In speaking about the Supremes’ arguments this past week, and the silly “must carry” suit — Paul is right about this: “…it might be better for free speech (at least temporarily) if the Court decides plaintiffs lack standing, and leaves the matter there….”
But all the rest he writes… is singularly uninformed.
He claims that the reason the social media sites ought to be forced into a “must carry” role… is that no one knew much about the pandemic in the early days, and that the government could not be trusted.
D A M N.
So his answer is that Jim Bakker MUST be allowed to sell what might be lethal doses of silver-infused beverages, at $179.00 a 12-pack — while making drug like therapy claims — having never conducted a study, nor even filed with (let alone won approval from) the FDA?
And that’s before we point out that CDC actually did know a quite lot about COVID-19, as a result of the Avian flu priors in Asia. Science is about… facts. And pandemic bio-science is about… saving lives, in a perhaps conservative fashion. But Paul (and Scott) think “muh rights” mean they can lie — with lethal consequences for perhaps a million mostly elderly low income people in the US who got COVID, and died from it (as at least a contributing cause of death).
And even after ALL that, there should never be a REQUIREMENT that private organs (like the NYT!) must hand megaphones to malign idiots like Bakker, free of charge, to sell lethal fake “remedies”. That’s been the law, since Ron Reagan’s first term — 1984.
Paul, like Scott, seems to think O.W. Holmes was wrong (as is 100 years of precedent, since) in Schenck (1919) — not only should there be a right to yell “Fire!” falsely — in a crowded theater (at page at page 249), but Twitter and Facebook must hand the shouting loons… a free megaphone. In sum, they are required to lose advertisers — due to carrying lies and hate speech, as well?! C’mon, Paul. Wake up.
Who are these guys? How did they ever get out of law school?
Out.
Powerline Lies... 