Posts Tagged ‘Twitter’

Rule of Thumb

December 21, 2012

I notice that at Professor Loomis’s group blog there has been a movement of sorts to defend his right to free speech against those awful conservative wingnuts who have taken note of some of his more offensive statements. Evidently saying bad things about the good professor is tantamount to an insidious campaign of hate and intimidation.

The worst mistake to make with regards to Erik’s battle with accumulated wingnuttery is this: If I’m careful, it won’t happen to me. Erik employed an emotional-but-common metaphor to describe his feelings about a major public figure in the wake of a tragedy; the response has amounted to a Two Minutes Hate. The first purpose of this Hate is to intimidate Erik and people like Erik into never again speaking forthrightly about American politics. The second purpose is to distract from the fact that twenty children were massacred with weapons that no civilian should be allowed to possess.

Let’s be clear: If you are a progressive interested in writing about politics, this will happen to you. The only question is how you deal with it.

No. The intent is to discourage people from fantasizing on the Internet about assassinating public figures. Anyway Loomis reactivated and then deleted his Twitter account. Again, we may be thankful that Twitchy has preserved his words. A quick overview of the tweets he made before deleting his account again indicates that this is not just a matter of one or two badly worded posts but that this is a man with some anger management issues. I apologize for the language.

Dear The Avery in Providence. Fucking forgive me for working on my book while drinking a beer in your empty bar. Laptops banned!!!!!

Quick! Grab screencaps before the mad professor deletes them again:

I was just ordered by ownership to close my laptop in an almost totally empty bar. If you ever wanted to see me in full anger, see me now.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) November 14, 2012

Nothing makes me more angry than being ordered what to do. Usuallly good at checking emotions, am now in towering rage at laptop-banning bar—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) November 14, 2012

@drfarls You have no idea how much I wanted to break my glass over that guy’s head.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) November 14, 2012

Erik Loomis, as most Twitchy readers know, is the hypocritical University of Rhode Island professor who retweeted a tweet advocating murder of certain gun rights proponents.

His bio used to note his position as assistant professor at the University of Rhode Island. Not anymore.

Anyway, after deleting his Twitter account on Tuesday, Mr. Angry is back today. We can look forward to many more tweets like these:

I love teaching books on the history of sexuality. I talked about dildos in a completely appropriate way in class today.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) November 20, 2012

This I Believe: Corporations are run by greedy, rapacious assholes who deserve long prison sentences. lawyersgunsmoneyblog.com/2012/11/this-i…
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) November 16, 2012

Dear subtitle people, white subtitles on a white background means I CAN’T FUCKING READ THE SUBTITLES. Seriously, have you heard of yellow?—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) October 23, 2012

@speechboy71 I would personally like to punch Matt Stafford for single handedly destroying my fantasy team this year.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) October 23, 2012

Dear right-wing morons, saying you “want someone’s head on a stick” is a metaphor. I know metaphor is hard for you to understand.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 18, 2012

Dear rightwingers, to be clear, I don’t want to see Wayne LaPierre dead. I want to see him in prison for the rest of his life. #nraterrorism
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 18, 2012

I am bringing all this up because I thought it might be a good way to introduce my rule of thumb regarding blogging, tweeting, writing, or saying anything that is likely to become public. If Professor Loomis and his colleagues happen to be reading this, I hope they will pay attention.

My rule of thumb is this; before hitting the return or send button, take a quick look at what you have written and consider how a complete stranger might take it. If what you have written comes across as angry, hateful, or deranged, you might want to rewrite or delete it. If there is anything in what you have written that could even remotely be construed as a threat of violence, then you should definitely rewrite or delete it. You may feel that this would cramp your style or restrict your free speech rights but I would say that the right of free speech comes with the responsibility to use that right conscientiously. In other words, if you don’t want people to jump all other you, you might try to express yourself with some degree of civility and respect. I think you might find it easier to persuade people to come around to your point of view if you didn’t start off by calling anyone who disagrees with you a moron.

Something similar could be said regarding foul language. If you have a problem expressing yourself without using the f-word, imagine your mother standing in front of your computer. You wouldn’t talk like that in front of her, would you? If you have a limited vocabulary, as so many seem to these days, invest in a thesaurus. You might also try reading the classics. Those writers like Shakespeare and Dickens, etc. really knew how to express themselves. Learn from them.

I think that if we all try to be calmer and more rational and not just write whatever happens to be on the top of our heads at any given moment, we would all be a lot better off and , who knows, we might just be able to find things we agree on.

Oh,and Professor Loomis, if by chance you do happen to be reading this, please get counseling. You’ll find it does a world of good in dealing with your issues.

Exceptions

December 18, 2012

I am generally opposed to any new gun control laws, and really I am opposed to any legislation enacted in the immediate aftermath of any crisis. The worst time to act is when emotions are high and easily manipulated, while it is better to wait a little while for everyone to cool down and consider the matter rationally. This, of course, is why the gun control proponents are insisting we do something right this minute. The last thing they seem to want is to consider the problem of violence in America rationally. Someone might come up with a solution that doesn’t empower the federal government, after all.

Still, in the interests of compromise and holding the conversation, I am willing to make an exception to my principles. There are some people who should never have access to firearms,or any weapon. I would go so far as to suggest that some people, who have made violent threats against others, should perhaps be taken into custody until they are proven to be no threat to themselves or others. One person who should definitely be watched might be University of Rhode Island Professor Erik Loomis. Professor Loomis has made some tweets which could be considered, well, violent if not to say somewhat deranged. Loomis has since deleted his Twitter account, but luckily for us Twitchy has preserved his words for posterity.

erik-loomis-rt

That was a retweet. It is possible that Loomis did not agree with the sentiment, but here are his own words.

@rmccrory I was heartbroken in the first 20 mass murders. Now I want Wayne LaPierre’s head on a stick.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 15, 2012

Looks like the National Rifle Association has murdered some more children.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 14, 2012

@fmanjoo There are words. Fuck the National Rifle Association and its policies to put crazy guns in everyone’s hands.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 14, 2012

You are goddamn right we should politicize this tragedy. Fuck the NRA. Wayne LaPierre should be in prison.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 14, 2012

Wayne LaPierre is a criminal and should be in prison for complicity with murder. 27 counts.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 14, 2012

Dear Republicans, Do you know the definition of family values? It’s not having our kids FUCKING SHOT AT SCHOOL!! Fuck the NRA.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 14, 2012

It’s harder to buy Sudafed in a pharmacy that high-caliber rifle bullets. Fuck the NRA.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 14, 2012

Can we define NRA membership dues as contributing to a terrorist organization?—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 14, 2012

I bet terrorist NRA head Wayne LaPierre will sleep well tonight.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 15, 2012

Larry Pratt and the group Gun Owners of America are terrorists and should be dealt with as such. thinkprogress.org/justice/2012/1…
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 15, 2012

Idiot of the day: Eugene Volokh, for arguing we should arm school teachers. volokh.com/2012/12/14/a-t…
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 15, 2012

The NRA pushes for policies that make it complicit in mass murders in the US and Mexico. Repeal the 2nd Amendment.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 18, 2012

Another day, another NRA facilitated terrorist attack. This morning at an Alabama hospital. abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/p…
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 15, 2012

Your daily NRA-facilitated terrorism. San Antonio this time. thedailybeast.com/cheats/2012/12…
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 17, 2012

He calls it an “intimidation campaign” when websites such as Campus Reform, quote what he said about Wayne LaPierre:

The right-wing intimidation campaign against me for saying the NRA was a terrorist organization continues. Will not succeed.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 18, 2012

@NeilAnAlien Indeed they will not. In fact, I’d like to write up my story of right-wing intimidation for a magazine.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 18, 2012

The Venn diagram between those who are trying to intimidate me and those who think Obama is the Kenyan usurper is sizable.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 18, 2012

He backs away from his “head on a stick” comment but doubles down on his view that Wayne LaPierre should be imprisoned:

Dear right-wing morons, saying you “want someone’s head on a stick” is a metaphor. I know metaphor is hard for you to understand.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 18, 2012

Dear rightwingers, to be clear, I don’t want to see Wayne LaPierre dead. I want to see him in prison for the rest of his life. #nraterrorism
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 18, 2012

Even when not addressing guns,  Loomis seems to have significant anger and anxiety issues:

@jacremes Bad TV makes me angry.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 17, 2012

How do people relax after writing without alcohol? Am trying, failing. A jumble of nerves, determined no one will ever publish the book.—
Erik Loomis (@ErikLoomis) December 17, 2012

Of course Loomis did not really mean he wanted to see anyone murdered. That was just a metaphor as he explained to the police. I will take his word for that, but it is fairly obvious he has some anger issues.

On a larger note, I think that I can honestly say that I have never advocated violence on this blog, or on any other forum, either metaphorical or actual. In general, though I am sure there are exceptions, I have found the most expressions of hatred and threats of violence have come from the Left, the very people who are always accusing those who are opposing them of being of being violent haters. I am not sure of the reason for this. Perhaps it is a sort of projection by some on the Left. They are prone to anger and violent talk, so they assume others are. Perhaps this is a good subject for a psychiatrist to study.

 

Nick Romney

October 21, 2012

I mentioned, not too long ago that I think we really do need to suppress voter turnout among the ignorant and ill-informed. I think these tweets, courtesy of Twitchy, go a long way towards proving my point.

 

PhoZzie ♥ @iamPhoZzie

The lack of analysis in the content that Nick Romney provides is laughable….

DJ Mastermix @dj_del_b313

If Nick Romney win he canceling porn lol

Scott Berty @ScottBerty

Too bad Nick Romney isn’t applying to be a car salesman because he would be a great one

marvin tate @niked_up_marvin

Nick romney lieing

@LiamJCurran

If Nick Romney is elected I guarantee that the U.S.A will be on the war path before this decade is out.—
Liam Curran (@LiamJCurran)

Jam Cris Martinez @JAMillionaire_

Did anyone see the debate between Nick Romney & Borack Obama?

I am not sure who Nick Romney is. Could he be somehow related to Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney? And, who is Borack Obama? Was that Barak’s Kenyan half-brother?

There are a lot more of these tweets over at Twitchy and I have to say that they are a little depressing. These people are too ignorant to even know who is running and too illiterate to be able to write a grammatical sentence. They cannot even express the simplest point without profanity. I guess this is Obama’s base.

 

 

Stacy Dash Endorses Romney

October 8, 2012

 

 

I actually have no idea who this actress is, but she has managed to commit the one unforgivable act in Hollywood. She has expressed her support for Romney. To make matters worse, she is black.

Actress Stacey Dash, who has starred in everything from the 90′s hit Clueless to CSI, prompted a firestorm on Twitter after publicly endorsing Republican nominee Mitt Romney, and then standing by her opinion.

“Vote for Romney. The only choice for your future. @mittromney @teamromney #mittromney #VOTE #voteromney,” Dash wrote on her official Twitter page, accompanied by a photo of herself with an American flag.

Of course, the Liberals responded in their usual classy and respectful way.

Not long after, presumed Obama supporters began insulting Dash for her opinion, saying she isn’t “black” enough, several even asking if the actress would just “kill herself.”

One man wrote: “This hurts but you a Romney lover and you slutting yourself to the white man only proves why no black man married u @REALStaceyDash.”

As news of Dash’s treatment spread, however, First Amendment-lovers nationwide began voicing their support for the actress using the hashtag #ISupportStaceyDash.

And here are some of the best/worst responses, courtesy of Twitchy.

And

Of course, it is the Conservatives who are the hateful racists.

She has stood firm by her opinion and has had much support from those who actually believe in that archaic concept called freedom of speech. Maybe I should go and watch something she has acted in.

 

Swedish Tweeter

June 13, 2012

In Sweden, they allow ordinary citizens to have control of the country’s official twitter account for a week at a time. I simply cannot imagine how that could be a good idea. According to this report in Yahoo News, it isn’t.

Sonja Abrahamsson, describing herself as a “low educated” single mother of two from Goteborg, in Sweden’s west, provocatively asked what makes a Jew a Jew, and used crude language.

“What’s the fuzz with Jews” she asked in one tweet on the @sweden account, suggesting it’s hard to tell them apart from other people and then went on to joke about Jewish circumcision.

In another, she said not even the Nazis could tell the difference: “In Nazi German(y) they even had to sew stars on their sleeves. If they didn’t, they could never (k)now who was a Jew and who was not a Jew.”

She also asked whether the Nazis sought to find the difference in the Jewish religion, or whether it was a “blood-thing” for them.

The reactions were immediate. One tweeter wrote “in one day @sweden went from global Twitter superstar to PR embarrassment.”

Another suggested the Swedish chef from the Muppet show might as well assume control over the account, while others defended Abrahamsson’s courage to raise her voice in such a frank way, politely answering her questions and sending her links to read more. One tweeter, who said she was Jewish, said she hadn’t been offended at all.

Later, Abrahamsson apologised if she had offended anyone, saying that was not her purpose. “I just don’t get why some people hate Jews so much,” she added.

Maria Ziv, marketing director at Visit Sweden – a Public Relations agency that set up the project – said the Twitter account would not be shut down just because some people had been provoked.

If Abrahamsson’s comments had been racist “we would have taken them down,” she added.

The project allows different citizens from various walks of life to curate the account each week. Tweeters have so far included both a female priest and a lesbian truck-driver.

The tweets are not pre-read or censored, but personal political opinions are to be followed with the hash-tag myownopinion.

Maybe they should let him handle their twitter account

In her defense, I suppose Ms. Abrahamsson’s statements did not seem particularly hateful, especially when you consider the very real anti-Jewish hatred in some portions of the population in Sweden. I suppose if she were a Muslim and had advocated burning down synagogues, no one would have said anything.

Still, Sweden is lucky in that it is a country with a small, homogeneous, mostly sensible population. Imagine what kind of nut cases would turn up if we tried something like that here in the US.

 

Yes, The Titanic was Real

April 17, 2012

I  had thought I had lost any capacity to be amazed by the ignorance of some people but I was wrong. I would have thought that even someone with only the vaguest grasp of history would have realized that the movie Titanic was based on real events. According to this article in the Independent, I would be wrong.

IT may have been one of the most iconic disasters of the twentieth century but it appears that some Twitter users are only now waking up to the fact that the sinking of the Titanic was not just the plot of a blockbuster film.

While subscribers to the microblogging site may be kept constantly up to date with the latest news and gossip, it is appears that some are less than familiar with the major events of the more distant past.

The sinking of the White Star liner with the loss of 1,500 lives in 1912 stunned the world and became a byword for tragedy.

But it appears that it has become so enmeshed in popular culture – particularly with the recently re-released film starring Leonardo DiCaprio and Kate Winslet – that some were not aware of the historical reality.

Twitter: Kelly Derrick: Is it bad that I didn’t know the titanic was real? Always thought it was just a film” :literally dont know what to say

Neither do I. I really don’t know how someone could be so ignorant. Maybe they don’t teach history in public schools anymore, except for politically correct victimology. I just don’t know.

Sinking of the Titanic, drawn from wireless de...

It really happened.

 

Giving it Up for Lent

February 25, 2012

I mentioned last Wednesday that it is common for Catholics and others to give up something for Lent. Most people choose to give up some luxury or maybe a favorite snack. Some choose to make real sacrifices, like this woman has by giving up Facebook. This story is from the local Chicago CBS affiliate.

One Chicago woman decided to give up more than the usual when Lent began on Wednesday.

As WBBM Newsradio’s Bernie Tafoya reports, some people might be inclined to give up sweets, pastries, candy or alcohol during Lent. But Christine Melendes has decided to give up Facebook.

Melendes says she has been used to using Facebook every day for the past five years.

She says she has been very active on the social networking site since 2007, posting status updates and pictures and checking what others have posted.

“I kind of feel like I forget to do something every morning before I go to work, but I’m doing pretty good,” Melendes said. “I haven’t cheated yet.”

Melendes thinks she will learn something about herself by going without Facebook until Easter.

“Probably how much I use it, and how much I use it to stay connected to my friends and my family,” she said.

Melendes is not giving up all social media, however. She says she cannot stop using Twitter along with Facebook.

“That would be impossible,” she said.

What did we do with ourselves before Facebook and Twitter?

 


%d bloggers like this: