MSNBC host insults Parkland student; time for boycotts?

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: carewemust
The students are now activists, and fair game for criticism... like all activists.

except they should be debated on the issues and not personally attacked. Only those with low intelligence would attack a child because he's protesting. In fact it's not really low intelligence, it's Fear. Fear and hate and maybe a mental illness would cause an adult to personally attack a kid? That's all I can think of. Mature, well adjusted adults don't do that.

Most of the comments directed toward hogg have been on his position being wrong, his outright lies, or his horrible attacks on people calling them curse words and killers.



Saying he was whining about his grades, although dumb, its not as big of deal as you are making it out to be. She was not attacking him for merely protesting, he made himself a target by calling anyone who has a different opinion as him as f*****ing killers that will take money to watch kids die.

But again, why would christian then turn that into a discussion on grades and college admissions? She's smart enough to debate him on the issues and call him out on that.

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: amazing

except they should be debated on the issues and not personally attacked.

Running around calling for gun control is a personal attack on 300 million Americans.

They're mass shooters just waiting to happen.

That's not true. Just like Seat Belt laws aren't an attack on Drivers and Drinking laws aren't an attack on Drunks. There was a shooting, they were effected, they need to vent and we need to have a discussion. That's hardly taking away your rights.

Have you heard the things he is saying?

“The pathetic f***ers that want to keep killing our children, they could have blood from children splattered all over their faces and they wouldn’t take action because they all still see those dollar signs,” Hogg said before describing the “exhaustion” he’s experienced as a result of his month-long stint as a political activist.

www.nationalreview.com...

"I look forward to Hogg's apologies to Republicans ('sick f***ers'), Dana Loesch (she was 'hypocritical and disgusting' for criticizing Broward Sheriff Scott Israel), and Marco Rubio (he said Rubio was bribed by the NRA to give away children's lives)," he wrote. "You may not like what Ingraham said. You may disagree with it. I did. But it isn't remotely CLOSE to the level of viciousness with which Hogg has attacked people who disagree with him."

www.dailywire.com...

That is not just venting.

That is calling people that disagree with him murderers and other vile names.

His being a "child" (17) does not excuse this behavior, nor does it shield him for criticism.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Grambler
Just waiting for all of the people denouncing Ingraham about how disgusting she was for attacking a kid on the thread about Hogg and that boycott to come on here and say MSNBC should also be boycotted.

Any second now....

And...what's wrong with that? Do tell. I pay attention to what's going on. I'm informed, but I don't watch any of those scumbags.

Well not watching them because you dont like them is a far cry for boycotting the sponsors on their show under the false pretense that its all about not wanting people to insult a kid.

For me I would boycott ingrahams sponsors because for me it is about her insulting a kid. That's me personally.

So then you would boycott Eichenwald as well?

Yeah. Like I said, before this thread I never heard of him. He's a minor pundit. I would never watch him. Ever. Take that to the bank.

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: carewemust
The students are now activists, and fair game for criticism... like all activists.

except they should be debated on the issues and not personally attacked. Only those with low intelligence would attack a child because he's protesting. In fact it's not really low intelligence, it's Fear. Fear and hate and maybe a mental illness would cause an adult to personally attack a kid? That's all I can think of. Mature, well adjusted adults don't do that.

Most of the comments directed toward hogg have been on his position being wrong, his outright lies, or his horrible attacks on people calling them curse words and killers.



Saying he was whining about his grades, although dumb, its not as big of deal as you are making it out to be. She was not attacking him for merely protesting, he made himself a target by calling anyone who has a different opinion as him as f*****ing killers that will take money to watch kids die.

But again, why would christian then turn that into a discussion on grades and college admissions? She's smart enough to debate him on the issues and call him out on that.

I guess for the same reason that MSNBC commentator did the same. However, because he was not on Fox News, he was given the benefit of having his apology accepted, and his sponsors not boycotted.

Sounds a bit biased, doesn't it?

Typical behavior of an open hypocrite. I would have expected no less.

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: amazing

except they should be debated on the issues and not personally attacked.

Running around calling for gun control is a personal attack on 300 million Americans.

They're mass shooters just waiting to happen.

That's not true. Just like Seat Belt laws aren't an attack on Drivers and Drinking laws aren't an attack on Drunks. There was a shooting, they were effected, they need to vent and we need to have a discussion. That's hardly taking away your rights.

And it is OK to question them and oppose their viewpoint. That is OK.....and does not mean we are trying to silence them. Opposition opinions are just that....we do not all have to follow like lemmings over the cliff.

Think for yourself of the larger scale ramifications of their veiled message that is being driven by those older than them with a long standing political agenda.


Don't be a lemming.

I'm not a lemming. Are you? I agree that there should be position discussions and view points. My whole point here is with that fake Christian Imgraham turning what was a golden opportunity to put in some good points in this discussion into instulting a minor about his grades and his college admissions...that's not opposition view points. If you think it is, you might be a lemming.

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Grambler
Just waiting for all of the people denouncing Ingraham about how disgusting she was for attacking a kid on the thread about Hogg and that boycott to come on here and say MSNBC should also be boycotted.

Any second now....

And...what's wrong with that? Do tell. I pay attention to what's going on. I'm informed, but I don't watch any of those scumbags.

Well not watching them because you dont like them is a far cry for boycotting the sponsors on their show under the false pretense that its all about not wanting people to insult a kid.

For me I would boycott ingrahams sponsors because for me it is about her insulting a kid. That's me personally.

So then you would boycott Eichenwald as well?

Yeah. Like I said, before this thread I never heard of him. He's a minor pundit. I would never watch him. Ever. Take that to the bank.

More deflecting. Just answer the simple question posited to you.

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: carewemust
The students are now activists, and fair game for criticism... like all activists.

except they should be debated on the issues and not personally attacked. Only those with low intelligence would attack a child because he's protesting. In fact it's not really low intelligence, it's Fear. Fear and hate and maybe a mental illness would cause an adult to personally attack a kid? That's all I can think of. Mature, well adjusted adults don't do that.

Most of the comments directed toward hogg have been on his position being wrong, his outright lies, or his horrible attacks on people calling them curse words and killers.



Saying he was whining about his grades, although dumb, its not as big of deal as you are making it out to be. She was not attacking him for merely protesting, he made himself a target by calling anyone who has a different opinion as him as f*****ing killers that will take money to watch kids die.

But again, why would christian then turn that into a discussion on grades and college admissions? She's smart enough to debate him on the issues and call him out on that.

You seem to have some very high standards.

Maybe a christian .... isnt perfect?

You act like she went on a profanity filled tirade about him (oh wait that was hogg that did that to people that disagree with him)

She said he was whining.

He was whining, but sure, it was a dumb thing for ingraham to say.

I assume you believe you are a person of morals.

Yet here you are in this thread calling people "scumbags"

So thats it. Nothing you say should be listened to now right? Lets dig in and find your place of work, and boycott them until they get rid of you.

Too late for an apology! You have acted without morals instead of rationally debating laura Ingraham.




Or....

Thats dumb, and just satying one little thing isnt a big deal, like saying hogg was whining.

a reply to: Grambler

Fine, I can't really argue with this post except...call him a jerk for being to hard headed and for not understanding the whole issue for having blinders on. Call him stupid because he's unwilling to research and look at the whole issue. Tear him apart, sentence by sentence of what he's saying.

But don't resort to childish.."..uh your dumb and no college wants you.." tantrums. How does that help anything?

Especially when she's the "Mature adult" here. Or I guess not...

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: amazing

except they should be debated on the issues and not personally attacked.

Running around calling for gun control is a personal attack on 300 million Americans.

They're mass shooters just waiting to happen.

That's not true. Just like Seat Belt laws aren't an attack on Drivers and Drinking laws aren't an attack on Drunks. There was a shooting, they were effected, they need to vent and we need to have a discussion. That's hardly taking away your rights.

And it is OK to question them and oppose their viewpoint. That is OK.....and does not mean we are trying to silence them. Opposition opinions are just that....we do not all have to follow like lemmings over the cliff.

Think for yourself of the larger scale ramifications of their veiled message that is being driven by those older than them with a long standing political agenda.


Don't be a lemming.

I'm not a lemming. Are you? I agree that there should be position discussions and view points. My whole point here is with that fake Christian Imgraham turning what was a golden opportunity to put in some good points in this discussion into instulting a minor about his grades and his college admissions...that's not opposition view points. If you think it is, you might be a lemming.

And yet, no outrage if this type over another media commentator that made an even more unjust and inflammatory insult to the kid.

It's hypocrisy....but I think you know that first hand.

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: amazing

except they should be debated on the issues and not personally attacked.

Running around calling for gun control is a personal attack on 300 million Americans.

They're mass shooters just waiting to happen.

That's not true. Just like Seat Belt laws aren't an attack on Drivers and Drinking laws aren't an attack on Drunks. There was a shooting, they were effected, they need to vent and we need to have a discussion. That's hardly taking away your rights.

And it is OK to question them and oppose their viewpoint. That is OK.....and does not mean we are trying to silence them. Opposition opinions are just that....we do not all have to follow like lemmings over the cliff.

Think for yourself of the larger scale ramifications of their veiled message that is being driven by those older than them with a long standing political agenda.


Don't be a lemming.

I'm not a lemming. Are you? I agree that there should be position discussions and view points. My whole point here is with that fake Christian Imgraham turning what was a golden opportunity to put in some good points in this discussion into instulting a minor about his grades and his college admissions...that's not opposition view points. If you think it is, you might be a lemming.

So just to clarify, saying a kid is whining means you arent a real christian?

Wow.

a reply to: amazing

That's not true.

Yeah it is.

Just like Seat Belt laws aren't an attack on Drivers and Drinking laws aren't an attack on Drunks.

False equivalence.

There was a shooting,

Yep which was in violation of at least two existing laws.

It's illegal bring firearms to school as per the Clinton Era Gun Free Zone Act, and the running around killing people was made illegal.

they need to vent and we need to have a discussion.

There's no discussion to be had.

All they have to do is read the GD existing laws.

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: amazing

except they should be debated on the issues and not personally attacked.

Running around calling for gun control is a personal attack on 300 million Americans.

They're mass shooters just waiting to happen.

That's not true. Just like Seat Belt laws aren't an attack on Drivers and Drinking laws aren't an attack on Drunks. There was a shooting, they were effected, they need to vent and we need to have a discussion. That's hardly taking away your rights.

And it is OK to question them and oppose their viewpoint. That is OK.....and does not mean we are trying to silence them. Opposition opinions are just that....we do not all have to follow like lemmings over the cliff.

Think for yourself of the larger scale ramifications of their veiled message that is being driven by those older than them with a long standing political agenda.


Don't be a lemming.

I'm not a lemming. Are you? I agree that there should be position discussions and view points. My whole point here is with that fake Christian Imgraham turning what was a golden opportunity to put in some good points in this discussion into instulting a minor about his grades and his college admissions...that's not opposition view points. If you think it is, you might be a lemming.

And yet, no outrage if this type over another media commentator that made an even more unjust and inflammatory insult to the kid.

It's hypocrisy....but I think you know that first hand.

I agree. like I said, I've never even heard of this schmuck. I promise you that I will never, ever watch him until the day I die. YOu have my word on that.

Ingraham is the bigger problem...she's actually famous and has a following. She's supposed to be above this pettiness. She's a Christian....She has one of the top rated news shows behind only Maddow, Hannity and carlson.

a reply to: amazing

It is also possible that someone who has put his character in the spotlight as much as Hogg has lately has torpedoed himself on the college front. At a time when people are starting to become deeply skeptical of the environment many of these campuses harbor, how eager would you be as an administration to take on someone as intensely public and divisive as David Hogg?

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Grambler
Just waiting for all of the people denouncing Ingraham about how disgusting she was for attacking a kid on the thread about Hogg and that boycott to come on here and say MSNBC should also be boycotted.

Any second now....

And...what's wrong with that? Do tell. I pay attention to what's going on. I'm informed, but I don't watch any of those scumbags.

Well not watching them because you dont like them is a far cry for boycotting the sponsors on their show under the false pretense that its all about not wanting people to insult a kid.

For me I would boycott ingrahams sponsors because for me it is about her insulting a kid. That's me personally.

So then you would boycott Eichenwald as well?

Yeah. Like I said, before this thread I never heard of him. He's a minor pundit. I would never watch him. Ever. Take that to the bank.

More deflecting. Just answer the simple question posited to you.

Sorry. Not deflecting. Just not a good debater. I think you asked if he should be boycotted. Yes. Definitely.

a reply to: amazing

You keep harping on this Christian thing.

Ask yourself, if you didn't know that, would you care?

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: amazing

except they should be debated on the issues and not personally attacked.

Running around calling for gun control is a personal attack on 300 million Americans.

They're mass shooters just waiting to happen.

That's not true. Just like Seat Belt laws aren't an attack on Drivers and Drinking laws aren't an attack on Drunks. There was a shooting, they were effected, they need to vent and we need to have a discussion. That's hardly taking away your rights.

And it is OK to question them and oppose their viewpoint. That is OK.....and does not mean we are trying to silence them. Opposition opinions are just that....we do not all have to follow like lemmings over the cliff.

Think for yourself of the larger scale ramifications of their veiled message that is being driven by those older than them with a long standing political agenda.


Don't be a lemming.

I'm not a lemming. Are you? I agree that there should be position discussions and view points. My whole point here is with that fake Christian Imgraham turning what was a golden opportunity to put in some good points in this discussion into instulting a minor about his grades and his college admissions...that's not opposition view points. If you think it is, you might be a lemming.

And yet, no outrage if this type over another media commentator that made an even more unjust and inflammatory insult to the kid.

It's hypocrisy....but I think you know that first hand.

I agree. like I said, I've never even heard of this schmuck. I promise you that I will never, ever watch him until the day I die. YOu have my word on that.

Ingraham is the bigger problem...she's actually famous and has a following. She's supposed to be above this pettiness. She's a Christian....She has one of the top rated news shows behind only Maddow, Hannity and carlson.

But, you still did not answer the simple question posed. Would YOU support calling for a boycott of the MSNBC commentators sponsors over his bullying of a kid?

You answered in a post above while I was drafting this one. So, I redacted the point as you did answer.

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: amazing

except they should be debated on the issues and not personally attacked.

Running around calling for gun control is a personal attack on 300 million Americans.

They're mass shooters just waiting to happen.

That's not true. Just like Seat Belt laws aren't an attack on Drivers and Drinking laws aren't an attack on Drunks. There was a shooting, they were effected, they need to vent and we need to have a discussion. That's hardly taking away your rights.

And it is OK to question them and oppose their viewpoint. That is OK.....and does not mean we are trying to silence them. Opposition opinions are just that....we do not all have to follow like lemmings over the cliff.

Think for yourself of the larger scale ramifications of their veiled message that is being driven by those older than them with a long standing political agenda.


Don't be a lemming.

I'm not a lemming. Are you? I agree that there should be position discussions and view points. My whole point here is with that fake Christian Imgraham turning what was a golden opportunity to put in some good points in this discussion into instulting a minor about his grades and his college admissions...that's not opposition view points. If you think it is, you might be a lemming.

So just to clarify, saying a kid is whining means you arent a real christian?

Wow.

No that's not clear. Insulting a kid publicly about something NOT even related to the discussion at hand, shows that you aren't a real Christian. Let's be clear. It should all be about what would Jesus do Jesus wouldn't say "your dumb". Seriously. christians aren't supposed to insult kids like that. She admitted it was bad afterwards. Even she knew it was bad.

a reply to: neo96

So what you're essentially saying is there is no need to take alook at these laws and policies to see if they need to be changed? Isn't that closeminded? Don't rational people take a look at what works and what doesn't and make changes as neccessary. That's what I'm saying.

a reply to: Grambler

When asked what specific measures he would implement if given the opportunity, Hogg begins to discuss mental-illness policy before arguing that it’s not his responsibility to formulate solutions: “I shouldn’t have to! I’m 17.”

Hogg is a punk.

Trying to have it both ways.

He can't even legally vote, and can't even legally buy a firearm until 21.

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Grambler

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: Krakatoa

originally posted by: amazing

originally posted by: neo96
a reply to: amazing

except they should be debated on the issues and not personally attacked.

Running around calling for gun control is a personal attack on 300 million Americans.

They're mass shooters just waiting to happen.

That's not true. Just like Seat Belt laws aren't an attack on Drivers and Drinking laws aren't an attack on Drunks. There was a shooting, they were effected, they need to vent and we need to have a discussion. That's hardly taking away your rights.

And it is OK to question them and oppose their viewpoint. That is OK.....and does not mean we are trying to silence them. Opposition opinions are just that....we do not all have to follow like lemmings over the cliff.

Think for yourself of the larger scale ramifications of their veiled message that is being driven by those older than them with a long standing political agenda.


Don't be a lemming.

I'm not a lemming. Are you? I agree that there should be position discussions and view points. My whole point here is with that fake Christian Imgraham turning what was a golden opportunity to put in some good points in this discussion into instulting a minor about his grades and his college admissions...that's not opposition view points. If you think it is, you might be a lemming.

So just to clarify, saying a kid is whining means you arent a real christian?

Wow.

No that's not clear. Insulting a kid publicly about something NOT even related to the discussion at hand, shows that you aren't a real Christian. Let's be clear. It should all be about what would Jesus do Jesus wouldn't say "your dumb". Seriously. christians aren't supposed to insult kids like that. She admitted it was bad afterwards. Even she knew it was bad.

And as a Christian, she acknowledged her failure, apologized for her weakness. I guess forgiveness of her action is not allowed for someone on her network. But it is acceptable on MSNBC. Is this Hogg kid a Christian too? If so, then is he not guilty of not forgiving, as Jesus would do?


Got ya.