Ask a fired up republican about the convention and most likely you will hear a more positive assessment. To these people, the convention was a soaring success, due in no small part to one feisty little pit-bull named Sarah Palin. Now, the American pit-bull can be a great dog, as long as it’s treated with love, care and affection. If not, they cut a startling figure, all snapping jaws and bad attitude. They are renowned for their ability to latch on to their prey and not let go. Palin is probably just a product of her environment, but she definitely falls into the latter category of dangerous dogs who will wreak havoc on any poor fool who strays into their path.

A large part of the convention was aimed at decrying the influence of special interest groups, which is patently ironic when you consider that the GOP is at the behest of the largest special interest group of all, namely evangelical Christians. People are fond of making comparisons between George W. Bush and John McCain, which has its place. However, there is a comparison to be made between Palin and Bush, especially when considering the average Jane appeal and her exploitation of Christian conservatism to garner votes. Palin rode the burgeoning wave of Christianity makings its way through the Alaskan wilderness into the 1996 mayoral race of Wasilla, injecting social issues such as abortion and gun rights into what was before described as a friendly contest between neighbors, often focusing on small town civic matters.

Palin’s speech has been described as a success, according to most. Between passing around her special needs baby for various photo ops and braying maniacally about the horror of being a community organizer, she struck that shrill conservative note beautifully. Her appearance was highly anticipated, due to her surprise tapping as vice presidential candidate. For all the whining coming from the right about Barack Obama’s immediate canonization after giving a mere speech, they sure followed suit where Palin was concerned. Suddenly she has been painted as the great white hope for America, despite her awful record, which has proven tumultuous. It includes allegations of abusing her authority to have a family member fired, backing the notorious Bridge to Nowhere, then rescinding her support after being elected, clamoring for government earmarks, which she has since come out vehemently against in attempts to keep in step with McCain’s reformer stance. Palin has already requested $197.8 million of next year’s federal budget, according to the LA Times. She has also been outed as former director of indicted senator Ted Stevens’ Excellence in Public Service, a shady 527 group allowing Stevens’ to rake in contributions without the typical restraints placed on political fundraising. Palin has attempted to ban certain books in an Alaskan library and threatened to fire the librarian when she refused to do so. She has also had contact with Alaskan Independence Party, fringe nut-job group clamoring for Alaska to secede from the United States, even being labeled as a former member by the vice chairman.

In stark contrast to Palin’s powerhouse performance, McCain appeared stiff and unenthusiastic about accepting the nomination. His attempts at levity were more terrifying than anything, and he became visibly unnerved by smattering of protesters that briefly interrupted the proceedings. Anyone still referring to McCain as a maverick should pursue a dictionary. A true maverick would have picked long time associate Joe Lieberman, despite the difficulty that would pose to the republican constituency. A good politician would have picked someone like Kay Bailey Hutchinson, conservative stalwart and longstanding senator, concurrently sating the republican base and possibly winning over some disgruntled Hillary Clinton supporters. Instead, McCain took the low road and chose Palin all because of the feel good narrative she proffers, as well as her appeal to fanatical Christian conservatives. She is the ultimate in distraction tactics.

The Democrats insist on taking the high road, to their peril. The Republicans are approaching this race like a street fight, with dirty tricks galore. Palin pummeled Obama with lies and misinformation, and he lamely jokes about taunting on the basketball court. The night after Palin’s shrill screed, Joe Biden half-heartedly defended his ticket without the typical aggressive attitude that made him a valuable player in this campaign. There seems to be a concerted effort among democrats to not collectively evacuate bowels in the wake of Palin’s uprising. But the threat is very real, and pretending that she is not invigorating McCain’s tired old campaign is dangerous. There is no need to sink to the subterranean level that Palin so easily descended, as her record garner’s ample evidence that either McCain is advantageous to an unbelievable degree, or he has horrible judgment, and neither bodes well for future decisions. Instead, they weakly dispute Palin’s claims with appeals for rationality and civility. Yet, this is not the time for niceties. The press has been chastised for poking into Palin’s personal life, a claim that has some credence. The press needn’t lead with her daughter’s illegitimate child or hick boyfriend, there is ample damning evidence illustrating corruption and negligence that is still not being expounded on, by neither the mass media nor the Democratic contenders. When those questions are addressed by some brave soul, they are shouted down by the GOP as unfair and scandalous, as though we are supposed to just take their word for it.

It’s about damn time that left leaning Americans start fighting fire with fire. First, we must dispel the notion that conservatives hold a monopoly on patriotism. In my estimation, a true patriot is one who defends their countries’ principals against corrupt governments and politicians, not one who mindlessly echoes any sentiment that trickles down from the powers that be. Secondly, we must loudly counter the steady stream of bullshit coming from the right wing, including the assertion that they are the bastion of morality. Thirdly, we must address the undue influence religious belief has on American politics, which is the breadth of Palin’s appeal. Certain voters need only to hear the words pro-life or god’s work and suddenly the decision has been made for them.

No matter who wins this November, the responsibility to solve many of these problems lies with the people. We should demand leadership that treats us as adults, not authoritarians who slather us in feel-good platitudes involving the glory of the United States, or terrifies us into compliance. We can collectively live up to the expectations we set for ourselves, or we can keep going the way we have been: struggling, on the verge of financial insolvency, with sparsely educated, listless children, with no hope for the future and having learned nothing from the past.

Also in the news recently was beleaguered Islam debunker Ayaan Hirsi Ali and her ongoing troubles due to her involvement in the 2004 Dutch film Submission. Ali has been sought after since contributing the screenplay to director Theo van Gogh’s exposition of the common atrocities inflicted upon Muslim women in the name of Mohammed. The reward was twofold: Van Gogh was brutally murdered in broad daylight by an offended Muslim, who was thoughtful enough to stab a death threat intended for Ali into Van Gogh’s barely cooled corpse; Ali has suffered continued harassment, to the point that she requires state funded protection from the Dutch government. Her financial support was recently rescinded, with the government claiming they are not beholden to her while she resides in the United States (although one would be excused for suspecting their burgeoning Muslim population’s distaste for apostates has something to do with it). The US government claims they are unable to support her due to regulations on protection for non-citizens. France has recently expressed interest in offering her financial support, one would assume in honor of free expression, while other countries continue to treat her like an insubordinate stepchild.

Shouldn’t gadflies like Ali and Van Gogh be afforded hero status in the freedom worshipping west? Ali’s horrid situation evokes Salman Rushdie’s plight after releasing The Satanic Verses. A fatwa (sort of like the Muslim kiss of death) was issued for Rushdie because he dared pen a book of fiction in which he lambasted the religious tenets he was raised with. In a bit of serendipity, the Archbishop of Canterbury at the time lamented that British blasphemy laws should be extended to cover all religions, in the wake of furor elicited by Rushdie’s book. Many were too quick to chide Rushdie for his disrespect of Islam, and in turn justify the rabid desire for his head on a sliver platter. Those religious types who openly blamed the author for the death threats were being extremely selfish. These people, supposedly bastions of peace and goodwill, were rationalizing murder for the most ridiculous reason possible.

I suspect that religious leaders are quick to defend other religious beliefs because the Big Three are inexorably linked. Christianity, Judaism, and Islam all share the figure of Abraham, who you may remember from such ditties as trying to sacrifice his own son in the name of god, that comedian. While Archbishop Williams claims his intent was to quell rising Muslim discontent in the UK , he is also attempting to cover his ass, so to speak. He is affording these hackneyed beliefs respect because he knows just what it feels like to be on a losing team. No other ideology is afforded this much leeway and nothing could be more dangerous. The devout seem unable comprehend that automatic deference to deities leads to hucksters to claiming authority over a large segment of the population. How can you remain skeptical of those wishing to take advantage of you when your belief system claims that skepticism is evil? How can you maintain stability when your holy book is brimming with god’s tricks and tests with the sole purpose of separating the goats from the sheep?

Religion addressed the unknown and explained the unexplainable in our intellectual infancy. We no longer labor under pre-science illusions such as the sun revolves around the earth, or that demons are the cause of illness. The fact that faith garners so much respect, to the point that we wish to subvert law and order, one of the bastions of civilization, is absolutely inexcusable. What about the legions of Muslim women living in the UK who would feel the acute effects of this simple minded multiculturalism? Who will speak for them? Not their husbands, many of whom consider their wives to be akin to chattel. Progressive thinkers, such as Ali, get reproached for doing just that, all in the name of respecting religion. And the proprietor of love and peace wishes to put these dire decisions in the hands of tyrants, the same people who find it acceptable to stone a woman for adultery (whether or not she had a choice in the matter), or see amputation of limbs a suitable punishment for theft. These are not thoughtless stereotypes or racism. These are actual instances of “justice” enacted at the hands of sharia law. Sharia law in the UK would be a huge a step backward for civilization and all that it supposedly represents.

Peace and love! A more useless coupling has yet to be realized (with the exception of that Lisa Marie/Michael Jackson thing, which was like trying to pair up two female wall sockets). Peaceful utopia is an idea best left in Kindergarten, right after you’re involved in a vicious fight with your best friend about whose daddy is stronger. My core complaint about hippies and/or their pacifist tendencies is the futility. It’s been over 40 years since that cultural “revolution” and what hath the hippies wrought? Hippiedom’s major contribution thus far has been stifling political correctness, the bane of every thinking person’s existence. These moral calisthenics, which goodly people use for easy identification, accomplish nothing, other than rigging up an unalterable code of conduct similar to atavistic etiquette mores.

Much like religious beliefs, peace-loving ideology is not compatible with modern society. An image of peaceful resistance often heralded is that of the fresh faced young girl sticking a flower into the barrel of a rifle. Oh, my heart is bursting with joyful rainbows! How beautiful! How ignorant. Peace and love don’t come expelling from that barrel, sweetheart; bullets do. Generally, a bullet shot from a rifle can travel almost 4,000 feet per second and is capable of blowing your face clean off. Responding to every negative development in the world by focusing your “good vibes” and spewing patchouli-scented rhetoric will only get you lauded at the vegan picnic. To the rest of the world, it’s a laughable distraction. You continue your endless debate on poverty and violence and aggression over soy lattes and dairy free pastries; I’ll be over here, living it.

Those high ideals that flourished in the 1960s had two revolting outcomes: isolation or assimilation. Many former love children believed they could drop out of society and create communities of their own. We now call these people junkies or hobos, and they effectively forfeited the game when they disappeared into their friends’ basements and low-wage work at the alternative bookstore.

I’ll let you in on a little secret: dumpster diving is not romantic or noble. Squatting in an abandoned house ceases to be sexy as soon as you reach adulthood. There are plenty of people who hold anti-establishment views and opinions, and instead of fleeing with their tails between their legs, they are in the shit daily. They wake up in the morning, work their asses off, then come home to educate their brood with important life lessons, such as self-defense and media literacy. You can’t win a game that you refuse to play, and merely refusing to participate does not render the game nonexistent.

Those choosing the latter option of assimilation kept the peaceable rhetoric yet abandoned the accompanying convictions. It’s amazing how loose one gets after hitting middle age, when those dollar signs start flashing in your eyeballs and the wife is on you for an all expenses paid trip to Jamaica for the “atmosphere” (although I hear the “atmosphere” in Amsterdam is far superior). Every Sunday morning the news shows are bracketed by commercials for insurance planning and stock portfolios aimed at aging hippies, complete with easily identifiable hallmarks, like lava lamps and trippy soundtracks recalling those halcyon days of free love and casual drug use. The dream died (for the millionth time) the day George Carlin agreed to voice a lackadaisical VW van named Fillmore in the Disney crap-fest known as Cars. This is the man who succinctly voiced every anti-establishment viewpoint I’ve ever held decades before I was born, and yet someone was deft enough to trick him into coming over to the other side?

Recent events sickeningly suggest otherwise. Right now in Jena, Lousiana six black youths are suffering continued abasement thanks to the local judicial system. The events read like some sort of dystopian science fiction; in fall 2006, a black student requested permission to sit under the so called white tree, a spot on campus informally delineated by white students. School officials granted permission (as though they had a choice; segregation has been illegal since the 1960s) and the next day the student body was treated to the sight of three nooses, proudly ablaze in school colors, hanging from the aforementioned tree. Predictably, things grew worse from there.

When the Jena high school principal suggested that the perpetrators be expelled, he was overruled by superintendent Roy Breithaupt. Breithaupt recommended only a three day suspension and when black students protested, obviously aghast at the lax punishment doled out, they were allegedly threatened by the LaSalle Parish DA. At a school assembly DA Reed Walters claimed to be capable of ruining the lives of anyone making trouble over what he termed an “adolescent prank.” That December, a flurry of conflicts set in motion the most troubling events thus far. A black youth was attacked by a gang of white kids at a party. Those responsible received no punishment. A white man pulled a loaded rifle on a group of black men at a convenience store. When one of the men wrestled the weapon away from the assailant, he was arrested and charged with felony theft (conversely, the white man received on a $5,000 fine for carrying a loaded weapon). At another party, a group of black students attacked Justin Barker, a fellow student frequently named as an instigator in many of the events leading up to this altercation. Barker was taken to the hospital, released the same day and even felt well enough to attend a party later that night. The six youths arrested for beating him were charged with second degree attempted murder and each faced up to100 years in prison.

So far, only one of the six has been to trial. Mychal Bell refused a plea bargain and was convicted of the reduced charge of second degree aggravated battery, which entails assault with a lethal weapon. Bell ’s lethal weapon consisted of a shoe. Apparently in Louisiana a black teenager with a shoe is more dangerous than a white man with a loaded rifle. Bell faces a possible sentence of 22 years and is awaiting an appeal. The remaining members of the now named Jen 6 are awaiting trial.

Rumors of corruption during the proceedings abound. Bell ’s court appointed district attorney called no witnesses in his defense, nor did he dispute the selection of Bell ’s all white jury. In addition, some members of the randomly selected jury had uncomfortably close ties to either the DA or several witnesses, one of whom was actually related to a juror. The overwhelming sentiment from officials seems to be that justice was amply served and it’s best to put all this unpleasantness behind us.

Adding insult to injury, this story has made nary a blip on the national news. The Jena 6 have received more thorough coverage from the international press, who no doubt use the situation to illustrate US’s waning moral authority. These are the same news outlets that relentlessly pummeled the public with hourly updates in Don Imus and the irreparable damage he supposedly caused, yet no one can be bothered with what is akin to a giant step backward in our social evolution.

There is no quick and easy solution for the plight of these young men. No sound bites, nor symbolic funerals, nor peaceful vigils can help them now. No amount of hand wringing or rhetoric will afford them the fair trial they obviously deserve. Consider that many of the citizens of Jena feel that nothing untoward has transpired at all. Many echoed the sentiments of the school superintendent and labeled those responsible for the initial hanging of the nooses as typical adolescent pranksters. A noose portends some dark things, especially in the south, where black men and women were not so long ago hanged with great frequency for often manufactured crimes. In light of this, I would not be so hasty to dismiss the appearance of three nooses as a mere prank.

* The Jena 6 petition

Louisiana Governor Kathleen Blanco contact info:

PO Box 94004
Baton Rouge , LA 70804 -9004
Phone: (225) 342-0991

Unlike benefit concerts of yore, which aimed to raise money with their sprawling festivities, Live Earth’s focus was on raising awareness of global warming. The notion that global warming needs further advertisement is laughable, considering the issue already garners more attention than every member of the Hilton family. Certainly a few well placed TV spots could have accomplished the same amount of awareness raising. Of course, there is nothing that powerhouse celebrities and politicians love more than congratulating themselves in spectacular fashion. In essence, Live Earth was merely a global circle-jerk for the rich and famous.

The leading complaint is that an event so massive, taking place in several locations around the globe and showcasing numerous celebrities and bands, is bound to do more damage than it’s worth. When you factor in the fuel needed to transport the acts and equipment, power for the show itself, and the mounds of trash generated by concert goers, it really does seem a bit disingenuous when attempting to raise awareness of environmental preservation.

Another factor is the somewhat contentious nature of the issue. Leave it to Al Gore to futz a particularly clear cut environmental concern and turn it into something you’re either for or against. What person in their right mind would argue that human beings and all their amenities are not largely responsible for global warming (save for a few crackpot nihilists parading as conservatives intent on raping mother earth for fun and profit)? The problem is that there are no real solutions, and additionally there are thousands of other issues on the table that would benefit greatly from awareness and/or fund raising. Live Earth’s big solutions? Change your light bulbs. Save gas by putting air in your tires. Not only are these suggestions excruciatingly pedestrian, but also widely known at this point in time. It appears that Live Earth may have been nothing more than a grand political ploy by a possible presidential candidate. Not to downplay genuine environmental concerns such as global warming, but this came across as Al Gore’s pet project gone mad.

From an entertainment standpoint, Live Earth fared miserably, ranking abysmal ratings in most nations running broadcasts. Having caught a few moments of this travesty myself, I must say it was a cache of unintentional comedy. Watching awkward celebrities wax quixotic about environmental issues and make idiotic, knee-jerk assertions spoon fed by Al Gore himself was a tad delightful. And as most were on the defensive, every backstage interview became a moratorium on how “green” any given performer was, Madonna faring the worst in that respect. It came across as a game of environmental one-upmanship between empty headed celebrities. I live for the day when I see Cameron Diaz and Leonardo DiCaprio dumpster diving for meals and squatting in abandoned buildings.

Today’s children have it much worse than I did. While the kids were annoying as hell, they did not intend to brainwash me in to being a better consumer, which is what Webkinz attempt to do. Retailing at upwards of $40, these seemingly innocuous stuffed toys come with a super secret code that allows you to access (for one year) the world of Webkinz on the internet, a virtual home for your “pet”. Let’s put aside for one minute that this must be signaling the utter decimation of a child’s imagination. In the Webkinz world, parents are encouraged to purchase Kinzcash, online currency used to buy staples for your pet; things such as food, home furnishings, amusement items, etc.

I must proffer a slow clap to the makers of Webkinz, namely the Ganz company, a family owned business which is seemingly a one stop shop for useless junk of every description. They have come up with a scam fit for the record books. Offering a small plush toy for this price, only to goad parents into paying more money for the privilege of visiting a website with various activities for children (equals of which can be found in great number all over the internet for free) is truly brilliant.

Another shrewd ploy on the part of the Ganz company is the way their product is marketed. They create a false demand by supplying only a portion of their product at a given time. This gives some children the opportunity to purchase these wares and subsequently lord the product over their peers, who in turn beg and plead with their parents to do the same. Repeat this process internationally (Ganz has a robust marketing strategy, boasting distribution centers in several countries), and you have the makings of a successful fad.

A good consumer is not something one should aspire to be. There is no prize for owning the most junk; conversely, it is detrimental to impulsively hoard every sparkly item that catches your eye. A child’s consumption should be curbed and they should be taught, as early as possible, to thoughtfully consider every single purchase they make. Why instill the notion of aggressive consumption in a child so early (or at all)? There is the “healthy economy” argument to be made, but I think that is a misnomer, especially when you consider how much of American merchandise is produced overseas. More importantly, consider that most of your useless junk will outlive you and your children.

Not to get too sentimental or cloying, but there is merit in appreciating the less sensational aspects of life. If you are so inclined to improve your child, may I suggest taking your $40 and purchasing a number of good books with sincere messages about life and society. These things are infinitely more valuable than any fleeting fad.

The obvious question is why. Why would the United States government, sentry of the greatest country in the world™, let its own citizens wallow in squalid conditions, helpless, when aid was readily available? Could it be the sheer incompetence that is a hallmark of the Bush clan? Or maybe it was due to a lack of interest? Too much paperwork involved? Or perhaps it was something more sinister? Was it really because a vast number of the indigent were black and poverty stricken?

Another question looming on the horizon: why is this not bigger news? To me, this appeared to be the linchpin in the case against the Bush administration. But I get the overwhelming sense that people just do not care (barring those directly affected, of course). Just after the storm touched down, a lot of us decried the victims for not leaving sooner, not comprehending the abject poverty many of these people were faced with. Many commented that it was the job of the local government to help its citizens, and while I concur, I don’t think that relieves the federal government of responsibility when the local government fails.

I was appalled by the president’s rapid response to the carnage at Virginia Tech in relation to his bungling of all affairs in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. It’s telling that when there is real work to be done, i.e. rebuilding, proffering supplies, etc. the president was notoriously MIA. But when the gesture was wholly symbolic, as in VA Tech, where there was little to do other than mourning balefully and attending many Kumbaya tinged candle light vigils, Mr. Bush was more than willing to dust off one of his stock speeches and say a few words for the cameras.

All this talk of rich and poor brings to mind another buried story of late. The burgeoning gap between the wealthy and everyone else continues to widen dramatically, with the wealthiest 1% of the population holding the highest percentage of wealth. The last time such a thing happened was in 1928, just before the great depression.

Perhaps you are wondering who the one percenters actually are. Well, these would be the presidents of corporations, CEOs, and other modern day robber barons who probably keep pets that live better than you or me. Dick Cheney is a one percenter, as illustrated by his hunting accident that occurred last year, wherein he “peppered” a friend in the face with his shotgun. Just after the incident, local law enforcement officials attempted to question the VP (after all, he had been drinking) but were turned away by the secret service. What do you think would have happened had Dick’s name been Jerome or Luis or Dale? The man would not have made it back to his car. A SWAT team would have rappelled from the tree tops and began beating him in rotation.

Of course, we’re not supposed to talk about this. It’s not real news. Real news is the aforementioned school shooting, or a large breasted, septic junkie overdosing expectedly. Real news is an irrelevant radio personality insulting college students and the subsequent feeding frenzy of book deals and talk show appearances. Real news is a million dollar thorough bred breaking its leg and ceasing to be a money machine for its owners (no doubt also part of that storied one percent). Millions of donations and well wishes poured in for that damnable horse, yet 46 million Americans went without health insurance in 2005.

There seems to be a steady ticking off of the often heralded ideals when attempting to illustrate the greatness of America . Things like freedom of speech, the veracity of the press, a right to privacy, blind justice, and compassion for those less fortunate have fallen out of favor in the realm of public opinion. Even more troubling is the ease with which these ideals were given up. The complacent American does not wish to be roused from his slumber, no matter what is happening outside his door.

If blaming the psychotic responsible for the killings doesn’t sate your bloodlust, how about shifting some over to the officials who demurred in locking down the campus despite the fact that a crazed gunman had already killed two people on the premises? This remains the most troubling aspect of the whole story. Whoever made that decision is at least partly responsible for the number of victims. It may be impossible to anticipate a psychotic break down (although, in this instance there was ample evidence), but damage control is crucial to minimize the impact.

The truth is Cho Seung-Hui was an extremely deranged individual. Reports range from mild autism (treatment of which his South Korean immigrant parents were reportedly unable to afford) to full on, teeth chattering delusional psychosis. The man was mentally ill and should have been institutionalized. I believe this to be the primary motivating factor for what occurred.

If you are seeking a philosophical or meta-reading of these events, don’t waste your precious time on the tired arguments trotting out the usual suspect like guns, gun laws, movies, video games, etc. I find it highly amusing that various wackos on both sides of the gun debate are using this as evidence for their respective arguments. And myopic soccer moms are still trying to convince everyone that we are so feeble minded and weak willed that entertainment can drive us to take lives.

When ever these kids go snap and take it upon themselves to thin the herd, we are privy to the same narrative: that they were teased, they were powerless in the face of their aggressors, that they barely received respect from their teachers, let alone their peers, that they were depressed and didn’t have many friends, and so on.

You tend to forget how horrifying the school environment can be once you reach adulthood. I used to contemplate suicide due to a bad hair day or a particularly volatile pimple, and I was merely your run of the mill miscreant. Just ponder the lives of those with more notable differences, i.e. kids with disabilities or deformities, kids from other countries with a limited grasp on their new language, kids too poor to afford decent clothes, etc. These types have two settings in school: ridicule and ignore.

Despite popular opinion proclaiming children to be bright, shining angels straight from heaven, we all know that kids can be interminably cruel and vile to those different from them. The little bastards seem to take joy in sadism. If you want to see fascism first hand, take a walk through a high school cafeteria. The hierarchy is unbeatable and makes the caste system look like a day at the beach. For some kids, every day at school can be catastrophic, made up of an endless stream of humiliations and abject despair. Imagine that your every misstep was observed, then rehashed over and over for the amusement of others.

The American school system fosters this environment by complying with the power brokers of the academia: kids who are wealthy and privileged, alpha dog types, and those willing to break their spines in order to fit in. What no one tells you is that these same kids who are king-shit in their formative years are experiencing their prime entirely too early. It may be a cliché, but I’ll be damned if it isn’t true; the sooner you peak, the longer you fall. These people will spend the rest of their lives trying to recapture that pyrrhic victory of their school days, to no avail.

There is no harm in sympathizing with Cho Seung-Hui. You are a better person if you are able to look at man who wreaked such horror on others and feel compassion for him. That doesn’t mean that you condone what he did, or that you celebrate it, merely means that you can appreciate the type of psychological torment this person was going through to undertake such a ghastly task. It is the first step toward understanding why and how a person could do this. Also, it would behoove everyone to teach their children some damn tolerance and empathy. There will always be a large amount of ribbing and verbal jousting among young people. The problem arises when its malicious, or when one is of the attitude that they are better or more valuable than someone else

Your average kid will not melt down due to adolescent teasing. In fact, some people thrive on this sort of adversity to excel. For a stable person, it’s fairly easy to overcome a tumultuous school experience. For someone already teetering on the brink, or someone without an adequate mental defense, this kind of thing can life shattering, more so than any piece of fluff entertainment.