Since we're running on funtime and seriousness here let's see if they can be interwoven:
"Consider that once you post a meme, you never have to look at it again"
True. But does that stop the stream of notifications about comments from dipshits with bruises to their snowflake sensibilities? I mean... I stick to what's documented, provable, demonstrable -and when I don't, I'm very particular about using verbiage indicating what's being said is speculative. Consequently, when I was in the habit of leaving the comments open, the only people who became incensed over my posts were the ones operating on mis/disinformation, mis-interpretation and/or just plain stupidity.
"Oh, right. Like your memes. I get it now. Thanks." re: citation of regugitations from tabloid sites, opinion show talking heads.
Nope. I only operate on material from sources with solid track records of factual reporting. But it's okay, I understand why you demonstratedly feel compelled to create a false narrative.
"So, you're denying me the opportunity to soak in your political brilliance."
First, it's very flattering you would call my memes "political brilliance" -I'm blushing just a little. Second, not at all; my memes are open to the public for perusal so I'm not denying that opportunity.
"Clearly, you are not. I'm not a Constitutional expert, but those two statements seem to be just a tad in conflict with each other." re: my statement concerning my pro-1A status, my explanation for why I turn off comments.
Soooo... should I take it you're not pro-castle doctrine? I mean... if one clicks on my meme for the purpose of posting a comment, are they not subsequently traversing from the "street" into my "home" on this media platform? And, as my "home" on this platform is my castle, is it not my prerogative to govern what takes place under my "roof"? As to the matter of individual expertise concerning the Constitution, the Rights enumerated therein aren't absolute, are subject to regulation. Were they absolute, the private citizen would be allowed to own nuclear weapons in accordance with the 2A. Would you agree that the 1A doesn't bestow the Right to utter death threats against, commit verbal harrassment of others? [see: explanation, subsection MAGA-bots thru chupacabra].
[STATUS - INTERWEAVING OF FUN-TIME/SERIOUSNESS: SUCCESS]
Oh baby... that was good for me *lights cigarette*. How about you?