Politics CHARLIE KIRK SHOT IN UTAH

Yeah, no. Again. There is no both sides on this one.

Calling out MAGA and Charlie Kirk for their bigotry is legitimate. Just scroll up to see the kind of racist shit he said.

Calling bigotry out for what it is is good and honorable.

Democratic leaders are not advocating for violence or kicking people out of the country. Or targeting specific races or genders.

There is a huge difference.

 

yeah I've seen it. On fb and in here. The truncated misleading quotes, some so dissected they are out of context. Ive seen what was posted on here, did my research and found the full quote. Realized that people are either sheep, believing a seven word quote, and not watching full videos to get the full truth, I don't know. But its a fact quotes like he said he is okay with kids being shot to keep the 2nd amendment haven been twisted to fit the lefts narrative.
Ive seen people up in arms. White men up in arms because he said women go to college to find a husband. But in that video, not one girl was offended and understood what he was saying.

If you don't think there are both sides, you are one of their victims, the ones who want us all to fight.
Ive seen it. If you haven't, do more research. Its out there.

 

Prior to his death, I was only vaguely aware of Kirk as some kind of toxic opportunist who found a niche with disaffected young Americans. It wasn't difficult to turn off that kind of vile noise. But now it's as if this guy was some young Jesus, reincarnated to save the youth of America. Half of this country literally probably never, ever heard of the guy prior to two days ago and now he is right up there with George Washington. The rending of clothing, the crocodile tears and the soaring rhetoric for this guy is utterly disgusting and and puts a capstone on just how far this country has fallen in terms of it ideals and it's "heroes". Right up there with the whitewashing of Ashlie Babbitt. Wow, from relative obscurity to sainthood with the pull of a trigger.......Make America Great Again........

 

My post was regarding the respect of facts and the expert professionals who have spent their lives studying a subject. For example climatology, epidemiology, chemistry, etc, just to name a few...

Arguing against the findings of these expert professionals when you don't have equivalent educational or professional expertise is deliberately avoiding a good faith conversation.

Arguing against their positions in effort to change popular opinions against those findings is engaging is simply engaging in deceit and the spread of propaganda.

The left doesn't engage in this kind of thing in order to target specific races, genders, or religions.

 

This has assassination by FBI all over it.
Pointing at the left?
Why would the left want a up and coming very popular political influencer that wanted the Epstein Files published killed.

Trump had this man taken out. Anyone who can’t see that isn’t paying attention.

Trump is using the Putin playbook.

 

Even more so they did this on the very first stop of his tour at the beginning of it so Epstein didn’t even get brought up yet.

 

How many of us common folk are engaged in dialogue with scientists and professors?
im referring to us common folk on day to day socializing. What we are witnessing, as common folk express themselves.
Also. Scientific studies can be manipulated to fit narratives as well, simply by ommiting certain facts/knowledge. And let’s not pretend educators and scientists don't also have beliefs and agendas just like politicians.

But thats all murky. I stand by what i said which i believe is clear. Both sides. All sides must engage in open and honest dialogue for us to come back together as a society and humanity. The right must listen to the left and the left must listen to the right. Without this, we are doomed.

 

Oh, they caught the guy? Great. Release the Epstein files.

 

Near where I live there's a strip with all kinds of auto-repair shops, including one that specializes in transmissions and it's called "Trany Dave's". I'm sure he's had that name for decades and even if he knew, he's not going to change it now.

 

People can have misunderstandings. What you were describing is a misunderstanding. Charlie Kirk is not an expert professional in anything. Nobody has any responsibility to know exactly what he says or how he says it. Nobody has any responsibility to give anything he says any weight.

He was a snake oil salesman. He engaged in debate with untrained an unprepared youth making shocking claims and spreading lies and hate toward specific races, genders, and religions in order to enrich himself.

Rather than posting the full debates on his website he would clip them when a student was getting the better of him so that he could show his little gotcha moments. It had nothing to do with quality debate and everything to do with his own personal financial gain.

Nothing regarding Charlie Kirk rises to the level of respect anybody should have when a scientist reports findings and data regarding their specific discipline.

Charlie Kirk is not an equivalent side of an argument. Nobody like Charlie Kirk is an equivalent side of an argument.

Charlie Kirk's skills were based in gaslighting and using red herrings in order to dissuade trained debaters from engaging him (Because he's not very skilled, and unwilling to engage in honest debate) while he targeted unsuspecting and untrained college students in an effort to hurt the standing of higher education.

This became very clear when he actually came up against students who had even a bit of training in debate (For example, Tilly, Dean Withers, etc). They ran circles around him even though he kept trying to gaslight them and kept throwing out red herrings in efforts to avoid having to defend his bigoted positions.

Once again, this is not honest debate. Charlie Kirk was an act. He did not engage in honest debate.

But you want to make it seem like what he says should be respected and studied as though he were some kind of well-educated and seasoned professional.

He wasn't. He was a quick-witted circus act and the idea that he was somehow legitimate has been harmful to this country.

The asshole claimed (or at least implied) that African Americans don't have the same mental capacity as white people. End of story.


Both sides aren't equal in this.

 

He changed his position on the Epstein files. Once Trump decided it was time, Kirk said he would no longer discuss the Epstein files.

 

1st amendment speech has consequences, as we are seeing across the country. People are getting fired all over the place for their reactions to Kirk's murder. There is a website out there of people screenshotting posts people made and their workplace to get them fired. Pretty fucked up.

It's also ironic that "violence is never the answer" except the dude that did this very well may get the firing squad in Utah.

The midterms are going to be an absolute shit show, if we even get there.

 

No, that is you misreading/misunderstanding/twisting my post. I never once said respect him. I never once said he was a good man or bad man. Im only commenting on the flood of emotional expressions of common folk who are basing their judgment off of truncated quotes. Don't read anymore into it than that.

Both sides love to quote portions of statements, publications, etc, to support their beliefs/ideologies.
This is a both side issue whether you are willing to acknowledge it or not.

The same goes for the murder of the Melissa Hartman.
Both sides are using this violence as agendas and finger pointing. If one is engaged in this finger pointing, they are part of the continual problem and not part of the solution.
You are mostly part of the solution because you continually push for improved healthcare, etc.
But when we stop pushing for improvements(mental health care, etc) on all sides and start pointing fingers at once side, while engaging in the same behavior, we will not improve anything.

Whether right or wrong, good or evil, no one gives a three year old temper tantrum the time of day. So whether the left is right or not, without ending the agro rage, nothing will improve.
Whether the right is right or wrong, without dividing religion from politics, nothing will improve. Religious beliefs should not supersede honest science.

That is a generalization, but it's also reality.
Both sides have communication breakdowns and both sides need improvement in that arena to make any change for the better. Without acknowledging this the left can yell all they want about how evil the right is. No one is listening.
Not saying that is right. It’s just the way it is. Its reality.
Sometimes it’s on the messenger to give the message in a way it is understood. No one understands fingerpointing and being called evil nazis because they voted on their conservative beliefs.

 

In the very conversation where you were trying to convince me that both sides are equal you are making vague claims about educators and scientists being dishonest or spreading agendas.

I rest my case.

Science is based on proving findings wrong. A whole field is not going to ignore evidence in order to push an agenda. That's not science.

This is how so much COVID disinformation was spread. This is how climate disinformation is spread.

You don't have the education or expertise to question the findings of scientists. There are thousands of other scientists who can do that, and they're actually doing the research to do it legitimately.

This is my point when I'm saying inability or unwillingness to engage in honest dialogue.

General statements like you just made (and your unwillingness to acknowledge that trained professionals using the scientific method have a more valid position than you) prevent this conversation from being classified as honest dialogue.

Typically educated and logical people would step away from a conversation like this.

Unfortunately, doing so has allowed people like Charlie Kirk and Trump to do great damage to this country and the world.

What you are engaging in is incredibly harmful to this country. I suggest you check yourself and give academia and real science the respect it deserves.

 

If your conservative beliefs convince you to vote for fascists then you need to re-examine what you believe in.

If you support Trump you're not very far off from a Nazi. That can really no longer be disputed.

Everything everybody said about Trump was true. He was literally always pushing a fascist agenda as though he were a Nazi.

We can tell because he's actually engaging in the same policy as Nazis.

I'm sorry, this is not both sides.

You claiming that people need to know exactly what Charlie Kirk said so they don't misrepresent him is you saying that they need to respect what he's saying enough to actually research it.

No. I don't. Nobody does. The things he was saying were bigoted propaganda. Very clearly.

*Edit*
I will say that I agree in that I wish there could be more honest debate.

However, if we're not willing to give academia and scientists the respect they deserve then there is no reason for them to even debate. They have already done the work. It's our responsibility to read their fucking findings.

Unfortunately, education has been so trashed in this country that much of our population no longer has the ability to understand those findings. And many don't even respect the scientific method enough to even try.

That's what our leadership should be focusing on. Not rounding up immigrants. Not attacking our own cities and states. Not cutting benefits from the needy. Not cutting NASA funding, or R&D in general.

 

Ditto. What you are advocating, that there is not any possibility of foul play in science, is very harmful to this country. Id suggest you check yourself and give light to the fact that scientists are also human and have agendas. Covid proved this. Not all scientists agreed on covid. I rest my case.

You are getting so far off the point to try to prove my statement wrong and i have no clue why.

do you disagree that without open and honest dialogue we can still improve things? Yes or no?
Are you advocating we don't need open and honest dialogue from both sides? Are you claiming the left has been open and honest aBout everything but the right has not?

What is your point in debating what i said? We need open and honest dialogue from all sides.
You disagree with that? You think a side can lie snd spread falsities and we can still improve?

Rather than making it personal and claiming im harming the country id suggest stay on point to what i said and don't read into it.

Its simple. Without open and honest dialogue from all sides, we are doomed.

WhT about that do you disagree with and why?

 

I laughed at the last inscription because I am basically 8 years old.

 

yes you do. You may still come to the same conclusion, but anyone who thinks they don't need all the facts to come to a conclusion is not being impartial. Period.

 

Absolutely.
My evening news programs for two days were nothing but Charlie Kirk. Finally shut off yesterday. They didn't have this kind of coverage when President Carter died

It's said nothing improves the character like being dead.

As far as both sides, one side expressed condolences and opposed political violence, the other blamed opponents and in many cases called for violence or at least ostracism.