Jump to content

Charlie Kirk assassinated at an event in Utah (by a 22 YO groyper)


Recommended Posts

Posted
8 minutes ago, elfenix said:

It's probably the notices bulges thing which is not trans messaging. It's a furry meme. And OWO is wide/shocked eyes 😳 (derived from O.O) not the same as uwu which is a cuteness noise. 

Ah, ok. So they're full of shit. That's what I thought. 

cool.gif

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 hour ago, The Hot Dog Buffet said:

Right. I'm not questioning how someone could possibly make a fake image for a screenshot. I'm questioning how you do that without having everyone else on his discord call their local news station and showing what was actually said. How do you pull something like fake texts or discord messages off without having it blow up in your face in less than a month?

I'm assuming these were private messages in discord, not in any chatroom on a server. Media keeps calling them texts but the probable cause affidavit definitely states that these were in discord. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
9 minutes ago, elfenix said:

I'm assuming these were private messages in discord, not in any chatroom on a server. Media keeps calling them texts but the probable cause affidavit definitely states that these were in discord. 

Listen, no one needs to hear from someone that knows what they are talking about. Apparently you didn't get the memo. It's trans-speak. Get on board with the messaging/s

  • Haha 1
Posted
3 minutes ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Even the shittiest Republicans make sense when they leave the cult and the fog lifts. 

 

"Democracy depends on heavy doses of civility".

Thank you, Mike Pence, for saying what so many in this country need to be told right now. Even people with wildly different political opinions can still get this. I just hope there are still enough of us around.

  • Hook 'Em 1
  • Like 1
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted

Good lord, people are going NUTS and using Kirk's murder as a reason to take down anything they don't like. Even the new Indiana Jones DLC got caught up in it, because Indy was saying to a cat in Fascist Italy (1937 Italy, literally Fascist Party members) "you don't care much about these fascists do you?"

Indiana Jones and Charlie Kirk

https://thenerdstash.com/bethesda-under-fire-after-indiana-jones-fascist-promo-linked-to-charlie-kirk-shooting-i-think-ill-pass-on-the-next-elder-scrolls/

 

Fucking ridiculous that these conservative crybullies are getting mad at the character who loves nothing more than punching fascists in the face

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 2
Posted
Just now, David Dennison said:

Keep calling fascists fascists and bigots bigots. 

Do not stop.

I thought it was funnier that they were self-reporting because the game is set in a time period where literal nazis and fascists are the enemy

  • Haha 2
Posted
16 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Good lord, people are going NUTS and using Kirk's murder as a reason to take down anything they don't like. Even the new Indiana Jones DLC got caught up in it, because Indy was saying to a cat in Fascist Italy (1937 Italy, literally Fascist Party members) "you don't care much about these fascists do you?"

Indiana Jones and Charlie Kirk

https://thenerdstash.com/bethesda-under-fire-after-indiana-jones-fascist-promo-linked-to-charlie-kirk-shooting-i-think-ill-pass-on-the-next-elder-scrolls/

 

Fucking ridiculous that these conservative crybullies are getting mad at the character who loves nothing more than punching fascists in the face

It's bullshit, but it was a bit of an odd choice of screenshot by the Bethesda team given the timing (i.e., Charlie Kirk shot a few days prior + screenshot saying "You don't care much about these Fascists, do you?" with a "good kitty" over the top).

It's the type of shit the right has been doing with a "wink-wink" for over a decade, and then crying about it if anyone ever calls them on it.  Think this bitch, for example:

1110255-bash.jpg?w=1360&quality=75&webp=

 

  • Hook 'Em 4
  • Like 1
Posted
3 hours ago, LateAughtsHorn said:

Hey, enchubben is back! I take it he's still cherry picking things to respond to and not engaging with anything that refutes his assertions? 

I'm responding to you :)  Only so much time in a day, and frankly most of the responses i get are the exact same and aren't really indicative of people wanting to have a conversation as much as they are interested in making flawed judgements of my character and childish name calling. 

  • Fuck You 3
Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This is perfection.  It is EXACTLY what the modern right wing does: over the course of time, say all the things.

First, say the racist, cruel, inflammatory things.  Because THAT is what your fanbase wants, and THAT is what energizes and draws more rage-filled eyeballs and dollars to your cause.  Charlie's fans loved him BECAUSE he said he can't trust black pilots, and that black women don't have brainpower.  If he didn't say shit like that, he would have a lot fewer devotees.

But second, say the obvious, rational, human things.  Like some of what he says in the clip Enchubben brought.  That is very, very important.  Because even though it's insanely stupid to think this way, saying two opposite things creates deniability.  First, it creates deniability for people like Enchubben.  Remember, Enchubben didn't love Charlie Kirk because of the things he said above; if that were the case, there are hundreds of voices he would love instead, who have said the same thing more often, more eloquently, and more credibly.  No, Enchubben loved Charlie because of the OTHER things he said -- the pilots, the brainpower, the roving gangs of black men, the goodness of whipping foreigners at the border.

But because Charlie says the things in this clip, Enchubben first gets to lie to himself: "sure, I don't trust black pilots, and I don't think black women have brainpower, and I'm cool with whipping foreigners....but I sign off on the statement that all people are made in the image of God, ERGO, I ain't racist!"  Then, he gets to tell that same lie to the world, as you can see him doing here.

Trump is a master of this - he says two opposite things (Medicare is a scam and we're gonna slash it, and also we're not gonna touch your medicare, etc. etc. about functionally every topic).  An easy analogy for us to understand would be a leader who shows up in Austin to give a speech and says "OU SUCKS!"  We all cheer, and love him for it.  But then he gives a speech in Oklahoma, where he says "OU, what a great university and what a storied football program!  There are so many great universities, I love all of them."  Sure, we can tell ourselves and the world that we're reasonable, see, the guy we love also loves all great American universities.  How can you disagree with that?  But....that isn't the reason we love the guy.  We love the guy because he thinks that OU sucks.  To take it even another level, you can't hang your hat on the time you said "all women should be secure in their bodies and have full bodily autonomy, without fear," when you ALSO said "women have no right to refuse sex to their husband, so even if a man forces himself on his wife, it's not rape."  That's not how it fucking works.  But in MAGA-land, it is.  It's how they get to simultaneously advance abhorrent positions, while claiming they don't agree with the very position they are working tirelessly to advance (remember "Project 2025? Never heard of it?")

Here's the question the Enchubbens of the world would ask themselves if they had any interest in honest self-evaluation: would you love Charlie Kirk if he had said ONLY the things in that video, and not the racist and inflammatory stuff?  And if so, why?  Because if he said only the things he said in that video, he'd be just another voice saying some pretty obvious baseline decent things.  What made Charlie different, and special?  Everyone knows what made him DIFFERENT, and "prophetic."  And it's the shit about whipping foreigners and not trusting black pilots and thinking black women have inferior brainpower and thinking that women should submit and not have agency.

 

It's made me think of Martin Luther. I was raised to only know how awesome he was and integral for the Protestent revolution and how great of a man he was, total veneration.

It was only recently I learned how hateful he was in other aspects of his speech. In fact, Nazi Germany used some of his language and speeches to justify their horrors (things we certainly weren't taught as children).

You can say and do good things in one aspect of your life while also being vile and hateful in another. It's rare that you are viewed holistically I think and it's more a judgment through the lens you have.

Edited by Vegas64
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted (edited)
2 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

It was only recently I learned how hateful he was in other aspects of his speech. In fact, Nazi Germany used some of his language and speeches to justify their horrors (things we certainly weren't taught as children).

Racists and fascists love nothing more than turning shields into swords. Hell, Texans and other slavers in the 1850s were using the Bible to justify slavery and justify their secession 

2 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

You can say and do good things in one aspect of your life while also being vile and hateful in another. It's rare that you are viewed holistically I think and it's more a judgment through the lense you have.

Kirk was orders of magnetude more awful than good. He has no positive contributions to society. He sent EIGHTY busses of rioters to the Capital on January 6th that went on to interrupt the peaceful transition of power and try to hang the Vice President. 

Edited by Captainant
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 1
Posted (edited)
8 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

It's made me think of Martin Luther. I was raised to only know how awesome he was and integral for the Protestent revolution and how great of a man he was, total veneration.

It was only recently I learned how hateful he was in other aspects of his speech. In fact, Nazi Germany used some of his language and speeches to justify their horrors (things we certainly weren't taught as children).

You can say and do good things in one aspect of your life while also being vile and hateful in another. It's rare that you are viewed holistically I think and it's more a judgment through the lens you have.

Every man is flawed.  Don't sanctify any human.  Those are good rules of thumbs.

But another good rule of thumb is "what about him to you admire?"  By and large, what we admire about MLK are things like his Letter from Birmingham Jail, his "I have a dream" speech.....NOT his petty grudges, womanizing, and harsh tone and words he sometimes employed.  [BRISKET correcting himself -- I see you were referring to Martin Luther, not MLK - my bad.  Yeah, Luther was a horrible anti-semite.  But, the contrast still stands.  A man who offered many profound things, and also harbored some truly abhorrent beliefs.  Today, protestants don't admire Luther because of his anti-semitism; they admire his reformation ideas and ideals].

Flip that around: "what is it about Charlie Kirk that you admire?"  Because it's not the stuff he said in that video Enchubben posted.  A jillion people say and have said things like that (again, they are baseline human things).  Nope.  That's not it. What they admire about Charlie Kirk is the pilot stuff, the black women brainpower stuff, the roving gangs of blacks stuff, the whipping foreigners stuff, the great replacement theory stuff.  Take THAT away, and what do you have left?  Just some garden variety platitudes.

That's the difference.  The contrast is important.  Admiring someone in spite of their flaws/worst nature can and should be a conclusion mature thinkers can reach.  Admiring someone BECAUSE of their flaws/worst nature is a shitty thing done by shitty people.

Edited by Brisketexan
  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 minute ago, Captainant said:

Kirk was orders of magnetude more awful than good. He has no positive contributions to society. He sent EIGHTY busses of rioters to the Capital on January 6th that went on to interrupt the peaceful transition of power and try to hang the Vice President. 

I get that is our and a lot of people's subjective opinion, but I think what a large segment of our society is saying is that they (in varying degrees of vehemency) disagree.

Posted
2 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Flip that around: "what is it about Charlie Kirk that you admire?"  Because it's not the stuff he said in that video Enchubben posted.  A jillion people say and have said things like that (again, they are baseline human things).  Nope.  That's not it. What they admire about Charlie Kirk is the pilot stuff, the black women brainpower stuff, the roving gangs of blacks stuff, the whipping foreigners stuff, the great replacement theory stuff.  Take THAT away, and what do you have left?  Just some garden variety platitudes.

No doubt, 100% there are a lot of people that admire Charlie Kirk for his racism and J6 insanity.

But I think, at least from what I've witnessed, is that most people actually admired Charlie Kirk for his evangilism and fervent defense of his (and by extension, their) beliefs and religion. They see him as a lion for their faith in an unchurched, biblically hostile world (even in the big tent of Christianity, where there are faiths and churches who are more "progressive" in views).

Posted
4 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

I get that is our and a lot of people's subjective opinion, but I think what a large segment of our society is saying is that they (in varying degrees of vehemency) disagree.

They disagree in the same way they disagreed with the outcome of the 2020 election. It's all bullshit and vibes and "many people are saying". There's no actual critique there aside from culture warring, it isn't backed by facts.

The most glowing thing I hear about Kirk is the LIE that he believed in and preached peaceful speech. His words and rhetoric were in the mouth of the El Paso shooter. His words and rhetoric were in the mouths of Jan6 rioters.

He was a cultural arsonist, and he's being mourned by people who like the smell of a campfire

  • Hook 'Em 9
Posted (edited)
3 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

No doubt, 100% there are a lot of people that admire Charlie Kirk for his racism and J6 insanity.

But I think, at least from what I've witnessed, is that most people actually admired Charlie Kirk for his evangilism and fervent defense of his (and by extension, their) beliefs and religion. They see him as a lion for their faith in an unchurched, biblically hostile world (even in the big tent of Christianity, where there are faiths and churches who are more "progressive" in views).

I'm gonna be honest - I think most people admired Kirk's ability to say the mean things they already felt while intertwining it with some stuff about Jesus that they could hide behind if needed.

There are millions of people who fervently defend their Christian beliefs yet this guy is the one they idolized.  What makes him different is all that other stuff that we aren't allowed to talk about since he died.

Edited by Chuckie Finster
  • Hook 'Em 8
  • Like 1
Posted
1 hour ago, Hank Kingsley said:

Even the shittiest Republicans make sense when they leave the cult and the fog lifts. 

 

 

IMG_2188.jpeg

Posted (edited)
12 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

I'm gonna be honest - I think most people admired Kirk's ability to say the mean things they already felt while intertwining it with some stuff about Jesus that they could hide behind if needed.

There are millions of people who fervently defend their Christian beliefs yet this guy is the one they idolized.  What makes him different is all that other stuff that we aren't allowed to talk about since he died.

And I'll be equally honest (thanks for your honesty and vulnerability as well) in that I think most people that I've talked to about the situation since last week (I literally had someone in my social circle I didn't even know knew who Charlie Kir was tell me he was his hero), they admire Kirk because he was a lion in defending a culturally unpopular belief system and way of life (and one that is impossible to adhere to as human beings on earth, full of hypocripsy and temptations) and they saw him as their champion of faith in a culture that is counter to everything they believe in. In that way maybe we are saying something similiar?

I think that what made him more popular than the other millions who fervently defend faith was that most of these people from what I can tell, aren't the sharpest tools in the shed, and most are addicted to the internet and the algorithm where Charlie Kirk reigned supreme. He was like the Mr. Beast of Christian short form video or something from what I gather in being prolific and popular. 

Edited by Vegas64
Posted
17 minutes ago, VABuckeye said:

When Mike Pence starts to make a little sense you know we are fucked.

When the fascists in charge, guys like Pence, Romney, and Dick Cheney (and probably W if he ever bothered to open his fucking mouth) all seem like Bernie Sanders by comparison. It's horrifying by itself.

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
16 minutes ago, Captainant said:

He was a cultural arsonist, and he's being mourned by people who like the smell of a campfire

I'm positive you stole that from somewhere....but who cares, it's perfect.

15 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

I'm gonna be honest - I think most people admired Kirk's ability to say the mean things they already felt while intertwining it with some stuff about Jesus that they could hide behind if needed.

Bingo.  Modern American "Christianity" is primarily used as a shield from criticism of abhorrent beliefs.....that are actually directly at odds with what the Jesus of the Gospels actually preached.

15 minutes ago, Chuckie Finster said:

There are millions of people who fervently defend their Christian beliefs yet this guy is the one they idolized.  What makes him different is all that other stuff that we aren't allowed to talk about since he died.

And also bingo.  There are many, many Christians who simply repeat the message of the Gospels (you know, the texts that actually make Christianity....Christianity): "When did we see you a stranger and invite you in?"  “Truly I tell you, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.”  Fuck, even if they want to stick to the OT, Leviticus wasn't ambiguous: “When a foreigner resides among you in your land, do not ill-treat them. The foreigner residing among you must be treated as your native-born. Love them as yourself, for you were foreigners in Egypt."  But....those aren't the people these Charlie Kirk Christians admire and idolize.  Nope.  They choose Charlie because he is DIFFERENT than the people who say those things.

Contrast with, apparently, America's most important Christian of the modern era:

546092052_10172193258380253_360041806777

 

This is not some side-issue for Charlie.  It's not like "Charlie was a really good Christian, but he had a weakness for betting on the ponies, or he cussed a lot, or he loved the ladies, and stepped out on his wife."  Nope.  That's a CORE BELIEF for him, and for those who support him.  They don't support Charlie in spite of that....they support him BECAUSE of it, while simultaneously saying that they love him because he was a good Christian.  Who just happened to preach ideas that are unambiguously 180 degrees in perfect opposition to plainly stated Christian values and beliefs.

Edited by Brisketexan
  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
40 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

This is perfection.  It is EXACTLY what the modern right wing does: over the course of time, say all the things.

First, say the racist, cruel, inflammatory things.  Because THAT is what your fanbase wants, and THAT is what energizes and draws more rage-filled eyeballs and dollars to your cause.  Charlie's fans loved him BECAUSE he said he can't trust black pilots, and that black women don't have brainpower.  If he didn't say shit like that, he would have a lot fewer devotees.

But second, say the obvious, rational, human things.  Like some of what he says in the clip Enchubben brought.  That is very, very important.  Because even though it's insanely stupid to think this way, saying two opposite things creates deniability.  First, it creates deniability for people like Enchubben.  Remember, Enchubben didn't love Charlie Kirk because of the things he said above; if that were the case, there are hundreds of voices he would love instead, who have said the same thing more often, more eloquently, and more credibly.  No, Enchubben loved Charlie because of the OTHER things he said -- the pilots, the brainpower, the roving gangs of black men, the goodness of whipping foreigners at the border.

But because Charlie says the things in this clip, Enchubben first gets to lie to himself: "sure, I don't trust black pilots, and I don't think black women have brainpower, and I'm cool with whipping foreigners....but I sign off on the statement that all people are made in the image of God, ERGO, I ain't racist!"  Then, he gets to tell that same lie to the world, as you can see him doing here.

Trump is a master of this - he says two opposite things (Medicare is a scam and we're gonna slash it, and also we're not gonna touch your medicare, etc. etc. about functionally every topic).  An easy analogy for us to understand would be a leader who shows up in Austin to give a speech and says "OU SUCKS!"  We all cheer, and love him for it.  But then he gives a speech in Oklahoma, where he says "OU, what a great university and what a storied football program!  There are so many great universities, I love all of them."  Sure, we can tell ourselves and the world that we're reasonable, see, the guy we love also loves all great American universities.  How can you disagree with that?  But....that isn't the reason we love the guy.  We love the guy because he thinks that OU sucks.  To take it even another level, you can't hang your hat on the time you said "all women should be secure in their bodies and have full bodily autonomy, without fear," when you ALSO said "women have no right to refuse sex to their husband, so even if a man forces himself on his wife, it's not rape."  That's not how it fucking works.  But in MAGA-land, it is.  It's how they get to simultaneously advance abhorrent positions, while claiming they don't agree with the very position they are working tirelessly to advance (remember "Project 2025? Never heard of it?")

Here's the question the Enchubbens of the world would ask themselves if they had any interest in honest self-evaluation: would you love Charlie Kirk if he had said ONLY the things in that video, and not the racist and inflammatory stuff?  And if so, why?  Because if he said only the things he said in that video, he'd be just another voice saying some pretty obvious baseline decent things.  What made Charlie different, and special?  Everyone knows what made him DIFFERENT, and "prophetic."  And it's the shit about whipping foreigners and not trusting black pilots and thinking black women have inferior brainpower and thinking that women should submit and not have agency.

 

The Motte and Bailey Fallacy. 
 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Motte-and-bailey_fallacy

  • Hook 'Em 3
  • Like 2
Posted
2 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

And I'll be equally honest (thanks for your honesty and vulnerability as well) in that I think most people that I've talked to about the situation since last week (I literally had someone in my social circle I didn't even know knew who Charlie Kir was tell me he was his hero), they admire Kirk because he was a lion in defending a culturally unpopular belief system and way of life (and one that is impossible to adhere to as human beings on earth, full of hypocripsy and temptations) and they saw him as their champion of faith in a culture that is counter to everything they believe in. In that way maybe we are saying something similiar?

Again, there are millions of loud and proud Christians who are (were?) infinitely less popular than Charlie Kirk.  The difference is most of them haven't made a career of owning the libs, with a "Jesus" cherry on top.

He allowed people to be their worst selves while feeling good about it.

  • Hook 'Em 8
Posted
1 minute ago, Chuckie Finster said:

Again, there are millions of loud and proud Christians who are (were?) infinitely less popular than Charlie Kirk.  The difference is most of them haven't made a career of owning the libs, with a "Jesus" cherry on top.

He allowed people to be their worst selves while feeling good about it.

I don't know, maybe you are right. But I don't think it's as clear cut or obvious as you think it is. I think it has more to do with distribution and a virtous cycle of popularity, likes, clicks, views, etc.

The only other Christian I can think of who was/is more popular for both the lay and actively practicing Chrisian is maybe Joel Osteen. And his message is wildly different as a prosperity gospel guy, but the distribution and algo's keep him relevant. 

As I've sort of poured over the Charlie Kirk issue the last week, I definitely agree that his nationalism and politics also had a lot to do with a certain (large size) sect of Christians loving him as well. Those are Christians who I agree with Brisket who are doing it wrong.

 

Posted
13 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

they admire Kirk because he was a lion in defending a culturally unpopular belief system and way of life (and one that is impossible to adhere to as human beings on earth, full of hypocripsy and temptations) and they saw him as their champion of faith in a culture that is counter to everything they believe in

 

Well, frankly, what people like that think is not relevant, because they are irredeemable. Which is hard to hear I'm sure, but it's the cold truth. I realize the argument that they have to be brought into the tent, but the fact remains that they can't be brought in the tent in a pluralistic society, full stop. 

 

The fact they think that attacking others is the only way to defend themselves is the root issue, not their personal beliefs. They simply cannot coexist.

12 minutes ago, Brisketexan said:

Modern American "Christianity" is primarily used as a shield from criticism of abhorrent beliefs.....that are actually directly at odds with what the Jesus of the Gospels actually preached.

This.

  • Hook 'Em 3
Posted
1 minute ago, G650 said:

 

Well, frankly, what people like that think is not relevant, because they are irredeemable. Which is hard to hear I'm sure, but it's the cold truth. I realize the argument that they have to be brought into the tent, but the fact remains that they can't be brought in the tent in a pluralistic society, full stop. 

 

I hear you. I personally think there is no such thing as "irrdeemable" and that everyone can be redeemed, but I understand those are personal values and beliefs. One of the reason I am involved in prison ministry IRL.

Posted
Just now, Vegas64 said:

I hear you. I personally think there is no such thing as "irrdeemable" and that everyone can be redeemed, but I understand those are personal values and beliefs. One of the reason I am involved in prison ministry IRL.

 

I mean, they can be redeemed by themselves. They cannot be redeemed by us is what I mean.

Posted
19 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

And I'll be equally honest (thanks for your honesty and vulnerability as well) in that I think most people that I've talked to about the situation since last week (I literally had someone in my social circle I didn't even know knew who Charlie Kir was tell me he was his hero), they admire Kirk because he was a lion in defending a culturally unpopular belief system and way of life (and one that is impossible to adhere to as human beings on earth, full of hypocripsy and temptations) and they saw him as their champion of faith in a culture that is counter to everything they believe in.

That’s not even true, well over half the country id’s as Christian. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
1 minute ago, G650 said:

 

I mean, they can be redeemed by themselves. They cannot be redeemed by us is what I mean.

If you've ever been a part of helping someone change, you might disagree. But yes, ultimately the locus of control and motivation has to be internal first, but the support can be almost as important.

I've seen it with religious things but also things like addiction and substance abuse -- I am assuming politics is not more sacred, could be wrong.

Posted
4 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

One of the reason I am involved in prison ministry IRL.

I'll suggest that the average prisoner is way more "redeemable" than the average MAGA.  Mostly because a higher percentage of prisoners would concede that their criminal action was wrong.  ZERO MAGAs would so concede.

  • Hook 'Em 6
  • Fuck Around and Find Out 1
Posted
Just now, bluto said:

That’s not even true, well over half the country id’s as Christian. 

That's the problem with the laziness and cultural status of what it means to self identify as Chrisitan in America (which I think is Brisket's main railing point).

Posted
Just now, Vegas64 said:

If you've ever been a part of helping someone change, you might disagree.

 

Well, I've mentioned before, but I sit on the board of our local university here. One of the things I'm absolutely most proud of is our recently instituted prison program. Obviously a big part of being able to participate in that is not attacking others. You don't seem to be understanding what I'm saying.

  • Like 1
Posted
1 minute ago, Brisketexan said:

I'll suggest that the average prisoner is way more "redeemable" than the average MAGA.  Mostly because a higher percentage of prisoners would concede that their criminal action was wrong.  ZERO MAGAs would so concede.

You'd actually be surprised. "Everyone in jail is innocent" is not an axiom for no reason. But even if it's just 1%, you are right. 

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
52 minutes ago, Captainant said:

Racists and fascists love nothing more than turning shields into swords. Hell, Texans and other slavers in the 1850s were using the Bible to justify slavery and justify their secession 

Kirk was orders of magnetude more awful than good. He has no positive contributions to society. He sent EIGHTY busses of rioters to the Capital on January 6th that went on to interrupt the peaceful transition of power and try to hang the Vice President. 

Makes that Pence clip above even more amazing. He gushes about Charlie the person even though that same asshole sent bus-loads of J6'ers to DC to storm the Capitol and potentially hang Pence for not overthrowing American Government that day.

Posted
When Mike Pence starts to make a little sense you know we are fucked.

Mike Pence has always had a fiber of decency within him. Remember when he went to that play (in NY?) and was getting booed and he blew it off by saying “That’s everyone’s right.”
  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted
12 minutes ago, Vegas64 said:

You'd actually be surprised. "Everyone in jail is innocent" is not an axiom for no reason. But even if it's just 1%, you are right. 

guess how i know you never been locked up. thats just some bullshit from shawshank redemption . 

  • Hook 'Em 2
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, VABuckeye said:

When Mike Pence starts to make a little sense you know we are fucked.

Well, there's also the issue of if we actually put America on trial and we're fair about it, we'd come to the realization that some level of stochastic political violence (or any kind of violence, really) is actually wanted by the right because it improves their electoral chances. This is the dystopia that conservatives want.

Edited by elfenix
  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
17 hours ago, BurntOrange&White said:

The only meaningful thing democrats should do at this point, if they ever get all 3 branches, is to completely pull fox license and cite all the made up bullshit lawsuits. But we all know democrats are giant pussies.

are not fascists and not seeking to obliterate the 1st amendment.

  • Hook 'Em 1
Posted
5 minutes ago, yoladu said:

are not fascists and not seeking to obliterate the 1st amendment.

Their inaction is complicit in the degradation. Senior democratic leadership and party leadership have failed this country just as hard as republicans. 

  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Vegas64 said:

No doubt, 100% there are a lot of people that admire Charlie Kirk for his racism and J6 insanity.

But I think, at least from what I've witnessed, is that most people actually admired Charlie Kirk for his evangilism and fervent defense of his (and by extension, their) beliefs and religion. They see him as a lion for their faith in an unchurched, biblically hostile world (even in the big tent of Christianity, where there are faiths and churches who are more "progressive" in views).

Yeah. He's able to take the clearly anti-Christian things that just about everyone is guilty of at some time or another and make people feel like it's ok because there was actually some virtue to those actions.

Posted
3 hours ago, VABuckeye said:

My daughter is a teacher in Fairfax County, VA.  She has always had a pride flag hanging in her classroom.  Knowing her, she probably still has it up.

She couldn't have it up in a Texas classroom.



×
×
  • Create New...