|HubPages Device ID||This is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel||This is used to collect data on traffic to articles and other pages on our site. Unless you are signed in to a HubPages account, all personally identifiable information is anonymized.|
|Remarketing Pixels||We may use remarketing pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to advertise the HubPages Service to people that have visited our sites.|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels||We may use conversion tracking pixels from advertising networks such as Google AdWords, Bing Ads, and Facebook in order to identify when an advertisement has successfully resulted in the desired action, such as signing up for the HubPages Service or publishing an article on the HubPages Service.|
http://dailycaller.com/2012/12/07/msnbc … men-video/
Hate speech is not hate speech if the left uses it. And boy do they use it.
VAWA does not protect people on reservations or illegal immigrants. Thus she is characterizing it as saying 'it is okay to beat certain types of women'.
I struggle to understand where you think the hate speech is.
BTW they should pass the damned law. It's a good law. But that is a comment on the substance of the issue not pointless tit for tat--so I guess it's off topic.
I am so sorry. I forgot the GOP are the hateful violent people this propaganda makes them out to be.
If there is a law that protects i am all for it but the sweeping generalization that is typical of an MSNBC piece is starting to get out of hand.
Where did they make one?
All i saw is that they quoted what a politician said. What politicians say is generally considered newsworthy but I saw no endorsement of it.
And it is strongly stated but a law that protects only come women from domestic violence does make beating the others is less criminal (attracting less punishment). What she said is emotive, but accurate.
I am beginning to think you adopt opinions from certain sources without fully understanding the underlying facts. As if the facts are somehow irrelevant.
And as a reminder I strongly support passing VAWA, so I am no fan of the woman being quoted. I just don;t get how her comment is hate speech or where the new channel endorsed it.
Her comment is hate speech because she targets one group and broad brushes them
Apparently you agree if you can't see it.
Like all your posts attacking liberals...?
Not hate speech to mention what a politician said.
I am so sorry I have forgotten once again what a hate ridden individual I am.
I never cease to be amazed at the levels of this crap allowed so long as it comes from the approved direction.
You are the one who said targeting a group with broad strokes is hate speech.
Stil not hate speech.
I am oncve again so sorry. I am supposed to be slapped and like it. i get that now.
It is a criticism by a member of an opposition party. Unless it is inaccurate or prejudiced, yes, you are meant to cowboy up and engage in debate focusing on facts, not hurt feelings.
Nor is anything I have said an insult. You seem to have some kind of cognitive bias to interpret simple disagreement as insult.
Would you like me to post up some video examples of violent hatefulness from MSNBC?
If a statement is basically true (provably) I don't see it as hate speech. They are pushing to pass a law that does not protect all citizens equally.
Hello Ms. Fae.
Hate speech is targeting one group and broad brushing them.
If you would like to see another example of targeting one group and broad brushing them, just re-read your own OP statement.
Most liberals stopped watching Msnbc a while ago because their solution was to be Fox News in reverse. The difference is that we apply critical thinking and know when news is an editorial rather than fact-based investigative reporting, whereas a lot of Fox News viewers don't seem to realize it.
Personally I go to the BBC and a few other sober foreign news services to find out what's really going on.
Again, one person's opinion does not represent an entire group or corporation.
Then someone at MSNBC should actually pulls his/her pants up and be an adult and stop allowing these sorts of generalizations. Period.
I'd be in favor of that if Fox did the same thing.
Whatever, I don't watch either network so I guess I can't make an informed opinion.
by Michael Collins aka Lakemoron5 years ago
Today we are seeing a movement toward tolerance or at least what we think as tolerance. Bulling has become a hot button issue in the public (as if it didn’t happen anytime before) with many different groups against...
by ngureco3 years ago
Where do we draw the line between free speech and hate speech for text we print on Facebook?
by weholdthesetruths7 years ago
is a right mentioned in the 1st amendment. Quoted here: Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the...
by EncephaloiDead4 years ago
We know that freedom of speech often allows hate speech and we know that more reasonable and rational speech combats hate speech. Should freedom of religion provide protection for religious hate speech in the same way?
by LoliHey24 months ago
Which of the following statements is "hate speech"?Choice 1: With regards to the alligator and the 2 year old boy's death, tweeting "That gator is a hero because that privileged boy would have grown...
by IRSHAD CV2 years ago
Do you think freedom of expression is misusing under certain cases?Why people of both sides (arguments and defends) are claiming they each of them have their freedom of expression?
Copyright © 2018 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.
HubPages and Hubbers (authors) may earn revenue on this page based on affiliate relationships and advertisements with partners including Amazon, Google, and others.