A reader told me she was puzzled by the editorial page editor of the Detroit Free Press calling on Barbara Byrum, a leading Democratic candidate for secretary of state, to drop out of the race.
This is ridiculous. Let her run. Let the chips fall where they may. We have thousands of "public servants" who are currently on the taxpayer/corporate tit who are being credibly accused of far worse than mashing as children. They're still in office and doing their damnedest to destroy the Republic. Two of them are on the Supreme Court. Yes, society needs to get its head around the mortal damage that privilege (mostly White but generally economic) and Misogyny are doing to the fabric of global society. Democrats , as a party, have done inestimable damage to American society by playing it safe. The fight will be bloody but we can't better society by trying to avoid it.
OK Jack, 99% of the time I agree with you. But Jeezuz, did you ever miss the mark on this! Especially grievous that you did so at this point of time. Talk about tone deaf, you my friend need atomic powered hearing aids.
Yes Barb Bynum needs to step aside. But dammit Jack, it isn’t her SON who needs to be protected! I don’t give a rat’s ass if he was “only” 13. He allegedly sexually assaulted another student!
How about you lay your inherit misogyny aside and realize that it’s time to stop excusing men and boys for their violence against and mistreatment of women and girls?
Yeah, I’m pissed and righteously so. My abuse began at the age of this student who was (allegedly) assaulted. I’m disappointed to discover you’re a member of the “boys will be boys” club.
No, I am NOT excusing whatever he did . But the key word is allegedly. And also 13. If he were 18 and this was proven I'd be happy to see him severely punished . We have allegations against a 13 year old, who was still essentially a child
So where’s your concern for the student who was the target of his actions? I notice you express a whole bunch of concern for the impact of this boy, but absolutely ZERO for the girl he targeted. Any concern for how her life has been impacted? Shades of Brock Turner much Jack?
Her mother is not a candidate for office. She's gotten counseling and a settlement from the district. Again, neither you nor I know exactly what happened here. I do not excuse any of that.
I agree wholeheartedly with Bex. You wrote "I don’t know any details beyond that. Nor do I want or need to." But you do need to. If you are going to write about a sexual assault, you have a responsibility to know the details of it and not write it off as an inconsequential part of the story. You then double down by writing: "We don’t know, of course, whether this was a deliberate sexual assault or whether the boy was just being a little jerk. It doesn’t matter." As the father of a daughter, I'll tell you it definitely does matter. And characterizing the act of a boy putting his hands down the pants of a girl as "being a little jerk" trivializes the act as if he had just pulled her pigtail. A boy putting his hands down a girl's pants is a deliberate act, and shouldn't be brushed off simply because you don't know the details.
I am not brushing it off, nor am I making a judgment about what happened -- you are. I am simply saying she must drop out because of this, And if you think about it, her candidacy might well also invade the privacy of the little girl, and someone might well print her name. and by the way, we have a 13-year-old granddaughter,
You're focusing on the point of your story and not on how it's presented. I agree that her candidacy could reveal the identities of the two children involved and agree with you that for this reason she should think carefully whether running is worth this. No disagreement there. But by stating that "We don’t know, of course, whether this was a deliberate sexual assault or whether the boy was just being a little jerk. It doesn’t matter" you are making a judgement. You're making a judgement that there is a difference between sexual assault and a boy putting his hand down a girl's pants for another reason. There isn't. Both are sexual assault.
But alleged sexual assault IS NOT WHAT JACK IS WRITING ABOUT! He is writing about Ms Byrum's candidacy. If a few readers of a brief Substack opinion piece are triggered to jump to conclusions of an incident they know next to nothing about, imagine what voters could conclude.
Thank you Lorraine. The boy is not being elected to office. Ms. Byrum is the candidate. Whether Ms. Byrum can do a good job as Secretary of State is the issue.
I’m voting for Suzanna Shkreli. She’s the only candidate in this race who has statewide executive level experience as the lottery commissioner, and prosecutorial experience — because fighting Trump where it matters most, in the courtroom is going to be something we need in 2028. I’ve heard her story and positions she’s impressive.
Republicans will have a field day between Gilchrist not showing up for work and Byrum shielding her son and revictimizing that girl. Easy choice!
Perhaps Kaffer would prefer Gilchrest, the current President of the Senate, who showed up for his job only 4% of the time, all year long. You would prefer a candidate who was absent on the job 96% of the time, yet took his full pay check?
This is an unfair smear against Barb. She used the same appeal process everyone has available and the school decided. She did what all parents should - what she thought best for her son. The alleged victims parents did the same for their daughter. More power to them both. He was punished which should be the end the story (since there is no proof or finding that Barb used improper influence). So must we now punish his mother, and the Democratic Party and deny the state the best qualified SOS candidate over this?! I think not.
This is ridiculous. Let her run. Let the chips fall where they may. We have thousands of "public servants" who are currently on the taxpayer/corporate tit who are being credibly accused of far worse than mashing as children. They're still in office and doing their damnedest to destroy the Republic. Two of them are on the Supreme Court. Yes, society needs to get its head around the mortal damage that privilege (mostly White but generally economic) and Misogyny are doing to the fabric of global society. Democrats , as a party, have done inestimable damage to American society by playing it safe. The fight will be bloody but we can't better society by trying to avoid it.
OK Jack, 99% of the time I agree with you. But Jeezuz, did you ever miss the mark on this! Especially grievous that you did so at this point of time. Talk about tone deaf, you my friend need atomic powered hearing aids.
Yes Barb Bynum needs to step aside. But dammit Jack, it isn’t her SON who needs to be protected! I don’t give a rat’s ass if he was “only” 13. He allegedly sexually assaulted another student!
How about you lay your inherit misogyny aside and realize that it’s time to stop excusing men and boys for their violence against and mistreatment of women and girls?
Yeah, I’m pissed and righteously so. My abuse began at the age of this student who was (allegedly) assaulted. I’m disappointed to discover you’re a member of the “boys will be boys” club.
No, I am NOT excusing whatever he did . But the key word is allegedly. And also 13. If he were 18 and this was proven I'd be happy to see him severely punished . We have allegations against a 13 year old, who was still essentially a child
So where’s your concern for the student who was the target of his actions? I notice you express a whole bunch of concern for the impact of this boy, but absolutely ZERO for the girl he targeted. Any concern for how her life has been impacted? Shades of Brock Turner much Jack?
Her mother is not a candidate for office. She's gotten counseling and a settlement from the district. Again, neither you nor I know exactly what happened here. I do not excuse any of that.
I agree wholeheartedly with Bex. You wrote "I don’t know any details beyond that. Nor do I want or need to." But you do need to. If you are going to write about a sexual assault, you have a responsibility to know the details of it and not write it off as an inconsequential part of the story. You then double down by writing: "We don’t know, of course, whether this was a deliberate sexual assault or whether the boy was just being a little jerk. It doesn’t matter." As the father of a daughter, I'll tell you it definitely does matter. And characterizing the act of a boy putting his hands down the pants of a girl as "being a little jerk" trivializes the act as if he had just pulled her pigtail. A boy putting his hands down a girl's pants is a deliberate act, and shouldn't be brushed off simply because you don't know the details.
I am not brushing it off, nor am I making a judgment about what happened -- you are. I am simply saying she must drop out because of this, And if you think about it, her candidacy might well also invade the privacy of the little girl, and someone might well print her name. and by the way, we have a 13-year-old granddaughter,
You're focusing on the point of your story and not on how it's presented. I agree that her candidacy could reveal the identities of the two children involved and agree with you that for this reason she should think carefully whether running is worth this. No disagreement there. But by stating that "We don’t know, of course, whether this was a deliberate sexual assault or whether the boy was just being a little jerk. It doesn’t matter" you are making a judgement. You're making a judgement that there is a difference between sexual assault and a boy putting his hand down a girl's pants for another reason. There isn't. Both are sexual assault.
But alleged sexual assault IS NOT WHAT JACK IS WRITING ABOUT! He is writing about Ms Byrum's candidacy. If a few readers of a brief Substack opinion piece are triggered to jump to conclusions of an incident they know next to nothing about, imagine what voters could conclude.
Thank you for getting it,
Thank you Lorraine. The boy is not being elected to office. Ms. Byrum is the candidate. Whether Ms. Byrum can do a good job as Secretary of State is the issue.
I’m voting for Suzanna Shkreli. She’s the only candidate in this race who has statewide executive level experience as the lottery commissioner, and prosecutorial experience — because fighting Trump where it matters most, in the courtroom is going to be something we need in 2028. I’ve heard her story and positions she’s impressive.
Republicans will have a field day between Gilchrist not showing up for work and Byrum shielding her son and revictimizing that girl. Easy choice!
Perhaps Kaffer would prefer Gilchrest, the current President of the Senate, who showed up for his job only 4% of the time, all year long. You would prefer a candidate who was absent on the job 96% of the time, yet took his full pay check?
This is an unfair smear against Barb. She used the same appeal process everyone has available and the school decided. She did what all parents should - what she thought best for her son. The alleged victims parents did the same for their daughter. More power to them both. He was punished which should be the end the story (since there is no proof or finding that Barb used improper influence). So must we now punish his mother, and the Democratic Party and deny the state the best qualified SOS candidate over this?! I think not.