Trump 2.0

[finicky]

He wasn’t a great person.

How disgusting.

 

[Value Collector]

How disgusting

Well, he wasn’t, what more would you like me to say? You don’t suddenly become a saint and everyone has to think good of you just because you got murdered.

The very first thing I said was that this is a shocking crime, but through y last few years of his life, he actively campaigned for things that have caused a lot of harm, poetically he campaigned strongly against gun control, he was ok with with schools being shot up, so it’s hard to feel to badly for him.

 

[finicky]

You are taking a quiet safisfaction in the murder of someone for bravely and repeatedly stating his moral and religious beliefs by going into the lion's den (translated: brain-washed, self righteous, know nothing, college morons) and inviting debate. Taking on the mob single-handed. That's what universities used to be for! When have you (or I) ever done anything remotely like that?

 

[finicky]

he was ok with with schools being shot up,

Calmness. Don't want to be kicked off. I won't say it.

 

[Value Collector]

You are taking a quiet safisfaction in the murder of someone for bravely and repeatedly stating his moral and religious beliefs by going into the lion's den (translated: brain-washed, self righteous, know nothing, college morons) and inviting debate. Taking on the mob single-handed. That's what universities used to be for! When have you (or I) ever done anything remotely like that?

I am not taking satisfaction in his death, I am just saying I have trouble empathising with it because he actively campaigned against gun control, and said he it was acceptable for people to die from gun violence.

As I said I don’t think he was a good person, or even an honest one. If you had asked me yesterday I would have described him with a lot less restraint than I have today, so get off your high horse buddy.

 

[finicky]

You're just a clever fart, nothing more .. byee

 

[IFocus]

You are taking a quiet safisfaction in the murder of someone for bravely and repeatedly stating his moral and religious beliefs by going into the lion's den (translated: brain-washed, self righteous, know nothing, college morons) and inviting debate. Taking on the mob single-handed. That's what universities used to be for! When have you (or I) ever done anything remotely like that?

There is no satisfaction, sad reality yes the gun situation in the US created and supported by by the likes Kirk is nut case extremism still sad he is a victim.

 

[IFocus]

Talking of killing people how many is Kennedy going to kill?

 

[Value Collector]

You're just a clever fart, nothing more .. byee

I am just not fickle that’s all, if I thought you were a piece of crap yesterday when you were alive, wouldn’t it be dishonest of me to change my opinion just because you died?

 

[Knobby22]

It is horrible.

There's been a lot of political leaders killed or injured lately. Hortmann 3 months ago with her husband. The Pennsylvania governors house was torched, Trump was attacked, quite a few others and now it's Kirk.

The more this happens the more the USA divides. The more this happens, the more their Republic teeters.

I just felt a bit sick hearing about it.

 

[StockyGuy]

Well, he wasn’t, what more would you like me to say? You don’t suddenly become a saint and everyone has to think good of you just because you got murdered.

The very first thing I said was that this is a shocking crime, but through y last few years of his life, he actively campaigned for things that have caused a lot of harm, poetically he campaigned strongly against gun control, he was ok with with schools being shot up, so it’s hard to feel to badly for him.

A great majority on the right (and a fair few on the left) in the USA believe in Second Amendment gun rights, and don't want them watered down...... does that mean all those people should "poetically", as you put it, be shot dead? It's a rhetorical question; so you don't need to respond

 

[moXJO]

Whatever people thought of Charlie Kirk he believed that discussion was better than the alternative.

Seems that era is over.

 

[Value Collector]

A great majority on the right (and a fair few on the left) in the USA believe in Second Amendment gun rights, and don't want them watered down...... does that mean all those people should "poetically", as you put it, be shot dead? It's a rhetorical question; so you don't need to respond

Yes, if your public position is that 30,000 gun deaths a year is an acceptable price to pay for gun freedoms, if you end up being one of those statistics, then I accept your opinion and your death.

But it’s much more than that, I don’t know how much you have seen of Charlie Kirk, but is is constantly spewing horrendous opinions and shows not empathy to others, so it’s hard to feel to much empathy for him.

Saying that though. As I said from the start no one deserves what has happened to him and his family.

 

[Value Collector]

Whatever people thought of Charlie Kirk he believed that discussion was better than the alternative.

Seems that era is over.

I don’t really even believe that, he wasn’t interested in honest debate.

 

[JohnDe]

How disgusting.

I have more left leaning friends than right, a few decades ago we debated with smiles on our faces. During the past few years that has changed, my left leaning friends have become mean, they purposefully look for comments that are hurtful to others with a different view, they make fun of them. The discussions are fewer but more malicious.

The crazier radicals of the nutso left are already overtly celebrating the slaughter of Kirk. Much more concerning is that significant parts of what would term itself the mainstream of progressive thought in the US is already framing the assassination in terms of amoral, neutral logical outcomes.​

​

Of course, it’s dreadful he was shot. No one should be killed for their beliefs. But then comes the venomous sting. We have to remember he was a right-wing monster. ​

​

All of which tends to one conclusion. People should not be shot. But we are not particularly sorry that this one was. This spells out the doctrinaire moral bankruptcy of much mainstream progressive thought. Most progressives presumably are opposed to assassination, though an alarming number giggled when Trump narrowly escaped a bullet.​

​

The fundamental issue was whether Charlie Kirk should have been allowed to speak at all. He certainly was right-wing. He undeniably was a Trump enthusiast. But he was not a lunatic. He did not attend Nazi rallies or propose compulsory reversal of transgender surgery. This speaks to one of the intractable problems of today’s political and cultural debate. You do not have to do much to be characterised as a dispensable madman of the far right. ​

 

[moXJO]

I don’t really even believe that, he wasn’t interested in honest debate.

Whats "honest" debate got to do with the discussions he was having?
Are you equating not having an "honest debate" as a reason to get shot. If so a whole lot of leftists will be looking over their shoulder.

He was going into woke central to talk with people who are nowhere near honest debate.
In fact he ended up getting shot and then it being widely celebrated by those people.

If you walked up to him you could debate him, pretty simple. Of course he's going to grandstand thats his whole spiel. But thats not a reason to shoot and celebrate.

Shooting him was stupid. Honestly all those guys were losing influence anyway.