AOC enables people harassing Supreme Court justices in their homes and at restaurants. She poo-poos all of it as peaceful protests. Now, she's complaining somebody's "exercising their First Amendment right," and that "nobody's protecting her." Poor AOC. She also seems to be disappointed that this "institution allows this." I guess she's mad that the US government respects the 1st Amendment. Is this ugly? Of course, but these are her rules. Now she can live with them. Because she enables this sort of behavior when it is against people she doesn't like, she will get zero sympathy from me. I would like to remind the leftist posters on Too Hot that this is the world they wanted. Get ready for more of this and worse of this.
Look, we got to take the L here, no woman was ever sexually harassed until some people protested outside a supreme court justices home. This is the world we wanted, the one with rampant sexism that didn't exist until a few weeks ago!
Yep, the First Amendment protects his speech, even if it is grotesque. Of course, it's amusing that you aren't outraged about it, after your comments in the Kavanaugh thread. I know, I know, it's "her rules," which frees you from your principles.
For some levity: This time she seems to have found the person bothering her who apparently does, in fact, actually want to date her.
It frees me from enforcing my rules on people who don't adhere to them themselves. AOC egged on harassing Kavanaugh at his house and outside the restaurant. If this is what she wanted, I won't defend her. She can have fun living in this world she created. Either she learns, or she feels the pain she brought on herself.
"I don't know why you guys are so mad, this just comes with the territory of being a high profile public figure. Do you guys hate the First Amendment?"
If AOC condemns harassing SCOTUS justices at their house and at restaurants, I'll defend her in cases like this. Until then, she can enjoy this.
In other words, your "principles" dissipate when you think the person they could protect is unworthy. That means they aren't real principles.
So just to be clear, in order to meet the 715 gold standard of "whats good for the goose," sexual harassment and stalking is something you have to accept as "tit for tat" if you vocally support legally protesting against an injustice or law.
Give him a break. People who are right wing cannot discern nuances such as protesting vs. harassing. Much like how they can't discern protesting vs. sedition.