News Us politics - read first post before comment

[EveHarrington]

@EveHarrington: "Hogg is for all intents and purposes, still a kid. I don’t thin...

I think you’re getting down to too much detail and not seeing the bigger picture.

The entire act was inappropriate. Kids should be off limits in the public eye, in that it’s not appropriate for an adult to essentially be shaming a child for their behavior/actions/whatever.....outside of his politics.

Shaming a child for their behavior? For not being admitted to school? NOT COOL!

People don’t even mature into their adult brains until around age 26 or so. This guy is still a kid. Whatever he does outside of his anti-gun political stuff should not be material for news anchors.

If we are a society that wants to throw kids under the bus for not behaving as adults, shame on us.

Stick to the politics. Agree. Disagree. But don’t stray from that. Again, below the belt hitting.

 

[Justmehere]

@Endofwar - you are trying to put other people in so many “us” vs “them” categories, and I think it pushes people away a bit.

Mentioning “Christian” to most of my LGBTQ friends doesn’t lead them to shut down with me. Why? *They know me as a person first.* Not a category or a label. Vice versa.

It’s actually prohibited by law in the US for therapists to refuse help based on race, color, gender, religion... etc. As a Christian myself (although I’m *very* reluctant to use that term for other reasons) I have been to therapists of various religious worldviews and sexual orientations. None of them limited or refused help because I used the word Christian. I had a lesbian therapist who knew of my faith and we talked about it. She didn’t share my faith and she also did not limit her help in any way. At all. She was one of the most helpful therapists I’ve seen. And frankly, the therapists who have happened to also be Christian have provided the least help, but it didn’t have to do with faith. They simply didn’t have the training to deal with trauma. Again, it’s been about symptoms and behavior. Not religion and sexual orientation.

Bringing this back to politics more directly - let’s consider the Austin Texas bombing and labeling. The white perp was called “troubled.” Implying they were in need of help.

Many people pointed out that if he had been black or middle eastern, they would have been immediately labeled as a terrorist. The Austin chief of police eventually realized his error, and labeled the perp a domestic terrorist.

If Cruz had been African American, there isn’t a greater chance he would have been better helped. There is a greater chance he would have been shot during one of his many interactions with police.

Racism and discrimination is real. But in the US it’s not usually against Christians and white kids, and not nearly to the same scale. Mentioning he was being bullied by a black kid is actually frankly more likely to get help. Not less. It also goes wayyyy too far to imply he became a murderer because he was bullied by a black kid or suffered reverse racism.

It would be fair to say that Americans as a culture do need to learn to listen to each other more and shut down less.

I don’t think you are experiencing people shutting down because you use terms like Christian and etc. I think it’s because you use labels to categorize and separate others as us vs them. Rather than to describe yourself. For example, if you are describing yourself as being gay, that’s one thing. But when you are pointing out the sexuality of others, and doing so as if it lessens the value of their viewpoints, that’s totally different. That is what creates divides between people. You don’t want people to reject your viewpoint because you could be labeled by some as conservative. But yet you are pushing away viewpoints of others because they could be labeled as gay and etc. You are doing what I don’t think you want people to do to you.

@EveHarrington - I agree. Plus, why is his college acceptance status tweet worthy in the first place? Why is it news? Is there really not bigger news in the world? Why tweet about it negatively too? Kudos to the one political commentator and to Hobbs for apologizing. Hope they all move on...

 

[joeylittle]

I feel like no on the entire planet has as power to do or say whatever they want and not be criticized as much David Hogg because he happened to be in a school, but not actually shot at, when a shooting took place and he is only a senior in high school.

I don't think anyone is saying that he can do or say whatever and not be criticized...I'm certainly not saying that.

I'm saying that to hold the shooter's peers responsible for not intervening, prior to the shooting, is ridiculous. That's what you began with, and that's what I think makes absolutely no sense - is, in fact, not possible - for the reasons I gave.

 

[joeylittle]

More like Joseph Stalin/Roman Emperor type power.

No, more like free market/free press power.

Anyone is free to say whatever they like. And the consequences are open to anyone. This isn't the first time, and it won't be the last, that advertisers have been pressured to withdraw from controversy. They are doing it to keep their client base, and to not be perceived as tacitly endorsing. It happens all the time. People and corporations alike are free agents as far as where they put their eyes, their dollars, their voices.

She (maybe) ruined her career with this. Thank goodness she was in a job that probably netted in excess of 1m a year for her...I don't know, I'm not bothering to look up her contract. The point is - she's going to be just fine.

 

[hodge]

@EveHarrington: "Hogg is for all intents and purposes, still a kid. I don’t thin...

I did not see that Hogg agreed with Ingraham in any way. What is your source?

And, for the record, if the Ivy Leagues are not competing for this kid, they are down on the count.

 

[Deleted member 46276]

@joeylittle: "This isn't the first time, and it won't be the last, that advertisers have been pressured to withdraw from controversy. They are doing it to keep their client base, and to not be perceived as tacitly endorsing. It happens all the time."

I agree with your basic argument, but there is something different about this. All she said was Hogg shouldn't have gotten in colleges he was rejected from and Hogg agrees, but she did use the word "whine". It was out of line and she apologized, but she did not demean groups of people or make some threatening comment or molest any one or any thing like this. And it wasn't a grass roots movement or some group leading a movement, Hogg responded to tweet by listing her advertisers and calling for a boycott and advertisers did as he wished.

Like Hogg was sort of saying that multinational companies better comply to his demands because he felt slighted or face consequences and repercussions, and multinational companies know just how dangerous it is to cross David Hogg and multinational companies complied.

Just saying, from a political standpoint liberal people should try to convince one of the other Parkland students to be the face of the movement or reign David Hogg in, because this kid has a mean, vindictive streak and a huge ego and eventually there is going to be some backlash against him. He might only be a high school student, but he's close to graduating and at some point it's going to become clear that he really likes power and does not like being opposed.

Please understand that I am not trying to criticize kids or even the movement or really even David Hogg, I just sort of like politics and I understand that everyone has strengths and weaknesses and Hogg is not the sort of person who lacks confidence or is particularly open to opposition. All of the other Parkland movement students are less egomaniacs than Hogg, and he's almost a conservatives dream as the face of the movement because i think if given enough rope he will hang himself. Again, please try to understand that I am just talking about politics, I think David Hogg is very bright and a good leader, but that he has strengths and weaknesses like everyone else and to be a good politician one has to manage their weaknesses, and I feel like David Hogg has a lot of maturing and some searching to do before he can become a well formed adult and astute politician

 

[Deleted member 46276]

@Muttly: "I suspect you and I are not going to find agreement, I never have much stamina for debates, and I feel like we've wandered from US politics, so I may not respond back to this thread, but I wish you well."

I think it's fine if people aren't in agreement, as long as there is reasonable and open discourse. People's experience can differ greatly, and reality is very complicated and it's not irrational for people to come to entirely different conclusions about how things should be.

I think I saw something about how it used to be that conservatives and liberals used to be at each other's throats in congress, but then they'd forget about all that and go out for a beer, liberals and conservatives together, afterwards.

But whether the above was ever reality or not, today it's certainly not like that...today it's more like WWI trench warfare with both sides in trenches firing machine guns and mortar rounds at the other side

 

[EveHarrington]

@joeylittle: "This isn't the first time, and it won't be the last, that advertiser...

I find it offensive that you say “but she did not molest” as a defense.

What is your trauma?

Do you realize you’re surrounded by people who were indeed molested as kids?

I don’t think I’m the only one who could possibly be offended by your “molest” defense.

Maybe I’m off on this, but I don’t think so.

Please, do share your trauma.

 

[Deleted member 46276]

@hodge: "I did not see that Hogg agreed with Ingraham in any way. What is your source?

And, for the record, if the Ivy Leagues are not competing for this kid, they are down on the count."

There was something on CNN yesterday where Hogg said something along the lines of he was rejected a couple weeks ago and a lot of really good candidates don't get into colleges.

Somewhere I saw it explained that colleges took applications well before Parkland shooting and the university system simply would not have taken his activism into account due to timing and how universities process applications.

The whole controversy is pretty stupid, everyone seems to understand that with system in place, Hogg should not have been accepted, but maybe Hogg was frustrated about rejection letters and maybe showed his frustration about it and Laura Ingraham said he whined about being rejected, which might not have been totally untrue, but was out of line to say.

Hogg really was in the right to say Ingraham shouldn't have mentioned this and Ingraham was in the wrong initially, but then she was in the right to apologize and take responsibility. But now I feel like Hogg is in the wrong and abusing his power by not letting a pretty minor slight go...he could show his maturity by saying he gets that people make mistakes and Laura Ingraham should not lose her career over this, but he is not doing this, he has his opponent down on the mat and they are saying uncle, but he is going for the kill anyway

 

[lostforgottensoul]

@EveHarrington, "molest", in a dated form, means to pester or harrass someone in an aggressive or persistant manner. That fits into the sentence.

 

[hodge]

@hodge: "I did not see that Hogg agreed with Ingraham in any way. What is your sourc...

She only apologized when companies started pulling their ads from her show. To me, that's not a genuine, heartfelt apology, and I don't blame Hogg at all for not accepting it. Besides, a true apology doesn't go like "I'm sorry if I said blah blah blah and it hurt you." A true apology acknowledges what you said that hurt someone else. There is no "if."

 

[Deleted member 46276]

@hodge a somewhat similar controversy has occurred since then when more conservative Parkland shooting survivor was harshly criticized by liberal commentator. The liberal commentator apologized after Kyle Kashuv, the more conservative survivor, tweeted MSNBC advertisers. But the apology was accepted and he deleted advertisers and says mistakes shouldn't end careers and he called for David Hogg to do the same.

Whatever your politics, I think it's important to get the difficulty with being a political commentator on this. These kids, or at least David Hogg, are extremely influential political figures, but they can't be treated like other political figures.

Conservatives seem to hoping that David Hogg will agree to a debate with Kyle Kashov, because he's almost the only person who can harshly criticize David Hogg and get away with it, but to this point Hogg has not agreed to a debate. Like a heavy weight face off of Parkland shooter survivor kids, but David Hogg is far more powerful than Kyle Kushov, so he's sees no reason to agree to the fight.