Charlie Kirk shot at (shot?) in Utah

[pood]

A bunch of quotes from [Charlie Kirk], including that black women lack the brain processing power to be taken seriously

Um, no, Kirk didn't say that. I watched the clip and what he said was that four specific individuals he named lack the brain processing power to be taken seriously. He did not generalize about black women.

Of course he did. It’s called dog whistling. Malign four specific black women who obviously have the brain power to be where they are, and you by implication malign all black women and black people in general. He was a racist, sexist, transphobic scumbag. Zero fucks given for his death.

 

[Derec]

Of course he did. It’s called dog whistling. Malign four specific black women who obviously have the brain power to be where they are,

Except that two out of four clearly did not, and the other two were still helped by racial preferences.

and you by implication malign all black women and black people in general.

Bullshit. So when you, pood, malign four specific white men, does that mean you malign all white men for being white and male?

 

[laughing dog]

What a desperate response.

No, a realistic one.

For a bigot or racist.

Mr Floyd is a symbol of a victim perceived police injustice.

Whatever happened to him, the degenerate George Floyd was a piece of shit who did not deserve to be honored with a a statue. Nor with a statute for that matter.

You may not share that perception, but that is view shared by a small percentage of the population

Not that small, but many people have been afraid to speak out about the excesses of that era out of fear of being cancelled.

Without evidence, that is ignorable.
But thanks for the intemperate bigoted remarks.

The many historical statutes that have been removed or vandalized are perceived to be associated with the promotion or maintenance of slavery - an institution that is a stain on global human history.

The achievements of historical figures should not be erased just because they lived in an era where slavery was accepted. Somebody like Thomas Jefferson, for all his faults, was a 1000x better human being than a left-wing hero like degenerate George Floyd.
But even statues of Abraham Lincoln, the man who abolished slavery in the US, have been vandalized.
For example in Portland:
Portland protesters tear down statues of Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt
And San Francisco in 2021 decided to remove names of people like Abraham Lincoln from schools.
San Francisco school board votes to rename 44 schools, including Abraham Lincoln and George Washington High Schools
The city later reversed the decision, but it shows the people the far left despises.

While I do not condone the removals or vandalizing of those statutes, because I think we need to remember history and that people have flaws.

At least we agree on something.

And yet you felt the need for verbiage.

But there is no double standard or puzzle in raising a statute to a symbolic flawed victim while razing/removing remainders of slavery.

Degenerate George Floyd had no accomplishments. There was no reason to honor him like that, to turn him into some sort of hero. I stand by my assessment.

And I stand by mine. Thanks again for volunteering the evidence.

 

[pood]

Of course he did. It’s called dog whistling. Malign four specific black women who obviously have the brain power to be where they are,

Except that two out of four clearly did not, and the other two were still helped by racial preferences.

and you by implication malign all black women and black people in general.

Bullshit. So when you, pood, malign four specific white men, does that mean you malign all white men for being white and male?

No, the situation is entirely asymmetric. That’s what people like you who whine about losing your white male privileges will never get, because you can’t afford to. Unqualified, evil white boobs like Trump and Kirk have been getting affirmative action since the nation began.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

With respect to who started It, it was Trump who gave voice to what we see now. To one degree or another there have always been ragtag fringe groups on both extremes, but Trump and subsequently the GOP gave all of them a place to coalesce around. The Dems, as limp dicked and ineffective as they have been, didn't give a voice to hate and violence. They've helped perpetuate a lot of problems, but at least it came from a place of empathy, no matter how stupid or foreseeably hopeless it was.

I disagree that it was Trump who started it. Trump is a symptom, a consequence that arose from years of rot.

The race rioting that started around 2014 certainly played a role. I don't think that he wins in 2016 without the #BLM movement "burning this bitch down" in city after city. The neglect of the illegal migration issue from both sides also helped, especially to discredit mainstream Republicanism in the eyes of many rank-and-file conservatives. Jeb "Act of Love" Bush comes to mind.

It's been going on for a lot longer than that.

 

[Bomb#20]

A bunch of quotes from [Charlie Kirk], including that black women lack the brain processing power to be taken seriously

Um, no, Kirk didn't say that. I watched the clip and what he said was that four specific individuals he named lack the brain processing power to be taken seriously. He did not generalize about black women.

Of course he did.

Of course he didn't, and it's your own link that clears him.

It’s called dog whistling. Malign four specific black women who obviously have the brain power to be where they are, and you by implication malign all black women and black people in general.

That's an unfalsifiability engine. Malign four specific black women who obviously relied on affirmative action to be where they are, and you by implication malign all affirmative action in general -- which, as the full clip makes perfectly clear, was his whole point. That in no way implies there aren't any black women with the brainpower to achieve high office without it.

He was a racist, sexist, transphobic scumbag.

That's entirely likely. But that doesn't magically make him have said the words BuzzFeed, HuffPost and you put in his mouth and called a Charlie Kirk quote, and you bloody well know it.

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Weren't the individuals who supported the institution of slavery degenerates (and far worse than someone who simply had drug problems)?

 

[laughing dog]

A bunch of quotes from [Charlie Kirk], including that black women lack the brain processing power to be taken seriously

Um, no, Kirk didn't say that. I watched the clip and what he said was that four specific individuals he named lack the brain processing power to be taken seriously. He did not generalize about black women. I can't say the HuffPost was actually lying -- it looks like HuffPost just uncritically reposted BuzzFeed's lie without bothering to do even the most trivial fact-checking: watching the clip to see whether Kirk said what BuzzFeed claimed he said.

In the same clip, Mr Kirk referred to them “stealing a white person’s slot”. So, while he did not specifically generalize about black women, it is a reasonable conclusion that he was, given his blatant racist comment.

To quote someone, what a dirt bag.

 

[pood]

A bunch of quotes from [Charlie Kirk], including that black women lack the brain processing power to be taken seriously

Um, no, Kirk didn't say that. I watched the clip and what he said was that four specific individuals he named lack the brain processing power to be taken seriously. He did not generalize about black women.

Of course he did.

Of course he didn't, and it's your own link that clears him.

Of course he did.

It’s called dog whistling. Malign four specific black women who obviously have the brain power to be where they are, and you by implication malign all black women and black people in general.

That's an unfalsifiability engine. Malign four specific black women who obviously relied on affirmative action to be where they are,

Full stop. Did they rely on affirmative action really, or, if they did, did they NEED to do so, to get the recognition they deserved but otherwise would not have achieved? To me, the four in question are obviously overtly qualified and extremely intelligent — far more so than ignorant, gibbering, racist boobs like Kirk and trump.

and you by implication malign all affirmative action in general -- which, as the full clip makes perfectly clear, was his whole point. That in no way implies there aren't any black women with the brainpower to achieve high office without it.

That was exactly what he implied.

He was a racist, sexist, transphobic scumbag.

That's entirely likely. But that doesn't magically make him have said the words BuzzFeed, HuffPost and you put in his mouth and called a Charlie Kirk quote, and you bloody well know it.

I bloody well know that he was a racist, sexist, transphobic pig who was impugning four specific black women to impugn all black women and blacks in general.

 

[Derec]

Frankly I do not have the time you seem to have to peruse the internet for stories about men murdering women, so I am unaware of those persons you mentioned.

It's not like I went out of my way to find these. They have been part of the news cycle, especially the Ukrainian refugee one.
But they don't fit into your narrative of "white men are bad, mkay", so you ignore them.

According to FBI stats, most crimes are committed by makes, with the category of white make comprising the largest sub group.

There are far more white people in the US than other racial groups, which is why you have to compare per-capita numbers, and not raw numbers.

Let's look at FBI stats. From here:
Indeed, the raw number of all crimes tracked by FBI is higher for whites. But when accounting for population, you get 2410/100,000 for whites and 4315/100,000 for blacks. A marked difference!
But that's for all crimes tracked, including white collar and low-level crimes. When we only look at "murder and nonnegligent manslaughter", blacks>whites even in raw numbers, and rates are 1.86/100,000 for whites and 9.69/100,000 for blacks, a 5.2x difference.

There is absolutely nothing that I’ve read about the suspect in the killing of Charlie Kirk that suggests he is not far to the right of his victim and that in fact the excuse for the murder seems to be that Kirk was too liberal.

I have seen such claims, that the antifascist messages are just ironic or something. While that is possible, I do not think it's likely.
I remember that during 2020 riots, the media was hell-bent to portray every white rioter as a right winger, despite the fact that there are many white #BLM and Antifa supporters.
I guess "groyper" is the new "boogaloo boy".

But speaking of Tyler Robinson, thee are some reports that he has been living with a trans-woman, and that they may have been sexually and/or romantically involved as well. A lot of this is uncertain, but would an extreme right-winger have somebody like that even as a roommate, much less a partner?
And if he Robinson is in love with a trans woman, Kirk's anti-trans rhetoric may have sent him over the edge. But that again does not fit well with the "he must be an extreme right-winger" narrative.

I don’t understand this myself but apparently fly there is a subgroup of young mostly white men who are engaged by the idea of making their mark in the world and grabbing some fame by killing school kids or famous public figures.

And again, your typical "white men bad" bigotry shines through.

Surely I am not more up to date than you about the memes quoted in the ammunition?

Anti-fascist messages and an Italian song about WWII partisans does not exactly scream "right winger". No more so than two whites and two blacks setting fire to a Minneapolis courthouse screams "right wing Boogaloo Boy". But the media ran with that narrative, at least for the two white guys.

 

[pood]

Of course he did. It’s called dog whistling. Malign four specific black women who obviously have the brain power to be where they are,

Except that two out of four clearly did not,

Which two?

and the other two were still helped by racial preferences.

People like you have been helped by white male preferences since the nation began.

 

[Toni]

Frankly I do not have the time you seem to have to peruse the internet for stories about men murdering women, so I am unaware of those persons you mentioned.

It's not like I went out of my way to find these. They have been part of the news cycle, especially the Ukrainian refugee one.
But they don't fit into your narrative of "white men are bad, mkay", so you ignore them.

According to FBI stats, most crimes are committed by makes, with the category of white make comprising the largest sub group.

There are far more white people in the US than other racial groups, which is why you have to compare per-capita numbers, and not raw numbers.

Let's look at FBI stats. From here:
Indeed, the raw number of all crimes tracked by FBI is higher for whites. But when accounting for population, you get 2410/100,000 for whites and 4315/100,000 for blacks. A marked difference!
But that's for all crimes tracked, including white collar and low-level crimes. When we only look at "murder and nonnegligent manslaughter", blacks>whites even in raw numbers, and rates are 1.86/100,000 for whites and 9.69/100,000 for blacks, a 5.2x difference.

There is absolutely nothing that I’ve read about the suspect in the killing of Charlie Kirk that suggests he is not far to the right of his victim and that in fact the excuse for the murder seems to be that Kirk was too liberal.

I have seen such claims, that the antifascist messages are just ironic or something. While that is possible, I do not think it's likely.
I remember that during 2020 riots, the media was hell-bent to portray every white rioter as a right winger, despite the fact that there are many white #BLM and Antifa supporters.
I guess "groyper" is the new "boogaloo boy".

But speaking of Tyler Robinson, thee are some reports that he has been living with a trans-woman, and that they may have been sexually and/or romantically involved as well. A lot of this is uncertain, but would an extreme right-winger have somebody like that even as a roommate, much less a partner?
And if he Robinson is in love with a trans woman, Kirk's anti-trans rhetoric may have sent him over the edge. But that again does not fit well with the "he must be an extreme right-winger" narrative.

I don’t understand this myself but apparently fly there is a subgroup of young mostly white men who are engaged by the idea of making their mark in the world and grabbing some fame by killing school kids or famous public figures.

And again, your typical "white men bad" bigotry shines through.

Surely I am not more up to date than you about the memes quoted in the ammunition?

Anti-fascist messages and an Italian song about WWII partisans does not exactly scream "right winger". No more so than two whites and two blacks setting fire to a Minneapolis courthouse screams "right wing Boogaloo Boy". But the media ran with that narrative, at least for the two white guys.

As I’ve written several times before, I never ‘watch’ news, mostly because so much of it is opinion, not fact or as the story develops. There are exceptions: if there is impending severe weather or something of import locally, I might ( or not) decide to watch local news stations. Some of the bigger names, I’ve never actually watched ( right or left) or did so only briefly before I was turned off by what I thought was lack of professionalism ( opinions vs facts/developing info) and hyperbole. Not what I want re: news.

Whatever you may think, I do not hate or resent or have grudges against white men or men in general. I have been married for decades, almost certainly since before you were born. I have sons, friends and other family who are male and who do not necessarily agree with me politically. I loved my father a great deal but we had some very sharp differences in world views. Ditto grandparents, uncles, inlaws, neighbors, etc. I like men. Because of when and where I grew up and where I live now, most of the people I know are white. I have no ill feelings towards them because of their ancestry ( which I generally share) or their gender. I am, as I have stated before, an egalitarian. I believe that all people have inherent worth and all are entitled to pursue the lives they want, so long as they do not harm or infringe on the rights of others. Not all of my family members are white. Not all were born in the US and some family members do not live in the US. I’ve worked for and with people from all over the world, and have/have had friends from many different parts of the world, and of a variety of faiths and cultures.

Until recently, it has always been easy enough to focus on shared values and to just ignore some of the ways we differ. One of my sisters joined the LDS church and we remained close even when she tried to influence the religious beliefs of my children and I did not mention that some of their bad beliefs were basically screwed her over nor did i mention that they provided even less support than did our mother’s church when support was very much needed. I’ve called out family members for various bigotries when I felt it was necessary. Part of my history and’s family and so my children’s ancestry is Jewish—I would not tolerate his antisemitism remarks and let him know that if that was a problem for him, he did not have to spend any time with his grandchildren. I shared similar information with Muslim bosses and coworkers let them know if it was a problem for them, I’d seek other employment. I would have done the same if I had fallen in love with someone of another race or religious heritage. I choose my friends cause I like them. Full stop. If others don’t like it, they can pound sand.

I don’t know every right winger in existence but I more than aware of white supremacist who had children with black partners. I’ve known self loathing gay people and people who found themselves attracted to someone their upbringing and friends and family and even their own religious upbringing and beliefs told them was wrong or evil. People are weird and are not always consistent. Shit, I never imagined myself married —and yet I married young, nor did I ever intend to be a stay at home parent but yes, I did that too and did not give up being a feminist while sleep deprived and changing diapers.

Please note that I focused on mass shootings of mostly schools and an occasional church, mall or concert —and the vast majority of the shooters have been white and male. AFAIK, my reading has suggested that part of the motivation is trying to claim some fame/out-do one another. I absolutely cannot understand why anyone could shoot up an elementary school. It is insane. But it tends not to be female shooters nor shooters of color who commit such atrocities.

This is contrasted with violence associated with other criminal activity where the motivation is much more clear and does include collateral damage —bystanders, children.

 

[Toni]

Frankly I do not have the time you seem to have to peruse the internet for stories about men murdering women, so I am unaware of those persons you mentioned.

It's not like I went out of my way to find these. They have been part of the news cycle, especially the Ukrainian refugee one.
But they don't fit into your narrative of "white men are bad, mkay", so you ignore them.

According to FBI stats, most crimes are committed by makes, with the category of white make comprising the largest sub group.

There are far more white people in the US than other racial groups, which is why you have to compare per-capita numbers, and not raw numbers.

Let's look at FBI stats. From here:
Indeed, the raw number of all crimes tracked by FBI is higher for whites. But when accounting for population, you get 2410/100,000 for whites and 4315/100,000 for blacks. A marked difference!
But that's for all crimes tracked, including white collar and low-level crimes. When we only look at "murder and nonnegligent manslaughter", blacks>whites even in raw numbers, and rates are 1.86/100,000 for whites and 9.69/100,000 for blacks, a 5.2x difference.

There is absolutely nothing that I’ve read about the suspect in the killing of Charlie Kirk that suggests he is not far to the right of his victim and that in fact the excuse for the murder seems to be that Kirk was too liberal.

I have seen such claims, that the antifascist messages are just ironic or something. While that is possible, I do not think it's likely.
I remember that during 2020 riots, the media was hell-bent to portray every white rioter as a right winger, despite the fact that there are many white #BLM and Antifa supporters.
I guess "groyper" is the new "boogaloo boy".

But speaking of Tyler Robinson, thee are some reports that he has been living with a trans-woman, and that they may have been sexually and/or romantically involved as well. A lot of this is uncertain, but would an extreme right-winger have somebody like that even as a roommate, much less a partner?
And if he Robinson is in love with a trans woman, Kirk's anti-trans rhetoric may have sent him over the edge. But that again does not fit well with the "he must be an extreme right-winger" narrative.

I don’t understand this myself but apparently fly there is a subgroup of young mostly white men who are engaged by the idea of making their mark in the world and grabbing some fame by killing school kids or famous public figures.

And again, your typical "white men bad" bigotry shines through.

Surely I am not more up to date than you about the memes quoted in the ammunition?

Anti-fascist messages and an Italian song about WWII partisans does not exactly scream "right winger". No more so than two whites and two blacks setting fire to a Minneapolis courthouse screams "right wing Boogaloo Boy". But the media ran with that narrative, at least for the two white guys.

As I’ve written several times before, I never ‘watch’ news, mostly because so much of it is opinion, not fact or as the story develops. There are exceptions: if there is impending severe weather or something of import locally, I might ( or not) decide to watch local news stations. Some of the bigger names, I’ve never actually watched ( right or left) or did so only briefly before I was turned off by what I thought was lack of professionalism ( opinions vs facts/developing info) and hyperbole. Not what I want re: news.

Whatever you may think, I do not hate or resent or have grudges against white men or men in general. I have been married for decades, almost certainly since before you were born. I have sons, friends and other family who are male and who do not necessarily agree with me politically. I loved my father a great deal but we had some very sharp differences in world views. Ditto grandparents, uncles, inlaws, neighbors, etc. I like men. Because of when and where I grew up and where I live now, most of the people I know are white. I have no ill feelings towards them because of their ancestry ( which I generally share) or their gender. I am, as I have stated before, an egalitarian. I believe that all people have inherent worth and all are entitled to pursue the lives they want, so long as they do not harm or infringe on the rights of others. Not all of my family members are white. Not all were born in the US and some family members do not live in the US. I’ve worked for and with people from all over the world, and have/have had friends from many different parts of the world, and of a variety of faiths and cultures.

Until recently, it has always been easy enough to focus on shared values and to just ignore some of the ways we differ. One of my sisters joined the LDS church and we remained close even when she tried to influence the religious beliefs of my children and I did not mention that some of their bad beliefs were basically screwed her over nor did i mention that they provided even less support than did our mother’s church when support was very much needed. I’ve called out family members for various bigotries when I felt it was necessary. Part of my history and’s family and so my children’s ancestry is Jewish—I would not tolerate his antisemitism remarks and let him know that if that was a problem for him, he did not have to spend any time with his grandchildren. I shared similar information with Muslim bosses and coworkers let them know if it was a problem for them, I’d seek other employment. I would have done the same if I had fallen in love with someone of another race or religious heritage. I choose my friends cause I like them. Full stop. If others don’t like it, they can pound sand.

I don’t know every right winger in existence but I more than aware of white supremacist who had children with black partners. I’ve known self loathing gay people and people who found themselves attracted to someone their upbringing and friends and family and even their own religious upbringing and beliefs told them was wrong or evil. People are weird and are not always consistent. Shit, I never imagined myself married —and yet I married young, nor did I ever intend to be a stay at home parent but yes, I did that too and did not give up being a feminist while sleep deprived and changing diapers.

Please note that I focused on mass shootings of mostly schools and an occasional church, mall or concert —and the vast majority of the shooters have been white and male. AFAIK, my reading has suggested that part of the motivation is trying to claim some fame/out-do one another. I absolutely cannot understand why anyone could shoot up an elementary school. It is insane. But it tends not to be female shooters nor shooters of color who commit such atrocities.

This is contrasted with violence associated with other criminal activity where the motivation is much more clear and does include collateral damage —bystanders, children.

I need to correct at least one typo that I missed before and could be misleading: I do not have Jewish ancestry but my husband does, even though he is not Jewish. Therefore, my children/granchildren have Jewish ancestry. My father was an anti-semite and overall bigot but surprisingly feminist as far as his daughters were concerned. I'm grateful for that.

 

[unapologetic]

Could someone explain to me what this was about. Thanks.
I've seen 3 YT vids That don't explain it. And the audio sux.
Heated Clash in Congress after ‘spoken prayer’ request for Charlie Kirk

 

[DBT]

These people run the country?

 

[GenesisNemesis]

Whatever you may think, I do not hate or resent or have grudges against white men or men in general.

Similarly I don't "hate white men" either, however I naturally prefer to be alone, I generally avoid interactions with both genders offline if I am able (especially now that it seems society's falling apart, no thanks to those who are overly obsessed with controlling others and have overly high opinions of themselves). It's a lot more comfortable for me to converse through text, too.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

A bunch of quotes from [Charlie Kirk], including that black women lack the brain processing power to be taken seriously

Um, no, Kirk didn't say that. I watched the clip and what he said was that four specific individuals he named lack the brain processing power to be taken seriously. He did not generalize about black women. I can't say the HuffPost was actually lying -- it looks like HuffPost just uncritically reposted BuzzFeed's lie without bothering to do even the most trivial fact-checking: watching the clip to see whether Kirk said what BuzzFeed claimed he said.

In the same clip, Mr Kirk referred to them “stealing a white person’s slot”. So, while he did not specifically generalize about black women, it is a reasonable conclusion that he was, given his blatant racist comment.

To quote someone, what a dirt bag.

Sorry, but in this case he's basically correct.

If the only reason someone got there is Affirmative Action then they stole a position that would otherwise have gone to a white or Asian. In the cases in question I do not believe that they were correct in stating they got there only because of Affirmative Action, though.

 

[laughing dog]

A bunch of quotes from [Charlie Kirk], including that black women lack the brain processing power to be taken seriously

Um, no, Kirk didn't say that. I watched the clip and what he said was that four specific individuals he named lack the brain processing power to be taken seriously. He did not generalize about black women. I can't say the HuffPost was actually lying -- it looks like HuffPost just uncritically reposted BuzzFeed's lie without bothering to do even the most trivial fact-checking: watching the clip to see whether Kirk said what BuzzFeed claimed he said.

In the same clip, Mr Kirk referred to them “stealing a white person’s slot”. So, while he did not specifically generalize about black women, it is a reasonable conclusion that he was, given his blatant racist comment.

To quote someone, what a dirt bag.

Sorry, but in this case he's basically correct.

It is racist to assume there is a “white person’s slot”.

 

[barbos]

I don't think that social media in and of itself is at issue. Even mainstream media plays a role in creating divisiveness. Why do both these platforms create divisiveness and extremism? The bottom line on social media is likes but the most frequent likes are gotten by "influencers" who make money from Big Tech and sponsors and The Algorithm feeds into magnifying the echo chambers. Within mainstream media, there isn't too much difference as the news media itself claims to be infotainment and tries to capture niche markets (i.e. Democrat or Republican) and cater to them. To add--even non-mainstream parties have a vested interest in making both parties look bad and then get a following increasing their own echo chamber and extremism, but this last one is more frequent on the Internet than in mainstream media, though they will use media sources from whichever side they want to criticize.

I don't have an easy answer to this, but at least critical thinking and skepticism could be somewhat helpful. These do not seem to be things that are promoted as values within the architectures of msm or social media. All I can say is that the very entities that are pushing extremism are now telling people "you idiots. political violence is bad."

It's a spectrum and progression. Mainstream media and then internet forums, then closed chats with mostly untreated patients.
Unfortunately for you, freedom loving people, this is an unavoidable result of said "freedom".
Insane people should not have that much freedom as they have on the internet. Of course capitalists care more about money than overall societal progress or common sense. So it's a price of internet.

 

[Toni]

Whatever you may think, I do not hate or resent or have grudges against white men or men in general.

Similarly I don't "hate white men" either, however I naturally prefer to be alone, I generally avoid interactions with both genders offline if I am able (especially now that it seems society's falling apart, no thanks to those who are overly obsessed with controlling others and have overly high opinions of themselves). It's a lot more comfortable for me to converse through text, too.

I actually enjoy people in person. I find people to be infinitely interesting.