, and if there's any sort of morality provisions in there, then they can fire you.

Never mind the fact that honestly, most people's contracts should essentially allow your company to fire you with adequate notice at any point for virtually any reason. I know for me, the only thing keeping me in my job is that I'm doing a good job in it. If my boss decided that I wasn't, then they might owe me an explanation personally but legally should be allowed to do whatever they want.
 
JohnnyHolmes said:
With regards to Damian Godard...he didn't even tweet anything offensive. It's not like he wrote "I hate fags".

He just tweeted that he supported some conservative douchebag's stance on marriage. That's it.
Click to expand...

On his Rogers Sportsnet official twitter account...if I sent out company emails espousing my political views, whether they're "acceptable" or not, I would likely get punted. It's not that he voiced his opinion, or even the content of his opinion that got him fired, it was how he did it. He used a platform that was built for him by the company for the purpose of supporting and growing the company's brand, to push his own social/political agenda. That's a paddling.

Getting fired for having an unpopular opinion should be human rights violation.
Click to expand...

Agreed. Though, getting fired for having an unpopular opinion and splashing it on your company twitter account wouldn't be.

If Damian Godard wrote that he loves queers and wants them all to get married, nobody would have said shit, and he'd still be employed by Sportsnet. Maybe.
Click to expand...

Doubtful. There would be language in his contract explicitly telling him to not do that.

Free speech isn't saying what you want without consequence. It's about protecting the individual's right to expression.
Click to expand...

From government persecution.

Saying "I don't support gay marriage" should be no different than saying "I support gay marriage".
Click to expand...

And saying either on your official twitter account when you're a ****ing sportscaster is dumb as shit.
 
With regards to Alfamale, I don't think I ever recall this privately owned and operated message boards guaranteeing unlimited free speech to all.

This site is way more free-wheeling than most sports boards out there, but there are still rules and limits. And as someone with no hand in the operation or moderation of this site, I'm pretty comfortable with a line in the sand being drawn when it comes to posting in support of Nazi ideology.
 
I agree with everything Mindzeye, Deckie, LeafGM, and UW said.

As I said earlier, this whole discussion makes it pretty clear that Johnny (like so many people today) has no idea what the phrase "Freedom of Speech" actually means and entails in our society.
 
MindzEye said:
Technically

The best kind of right.
Click to expand...

235px-Number_1.0.png
 
That doesn't change the fact that if he had tweeted from a non-Sportsnet account they would have had no case against him. It was because he used his official work account.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top