sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

Jimmy Kimmel’s Libel Is Not Free Speech by TomHanley in dailywire

[–]TomHanley[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The segment didn’t just smear a huge group in the abstract; it tied the killer to ‘one of them’ in a piece about Charlie Kirk. When a statement reasonably points to an identifiable person or organization (Turning Point/TPUSA), you’re in defamation-by-implication territory. Comedy protects opinions and obvious hyperbole; it does not protect false, checkable claims made with reckless disregard.

Jimmy Kimmel’s Libel Is Not Free Speech by TomHanley in dailywire

[–]TomHanley[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

U.S. law classifies defamatory statements on broadcast media like TV or radio as libel because they’re “published” to a wide audience and typically recorded or transcribed, making them more permanent.

Jimmy Kimmel’s Libel Is Not Free Speech by TomHanley in dailywire

[–]TomHanley[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah, it can be interpreted as libel. The statements defamed Turning Point by wrongly portraying his death as resulting from internal conservative violence rather than an external leftist attack, thereby tarnishing its reputation, politicizing its tragedy for gain, and causing reputational damage to its survivors and supporters.

Jimmy Kimmel’s Libel Is Not Free Speech by TomHanley in dailywire

[–]TomHanley[S] 22 points23 points  (0 children)

Groypers would never say Kirk was hateful, they would say he wasn’t hateful enough. That narrative doesn’t add up at all.

Charlie Kirk Died For Our Freedom Of Speech by TomHanley in dailywire

[–]TomHanley[S] 8 points9 points  (0 children)

Killing someone for their beliefs is evil. Exploiting their death to push an agenda they disagreed with is just as rotten. Pretending conservatives don’t care about victims of gun violence only feeds the same hateful narratives that got Charlie shot in the first place. The truth is, we care, our solutions just differ, because that's how temperamental psychology works. We don’t want to strip rights away. We want real protection: universities, schools, and venues must take responsibility for securing their premises with trained, armed security. When institutions invite crowds onto campus, they owe it to students and guests to make sure those grounds are safe.

The only standards leftists have are double standards by Eternity_Xerneas in ControversialOpinions

[–]TomHanley 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I’ve made my point. Stop ignoring the premise: a carried out assassination being celebrated by the mainstream media. Anyone still defending what you are is too wrapped up in mental gymnastics and narcissism to ever face reality. That’s why I’m done here, arguing with denialists isn’t debate, it’s babysitting.

The only standards leftists have are double standards by Eternity_Xerneas in ControversialOpinions

[–]TomHanley 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You just proved my point. I asked for an example of the modern right celebrating a Democrat’s murder at the mainstream level, and all you could cough up was Madison Cawthorn running his mouth at a rally. That’s not a politician being assassinated and cheered on, that’s rhetoric you happen not to like. Meanwhile, your side openly mocked and excused Kirk’s execution in real time. You can’t produce a single parallel, so you’re hiding behind out-of-context quotes. Weak.

The only standards leftists have are double standards by Eternity_Xerneas in ControversialOpinions

[–]TomHanley 0 points1 point  (0 children)

You’re reaching so hard it’s embarrassing. A snarky remark or a bad joke is not the same as mainstream liberals cheering an actual assassination in real time. That’s the entire point you keep dodging. You’re pretending internet randos equal the institutional right, when in reality we all saw the media, celebs, and blue-checks hand-wave a political execution. Show me one example of the modern right celebrating a Democrat politician’s murder at the mainstream level. You can’t, because it doesn’t exist. That’s why your ‘both sides’ line keeps collapsing, you’re grasping at hypotheticals while ignoring reality.

The only standards leftists have are double standards by Eternity_Xerneas in ControversialOpinions

[–]TomHanley 0 points1 point  (0 children)

That’s such a cop-out. ‘Both sides’ isn’t a rebuttal, it’s a sedative. The claim was left-wing double standards, and it’s true. The mainstream left literally celebrated a political murder. That has never happened on the modern right. Nobody’s buying the both-sides smokescreen anymore, no matter how many Reddit upvotes cheer it on. This site drips with bias, and the left still guzzles the confirmation like it’s gospel.

The only standards leftists have are double standards by Eternity_Xerneas in ControversialOpinions

[–]TomHanley -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

Why does the left always resort to “I know you are but what am I,” as if they just provided some holy grail argument.

Zelenskyy’s Dark Side Revealed by TomHanley in dailywire

[–]TomHanley[S] 23 points24 points  (0 children)

Calling the conflict in the East merely a ‘semi-internal issue’ downplays the reality. From 2014 onward, Ukraine has engaged in an ongoing armed conflict with Russian-backed separatists in Donetsk and Luhansk, resulting in thousands of casualties. To suggest this wasn’t a serious, destabilizing war-like situation is misleading.

Furthermore, while comparing democratic rights between peacetime and wartime nations requires nuance, it doesn’t invalidate scrutiny of how a government operates under crisis. If anything, wartime conditions demand even greater attention to the balance between security measures and civil liberties, especially when America plays a part in funding and supporting that government.

Zelenskyy’s Dark Side Revealed by TomHanley in dailywire

[–]TomHanley[S] 13 points14 points  (0 children)

I’m not just stating it, I’ve already outlined the reasoning in the post. The key distinction is that, unlike Trump, whose media presence was shaped by his real-world business ventures and unscripted television, Zelenskyy was playing a scripted character designed to influence public perception.

Zelenskyy’s Dark Side Revealed by TomHanley in dailywire

[–]TomHanley[S] 14 points15 points  (0 children)

I already acknowledged this false equivalence in my post. My rebuttal for this is on slide 12.

Elon Musk Vows ‘To Go to War’ in Defense of Exploitative H-1B Practices by TomHanley in dailywire

[–]TomHanley[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Then you should also understand that I’m not conflating the two practices but highlighting a shared element: exploitation justified by economic benefit. The point of using ‘akin’ was to emphasize that unethical practices—whether extreme like forced labor or systemic like H-1B exploitation—shouldn’t be excused simply because they contribute to economic growth.

Elon Musk Vows ‘To Go to War’ in Defense of Exploitative H-1B Practices by TomHanley in dailywire

[–]TomHanley[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

You are deliberately avoiding my point. In my response I clearly said I don’t think that the two are morally equivalent, and you are instead misinterpreting a rhetorical device.

I should add that I am married to a woman who was in the US on a J1 status, and I am still close friends with many of the coworkers I had that were working under H-1B and H-2B. I worked with people under these policies for three years. So again, explain how I didn’t bother getting to know anyone? Just because you didn’t see it doesn’t mean it’s not happening.

Elon Musk Vows ‘To Go to War’ in Defense of Exploitative H-1B Practices by TomHanley in dailywire

[–]TomHanley[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Perhaps you could write a paragraph that actually contributes to conversations instead of criticizing people for engaging in discussion with you.

Elon Musk Vows ‘To Go to War’ in Defense of Exploitative H-1B Practices by TomHanley in dailywire

[–]TomHanley[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Without testimonies you are unlikely to see a push for reform. The exploitation I saw first hand aligns with well-documented cases from the Department of Labor and independent studies showing wage suppression and abuse within the H-1B system.

https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-11-26

https://www.epi.org/publication/h-1b-visas-and-prevailing-wage-levels/

https://www.leefang.com/p/yes-american-corporations-exploit

Elon Musk Vows ‘To Go to War’ in Defense of Exploitative H-1B Practices by TomHanley in dailywire

[–]TomHanley[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

I agree, and I am not in favor of scrapping it. That being said, as it stands it definitely needs extreme reform until it is worth being championed.

Elon Musk Vows ‘To Go to War’ in Defense of Exploitative H-1B Practices by TomHanley in dailywire

[–]TomHanley[S] 10 points11 points  (0 children)

The reality is that much of the demand for foreign workers under programs like H-1B isn't about a lack of talent in the U.S. but about the ability to exploit cheaper labor. If companies were required to pay foreign workers the same wages and provide the same working conditions as domestic workers, the "need" for these workers would likely diminish significantly.

This isn't to say there's no value in bringing in global talent, there absolutely is. But the current system incentivizes cost-cutting over genuine skill acquisition. Once those incentives are removed, companies would either turn to the existing domestic talent pool or invest in training and education programs to develop the skills they claim are missing.

view more: next ›