The republican platform - can
Subscriber Account active since. I was raised in a conservative Republican home with strong beliefs in free markets. My dad was raised on a North Dakota farm, where success depended on hard work and independent problem-solving skills. I grew up believing that government intervention in our personal lives should be limited to things we cannot effectively do as individuals, such as law enforcement, national defense, and protecting the public from unfair business practices and negative externalities. My upbringing emphasized data-based decision-making — seeking the truth and adhering to evidence, rather than simply trusting what someone might say or write — no matter how bully their pulpit. Thus, my family took pride in America's scientific leadership, from agricultural improvements to creating the polio vaccine to landing on the moon, and my parents encouraged my interest in biology from my earliest years. My trust that the Republican party can uphold its once-proud legacy, however, has waned over many years and has now totally collapsed. The current party philosophy seems to be: "If you don't like something, simply say it's false" If you don't like the evidence that Trump lost the election, no worries, just insist it isn't true. If you don't like the fact that a reliance on fossil fuels is dangerously warming the world, simply deny it. And when challenged, don't produce evidence, just become louder and more shrill. the republican platformThe republican platform Video
Lincoln Rides the Republican Platform in 1860House Republicans are gearing up to take aim at the legal shield that protects tech platforms from liability for the content users post. On Thursday, Republican staff for the House Energy and Commerce Committee sent a memo suggesting several concepts for reforming Section of the Communications Decency Acta law that protects tech platforms from liability for users' posts and for their own moderation practices. Underscoring all of the concepts are three main principles: Protecting free speech, balancing interests of small businesses to protect competition, and promoting American leadership in tech. Republicans generally have criticized Section protections for allowing tech platforms to make allegedly biased decisions about what posts to take down, while Democrats seek to place greater responsibility on platforms the republican platform expand the republican platform content moderation to make their services safer for users.
Source decisions. The memo suggests tech platforms should have a stronger path for users to appeal decisions they feel are unfair.
Related Articles
One concept says platforms should be required to maintain a user-friendly appeals process to challenge decisions and tell users why they were made. Carving some companies out entirely.
The memo suggests carving Big Tech companies out of Section protections so only smaller businesses and new entrants will maintain the protections, and repealing the shield for companies that use targeted behavioral advertising the republican platform latter of which is similar to a bill Democrats have proposed. Reauthorization every five years. The staff proposed that Section should be reauthorized every five years republian the Big Tech companies, incentivizing them to be careful and allowing for iteration as the industry evolves.
Another set of principles focuses specifically on transparency around the Big Tech companies' content moderation practices, like requiring them to submit detailed descriptions of their policies to the Federal Trade Commission. Protecting children.
Polar opposites
The memo also outlines principles to protect children online, a theme that emerged during the committee's last hearing with several tech CEOs in March. Some of the concepts center around holding the companies accountable for the republican platform and ads they show to minors, while others require them to track the way their products impact children's mental health.
Working with law enforcement. A final set of concepts outlines the ways Big Tech should be required to work with law enforcement. Many platorm do work with law enforcement and report illicit material, but conflicts have arisen when enforcers have asked for access to encrypted information.]
I consider, that you are mistaken. I can defend the position.
Rather, rather