June 15, 20214 yr Houston news TV reporter blasts FOX news, says they muzzled her, while live on TV. Says Project Veritas will release her story. And yet, after going "rogue" to deliver this "bombshell" news blasting her employer, she is still has her job at FOX... Call me skeptical.
June 20, 20214 yr On 6/15/2021 at 8:29 AM, toolg said: Houston news TV reporter blasts FOX news, says they muzzled her, while live on TV. Says Project Veritas will release her story. And yet, after going "rogue" to deliver this "bombshell" news blasting her employer, she is still has her job at FOX... Call me skeptical. Couldn’t leave it alone could you?
June 20, 20214 yr 9 hours ago, SNOORDA said: Couldn’t leave it alone could you? Nope. Her story seems manufactured to me. She needs a "bump” to get started and Fox just gave it to her. So she wants to cover Bitcoin and hydroxychloroquine? Good for her. She won’t do it at Fox 26. She can start her own news station. Producers pick the stories, reporters report. That’s how it always works.
June 23, 20214 yr Oh nothing, just WaPo admitting (again) to lying and having to change their story after attempting to smear Rufo. lol does anyone still believe anything these liars produce?
June 23, 20214 yr Supreme Court rules school wrong to punish cheerleader for profane Snapchat rant in 8-1 free speech decision https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-free-speech-ruling-cheerleader-profane-snapchat-post This is good. The parents can deal with her, if they choose. What she does on snapchat outside of school has what to do with the school? Of course, 1 justice had to be a dimwitted dewshberry: Quote Justice Clarence Thomas issued a dissent arguing that the majority did not look closely enough at the precedents about how schools may punish students for speech that happens outside of school but could affect what happens inside of the schoolhouse gates.
June 23, 20214 yr 1 hour ago, Toastrel said: Supreme Court rules school wrong to punish cheerleader for profane Snapchat rant in 8-1 free speech decision https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme-court-free-speech-ruling-cheerleader-profane-snapchat-post This is good. The parents can deal with her, if they choose. What she does on snapchat outside of school has what to do with the school? Of course, 1 justice had to be a dimwitted dewshberry: Can someone explain to me why a so-called "conservative" justice would side with the state's right to punish citizens for their speech?
June 23, 20214 yr 13 minutes ago, VanHammersly said: Can someone explain to me why a so-called "conservative" justice would side with the state's right to punish citizens for their speech? lol, van about to argue that Clarence Thomas is not a true conservative. But yeah, says it right there. He cited court precedent.
June 23, 20214 yr 4 minutes ago, Kz! said: lol, van about to argue that Clarence Thomas is not a true conservative. But yeah, says it right there. He cited court precedent. I'm asking what precedence he's citing that justifies it, moron. Also, I was asking conservatives, not you.
June 23, 20214 yr 2 minutes ago, VanHammersly said: I'm asking what precedence he's citing that justifies it, moron. Also, I was asking conservatives, not you. Sure you were. Now continue with your "Clarence Thomas is not a true conservative" idiocy. I like where this is going.
June 23, 20214 yr Quote The NBA's TV market share has hit an all-time high. The viewership share for the 2021 NBA Playoffs is at its highest since 2002, when the league started tracking it, despite missing LeBron James. nba be killin' it in the ratings. the ratings!
June 23, 20214 yr 19 minutes ago, Kz! said: Sure you were. Now continue with your "Clarence Thomas is not a true conservative" idiocy. I like where this is going. I'm asking how his decent jives with conservative dogma (aside from the obvious fact that it leans on precedence, which is often how conservative judges defer), you aggressive moron. The case is about the state regulating speech outside of their grounds. Siding with the state doesn't appear to be particularly conservative stance. Which is why I wanted to know what conservatives thought. For instance @vikas83? Or @Gannan? That obviously doesn't include you, since you're not a conservative.
June 23, 20214 yr 5 minutes ago, VanHammersly said: I'm asking how his decent jives with conservative dogma (aside from the obvious fact that it leans on precedence, which is often how conservative judges defer), you aggressive moron. The case is about the state regulating speech outside of their grounds. Siding with the state doesn't appear to be particularly conservative stance. Which is why I wanted to know what conservatives thought. For instance @vikas83? Or @Gannan? That obviously doesn't include you, since you're not a conservative. I only read the article in the link, not the decision or Thomas' dissent (because, frankly, I have better things to do). The school's argument here seems ridiculous and poorly constructed: Quote The school district and those who sided with it said that schools should be able to punish off-campus speech like Levy's as part of their efforts to regulate cyber-bullying. I whole-heartedly disagree with that. The school should have argued that being on the cheerleading team is a privilege, not a right, and they can kick someone off for any reason. That would have made more sense. Argue that her actions reflected negatively on the school and therefore she lost the privilege of representing the school on the cheerleading squad. I'd have to read Thomas' dissent, but the article cites the idea that people could view it in school. That doesn't make sense to me. I could read a newspaper article in school too. Basically, I'd side with the majority because it seems the school made a dumb argument.
June 23, 20214 yr 46 minutes ago, mr_hunt said: nba be killin' it in the ratings. the ratings! But, but, but, social justice messages will destroy the league.
June 24, 20214 yr On 6/23/2021 at 2:33 PM, downundermike said: But, but, but, social justice messages will destroy the league. Obviously, and 39% increase over the previous year can't be anything but good, but it's worth noting that that previous year was a disaster. Quote For the 2020 NBA Finals, the ratings dropped to a historic low, with one of the games drawing only 5.9 million viewers. The average viewers figure over 6 games was 7.5 million, which is a 51% decline from the previous year.
June 24, 20214 yr 4 minutes ago, The_Omega said: Obviously, and 39% increase over the previous year can't be anything but good, but it's worth noting that that previous year was a disaster. It was a bubble playoffs though. Games without the crowds aren't the same.
June 24, 20214 yr 17 minutes ago, The_Omega said: Obviously, and 39% increase over the previous year can't be anything but good, but it's worth noting that that previous year was a disaster. 12 minutes ago, VanHammersly said: It was a bubble playoffs though. Games without the crowds aren't the same. https://fortune.com/2020/09/21/cord-cutting-record-covid-19-pandemic/ A record number of consumers are dropping their cable and satellite TV subscriptions, as the COVID-19 pandemic accelerates the cord-cutting trend of the past decade. About 6.6 million households are expected to cut the cord this year, according to research firm eMarketer. That leaves just 77.6 million still paying, a 7.5% drop, the steepest one-year drop on record, eMarketer said.
June 24, 20214 yr On 6/23/2021 at 2:33 PM, downundermike said: But watching Ben Simmons shoot free throws will destroy the league. Fyp
Create an account or sign in to comment