TheShadowLord
Member
someone here tried to make it look like it was all staged up.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
The speech that sparked a revolution.
- Thread starter Nintendo Switch
- Start date
burnside13
Member
I can sort of see where the sceptics are coming from. It seems clear to me that this speech is loaded with professionally written rhetoric and cited statistics. So in some ways you can claim this is scripted from somewhere.
But I cannot understand where the cynicism or in some cases plain hatred is coming from. What she is saying is coming from a true place, her emotion is traumatic. Her points (scripted or not) are all entirely valid. And the best part. USAs NRA is a national shame and a movement against that smear on human values/dignity - condemnation should be supported by everyone
But I cannot understand where the cynicism or in some cases plain hatred is coming from. What she is saying is coming from a true place, her emotion is traumatic. Her points (scripted or not) are all entirely valid. And the best part. USAs NRA is a national shame and a movement against that smear on human values/dignity - condemnation should be supported by everyone
Last edited:
rokkerkory
Member
Man just saw video quoting the WP analysis that since 1999 (Columbine), 150,000 students in more than 170 schools have experienced some kind of shooting on their campus. 
((
((
Corrik
Member
Who cares. He is entitled to his opinion. Show him why to think otherwise if you think he is wrong.
TheShadowLord
Member
I never said he was or was not wrong. All I did was answer another guys question.
Qwell
Member
Little early to call it a revolution I think, I'm very interested to see how the midterms turn out, I think the Dems are going to be in a for a big wake up call after them, but we shall see. In regards to this particular speech and the current gun control talk. I'm sorry for what happened at the school and what these kids had to go through, but I don't really value the emotional speech of a teenager over historical evidence. Not to mention I don't really see the use in gun control measures unless we have real evidence to back it up. Here is what we know based within the US (again I don't really care to compare what happens in other countries, as much as people say we are the same, there are complex differences between us and say Australia or Britain).
- Mass school shootings are a product of the last 20-30 years
- prior to any of these we had literal shooting clubs in school and you never witnessed these kinds of shootings
- I can't think of any legislation outside of outright banning all guns that would have prevented any of these mass school shootings
- in this particular shooting the FBI knew of the shooter, and the police had 39 interactions, if they would have arrested him once he should have been put into the NICS system had not allowed to buy the gun
- majority of mass shootings like this the person is NOT a criminal prior to the shooting, so without precogs like minority report we can't just take peoples gun away (unless again you are advocating for full gun ban)
As much as I hear about "common sense gun control" I would love to see some actual honest to goodness put down on paper rules for these "common sense" measures, but the few I have seen actually spelled out are usually already in place, or impractical to actually implement. Again, we have historical evidence of these shootings, so if there is a common sense measure, simply put it to the test ... if you apply that measure to a previous shooting would it have actually prevented it? If it would not have prevented the shooting then why bother? And again we know for this particular one all the flags were raised, all the authorities were notified and they all dropped the ball, so just adding more laws isn't going to magically plug that gigantic flaw that just occurred.
- Mass school shootings are a product of the last 20-30 years
- prior to any of these we had literal shooting clubs in school and you never witnessed these kinds of shootings
- I can't think of any legislation outside of outright banning all guns that would have prevented any of these mass school shootings
- in this particular shooting the FBI knew of the shooter, and the police had 39 interactions, if they would have arrested him once he should have been put into the NICS system had not allowed to buy the gun
- majority of mass shootings like this the person is NOT a criminal prior to the shooting, so without precogs like minority report we can't just take peoples gun away (unless again you are advocating for full gun ban)
As much as I hear about "common sense gun control" I would love to see some actual honest to goodness put down on paper rules for these "common sense" measures, but the few I have seen actually spelled out are usually already in place, or impractical to actually implement. Again, we have historical evidence of these shootings, so if there is a common sense measure, simply put it to the test ... if you apply that measure to a previous shooting would it have actually prevented it? If it would not have prevented the shooting then why bother? And again we know for this particular one all the flags were raised, all the authorities were notified and they all dropped the ball, so just adding more laws isn't going to magically plug that gigantic flaw that just occurred.
Corrik
Member
And, I was just stating why that answer was not good enough.
Last edited:
BraveOne
Member
You are either being obtuse on purpose or you dont understand how replies to questions work
perryfarrell
Member
You should care. But it's not always worth your time to prove people wrong. Time has value.
If you had a prove every single conspiracy nut wrong (and those nuts are not exactly known for being RECEPTIVE to reason), then you'd be posting walls of text until the cows come home, with zero result. I mean, just look at the 9/11 truther movement. Still going strong, despite huge efforts by reasonable people to talk them out of their confusion.
But it's getting pretty clear that NeoGAF has become a second home to some type of strain from the KotakuInAction/Gamer's Gate. I mean, in the first page of every thread, there are these posts that just make you go 'yuck'.
Nintendo Switch
Banned
To the people asking for proactive effective solutions that would prevent future shootings, Brian Mast is a GOP Congressman, NRA member and Afghanistan war veteran that lost both his legs to an IED. He just wrote an excellent op ed full of suggestions to reduce mass shootings.
His op ed is all over the internet and I encourage you to read it below:
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/02/...pons-ban.html?referer=https://www.google.com/
His op ed is all over the internet and I encourage you to read it below:
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/02/...pons-ban.html?referer=https://www.google.com/
Last edited:
Corrik
Member
So, one person said something you didn't like and the whole site is home to "KotakuInAction/Gamer's Gate"? (whatever that even means).
It doesn't matter if people post stuff that is yuck or cringeworthy to you. They are entitled to their opinion. It doesn't mean they are right or that you are right. This is what real life is. A bunch of people's opinions no matter how absurd or logical.
You don't have to listen or respond to those opinions. That person should be allowed to have them though.
He is not insulting anyone by says it feels unauthentic to him. That's what he thinks. Seems a bit silly to me that someone right after their school is shot up was deciding to not say how they really feel and is just pedaling propaganda, but hey if that's what the person wants to think!
Nothing wrong with arguing sides. The person said why did we go to a calm and polite thread to an aggressive and impolite thread (added insinuation). The guy responded because the guy had an opinion it was unauthentic.
That is not a good enough answer.
Rudelord
Member
'The exact definition of assault weapon will need to be determined. But we should all be able to agree that the civilian version of the very deadly weapon that the Army issued to me should certainly qualify.'
Yeah no. An AR15 is no more deadly than any other firearm civilians can obtain, it's simply one of the cheaper options depending on where/what you buy.
'Assault weapons' are not semi-autos. Stop this.
generaldane
Member
To the people saying they are inauthentic, what would he an authentic response to having your school shot up by a crazy person?
Nintendo Switch
Banned
Bullshit. These rifles allow for accurate shooting of crowds from 100 yards away and can shoot off 40 bullets with upgraded magazines before having to reload.
But more importantly in challenging your point, assault rifles are far deadlier than handguns as well documented by radiology scans of bullet wounds here...
https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/553937/
Last edited:
Rudelord
Member
More people in the US die from handguns than rifles. Unless the average civilian is walking around in full kevlar vests 24/7, getting shot with a pistol caliber round 9mm or above is going to do serious damage to soft tissue just like a rifle caliber round is. Unless you get immediate treatment from either you're liable to bleed out.
Virginia Tech? Handguns. FT. Lauderdale airport? Handgun. Charleston church? Handgun. Colombine? Handguns and shotguns.
Banning '''''assault weapons''''' does nothing but make you feel good. It doesn't solve the root problem.
As an aside, you can't buy an assault rifle without paying some heavy fees through the ATF. An assault rifle being one that can shoot fully automatically. Which is not what an AR15 is.
Last edited:
Kotzen Ducha
Banned
I've already been labeled simply for thinking these kids are inauthentic.
But I'm not a conservative. I'm in favor of gun control measures, extensive background checks, and closing loopholes.
My voting record is liberal as fuck.
But listen, I don't want my views delivered via ruse.
If my gut is right and that these politically active kids were assembled and used by the DNC it would be disastrous to the cause.
And it's not beyond the scope of possibility given what the DNC has done in the recent past.
Let things be authentic. I haven't seen a single teenager in any shooting react like the Hogg Group has reacted.
Not in speech, message, or demeanor. None have gotten this kind of airtime. It seems as fishy as anything.
But I'm not a conservative. I'm in favor of gun control measures, extensive background checks, and closing loopholes.
My voting record is liberal as fuck.
But listen, I don't want my views delivered via ruse.
If my gut is right and that these politically active kids were assembled and used by the DNC it would be disastrous to the cause.
And it's not beyond the scope of possibility given what the DNC has done in the recent past.
Let things be authentic. I haven't seen a single teenager in any shooting react like the Hogg Group has reacted.
Not in speech, message, or demeanor. None have gotten this kind of airtime. It seems as fishy as anything.
Moderator 10
Banned
There's a lot of things the Moderation Team and Neogaf as a community needs to improve on. An honest attempt to achieve this is been made. Criticsm is taken to heart... at least the constructive one.
i don't think your insults were warranted in this case. Upon entering a discussion forum you must be prepared to stumble upon opinions or views you don't agree with, some well founded others not so much, just like in real life. So we should try to tackle these views in a reasonable and civil manner and let facts speak for themselves.
Is not about censoring the things we don't want to hear but to confront and debate them in pursue of the truth.
The problem is that its hard to disprove ‘feelings’. Like kotzen ducha claims ita fake because of his ‘guts’ while we can all throw facts at the computer screen thats a whole other category that can’t beat feelings. Ie, flat earthers, holocaust denials, people who put pineapples in pizza.
Kotzen Ducha
Banned
What facts close the door to the possibility that these kids are being used to promote an agenda?
Never have I seen a shooting reaction be so glossy and rehearsed. It feels inauthentic and I'm open to evidence either way. The mainstream media isn't exactly trustworthy.
InterMusketeer
Member
Ehh, the speech itself doesn't really speak to me, but if it achieves some kind of gun control that'd be good.
Chairman Tickles
Banned
Using extreme incidents to promote social change usually leads to application of extreme ideas that may lead to unintended consequences long term.
I am always very leery when it comes to the marriage of tragedy and politics. 9/11 teaches us what that can lead to; specifically how to make a bad situation 10x worse.
At present, there exists no practical method to separate tens of millions of Americans from their guns; campaigning in this way is usually preaching to the choir, not the opposition. Hence the sudden jump in sales of assault rifles in Florida after this incident.
Similarly, trying to force the issue would lead to insurrection.
Rule 1 of a political crisis situation; Preach smarter, not harder. Incentivize, don't demonize.
I am always very leery when it comes to the marriage of tragedy and politics. 9/11 teaches us what that can lead to; specifically how to make a bad situation 10x worse.
At present, there exists no practical method to separate tens of millions of Americans from their guns; campaigning in this way is usually preaching to the choir, not the opposition. Hence the sudden jump in sales of assault rifles in Florida after this incident.
Similarly, trying to force the issue would lead to insurrection.
Rule 1 of a political crisis situation; Preach smarter, not harder. Incentivize, don't demonize.
Last edited:
It just seems like a ridiculous point. Lets say the DNC got a bunch of so called ‘crisis actors’ to uplay this tragedy (which imho is kinda out there, but Ill play). At the end of the day it doesn’t change the basic facts and issues of the tragedy unless you don’t believe it happened. At a certain point than nothing is real; Trump stole the election, all cop shootings are fake, Finland is an imaginary country made up to sell cheese, etc. There’s a big difference between news bias (which had gotten worse but has always existed) and outright ‘facts are fake/facts don’t matter, here are my feelings’
Kotzen Ducha
Banned
No doubt it doesn't change the event, but it can hurt the recourse.
If you, like me, want gun laws reformed then you don't want one of the primary mechanisms of the attempted movement to be a fabrication or some additional collusion between the corrupt DNC and the corrupt MSM.
Authenticity is key and not in a "find better actors" kind of way. I want the closet free of skeletons so nothing can blow back on a movement.
If you, like me, want gun laws reformed then you don't want one of the primary mechanisms of the attempted movement to be a fabrication or some additional collusion between the corrupt DNC and the corrupt MSM.
Authenticity is key and not in a "find better actors" kind of way. I want the closet free of skeletons so nothing can blow back on a movement.
Coffe Time
Member
High school kids have the capability to be really well articulate and clear. Not all of them are unintelligible, awkward idiots. It could also sound rehearsed, because the girl had rehearsed it before hand? Maybe you got used to Trumps on the fly form of speaking.
Kotzen Ducha
Banned
Another label. I'm now a Trump supporter too.
Anything else y'all want to put on me?
Anything else y'all want to put on me?
D
Deleted member 12837
Unconfirmed Member
That's what you got out of "Maybe you got used to Trumps on the fly form of speaking"?
Are only Trump supporters privy to Trump's televised speeches or something?
BraveOne
Member
You are spreading fake news because you have a feeling , I’ll ask you again show me the proof , and not some meme off the_donald subreddit , which goes to show how far down the rabbit hole you are if that is the type of web page you think holds any truth. You are intitled to your misinformed full of shit thinking that holds zero evidence, but you will be called out on it so you better be prepared to back it up with facts or you just look like an alt-right hyper troll who’s only gain is being disingenuous to piss people off
I get what you are saying , but you need to have a line where something is ridiculous say without any proof or evidence, and you need to reconsider what counts as a trustworthy source we do it to Dailymail we should for The_donald Whitch has always had a history of spreading fake news and lies. You can’t just post crap like that and say you think children who witnessed their friends be murdered are frauds , that’s a crazy allegation that needs proof.
Last edited:
Please keep talking like this. Please show the world how monstrous you are. I want your side to be represented EXACTLY like this.
This post is monstrous. Absolutely monstrous.
What’s especially sad is that you have never interacted with articulate and thoughtful young people, so this speech sounds foreign to you.
God damn...it’s fucking depressing to think that someone can be so broken, so cynical, so provincial that you can’t recognize moving sincerity when you see it.
I see children like this all the time. These are what the kids of successful, loving parents look like. These are the children you get when they are raised with compassion and reason.
This post is monstrous. Absolutely monstrous.
What’s especially sad is that you have never interacted with articulate and thoughtful young people, so this speech sounds foreign to you.
God damn...it’s fucking depressing to think that someone can be so broken, so cynical, so provincial that you can’t recognize moving sincerity when you see it.
I see children like this all the time. These are what the kids of successful, loving parents look like. These are the children you get when they are raised with compassion and reason.
Last edited:
Kotzen Ducha
Banned
What is my side?
BraveOne
Member
Kotzen Ducha
Banned
BraveOne
Member
Who post and supports Alt-Right material and subscribes to their thinking
Nintendo Switch
Banned
No one cares what you choose to call yourself. They are specifically addressing the absolutely idiotic claim that you made in this thread that these kids are somehow not authentic.
SoulUnison
Banned
Yeah, clearly her feelings took over.
Like her feelings of safety being shattered by having 17 of her peers murdered around her on a seemingly normal school day.
We're not allowed to talk about gun control, we're not allowed to research gun violence, we're not allowed to talk about guns at all if there's been a recent mass shooting which means we can never talk about guns because mass shooting are constant, and apparently we can't even be passionate and emotional about pretty much the worst experience a person can have in a place that supposed to be about nurturing and safety.
This is a girl who saw her friends and classmates executed and your stance is basically "How dare she have a logical and human response to unbelievable trauma and tragedy."
You're the one who's being blinded by feelings over facts - this shooting happened, just like the hundreds before it, but you hate the idea of someone with different politics than you being vindicated by events more than you hate that the event is happening.
You think if she spent some time at a gun range that'd change the fact that her school was shot up? Like she'd just go "Wow, that sure was cool, that's worth almost being murdered in cold blood!"
Why does she need to talk to gun owners when she's already been almost murdered by one? No matter how many decent-seeming, law-abiding gun owners she speaks with it doesn't change the fact that someone with a gun turned it on her school.
Like if she just talks to enough gun enthusiast she'll just sort of forget that a gun enthusiast is what tried to end her? That a gun enthusiast pops up seemingly every week doing this same thing somewhere in the country?
You're being way more political than she is, trying to drag party politics (and gender politics, what the fuck?) into a bunch of children being murdered by another child.
She's giving an appropriate, understandable response to almost being murdered and you're trying to ridicule and silence her because you can't stand that reality seems to be on her side.
Who was she even yelling at? How about people like you whose response to her almost being shot in the face is "That's the price of freedom!"
Seriously, though, what the fuck is that is "don't want to assume her gender" crack, anyway? Like, man, talk about going out of your way to be an asshole.
"It doesn't turn them into fully-automatic weapons it just allows them to operate with the same characteristics and speed as a fully-automatic weapon."
Last edited by a moderator:
He's every other Bernie Sanders supporter I've ever met, unfortunately.
SatansReverence
Hipster Princess
The thing that gets me with that speech is the rhetoric about knowing the shooter was going to do what he did just screams "we knew he was getting bullied, participated in it ourselves and did absolutely nothing to stop it and just joked with each other about him being the next school shooter".
I hope I'm wrong on that but as a victim of school bullying that's what it appears to be.
I hope I'm wrong on that but as a victim of school bullying that's what it appears to be.
Last edited:
Just a quick note on conspiracy theories. While you're free to hold you own beliefs, voice and defend them please don't lose sight of the fact that there has been an actual loss of life. While it's a valid topic of debate (how certain tragedies are politicised and used as a vehicle for current affairs), can we steer clear of the 'sacrifical lambs' metaphor that often manifests itself in these type of threads.
Also please put into context opposing sources and don't ignore them. For instance Alex Jones ranting about the fact that some of these people are actors may easily be discredited. You would be expected to accept the evidence and provide counter points or a stronger source with frames of reference.
Also please put into context opposing sources and don't ignore them. For instance Alex Jones ranting about the fact that some of these people are actors may easily be discredited. You would be expected to accept the evidence and provide counter points or a stronger source with frames of reference.
Last edited:
1morerobot
Member
BOTTOM LINE, who gives a shit if they come off as inauthentic? Seriously, who cares? If it helps to bring attention to the freaking problem, which is what is happening, then that is A GOOD THING.
Unbelievable.
Unbelievable.
SatansReverence
Hipster Princess
Because it can and does undermine the entire discussion.
If it is found that they are being paraded around to push an agenda as opposed to it just being organic, it will set things back years.
I really wish that people would stop pointing out assault rifles.
There is nothing different between say AR15 and Browning BAR
http://www.browning.com/products/firearms/rifles/bar.html
So people who talk about assault rifles should be honest and say that they want to ban all semi auto rifles regardless of color. Which is what Australia did.
As far as gun control, there is really no logic or consistency to it, it's whatever the masters decide to allow you on a whim. Let us compare UK and Australia.
For example in Australia all semi auto rifles and shotguns are banned regardless of caliber and there are significant restrictions on handguns but you still can own one.
Also, even pump action shotguns are banned. But you can buy a pump action rifle (unless it has a military look see below).
Moreover in Australia they ban any gun that LOOKS like a "military weapon".
For example this kind of bolt action rifle. It's a "tactical" looking bolt action - heavy bench shooting target gun that would be extremely difficult to use in mass shooting, a light hunter rifle would be much easier to use.
However this gun is banned simply because it "looks military" Yup. They ban guns on a whim just because they look bad. Because some bureaucrats decided fuck you gun lover.
In the UK on the other hand.
Handguns are banned outright - that's it, not even single shot sporting ones.
However, in the UK you can own small caliber 22LR semi auto rifles, even small caliber that look like AR15.
You can also own semi auto shotguns as long as they cannot load more than 3 shells.
In other words the regulations are arbitrary, capricious and there is never enough banning. In a way I guess UK laws are more logical since they sorta go by how dangerous the gun is and how attractive it may be to criminals. Australian laws are more "ban ban ban everything you see".
Now why should I trust any antis? If you give someone power over you, they will use it whichever way they see fit.
There is nothing different between say AR15 and Browning BAR
http://www.browning.com/products/firearms/rifles/bar.html
So people who talk about assault rifles should be honest and say that they want to ban all semi auto rifles regardless of color. Which is what Australia did.
As far as gun control, there is really no logic or consistency to it, it's whatever the masters decide to allow you on a whim. Let us compare UK and Australia.
For example in Australia all semi auto rifles and shotguns are banned regardless of caliber and there are significant restrictions on handguns but you still can own one.
Also, even pump action shotguns are banned. But you can buy a pump action rifle (unless it has a military look see below).
Moreover in Australia they ban any gun that LOOKS like a "military weapon".
For example this kind of bolt action rifle. It's a "tactical" looking bolt action - heavy bench shooting target gun that would be extremely difficult to use in mass shooting, a light hunter rifle would be much easier to use.
However this gun is banned simply because it "looks military" Yup. They ban guns on a whim just because they look bad. Because some bureaucrats decided fuck you gun lover.
In the UK on the other hand.
Handguns are banned outright - that's it, not even single shot sporting ones.
However, in the UK you can own small caliber 22LR semi auto rifles, even small caliber that look like AR15.
You can also own semi auto shotguns as long as they cannot load more than 3 shells.
In other words the regulations are arbitrary, capricious and there is never enough banning. In a way I guess UK laws are more logical since they sorta go by how dangerous the gun is and how attractive it may be to criminals. Australian laws are more "ban ban ban everything you see".
Now why should I trust any antis? If you give someone power over you, they will use it whichever way they see fit.
SatansReverence
Hipster Princess
You should probably talk less about Australian gun laws because most of what you've said is wrong.
A/B licenses are relatively easy to get.
C licenses aren't impossible either just have further restrictions.
Also appears that the particular weapon you pointed out isn't banned
Last edited:
<+)O Robido O(+>
Member
I wish someone would just come out and say killing kids is okay because the number of kids that die due to crazies shooting up the place is a lot smaller than the kids not affected by it and stop beating around the bush. We already accept a number of deaths will occur to cars, alcohol, etc might as well add guns to the list.
The number of guns in circulation and the number of kids killed is basically a statistical anomaly. Just accept that gun loons will beget a small number of loons that will steal their guns and kill people and move on.
In a perfect world there'd be no guns, but here we are, so whatever.
The number of guns in circulation and the number of kids killed is basically a statistical anomaly. Just accept that gun loons will beget a small number of loons that will steal their guns and kill people and move on.
In a perfect world there'd be no guns, but here we are, so whatever.
SatansReverence
Hipster Princess
My problem is that there is little to no evidence (I haven't seen it atleast) that removing guns ends in a net decrease in deaths.
Yes, school shootings are an absolutely horrible thing to hear about. But is school knifings, school bombings, school vehicle attacks or school arson attacks really any better? This is why people want to identify and target the root cause and not the basic tool used because tools will change as long as nothing is done against the root cause.
Last edited:
1morerobot
Member
But what agenda does anyone think they're pushing? Honestly asking.
Also, how would these kids not come off as being paraded around? They're trying to get as much exposure as possible, obviously. Pretty hard to do that and have it still seem organic.
Any rifle round is more deadly than a handgun. AR15 uses what is called a "varmint round". Big game round wounds will be far more scarier.
Why 100 yards? Most recent shooters were shooting at people essentially point blank.
Assault rifle ban is there just to pave way for further bans
So what was wrong?
Category C is pretty damn hard.
http://www.police.vic.gov.au/retrievemedia.asp?media_id=113523
Military looking guns like this one are banned in some states and not others. So if I lived in Brisbane and wanted to move to Sydney I would have to sell it or get rid of it some other way.
SatansReverence
Hipster Princess
Wide sweeping gun reform that would either A) be completely useless i.e "assault weapon" bans or B) completely negate the 2nd amendment.
I can't say for certain but behind the scenes photos of them apparently cheering and smiling definitely doesn't help. I know when something has happened in my life that was horrible it takes weeks on weeks to start feeling happy enough to do that.
Several mentions of things being banned when they aren't banned and simply have further restrictions.
And it appears as though you can get a class C for being in a certain clay target club. Hardly near impossible.
Last edited:
OK, I change banned to almost impossible to get if you are not a farmer or an active sport shooter in a team (not just some guy who shoots clays on weekends).
llien
Member
I can tell you about at least holocaust denials that it isn't based on feelings at all.
(yes, I actually bothered checking WTF their interpretation of events is, not to join #didntreadbutcondemn camp)
The foundation of holocaust denialism is mostly based on:
1) Misinterpretation of figures some of which were genuinely misleading (e.g. USSR stats).
2) Some witnesses are not real witnesses or do not remember much and make things up describing situations that can be proved to be made up.
3) Some witnesses genuinely misinterpreting what happened (mistaking bathroom for a gas chamber)
4) German veterans lying to cover atrocities committed by comrades
There is this brilliant blog scrupulously addressing h.d. flawed arguments, including popular tweets.
"I feel it is" is not very convincing in any setting, I doubt there is any major group based only feelings.
Now, to the post #2, isn't this factually true:
"David Hogg and ilk have gotten more airtime than anybody else and are hamming for selfies like the cast of Real World. "
?
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked