As Twitchy reported earlier, Arnold Schwarzenegger said, “screw your freedom” in a segment in which he argued for mask mandates. Not surprisingly, “screw your freedom” is making headlines. He responded to The Hill’s story by making an analogy about traffic lights, but we’re a little disappointed he didn’t follow Rick Wilson’s and Wajahat Ali’s lead and spelled it “freedumb,” ’cause that’s what liberals are using now in relation to maks.
Schwarzenegger to anti-maskers: "Screw your freedom" https://t.co/ve7Qcc0TI7 pic.twitter.com/EEsZdfccd1
— The Hill (@thehill) August 11, 2021
“…because with freedom comes obligations and responsibilities.” Like I said, pure freedom would also mean ignoring red lights, but we don’t do that because it would kill our fellow citizens.
— Arnold (@Schwarzenegger) August 11, 2021
We don’t enjoy “pure freedom,” but conservatives do try to preserve as much personal freedom as they can.
Disappointing
— Marc Lobliner (@MarcLobliner) August 11, 2021
That’s right, you’re of Austrian descent, right next to a famous authoritarian country … is it a learned trait from this region?
— Tom Martino (@tom_martino1) August 11, 2021
Apples and oranges. Poor analogy.
— Mike Smith A (@MikeSmithAmmon) August 11, 2021
Running a red light is breaking the law.
No law exists mandating vaccines or masks.
— Me (@Keefer1958) August 11, 2021
Except there have been laws that were passed through proper procedures by elected legislators to make those things illegal…there have been no laws passed to force you to wear masks
— Chase Smith (@spiritworldfilm) August 11, 2021
"Because traffic lights, we can do anything we want to you" is not an argument.
Each specific limitation to individual freedom is negotiated separately and independently with the people. One cannot be used as an excuse to add another.
— Lari Harvassaila (@harvassaila) August 11, 2021
Recommended
Well said.
There is literally no limiting principle to nonsense like this. You could argue for any level of reductions in freedoms for any level of unsubstantiated supposedly negative externality. I know you are not a mad man, but understand that virtually every mad man of the 20th…
— Eric Newbury (@newbury_eric) August 11, 2021
…century mad this EXACT argument for why society needed to be increasingly more tightly controlled and it was a citizen's "responsibility" to give up their freedoms for the "greater good."
— Eric Newbury (@newbury_eric) August 11, 2021
False equivalency. Driving is a privilege, not a right.
— Basic Bitcoinomics (@Bitcoinomics101) August 11, 2021
Go pound sand… traffic lights aren't in the constitution.
This is about control. You want something you're not big enough to take. Our rights. Anyone willing to give them up, doesn't deserve them.— Scott Maiwald (@scottmaiwald) August 11, 2021
You don't have a right to drive a car on public roads. When you agree to the privilege of doing so you also agree to abide by certain standards.
On the other hand you absolutely have the right to walk in public. Therefore the government has no ability to constrain that.
— Jon (@faroutmadman) August 11, 2021
Stopping at a red light will most certainly save your life and the lives of others. There is no scientific proof that a mask protects you or anyone else from covid. Prove that a mask will protect me and my family or anyone just like a red light or stop sign does when driving.
— Kristen (@kristen_j74) August 11, 2021
As long as I remember you can still drive and ignore red lights… But the punishment comes after the crime not before
— raul gonzalez (@DarkLight333) August 11, 2021
Ignoring red lights puts the person doing the ignoring in harm's way too, self interest dictates that they stop at a red light, not social conscientiousness. Remember when somebody hit you with an egg during your campaign, remember what you said about it? That Arnold is dead.
— The account formerly known as NillaWafer (@BasedWafer) August 11, 2021
Terrible correlation. I don’t stop at red lights because I’m worried about everyone else.
— Lasagna Rigatoni-Cromartie (@number1profile) August 11, 2021
Any knucklehead that wants to can ignore a red light. Freedom & liberties are much more than that. It’s being free to decide for self what you want or need w/out interference & retaining bodily autonomy . It’s being able to have our vote to count. Now we know vote don’t count.
— Bernadette (@Bernade25119930) August 11, 2021
Poor reasoning, Arnold. Freedom has never meant one is free to make ill advised decisions *without consequences*. Anyone can run a red light anytime they choose to, but there will always be very serious ramifications should one do it at rush hour. That’s why it seldom occurs.
— Archer (@Archer_14) August 11, 2021
Statism’s indefensible, because it’s almost always a bad faith promotion relying on fear in order to extort compliance by the public. There is always a terrible bogeyman proffered as a threat, which government, of course, has a (false)remedy for. Sounds awful and awfully familiar
— Archer (@Archer_14) August 11, 2021
I’m tired of people comparing not using masks with driving drunk or running red lights. N95 masks a readily available. If you want to be a slave to the fear, wear one and leave the rest of us the fuck alone.
— Patrick Crone (@Pieces_of_Bits) August 11, 2021
This is what you call "begging the question." He's assuming before proving. What about masks are "responsible or safe"? Let's answer that one first bud.
— Mik Olson (@thegulagpod) August 11, 2021
Freedom comes with responsibilities, not obligations.
— Ian Haworth (@ighaworth) August 11, 2021
That’s not what freedom is good sir. You are arguing a straw man. Individual freedom allows you to break laws and then face the consequences of those actions. “Obligations and responsibilities” are subjective and a matter of personal conviction, not law.
— 𝔸𝕝𝕖𝕩 𝕀𝕟𝕚𝕘𝕦𝕖𝕫 𝔸𝕣𝕥 (@AlexIniguezArt) August 11, 2021
Yeah… obligations and responsibilities to stand up for freedom… not take it away from people.
Thanks for playing.
— Tim Young (@TimRunsHisMouth) August 11, 2021
Your right, freedom does come with obligations and responsibilities. And those obligations and responsibilities is DEFENDING Freedom when it is under threat from idiot celebrities and out of control government.
— 🎥 MotionMark (@MotionMark369) August 11, 2021
Hollywood has made you soft and comfortable. Lift some weights again, the testosterone might come back to you.
— Mister Bones (@Connor_2910) August 11, 2021
How do you not see the irony in this?
— JN618 👁️ (@Jacob_UWS) August 11, 2021
https://twitter.com/BasedSonic69/status/1425599409195085827
I don't enjoy slaying this particular hero, but it must be done
— Dr Bitcoin MD (@DrBitcoinMD) August 11, 2021
But you said “screw your freedom” which contradicts what you’re saying here.
— Greg Pearson (@east_texan12) August 11, 2021
— Catturd ™ (@catturd2) August 11, 2021
Who the hell is arguing for "pure freedom"? We want our Constitutional rights upheld. Which means no lockdowns, mask mandates, vaccine passports, or eviction moratoriums.
— AdamInHTownTX (Sixteen Cents Richer) (@AdamInHTownTX) August 11, 2021
We guess Swarzenegger wasn’t invited to Barack Obama’s birthday party or he would have been slapping masks on everyone in sight. If the former president can stick hundreds of people in a tent without masks, we’d like the freedom to do the same.
Related:
Arnold Schwarzenegger says ‘screw your freedom’ to those who don’t get in lockstep with CDC’s moving goalposts https://t.co/8Wf4mGHPrS
— Twitchy Team (@TwitchyTeam) August 11, 2021
Join the conversation as a VIP Member