• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

CNN Townhall with Parkland Students, Rubio, NRA and others

If it's possible to get annoyed with Sister Jean's overexposure, it's possible to be annoyed with this Hogg kid. And I've heard neither of the two ever speak.
 
Weird take

Ok I guess. I’ve supported these kids from moment one, and have supported and voted for gun control my entire life. The backpacks aren’t the ultimate solution but theyre not a completely unrealistic cautionary measure towards the interest of their safety. They are doing great work and have outshined the adults so far, but gun control is not going to occur overnight. What is the harm, the inconvenience? The loss of privacy of what’s in your bag in the high school halls? Meh. Thats a small price to pay for some transparency that very likely eases tension at the school. I would think anyone who witnessed that kid unzip a bag and pull out a weapon and kill their friends might be a little spooked about people’s bags and what’s in them, but apparently that’s inconvenient.
 
Weird take

A Larger point though would be that movements should be careful about their out rage and pick their battles. Liberal movements so easily go off message and lose focus...I've been to so many Climate Change events where a sub set of idiots show up in support of legalizing marijuana. It gives the media and conservatives the opening to declare the movement a bunch of left wing zealots and loonies and not take the actual climate change message seriously. So many progressive movements degrade into an unorganized collection of causes that endup make little progress on anything. Maybe that wasn't Bake's point, but these kids should be careful about making a whole lot of noise about back pack restrictions and the right to privacy because it might undermine the goal of enacting gun control. That's just some worthless advice from a middle aged guy who has been protesting since the 90's I guess.
 
Of course that was my point. It wasted the cache their gun control argument had built up with a small gripe about privacy.
 
Ok, I'll explain it since I like you, W&B, and didn't intend to be a dick (but then you didn't get it and then responded all hostile-like).

The discussion was about the Right's poor choice of words/metaphors when it comes to talking about the Parkland Shooting (e.g. "bulletproof", "target on their back"). Then you used the word "cache" twice in two posts, a word that is most commonly associated with a collecting and stashing of guns.

The word you were looking for is "cachet," which is a different word entirely. The fact that you used "cache" instead of "cachet" made it seem like you were purposely selecting the homophone with gun-related valences to make a dark joke. You weren't doing it intentionally, which was the basis for my joke. See, hilarious!
 
Last edited:
Ok, I'll explain it since I like you, W&B, and didn't intend to be a dick (but then you didn't get it and then responded all hostile-like).

The discussion was about the Right's poor choice of words/metaphors when it comes to talking about the Parkland Shooting (e.g. "bulletproof", "target on their back"). Then you used the word "cache" twice in two posts, a word that is most commonly associated with a collecting and stashing of guns.

The word you were looking for is "cachet," which is a different word entirely. The fact that you used "cache" instead of "cachet" made it seem like you were purposely selecting the homophone with gun-related valences to make a dark joke. You weren't doing it intentionally, which was the basis for my joke. See, hilarious!

This is why I board.
 
Ok, I'll explain it since I like you, W&B, and didn't intend to be a dick (but then you didn't get it and then responded all hostile-like).

The discussion was about the Right's poor choice of words/metaphors when it comes to talking about the Parkland Shooting (e.g. "bulletproof", "target on their back"). Then you used the word "cache" twice in two posts, a word that is most commonly associated with a collecting and stashing of guns.

The word you were looking for is "cachet," which is a different word entirely. The fact that you used "cache" instead of "cachet" made it seem like you were purposely selecting the homophone with gun-related valences to make a dark joke. You weren't doing it intentionally, which was the basis for my joke. See, hilarious!

well fuck. I'm an idiot. I thought I was using the correct spelling. apologies
 
I'm not sure I agree that that it's a bad idea to bring up how ridiculous an idea it is to make the students use clear backpacks as a way to deter gun violence. The whole point of the greater movement is to point out that the GOP thinks that the 2nd Amendment is all-powerful and would rather take away other constitutionally guaranteed rights over enacting common sense gun control that doesn't violate any constitutional rights. This seems to be an on-point example of that.

The GOP always likes to bring up that it's a slippery slope and that enacting simple gun control measures will mean that soon enough, liberals will try to take away all conservatives' guns. Here, we actually have an example of a right potentially being infringed (not hypothetically, like with guns), and it's not a far leap of logic to think that more rights could be if it means "saving" people's guns. The NRA's rhetoric recently is already character assassination and intimidation to inhibit free speech, only a matter of time before the GOP Congress tries to hop on board.
 
better phan = better words
 
Ok, I'll explain it since I like you, W&B, and didn't intend to be a dick (but then you didn't get it and then responded all hostile-like).

The discussion was about the Right's poor choice of words/metaphors when it comes to talking about the Parkland Shooting (e.g. "bulletproof", "target on their back"). Then you used the word "cache" twice in two posts, a word that is most commonly associated with a collecting and stashing of guns.

The word you were looking for is "cachet," which is a different word entirely. The fact that you used "cache" instead of "cachet" made it seem like you were purposely selecting the homophone with gun-related valences to make a dark joke. You weren't doing it intentionally, which was the basis for my joke. See, hilarious!

Isn't it cache also the preferred term in IT/computers (which I believe is WakeandBake's field)? That's where my mind went, not guns.
 
Isn't it cache also the preferred term in IT/computers (which I believe is WakeandBake's field)? That's where my mind went, not guns.
Of course it has other meanings. But that's why it was a joke! Because W&B was clearly not making a gun joke
 
well fuck. I'm an idiot. I thought I was using the correct spelling. apologies

Don't apologize for not knowing an obscure word. Apologize for not thinking I am hilarious.

(or, really, for not assuming I was joking and then trying to decipher the joke)
 
Isn't it cache also the preferred term in IT/computers (which I believe is WakeandBake's field)? That's where my mind went, not guns.

no he's right, but I have never actually typed out the word and thought it was the same spelling for both definitions. I meant cachet. :tard:
 
nevertheless, I am still right that these kids should pick their battles a little better. :cool:

They are kicking ass, if they start shooting holes (damnit!) in every small, short term measure meant for their safety it dilutes the strength of their bigger point on gun control somewhat. It comes off as whiny and snarky to me. The superintendent told them the clear backpacks were temporary. It takes time to change gun laws, although I appreciate them pushing. Accept the clear backpacks with grace but keep pushing.
 
I'm not sure I agree that that it's a bad idea to bring up how ridiculous an idea it is to make the students use clear backpacks as a way to deter gun violence. The whole point of the greater movement is to point out that the GOP thinks that the 2nd Amendment is all-powerful and would rather take away other constitutionally guaranteed rights over enacting common sense gun control that doesn't violate any constitutional rights. This seems to be an on-point example of that.

The GOP always likes to bring up that it's a slippery slope and that enacting simple gun control measures will mean that soon enough, liberals will try to take away all conservatives' guns. Here, we actually have an example of a right potentially being infringed (not hypothetically, like with guns), and it's not a far leap of logic to think that more rights could be if it means "saving" people's guns. The NRA's rhetoric recently is already character assassination and intimidation to inhibit free speech, only a matter of time before the GOP Congress tries to hop on board.

That is a good angle to frame this is in. I am not sure that angle came across in the tweet.
 
Back
Top