Skip to content
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Twitter)   Tulsi finally comes clean, supports Trump   (twitter.com) divider line
    More: Followup, shot  
•       •       •

5152 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 Dec 2020 at 3:08 PM (7 weeks ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook



175 Comments     (+0 »)
 
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all

 
2020-12-03 2:15:26 PM  
Original Tweet:

 
2020-12-03 2:20:36 PM  
Well at least she's not hiding it anymore
 
2020-12-03 2:24:32 PM  
I can't wait for both of these assholes to go away forever. At least Tulsi's career crashing and burning is proof that Democrats aren't nearly as fooled by scam artists as Republicans are.
 
2020-12-03 2:24:40 PM  
I'd be interested in seeing her actual ballot.
 
2020-12-03 2:24:53 PM  
Doesn't she have a food show on the Travel Channel?
 
2020-12-03 2:27:28 PM  

ArkPanda: I'd be interested in seeing her actual ballot.


I'm not familiar with that euphemism but yeah I agree.
 
2020-12-03 2:27:35 PM  
This is embarrassing.
 
2020-12-03 2:33:23 PM  
My bullsh*t sense is tingling again
 
2020-12-03 2:37:53 PM  

MaudlinMutantMollusk: My bullsh*t sense is tingling again


She might be angling to join the Putin party when this is all over.
 
2020-12-03 2:38:08 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-12-03 2:38:31 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-12-03 2:58:12 PM  
Will someone explain to me how repealing Section 230 helps Trump?   Wouldn't that make all these social media platforms liable for the bullshiat people say on it?  I would think the day it's repealed, no one sees a twitter from the idiot again.   Also - in the long run wouldn't it be good for discourse in our culture if people had to have facts on their side before posting?  Would Fox be able to keep Tucker Carlson on the air?
 
2020-12-03 3:02:04 PM  

Ishmel: Will someone explain to me how repealing Section 230 helps Trump?   Wouldn't that make all these social media platforms liable for the bullshiat people say on it?  I would think the day it's repealed, no one sees a twitter from the idiot again.   Also - in the long run wouldn't it be good for discourse in our culture if people had to have facts on their side before posting?  Would Fox be able to keep Tucker Carlson on the air?


It's not about helping Trump. It's about getting even for perceived slights against Trump. If it hurts him in the end, he'll figure out a way to shift the damages to some other rube and move on to the next grift.
 
2020-12-03 3:03:22 PM  

kevlar51: Ishmel: Will someone explain to me how repealing Section 230 helps Trump?   Wouldn't that make all these social media platforms liable for the bullshiat people say on it?  I would think the day it's repealed, no one sees a twitter from the idiot again.   Also - in the long run wouldn't it be good for discourse in our culture if people had to have facts on their side before posting?  Would Fox be able to keep Tucker Carlson on the air?

It's not about helping Trump. It's about getting even for perceived slights against Trump. If it hurts him in the end, he'll figure out a way to shift the damages to some other rube and move on to the next grift.


To add to that--"See what happens when you slight me?!" is how it helps Trump.
 
2020-12-03 3:04:29 PM  

Ishmel: Will someone explain to me how repealing Section 230 helps Trump?   Wouldn't that make all these social media platforms liable for the bullshiat people say on it?  I would think the day it's repealed, no one sees a twitter from the idiot again.   Also - in the long run wouldn't it be good for discourse in our culture if people had to have facts on their side before posting?  Would Fox be able to keep Tucker Carlson on the air?


Indeed, just like what happened with Craigslist and "personals" listings, any company with a legal department that has a basic grade school education would opt out entirely.
 
2020-12-03 3:10:09 PM  
This woman is a dipshiat and the people who supported her are even more stupid.
 
2020-12-03 3:10:43 PM  
So if they removed 230 wouldn't the social media move their servers over seas and then the US or the company would ban the service to US residents? You would have to use a VPN to get on social media?
 
2020-12-03 3:11:26 PM  

ArkPanda: I'd be interested in seeing her actual ballot.


Riddled with hanging Chads.
 
2020-12-03 3:11:29 PM  
It's kind of funny, because really they are stabbing Trump in the back. Tulsi wants a piece of the pie, and they don't care if fighting over it ends up killing Trump. They're like piranhas.
 
2020-12-03 3:11:39 PM  
She wants to keep people from claiming she doesn't surf.
 
2020-12-03 3:12:17 PM  
Tulsi is a Russian dirty girl.
 
2020-12-03 3:12:50 PM  
What a shock.
 
2020-12-03 3:13:23 PM  
Who?
 
2020-12-03 3:13:39 PM  
She's a veteran, you know
 
2020-12-03 3:14:03 PM  
My favorite thing is that if they revoked it and Twitter became legally liable for Trump's tweets they'd have to ban him immediately
 
2020-12-03 3:14:10 PM  

ginandbacon: This woman is a dipshiat and the people who supported her are even more stupid.


She sounded alright when she was the first congresswoman to endorse Sanders. That didn't last too long.
 
2020-12-03 3:14:13 PM  
Well if Tulsi supports it, how can I disagree? I heard she's a veteran and she surfs...


/Plus, removing 230 protections would mean removing diaperdon's shiat from the internet, so I can't really argue there
 
2020-12-03 3:14:15 PM  

zerkalo: She's a veteran, you know


Veteran of the propaganda campaign. And she performed well in it.
 
2020-12-03 3:14:17 PM  
Apparently Biden also favours getting rid of Section 230.  I'm not even sure what my stance is on it, only that it would be stupid as f$ck for someone like Trump to want it eliminated.
 
2020-12-03 3:14:49 PM  
What more proof do you need to know that Vladimir Putin wants Section 230 gone?

Trump AND Tulsi both want it gone.

They all hate our freedom of speech.
 
2020-12-03 3:15:08 PM  
Section 230 is the only reason Nazis can use the internet -- or more accurately, the reason social media can use Nazism to make money, and  It  needs to go.  The fact Trump is too stupid to realize it has nothing to do with being nice to him online is besides the point.


Section 230 is easily one of the worst laws ever passed -- you know, if you're against death threats, targeted harassment, and murder being a legal way to make money online.
 
2020-12-03 3:15:21 PM  
OK, so my understanding of Section 230 is that all the crazy sh*t people are posting on the internet (twitter/Facebook) now has to be monitored adn removed by the owners of the website if it is something that might get them in legal trouble if they are sued.

So Trumps Tweet storms are going to be more likely to be removed than just tagged as misinformation.

At least that is how I understand the law.
 
2020-12-03 3:15:26 PM  

AdmirableSnackbar: I can't wait for both of these assholes to go away forever. At least Tulsi's career crashing and burning is proof that Democrats aren't nearly as fooled by scam artists as Republicans are.


I'm not so sure of that.  Tulsi might be a nutjob scam artist, but she didn't have nearly the celebrity status to exploit that Trump did.  She's more comparable to a Sarah Palin than a Donald Trump.

Let's see what happens if someone like Oprah Winfrey runs.  Which I hope doesn't happen, but it'd probably be the best comparison point.
 
2020-12-03 3:15:35 PM  

zerkalo: She's a veteran, you know


She's a foreign agent you know.

She can get farked and cram her "veteran" credentials where her surfboard probably fits.
 
2020-12-03 3:16:58 PM  
I heard she surfs, so maybe we should give her a chance.
 
2020-12-03 3:17:04 PM  

DarnoKonrad: Section 230 is the only reason Nazis can use the internet -- or more accurately, the reason social media can use Nazism to make money, and  It  needs to go.  The fact Trump is too stupid to realize it has nothing to do with being nice to him online is besides the point.


Section 230 is easily one of the worst laws ever passed -- you know, if you're against death threats, targeted harassment, and murder being a legal way to make money online.


How about treating those threats, as threats?

Instead of the police shrugging their shoulders, fund the FBI and the NSA, have them birth a new law enforcement agency.
 
2020-12-03 3:17:08 PM  
Biden should work to repeal the PLCAA.If we are going to start messing around with Amendments the 2nd should be on the block too, right?

Trump is lying.  I know, water is wet.
liability shielding gift from the U.S. to "Big Tech" (the only companies in America that have it

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Protect​i​on_of_Lawful_Commerce_in_Arms_Act
 
2020-12-03 3:17:13 PM  

zerkalo: She's a veteran, you know


So are Snowden and Winner - where you at with them, these days?
 
2020-12-03 3:17:33 PM  
Well. Spiteful losers tend to stick together.
 
2020-12-03 3:17:35 PM  

DarnoKonrad: Section 230 is the only reason Nazis can use the internet -- or more accurately, the reason social media can use Nazism to make money, and  It  needs to go.  The fact Trump is too stupid to realize it has nothing to do with being nice to him online is besides the point.


Section 230 is easily one of the worst laws ever passed -- you know, if you're against death threats, targeted harassment, and murder being a legal way to make money online.


The really funny thing is, section 230 is the only reason Trump is allowed to actually Twitter shiat for 16 hours a day.  If it wasn't there and Twitter might face liability for all the awful shiat he posts, they'd have banned him before he even ran for President.
 
2020-12-03 3:17:42 PM  
So literally everything that was said about her being a quisling was right. Walk like a duck talk like a duck. Of course I'd also like to take this time to say "go fark yourself" to anyone who defended this waste of carbon. You are a shiatty person and should be ashamed for having made this world a stupider place.
 
2020-12-03 3:17:57 PM  
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-12-03 3:18:08 PM  
Ishmel:

Will someone explain to me how repealing Section 230 helps Trump?

It doesn't.  It's only because of Section 230's protections that conservative safe spaces, like Fark and Twitter, can get away with coddling and encouraging the increasingly violent rhetoric from their conservative contributors without legal consequences.

Repealing it would hurt their most outspoken adherents and there'd be no legal recourse.
 
2020-12-03 3:18:09 PM  

theknuckler_33: I heard she surfs, so maybe we should give her a chance.


Fark user imageView Full Size

And a veteran!
 
2020-12-03 3:18:41 PM  
That does it. I'm not voting for Tulsi this year. Instead, I'll think of the good she's done as ambassador of the surfing lifestyle.
Fark user imageView Full Size

Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-12-03 3:18:47 PM  

Ishmel: Will someone explain to me how repealing Section 230 helps Trump?   Wouldn't that make all these social media platforms liable for the bullshiat people say on it?  I would think the day it's repealed, no one sees a twitter from the idiot again.   Also - in the long run wouldn't it be good for discourse in our culture if people had to have facts on their side before posting?  Would Fox be able to keep Tucker Carlson on the air?


Well, Tucker Carlson is employed by Fox directly.
They are on the hook for his shiat.

Section 230 shields companies from user-generated content.
For example, if somebody were to say on Fark.com that Tulsi Gabbard farked a dolphin on camera, and linked to the video, Drew Curtis would not be liable or party to any libel lawsuit resulting from that.
 
2020-12-03 3:19:05 PM  

Purple_Urkle: DarnoKonrad: Section 230 is the only reason Nazis can use the internet -- or more accurately, the reason social media can use Nazism to make money, and  It  needs to go.  The fact Trump is too stupid to realize it has nothing to do with being nice to him online is besides the point.


Section 230 is easily one of the worst laws ever passed -- you know, if you're against death threats, targeted harassment, and murder being a legal way to make money online.

How about treating those threats, as threats?

Instead of the police shrugging their shoulders, fund the FBI and the NSA, have them birth a new law enforcement agency.


Great, more cops.
 
2020-12-03 3:19:12 PM  

NINEv2: Who?


This lady:
Fark user imageView Full Size
 
2020-12-03 3:19:28 PM  

Ishmel: Will someone explain to me how repealing Section 230 helps Trump?   Wouldn't that make all these social media platforms liable for the bullshiat people say on it?  I would think the day it's repealed, no one sees a twitter from the idiot again.   Also - in the long run wouldn't it be good for discourse in our culture if people had to have facts on their side before posting?  Would Fox be able to keep Tucker Carlson on the air?


Look up sadopopulism

https://terikanefield-blog.com/sadopop​ulism-2/

Twitter is just another enemy he created.
 
2020-12-03 3:19:33 PM  
If this passes, can we post nudes on Fark threads?
 
Displayed 50 of 175 comments


Oldest | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | » | Newest | Show all


View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking





On Twitter



  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.