Trump says suspect in custody in killing of Charlie Kirk

[NxNW]

Charlie could've lived to be a hundred years old, and I'm pretty confident he would've never shot someone over differing views.

He praised Pelosi's attacker. He was fine with using a hammer.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

Why do you think his MAGA family were a leftist influence?

Do you understand the definition of a "rebellious child?"

 

[Oompa Loompa]

He praised Pelosi's attacker. He was fine with using a hammer.

Calling your bluff. Citation please and I would like direct quotes.

 

[BPPLEE]

Calling your bluff. Citation please and I would like direct quotes.

He said the attack was awful but he did call for a patriot to come forward and post bail for the attacker

 

[Oompa Loompa]

He said the attack was awful but he did call for a patriot to come forward and post bail for the attacker

Wasn't that about the same time Kamala Harris was bailing out BLM thugs and vandals? Maybe Kirk was making a sarcastic remark to point out how the left was encouraging violence?

 

[Bradskii]

This point of view completely explains why academia has failed so many students and have regressed to propaganda machines with the intent of radicalized their students to become the next generation of activists. If Kirk failed so miserably in "dismantling tose of the liberal left" wouldn't more liberals want more debates to expose him instead of trying to silence him and his supporters?

I had no problem with him airing his views. It was nice to get them out into the sunshine so we could all see what they were.

 

[rjs330]

Makes everyone wonder where society went wrong for this troubled young kid. If I may address the elephant in the room. Society failed him by convincing him that any speech he didnt like was hate speech and violence was an acceptable response. Does anyone think for a second that perhaps celebrities holding bloodied heads resembling Donald Trump had anything to do with this? Does anyone think that perhaps a sitting president calling half the country "the greatest threat to democracy" had anything to do with it? When you had mobs of people throwing milkshakes and attacking people, some even punching elderly people for wearing a MAGA hat, does anyone think that perhaps that had something to do with it? When Trump was shot in the ear, and the internet became flooded with people enraged because the gunman missed, does anyone think perhaps that had something to do with this impressionable young kid assassinating someone because he had the audacity of sitting down with people who disagreed with him and have conversations?

I think so. Violence has ALWAYS been a possible response to speech we don't like. All this talk about how violence is never an acceptable response belies the fact that it always has been. People have been punching each other out forever over insulting things or grossly inappropriate things. Thats why rhe Supreme Court has recognized fighting words as unacceptable speech.

But they are fighting words and not killing words. There is NO speech that is worth killing over. Fighting over, well maybe, but you run the risk of a Disorderly Conduct charge for both of you.

Words can even incite a riot and thats not acceptable speech either.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

If true, then it was Charlie Kirk's own words and attitude towards the transgender community, and not rhetoric from the left, that angered Tyler Robinson and led to his decision to assassinate him.

I think that's debatable.

If certain progressive groups were spinning rhetoric that labelled "anyone who doesn't get fully on board with our definition of Trans rights" as a Nazi who wants to commit trans genocide, that would play a factor as well.


If a group spends a considerable amount time and effort convincing you that anyone who likes pineapple on pizza is Hitler.

And as a result, me traveling around the country proclaiming "I love pineapple on pizza" makes you so angry that you want to shoot me...

Sure, it may have been my opinion that sparked your outrage, but it was the indoctrination that made you think my opinion was that big of a threat in the first place.


As far as I why I think that?

Prior to this current incarnation of trans activism and their rhetoric heating up, someone saying "men cannot become women, and women cannot become men" was a view held by almost everyone (left and right), and nobody was getting shot for it, nobody was being called "fascist" for it.

In fact, suggesting that such an idea would ever become mainstream viewpoint on the left was considered a "laughable conservative slippery slope argument" by Democrats.

Here's an example:

Here's Dennis Prager saying "pretty soon they're going to say men can menstruate", and it's met with belly laughter from the audience and eyerolls from the liberal panel and them saying "oh c'mon, that's ridiculous nobody's going to say that"

Fast forward to 6 years after that video was made... turns out, not only was Prager right about that, but rejecting the idea (that liberals themselves said wasn't a real thing and just a slippery slope 6 years prior) gets one labelled a fascist and paints a target on their back.

The other argument a few years back of "pretty soon, they're going to be pushing to make gender affirming care and puberty blockers available for minors", that was also met with the "eyeroll, that's just a slippery slope argument, we're just talking about adults here"

Ben Shapiro gets lumped in with Charlie Kirk on that topic.

Shapiro (from a DailyWire podcast): “If you’re an adult and you want to live your life as though you’re the opposite sex, you have the freedom to do that, just don't expect me to participate and pay for it. But puberty blockers and cross-sex hormones for minors is child abuse"

So basically, he's affirming the position that Democrats claimed to have in 2022, "no, it's not going to happen for children, but if you're an adult, you're free to do what you want"

He still gets the "trans genocide fascist" label circa 2025.




While I think people can have reasonable disagreements on these types of subjects... I do think "rate of change" demands being made by the progressive left have been unreasonable, and the center-left have opted to get dragged along for the ride rather than asserting themselves a little more.

This paradigm where if you hold the the views of Democrats from 10 years ago, the Democrats of today will call you a fascist (or at the very least, some sort of "-phobe" or "-ist") certainly isn't a healthy or sustainable pattern.

 

[Chesterton]

progressive left

Contradiction in terms.

 

[rjs330]

The one Christian trans person I know was disowned by her parents when she transitioned.


You’re having trouble grasping it because you’re assuming everything he did was sincere and not part of a performance. His public persona, his “debates” and dunking on people, his propagandizing were all part of a schtick. His whole public persona was built around a facade of “speech” and exchange of ideas.

I’d add that there’s a phenomenon prevalent on the right (maybe on both sides, who knows) of saying terrible stuff about people on the left with a straight face and without really thinking about the magnitude of what those words mean. The result is a disconnect between the message conveyed by a person’s words and what’s conveyed by their (relatively more pleasant) demeanor.

It was sincere. I've heard from so many people that what he said he believed in and he was no phoney. People genuinely loved him as a person. There was no facade.

He did enjoy debating people and trying get them to change their minds or at least to really think.about what rhey believed in and if it was correct or not.

He didn't hate nor did he express hate. It was accusations of hatred from the left that contributed to his death. He just spoke truth when the truth isn't popular.

 

[Servus]

Media reports are coming in that Tyler Robinson was in a romantic relationship with a transgender partner.

Charlie Kirk's alleged assassin lived with transgender partner who is now cooperating with FBI: Officials

EXCLUSIVE: Charlie Kirk’s alleged assassin lived with his transgender partner, Fox News Digital has learned.

www.foxnews.com

 

[Oompa Loompa]

I had no problem with him airing his views. It was nice to get them out into the sunshine so we could all see what they were.

Well unfortunately, there are many in your camp who think otherwise to include his assassin, all those who celebrated the assassination, and are currently on BlueSky making death lists. All we need for the country to begin healing is for the left to acknowledge the part they have played lest CNN reports a "bloody but mostly peaceful assassination."

 

[Bradskii]

Okay maybe I'm out of touch. I don't follow popular culture very closely. Name some right-wingers who identify as trans. I'm sure they'd be quite famous because the media loves such incongruous combinations. I'm sure they've appeared on every talk show that I don't watch.

From here: Making Sense of the Trans Right - The Gay & Lesbian Review

'I interviewed more than 110 transgender people with far-right views for my forthcoming book, Belonging Through Exclusion: Understanding the Transgender Far Right, which examines the motivations behind their beliefs and what actions could prevent others from joining them.'

Plus: LGBTQ conservatism - Wikipedia

I'm not even sure why this is even being questioned. Again, what has your gender have to do with your politics or your religious beliefs?

 

[Bradskii]

Nope, it was to advertise his views to those outside his base.

He preached to mthe choir.

Because they did.

We can only agree to disagree.

You don't get candlelight vigils across a country the size of America unless millions of people also have a high opinion of you.

I didn't suggest that other people did not have a high opinion of him.

 

[Bradskii]

All we need for the country to begin healing is for the left to acknowledge the part they have played lest CNN reports a "bloody but mostly peaceful assassination."

That's all you need? Yeah, I imagine that you actually think that. Your earlier post confirmed it.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

Okay maybe I'm out of touch. I don't follow popular culture very closely. Name some right-wingers who identify as trans. I'm sure they'd be quite famous because the media loves such incongruous combinations. I'm sure they've appeared on every talk show that I don't watch.

How "far" right are you looking for?

Buck Angel and Blaire White come to mind (as people who expressed conservative viewpoints on the subject)

(Disclosure, Buck was a FTM trans adult film star in the past, so if you google that name, don't blame me if you get an eyeful of something you weren't expecting to see)... But Buck has also been very vocal about the fact that it's gotten too pervasive and lacked screening processes and due diligence, Buck's words "someone's got to step up and save these kids from corrupt doctors".

It should be noted, that Buck was considered (at one point) to be one of the "Pioneers of the movement", but Buck also recounts how the decision was a long and arduous one, and not a decision that should be made in a period of 3 months based on the whims of a 13 year old.


Now, the argument I've heard from some uber-progressives before is that their opinions on the issue "don't count as much" because they're more "passable" and...I kid you not, I've heard some use the term "passable-privilege" to describe Blaire and Buck.
(Meaning, since they're "convincing" enough that if they walked into the bathroom of their choice, nobody would notice or care), therefore, their opinions "aren't as valid".

As if "it has to challenge someone's comfort level" is "the point" or some "feather in the cap" for the movement.

 

[RDKirk]

How "far" right are you looking for?

Buck Angel and Blaire White come to mind (as people who expressed conservative viewpoints on the subject)

Now, the argument I've heard from some uber-progressives before is that their opinions on the issue "don't count as much" because they're more "passable" and...I kid you not, I've heard some use the term "passable-privilege" to describe Blaire and Buck.
(Meaning, since they're "convincing" enough that if they walked into the bathroom of their choice, nobody would notice or care), therefore, their opinions "aren't as valid".

As if "it has to challenge someone's comfort level" is "the point" or some "feather in the cap" for the movement.

That's kind of ironic inasumuch as to be "passable" means that they have gone to the expense and physical pain of becoming just about as trans as possible...they are on the far end of being trans.

 

[ThatRobGuy]

That's kind of ironic inasumuch as to be "passable" means that they have gone to the expense and physical pain of becoming just about as trans as possible...they are on the far end of being trans.

Correct, and I would encourage people to listen to the interviews that Buck has done.

Buck openly admits (paraphrasing) "I'm not a male, I'm a female with Gender Dysphoria, there's something wrong with my brain chemistry, if I didn't do this, I was going to self-destruct, but this isn't the kind of thing you can ascertain with 3 weeks worth of counseling sessions, this was a long journey"

Juxtaposed against this

Do I think trans people exist? (by that I mean, people who brains are telling them they actually belong with the opposite sex, and it gives them great mental distress if they can't present like the opposite sex)

Yes...

Do I think it's as pervasive as the number of people (especially younger people) who opt to identify as anything other than "boring old cis person"?...absolutely not. There certainly is a "fad" and "coolness" component in all this.

 

[Oompa Loompa]

That's all you need? Yeah, I imagine that you actually think that. Your earlier post confirmed it.

Yes.

 

[Postvieww]

It was his MO. I'm beginning to think you've never watched any of his debates...

Probably more than you. It was not worthy of the death penalty because he had the moral high ground. Debate is all about presenting facts to support your ideas, Charlie did that very well . Your opinion that many times he came in a distant second or was sticking it to them is a flawed biased opinion that shows if you really did watch some of his videos you really didn’t look at them objectively. That is my opinion!. I really would like to see at least one video where in your opinion Charlie came in a distant second, if there is one.