The Charlie Kirk Thread

[rodoheel]

didn't miss it. That is what I referenced as troubling. But if ABC feels it is not constitutional, they can take the fcc to court. And in my opinion they would win. However, they didn't. That is the "why" part of my comment. If JK had been a huge ratings win and big profit generator then ABC would have fought any actions by the fcc. The concept of late night comedy shows on broadcast TV is dying and ABC knows that. This entire thing gives ABC the out they likely wanted but were to afraid to act on. I don't fault the left for feeling the way it does especially given how much you guys preach the fascist crap. But do you not think it odd that ABC wouldn't also be screaming this is fascist and undermining free speech. Shouldn't ABC be leading the free speech fight on this? But again, they aren't. Does ABC not give a shit about free speech?

It’s not ABC who can or should take the government to court - it’s Kimmel. He is the one who suffered the harm. This is a perfect example of the government forcing a third party to restrain speech. In this example ABC is the coerced instrument of the government, not the victim.

But in any event the logic that “if someone complies with the government that must mean the government didn’t do anything wrong” is absurd. Trump admin has targeted numerous universities and law firms, among others, with plainly illegal and unconstitutional actions. Many of those entities have given in and caved to the admins demands in response. That doesn’t mean the admins actions weren’t illegal, it means those entities were too scared and/or protective of their profits/research dollars to risk fighting the massive power of the federal government and so they caved. That’s ABC in this circumstance. You are basically ignoring the fact that this is exactly how a protection racket works. Trump is walking around going “nice university you got there, be a shame if something happened to it” while he holds a flamethrower in his hands. Compliance in those circumstances is not voluntary. It is coerced.

 

[dukeman92]

You are basically ignoring the fact that this is exactly how a protection racket works. Trump is walking around going “nice university you got there, be a shame if something happened to it” while he holds a flamethrower in his hands. Compliance in those circumstances is not voluntary. It is coerced.

And if they step up, this will be the result.

 

[rodoheel]

O'Reilly is, of course, completely making things up here, unsurprising for a guy who was long ago discredited as a serious newsperson because he routinely made things up.

First of all, the idea that all of the broadcast networks have gone "full progressive" is obviously ridiculous. What Trump is usually complaining about with his "97% negative" comment is the late night comedy shows on those networks specifically, which of course aren't news programming. Those shows have no obligation to cover Trump positively, nor would it really make sense for them to have a comedy show that involves them just standing up there saying nice things about Trump. Those late night shows (with the possible exception of Jimmy Fallon) have certainly skewed more political in recent years, and it is absolutely true that their hosts are openly not fans of Trump. But the idea that it is "censorship" for the networks not to get together and be like "one of us needs to hire a conservative late night host" is both factually and legally absurd.

O'Reilly is of course straight up lying when he says "all the network shows" have no conservative guests on. For example, "Meet the Press" airs on NBC and has conservative guests on every week. In the last few weeks they have had on the Republican governor of Utah, Lindsey Graham, Scott Bessent, Sen. James Lankford, JD Vance, and Rand Paul. On George Stephanopolous's show on ABC, they've had on the Republican governor and senator from Utah, Thomas Massie, and Chris Christie in the last two weeks. I'm sure there are similar examples from the other networks.

Again, it is not "censorship" when a talk show or late night comedy show from a network doesn't bring on conservative guests or doesn't say nice things about Trump. Every show on a network doesn't have to have some perfect down-the-line ideological balance. Stephen Colbert's show can book who it wants. Why does it express a more liberal-leaning position and have on more liberal-leaning guests (though to be clear most of its guests aren't political at all)? Because that's what its audience wants. Recall in the leadup to the 2016 election when Jimmy Fallon was lambasted by his audience for having Trump on and ruffling his hair? The audience spoke on that. There has not been some great clamor for these shows to bring on guests. That's not why their audiences are leaving; the audiences are leaving because, as I think you said in another post, the medium is dying; you don't have to stay up until midnight to get the sort of content those shows produce because it's everywhere now.

But again: O'Reilly is just, like always, completely full of shit (and he knows it). Nothing he alleged is anywhere close to "censorship" even if it was true, and it very obviously isn't.

 

[rodoheel]

Speaking of Colbert, personally I always thought his Comedy Central show was better than the show he does at CBS, and it was a good call for him to bring back the best segment from that show this week:

 

[Turd Ferguson]

No, it’s Oklahoma.

O-o-o-o-klahoma, where the racism comes sweeping down the plain. And the bigotry you meet can sure smell sweet when the hate comes right behind the rain.

 

[thebruinbleedstarheelblue]

I didn't fall for anything. It is a variable in all of this and you seem only focused on one aspect of it. Namely, the fcc pressuring ABC. While I agree that is very troubling based on what knowledge I have, it isn't the only thing in play. This relates to only broadcast licensing. JK can now say anything he wants and the g'ment can't touch him. So his freedom of speech hasn't been neutered. Only his ability to draw a check from ABC and say dumb shit. ABC, part of a public company where profits matter, could have told trump and the fcc to kick rocks but they didn't because....why?

this ignores your mention of the financial rationale of the move.

JK can be fired and you are correct …can talk/tweet whatever is not promised a job.

However the FCC went mob boss on ABC and THAT is an absolute authoritarian move and 1st amendment concern.

 

[UNCatTech]

He was lionized. Portrayed as a Saint.

No he wasn't. Everyone knew his history. He was a symbol for how the police overreacted. He was killed because some stupid cops didn't know how to do their job.

No one asked for a national holiday, no one gave his family a ride in a government jet, no one proposed a law that every state college have a memorial to him.

You're crazy if you see these two as equal.

People are literally worshipping Kirk, people only wanted justice and reform for Floyd.

If you want to keep making this ridiculous argument, it's easy to prove. Just show us where it was proposed that there be a national holiday for Floyd, I can show you that for Kirk. We can go one item at a time and show that Floyd reaction was nothing like the Kirk reaction.

But I understand some people in this world are always looking for someone or something to worship.

 

[UNCatTech]

I can endure pettiness to gain control of our borders, get wokeism out of our military and other agencies and schools, generate the economic development that many countries have pledged, free up energy production, etc. because I know the pettiness will be temporary and then he will be gone like a fart in the wind.

Yea that economic development isn't happening, he's shutting down energy production, unless it's fossil fuels, the cost of ICE has doubled. How long are you willing to endure the pettiness? Because it's not going away when he's gone, the model works so they will stick with it until it doesn't.

So enduring it only extends it.

 

[Ramrouser]

I don’t even know what that means. I have been sincere in sharing how profoundly CK’s death impacted me. The clarity of what contributed to it was like a light turning on for me. I have always known how vicious and hateful the left was. That is displayed every day on this board. But until CK’s death I didn’t see how vicious and hateful the right was. The night of his death all i heard on every channel from everyone on the right who had a national voice was steeped in pure hatred for an entire party and promising retribution the likes of what you heard on 9/11. I recognized that I participated in it on this board and was no better. I also decided that that was it for me and that arguing over politics to the point that im behaving like those I heard, and many i interacted with on here made me embarrassed and ashamed and forced me to see how hypocritical I was. However, CK’s death didn’t make me change my beliefs on what I think is right and wrong with respect to the direction of the country. My feelings on illegal immigration for example haven’t changed. Im just not going to engage in conversation anymore that drives hateful rhetoric and devolves into trump level immaturity. I enjoy discussing politics, but no longer to the point where arguing and hostility blocks out all listening and consideration. I don’t put people on ignore, im just not going to respond to trash comments or those where good faith and objectivity is nonexistent, and I have pledged to myself not to be a contributing participant in driving unhealthy and hateful conversations.

CK assassination + Iryna murder have been tough. The anger over Charlie’s murder is slowly giving way to determination

Did Kimmel say MAGA was responsible for the assassination of Charlie Kirk? I missed that bit.

Strongly implied it and refused to walk it back. He thought everyone was like this board.

No wonder JK lost 43% of his audience since January.

 

[Ramrouser]

No he wasn't. Everyone knew his history. He was a symbol for his the police overreacted. He was killed because some stupid cops didn't know how to do their job.

Boo one asked for a national holiday, no one gave his family a ride in a government jet, no one proposed a law that every state college have a memorial to him.

Your crazy if you see these two as equal.

People are literally worshipping Kirk, people only wanted justice and reform for Floyd.

If you want to keep making this ridiculous argument, it's easy to prove. Just show us where it was proposed that there be a national holiday for Floyd, I can show you that for Kirk. We can go one item at a time and show that Floyd reaction was nothing like the Kirk reaction.

But I understand some people in this world are always looking for someone or something to worship.

Unlike the left, conservatives have reacted peacefully to CK’s death - holding vigils and going to Church instead of three months of rioting, death and destruction of property.

 

[heelinhell]

To each poster who said callatoroy was becoming “less MAGA,” I give you this poast.

callatoroy is as MAGA as he’s ever been.

put me down as someone who has always thought that callatoroy and ram are MAGAs, but I am confident that each one has a triple digit IQ and have held out hope that they are open to rational inference and willing to live on earth 1

My hope is fading but I pray it is not too late for them to step back from the abyss

 

[lawtig02]

Unlike the left, conservatives have reacted peacefully to CK’s death - holding vigils and going to Church instead of three months of rioting, death and destruction of property.

Other than murdering the First Amendment, you mean. Right?

 

[UNCatTech]

Unlike the left, conservatives have reacted peacefully to CK’s death - holding vigils and going to Church instead of three months of rioting, death and destruction of property.

Yea, you don't consider the groups on the right actively trying to get people fired as being just as bad? Especially when it's over those people opinions, which they claim should be protected and claim was the cause of Kirk's death. You also ignore the calls for civil and holly wars. The any of that nonsense. Yes, riots were wrong, but they are no where near a civil war.

And individuals are doing things to, one of your fucking conservatives spit on my wife's car and threatened to beat her ass. I'm sure he went to church and celebrated Kirk that same day. So fuck the bullshit that conservatives are just peace loving people sitting around singing and praying and not being violent, they are just a violent as anyone else. You simple turn a blind eye because they worship the same mythical god and orange turd that you do. So fuck you and your holler than tough, were perfect bullshit.

 

[JCTarheel82]

Unlike the left, conservatives have reacted peacefully to CK’s death - holding vigils and going to Church instead of three months of rioting, death and destruction of property.

Link to those things happening after Democratic politician Melissa Hortman was murdered a few months ago?

Also, the day after Kirk's death, a number of HBCUs as well as the DNC headquarters received bomb threats, and many Democratic politicians across the country received threats against their lives and their families. Additionally, there was a deadly school shooting in Colorado carried out by a 16-year-old influenced by far right ideology mere hours after Kirk's assassination.

 

[UNCatTech]

Link to those things happening after Democratic politician Melissa Hortman was murdered a few months ago?

Also, the day after Kirk's death, a number of HBCUs as well as the DNC headquarters received bomb threats, and many Democratic politicians across the country received threats against their lives and their families. Additionally, there was a deadly school shooting in Colorado carried out by a 16-year-old influenced by far right ideology mere hours after Kirk's assassination.

Yes. His perfect little group is a myth. Every group is a spectrum of people from peaceful to violent, the magas are no different.

I didn't see him respond that the maga idiot that spit on my wife's car and his toothless wife that threatened to beat her ass were wrong. He just pretends those things are not happening.

Then he pretends that the response to Floyd's death was equal to the worship we are seeing for Kirk. They even refer to him as CK like they are best palls. Every clip have watched of Kirk he is divisive and belittling and doesn't accept anyone who doesn't believe exactly as he does. That's not this wonderful Christian leader they lie and say he is. The words in the Bible attributed to Jesus were to bring people together, different people, Kirk didn't want any differences he only wanted to bring together the minions that would worship his every word.

Isn't there a commandment about worshipping other gods, the right is ignoring that in their worship of trump and now Kirk.

 

[ChapelHillSooner]

Good lord.

Embarrassing

 

[korgguy1971]

O-o-o-o-klahoma, where the racism comes sweeping down the plain. And the bigotry you meet can sure smell sweet when the hate comes right behind the rain.

First in being last in education

 

[ChapelHillSooner]

I absolutely LOVE this idea. And what better way to celebrate Charlie Kirk's contribution to the world than display his teachings for everyone to see? On this day, anyone on this board that has a social media account, I humbly ask that you choose a direct Charlie Kirk quote (or many quotes!) and post them to your feed. No need to hyperbolize his beliefs, simply post them with full context and let the world understand what Saint Charlie was all about. Let's spend the day getting Charlie's philosophy out there under the spotlight for the entire world to enjoy.

Let's make this Remembrance Day special!

Good idea but I need my job…

 

[nycfan]

Unlike the left, conservatives have reacted peacefully to CK’s death - holding vigils and going to Church instead of three months of rioting, death and destruction of property.

Because Trump is in power — so this is a leverage point while law enforcement supports these activities rather than looming over them in a threatening/escalatory posture. In contrast, when Trump was going out of power, J6 happened.

People with nothing or a lot less to lose tend to behave very differently than people with something to protect — a human behavior frequently exploited by authoritarian forces.

It is always easier for the people whose political and economic interests are represented by the government in power to engage in peaceful protest and to leverage their political standing for good and ill.

People out of power tend to meet resistance in peaceful protest, which in turn empowers the more radical voices of protest toward escalation and violence, which in turn creates a lot of space for more violent actors to take advantage and in turn leads to more forceful response etc.

I tend to agree that violence of George Floyd protests tended to be understated but that happened as a reflex to all protests being painted as violent and overstatement of the extent of some of the violence. But a portion of the violence of the Floyd protests was instigated or inflamed by counter protesters and anarchic/criminal actors exploiting the situation. Unfortunately, there were too many people on both sides who waded into those protests looking for a fight, eager to light a match in a powder keg.

A LOT of the people who defaced property and other violent actors were liberal protesters for sure, but far from all. And even the most violent events were far more contained than conservatives continue to pretend. Seattle was not occupied but a large park and surrounding blocks were. No American city was burned to the ground or even close to it. Even a drum fire in an urban protest makes for startling imagery but that is still isolated.

And there were some cases that were astonishing, like the police station siege in Seattle. That was not a city-wide incident and not unlike some far right sieges of federal property in protests in more rural settings.

 

[Mulberry Heel]

Link to those things happening after Democratic politician Melissa Hortman was murdered a few months ago?

Also, the day after Kirk's death, a number of HBCUs as well as the DNC headquarters received bomb threats, and many Democratic politicians across the country received threats against their lives and their families. Additionally, there was a deadly school shooting in Colorado carried out by a 16-year-old influenced by far right ideology mere hours after Kirk's assassination.

The notion that conservatives are peaceful compared to liberals is absurd. There have been studies showing that the great majority of political violence committed in America has actually been from the right, not the left. Some of those studies have been posted here.