Bill Maher calls out David Hogg as a bully for the Ingraham boycott...liberals meltdown

So wierd that so many posters are focused on TS's use of the phrase meltdown.

Do you guys throw your remote at the tv when the news you watch says, breaking news: Kanye just Kardashian blah, blah.....ect.?

Do you scream at your tv, that that isn't news. I mean it bugs me, but it also is normal.
 
VivaRevolution said:
So wierd that so many posters are focused on TS's use of the phrase meltdown.

Do you guys throw your remote at the tv when the news you watch says, breaking news: Kanye just Kardashian blah, blah.....ect.?

Do you scream at your tv, that that isn't news. I mean it bugs me, but it also is normal.
Click to expand...



So, do you believe that Ingrams comments about Hogg on public television are correct? Or do you think she should have absolutely no consequences for what she says on television?
 
Fawlty said:
More like Hogg knocked the bully the fuck out.

Bill gets his head up his ass now and then, is normal.
Click to expand...

Yes, by escalating from a mean comment to going after someone's job.

Of course with examples of non-bullying like that, no wonder we have such a civil culture where school shootings aren't a norm.
 
Wasn't really a meltdown, but those conversations about boycotts always take a weird turn. Nobody is claiming you don't have a right to boycott, he's saying it's stupid because these companies are paying to advertise their product to different audiences, they aren't donating money for Laura Ingram's thoughts so a public boycott is just a tantrum to silence someone cause you don't like what they have to say and you'd rather they just went away than prove them wrong. If you like the product, but it, if you don't, don't buy it, if you care about Laura Ingram's thoughts, listen to them, if not, don't.
 
Another butt hurt right wing snowflake shit posting how unusual.
 
7437 said:
So, do you believe that Ingrams comments about Hogg on public television are correct? Or do you think she should have absolutely no consequences for what she says on television?
Click to expand...

They were a personal attack, which is distasteful.

The consequence should have been him responding in kind with a personal attack, or he could have taken the high road, and when a high school kid gives you an education in civil discourse, what more of a consequence could you want for ingram then looking that stupid?
 
VivaRevolution said:
So wierd that so many posters are focused on TS's use of the phrase meltdown.

Do you guys throw your remote at the tv when the news you watch says, breaking news: Kanye just Kardashian blah, blah.....ect.?

Do you scream at your tv, that that isn't news. I mean it bugs me, but it also is normal.
Click to expand...
I tend not to regularly watch, listen, or read anything that paints a reaction incorrectly in order to condemn said reaction. I can't remember the last time that I learned anything about Kanye or a Kardashian (I guess the whole broke the internet thing). Do you think those people on Maher's show melted down? If they did, I'd say every single war room conversation where there is disagreement qualifies as a meltdown. In which case, what's the point of the term?
 
VivaRevolution said:
They were a personal attack, which is distasteful.

The consequence should have been him responding in kind with a personal attack, or he could have taken the high road, and when a high school kid gives you an education in civil discourse, what more of a consequence could you want for ingram then looking that stupid?
Click to expand...
The high school kid is the one who should take the high road, instead of the professional broadcaster? Are you serious?
 
VivaRevolution said:
They were a personal attack, which is distasteful.

The consequence should have been him responding in kind with a personal attack, or he could have taken the high road, and when a high school kid gives you an education in civil discourse, what more of a consequence could you want for ingram then looking that stupid?
Click to expand...

So no consequence is what you would prefer. Laura Ingram doesnt care if she looks stupid, shes a fox news host.

Hogg called the attention of people who are advertising on her show as to her distasteful content. I dont see how that is an issue at all.
 
7437 said:
So, do you believe that Ingrams comments about Hogg on public television are correct? Or do you think she should have absolutely no consequences for what she says on television?
Click to expand...
Are we talking about her tweet about that douche? Unless he has tourettes and just blurted it out for no reason, he talked about his college rejection as if his activism played some role in it, when colleges had gone through his application long before anyone knew anything about him. He wants to be a hero who keeps going forward despite the negative consequences, when in fact his activism had nothing to do with it and would probably gain points for him with universities if anything.
 
Quequeg said:
The high school kid is the one who should take the high road, instead of the professional broadcaster? Are you serious?
Click to expand...

You say that as if taking the high road isn't a winning move there.

The personal attack or calling for a boycott, may make your feels feel better, but it strategically serves no purpose.
 
VivaRevolution said:
Conversation is stupid. Why did hogg call for the boycott?

Not because he wants guns banned, but because ingram said something he didn't like.

It was a lynch mob, and as maher pointed out, it wasn't based on the principle of belief, but the power media coverage gives anyone. Hogg chose to use that power to be petty, but what do you expect from a kid. I remember being his age, and I was fucking idiot.
Click to expand...

Hogg is definitely a jerk and abuses the goodwill the media has for him. Guys like him burn out quickly.
 
VivaRevolution said:
You say that as if taking the high road isn't a winning move there.

The personal attack or calling for a boycott, may make your feels feel better, but it strategically serves no purpose.
Click to expand...
It got the nasty bitch suspended and possibly fired, costing her a lot of money. I call that a clear win for the kid.
 
nostradumbass said:
Are we talking about her tweet about that douche? Unless he has tourettes and just blurted it out for no reason, he talked about his college rejection as if his activism played some role in it, when colleges had gone through his application long before anyone knew anything about him. He wants to be a hero who keeps going forward despite the negative consequences, when in fact his activism had nothing to do with it and would probably gain points for him with universities if anything.
Click to expand...

Hogg didnt steal her phone and make tge fuckibg tweet. Ingram doesnt have some kind of right to paid advertising. All she had to do was not act like a piece of shit. That was too hard for her, so she lost some advertisers. Free speech working as intended.
 
7437 said:
So no consequence is what you would prefer. Laura Ingram doesnt care if she looks stupid, shes a fox news host.

Hogg called the attention of people who are advertising on her show as to her distasteful content. I dont see how that is an issue at all.
Click to expand...

You want your feels to feel better.

Like I said. The high road is the strategically sound move there. If you aren't smart enough to understand why making her look stupid, is better then trying to silence one person whose comment is 10% as offensive as your average post in a comment section or forum, I don't know what to tell you.
 
The problem with Kaep was more of the fact that if the league colluded it could violate the collective bargaining agreement with the players union.

And people claimed to be boycotting the league because of the kneeling
 
It's worth pointing out that the panel agreed with Maher that this wasn't the reason she should have lost advertisers. Their point was simply that advertisers pulling their funding was a form of free speech. It's the game that celebrities who depend on popularity play; and no, I don't envy the position they put themselves in in that regard. When I make a nasty comment that I shouldn't, I'm glad that it gets lost in the ether of anonymity.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,528
Messages
58,293,854
Members
175,997
Latest member
WingedC

Share this page

Back
Top