Video: Ingraham returns slams the chilling effect of free speech

[Care4all]

All she did was mention that he whined about not getting into a few colleges

She has said some reprehensible stuff but, she got boycotted for that?

LOL.

I've never seen her show and I don't know anything about what she's said before but in this particular case, I think Hogg overreacted.

She went out of her way, with her followers, to try to humiliate and laugh at David Hogg, which had absolutely nothing to do with arguing the argument of his or her own stances on the issue. She did what all bullies do, instead of being the adult in the room....and sponsors called her on it.

Her followers had nothing to do with it. They were her remarks and hers alone.

That said, she mocked his whining, not his failure to get into these schools as he made it out to be.

she tweeted it didn't she? Who do you think she tweeted it for?

 

[Care4all]

Didn't she apologize for reaching so low, during ''holy week''?

 

[Faun]

To which he was offended and then exercised his freedom of speech to motivate folks to boycott her sponsors. Which she then framed as a “Stalinist” maneuver to rob her of her First Amendment rights. She’s actually bitching about the left employing thuggish vernacular to shame the right into silence by resorting to thuggish vernacular herself to shame the left into silence; because when the left spoke up against her, it hit her where it hurts — her pocketbook.

Irrelevant. I'm not disputing anyone's rights or excusing Ingraham's later words and actions. If Hogg and so many others had not misconstrued what she said and overreacted in the first place, it would have just been a hiccup in the news. She didn't say anything that warranted this firestorm.

Hogg felt that it was a personal attack. You’re welcome to disagree with him but you’re in no position to tell him how to feel about it.

To begin with, I never said or suggested in any way that Hogg should feel one way or the other. Secondly, Hogg took it as a mocking of his not getting into these colleges and it simply was not. He conflated her words and meaning into something entirely different. So you'll forgive me if I'm not moved by his tantrums.

Of course you’re saying how Hogg should feel about it. You’re saying Ingraham’s comment was nothing to you, so Hogg overreacted.

Okay, I won't tell Hogg how to feel about it but can I tell him how to interpret her remarks? I can at least do that much can't I? Hogg made it out like she was mocking him for not getting into these colleges when any idiot with a grade school grasp of the English language can see that she did not.

He gets to interpret her words just like you do. Just because you don’t find it offense doesn’t mean he doesn’t, can’t or shouldn’t.

Again, you don’t get to tell Hogg how to feel about her comment. And no one cares if you think he overreacted, so there’s nothing really to forgive. Many people agreed with how he took her comment and 19 advertisers agreed as well.

You're not so naive as to think they dropped her because of her remarks are you? All they're doing is a preemptive boycott before they get boycotted by their consumers. Because they know and I know and you know that if they had not pulled their advertising from her show, Hogg and/or others would have called for a boycott on their products.

If that were true, ALL of her advertisers would have pulled their spots.

 

[Carl in Michigan]

She said he whined. How heinous.
It’s completely ignorable - unless you’re a snowflake leftard, of course.
Then you try to ruin careers.
Lol.

Yep. That's all any honest person would get out of it. But the tards always need an issue to beat their opponents. Laura said NOTHING wrong.

 

[skookerasbil]

Even if it was, his remark that politicians are "pathetic fuckers who want to see more children killed" was not intended to demean? And Jimmy Kimmel's mocking of Melania's accent was that not intended to demean? I don't hear any of Ingraham's critics even mentioning that.

One has nothing to with the other, but I encourage you to go after Jimmy Kimmel if you want.

Hogg said, "It's disappointing," and Ingraham characterized that as "whining" to devalue him and his opinions. He "hit back", as Trumpkins like to say. She had her say, he had his. I really don't get why righties are upset about it. If Ms. Ingraham is going to throw cow patties in cyberspace, she has to learn to take her lumps.

View attachment 187337

The bad lady said I whined. Bwahhhhhhhh.
Ruin her career, now! Bwahhhhhhh.

She's the person who thought Hogg's college rejections were worthy of snark. She's also the person responsible for her career.



Language: A Key Mechanism of Control

Newt Gingrich's 1996 GOPAC memo

Contrasting Words

Often we search hard for words to define our opponents. Sometimes we are hesitant to use contrast. Remember that creating a difference helps you. These are powerful words that can create a clear and easily understood contrast. Apply these to the opponent, their record, proposals and their party.

• 
  
  
  • abuse of power
  • anti- (issue): flag, family, child, jobs
  • betray
  • bizarre
  • bosses
  • bureaucracy
  • cheat
  • coercion
  • "compassion" is not enough
  • collapse(ing)
  • consequences
  • corrupt
  • corruption
  • criminal rights
  • crisis
  • cynicism
  • decay
  • deeper
  • destroy
  • destructive
  • devour
  • disgrace
  • endanger
  • excuses
  • failure (fail)
  • greed
  • hypocrisy
  • ideological
  • impose
  • incompetent
  • insecure
  • insensitive

• 
  
  
  • intolerant
  • liberal
  • lie
  • limit(s)
  • machine
  • mandate(s)
  • obsolete
  • pathetic
  • patronage
  • permissive attitude
  • pessimistic
  • punish (poor ...)
  • radical
  • red tape
  • self-serving
  • selfish
  • sensationalists
  • shallow
  • shame
  • sick
  • spend(ing)
  • stagnation
  • status quo
  • steal
  • taxes
  • they/them
  • threaten
  • traitors
  • unionized
  • urgent (cy)
  • waste
  • welfare

To fully play the victim card on Ingraham's behalf, you should point out she's a single mom, but you should omit her net worth of $45 million. She has made a literal fortune fomenting anger and hate. And not once did anyone interfere with her free speech rights.

That’s all irrelevant. The bottom line is she said Hogg whined, and he’s such an outrageous snowflake, he thought that comment warranted trying to ruin her career.
You REALLY don’t get more pathetic than that.

And 19 corporations agreed with Hogg.

Spoiler: Who’s whining now...?

Lol..

Progressives are hanging their hat on having gotten Ingram off the air for a week

What else has Hogg accomplished? Exactly zero s0ns.... Congress checked out on this shit 3 weeks ago!!!

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

All she did was mention that he whined about not getting into a few colleges

She has said some reprehensible stuff but, she got boycotted for that?

LOL.

I've never seen her show and I don't know anything about what she's said before but in this particular case, I think Hogg overreacted.

She went out of her way, with her followers, to try to humiliate and laugh at David Hogg, which had absolutely nothing to do with arguing the argument of his or her own stances on the issue. She did what all bullies do, instead of being the adult in the room....and sponsors called her on it.

Her followers had nothing to do with it. They were her remarks and hers alone.

That said, she mocked his whining, not his failure to get into these schools as he made it out to be.

she tweeted it didn't she? Who do you think she tweeted it for?

You said "...with her followers...". I took that to mean that they participated somehow in her remarks. If that is the case, her followers are guilty of simply receiving and reading her Tweet. Is that what you're telling us?

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Irrelevant. I'm not disputing anyone's rights or excusing Ingraham's later words and actions. If Hogg and so many others had not misconstrued what she said and overreacted in the first place, it would have just been a hiccup in the news. She didn't say anything that warranted this firestorm.

Hogg felt that it was a personal attack. You’re welcome to disagree with him but you’re in no position to tell him how to feel about it.

To begin with, I never said or suggested in any way that Hogg should feel one way or the other. Secondly, Hogg took it as a mocking of his not getting into these colleges and it simply was not. He conflated her words and meaning into something entirely different. So you'll forgive me if I'm not moved by his tantrums.

Of course you’re saying how Hogg should feel about it. You’re saying Ingraham’s comment was nothing to you, so Hogg overreacted.

Okay, I won't tell Hogg how to feel about it but can I tell him how to interpret her remarks? I can at least do that much can't I? Hogg made it out like she was mocking him for not getting into these colleges when any idiot with a grade school grasp of the English language can see that she did not.

He gets to interpret her words just like you do. Just because you don’t find it offense doesn’t mean he doesn’t, can’t or shouldn’t.

Problem is, there's only one way to interpret her words and her words did not in any way mock him for not getting into the schools like he made out. You're not stupid and you can read just as well as I can that this is not what she said. So why are you bucking me so hard on this?

Again, you don’t get to tell Hogg how to feel about her comment. And no one cares if you think he overreacted, so there’s nothing really to forgive. Many people agreed with how he took her comment and 19 advertisers agreed as well.

You're not so naive as to think they dropped her because of her remarks are you? All they're doing is a preemptive boycott before they get boycotted by their consumers. Because they know and I know and you know that if they had not pulled their advertising from her show, Hogg and/or others would have called for a boycott on their products.

If that were true, ALL of her advertisers would have pulled their spots.[/QUOTE]

So you're telling me that the companies that dropped her are no better at understanding plain English any better than Hogg?

 

[Faun]

One has nothing to with the other, but I encourage you to go after Jimmy Kimmel if you want.

Hogg said, "It's disappointing," and Ingraham characterized that as "whining" to devalue him and his opinions. He "hit back", as Trumpkins like to say. She had her say, he had his. I really don't get why righties are upset about it. If Ms. Ingraham is going to throw cow patties in cyberspace, she has to learn to take her lumps.

View attachment 187337

The bad lady said I whined. Bwahhhhhhhh.
Ruin her career, now! Bwahhhhhhh.

She's the person who thought Hogg's college rejections were worthy of snark. She's also the person responsible for her career.



Language: A Key Mechanism of Control

Newt Gingrich's 1996 GOPAC memo

Contrasting Words

Often we search hard for words to define our opponents. Sometimes we are hesitant to use contrast. Remember that creating a difference helps you. These are powerful words that can create a clear and easily understood contrast. Apply these to the opponent, their record, proposals and their party.

• 
  
  
  • abuse of power
  • anti- (issue): flag, family, child, jobs
  • betray
  • bizarre
  • bosses
  • bureaucracy
  • cheat
  • coercion
  • "compassion" is not enough
  • collapse(ing)
  • consequences
  • corrupt
  • corruption
  • criminal rights
  • crisis
  • cynicism
  • decay
  • deeper
  • destroy
  • destructive
  • devour
  • disgrace
  • endanger
  • excuses
  • failure (fail)
  • greed
  • hypocrisy
  • ideological
  • impose
  • incompetent
  • insecure
  • insensitive

• 
  
  
  • intolerant
  • liberal
  • lie
  • limit(s)
  • machine
  • mandate(s)
  • obsolete
  • pathetic
  • patronage
  • permissive attitude
  • pessimistic
  • punish (poor ...)
  • radical
  • red tape
  • self-serving
  • selfish
  • sensationalists
  • shallow
  • shame
  • sick
  • spend(ing)
  • stagnation
  • status quo
  • steal
  • taxes
  • they/them
  • threaten
  • traitors
  • unionized
  • urgent (cy)
  • waste
  • welfare

To fully play the victim card on Ingraham's behalf, you should point out she's a single mom, but you should omit her net worth of $45 million. She has made a literal fortune fomenting anger and hate. And not once did anyone interfere with her free speech rights.

That’s all irrelevant. The bottom line is she said Hogg whined, and he’s such an outrageous snowflake, he thought that comment warranted trying to ruin her career.
You REALLY don’t get more pathetic than that.

And 19 corporations agreed with Hogg.

Spoiler: Who’s whining now...?

Lol..

Progressives are hanging their hat on having gotten Ingram off the air for a week

What else has Hogg accomplished? Exactly zero s0ns.... Congress checked out on this shit 3 weeks ago!!!

You think that’s all he accomplished? You seem to be blocking out the 19 sponsors he got to pull from her show. Legislatively, he was part of the force to get a gun bill passed in Florida. His movement is also inspiring 18 year olds to get out and register to vote. Not a bad start for a kid.

 

[Faun]

Hogg felt that it was a personal attack. You’re welcome to disagree with him but you’re in no position to tell him how to feel about it.

To begin with, I never said or suggested in any way that Hogg should feel one way or the other. Secondly, Hogg took it as a mocking of his not getting into these colleges and it simply was not. He conflated her words and meaning into something entirely different. So you'll forgive me if I'm not moved by his tantrums.

Of course you’re saying how Hogg should feel about it. You’re saying Ingraham’s comment was nothing to you, so Hogg overreacted.

Okay, I won't tell Hogg how to feel about it but can I tell him how to interpret her remarks? I can at least do that much can't I? Hogg made it out like she was mocking him for not getting into these colleges when any idiot with a grade school grasp of the English language can see that she did not.

He gets to interpret her words just like you do. Just because you don’t find it offense doesn’t mean he doesn’t, can’t or shouldn’t.

Problem is, there's only one way to interpret her words and her words did not in any way mock him for not getting into the schools like he made out. You're not stupid and you can read just as well as I can that this is not what she said. So why are you bucking me so hard on this?

Again, you don’t get to tell Hogg how to feel about her comment. And no one cares if you think he overreacted, so there’s nothing really to forgive. Many people agreed with how he took her comment and 19 advertisers agreed as well.

You're not so naive as to think they dropped her because of her remarks are you? All they're doing is a preemptive boycott before they get boycotted by their consumers. Because they know and I know and you know that if they had not pulled their advertising from her show, Hogg and/or others would have called for a boycott on their products.

So you're telling me that the companies that dropped her are no better at understanding plain English any better than Hogg?

No, what I’m telling you is you don’t get to interpret her words for anybody but yourself. And even that doesn’t scratch the surface of being just the reader of her words as opposed to Hogg, who was also the target of her words. And just like you get to interpret her words for yourself, so did all of Ingraham’s sponsors. 19 of them felt it warranted pulling their spots from her show.

 

[GreenBean]

Don't know who Maher or Griffin are.

You don't know who Kathy Lee Griffin is ??!!

You don't know who Bill Maher is ???

Wow - you are out of touch aren't you - even for a libtard ....

 

[Tilly]

To begin with, I never said or suggested in any way that Hogg should feel one way or the other. Secondly, Hogg took it as a mocking of his not getting into these colleges and it simply was not. He conflated her words and meaning into something entirely different. So you'll forgive me if I'm not moved by his tantrums.

Of course you’re saying how Hogg should feel about it. You’re saying Ingraham’s comment was nothing to you, so Hogg overreacted.

Okay, I won't tell Hogg how to feel about it but can I tell him how to interpret her remarks? I can at least do that much can't I? Hogg made it out like she was mocking him for not getting into these colleges when any idiot with a grade school grasp of the English language can see that she did not.

He gets to interpret her words just like you do. Just because you don’t find it offense doesn’t mean he doesn’t, can’t or shouldn’t.

Problem is, there's only one way to interpret her words and her words did not in any way mock him for not getting into the schools like he made out. You're not stupid and you can read just as well as I can that this is not what she said. So why are you bucking me so hard on this?

Again, you don’t get to tell Hogg how to feel about her comment. And no one cares if you think he overreacted, so there’s nothing really to forgive. Many people agreed with how he took her comment and 19 advertisers agreed as well.

You're not so naive as to think they dropped her because of her remarks are you? All they're doing is a preemptive boycott before they get boycotted by their consumers. Because they know and I know and you know that if they had not pulled their advertising from her show, Hogg and/or others would have called for a boycott on their products.

So you're telling me that the companies that dropped her are no better at understanding plain English any better than Hogg?

No, what I’m telling you is you don’t get to interpret her words for anybody but yourself. And even that doesn’t scratch the surface of being just the reader of her words as opposed to Hogg, who was also the target of her words. And just like you get to interpret her words for yourself, so did all of Ingraham’s sponsors. 19 of them felt it warranted pulling their spots from her show.

Oh so very precious!
Particularly since the young man has a mouth like a sewer himself.
You’re too funny.

 

[Faun]

Of course you’re saying how Hogg should feel about it. You’re saying Ingraham’s comment was nothing to you, so Hogg overreacted.

Okay, I won't tell Hogg how to feel about it but can I tell him how to interpret her remarks? I can at least do that much can't I? Hogg made it out like she was mocking him for not getting into these colleges when any idiot with a grade school grasp of the English language can see that she did not.

He gets to interpret her words just like you do. Just because you don’t find it offense doesn’t mean he doesn’t, can’t or shouldn’t.

Problem is, there's only one way to interpret her words and her words did not in any way mock him for not getting into the schools like he made out. You're not stupid and you can read just as well as I can that this is not what she said. So why are you bucking me so hard on this?

Again, you don’t get to tell Hogg how to feel about her comment. And no one cares if you think he overreacted, so there’s nothing really to forgive. Many people agreed with how he took her comment and 19 advertisers agreed as well.

You're not so naive as to think they dropped her because of her remarks are you? All they're doing is a preemptive boycott before they get boycotted by their consumers. Because they know and I know and you know that if they had not pulled their advertising from her show, Hogg and/or others would have called for a boycott on their products.

So you're telling me that the companies that dropped her are no better at understanding plain English any better than Hogg?

No, what I’m telling you is you don’t get to interpret her words for anybody but yourself. And even that doesn’t scratch the surface of being just the reader of her words as opposed to Hogg, who was also the target of her words. And just like you get to interpret her words for yourself, so did all of Ingraham’s sponsors. 19 of them felt it warranted pulling their spots from her show.

Oh so very precious!
Particularly since the young man has a mouth like a sewer himself.
You’re too funny.

So?

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

To begin with, I never said or suggested in any way that Hogg should feel one way or the other. Secondly, Hogg took it as a mocking of his not getting into these colleges and it simply was not. He conflated her words and meaning into something entirely different. So you'll forgive me if I'm not moved by his tantrums.

Of course you’re saying how Hogg should feel about it. You’re saying Ingraham’s comment was nothing to you, so Hogg overreacted.

Okay, I won't tell Hogg how to feel about it but can I tell him how to interpret her remarks? I can at least do that much can't I? Hogg made it out like she was mocking him for not getting into these colleges when any idiot with a grade school grasp of the English language can see that she did not.

He gets to interpret her words just like you do. Just because you don’t find it offense doesn’t mean he doesn’t, can’t or shouldn’t.

Problem is, there's only one way to interpret her words and her words did not in any way mock him for not getting into the schools like he made out. You're not stupid and you can read just as well as I can that this is not what she said. So why are you bucking me so hard on this?

Again, you don’t get to tell Hogg how to feel about her comment. And no one cares if you think he overreacted, so there’s nothing really to forgive. Many people agreed with how he took her comment and 19 advertisers agreed as well.

You're not so naive as to think they dropped her because of her remarks are you? All they're doing is a preemptive boycott before they get boycotted by their consumers. Because they know and I know and you know that if they had not pulled their advertising from her show, Hogg and/or others would have called for a boycott on their products.

So you're telling me that the companies that dropped her are no better at understanding plain English any better than Hogg?

No, what I’m telling you is you don’t get to interpret her words for anybody but yourself.

You do realize that goes both ways, right? Therefore, if I don't get to say he overreacted based on my personal interpretation then you don't get to say he didn't based on your personal interpretation.

I don't understand why you people are carrying on like this. All I said was that I think he overreacted and you people are making it out like I'm trying to tell him how to feel.

And even that doesn’t scratch the surface of being just the reader of her words as opposed to Hogg, who was also the target of her words. And just like you get to interpret her words for yourself, so did all of Ingraham’s sponsors. 19 of them felt it warranted pulling their spots from her show.

So because you happen to agree with them, you're okay with their pulling their advertising based on their personal interpretation. Seems rather hypocritical to me.

Lastly, here is Ingraham's Tweet: "David Hogg Rejected By Four Colleges To Which He Applied and whines about it. (Dinged by UCLA with a 4.1 GPA...totally predictable given acceptance rates.)"

How in the world can you possibly interpret this as mocking him for not getting into the colleges? You can't be so hell bent on defending Hogg as to not read this for what it is.

 

[Care4all]

She has said some reprehensible stuff but, she got boycotted for that?

LOL.

I've never seen her show and I don't know anything about what she's said before but in this particular case, I think Hogg overreacted.

She went out of her way, with her followers, to try to humiliate and laugh at David Hogg, which had absolutely nothing to do with arguing the argument of his or her own stances on the issue. She did what all bullies do, instead of being the adult in the room....and sponsors called her on it.

Her followers had nothing to do with it. They were her remarks and hers alone.

That said, she mocked his whining, not his failure to get into these schools as he made it out to be.

she tweeted it didn't she? Who do you think she tweeted it for?

You said "...with her followers...". I took that to mean that they participated somehow in her remarks. If that is the case, her followers are guilty of simply receiving and reading her Tweet. Is that what you're telling us?

gosh, I didn't mean to get in to such details...

but what I meant when I said it, was that Laura whined/tweeted/brought up/mocked whatever you want to call it....about his whining about not getting accepted in to 4 colleges... even with his 4.2....

I believe she did so, to get a laugh out of her followers...to give her followers another thing on Hogg to cut down on and to mock, and to me, she expected and even hoped her tweet would meet favor with her followers and be retweeted by her followers....all in the name of show biz perhaps, or just out of hatred....

there was absolutely no other reason, to tweet it...imo.

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

I've never seen her show and I don't know anything about what she's said before but in this particular case, I think Hogg overreacted.

She went out of her way, with her followers, to try to humiliate and laugh at David Hogg, which had absolutely nothing to do with arguing the argument of his or her own stances on the issue. She did what all bullies do, instead of being the adult in the room....and sponsors called her on it.

Her followers had nothing to do with it. They were her remarks and hers alone.

That said, she mocked his whining, not his failure to get into these schools as he made it out to be.

she tweeted it didn't she? Who do you think she tweeted it for?

You said "...with her followers...". I took that to mean that they participated somehow in her remarks. If that is the case, her followers are guilty of simply receiving and reading her Tweet. Is that what you're telling us?

gosh, I didn't mean to get in to such details...

but what I meant when I said it, was that Laura whined/tweeted/brought up/mocked whatever you want to call it....about his whining about not getting accepted in to 4 colleges... even with his 4.2....

I believe she did so, to get a laugh out of her followers...to give her followers another thing on Hogg to cut down on and to mock, and to me, she expected and even hoped her tweet would meet favor with her followers and be retweeted by her followers....all in the name of show biz perhaps, or just out of hatred....

there was absolutely no other reason, to tweet it...imo.

Maybe I'm just anal about such things but when you say "She went out of her way, with her followers, to try to humiliate and laugh at David Hogg..." The way this is worded, her followers went out of their way, with her, to humiliate Hogg and that simply is not true.

 

[Care4all]

She went out of her way, with her followers, to try to humiliate and laugh at David Hogg, which had absolutely nothing to do with arguing the argument of his or her own stances on the issue. She did what all bullies do, instead of being the adult in the room....and sponsors called her on it.

Her followers had nothing to do with it. They were her remarks and hers alone.

That said, she mocked his whining, not his failure to get into these schools as he made it out to be.

she tweeted it didn't she? Who do you think she tweeted it for?

You said "...with her followers...". I took that to mean that they participated somehow in her remarks. If that is the case, her followers are guilty of simply receiving and reading her Tweet. Is that what you're telling us?

gosh, I didn't mean to get in to such details...

but what I meant when I said it, was that Laura whined/tweeted/brought up/mocked whatever you want to call it....about his whining about not getting accepted in to 4 colleges... even with his 4.2....

I believe she did so, to get a laugh out of her followers...to give her followers another thing on Hogg to cut down on and to mock, and to me, she expected and even hoped her tweet would meet favor with her followers and be retweeted by her followers....all in the name of show biz perhaps, or just out of hatred....

there was absolutely no other reason, to tweet it...imo.

Maybe I'm just anal about such things but when you say "She went out of her way, with her followers, to try to humiliate and laugh at David Hogg..." The way this is worded, her followers went out of their way, with her, to humiliate Hogg and that simply is not true.

do you know if they retweeted it to their friends? or bots retweeted it?

I'm thinking they did.... we even have a thread on this site about it right after she did it, if memory serves.... and even before david hogg responded.....

 

[Carl in Michigan]

So because you happen to agree with them, you're okay with their pulling their advertising based on their personal interpretation. Seems rather hypocritical to me.

They pulled their advertising ONLY because they felt BULLIED by an ARMY of leftist pawns. Advertisers don't like controversy. They believed the vast majority were with the snowflakes.

They did not pull their advertising because it was their choice. It's all about bullying

 

[Ghost of a Rider]

Her followers had nothing to do with it. They were her remarks and hers alone.

That said, she mocked his whining, not his failure to get into these schools as he made it out to be.

she tweeted it didn't she? Who do you think she tweeted it for?

You said "...with her followers...". I took that to mean that they participated somehow in her remarks. If that is the case, her followers are guilty of simply receiving and reading her Tweet. Is that what you're telling us?

gosh, I didn't mean to get in to such details...

but what I meant when I said it, was that Laura whined/tweeted/brought up/mocked whatever you want to call it....about his whining about not getting accepted in to 4 colleges... even with his 4.2....

I believe she did so, to get a laugh out of her followers...to give her followers another thing on Hogg to cut down on and to mock, and to me, she expected and even hoped her tweet would meet favor with her followers and be retweeted by her followers....all in the name of show biz perhaps, or just out of hatred....

there was absolutely no other reason, to tweet it...imo.

Maybe I'm just anal about such things but when you say "She went out of her way, with her followers, to try to humiliate and laugh at David Hogg..." The way this is worded, her followers went out of their way, with her, to humiliate Hogg and that simply is not true.

do you know if they retweeted it to their friends? or bots retweeted it?

I'm thinking they did.... we even have a thread on this site about it right after she did it, if memory serves.... and even before david hogg responded.....

I've no doubt that they did. But that still doesn't mean that they are culpable in any way. It was her speaking and her alone.

 

[AvgGuyIA]

Otherwise known as — freedom of speech.

Which you support silencing in Laura by BULLYING her advertisers to abandon her program -- or ELSE!

THAT'S not free speech dimwit

True Liberal's wouldn't have anything to do with these anti-free speech snowflakes. They piss their pants until they call for a boycott.

 

[Faun]

Of course you’re saying how Hogg should feel about it. You’re saying Ingraham’s comment was nothing to you, so Hogg overreacted.

Okay, I won't tell Hogg how to feel about it but can I tell him how to interpret her remarks? I can at least do that much can't I? Hogg made it out like she was mocking him for not getting into these colleges when any idiot with a grade school grasp of the English language can see that she did not.

He gets to interpret her words just like you do. Just because you don’t find it offense doesn’t mean he doesn’t, can’t or shouldn’t.

Problem is, there's only one way to interpret her words and her words did not in any way mock him for not getting into the schools like he made out. You're not stupid and you can read just as well as I can that this is not what she said. So why are you bucking me so hard on this?

Again, you don’t get to tell Hogg how to feel about her comment. And no one cares if you think he overreacted, so there’s nothing really to forgive. Many people agreed with how he took her comment and 19 advertisers agreed as well.

You're not so naive as to think they dropped her because of her remarks are you? All they're doing is a preemptive boycott before they get boycotted by their consumers. Because they know and I know and you know that if they had not pulled their advertising from her show, Hogg and/or others would have called for a boycott on their products.

So you're telling me that the companies that dropped her are no better at understanding plain English any better than Hogg?

No, what I’m telling you is you don’t get to interpret her words for anybody but yourself.

You do realize that goes both ways, right? Therefore, if I don't get to say he overreacted based on my personal interpretation then you don't get to say he didn't based on your personal interpretation.

I don't understand why you people are carrying on like this. All I said was that I think he overreacted and you people are making it out like I'm trying to tell him how to feel.

And even that doesn’t scratch the surface of being just the reader of her words as opposed to Hogg, who was also the target of her words. And just like you get to interpret her words for yourself, so did all of Ingraham’s sponsors. 19 of them felt it warranted pulling their spots from her show.

So because you happen to agree with them, you're okay with their pulling their advertising based on their personal interpretation. Seems rather hypocritical to me.

Lastly, here is Ingraham's Tweet: "David Hogg Rejected By Four Colleges To Which He Applied and whines about it. (Dinged by UCLA with a 4.1 GPA...totally predictable given acceptance rates.)"

How in the world can you possibly interpret this as mocking him for not getting into the colleges? You can't be so hell bent on defending Hogg as to not read this for what it is.

Well, no, it doesn't actually go both ways because I never actually he didn't overreact based on my personal interpretation, as you falsely ascribe to me.

And I'm ok with with her advertisers pulling their spots because they too have freedom of speech.