TheGirondin

So anyone who is acting nefariously can circumvent with bit of work, and the rest of us are subject to another vector of mass surveillance.

I agree that people with the wrong political opinions should not be allowed to work, and that it's up to corporations to be the ultimate arbitrator of what is acceptable political discourse.

If you read your own link, you will learn that free speech and the first amendment are not the same thing.

Sorry, that doesn't fly. Working with people who have different political views is part of being a professional.

It's a team sport after all.

Something tells me that you aren't also going to defend the firing of anyone with open SJW beliefs for the same reason.

Immigration is a perfect example of how the left has traded working class issues for identity politics.

FFS, this story itself is a perfect example. Here we have a corporation firing an employee for 'wrong' speech - and the left is in full support.

That's a class issue, and the left has clearly sided with corporations over the working class.

>We had racial policy in the form of slavery, then segregation and Jim Crow, to discriminatory housing policies, to inequitable application of drug laws

All of those examples are the opposite of

>"treat people as individuals, not as just another member of their group"

I for one am glad that corporations are the ultimate arbitrator of what is acceptable political discourse. -s

No. Real hospitals in the US and in Italy have offered to treat him, but the UK has indeed decided he should die and preventing the parents from bringing him to those hospitals.

>And what do you do if your preferred media posts what may be construed as a [opposing viewpoint] headline? Just unsubscribe immediately?

No, because I'm not fragile like liberals are.

I trust the government even less. Charlie Gard is a good example - the UK government has not only decided that he should die, but that his parents are barred from bringing him to another country for treatment.

On top that, the UK is saying that he has to die at the hospital and that his parents can't bring him home on hospice.

I would gladly subscribe to an NPR-caliber newspaper that doesn't have pushing liberal narratives as a #1 priority.

Just like Fox is #1 because it's the only not-liberal media outlet, a real not-liberal newspaper would have a huge following because of the lack of alternatives.

Why single out News Corp (Fox News) when the NYT, WaPo, and the WSJ are also involved in this?

No one in the US has contributed more the rise of ISIS than Democrats.

The current situation in northern Iraq is exactly what was predicted would happen if the US withdrew before the Iraqi government was stable enough. In response, Democrats said that the anti-government AQ forces were "freedom fighters" and said that what happened there was "none of our business."

This is the "peace" Democrats wanted.

So when someone from HL inevitably is jailed over this, will you admit that you and your outlook are wrong?

And in Democrat eyes, they were already hated villains and they are cheering for the company to hit hard.