Spoiler: There isn’t one.
Senator Rand Paul (R-KY), the U.S. Senate’s most passionate libertarian, was suspended from YouTube for expressing his strong opposition to Wuhan virus mandates and calling for widespread citizen resistance. This is res ipsa loquitur: Big Tech is using its corporate power to support government policies and prevent dissent. The argument that YouTube (that is, Google) is a private entity and not bound by the First Amendment is disingenuous, just as similar arguments defending Facebook, Twitter and other social media banning President Trump as well as posts that offer opinions and positions they don’t want the public to see. When corporations use their massive power and influence to suppress speech and control the flow of information, they pose an existential threat to democracy. When they exercise this power to advance the political agenda of a specific group, individual or party, that threat is worse. When they are censoring and distorting on behalf of the government, the threat is dire.
Paul released a rebuttal and condemnation of YouTube’s indefensible action, and it was also taken down by Our Video Masters. You can view it here, on Rumble. If I could embed it, I would.
Let me turn the floor over to Professor Turley, not as an appeal to authority, but because there is no reason for me to write in different words what he has said persuasively already:
“This is part of our political debate. People have a free speech right to oppose the mandates and question the science cited by the government. In this case, a corporation is preventing a major political figure from being able to use its platform to engage others on this subject. It is picking and choosing who can speak and what they can say. It has a right to do so as a private company but it is wrong to do so. It is a denial of free speech and we need to address the corporate control over political speech in the United States. I have previously and repeatedly said that I believe people should be vaccinated. I and my family are vaccinated. However, I will not accept arguments that my public health concerns should negate the free speech rights of others, including Sen. Paul. I also do not accept that these corporations should hold such a strangle hold over public debate.The rise of corporate censors has combined with a heavily pro-Biden media to create the fear of a de facto state media that controls information due to a shared ideology rather than state coercion. That concern has been magnified by demands from Democratic leaders for increased censorship, including censoring political speech, and now word that the Biden Administration has routinely been flagging material to be censored by Facebook.”
Bingo. If you scroll down the nearly 200 comments to Turley’s, you don’t have to go far to find Turley readers, many of them bravely named “Anonymous,” who argue against the professor’s position by arguing that Paul is “wrong.” This is the same approach used by my increasingly totalitarian-tilting Facebook friends, a depressing number of them lawyers, to rationalize the biased mainstream media distortion of facts and manipulation of news during the Trump administration (as well as before and after.) It doesn’t matter if the senator is wrong. Rand Paul, like his father, is wrong about a lot of issues, but he is a U.S. Senator, and a free populace must be able to hear what he wants to say. The same applies to Donald Trump, the “Squad,” Andrew Cuomo, and my neighbor who doesn’t have the sense to come out of the rain.
Two cheers are due, I guess, to the mainstream media for coverage, though spotty and misleading, of YouTube’s disgraceful move. At least the Washington Post and New York Times covered it, though not with the prominence such a story deserves, and I have yet to see or read a ringing editorial by any of these First Amendment-protected entities condemning Google and YouTube, because, you see, these papers support the censorship. It’s just an extension of their own attacks on democracy. The Post, Times, and most of the other outlets flag their support by headlines like the AP’s “YouTube Suspends Rand Paul After Misleading Video on Masks.” His speech isn’t about masks, and they damn well know it. Turley’s headline is accurate and fair: “YouTube Censors Sen. Rand Paul for Speaking Against Mandates.”
Americans have to be willing to fight for their freedom speech. No, by “fight” I’m not calling for an insurrection any more than Donald Trump was.
But it might have to come to that.
Ethics Alarms 
When’s Arnold going to be terminated?
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/screw-your-freedom-arnold-schwarzenegger-unleashes-viral-mask-vaccine-rant/ar-AANfpSh?ocid=uxbndlbing
I terminated him when he fathered a child with his babysitter, or whatever she was. What a slimeball. And it hurts, because he’s the ultimate immigrant Horatio Alger story, if Horatio’s father was a Nazi, and I have a soft spot for dilettantes, being one myself, who, unlike me, achieve great success and fame in several unrelated fields. Bodybuilding—movie star—entrepreneur—Kennedy spouse—governor. Wow. You shouldn’t have to be an asshole to do all that, but Ahnold raises a rebuttable presumption that you do.
Masks don’t work. I know that because Fauci explicitly said they don’t. Censor him then.
!
He pioneered recreational steroids. His entire persona is based on steroids. We have him to blame for all that followed.
Arnold has the right to say what he wants, too, just as we have the right and, frankly, the obligation not to give his opinion any more weight than we would any other private citizen.
I was just shocked by how obnoxious and ornery his words are. He used to be a consensus builder as a politician. He didn’t used to ever let his guard down. Again, can you imagine if Trump said something using this tone? I mean, come on, I’m not sure what a fascist is but I suspect he might sound about like Arnold here.
He’s gone full “Get off my lawn!” Not a good look. Maybe it’s steroid rage in it’s terminal stages? I suspect he’s still on the juice.
And you make a very good point here. Setting aside his messy personal life, Arnold struck me as a fairly reasonable person. Something is happening to fairly reasonable people in this country and I’m not sure exactly what it is. It’s like some kind of derangement virus has been let loose.
Did they take some kind of drink like Soma in “Brave New World” or “Instant Smile” like that in that episode of “The Twilight Zone” that makes it impossible for them to comprehend? Have they been so completely indoctrinated that concepts they understood before now have no meaning?
I am sickened to hear and read Americans saying and writing snide things about “your freedom” and “your precious Constitution”. It should be EVERYONE’S precious Constitution.
I think Jack’s “The Revolutionary’s Excuse” is running rampant, A.M. Plus, I think a lot of people are less perceptive than we thought they were.
One wag: you can take the boy out of Austria, but you can’t take Austria out of the boy.
Ja, ja, Mozart ist German but Hitler he vas Austrian.
Personally I don’t give a fart-in-the-wind what Arnold Schwarzenegger or any other celebrity says about anything especially when they go on a tirade attacking my freedoms and liberty. In fact, celebrities personal opinions hold less value to me than that of my neighbors dog and only slightly more value than the drunken imbecile passed out in the gutter, they can all fuck off.
Progressive fascism is rapidly growing in the USA.
YouTube is an enemy of the people!
I just went to YouTube and typed in “Rand Paul” and it appears the fix is in to smear him. All the leading search hits are about “financial impropriety” and calls by that champion of ethics, Corey Booker, for him to resign.
What a SHOCKING coincidence!
Update: It was CHARLES Booker, a potential senate rival in Kentucky (no vested interest there) not Corey.
We have already seen that the Biden administration advises social media platforms regarding “misinformation.” Who else do they advise? What other organs of the government “suggest” that government business partners in good standing do not do business with “insurrectionists,” and would do well to police their own ranks of both employees and other customers lest they draw the ire of their respective federal procurement departments?
Really, I think we all pretty well understand what’s going on here. The government is censoring our speech by proxy. Does anyone entertain reasonable doubts that the government will gladly offer their opinion about who should be allowed to speak and what they should be allowed to say if such feedback is solicited? And is there any doubt that the corporations running social media and other Internet backbone services will solicit said guidance and implement it?
I don’t know if the courts actually can get involved, but there has to be a point at which government influence is so egregious and obvious that the judicial branch will have to do something … or we will. This is censorship by “gentlemen’s agreement,” although all the gentlemen agreeing seem to all be on one side of the argument.
This cannot continue indefinitely.
“Really, I think we all pretty well understand what’s going on here. The government is censoring our speech by proxy. Does anyone entertain reasonable doubts that the government will gladly offer their opinion about who should be allowed to speak and what they should be allowed to say if such feedback is solicited? And is there any doubt that the corporations running social media and other Internet backbone services will solicit said guidance and implement it?”
No doubt about it. Nothing like “Nice little social media platform you have there. Shame to see what will happen to it if you don’t play ball with us” to pressure corporations into doing their bidding. Remember when the Democrats believed that corporations having too much information and too much control over us was a bad thing?
It wasn’t even that long ago!
A.M. Golden wrote, “The government is censoring our speech by proxy.”
Isn’t that one of the hallmarks of a literal totalitarian government, like Fascist and Marxists?
Literal totalitarian governments don’t have to use proxies. They just censor. In the U.S., they are using proxies so that they can still be “compliant” with the Constitution and say, “Well, actually, it only says that the GOVERNMENT can’t censor your speech, not private companies”.
It’s not simply that the world’s biggest corporations have a “shared ideology” with the Democrats. They share everything. Family members, finances, political goals, favors, personnel, social functions. Most of the mega corps are well-represented in Joe Biden’s cabinet. They use their considerable platforms and money to sweep Democrats into office, and Democrats use their power to “fundamentally transform” the marketplace so that those same corporations are never threatened by market competition. They are not allies; they’re a cabal. And it should be noted that they almost all experienced record profits in 2020.
Has there ever been another time in history far gone or even recent history in which any government/business cabals have tried to run things?
Is there a label or description of such a total system?
Can anyone else tell me what the system is called when One Political Party and Big Corporations and Education and Media are all coordinating together to run a nation with no opposition?
Hmmmmm, let me think……
Oh, now I remember…
Totalitarianism
Italian Fascism
Boy, were the Dems ever projecting when they called Trump a fascist.
Evidently daring to have doubts about the efficacy or safety of the covid vaccines and expressing those doubts is now a capital offence. At least among the woke and the media. This is the opening line of a story on CNN about, of all things, the replacement for Alex Trebek on “Jeopardy.”
“In perhaps the most uninspired choice in game show history, “Jeopardy!” announced it is replacing legendary host Alex Trebek with two successors: a guy few people have heard of, and an actress who has expressed some questionable opinions about vaccines.”
Man, if you doubt the orthodoxy, it’s “off with your head” and “burn him at the stake.” No questions asked. “Next victim….”
“Rand Paul, like his father, is wrong about a lot of issues, but he is a U.S.Senator, and a free populace must be able to hear what he wants to say. The same applies to Donald Trump, the “Squad,” Andrew Cuomo, and my neighbor who doesn’t have the sense to come out of the rain.”
Gee, I love it when someone else writes for me. Jack does it a lot.
1. Of course, masks work. Paper masks work pretty well, especially surgical style. Cloth masks work better, especially double-layered.
2. Neither paper nor cloth masks work at all well if they don’t FIT with complete closure or the wearer “plays” with them when near others.
3. Touching surfaces of any kind is quite safe unless you then touch your face before washing your hands or using an anti-WuFlu spray or wipe. Touching your face is very automatic: be more aware of it. That’s all. If you know a WuFlu hysteric, this will kill or cure them:
\
https://www.webmd.com/lung/how-long-covid-19-lives-on-surfaces
4. Wearing a mask that’s fit for its job also helps prevent any WuFlu that does get through (it happens, particularly in large and/or tight groups of strangers} from putting you on a ventilator.
5, Vaccination works (Moderna up to 95%).
6. Just because science is NEVER 100% is no reason not to trust it. Know your sources.
New science comes in slowly, in bits and pieces. Its early conclusions (aka “lies) used to be withheld from the public– and announced as such — for good reason. Nowadays, the pressure for early statements, conjecture and conclusions — usually via the press — is to the public’s own detriment. Moreover, without at least basic knowledge of the subject(s) behind them, Science in a headline is always an untruth and stats are always misleading.
Better education based on raising everyone’s knowledge and reasoning skills (“without fear or favor”) to the highest level they can manage a very large part of the answer.”
Oops. Last para: …IS a very large part of the answer, And the end of it needs no closing quote mark.
I looked up the quote later – it was niggling me. It came from “Adolph Ochs, who promised readers when he acquired The New York Times in 1896, that it would be his “earnest aim to … give the news impartially, without fear or favor, regardless of party, sect, or interest involved.”
… “Party” came first in the first place, eh?
\
I think this is the first video, hoping the link works:
https://rumble.com/embed/viay2w/?pub=4
Or it may more likely be this one, with the “offending” statement at about the 3:25 mark.
https://rumble.com/embed/vic5vk/?pub=4
It’s hard to get a good read on exactly which video, as there are now numerous news accounts and related clips on Rumble.
There is NO legitimate defense of government-encouraged Big-Tech censorship. I still wonder whether the Dems have given any thought to the distinct possibility that since their totalitarian tactics are now “on the table” as accepted political conduct, when the worm turns in the apple and Republicans are in charge, those same tactics will be used to decisively roll back their “progress” in so many areas? Are conservatives going to just forget their demonization and “Nazification” by the Left and let bygones be bygones? I don’t think that is likely. The ruling elites (both parties) didn’t realize that for most people, electing Trump was not about love for Trump, but about disgust with all of them!