0
0

[–] tribblepuncher ago 

I believe this is one of the few times anyone in a newspaper has acknowledged the whole wiretapping thing against Trump. I can't help but wonder if the only reason they did this is because they're crapping on a bunch of Republican legislators.

Mind you I don't support privacy invasion of any sort, but it seems a little bit too politically advantageous to acknowledge it for this one thing and then go back to screaming about Trump being the center of a huge Russian conspiracy.

0
2

[–] Feeldaberm 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

Facebook paid for these ads because they don't want ISPs cutting in on their data selling marketshare they've been dominating for 7 years unopposed.

0
0

[–] YourDumbWhat ago  (edited ago)

Fine by me. It's a lot more inconvenient to opt out of the internet than to just never using facebook. I don't like facebook, but common enemies can make for some strange bedfellows.

0
0

[–] 8596030? ago 

Damn fine ad!

0
0

[–] shwanky ago 

Petition to sign if you want. I doubt these do much of anything they didn't change Obama's mind on anything.

0
3

[–] movebackward 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

The ad conflates the recording & dissemination of content with something that is not that. I hate that kind of sophistry. There are reasons to veto this law, but being dishonest about it is not going to impress me. He would be better off encouraging dig once polices so that we can choose our ISPs for this and many other reasons.

0
0

[–] Firevine ago 

Dear Mr. President plzz don't do to us what we did to u kthnx bai

0
0

[–] JulyMoonbeam ago 

This should have been put on Fox & Friends or Brietbart. Think he reads the NYT?

0
0

[–] common_sense ago 

Why do people use imgoat? Stupid fucking website never loads.

load more comments ▼ (6 remaining)