President Donald Trump

[Judge Jude]

I give credit to the Times, and also to CNN.

I would like to think that MSNBC dialed things back, too, but I may be naive there.

hearing what that kid said he was trying to do - tamp down the weird, tense situation by being passive - and then watching the conveniently hacked-down lead video clip - is so informative.

so are the efforts to find salvage in anything at all inappropriate that group did either that day or ever, to cover up the rush-to-judgment blunders. wow, teens ever did anything inappropriate! but not us, of course. we all matured at age 9.

the fact is that a group of teenagers were verbally harassed for an extended period of time by some middle-aged black racists. they reacted not with fists but with school chants. then a native American - misreading the situation - decides that walking into the teen midst, inaccurately believing/claiming that they were the threatening group, would be helpful.

the reaction is not "surrounding" or "threatening." confusion, yes. why wouldn't they be confused?

this just days after the bogus Buzzfeed story dominated the news. we just suck.

[baldgriff]

I do use twitter, so I ran a test just now ... my theory is that anyone - ANYONE - in the public eye has had a tweet about them getting punched in the face. So I picked three people in the news today.
If all of this is considered hate speech then, well, were gonna need a bigger boat. Here goes ...

These kids were not "people in the public eye" - they were by kids that were accused of race baiting. In response to the accusation we have "people in the public eye" calling for these kids to punched in the face. If I recall someone offered to put 1000 buck to someone for kicking the kid in the nuts. These calls were a reaction "by people in the public eye" to what was some believed political stance held by the kids. Not someone taking a shot at Mariano for saving a game in 2009, or JK in 2016, or Cooper for singing in a movie.....

These were direct calls for retribution because some kids were wearing MAGA hats. You know that there is a difference in what people wanted done to those kids vs. some random comment about Mariano. You know that there is context to be included in the conversation and its disingenuous to make the comparison. If some "alt-righty" made similar comments about punching the Indian Chief or the BI group - well lets just say that there would be some lefties screaming that the alt-righty should be held accountable.


Here is the sad part - I had a conversation with someone yesterday after all of this BS has come out that the kids really didnt do anything - and he still holds them accountable and that its the "righty press" making the claim that the kids didnt do anything. Im hoping to resolve that later today. That conversation was not here.

[TranaGreg]

my point was, as a general rule I don't use twitter as a source for anything & I think it's silly for anyone to get riled up over what some anonymous poster might say there.

if someone in a position of power or authority called for violence against them, that's different.

[baldgriff]

my point was, as a general rule I don't use twitter as a source for anything & I think it's silly for anyone to get riled up over what some anonymous poster might say there.

if someone in a position of power or authority called for violence against them, that's different.

Unfortunatley - News outlet use Twitter to keep up with what is happening and it is part of the cause of the hourly new cycle.

[B-Fly]

Unfortunatley - News outlet use Twitter to keep up with what is happening and it is part of the cause of the hourly new cycle.

Are you advocating for anything, though, or just venting? I'm trying to think of what, if anything, can be done to protect people against mean tweets, or even violent tweets that fall short of specific incitement of unlawful action. Given the 1st Amendment, what if anything should happen to someone who says "I'd pay good money to watch that kid get punched in the face" or "I would love to kick that kid in the nuts"? Is it vile? Absolutely. Could Twitter make it a violation of the terms of use and boot people from their platform for it? Maybe. But something else (Reddit?) is still there for people, publicly or anonymously, to vent ugliness, and the government is constitutionally limited in its ability to do anything about it.

[baldgriff]

Are you advocating for anything, though, or just venting? I'm trying to think of what, if anything, can be done to protect people against mean tweets, or even violent tweets that fall short of specific incitement of unlawful action. Given the 1st Amendment, what if anything should happen to someone who says "I'd pay good money to watch that kid get punched in the face" or "I would love to kick that kid in the nuts"? Is it vile? Absolutely. Could Twitter make it a violation of the terms of use and boot people from their platform for it? Maybe. But something else (Reddit?) is still there for people, publicly or anonymously, to vent ugliness, and the government is constitutionally limited in its ability to do anything about it.

I guess I was hoping to see more people on the left side here willing to call out "their own" for acting in ways that they say are deplorable about those from the right. I dont believe that either side should be advocating "Punching X or Y in the face" or "kicking someone in the nuts" -

I would have thought when "blue checked" public figures from the left were calling for these kids to be kicked or punched or were calling for doxing that some here on the left would have stated in a very clear matter of fact way that those statements were in fact wrong. Rather than that we got equivocation and continued attempts to place blame on either the kids or their chaperone's - rather, in fact, at the feet of those who were initiating and then fanning the flames of this whole thing.

So what I was left with, to some degree, was the feeling that if those on the right do it - well its morally reprehensible and shouldn't be tolerated by those folks who are more "woke". However, if your call to punch someone or kick em in the nuts or doxing is somehow "morally right" then punch and kick and dox away.

I mean really - comparing the calls of various blue checked public figures to physically harm the kids to some idiot saying punch JK (given the existing context) - is frankly asinine!

I was really just hoping for consistency from our vocal lefties here - and unfortunately - I got what I thought I would get. It sad honestly, just sad.

[B-Fly]

Well, I have and will continue to condemn violent rhetoric, both generally and particularly when aimed at non-public-figures and kids. When a video and debate hits the zeitgeist, however, I don't necessarily view criticizing the kids or their chaperones as in any way accepting or endorsing violent rhetoric or doxing aimed at those kids. I think it is possible to condemn calls for doxing or violence against people whose motives and behaviors you still find subject to legitimate criticism.

[baldgriff]

Well, I have and will continue to condemn violent rhetoric, both generally and particularly when aimed at non-public-figures and kids. When a video and debate hits the zeitgeist, however, I don't necessarily view criticizing the kids or their chaperones as in any way accepting or endorsing violent rhetoric or doxing aimed at those kids. I think it is possible to condemn calls for doxing or violence against people whose motives and behaviors you still find subject to legitimate criticism.

In the zeitgeist, sure maybe - but we were past the intial stages. We knew what happened and when confronted with my concern about these calls from the lefty public figures to do harm to the kids --- NONE of the left here stated it was wrong. They equivocated - and made statements that the kids arent innocent or dismissed the context around the calls for violence and compared them to statements some randoms made about punching Mariano (almost 10 years ago).

I appreciate that you will condemn the violent rhetoric, but if this had been reversed - the outrage posts here would have been numerous.

The Left frequently calls for violence, based upon some guise that it is morally acceptable. That is what we got to see here in this episode of "The Media Jumps the Shark"

[baldgriff]

In different news - it seems NBC has a very large relationship with Buzzfeed:

https://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/nbc-raises-eyebrows-over-400-million-relationship-with-buzzfeed

[DMT]

In the zeitgeist, sure maybe - but we were past the intial stages. We knew what happened and when confronted with my concern about these calls from the lefty public figures to do harm to the kids --- NONE of the left here stated it was wrong. They equivocated - and made statements that the kids arent innocent or dismissed the context around the calls for violence and compared them to statements some randoms made about punching Mariano (almost 10 years ago).

I appreciate that you will condemn the violent rhetoric, but if this had been reversed - the outrage posts here would have been numerous.

The Left frequently calls for violence, based upon some guise that it is morally acceptable. That is what we got to see here in this episode of "The Media Jumps the Shark"

This is such bullshit and it's hard to believe you're not just trolling...again. Continue posting it but almost no one is responding because it doesn't warrant a response.

[B-Fly]

I appreciate that you will condemn the violent rhetoric, but if this had been reversed - the outrage posts here would have been numerous.

How so? I mean, there are online calls for doxing and violence every day against liberal journalists, politicians, alleged sexual assault victims, advocates/protesters, and it's so common and normal that we almost never even discuss it here. The Covington Catholic kids have probably already "benefitted" from stronger condemnation of their online harassers/doxers than, say, the Parkland kids, or the targets of Gamergate. Unfortunately, the web is a cesspool of hate and violent rhetoric.

[DMT]

How so? I mean, there are online calls for doxing and violence every day against liberal journalists, politicians, alleged sexual assault victims, advocates/protesters, and it's so common and normal that we almost never even discuss it here. The Covington Catholic kids have probably already "benefitted" from stronger condemnation of their online harassers/doxers than, say, the Parkland kids, or the targets of Gamergate. Unfortunately, the web is a cesspool of hate and violent rhetoric.

And the overwhelming majority of that hate is from right-wingers.

[TranaGreg]

How so? I mean, there are online calls for doxing and violence every day against liberal journalists, politicians, alleged sexual assault victims, advocates/protesters, and it's so common and normal that we almost never even discuss it here. The Covington Catholic kids have probably already "benefitted" from stronger condemnation of their online harassers/doxers than, say, the Parkland kids, or the targets of Gamergate. Unfortunately, the web is a cesspool of hate and violent rhetoric.

Exactly. I could do a twitter scan of calls for violence - serious calls for violence - against left wing journalists. It'll get ugly fast.

[baldgriff]

This is such bullshit and it's hard to believe you're not just trolling...again. Continue posting it but almost no one is responding because it doesn't warrant a response.

Lets put it differently - There are many of us centrists and righties here that have called out Trump for being an idiot and that he should condemn racism to the core. We agree his response about David Duke or other members of racially based groups has been less than what we would hope for. Lefties here have spent basically everyday in the last 2 years - making sure that any and every faux pas that the President makes is chronicled - and by God - you righties better agree with us or your some kind of racist, bigot or whatever other label you want to put on it. If you dont disavow it specifically -well then you approve of it implicitly....

So really - other than your statement that the Twitter mob is out of hand - no one specifically stated that the public figures that called for these kids to be harmed was WRONG. If a righty didnt call it out - well again - they would have been called all sorts of bullshit by some of the left here.

You may think it bullshit - but honestly the discourse here is diminished because so much of the small amount of "righties" either left or wont engage anymore - Why? They are tired of being labelled something - but when the left does something similar - its just ok, because we are allowed to punch people based on our higher moral standing.

So with that - DMT - I will drop the subject (or at least try too)... and we can agree to disagree.

[DMT]

Because there is a HUGE difference between the POTUS and Twitter mobs. It's so obvious but you continue to act like they're equivalent.