Message to a Facebook Friend of a Facebook Friend

You know how I knew your facebook post was going to be partisan talking-point bullshit? Because you started out with "I've read the entire deal with Iran..." I'm not sure what kind of free time you've got on your hands, but I find it difficult to believe you spent any of it wading through 150+ pages of legalese about reactors, heavy water, and enriched uranium. And even if you did, you'd have to have a "rather particular set of skills" (to paraphrase Liam Neeson) to fully understand it. But I don't know you; maybe that's right in your wheelhouse. However, then you had to go and add "and spoke to many others who have also read it." That, my friend, is a bridge too far. You might be able to convince me that you had read it. It's available online. I even skimmed through it myself. And by skimmed, I mean I read the first couple of pages, and then scrolled through it, looking at random sections. You might even be able to convince me that you fully understood it, even though people who are experts in the field have had some trouble with it. But the idea that you know "many" people who have accomplished a task only slightly longer and less interesting that sitting through a Russian film festival strains credulity.

I actually just felt bad for you when you came up with the howler, "and I was talking to my friend who's an expert in international law...." Oh, of course there are experts in international law out there; most people just call them "lawyers," which makes me wonder why you didn't. This smacks of that faulty appeal to authority, whereby we're supposed to give more weight to your argument because you referenced someone (an unknown someone, in this case) who you've claimed is an "expert" (again, without actually giving any real credentials). I'll bet you were one of those guys who had a Canadian girlfriend, too.

Yeah, It's An Old Meme. So What?!

I had some time on my hands, and hadn't seen anyone else do it yet, so...

"Hitler Finds Out About Hillary's Poll Numbers"

Never Look a Gift Course in the Mouth.

I fully agree with a student body's right to self-govern. If the students at UC Irvine feel that flying the flag of the country in which they are located sends the wrong message, and endorses American "exceptionalism and superiority," then by all means they should completely separate themselves from that. Completely. I eagerly await, then, the next resolution, which divests UC Irvine from all that dirty, dirty American federal funding as well as federal student loan opportunities. Because clearly, taking that money sends the wrong message, and might lead people to think that one who accepted that money, even tacitly, through attending a school funded in part by that money, was lauding themselves (with an exceptional, superior attitude, I guess) over others.

In case any of you out there don't recognize sarcasm when you read it, let me just say that I do actually applaud those who have strong convictions. But if you feel that strongly about them, live by them. Attend one of the many other universities around the world that don't feel any need to tout American values, including "exceptionalism and superiority." Otherwise, you just seem like a petulant child, throwing a tantrum, telling mommy and daddy how much you hate them, even as you ask to borrow the keys to the car.

I'm not even going to address the "freedom of speech, in a space that aims to be as inclusive as possible, can be interpreted as hate speech" line of the resolution, because if you think that, even a little bit, then you don't really understand the concept of "freedom of speech." Or possibly language.