Spare Me The Right's Tears For Kyle Kashuv - He Deserved Being Bounced From Harvard

"WAAAAAHHHA! Dem Libwuls gotta stop pickin' on Kyle! BWAAAHHAAA!"

Back on March 26 last year I posted about the fearless Parkland students who marched and demonstrated to return gun sanity to this country. I also tore into the NRA-backed punk, Kyle Kashuv,  who gained notoriety by going against his classmates.  In the words of fellow blogger Ilana Novick on smirkingchimp.com:

"Kashuv’s political views are often at odds with his fellow Parkland survivors. After the horrific Parkland shooting, many of the surviving students, including David Hogg and Emma Gonzalez, became activists. They organized the March for Our Lives in support of gun control and often spoke out against the policies of the Trump administration. Kashuv was an outlier among his classmates, a conservative defender of the Second Amendment."


 As I wrote at the time, in my above-cited post:

"Then there is the other clueless NRA tool making the talk show rounds on behalf of the gunrunners and 2nd amendment phonies. That would be Kyle Kashuv who.actually tweeted the following ding on his fellow Parkland  students:

No one's feelings are hurt by a group of people who Don't have a basic understanding of US case law and are fighting to get existing laws passed.

Which is total balderdash.

In fact it's Kashuv who lacks a basic understanding of U.S. case law pertaining to the 2nd amendment given he is blissfully unaware there is NO  "existing law" that currently bans military grade weapons like the AR-15 which is one of the provisions his classmates want passed.

Nor is he aware of the D..C. vs. Heller  Supreme Court decision  e.g.

http://brane-space.blogspot.com/2018/02/sorry-you-have-no-constitutional-right.html

Kashuv is now in the news after Harvard decided to revoke his admission. He asked for a face-to-face meeting but was told the matter was closed. Predictably, conservative Twitter erupted Monday, arguing that this was another case of liberal -elite Harvard bashing conservatives. Actually it was not, so these Reich whiners are off base.  It was a case of Kashuv trashing his own  Harvard aspirations by posting racist slime drivel - and Harvard finding out about it.  But I will get to that.

The backstory is that when he was 16, some months before the shootings, Kashuv wrote racist comments in text messages and on a collaborative Google doc.  In many ways it reminded me of the gaggle of 10 dimwits who also had their Harvard admissions rescinded in June of 2017.  This  after their depraved texts under a self-branded  “Harvard memes for horny bourgeois teens”  were posted on a Facebook message board.  The story was first reported by the Crimson.     Suffice it to say that even one of the "least" offensive posts -  by one person in the original clique -  is simply too abominable for words, or repetition here.

Back to Kashuv: He was studying for the A.P. American History exam with some classmates online. Around midnight, they got restive and suddenly thought posting aberrant brain farts would be cool. At least a change from the drudgery of study. So they began posting assorted racist garbage and tried to see who could outdo the other in terms of outrage.  Much like the ten losers noted above on the deformed "memes for bourgeois teens" group.

Kashuv’s comments, to any normal, sentient person who read them, were degenerate, blatantly racist and anti-Semitic. He wrote the N-word twelve times and then even explained that he was good at typing that word. “[P]ractice uhhhhhh makes perfect.”

All sorts of excuses have been made for him in the wake including by NY Times scribe David Brooks,  who wrote:

"Moral formation is not like learning math. It’s not cumulative; it’s inverse. In a sin-drenched world it’s precisely through the sins and the ensuing repentance that moral formation happens. That’s why we try not to judge people by what they did in their worst moment, but rather by how they respond to their worst moment. That’s why we are forgiving of 16-year-olds, because they haven’t disgraced themselves enough to have earned maturity."

A nice patter but it doesn't hold water.    Left off Brooks' defensive radar is that each sentient human - certainly by the age of 16, and according to Catholics by the age of 7 - at least possesses the capacity for reason and a rudimentary conscience.  The role of conscience  as Ethics professor Cheryl Mendelson has noted ('The Good Life', p. 71) is critical to having a moral compass:

"In the premoral mind.... in place of the individual's capacity to think and act according to conscience - there is mere egoism: the demand or wish, to be allowed to do and have what one wants."

Even a 7 year old arguably has the capacity to know it's wrong when he grabs a candy bar off a store shelf and stashes it into a pocket.   He may not know the details and nuances of his moral choice, but instinctively he knows it was antithetical to societal accepted norms. And indeed, the furtive act amounted to taking something that wasn't his, he just wanted it at that time. Ego over conscience.

In the same respect, when the 14 year -old Donald Trump Jr. in Queens tested home -made switch blades on alley cats, he had to know at some level it was wrong to slice up those animals and leave them to die in agony. (The discovery of Trump's penchant for testing custom-made switch blades on cats was what led his dad Fred to ship him off to a military school in New York.)

Likewise,  Kashuv already had a moral compass and conscience by the time he wrote those racist epithets. His conscience may not have been fully aggregated or formed - but it was there - and he damned well knew right from wrong.   Hence, all the caterwauling now by the conservo crowd is a bit rich, especially in appealing yet again to the tired trope of  'political correctness'. Which has now become a general catch all and escape clause for dodging any moral responsibility .  An ethically grounded citizen appears and critiques Trump for his caging of migrant infants? "Political correctness!" is the knee- jerk response by these dingbats.

Finally, Harvard would have looked inconsistent in its admission rescission standards had it given Kashuv's vicious mischief  a pass while not doing so for the ten previous "bourgeois memes"   miscreants.  Kashuv, if he really had a brain - say to have earned that reported 5.345 grade point average at Parkland (preposterous grade inflation!) - ought to have known the competition to gain the advantage of a place at Harvard was enormous,  Tens of thousands of worthy candidates apply each year and receive rejection slips.

  In the words of two recent NY Times commenters:

"Harvard has the widest talent pool to draw from. Why would it accept a bright student who makes racist comments when they can accept the next equally bright student who doesn't?"

And:

"For every maybe racist kid who gets into Harvard there are thousands of non-racist kids who are dying to go. Harvard simply set an example for teenagers everywhere to clean up their acts and to be aware of how their social media is presenting them to the world. Without reforms like this, social media will take us and our kids all down the swirling toilet of crass behavior, bullying, words that should matter but don't seem to. Kids and adults alike should take this as a lesson in life."

Amidst this milieu and so many other more worthy students trying to gain admittance, Kashuv's best response now is to suck up his rescission and learn from his errors.  Also, cease thumping his chest about his "act of contrition".  Fine, he rendered himself contrite for his reckless and disgusting words, but now there is the piper to be paid.   Learn and move on!  Besides, not gaining entry into an elite school (or the prime one desired) it not the end of a talented person's options or aspirations.  Millions do not graduate from Harvard (or Yale, or Princeton) and still have very successful careers, lives.  Kashuv could as well if he ditched the self-pity and moved on.

Meanwhile, his conservative whiners, enablers, and apologists need to also grow up and rethink their stance.  No, Harvard isn't saying Kashuv "can't grow" or hasn't learned. They are merely saying that vicious words, as well as actions, have consequences - and for Harvard these are taken seriously. Unlike in the rest of  Trump's America.

And yeah, Kashuv did "experience a vicious shooting spree" but let's bear in mind his vile words on Google.doc were dispatched before that event, not after. So he doesn't get to claim it as an excuse, nor should he. 

See also:

Conservatives and the Right

Conservatives Play the Victim as Harvard Pulls Parkland Student’s Acceptance

If We're Depending On An Obtuse Breed Of Millennial Women To Flip The House in November, We Might As Well Pack It In

Millennial "genius" Rachel Funchess brushing her teeth with charcoal tooth powder (WSJ, Aug. 13). If we're depending on young Millennials like this to flip the GOP House in November, we're screwed.


It appears young Millennial women, the type who are least likely to vote in any election, are on to a new kick: brushing their teeth with charcoal powder to "enhance whiteness." As CBS co-anchor Bianna Golodryga said yesterday morning in a segment on the practice: "Well, the joke's on them".    Indeed it is. According to a consumer adviser from the American Dental Association, quoted yesterday in the Wall Street Journal's piece on the craze:

"It may whiten teeth in the short run, but will eventually wear into the dentin."  (The dentin is the next layer below the enamel)

Anyone for ghoulish vampire teeth?  Anyone?  Well, what about the even more ghoulish voting tendencies of the young and undone - who appear to have no remote clue? That is, no more clue about the impact of not voting on their civic health than using an abrasive,  like powdered charcoal,  has on their dental health.

According to a CBSNews -Refinery29 poll reported yesterday morning, a full 70 percent of young women (ca. Millennial age or 18 - 35) are "dissatisfied and angry about the Trump presidency".  Now, normally for such an outraged demographic the action would be clear: vote to get him out, ultimately. But also, in the meantime, check his power  by turning at least one house of congress over to the opposition party.

But what do we find instead from the same poll, when the women were asked if they will actually positively show up to vote? "Only 30 percent said they will definitely vote in November," In other words, though 70 percent are dissatisfied with the Trump presidency, 70 percent don't plan to do a damned thing about it.

Stunning, and as absolutely vacuous  and illogical as using charcoal powder to whiten teeth when it destroys them in the long term. (And believe me, you do not want high dental bills when you're on Medicare, given they're totally uncovered by Uncle Sam!)

As wifey put it when she happened to come in when the segment was on: "What are these young women, stupid?"

When CBS co host Alex Wagner asked the Refinery29 chief content officer Amy Emmerich:

"I don't like this statistic at all! Young women are the least likely to vote in November, Why is that?"

Emmerich replied:  "They are more invested in the experiential, activist movement where they can feel the change. They don't believe their vote matters."

Well, hey geniuses, tell that to the three states Trump won by a razor thin 77,000 votes. That is, barely enough to fill a proper NFL football stadium,  thereby taking the Electoral College margin and the presidency.

As Janice put it, when she heard that: "What do they have,  air for brains? Of course your vote won't matter if you don't get off your butt and actually exercise it."

Ms. Emmerich went on:

"They don't trust the process. They believe it's all about the politics and not about the policy."

Right. So you're going to fix the mal-designed process by not voting? Oh wait, you also believe you'll fix your teeth by using charcoal powder on them....right....

So, according to Emmerich:

"Why would you vote for something you really don't believe in, when you can get out on the street and feel the impact you make?"

Typical solipsism of the young and dumb.  They embrace the transient fresh air in the face and feel the throbbing pulse of activism while marching, hoisting banners and yelling - believing (wrongly) they are making a difference. But forget when the parade or march is over,  that's it. The gusto is gone and no permanent imprint is evident.

 It's a rush like swigging a high caffeine drink then it wanes.

At least the youngest citizens-  the Parkland kids - knew that voting was the core issue and ultimately without it, they'd never make  long term progress. This  was why when they organized their events in March and April they always included registering the attendant young people to VOTE. But these dumb women exposed in the survey think it's all over after you just show up to march. No way Ask David Hogg or Emma Gonzalez of Parkland.

As Bianna Golodryga - another co host put it: "And yet they're so invested in these policies, like health care."

Confirming this is another aspect of the poll of these young women, the issue priorities, showing the following as "very important":

- Healthcare   62 %'

- Civil Rights and equality  55 %

- Equal pay for women   54 %

- Crime and safety - 50 %

So it's incredible these young women believe they will get any of these without voting. Know why the elder population in this country gets more fiscal protection than the young? Because we come out and vote - every time!  70 percent of us vote in general elections, and almost as many in midterms. Because we know it's important. We vote to protect the programs we rely on,  whether Social Security or Medicare. And the Right's extremists know if they try to take those away they will have to face the blowback at the ballot box.

Co-host Vladimir Douthier then asked CBS election specialist Anthony Salvanto:

"What is it about these younger women that they choose not to vote? What reasons do they give?"

Salvanto replied:

"Well part of that is just that as you grow older you start to see how politics affects your life. Or, you put down roots, you buy a house, and have kids so you start to see how policies affect you. We also see that for the young women who are going to vote, the motivation is really high. Their enthusiasm is really high and they believe it matters who controls congress.  Whereas those who aren't going to vote say it doesn't matter who controls congress."

Which effect will be interesting to see when these indifferent youngsters need food stamps or help to pay off their college loans and can't get it because the Repukes in the House (and Senate) have insisted on 20 hours per week of work to get the food stamps, and raised the college loans to 7 percent.

Well, duh. Of course, it does. Something we've learned very painfully since the 2014 midterm election when barely a fraction of the young turned out.  And yet, fully 26 percent of the young women share the belief that party doesn't matter in terms of which controls congress. Clearly these fools haven't been paying attention the past 17 months. Or....maybe they've been too busy marching. Who knows?

But given 70 percent are dissatisfied and angry about the Trump presidency- according to the CBS poll- it beggars the imagination that such a large proportion of them would also not be aware of which party is protecting that presidency they're leery of. Hint- hint: It isn't the Democrats!  As one political specialist put it on 'All In' last night, regarding the GOP: "They are no longer even operating as conservatives. They are no longer a party of fiscal responsibility. They're not a party of family values. They're not a strong on national defense or free market party.  So they've become a party of identity politics and white grievance".

And as Sen. Bernie Sanders put it in a recent piece in The Nation: The GOP are essentially now a party of right wing extremists who primary goal is to protect Trump and advance a radical agenda, as well as line up with white nationalism. (Also evident in the degree to which they suppress the votes of minorities, e.g. African-Americans.)

Would any real red-blooded young female with a grain of common sense then fail to discern the difference between this party of white supremacist -backing, traitor -protecting degenerates and the Dems?  Evidently, the subset of nincompoops exposed in the CBSNews - Refinery 29 survey- who believe it doesn't matter which party controls congress-  meets that deplorable standard.

As Jess McIntosh bluntly put it on the same program:

"You cannot be for a few things, and not white supremacy, and still support the president and this administration."

Which, of course, also means you also can't blind your eyes to the GOP and how they've supported Trump, as well as their history of racism since the "Southern strategy" - after the Civil Rights movement - as McIntosh noted.  Hence, if you see no difference between the parties - as 26 percent of the young women do not - you must de facto be a supporter of racism, white supremacy. Either that, or you are abysmally ignorant and "likely stupid"  - to invoke Janice's parlance.  As stupid as those who brush their teeth with charcoal powder, I asked her. "Absolutely!"

Those 70 percent of young women positive they will not vote in November need to take a page from the Colorado student below - who despite being a recent HS grad - obviously is far wiser.

Why The Parkland Students #Never Again Movement May Founder

Delaney Tarr, a senior at Stoneman Douglas High in Parkland FL, three months ago, warned the NRA backing pols: "We are coming after every single one of you and demanding that you take action, demanding that you make a change!" 

Part of the crowd which showed up for the "March for our lives" in Washington, D.C. two months ago.

No fully conscious citizen can forget how the Parkland #NeverAgain protest movement began with great fanfare three months ago, marking its high point with the "March for our lives" on March 24. The event featured stirring speeches from a number of the students whose Parkland FL school was the scene of the worst ever mass shooting for a high school.  In one of the first speeches, Marjory Stoneman Douglas senior Delaney Tarr told the crowd of the students’ demands, including background checks and a ban on assault weapons.

“When you give us an inch, that bump stocks ban, we will take a mile. We are not here for breadcrumbs, we are here to lead.”


Before her D.C. march appearance, Ms. Tarr appeared a number of times earlier, including on CNN, and MSNBC, warning NRA-backed politicos that "we are coming after you".  She achieved much prominence, as did the other Parkland students  - including Emma Gonzalez, David Hogg, and Cameron Kasky  - based on their poise, knowledge and ability to articulate the anxieties of millions of kids nationwide, trapped in an out of control gun culture. (An estimated 300 million guns are possessed by a minority of U.S. citizens.)

Parkland student Jordan Khayyami, 15, warned: “I think that legislatures should be aware that the next generation of voters is right in front of them so if they don’t want to promote change then we will vote for change.”

The scenes of  hundreds of thousands of activated students was overwhelming to many of the victims of earlier gun violence, including Mark Barden, whose seven-year-old son Daniel was one of the 20 children murdered at Sandy Hook in 2012, Barden told a reporter from the UK Guardian:

“I did not expect this. I’m still astounded,. To me, it looks like our entire nation is finally on board, on the right side of this issue. It’s so inspiring and encouraging and overwhelming, and beautiful to me.”

The students - including speakers from other gun-victimized high schools, e.g. in  D.C., Maryland, Chicago,  also took time to set up voter registration booths, to prepare as many 18-year olds and others eligible to vote this year as possible.

But what has transpired since the last marches in April? Not much, and this bespeaks why the #Never Again movement may now be running out of steam.   This also highlights the bane of too many incipient mass movements that begin with energetic protests but soon expire - especially in the modern era (including "Occupy Wall Street"). The cautionary note being that even the most sensational mass marches and activism are often interpreted in hindsight as merely temporary shows of enthusiasm.  

Indeed, as we discovered in the 1960s, it is extremely difficult to translate march protests into sustained mass movements that can change history.  In fact, for most of American history -  going back to the "Wobblies" in the 1920s and even before - it was understood that movements required months or even years of planning and effort as well as determined commitment. It couldn't simply be a case of rousing the masses to concerted action, then say going off to college and forgetting about them, or assuming they will organize on their own.

This is why starting in the mid 1960s one was often asked to be part of "the movement", which was understood to mean committing your heart, mind and soul to the work at hand and then showing up whenever and wherever bodies were needed. That included not only in march protests like the kids from Parkland put on, but also appearing in Southern diners alongside African American students - say in Birmingham or Jackson, Mississippi in the fall of 1964, or on buses as "Freedom Riders".

I learned early at Loyola, in September, 1964, at a rapidly- called meeting by the  Loyola chapter of the Congress for Racial Equality (CORE) that I was not cut out for such commitment.  I came out of curiosity to the meeting, held at nearby Tulane - with about 35 other Loyola freshmen - expecting to learn ways we could contribute. But when we were told we needed to board buses that weekend to go to Montgomery, Alabama as "Freedom Riders", many of us balked. For me it was a matter that I'd just commenced my college first year and was on scholarship - which I didn't want to risk. For others, it was that they simply didn't feel the amount of time  needed was feasible.  For others, it was a fear of actual physical harm since we'd already read of Freedom Riders being beaten and buses set on fire.

As it turned out, those who joined the CORE campaign were not seen at Loyola from the next year. The word was most had either dropped out to join the movement full time, or had been injured, or flunked out and left.   This brings us to the #Never Again movement.

Recall how two beat writers (Arian Campo-Flores and Nicole Hong)  on the staff of The Wall Street Journal wrote a stirring article ('From Shooting To Gun Control Movement')  of why these Stoneman  Douglas students were different, noting:

"The students at Stoneman aren't like those who witnessed previous mass shootings at Columbine High School in 1999, or Virginia Tech in 2007. They are digital natives, at one with the language and power of smartphones and social media.  That is one reason why the movement they started, dubbed #NeverAgain, has become a nationwide phenomenon in barely a few days, and shows signs of becoming the kind of campaign success that a company or politician can only dream of."

This and similar media pieces naturally spawned vast expectations.  It prompted the expectation - especially after a number of states had enacted new gun laws in response  - that this was just the beginning. But one little element appeared to escape the attention of the movement optimists: Most of the Parkland activists were Stoneman Douglas seniors who were now in the midst of Advanced Placement preparations (the AP Calculus test, for example,  was last Tuesday a.m.) and are going off to college. How then can the needed motivation and commitment be sustained if one must take on intense, new obligations? As many of us learned in our first year at Loyola, it can't. You can't honor two masters at the same time. If you honor your education with first priority you have to let full commitment to the movement go.

This is what Parkland's ambitious student activists are now learning and the rest of us as well.  That is, just dispatching social media texts  from an office and organizing to show up on the streets and in schools,  does not necessarily presage a movement or earn you enduring credit.  While jump starting a movement is easy, making it stick is a helluva lot more difficult - especially to translate into concrete change.

Make no mistake the latter has been achieved by the Parkland kids and victims, in terms of new state gun laws (see previous post), but much more could still be done - especially mustering the numbers to get 18 years registered to vote for the mid terms. Who will see this through?  What is possible, of course, it that the younger Stoneman Douglas students, e.g. 15 year old Jordan Khayyami and 16 year old Morgan Williams, can now take up the banner from their older peers.

If they don't, or can't - say because of time constraints or academic priorities - then the #Never Again movement that held so much promise three months ago, may now founder on the rocks of lower energy and inattention.

See also:

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/cesar-chelala/77791/a-student-s-message-to-politicians-about-the-florida-massacre

Malaysia Proposes Crackdown On Fake News - What About In The U.S.?

As reported in The Wall Street Journal ('Malaysia Aims At Fake News', March 27, p. A6),  the country of Malaysia is now prepared to treat the problem of fake news as a serious issue, as opposed to a frivolous lark by amiable know- nothings. As the piece notes:

"Malaysia's government has proposed a new law that would make spreading fake news a crime punishable by up to 10 years in prison"

Adding:

"The proposed law defines fake news as 'any news, information, data or reports which are wholly or partly false, whether in the form of features, visuals or audio recordings or in any other form capable of suggesting false words or ideas."

And further (ibid.):

"The draft of the proposed law allows a prison term of up to 10 years or a fine of up to 500,000 ringgit ($127, 715 U.S.) or both. Anyone failing to remove allegedly false material faces a further fine of up to 100,000 ringgit, and up to 3,000 ringgit for each day the material remains available"

Noting the bill must still be approved by both houses of parliament and is expected to become law before Malaysia's next national elections, which must be held in August and are expected to be announced in the next few weeks.

On perusing the details of the proposed law it is difficult not to see that it could well be of use in the toxic fake news environment of the U.S. as well - under which cover of "protected first amendment" much vitriol and hate is spewed which is outright fake.  In terms of  "visuals" one can cite the image (which I will not dignify by reproducing here) a degenerate has created of Parkland student  Emma Gonzalez appearing to rip up the U.S. Constitution. Given how inflammatory the image is and that it is targeted at a victim of the Parkland massacre, "free speech" doesn't cut the mustard. Hence,  I can easily see this is where the Malaysian law could be applied and the perp given the full fine and 10 years to think about it.

First amendment purists and toads using it to cover their hate screeds will bitch but as I've already written before the first amendment is no more an absolute than the second. Both have to have limits imposed to mean anything if those who act under them aren't prepared to act responsibly. Indeed, in a guest blog post (Sept. 12, 2017) , philosopher George Lakeoff has already written on why hate speech (which is what the fake image of Emma amounts to) is not free speech, noting:

"Freedom in a free society is supposed to be for all. Therefore, freedom rules out imposing on the freedom of others. You are free to walk down the street, but not to keep others from doing so. The imposition on the freedom of others can come in overt, immediate physical form — thugs coming to attack with weapons. Violence may be a kind of expression, but it certainly is not “free speech.”

Like violence, hate speech can also be a physical imposition on the freedom of others. That is because language has a psychological effect imposed physically — on the neural system, with long-term crippling effects.

Here is the reason:

All thought is carried out by neural circuitry — it does not float in air. Language neurally activates thought. Language can thus change brains, both for the better and the worse. Hate speech changes the brains of those hated for the worse, creating toxic stress, fear and distrust — all physical, all in one’s neural circuitry active every day. This internal harm can be even more severe than an attack with a fist. It imposes on the freedom to think and therefore act free of fear, threats, and distrust. It imposes on one’s ability to think and act like a fully free citizen for a long time. 

That’s why hate speech imposes on the freedom of those targeted by the hate. Since being free in a free society requires not imposing on the freedom of others, hate speech does not fall under the category of free speech."

Under this standard, other examples of fake news that engenders hatred, e.g. photo-shopped images of the Parkland students as Nazis, would also not be protected. They'd all qualify as serious violations under an analog to the Malaysian law.   Amanda Marcotte, in her salon.com piece ('Conservatives Can't Stop Themselves From Bashing Parkland Students') has pointed out that:

"Alex Jones has equated the Parkland survivors to Nazis, suggesting they intend to murder gun owners. "Alt-right" sites are spreading fake images of the kids and spreading conspiracy theories, including claiming that the students are actors or that no massacre happened at all. "

Since Alex Jones would have obviously violated  the proposed Malaysian law - and again, under Lakeoff's principles he's not manifesting any "free speech"-   then he also merits the "book"  being thrown at him. Similarly for the Alt-Right troglodytes who incite hate and create conspiracy theories that the massacre never happened or that the students are crisis actors. Of course, if I were handling the sanctions I would give the perps 3 days to take down all their bullshit before bringing the hammer of the law. Ditto for imps who post images ("visuals")  showing Hitler and David Hogg in photos as if the latter is supported by the former. The excuse that the images are "satire" wouldn't cut it, and anyone with a grain of sense and an IQ over room temperature would know that. (In a similar way, anyone in Germany who uses cartoon, images, text or other fare to deny the Holocaust faces years in prison and huge fines.)

Again, free speech is not absolute or open ended, it implies limits. So does the 2nd amendment have limits, i.e. owning military grade weapons is NOT a right! (Again, MD and other states have banned such weapons without having had the laws overturned.)

The WSJ piece notes that the government didn't just spawn its proposed legislation on its own but  "sought the views of the Asia Internet Coalition when drafting the bill."  This group comprises companies such as  Facebook Inc.,  and Alphabet Inc's Google.  Incredibly, the group has also insisted "the prescriptive legislation wouldn't be an effective way to address the spread of false news."

This echoes many op-eds I have seen in the press recently (TIME, Financial Times, WaPo,  NY Times etc.) that users need to take their own responsibility for what they see and hear.  But how far does that go? Assume there is a massive threat of a storm, or hurricane, bearing down on the Gulf coast and people are advised to take cover and precautions against loss of life and property. But a fake news station, WFAK,  insists it's all baloney and merely a government ploy - a "nothing burger".  This leaves thousands to believe the fakery and hundreds perish. 

Or imagine some whacked out nut who sees Jones' lies about the Parkland kids  being "Nazis" and taking his guns, then acting out,  killing one or more of them. WHO has to pay? Certainly not the students if they ignore Jone's website. But he must pay for creating the malicious content that brought the harm. This ought to be a no brainer.

 Isn't there a need  -even in an alleged "free society" -  to protect vulnerable people,  say from those who'd undermine the polity and a given community's security using lies? This, of course, also applies to the venomous lies heaped on the Parkland student survivors like David Hogg and Emma Gonzalez - now rendered potential targets for crazies. This on account of the vicious lies spread by Alex Jones and others.

Frankly, I don't buy the conglomerate's claim that "false information is a highly complex issue" -  no it is not.  It is a very basic and simple issue but requires people read widely and don't tune into the liars and fake news disseminators. It also requires we impose restrictions on web sites and sources - like Alex Jones' site- if they are given to spreading malignant, hate-filled lies with the potential for harm to the targets.  ("Pizzagate" also qualifies under that rubric. After all, a nut armed with a semi-automatic rifle did barge into a D.C. pizza parlor looking to kill one or more people after reading the lie. Fortunately, no one was harmed that time.)

Fake news and information is only "complex" if we make it so, which then provides an expedient loophole for those who create it to operate with no restrictions and with impunity.  But given the toxic effect fake news is having on our nation, subtly and not so subtly ripping its remaining strands of civility asunder, we no longer have the luxury to ignore it or treat it frivolously. Or blithely regard it as a simple "exercise of free speech" - which it is not, as Lakeoff noted.

It is time to at least consider a Malaysian type of law.  And the first person in the dock ought to be Dotard Trump.

First Clue, Sherlock: Do Not Use Hate Attacks On The Parkland FL Survivors

Mainer Leslie Gibson, learned the hard way to keep his yap shut about insulting shooting survivors.

Most brane space readers would likely never have heard of Leslie Gibson,  a former  Reepo lawmaker from Maine's hinterlands who looks like a human cloning experiment (using a Moose's uterus)  gone bad.

Gibson has been under fire the past week for comments he made online about two teens (David Hogg and Emma Gonzalez)  who survived the Valentine’s Day massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School.   What provoked this inbred (or cloned, using a female Moose) ignoramus we can't say.  It's always difficult to tell with inbreds, partial Moose offspring, or knuckle draggers. But I suspect it was Ms. Gonzalez'  buzz cut hairdo and Mr. Hogg's articulate activism on behalf of controlling AR-15s and other military style weapons.

Whatever the trigger, this since rapidly retired asswipe from Maine's state house  can now repent at leisure.  Well, maybe so long as he keeps his twitter feed private.  Evidently the poor little misfit has been taking savage blowback on twitter since calling  Emma Gonzalez a "skinhead lesbian,"  and David Hogg "a bald faced liar."  (Ms. Gonzalez has since clarified she  accepts a bisexual sexual identity. In either case, lesbian or bisexual, it is of the most sordid hate to take her to task for her sexual choices. )

Unable to withstand the backlash he's  taken his Twitter feed private. Apparently, he's been miffed and appalled at all the mean things people were posting there: But what did this former lawmaker expect when you - as an elected pol - assume the role of a common bully and vilify kids whose school just endured the worst high school shooting in U.S. history?  Did he really seriously think he'd garner plaudits and kudos? Especially after going after a teen student's physical appearance.

How badly did this asshole blow himself up? Gibson had been cruising toward an unopposed election in the  particular Maine district, which included two hamlets,  Sabattus and Greene. But his comments stirred both a moderate Reep (Thomas Martin Jr.) and Democrat  Eryn Gilchrist to join the contest. As Martin put it:

“There’s enough division in our state and country already without ramping up the rhetoric,"

Yeppers, and Trump, aka Dotard or Hitler Jr. provides much of it.

So, "hoping to restore some peace and quiet in our lives,", Gibson  has abandoned his effort to win a state House seat. I'm sure a lot of Mainers are keenly disappointed but they are more than likely of the "basket of deplorables"  kind that would agree with his slander about Emma Gonzalez.

Among the last comments from this mutant - or human cloned via a Moose- was this offered to the Maine media:

“I am not walking away with my head hung low. I am walking away with my head held high,” 

Whatever. The point is you are walking away with your (Moose?) tail between your legs.

Interestingly, Gibson is said to have made the decision after talking with his family, praying and discussing it with friends and colleagues, including Thomas Martin Jr. of Greene, the GOP contender who entered the 57th District race Thursday.

“It’s the best thing for everybody,” Gibson said. Well it certainly may be\for Martin with whom he "talked it over".  ("Uh yeah, Mr. Moose face, I totally agree it is best to bow out now. Oh, and take your prayers and Moose face with ya!")

As for "prayers' - mayhap Mr. Moose face, errr... Gibson, might still be in the thick of it had he prayed BEFORE he opened up on the two teen Parkland FL survivors. Yuh think?

Gibson has since "apologized" for his comment, but he'll also have to make another one when his Democratic opponent grabs his seat in the Maine House. .

WSJ Piece Easily Explains The Confidence, Media Savvy Of Parkland FL Students

"We are coming after every single one of you and demanding that you take action, demanding that you make a change!"  The words of Delaney Tarr, a senior at Stoneman Douglas High in Parkland FL.


Let's admit that the Right's screechy knotheads  - twisting themselves into knots at the media savvy of the Parkland  FL students,  still convinced they're all "paid crisis actors"-  need to get a life, or learn more.  I am convinced their cockeyed "theories"  arise because: a) they don't know enough about what they're criticizing, and b) they too often sell fellow humans too short, or at least give them no more credit for brains or talent than they themselves possess.  They pretty well did the same thing a year or so ago when protesters appeared at numerous town halls in Red states to protest the GOP plan to overturn Obamacare  The Right's troglodytes blamed the  massive assemblies and outspokenness on "paid protesters."   As if anyone seriously had to be  paid to protest in Trump's Amerikka.

So it was really no surprise to see these clueless yahoos come out again to accuse the articulate students of Stoneman Douglas, including the brilliant Delaney Tarr (who really IS Mensa member material), David Hogg, Cameron Kasky and Emma Gonzalez (another Mensan in waiting) of being paid crisis actors.  Collectively the posts questioned the honesty and credibility of the grieving students as they spoke out against gun violence.  For example, online media sites including Gateway Pundit, Reddit, 4chan and YouTube swelled with false ­allegations that Hogg was ­secretly a “crisis actor” playing the part of a grieving student in local and national television news reports.

Another troll  (Kelley Campbell) responded sarcastically to one of Delaney's appearances, bellowing: "FAKE NEWS!  You can't just walk into a building with $130 and walk out with an AR -15".   But if this turd had thought a bit more, assuming he had the brains, he'd have perceived that Delaney couldn't possibly have been an actor.  This is because any professional actor (actress) would not have made the error of citing the too low cost of an AR purchase as $130, when it actually runs upward of $1200.  My point? It showed these kids really are....just kids...they have media savvy but when they're passionately speaking out their hearts tend to lead their heads and  they don't always have all the friggin' facts in tow. Give 'em a break, for god's sake.

Same thing with senior Sam Zeif when - in the midst of a passionate speech at the Trump "listen in"  last week  -  misspoke, i.e. saying that the Australians changed their gun laws after a "school shooting" in 1999. It was after a tourist massacre in 1996.  But again, these are errors of fact  a kid would make, but I'd argue not a professional "crisis actor" who'd have his or her script well prepared and double checked.  (Of course, there is a species of hyper cynical skeptic who'd assert a kid woud deliberately include erroneous claims ,...to present themselves as an unknowing....student.)

But anyway, we can thank two beat writers (Arian Campo-Flores and Nicole Hong)  on the staff of The Wall Street Journal for scuttling these stupid memes with a piece that gives a prosaic account ('From Shooting To Gun Control Movement')  of why these Stoneman  Douglas students are so good in their media exchanges.   As we learn from the piece- and this ought to be required reading for all the loopy naysayers at Reddit, 4chan, Gateway Pundit and other blogs:

"The students at Stoneman aren't like those who witnessed previous mass shootings at Columbine High School in 1999, or Virginia Tech in 2007. They are digital natives, at one with the language and power of smartphones and social media.  That is one reason why the movement they started, dubbed #NeverAgain, has become a nationwide phenomenon in barely a few days, and shows signs of becoming the kind of campaign success that a company or politician can only dream of."

 Adding:

"In particular they have used Twitter to build a grass-roots network of activity leading to school walkouts around the country by students protesting violence."

The kids know no fear, i.e. they are also "tweeting directly at Donald Trump".  You can also thank the Stoneman Douglas kids for mounting a successful boycott social media campaign - under the hashtag #BoycottNRA - for already getting 17 companies to no longer honor NRA member discounts. These include:  United Airlines, Delta, Best  Western Hotels,  and assorted car rentals (Hertz, Avis), MetLife as well as computer security company Symantec.(WSJ, Feb. 23-24, p. B4) 

 As the piece put it, companies "are reacting to the social media pressure ....energized by the emotional calls for gun control from the survivors of the shooting rampage at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Florida."

And why not? If Diaper Donnie Dotard can tweet profusely with so much balderdash content and stir up division and upheaval in our nation, why can't intelligent kids create their own social media firestorms? Including slapping the imp down and getting companies to abandon the NRA.

Another key aspect showing these are not professional actors as the Right's trolls seem to think:

"The messages are expressed in genuine teenage voices   alternating between lighthearted selfies and posts about how they are coping with the trauma."

Even more impressive, in four days these kids have raised $2.2 million in an online fundraiser for a rally next month (March 24th).  Much of this action was mounted by the students themselves meeting at one of their homes with personal computers, smartphones etc. at the ready. `

What makes these Stoneman Douglas kids so damned smart? Delaney Tarr explained it in a nutshell in one answer to a VOX interview (see link at bottom):

"So many of us are in politics clubs. So many of us are in AP government. We dedicate ourselves to this. We dedicate ourselves to learning about this. So we are in a place where we are lucky enough to know what to say, to know what to talk about, and to know what changes need to be made."

So - to the consternation of the Right's trolls - it's not like any of these youngsters need coaching from us liberals. They already have the academic and other wherewithal to succeed on their own  - and the social media aptitude to organize huge marches (like on Mar 24th) as well as to get large companies to boycott the NRA.

Still, their optimism and actions have opened up even darker forces on the net to pump in more fake news than ever. As reported in The Sunday Denver Post ('Incidents Show Dark Online Battle', p. 10A):, trolls have now taken to using software tools to create Twitter posts and a phony Miami Herald story  - including copying the paper's font and masthead - to scare the bejeezus out of already fretful citizens.

In one incident the software was used to create two fake twitter posts - from a Miami Herald reporter (Alex Harris) asking "Where are the photos of the dead bodies?" Again hearkening back to the Sandy Hook episode, in which  Reich trolls deemed "no one really died", the victims were just actors playing a role in a gov't false flag operation..

In the second incident, a full Herald story was created under the byline of Herald columnist Monique O. Madan, claiming that a "Miami-Dade middle school faced threats of potentially catastrophic events on upcoming dates."- indicating a new mass shooting was imminent.  Screenshots of the fake story were then passed along Twitter and Snapchat.

Aminda Marques, executive Herald reporter quoted in the piece, said:

"This is hampering our ability to cover this terrible story in our own backyard because we're having to deal with the backlash"

But WHY is there a backlash to genuine  news accounts of human tragedy on the scale of this school massacre? What manner of human swine or reptile resorts to such perfidy? Author Susan Jacoby has provided many answers in her book, 'The Age Of American Unreason In A Culture of Lies',  forcefully arguing that too many are responsible for their own ignorance  and have also fostered - by their anti-intellectual attitudes and bias ignorance at the highest levels of government. In other words the ascension to power of a dangerous, degenerate ignoramus like Trump reflects on that segment of the electorate responsible.  Much of this due to "junk thought" that makes no effort to separate fact from opinion or deliberately faked news such as circulated by trolls that generated the  mock Miami Herald stories.

Yes, the trolls and fake news generators definitely merit a measure of blame for attempting to distract and mislead people. But, citizens also share part of the blame if they lack the critical thinking skills to separate trash from truth and reach a stage (as the Post article describes) where "they are unsure what to believe.". That development of critical thinking - and specifically a "nose"  for truth - necessitates reading widely and critically,  from diverse sources - especially to cross check stories purported to be true but which are fake to the core.

To see the transcript of a recent interview with Delaney Tarr go to:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/2/20/17031050/florida-shooting-parkland-advocacy-gun-control-delaney-tarr


See also:


http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/robert-reich/77915/the-moral-movement-against-violence

And:


http://www.smirkingchimp.com/thread/camillo-mac-bica/77918/i-am-a-teacher-not-an-instrument-of-violence