Comments by "L.W. Paradis" (@l.w.paradis2108) on "NBC News" channel.

  1. ​@glellio88 It is not a "natural" reaction to anything. These kids are being manipulated by the adults around them, who are vicariously working out their own issues on innocent minors. So, you think it's "natural" to pile on? This is what you teach your kids? This is Lord of the Flies in real life. If someone appears to be abnormal in some way, steer clear. This is a minor, and you don't know what's going on with them. You are not qualified to judge. If you cannot be kind, or at least civil, leave them in peace.
    21
  2. ​ @BlackSun90 Are you kidding? This is how you justify law breaking?
    8
  3. That word struck me as well.
    8
  4. To be honest, this is a surprise: every major power in the world is thinking about their own intelligence, and questioning just how good it is. That's the geopolitical meaning of this event. The human meaning, on the other hand, should be clear. If it isn't, I don't want to know. 😢
    8
  5. "Pro-life, pro-gun, pro-wall" This made sense to his brain. I mean "brain."
    7
  6. These perpetrators make me think of Fauci's efforts to avoid the moratorium President Obama placed on funding risky viral research.
    5
  7. ​ @TRUTHandLIGHT4809 Not if it adheres to First Amendment principles it can't. If it adheres to whichever way the wind blows and the dollars flow, well that's something else. It's a private institution, it doesn't have to respect free speech anymore than your boss does.
    5
  8. ​ @tjsbbi She was utterly incompetent, probably because she neither knows First Amendment law, nor in her heart of hearts supports it. Out of these three university presidents, not one was capable of explaining -- and passionately defending -- free speech.
    5
  9. ​​ @loganb9697 You cannot deny that the lid is off. No one is saying murder is justified, by the way. At least no one I see commenting. I don't think anyone believes that.
    4
  10. ​ @ihatecrackhead  If this were "obscene," it could be seized and very likely prosecuted. In law, that is a technical term. State employees do have some First Amendment rights that those in the private sector do not.
    4
  11. ​ @shonuff4323 ​ It is not a "natural" reaction to anything. These kids are being manipulated by the adults around them, who are vicariously working out their own issues on innocent minors. So, you think it's "natural" to pile on? This is what you teach your kids? This is Lord of the Flies in real life. My late father was a really tough guy, WWII veteran, and a natural athlete his whole life. He always defended people against bullies. When he showed up, they backed off so fast it was funny. If someone appears to be abnormal in some way, at least steer clear. This is a minor, and you don't know what's going on with them. You are not qualified to judge. If you cannot be kind, or at least civil, leave them in peace. You think there's something unnatural about that? Beating someone up puts you in a relationship with them. Explain to me what that's about. It's not a "natural" reaction at all.
    4
  12. ​ @OrangeySky11 My father was a true tough guy and a gifted athlete. He always defended people against bullies, and they always backed down fast. Of course, he was an ethnic immigrant, so this bullying thing you all worship and set your little hierarchies by seemed ridiculous to him. Take it to the soccer field if you're so great.
    4
  13. ​ @notme989 Is that a serious question? Do you believe what you're implying? I don't give a break to any DNC. Who would?
    4
  14. ​ @brianmccloskey2842 It means freedom from PUNITIVE consequences. One more slogan you should consider dropping.
    4
  15. @ceciliajones7816  Just the opposite. State universities must be administered in a way that is consistent with all constitutional rights, including the First Amendment. Private universities have some choice in the matter, but any speech or other activity they allow one group they need to allow every other group, or they will lose Title VI funding and get sued for discrimination. They just found that out when they defended affirmative action and lost.
    4
  16. That blond?? A false flag, perhaps??
    4
  17. ​ @coreyham3753  No one listened to the end. He didn't say. He made it a point not to say. Even the Pope can't get 10 minutes of anyone's time.
    3
  18. @tamdang8346  Exactly. But the worst part is what you see here: these people are SO easily led. Rile them up, and they can't think. Any skilled politician can make them fall for anything, especially with bullying tactics. People love to see someone privileged be bullied. And they'll give up constitutional rights for the thrill. (Speaking of thrills, I thought Stefanik was just a little too enthusiastic about being able to repeat those words.)
    3
  19. That was not a question that could be answered yes or no. Amazing how everyone loves bullying and falls for grandstanding. No one in this picture showed principles, character, or intelligence, and these are supposed to be leaders.
    3
  20. @kevinstaggs5048  I don't view this stuff, so my standard is worse, better, or same as Boogie Nights, leaving aside Lars von Trier and other European cinema. We don't know how bad this was. Hugh Hefner became celebrated. I don't care for Playboy, either, but . . . Involvement with that doesn't disqualify anyone for pretty much any job involving adults. In today's rainbow flag days, this might be quaint.
    3
  21.  @jameswarner7435  Beautifully stated. Made my day.
    3
  22. ​ @jlmoses16 This isn't about his haircut, or whether we like his shoes, OR criticism for something stupid he did as an adult of his own volition. He was eleven. Not 15, not 17. Eleven. And his parents were divorced. Do you know any kids? . . . Maybe better that you don't? 🤔
    3
  23. ​ @AngieKawaii01 Also, what people say online and what they say under oath are two different things. If you don't trust this report, why put more store in the online accounts of what happened? They might be true, they might not.
    3
  24.  @CAPS0L  Whose flag??
    3
  25. if any part of campus is treated as a First Amendment forum, then so-called hate speech is protected there. "Hate speech" is a political slogan, not a legal category.
    3
  26. Not if they actually do conflict with constitutional law they don't. This is a state employer, not a private one. The rules are not identical.
    3
  27. ​ @Businessentials  Just another word that's lost its meaning. :/
    3
  28. Free Julian Assange
    2
  29. This is the truth.
    2
  30. Look, if this were a court case, there is no doubt that the jury would have to view the material to see whether it is "inappropriate," "abhorrent," or "unbecoming for someone in a leadership position." At a state university, the First Amendment does apply. It's hardly certain that the law doesn't favor him until it's put to the test. I simply don't believe anyone about anything until I see for myself. That said, I'm not on his jury and don't plan to scare up the evidence.
    2
  31. Do they owe you?
    2
  32. ​ @legallyregarded No, the OP has made an important point. This could turn out to be a close case. I haven't seen his videos, and I am guessing you have not, either. Don't be quick to judge before you have.
    2
  33.  @kevinstaggs5048  State employees enjoy a measure of First Amendment and due process rights that private sector employees do not.
    2
  34. ​ @imtryinghere1 The First Amendment does apply here, though it may not protect his job in this case. People who work for the state have more rights than those who work for private concerns.
    2
  35. It's ubiquitous.
    2
  36.  @dr.g3860  That's a good point. They are private, so they could ban all demonstrations pro Israel or pro Palestine on campus, as "too disruptive to the educational process," but if they banned one and not the other, they would be sued under Title VI. Yup, excellent point. (I wonder if she knows, lol.)
    2
  37. If you haven't seen it, how do you know that? I'm serious. I'm done taking someone else's word.
    2
  38.  @rodster811  I didn't defend it. Why do you think I did? Because I declined to attack it without specific evidence?
    2
  39.  @OrangeySky11  Who assumed anything about you? Whoa. What does my post have to do with pronouns? It has to do with cultures that do not worship bullies. Bullies are weak.
    2
  40.  @OrangeySky11  Women play soccer, too. Where have you been?
    2
  41.  @professorwiggins3290  They CLAIM to embrace the full panoply of First Amendment freedoms. It's rather sad that their president could not articulate what those are. Well, I already said why I think they can't --- they stopped caring about free speech a long time ago.
    2
  42. Where is the shame? Did you watch what they've made public? I refuse to judge ANYONE without investigating.
    2
  43. ​ @Blurb777 ❤❤❤
    2
  44. ​ @charlesscholton5252 I tried to use the other word and got sense oared. This has been common for a long time, doing this as a response to bullying. Otherwise normal but sensitive kids have felt driven to it, especially since "social" media started ruling their lives. Everyone suddenly forgot?
    2
  45. ​ @AngieKawaii01 Well, to be fair, they cannot comment during an ongoing investigation, especially where liability is quite likely. Not that I disagree with you. It could turn out that they violated everyone's rights in the way they chose to handle this. It would not be the first time.
    2
  46. @CAPS0L  I've never seen cr ac k, or anything like it. What made you think of it? 😊
    2
  47.  @CAPS0L  reported
    2
  48. ​@georgebates7862 LOL, you've identified the real problem. It's not free speech that's the problem, it's the lack of free speech that is.
    2
  49. ​ @ferngrows6740 If you don't know, then don't speculate. It is true that state employees enjoy some First Amendment protections that private employees do not. These are limited, for obvious reasons, but they exist.
    2
  50.  @sweetpie7919  Never trust completely. Simple fact of life. :/
    2