Liberal censorship - We know you can burn a book, but can you light a kindle?

[Uncle Ben]

Liberals don't like being told the truth about Global Warming, especially by another intellectual from FOX News - (the great) Charles Krauthammer. They're now trying to pressure the Post into censuring his columns!

When it comes to free speech, he says, “they don’t even hide it anymore. Now they proudly want certain arguments banished from discourse. The next step is book burning. So the question of the day is: Can you light a Kindle?"

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/24/heating-up-climate-change-advocates-try-to-silence-krauthammer/

 

[Sand4x105]

And all the liberals on RIU already know this... just as the petition signers sign a petition against free speech....
The RIU Lib's will bash you for posting the evil opposite of what they have been brain washed to believe... very sad...

“Is there anything more anti-scientific than scientific truths being determined by petition and demonstration?”
Maybe this reflects a broader trend in which people want to wall themselves off from contrary information — and wall off others as well. Debating a complicated subject like climate change — and, equally important, what to do about it — is difficult. Attempting to silence the other side is the easy way out.

It seems only Liberals realize they are against "Free Speech"
No body better ever say anything against The King... Long live the king...

 

[Canna Sylvan]

Liberals don't like being told the truth about Global Warming, especially by another intellectual from FOX News - (the great) Charles Krauthammer. They're now trying to pressure the Post into censuring his columns!



http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2014/02/24/heating-up-climate-change-advocates-try-to-silence-krauthammer/

So, he gets to write what he wants, but must make an apology too? Is there also an implied promise never to do or say such actions again like with politicians? Or is it closer to a Catholic confession?

 

[Sand4x105]

CNN: senior media correspondent says there’s no need for journalists to provide a voice to those who question global warming or the threat it poses.
“Let’s begin with an important journalistic statement,” Brian Stelter declared Sunday on his show, CNN’s “Reliable Sources.” “Some stories don’t have two sides. Some stories are simply true. There’s no necessity to give equal time to the ‘other side.’ One of these is climate change. Depending on which study or which expert you consult, between 95 and 97 percent of scientists agree that climate change is happening now, that it’s damaging the planet and that’s it’s manmade. That seems pretty definitive, right?”

http://dailycaller.com/2014/02/23/cnns-media-critic-journalists-shouldnt-give-equal-time-to-global-warming-skeptics/

 

[Sand4x105]

Global warming is back. Not actual global warming, as the decade-long trend of little to no increase in temperatures continues. But the topic of global warming is back in the news. From Secretary of State John Kerry's recent climate comments in Jakarta to the White House's 2014 "year of action" plan on carbon emissions, global warming has garnered more ink and pixels than we've seen in a while.
It's an open question whether this renewed emphasis reflects sincere concern about global warming or is just the Obama administration playing to part of its base prior to the midterm elections. Either way, the White House and the eco-left must be disappointed by polls that continue to show Americans do not share their sense of urgency. Even though many believe some warming exists and is at least partly anthropogenic, the vast majority consider it a low priority. In a January Pew Research poll, climate change was ranked 19th out of 20 items for the president and Congress to address.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304709904579408950141040072

 

[UncleBuck]

 

[Sand4x105]

http://www.livescience.com/39954-with-ipcc-report-climate-change-is-settled-science.html

The debate is over.
On Friday, an international panel of hundreds of scientists will issue its fifth (and perhaps final) comprehensive scientific assessment of what scientists now know about climate change. Its central conclusion will be certain and unequivocal — human beings are altering the climate, with impacts starting to occur now.

 

[Sand4x105]

Damn it... Don't you get it... The Science IS Settled...

 

[Sand4x105]

Liberals are not trying to censor... The Science IS Settled...

 

[UncleBuck]

 

[schuylaar]

um, back to studying

 

[jahbrudda]

But if there were no liberals, who could we ridicule?

 

[UncleBuck]

But if there were no liberals, who could we ridicule?

it would still be you.

 

[Padawanbater2]

Damn it... Don't you get it... The Science IS Settled...

LOL! Looks like science doesn't give a shit what your pea brained opinion is, does it!

Innovation continues without your ass, who would have thought

 

[jahbrudda]

All this talk of consensus and empirical evidence and all we get are opinions, theoretical charts and attitudes.
Maybe the argument is settled.

 

[UncleBuck]

All this talk of consensus and empirical evidence and all we get are opinions, theoretical charts and attitudes.
Maybe the argument is settled.

all we get from YOU is opinion and political groups like the heartland institute or rush limbaugh proteges.

just because you're too dumb to tell the difference does not change the content of what others have posted.

 

[UncleBuck]

yes, we know.

you side with the politically motivated stooges who deny the plain reality of global warming. the same people who used to say that smoking wasn't harmful as long as tobacco companies paid them are now denying anthropogenic climate change as long as exxonmobil and the koch brothers pay them.

that's who you side with.

whereas i side with the overwhelming majority of scientists whose work is repeatable and verifiable and not motivated by bribes from oil companies with preconceived agendas.

 

[jahbrudda]

yes, we know.

you side with the politically motivated stooges who deny the plain reality of global warming. the same people who used to say that smoking wasn't harmful as long as tobacco companies paid them are now denying anthropogenic climate change as long as exxonmobil and the koch brothers pay them.

that's who you side with.

whereas i side with the overwhelming majority of scientists whose work is repeatable and verifiable and not motivated by bribes from oil companies with preconceived agendas.

Enough of the small talk, put up or shut up, where is your proof?

 

[UncleBuck]

Enough of the small talk, put up or shut up, where is your proof?

i think you mean evidence, and we have tons of it. but enough of that, you have made it clear that you won't believe any evidence we post.

so let's keep this fun and have YOU post some of your favorite links to political scientists that work for rush limbaugh or groups paid by oil companies to say what they are paid to say.

 

[Wilksey]

The funniest thing about the liberal Fox News hate is that they think it's any different from any other "main stream" media source.

It's ALL bullshit and propaganda spewed by retards shilling for the mighty dollar.