Charlie Kirk shot and killed at Utah rally.

ChapelHillSooner said:
Even if you feel using cancel culture against the left is fair play, the following two things are not remotely justified:

1. Going after people who did nothing but criticize Kirk for his statements. Celebrating his death is one thing but simply criticizing the man for how he lived is another.

2. The government actively playing a role in this as Stephen Miller is advocating. And Miller is calling for the government to come down on people I described above who did nothing but criticize Kirk’s politics.
Click to expand...
Totally agree with the government not having a role.

As far as what is "fireable", that's obviously up to each individual employer and there will always be disagreements on whether any given firing is/isn't justified.
 
There will no doubt be far more evidence coming out about the shooter, but from what we've seen so far it's hard to say they're either right or left wing, but more of a deeply alienated person from a deeply conservative family who attended just one semester of a regular college (Utah State), took some classes at a trade school (Dixie Technical College), and was deeply involved in gamer culture while obviously having some severe mental or emotional issues. It sounds more like they just hated the world generally and lived on the social fringe rather than having any set political or social beliefs. In other words, similar to other
CFordUNC said:
Click to expand...

And Singman is still at it and is doubling down this morning on her claims. Virtually every right-wing media claim that the shooter had a transgender boyfriend is based on Singman's tweets. And yet to date there has been no official confirmation of any of her claims, which is based on unnamed sources. It's just more frightening evidence of how a single (as yet) unproven and anonymous claim (in this case her unnamed source) can set off a social and news media frenzy because it fits the world view of a large group of people.
 
Mulberry Heel said:
There will no doubt be far more evidence coming out about the shooter, but from what we've seen so far it's hard to say they're either right or left wing, but more of a deeply alienated person from a deeply conservative family who attended just one semester of a regular college (Utah State), took some classes at a trade school (Dixie Technical College), and was deeply involved in gamer culture while obviously having some severe mental or emotional issues. It sounds more like they just hated the world generally and lived on the social fringe rather than having any set political or social beliefs. In other words, similar to other

And Singman is still at it and is doubling down this morning on her claims. Virtually every right-wing media claim that the shooter had a transgender boyfriend is based on Singman's tweets. And yet to date there has been no official confirmation of any of her claims, which is based on unnamed sources. It's just more frightening evidence of how a single (as yet) unproven and anonymous claim (in this case her unnamed source) can set off a social and news media frenzy because it fits the world view of a large group of people.
Click to expand...
Cox did say that on MTP this morning so that probably counts as an “official” statement. If Cox turns out to be wrong, that will go down as an all time irresponsible statement.
 
wmheel1287 said:
And I hear all that. I dont call for people to be banned. Like...ever. However, he's crossed the line into the kind of stuff that is going to get people killed, beaten, etc. This push to try to turn this murderer into someone transsexual or dating a transsexual as a pretext to invent a motive is dangerous in the extreme. He started in on it from the beginning, then insisted he never said that, and now has returned to absolute insistence that its absolutely trans motivated.

People that do that with no self awareness of the violence they are inviting against others just can't be part of civil (or even rough edged) discourse.

Honestly at this point he probably shouldn't be banned but Im surely not going to engage with him and risk furthering the kind of threat to people he does.
Click to expand...
No, you don’t call for people to be banned. But banning isn’t the solution. Nor is ignoring Ram. This is a very sensitive topic with more than one level of complexity and frustration. My experience has taught me that most people, especially educated people are reachable to some degree with the right approach. That is why “ignore” is so intellectually and emotionally lazy. That isn’t directed at you, or anyone specifically and I do think you are tolerant and respectful. I also think you are wise enough to not have a brief moment of frustration change your attitude about personal engagement. I think if you created a game or little experiment to see who the most respectful and tolerant posters on the zzl are, you would do pretty well. It actually would be pretty interesting and not be difficult to do because it doesn’t take long for personalities to come out.
 
ZenMode said:
I think many on the right see this as "being bitten by the mouth you fed".

I generally agree.

I've never had a huge issue, in principle, with people being fired for idiotic things they say in public, when those people are tied back to their employer.

There are exceptions. I didn't agree with Netflix' Jonathan Friedland being fired, but when people say blatantly racist/anti-Semitic, etc things in public, you take the risk.

No idea if this is real, but:

Click to expand...

Do you think that is real or just to get views?
 
Callatoroy said:
Do you think that is real or just to get views?
Click to expand...
Yes, I definitely think it's real or for views.

But Seriously.....

If I got fired from my job for something I said on social media, the last thing I'd do is broadcast it on social media.... you're only making it more difficult to get a new job.

With that thought in mind, I'm leaning toward it being fake.
 
Last edited:
lawtig02 said:
One more comment on Cox. At a very high level, I think the two major forces of destruction and dysfunction in America today are (1) social media, and (2) the incessant stream of divisive, irresponsible rhetoric from GOP leadership. I appreciate that Cox is calling out the first. I find it sad and a little pathetic he’s not willing to call out the second, but I’ll give him a D- for at least not blaming the left alone as that GOP leadership has done.
Click to expand...
I’ll fix it for you:

I think the two major forces of destruction in America today are (1) social media, and (2) the incessant stream of divisive, irresponsible rhetoric from our political leadership.

I agree with your corrected comment.
 
ZenMode said:
Yes, I definitely think it's real or for views.

But Seriously.....

If I got fired from my job for something I said on social media, the last thing I'd do is broadcast it on social media.... you're only making it more difficult to get a new job.

With that thought in mind, I'm leaning toward it being fake.
Click to expand...
There are a lot of similar posts popping up. Musk is putting his money where his mouth is in regards to his beliefs in free speech. Quite a paradox given how tight he was with CK.
 
lawtig02 said:
Cox did say that on MTP this morning so that probably counts as an “official” statement. If Cox turns out to be wrong, that will go down as an all time irresponsible statement.
Click to expand...
I saw that, and you're probably right, although he also doubled down on the shooter clearly being a left-winger based on reports from the family, which have since been retracted by the family and most news media. So there's that.
 
Callatoroy said:
I’ll fix it for you:

I think the two major forces of destruction in America today are (1) social media, and (2) the incessant stream of divisive, irresponsible rhetoric from our political leadership.

I agree with your corrected comment.
Click to expand...
Democratic leaders do sometimes say things that are irresponsible. I don’t deny that. But it’s absurd to lump the two groups together. The irresponsibility from Trump and his team is an existential threat to our nation. The irresponsibility from the Dem leadership would struggle to crack the top 100 threats to our nation.
 
evrheel said:
www.rawstory.com

'Charlie Kirk was not a saint': Fox News host defies right-wing spin on dead MAGA legend

Fox News host Howard Kurtz pushed back on the whitewashing of Charlie Kirk's ideology by noting that the conservative influencer was "not a saint" before he was killed.During a Sunday panel discussion on Fox News, Kurtz suggested that conservative media were "politicizing this by blaming the...
www.rawstory.com www.rawstory.com
Click to expand...
From someone who knew very little about CK before his murder, I have become fairly knowledgeable about him afterwards. He was most definitely not a saint. He would be the first to acknowledge that.
 
Callatoroy said:
Maybe I read it wrong but from nyc’s post, musk was willing to pay the legal fees of anyone who was wrongfully fired due to anything expressed from the CK murder.
Click to expand...
That’s people ironically posting a screenshot of an old Musk tweet directed at right wing people who lost their job due to social media activity. Musk has posted nothing to oppose the widespread doxxing and contacting employers that’s going on now, even though doxxing is against X’s TOS.

What you’re citing as evidence of Musk’s commitment to free speech is actually a demonstration of his hypocrisy on the matter. It was always was BS.

Here’s what he is actually promoting

 
Callatoroy said:
Maybe I read it wrong but from nyc’s post, musk was willing to pay the legal fees of anyone who was wrongfully fired due to anything expressed from the CK murder.
Click to expand...
You DEFINITELY misunderstood that. I posted this once already, followed by examples of Musk’s flame throwing, but the musk post about legal fees has nothing to do with the CK murder — it was an old post when Musk was offering protections to encourage right wingers to return to Twitter, used ironically while Musk is being a cheerleader for hunting down anyone critical of Kirk and trying to cost them their jobs or worse.
 
Do you guys think it’s possible Tyler Robinson was using this guy to try and set him up for the shooting of Charlie Kirk? I mean he sent him the messages ti go and pick the gun up and left unused casings in the gun with the messages on them.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top