"get him to do civil disobedience the right way." wow this is Orwellian doublespeak at its finest. So now, from some clever phrasing, civil disobedience is redefined. They killed two birds with one stone. Doing something unlawful is now BEYOND civil disobedience (terrorism perhaps?), and simultaneously, doing something lawful, but inconvenient for officials, like exercising free speech, is now defined as civil disobedience. They never let a good crisis go to waste.
To all the nay-sayers out there, if you don't like it, just don't be a part of it. We shouldn't seek to be a unified colt, that is how THEY operate. Remember this: the Sons of Liberty (led by Samuel Adams) were key to the American revolution's success. They were the "radical" rebels, whom the intellectuals wanted to distance themselves from. But BOTH the intellectuals AND the radicals played important roles in the scheme of History, so even if you find yourself more comfortable with one style than the other, respect that both types are attacking the same problem from different angles, which in the long run will be most effective.