Peter Fonda should go to jail !!

[yuna628 9,711]

3 minutes ago, bcking said:

So is it an acknowledged diagnosis from a doctor or his Family, or are people just diagnosing him based on his TV appearances?

 

Seriously this is the first I've heard of this. I don't care either way but I'm just surprised I haven't seen people talk about it before.

It's one of those sort of whispered rumored things... not one of those things they put out in public or want it to be talked about. Whenever there is speculation or off-the-cuff remarks, it's shut down pretty quickly by the press. As he is a child it's certainly not fair to him to discuss in the public domain or speculate. There is no known public diagnosis or confirmation. Melania tends to go full mamma bear (as she should) when it's mentioned.

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

I said this when Obama was President and I will say it when Trump is President. The kids should be off limits period.

[Unidentified 2,930]

4 hours ago, missileman said:

So you totally ignore Fonda, and immediately spin some smear toward Trump.....Congratulations...you just made my ignore list.....

He has a good point. 

[Unidentified 2,930]

3 hours ago, Bill & Katya said:

Doesn't really seem relevant as I am not sure this would have incited anyone to do anything other than raise questions as compared to what Peter Fonda wrote.

It led to a whole bunch of people thinking that Obama was a Muslim and he also made it sound like being a Muslim is a very bad thing... 

[Unidentified 2,930]

1 hour ago, Paul & Mallory said:

Seriously? lol no, I'm not a doctor nor do I have a copy of a clinical diagnosis. But ok. That's totally not even the main point of what I said, I just added it along with other facts I chose to point out. Take the word "autistic" out, and my point really doesn't change.

 

**His TV appearances didn't "give it away". A lot of people already knew. It came up when people reacted rudely to his TV appearances. No, not everyone knew. Some people felt bad. Some people didn't.

I don't like Trump. But what I like less is when people start judging and diagnosing children when they're not educated enough to do that. "Oh that child can't sit still he must have ADHD" or "that child is so awkward, must be autism". No, it does not. 

[bcking 3,157]

1 hour ago, Paul & Mallory said:

Seriously? lol no, I'm not a doctor nor do I have a copy of a clinical diagnosis. But ok. That's totally not even the main point of what I said, I just added it along with other facts I chose to point out. Take the word "autistic" out, and my point really doesn't change.

 

**His TV appearances didn't "give it away". A lot of people already knew. It came up when people reacted rudely to his TV appearances. No, not everyone knew. Some people felt bad. Some people didn't.

I wasn't calling you out in particular, I was just completely in the dark on this. Not sure why I haven't picked up on it in articles. I don't think any of us should be speculating on any diagnoses for the children of Presidents (or really any children in the public eye, or really anyone in general for that matter). 

 

If they want to embrace it and make it public, then fine lets talk about it. But if they haven't commented, then I wouldn't just assume it is the case. We don't really see the "private side" of him, and the "public image" can be significantly skewed, especially in children. 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

Autism covers such a wide array of conditions now as opposed to 12 to 15 years ago. Not more autism just more classifications under the umbrella. 

 

Autism or not is irrelevant.  It was way worse than what Roseanne said, and he should be held accountable 

[Paul & Mallory 1,398]

Well, besides to say now I’m questioning everything I *thought* I knew on the topic, I’m done derailing the OPs post with autism. Certainly didn’t intend to offend anyone - it’s a topic I have a big heart for and take very seriously.  It was a long time ago and apparently I’m the only one here who recollects such a(n alleged) fact, so perhaps I dreamed the whole thing.

 

anyway. Peter Fonda is still a removed by site moderation. 🤷🏻‍♀️

Edited June 21, 2018 by Ban Hammer
edited to remove a banned term.

[Steeleballz 7,550]

53 minutes ago, Nature Boy Flair said:

Autism covers such a wide array of conditions now as opposed to 12 to 15 years ago. Not more autism just more classifications under the umbrella. 

 

Autism or not is irrelevant.  It was way worse than what Roseanne said, and he should be held accountable 

 

   True that. Leave the kids out of it regardless.

 

   The whole tweet is abhorrent. You can't be against something and then suggest actually doing that same thing to somebody else. It's hypocritical, and back to that old saying. No matter what someone does, two wrongs can never add up to make it right. 

[Keith & Arileidi 437]

3 hours ago, Paul & Mallory said:

Seriously? lol no, I'm not a doctor nor do I have a copy of a clinical diagnosis. But ok. That's totally not even the main point of what I said, I just added it along with other facts I chose to point out. Take the word "autistic" out, and my point really doesn't change.

 

**His TV appearances didn't "give it away". A lot of people already knew. It came up when people reacted rudely to his TV appearances. No, not everyone knew. Some people felt bad. Some people didn't.

The producers of apprentice have already admitted that they had to do a lot of editing to make it seem like Trump's ideas were grounded in reality. 

 

Now, we are getting the full Trump raw and uncut. 

And boiii he is full of hurtful things.

 

In all honesty... I hope Peter Fonda gets some social backlash, because the things he said shouldn't be acceptable in our society. 

 

[Steeleballz 7,550]

Just now, Keith & Arileidi said:

The producers of apprentice have already admitted that they had to do a lot of editing to make it seem like Trump's ideas were grounded in reality. 

 

Now, we are getting the full Trump raw and uncut. 

And boiii he is full of hurtful things.

 

In all honesty... I hope Peter Fonda gets some social backlash, because the things he said shouldn't be acceptable in our society. 

 

 

 They are not acceptable. I'm not sure why there is the false narrative that this type of response represents the typical thinking of the left. I haven't seen anyone on the left say this is acceptable. I also didn't see anyone on the left suggest Roseanne's tweet was typical behavior of the right. There are extremist viewpoints on both sides of the political spectrum obviously. I'm not sure why people feel the need to represent these opinions as anything but that. There is way too much hyperbole and stereotyping going on in this forum at times just for the sake of argument. 

[Randyandyuni 2,682]

5 hours ago, Jojo92122 said:

First Amendment.  

 

Ha, the government can not put people in jail for exercising their First Amendment rights.

 

Trumpsters are so funny.

Go into a theater and scream fire or suggest a shooting should take place, you right to free speech does not apply as it incites others to respond, his comments called for the kidnapping and rape of a child and the kidnapping of a secret service protected wife of the sitting president. 

 

 You cannot be so angered by his presidency that you condone this type behavior by Fonda and hide behind the skirt of the first amendment and to  be so smug about Trumpsters. 

 

I was not a Trump supporter before the election attitudes like his and yours is swaying me in that direction

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

50 minutes ago, Steeleballz said:

 

 They are not acceptable. I'm not sure why there is the false narrative that this type of response represents the typical thinking of the left. I haven't seen anyone on the left say this is acceptable. I also didn't see anyone on the left suggest Roseanne's tweet was typical behavior of the right. There are extremist viewpoints on both sides of the political spectrum obviously. I'm not sure why people feel the need to represent these opinions as anything but that. There is way too much hyperbole and stereotyping going on in this forum at times just for the sake of argument. 

keep it up I might give you a MOR driving pass.  In this forum. A lot of the fringe moon bats have been weeded out 

[The Nature Boy 7,659]

I recall when one of the Obama daughters seen by some media outlet, appartley smoking a joint or doing something at a party, it it made all the news outlets.

 

Any reputable outlet should have refused to even touch it. It angered me .

[elmcitymaven 9,712]

Peter Fonda's speech, as abhorrent as it is (and it is absolutely repellent and beyond the pale), is protected by the First Amendment. While it is true that some speech is unprotected, this does not fall into that category. In order to do so, it would have to pass this test: Are the words intended to incite immediate criminal action, and is there a likelihood of imminent danger of such action? We're not talking about whether some loony takes this into their head that the suggestion is a good idea. The example I recall from school is where there's a seething mob, and guy is standing there handing out pitchforks saying, "Go get that [*expletive deleted*]!" If the danger is imminent that the mob will take those pitchforks and stab the [*expletive deleted*] because (1) they've now got weapons and (2) there is an immediate opportunity that there's going to be some stabbing because the SOB is just around the corner, the speech is unprotected. But, if there's a mob, and pitchforks, and the guy telling the mob to go get the SOB, but the SOB is, say, on the other side of the country, or anywhere where the danger of criminal activity is not IMMINENT, the speech is protected, even if it is abhorrent. 

 

There's no imminence here, and there's probably no likelihood of harm. It's gross, but it's protected speech. It is a high hurdle to pass for good reason, because we have a super-awesome First Amendment and it is meant to protect us from government action except in certain, very circumscribed instances. 

 

Funtimes reading here: https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/395/444/case.html