Latest Breaking News

Occulus

(20,599 posts)

29. Two people on this thread care greatly that too much speech has an effect.

Wed Mar 8, 2017, 08:02 PM

Mar 2017

Those two individuals have a history here, and to judge their unwillingness to reply to my posts, apparently also both have me on ignore.

By their replies here, they've tipped their hands. They believe there is such a thing as "too much free speech" (one argument given is that it ties up the phone line, DUH, that's the point), and that's aggressively Trumpian in the worst of all possible ways.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

63 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

MILWAUKEE MAN GETS 'CEASE AND DESIST' LETTER FROM US SENATOR [View all] Judi Lynn Mar 2017 OP

I believe that he should take this to court Sherman A1 Mar 2017 #1

Agree. DISGUSTING behavior from this senataor iluvtennis Mar 2017 #2

I think there's a point at which it crosses from being "contact" into "harassment." Honeycombe8 Mar 2017 #3

This man is indeed guilty of harassment. murielm99 Mar 2017 #5

I was just about to say that Bradical79 Mar 2017 #8

That campaign would be guilty too. Occulus Mar 2017 #32

That's immature and not productive "contact." Honeycombe8 Mar 2017 #12

Free speech is under no Constitutional requirement to be "productive". Occulus Mar 2017 #34

Harassment is illegal. Honeycombe8 Mar 2017 #56

what then is the relevant and precise difference between free speech and harassment? LanternWaste Mar 2017 #58

He had to dial eight three times before his call was answered csziggy Mar 2017 #44

Which court is that? Kindly explain. nt msanthrope Mar 2017 #7

It was a cease and desist letter...not a court. Honeycombe8 Mar 2017 #10

I think it was a cease and desist from a lawyer Bradical79 Mar 2017 #9

It is not like he is actually talking to Johnson rurallib Mar 2017 #13

83 calls is harassment. Come on. Let's not say this is similar Honeycombe8 Mar 2017 #15

Sorry. I disagree rurallib Mar 2017 #16

Give me your # and I'll call you 83 times tomorrow and every day thereafter... Honeycombe8 Mar 2017 #17

are you freaking serious? rurallib Mar 2017 #21

lol this is getting good Norbert9 Mar 2017 #22

Is the poster an elected official? Eliot Rosewater Mar 2017 #26

but he's not a public servent or in business gopiscrap Mar 2017 #35

So if other constituents can't get their calls answered because this guy is tying up the lines, onenote Mar 2017 #23

Authoritarian right wingers always want to ban the effective tactic. Occulus Mar 2017 #27

Also, "Too much speech should be banned." Occulus Mar 2017 #28

Also: "I support harassment of Democratic legislators" onenote Mar 2017 #37

Your examples aren't illegal Occulus Mar 2017 #39

Apparently in addition to being a jerk, you can't comprehend English. onenote Mar 2017 #50

By your logic, a political organization or collective, SUCH AS DU, Occulus Mar 2017 #25

This message was self-deleted by its author Occulus Mar 2017 #30

This message was self-deleted by its author Occulus Mar 2017 #31

You would limit the number of times per day one may speak freely to an elected representative? Occulus Mar 2017 #24

A different story I read said he called 83 times before the senator's office answered the phone csziggy Mar 2017 #40

You could call it that. Or you could call it civil disobedience, or a political action - sometimes Kashkakat v.2.0 Mar 2017 #42

Message auto-removed Name removed Mar 2017 #57

Agree. Even pubs have rights, :), including Hortensis Mar 2017 #59

I wonder if it ever crossed the Senators mind Mr.Bill Mar 2017 #4

What makes you think he didn't? nt Honeycombe8 Mar 2017 #11

Uhh, because the OP says Mr.Bill Mar 2017 #14

Nicely stated... busterbrown Mar 2017 #20

Two people on this thread care greatly that too much speech has an effect. Occulus Mar 2017 #29

Thanks for the fill in.. busterbrown Mar 2017 #33

I share the sentiment. Occulus Mar 2017 #36

That's what I was thinking! GWC58 Mar 2017 #43

pox on these congress critters who doge and evade their constituants. AllaN01Bear Mar 2017 #6

Because you can't communicate with your rep via email (unless you're in their LuckyLib Mar 2017 #18

he should protest the university of wisconsin certainot Mar 2017 #19

THATS BRILLIANT! "apolitical radio stations" - that would be public radio, which btw Kashkakat v.2.0 Mar 2017 #47

not what i had in mind... it has to be to music and sports stations or they'll certainot Mar 2017 #54

OK, well I guess I'M the brilliant one then - LOL. Might be hard to find music or sports stations Kashkakat v.2.0 Mar 2017 #60

i think it will be a lot easier to argue for taking the sports to apolitical stations certainot Mar 2017 #61

Ron Johnson is an extremely unresponsive Senator. milestogo Mar 2017 #38

Too bad! GWC58 Mar 2017 #46

Thanks for your empathy for Wisconsin Democrats. milestogo Mar 2017 #48

Yeah, well my Congressman is GWC58 Mar 2017 #49

Anyone who takes improper communication to that level ManiacJoe Mar 2017 #41

See my two posts above with more information csziggy Mar 2017 #45

Ah, yes. Modern journalism at its finest. ManiacJoe Mar 2017 #62

Seems to me the Congress Critter could have maybe just taken the guys call. LOL Lib Mar 2017 #51

Robo-calls are ok, then? moonseller66 Mar 2017 #52

and also... moonseller66 Mar 2017 #53

This is fake - saw on snopes or somewhere. Justice Mar 2017 #55

No, Snopes confirmed through a local TV station it is true csziggy Mar 2017 #63