Following Justice Thomas’s Logic Smackdown – 16 Questions To Ask Your “Woke” Friends

On Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a case that claimed former President Donald Trump blocking people on Twitter violated the First Amendment.  The lawsuit was brought by a group of users who were blocked by President Trump, along with the Knight First Amendment Institute at Columbia University.

Justice Clarence Thomas issued a concurring opinion where he used a perfectly logical argument for dismissal.

“The disparity between Twitter’s control and Mr. Trump’s control is stark, to say the least. Mr. Trump blocked several people from interacting with his messages. Twitter barred Mr. Trump not only from interacting with a few users, but removed him from the entire platform, thus barring all Twitter users from interacting with his messages.

Any control Mr. Trump exercised over the account greatly paled in comparison to Twitter’s authority, dictated in its terms of service, to remove the account ‘at any time for any or no reason.’“

What Justice Thomas is saying is that Twitter – a private company – exercised its sole power to completely erase what was considered “a public forum.” President Trump only blocked several users from posting on his personal Twitter feed on that forum; by removing President Trump’s account, Twitter banned all users from posting on it. So if anybody is liable for a First Amendment violation here, it’s Twitter.

“A society of essential oils and self-esteem has replaced a society of logic.” ― Ben Shapiro

There is one thing that will eventually destroy the woke movement: their inability to embrace simple logic. None of the rules that they are trying to impose on society make any sense – and sooner or later the majority of people will catch up with that fact. Just as a person who jumps from a balcony because he doesn’t understand gravity will end up in an ER or worse, so the woke mob will bring about their own destruction by refusing to obey the rules of logic.

I encourage you to hasten the woke mob’s demise by following Justice Thomas’s lead and unleashing some mean logic on them. If you have a “woke “friend, here are a few things that will likely make them suck their thumb and send them running for a safe space.

 RWR original article syndication source.

Share this:

What do you think?

Written by Tatyana Larina

Tatyana Larina comes from my favorite work of poetry.  And that's the only time you'll see me quoting Wikipedia as a source.

I came to the US in 1991, lived in San Francisco for 5 years, and I have a Computer Science degree.  I worked in software industry for several years, later switching to a career of a full time mom, and I never looked back.

In my younger days, I wasn’t a conservative. That is not to say that I was ever a liberal – I was not anything at all. I had no idea that there were such concepts as “conservative” and “liberal”. I did not pay attention to politics at all, and the most political knowledge you would get out of me would be who the US President was, and even for that you had to catch me on the right day.
My first introduction to politics was during the second Israeli intifada in 2002. Unspeakable violence erupted in Israel. Every day dozens of people were killed. Even though I didn’t follow politics, that deeply affected me. I felt sad, frustrated, and powerless. And one night, I happened to stumble on an MSNBC program called “Alan Keyes is making sense.” He was talking passionately about Israel and the violence, and he addressed my feelings very well.  Since that evening, I turned on Alan Keyes every night, and by his commentary he was able to take away some of the frustration and anger that I had. It was like a nightly therapy session.
Feeling intrigued after watching Alan Keyes, I wondered what else MSNBC had in store. I switched through the channels, and low and behold, I found Scarborough Country. Right off, Joe Scarborough wasn’t what he is today at all. He was a solid conservative (as I now understand), making common sense conservative points. I found him interesting and engaging. Opposing liberalism had not entered my mind at that time. I still didn’t know anything about liberalism. It was just the things he said sounded very common sense and worthwhile to me. Imagine that at some point, MSNBC had a conservative host on the air. Crazy times, ha?
Exploring my new political universe, I switched through more channels, and one night I found FOX. O’Reilly Factor was on. From the very first night, I was hooked. I abandoned Scarborough. O’Reilly was not just common sense – he was aggressive, and he was a fighter. He was Scarborough on steroids. He wasn’t just talking – he was taking on what he thought to be wrong and unjust. Ever since the first time, and until untimely end of Bill’s FOX career, I don’t think I ever missed one Factor.
For forming my political views, and my ability to formulate them, I have to give special credit to three people: Charles Krauthammer, Bill O’Reilly, and Greg Guttfeld.  To Charles - philosophy.  To Bill - realistic and pragmatic approach to politics.  To Greg - realization that a good joke will change more minds than a long lecture.
And for everything else, thanks to my family.

5 Comments

Leave a Reply
    • Objective logic: Progressives cannot construct a truth table. They have nothing to work with. The starting point is not in constructing the argument: it lies in questioning the premise upon which the argument is based. Succinctly put, from Biden’s Iowa State Fair speech: “We choose truth over facts.” Their truth is dogmatic, not veridical. It is religious; faith and belief dominates over observed reality – and if reality contradicts the dogma, reality is heresy. The Progressives hold the capacity to live in a geocentric universe and never question it. Dogma is truth.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Jordan’s King Abdullah describes ‘most painful’ royal rift

In What Do You Believe? (3)