682
Gus Walz broke the internet with his tearful love for his dad. Then the bullying began
(www.usatoday.com)
this post was submitted on 23 Aug 2024
682 points (97.8% liked)
politics
19090 readers
4094 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Don't listen to the "we didn't know he had a disability" crowd. They knew what they were doing.
Give them a few terms in power and that kid advances from "having a disability" to "being euthanised for the good of the nation".
I didn't know he had a disability, and all I thought was "That kid is really proud of his father, good for him"
Isn't that a post birth abortion?
I'm more irritated that so many people use his disability as an "excuse." If he were the most average, neurotypical boy in the world, it would still be perfectly normal and acceptable to get excited and emotional about his father potentially being the next vice president.
Maybe, maybe not.
It’s irrelevant because that’s not what happened.
I get what you’re saying, but I find comparisons like this - although founded in fairness- to be ultimately unhelpful because they draw consideration away from what did happen: bullying and otherism. This isn’t about what might have been, it’s about what happened. And we can say how it would have been unacceptable under this or that circumstance, but that, I feel, detracts from us all uniting behind saying that THIS, under THESE circumstances was wrong.
I’m not trying to criticize you at all, your intentions are good here. I just don’t think that we should lose focus of criticizing the bullies for the reason why they were bullying in the first place. They were bullying this kid because he is different. Because he is an other. If he wasn’t, they probably would not have, or they would not have attacked his otherness.
The person you replied to wasn't disagreeing that they would bully him for being different. I just see them as saying no matter who or how someone is it should be ok for anyone to cry while being proud of their parent. I wish I could cry for being proud of mine but they're on the other side and probably mocked him as well.
I don't think you need to try to be dismissive of the commenters opinion, it's perfectly valid just as yours and mine. You can get yours out without having to say "I think you're wrong." Anyways 3rd party perspective over.
I wasn’t dismissing or even criticizing them— I think you misunderstood my comment.
Well not to be overly pedantic just because you say you're not trying to criticize them doesn't mean you weren't. As for your message it seems to be lasered focused the kid's level of ablelism which is a valid point but it doesn't invalidate the above comment.
If you’re claiming to know my intentions and thoughts better than I, myself, do, then I suggest you open a psychic hotline.
Otherwise, perhaps acknowledge that, perhaps, you might just be wrong.
Or just become hostile and defensive that works too. Hopefully the rest of your day goes better.
You're the only one who’s hostile, making false accusations and pretending to be able to read minds, then refusing to admit that you might be wrong
Go troll someone else
Well I wasn't attempting to troll just have a dialogue like but I'll go look for a bridge to go under then.
Edit I just noticed you went through and down voted like all of my comments. That's kind of petty.
Most of your recent comments have 3-4 downvotes. You think I did that?
Lol