For Conservatives Only, Censuring of Conservative Opinion

Jump to Last Post 1-16 of 16 discussions (70 posts)
  1. gmwilliams profile image84
    gmwilliamsposted 10 months ago

    https://usercontent2.hubstatic.com/15284511.jpg
    Conservatives are under attack by Liberals in that their opinions are being deleted or banned by Liberal technological entities.  Many conservatives are even being silenced in other ways by Liberals because the latter are threatened by opinions which are outside the Liberal purview.   The Liberals are now becoming the new totalitarians who believe that their opinion is the right one & others are suspect.   What are your thoughts on this?   Are Liberals/Leftist creating a new totalitarianism?

    1. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
      Kathryn L Hillposted 10 months agoin reply to this

      there it is.

      1. abwilliams profile image66
        abwilliamsposted 10 months agoin reply to this

        Yes without a doubt.
        They may put anti- in front of it, for modern day purposes, but the fact remains. The left is no longer hiding their goal and individual liberty is nowhere in the picture. Any one believing it is...is already brainwashed and that is half the battle!

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
          Kathryn L Hillposted 10 months agoin reply to this

          +1

    2. Credence2 profile image80
      Credence2posted 10 months agoin reply to this

      Conservative rights to an opinion does not extend to sacking the Capital buiding nor interfering with Government business.

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
        Kathryn L Hillposted 10 months agoin reply to this

        LIES. it was promoted and staged by the left, (Antifa was there pushing people into the capital building) to make Trump look bad
        - to be able to impeach him
        - to be able to get rid of the OPPOSITION

        1. Credence2 profile image80
          Credence2posted 10 months agoin reply to this

          No, not you too, more  QAnon rubbish?

          1. abwilliams profile image66
            abwilliamsposted 10 months agoin reply to this

            Keep an open mind and watch in its entirety:

            https://rumble.com/vcldub-january-6-202 … pened.html

            1. Credence2 profile image80
              Credence2posted 10 months agoin reply to this

              Interesting, but why should I accept her sole account when the official version from the FBI says otherwise as to participation from ANTIFA in the siege of the capitol.

              Those officers that offered no resistance to the entry of this mob should be fired an perhaps prosecuted for aiding and abetting.

              Why should I give this person more credibility than the overwhelming numbers of mainstream media?

              1. abwilliams profile image66
                abwilliamsposted 10 months agoin reply to this

                Why indeed! Why would you do that? Silly me.

                1. ScottSBateman profile image81
                  ScottSBatemanposted 10 months agoin reply to this

                  Maybe we can stay on the point Credence is trying to make. Is she telling the truth and the FBI lying?

                  1. abwilliams profile image66
                    abwilliamsposted 10 months agoin reply to this

                    I wasn't aware that her account is different than the FBI's.

        2. MizBejabbers profile image90
          MizBejabbersposted 10 months agoin reply to this

          That is not true, that is CMA by Trump supporters. I recently saw a podcast that was an interview by a liberal podcaster who was interviewing a liberal reporter. The reporter said that he normally covers antifa, and he'd heard antifa was going to be there so he went to cover then. He said that antifa was not there, but it was interesting, so he stayed and covered the protest by Trump supporters. So even this guy was fooled.
          I would be happy to post the source, but it was taken down so fast that when I tried to download the link, it wouldn't download. These websites are removing all links to anything concerning that riot by Trump supporters because they don't want anything to do with sedition perpetrated by them.

      2. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 10 months agoin reply to this

        I agree they are making an attempt to ushering in totalitarianism. However, I also feel the tide will turn quickly in the next four years. America's are very versatile, but also very sensitive to keeping freedoms. It should not take long for many to wake up to the fact they have "been had".

        In regards to silencing the conservatives, I have never witnessed so many conservatives sit up and take notice of what the left is up to. It's up to conservatives to make sure they are heard. I realize many conservatives prefer not to mix in with anything they find distasteful, and tend to placate those with ideologies they find adverse to their own. But, at this point, it's time to step into the fray.

      3. ScottSBateman profile image81
        ScottSBatemanposted 10 months agoin reply to this

        True conservatives oppose social media postings that encourage violence, sedition and insurrection.

        Getting banned is more than appropriate.

        "Liberals / leftists" have nothing to do with it. It's just moral, legal and common sense.

      4. Sharlee01 profile image83
        Sharlee01posted 10 months agoin reply to this

        IMO it is clear the Democratic party working with media is promoting an agenda that is not what half the country is in agreement with. We very much have a severe problem, one our country has not been faced in decades.

        Not sure all citizens that profess to be Democrats are ready to join in to promote totalitarianism. However, it is very clear many do. I would hope American's wake up to what seems a clear fact --- the country is very divided, and IMO our Government is inciting this divide at every chance they get. And that is to include both sides of the aisle. It seems true that one side is most differently trying to silence the other, people that want to be heard. The government and the media are screaming for impeachment. I have heard not one word about why we ended up with Ameican's attacking our Capitol. I have heard lot's about a president provoking a crowd. But, why are these citizens so willing to uprise?

        Some will say, Trump, fed them lies. We have been being lied to by our presidents and politicians for hundreds of years. And yet some feel Trump had the power to bring many to violence. Was it Trump's words or perhaps many are done with a Government that they see as not hearing them, not seeing them? Ignoring them, disregarding them. Trump gave them a voice.

        So realistically, do you think these people will now give up that voice?

        1. Valeant profile image88
          Valeantposted 10 months agoin reply to this

          You see this as a goal of authoritarianism when the goal is to actually stop further cases of domestic terrorism like we saw last week.  There are active threats of violence from the right being promoted on these sites.  Do you want more violence?  Seriously.  Stop purporting this to be something it is not.  A large group of violent people just tried to stage an armed coup at Congress.  This is currently about safety.

          1. Sharlee01 profile image83
            Sharlee01posted 10 months agoin reply to this

            As I have said, now multiple times.-- I have no problem with a legal impeachment.  I disagree that it is being offered as a solution to violence, but is clearly political. The Democrats in Washington IMO are inflaming a situation without the necessity to justify their actions.  The fact is we have a divided country, we do not need more fuel at this point.

            My comment was in response to the subject  --- Are Liberals/Leftist creating a new totalitarianism

            I simply used the Democrats pushing for impeachment, making an attempt to silence " the other side".  A tactic of totalitarianism.

            My statement --" It seems true that one side is most differently trying to silence the other, people that want to be heard. The government and the media are screaming for impeachment."

            In my view, this impeachment at this point is a power play. And most likely will cause more violence. This is clearly my opinion.

          2. Sharlee01 profile image83
            Sharlee01posted 10 months agoin reply to this

            Again I may not have been clear, my original comment was referring to is the Democratic party hoping to push totalitarianism. I was responding to the subject. Read my first post. 

            I have stated many times over the past few days. I do not condone any form of violence. I am a realist and feel there will be. I think the impeachment will pour fuel on a fire that is already raging.  I have kept my opinion this is a Dem political ploy. The dens could care less about anything but keeping power.  I have no respect for the party.

    3. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
      Kathryn L Hillposted 10 months ago

      adjective: totalitarian
      relating to a system of government that is centralized and dictatorial and requires complete subservience to the state.
      "a totalitarian regime"

    4. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
      Kathryn L Hillposted 10 months ago

      "What is the difference between totalitarianism and authoritarianism?
      Both forms of government discourage individual freedom of thought and action. Totalitarianism attempts to do this by asserting total control over the lives of its citizens, whereas authoritarianism prefers the blind submission of its citizens to authority.

      While totalitarian states tend to have a highly developed

                                           g u i d i n g   i d e o l o g y,

      authoritarian states usually do not.

      Totalitarian states suppress traditional social organizations, whereas authoritarian states will tolerate some social organizations based on traditional or special interests.

      Unlike totalitarian states, authoritarian states
                         lack the power to
                            m o b i l i z e
                     the entire population
                in pursuit of national goals,

      and any actions undertaken by the state are usually within relatively predictable limits." Internet

    5. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
      Kathryn L Hillposted 10 months ago

      In other words:     

                 Totalitarian states use
              their power and influence to
                        m o b i l i z e
                 the entire population
            in pursuit of national goals.

    6. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
      Kathryn L Hillposted 10 months ago

      ... where do they get their power and influence?

    7. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
      Kathryn L Hillposted 10 months ago

      little by little promoting the lies ...
      no opposition ...

    8. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
      Kathryn L Hillposted 10 months ago

      why no opposition?

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
        Kathryn L Hillposted 10 months agoin reply to this

        ... even the opposition is shut down with threats!

        1. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
          Kathryn L Hillposted 10 months agoin reply to this

          ... and the opposition

          goes dark.



          crickets.

    9. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
      Kathryn L Hillposted 10 months ago

      The tactics of totalitarianism:

      Eradicating common sense.
      Shutting down the truth.
      Threatening opponents.
      Surveilling the people.
      Abusing freedom of speech.
      Preventing freedom of speech.
      Allowing slander and supporting falsehoods.
      Creating illusions.
      Government agencies (such a the CIA) controlling the news.
      Draining the treasury.
      Brainwashing, infiltrating the youth ...
      and the people.

    10. Valeant profile image88
      Valeantposted 10 months ago

      I'm amazed at the detachment from reality I read in one of the responses in this thread.

      And if you take the removal of further coordination of violent attacks against our country as censure, especially when the reasoning behind those attacks are based on lies to undermine our democracy, then I'm not sure you're going to get much support from anyone but the farthest of the far-right.

      1. profile image0
        PrettyPantherposted 10 months agoin reply to this

        Yep. And then to say "dissent, of any type, is criminalized."

        Do they even read what they write?

        1. abwilliams profile image66
          abwilliamsposted 10 months agoin reply to this

          When you daydream about the future of this Country and of the people in it, do you see our individual liberty intact?

          1. profile image0
            PrettyPantherposted 10 months agoin reply to this

            Of course.

            Can you name one person who has been jailed for mere dissent? Because that's what "criminalized" means.

    11. Live to Learn profile image75
      Live to Learnposted 10 months ago

      Dissent, of any type, is being criminalized. The DNC and their cronies in media and big tech will regret their behavior and tactics. The majority of Americans do not agree with the agenda of those such as Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer. Whether we lean left or right. Once we stop following the lead of the politicians and stop being manipulated by big tech and the media; and start working together, they are history.

      The sooner the better.

      1. Justin Earick profile image74
        Justin Earickposted 10 months agoin reply to this

        Pelosi and Schumer are conservatives. They despise leftists and have never in their lives fought Republicans as hard as they fight the left on a daily basis. Their entire job is to occupy the worker's party and keep actual leftists out of power. They work with people like McConnell (and formerly Boehner) to keep working people divided and desperate while the rich extract the wealth of the nation and world. Politics is professional wrestling: they are paid by the same people and all the outcomes are predetermined. And to screw up the metaphor, Democrats are the Washington Generals. The Republican Globe Trotters pass the ball around and dunk all over them, while Democrats pretend not to know how to play the game and inevitably lose over and over again. So a country that poll after poll show they want healthcare and secondary education included in our taxes, want a living wage, want to end prohibition, want to raise taxes on corporations and the rich... get none of those things because Democrats are paid to pretend they tried so hard but lost for the millionth time in a row

    12. abwilliams profile image66
      abwilliamsposted 10 months ago

      It was just a question to see if you have ever thought about what all of this canceling ("censuring") of conservatives will do to all of us long term.

      As far as who has been jailed; there's Facebook jail (for those conservative in thought) there's Twitter jail (for those conservative in thought) there's Parler jail (because they dared to MAKE ROOM for conservative thought)

      1. profile image0
        PrettyPantherposted 10 months agoin reply to this

        It seems that you have a fundamental misunderstanding of censorship. All of those you mentioned are privately owned  companies that have the legal right to control the content allowed on their own platforms. Do you disagree with this? That is fine, but it is not censorship.

        I have many right-wing friends on Facebook who post their opinions daily with no problem. It's when they post proven lies and misinformation, or when they repeatedly make violent threats, that they are slapped by Facebook. And, not a single one of my friends have been banned, even the one who posted an image of a "patriot" pointing an AR-15 at the head of a young man identified as a liberal saying he is ready to shoot him. He was reported for that and he received a warning and the post was removed. Seems very reasonable to me. I assume if he continues to post such ugly sentiments, he will be banned, and rightly so.

        The president was on national TV yesterday, stating his case. He is not censored.

        1. abwilliams profile image66
          abwilliamsposted 10 months agoin reply to this

          Also, you wrote, "they are private companies and have the right to control...allow", as of the end of the year 2020, over 100,000 companies that were shut down by government, are no longer in business! I am not sure what that number is today.
          Do these "private companies" have the same rights as Twitter, Facebook, YouTube, etc.?

    13. abwilliams profile image66
      abwilliamsposted 10 months ago

      I've seen the same, reversed, I do not participate in such things; it's not productive going forward. But, we are to the point where only one side is being called out, only one side is being censored. There is a double standard, as large and as destructive as anything imagined. You don't see it yet, but you will, in time.

      1. profile image0
        PrettyPantherposted 10 months agoin reply to this

        I have seen posts from liberals spreading false information about vaccines be removed from Facebook.

        Yes, right now, more on the right are spreading false information and therefore more on the right are having their posts removed. That is a natural consequence of their own behavior. They are not victims.

      2. Valeant profile image88
        Valeantposted 10 months agoin reply to this

        And only one side is organizing armed threats against our own government.  You seem to be in support of that by saying that these people should not be censored by private companies.

        1. wilderness profile image97
          wildernessposted 10 months agoin reply to this

          How quickly we forget (ignore) the months of rioting over the summer.  Or do bricks, stones, arson equipment, etc. not count as being "armed"?

          1. Valeant profile image88
            Valeantposted 10 months agoin reply to this

            Where were the posts saying that people were going to riot and loot?  Provide those, and then there's an equivalency.

          2. Sharlee01 profile image83
            Sharlee01posted 10 months agoin reply to this

            They don't remember the deaths either.

            It seems so many have the ability to uses selective thinking. I have never witnessed anything like this in my life.

        2. abwilliams profile image66
          abwilliamsposted 10 months agoin reply to this

          Really, do you know something that I don't know? Have you heard anything definitive about who scaled the walls of the Capitol Building, who broke glass in order to enter in, who assaulted police officers, who fired shots? I haven't heard anything definitive on that, please share their names and their affiliation with Donald Trump or with Conservatives. If it was in fact Donald Trump supporters that were behind this assault and committed these crimes, I'll condemn them. (but, you will have to do the same, if it turns out they're ANTIFA or BLM) I will not, however, condemn the 2mil that peacefully assembled on January 6th, 2021.
          While on the subject of Government buildings and such, let's go back to the events of summer 2020, one involving the Capitol Building in Oregon, who was a threat during this time and who was not?
          Who was a threat at the Federal Building in Atlanta over the summer and who was not?
          Who is seasoned at this type of disruption and anarchy and who is not?

          1. Valeant profile image88
            Valeantposted 10 months agoin reply to this

            You've fallen so deep into conspiracies.

            Here's an initial list - good luck tying any of these arrested to Antifa.
            https://6abc.com/richard-barnett-arkans … i/9470889/

            Here's a deeper look into this peaceful protester drawn to the Capitol after watching some conservative media:
            https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nat … 647101002/

    14. abwilliams profile image66
      abwilliamsposted 10 months ago

      Thank you. I didn't know that had wrapped it up so quickly. Amazing!

      1. ScottSBateman profile image81
        ScottSBatemanposted 10 months agoin reply to this

        You're welcome, AB.

    15. Justin Earick profile image74
      Justin Earickposted 10 months ago

      Multi-national corporations are anything but liberal. Unless you're importing the European use of "liberal" - meaning that centrist Democrat squishes and establishment Republicans are practically identical.
      Same mistake conservatives make when referencing non-existent "liberal media." Individual people might be socially liberal when it comes to not hating gays and whatnot - but literally every person in media, and every CEO of every major corporation, are 100% economically conservative. Culture wars are a distraction. They just use Evangelicals and white identity politics to get the tax cuts and deregulation they really want, so they can extract the wealth of the nation and redistribute it upward to the wealthy

      1. Kathryn L Hill profile image76
        Kathryn L Hillposted 10 months agoin reply to this

        Multi-national corporations are not liberal.

        The "Liberal media" is non-existent.

        Everyone in the media and the CEOs of major corporations
        are economically conservative.

        The money from tax cuts and deregulation is channeled to the wealthy.


        So, you are saying greedy Republicans and are everywhere, even where you would least expect them.

        Good to know.

    16. abwilliams profile image66
      abwilliamsposted 10 months ago

      For Scott and Valeant, since you both have all of the answers on what you’ve decided is an open and shut case when it comes to what happened at the Capital on Jan, 6, 2021. How do you explain this:
      https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct … si1-9aaHTC

      1. Valeant profile image88
        Valeantposted 10 months agoin reply to this

        Apparently, your own article answered your question...

        Dozens of demonstrators who stormed Congress dressed in pro-Trump regalia have been arrested and charged with violent and unlawful entry to the Capitol where hundreds of lawmakers were gathered inside for a vote to confirm Joe Biden’s Electoral College victory.

        In one video shared on Twitter, a rioter with a bullhorn can be heard yelling: “We were invited here. We were invited by the president of the United States.”

        1. Sharlee01 profile image83
          Sharlee01posted 10 months agoin reply to this

          What are your thoughts on the fact that the FBI knew about what was being planed days before the riot occurred? Do you think the law enforcement agencies should have beefed up security to make an attempt to stop people from entering the Capitol? It would seem the FBI can get in line with those that dropped the ball.

          "But on Tuesday, The Washington Post reported on the existence of a Jan. 5 report from the FBI’s field office in Norfolk, Virginia, that forecast, in detail, the chances that extremists could commit “war” in Washington the following day. Steven D’Antuono, the assistant director in charge of the FBI’s Washington field office, said that once he received the Jan. 5 warning, the information was quickly shared with other law enforcement agencies through the joint terrorism task force."
          https://apnews.com/article/donald-trump … a1d4c00dfd

          1. Valeant profile image88
            Valeantposted 10 months agoin reply to this

            Yeah, we have some agreement here.  FBI had intel and someone definitely dropped the ball in coordinating additional security.

            1. MizBejabbers profile image90
              MizBejabbersposted 10 months agoin reply to this

              They are now being accused of it being an inside job, and some Republican congressmen are being investigated for their alleged roles. Of course it's that darned ole liberal media that is reporting it. lol

            2. Sharlee01 profile image83
              Sharlee01posted 10 months agoin reply to this

              Well, it is apparent all the agencies are out in full force to protect all at the inauguration. I really hate to be thinking about what I am thinking about why few law enforcement was called upon for the Jan 6th rally/protest. IT is apparent all the agencies were notified of the treats, yet stood down.

              My God, what has become of our Government? Politicking with citizen's lives.

              1. profile image0
                PrettyPantherposted 10 months agoin reply to this

                This happened under Trump's watch. His appointees dropped the ball. Was it simple incompetence or something else?

                1. wilderness profile image97
                  wildernessposted 10 months agoin reply to this

                  Did he take a clue from a summer of "standing down", when every liberal in the country complained about using troops?

                  Or did he take a clue from an almost complete lack of violence in similar protests, with the violence mostly limited to BLM riots?

                  Or was it not Trump's call at all as to how to distribute security, troops or anything else?

                2. Sharlee01 profile image83
                  Sharlee01posted 10 months agoin reply to this

                  I am afraid I can't actually figure out why with all the heads-up that all law enforcement agencies had why they all were not out in numbers.  This is curious.

                  1. profile image0
                    PrettyPantherposted 10 months agoin reply to this

                    It is strange. I don't yet know what to make of it and am waiting to hear what is uncovered in the aftermath.

                    1. Sharlee01 profile image83
                      Sharlee01posted 10 months agoin reply to this

                      This is something that needs to be looked into. I don't want to use the word investigated --- LOL   But we deserve answers on why law enforcement was not out in full force.

    17. abwilliams profile image66
      abwilliamsposted 10 months ago

      Why was there silence on the floor of the House?  You don't have all the answers, you just THINK you do.

      1. Valeant profile image88
        Valeantposted 10 months agoin reply to this

        Because it was that speaker's time, so all other members remain silent per the rules.  You're right, I do have that answer.

        1. abwilliams profile image66
          abwilliamsposted 10 months agoin reply to this

          I am speaking of the 30 seconds he gave them to respond to his question.

          1. Valeant profile image88
            Valeantposted 10 months agoin reply to this

            'Nonetheless, House rules do not allow for questions and answers during a debate. So Mast’s question was followed by 30 seconds of silence while his one-minute of time ticked away.'

            Again, still in Mast's time - see the House rules.

            1. abwilliams profile image66
              abwilliamsposted 10 months agoin reply to this

              That MUST be it, they are sticklers for the rules....lol

     
    working

    This website uses cookies

    As a user in the EEA, your approval is needed on a few things. To provide a better website experience, hubpages.com uses cookies (and other similar technologies) and may collect, process, and share personal data. Please choose which areas of our service you consent to our doing so.

    For more information on managing or withdrawing consents and how we handle data, visit our Privacy Policy at: https://corp.maven.io/privacy-policy

    Show Details
    Necessary
    HubPages Device IDThis is used to identify particular browsers or devices when the access the service, and is used for security reasons.
    LoginThis is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.
    Google RecaptchaThis is used to prevent bots and spam. (Privacy Policy)
    AkismetThis is used to detect comment spam. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide data on traffic to our website, all personally identifyable data is anonymized. (Privacy Policy)
    HubPages Traffic PixelThis 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.
    Amazon Web ServicesThis is a cloud services platform that we used to host our service. (Privacy Policy)
    CloudflareThis is a cloud CDN service that we use to efficiently deliver files required for our service to operate such as javascript, cascading style sheets, images, and videos. (Privacy Policy)
    Google Hosted LibrariesJavascript software libraries such as jQuery are loaded at endpoints on the googleapis.com or gstatic.com domains, for performance and efficiency reasons. (Privacy Policy)
    Features
    Google Custom SearchThis is feature allows you to search the site. (Privacy Policy)
    Google MapsSome articles have Google Maps embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    Google ChartsThis is used to display charts and graphs on articles and the author center. (Privacy Policy)
    Google AdSense Host APIThis service allows you to sign up for or associate a Google AdSense account with HubPages, so that you can earn money from ads on your articles. No data is shared unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Google YouTubeSome articles have YouTube videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    VimeoSome articles have Vimeo videos embedded in them. (Privacy Policy)
    PaypalThis is used for a registered author who enrolls in the HubPages Earnings program and requests to be paid via PayPal. No data is shared with Paypal unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook LoginYou can use this to streamline signing up for, or signing in to your Hubpages account. No data is shared with Facebook unless you engage with this feature. (Privacy Policy)
    MavenThis supports the Maven widget and search functionality. (Privacy Policy)
    Marketing
    Google AdSenseThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Google DoubleClickGoogle provides ad serving technology and runs an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Index ExchangeThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    SovrnThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Facebook AdsThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Unified Ad MarketplaceThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    AppNexusThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    OpenxThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Rubicon ProjectThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    TripleLiftThis is an ad network. (Privacy Policy)
    Say MediaWe partner with Say Media to deliver ad campaigns on our sites. (Privacy Policy)
    Remarketing PixelsWe 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 PixelsWe 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.
    Statistics
    Author Google AnalyticsThis is used to provide traffic data and reports to the authors of articles on the HubPages Service. (Privacy Policy)
    ComscoreComScore is a media measurement and analytics company providing marketing data and analytics to enterprises, media and advertising agencies, and publishers. Non-consent will result in ComScore only processing obfuscated personal data. (Privacy Policy)
    Amazon Tracking PixelSome articles display amazon products as part of the Amazon Affiliate program, this pixel provides traffic statistics for those products (Privacy Policy)
    ClickscoThis is a data management platform studying reader behavior (Privacy Policy)