Do you believe Kirk’s killer was a leftist? — praxis

I believe he thought Charlie Kirk was a fascist. So yeah, probably. But it’s not important. The shooter wasn’t playing politics anymore was he? If you think he was playing politics, then you need to know if he was leftist or not. He wasn’t a white supremacist, was he?

I believe the people who celebrated Kirk’s death were on the left. They were playing politics. Using death as a statement.
I don’t believe we should curtail their speech. I just believe they are sick or being immoral. And utterly stupid about how politics in a free society is supposed to work.

So you’re just denying it. — praxis

That the right hates leftists? I’m not denying that. What’s not to hate? I’m saying who cares? Besides children at recess on the school yard. “Stinky pants hater!”

The head of the FCC said "we can do this the easy way or the hard way" and Jimmy Kimmel was suspended. — RogueAI

1. That was wrong of the FCC and he was rebuked. (It wasn’t just Ted Cruz who rebuked him. That says it all.). So I agree it was chilling speech, but he was rebuked.
2. Kimmel was suspended for a week. (That says Kimmel wins the speech battle.)

This all happened right before our eyes - no shady government corruption, just stupidity on behalf of the FCC.

It all played out the way it should. We should keep an eye on the FCC for sure, but what else is new?

You don't think Trump tried to steal the 2020 election? — RogueAI

Steal? By sending insurrectionists off to the Capital? No, that is stupid.
By messing with state delegates? Maybe he tried to work the system with every ounce he could muster. Maybe he pushed all limits. But steal? How do you take actions in court and appeal delegates, all in public view, etc as “theft”? Any improprieties are done in the light of day. Which is why he stepped down when he had to step down. This is hardball people. Was Al Gore trying to steal the election in 2000? No he wasn’t either.

Do you think Jan 6th happens if Trump doesn't give that speech right beforehand? — RogueAI

I never heard the speech so I don’t know. I think the fact that it is a question and the answer is not plain as day speaks volumes. Maybe fools all see what they want to see, as they always are foolish - like anyone who thought Trump was hoping people would storm the Capital so they stormed the Capital, and like anyone who thinks Trump wanted to stay in office by force.

It doesn't concern you that Trump talks about running in 2028? — RogueAI

No, it concerns me (a little) that people don’t realize he’s messing with them. So silly.

I could see Trump trying to amend the constitution so he can run - but it will never happen.

So gullible.

It’s like the sombreros on Hakeem and Schumer mean Trump is racist. So silly.

Or that he wanted to suspend the Constitution to reinstate himself? — RogueAI

Trump stepped down from office in 2020.

Trump will not run in 2028. Trump will not be president after 2028. Period. If I’m right, do you think the left and the media who are currently worried about this rethink anything? And I’m definitely right about this.

There are way bigger threats to democracy in the US besides Trump messing with gullible lefties.

The hatred for Trump blinds people. And when Trump is gone, the hate will live on and breathe strong against whoever takes his place - and we’ll get more conspiracy theories about elections and white supremacy and whatever else is easiest flavor of BS the media can push. Guaranteed that whoever takes Trumps place will be worse than Trump in the eyes of the media. The media thinks Trump is stupid and just an egomaniac. So if the next person looks smart at all, now they’ll be an evil genius - worse than Trump if you can imagine that! And we’ll see all of the same threats to democracy coming from them. Such tired BS.

I have asked you multiple times, at least half a dozen times now, for evidence. — Mijin

Evidence of what woke is? Are you serious?

Or evidence of how Trump is not a fascist - you want me to prove a negative, with positive evidence? My proof Trump is not a fascist is the fact that he stepped down from office in 2020 all while he seems to have believed the election was stolen from him.

You are the one who needs to prove how woke isn’t a thing. How woke isn’t all over the university system.

Pick your pronouns - that’s of the essence of woke.

You don’t need to climb back in here. I tagged you because I didn’t want to use your name here without you knowing it. I had to reference you because @Athena didn’t see the context. That’s all.

Happy to discuss things, but we should slow down.

Evidence of what specifically do you think I haven’t addressed 12 times?

Evidence of what woke is? Are you serious? — Fire Ologist

Any evidence of the injustices and suppression of free speech and free assembly that you're saying is a significant problem on the left, right now.
Preferably comparable to what is happening in the real world, with ICE protestors being brutally put down, an executive order basically saying left wing ideology is terrorism and a speech to the military making it clear that ideological loyalty is a requirement. And this is just in the last few days.

My proof Trump is not a fascist is the fact that he stepped down from office in 2020 all while he seems to have believed the election was stolen from him. — Fire Ologist

Haha, that's hilarious.
You know, you and I have had our differences, but with wit like that, you're all right @Fire Ologist, you're all right.

That the right hates leftists? I’m not denying that. What’s not to hate? — Fire Ologist

Not what I was asking.

I’ll leave you with a quote from someone who Charlie Kirk described as “awful” and “not a good person”:

“I have decided to stick with love. Hate is too great a burden to bear.”
— Martin Luther King Jr.

Any evidence of the injustices and suppression of free speech and free assembly that you're saying is a significant problem on the left, right now. — Mijin

Right wingers want to talk ideas at a university (you know, a university, where ideas are talked about and minds are supposed to be challenged). https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/maga-debate-group-at-tennessee-state-university-escorted-off-campus-after-chaos-erupts/ar-AA1NeoqB
And the media calls it "escorted off" - meaning threatened, bullied and scared into running for their lives.

Normal left tactics. When faced with someone who wants to....talk ideas, the left screams "hate speech" when they don't like those ideas. It's the policy of at least 95% of our universities to bow to left-leaning student temper tantrums. They are too scared of the woke mob, and more to the point, they don't know what to do even if they wanted to stop such nonsense. They are incapable of saying "sit down and listen and learn" to flakey college kids. They fear such behavior is fascist and authoritarian, when screaming mobs are actually fascist and authoritarian. So my example of injustice and suppression of speech is, today's university system. Right wingers need not ask to speak. Until Kirk was shot of course, now some of them feel embarrassed, but continue to misunderstand what their policies have built at the university. Today's university is just a re-education camp to anyone who doesn't pay attention. So that is teachers using the authority of their positions to tell millions of conservative thinkers (who are children looking for guidance) to keep quiet. Don't dare to say "my pronoun is obvious to anyone with half a brain." That's hate, and bad, and must be silenced, and you should be ashamed of yourself for all of the evil thoughts that must accompany such a statement. So just shut up. Try to be conservative on a college campus today. You will know what chilling is.

California legislation to force censorship. https://cabassa.substack.com/p/newsom-to-sign-bill-that-could-censor.
The law is intended to "prohibit discrimination, violence, intimidation, or coercion based on protected characteristics such as race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, or immigration status." In other words - it is trying to push woke ideology and silence the right. So only discrimination based on those things? How about unprotected characteristics, like, being a white man, or having a conservative ideology? And does "Christianity" count as a religion?? Any consistency to be expected Gavin??? Who gets to be judge of what gender is, what religion is, what race means...??
It won't fly in America. Watch. Totally Orwellian. Like in the UK, where laws like this land individuals in jail for saying mean words that hurt people's feelings. Utterly weak. The left wants to give the government all of the power, but then scream its the end of freedom when conservatives win elections - how about we just keep the government out of regulating speech?
So that is spot on legislation, giving enforcement power to the government, to tell whoever they want to shut up because the current government happens to think their ideas are "dangerous". This type of legislation is the beginning of the end of freedom.

The left doesn't see government power as a threat to freedom. They just see government power in the hands of republicans as a threat to freedom. That's incoherent and illogical.
How about government power in the hands of anyone? Let's not let the government regulate our speech.

How about when the FBI investigated parents who said they didn't like woke school curriculum shoved in their kids faces? https://judiciary.house.gov/media/press-releases/whistleblowers-the-fbi-has-labeled-dozens-of-investigations-into-parents-with
Sounds pretty big brother to me.

How about when the IRS targeted conservative organizations? https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/federal-court-strikes-down-irs-policy-targeting-conservative-group/ar-AA1NKVNs
Our government isn't allowed to judge winners and losers. We get to do that at the ballot box. The IRS can stick their opinions up their ass, which is what the court said.

This is government action chilling speech, and its not right wing dude. And it's not for nothing. The UK and Europe are in real trouble when it comes to freedom of speech and assembly. The US has become the last man standing for free speech. The left in America aren't helping. At all.

______

The FCC and Jimmy Kimmel thing was bad. Really bad. That is government abuse that chills speech.

Pam Bondi saying "there is free speech, but then there is hate speech" was utterly woke bullshit. Pam was wrong there too.

Trump's free speech threats: https://thehill.com/opinion/white-house/5519888-trump-free-speech-threats/

Most of it is rhetoric (not law), and legal battles that we will have to see how it plays out. I agree, it is chilling.
But the press needs to watch their sources and their opinions - there has to be some check on the "press" and that check is lawsuits for defamation and fraud.

I agree Trump promotes threats to free speech, and so Trump can create a danger to freedom. He needs to be closely watched and managed (like, what politician doesn't?). But I don't believe he is doing anything that our system cannot handle.

Don't worry. He won't be president in 2029.

The left wants to change the system - Newsom's law is an example of that. Mamdani's socialism is an example of that. They want to give the government too much power. Trump is abusing the power the government already has. Trump shows us the weakness of the controls we citizens have over our current governmental officials. If we give the government an inch, people like Trump (and the FBI and IRS under Biden) can take it a mile.

But the left's solution is.....give this government more power to silence people.

Like Gavin Newsome, in the name of "misinformation" and "hate speech" the answer is more power to the government and keeping right-wing voices silent. Fucking brilliant. Poor California. Such a mess.
______

that's hilarious. — Mijin

It's also true. But ok.

____

EDIT ADDED:

All of Trump's talk about the "enemy within" and the deployment of troops to handle Democrat states, and statements like he "hates democrats" - that is all seriously bad shit. But there are extremist enemies within the US (some of whom are left wing). So it is matter of how Trump applies force; it is not simply bad because he even thinks there are "enemies within" (because there always have been). "Enemies" is a strong word though. Need to watch this play out a bit more to call it "fascist" though. It might be better called "law enforcement."

You know a definition of a war zone is a place where there are 4 deaths per 100,000 people. That often describes our big cities. The Democrats aren't dealing with crime. The only cities where murder rates are down are cities where murders are not being counted the same anymore. There is danger coming from the left my friend.

Are you saying leftists don't hate the Maga?

Not what I was asking. — praxis

What is your point? Tell me how it really is.

I am not Maga. Never was. I had to vote for Trump because.... Biden/Harris had no ideas, not a clue.

I never used social media. Right after Kirk was murdered, I first downloaded Instagram. I don't have twitter or facebook or TikTok accounts. Barely use LinkedIn. When I watch the news, I put on CNN until I can't stand it, then I watch Fox, until I can't stand it. I get my news from all over the place. I mostly think politics is a burden. I'm pursuit of happiness focused. And that comes from engaging with those in need and building a business for all of my employees.

But now young men are getting shot for political speech, and many others are celebrating it. So I said enough with holding my tongue. I think a few million others are saying the same thing. Around the country and around the world. The left's paper thin reasoning and rhetoric just isn't going to fly anymore.

Trump putting sombrero's on Hakeem Jeffries is monumental. The only people offended by that are the ones who are losing the arguments. They aren't offended because of its racism (although they of course say that bullshit). They are offended that Trump refuses to learn from them how to behave.

Woke-type ideology has been leading Western cultural changes since the 1980's. Woke peaked under Obama and spawned the Trans rights movement. (Trans rights ironically cause the woke to begin eating its tail, as Trans people pose big problems for woke homosexual policies, and woke feminist policies, as well as for basic security for children). Wokeness became untenable. And the right finally reacted. That was 2016 with Trump's victory over Clinton.

Now, the deep trench wokness dug of our culture is full of mud. Now the left is more outraged than ever, and less rational. Now people sympathetic to the left shoot people more often than they used to.

I think the world is realizing that only half of its population even wants to be free. Only half of the population really wants to be responsible for their own lives. The rest, the lefties, want government to take care of them and protect them (even from mean words and haters!). The left has been gaslighting about their interest in equal rights for all people. They don't give a shit about all people. They only care about the half that don't want freedom.

Still in denial.

Still in denial — praxis

We know you are Praxis, but he’s trying very hard to get you not to be.

:up:

We know you are Praxis, but he’s trying very hard to get you not to be. — DingoJones

Do you also deny that MAGA used Kirk’s assassination for anti-leftist hate mongering?

It was a commentary on your denial not your politics. I was being cheeky, this thread could use some levity.
Maga anti left hate mongering is standard OP. I think the same can be said of the other side as well. (Not the left, the left Maga equivalent.)

Do you also deny — praxis

Do you deny the Left hates MAGA?

Do you deny hatred from the left is behind all of the protests and assaults and deaths and billions in property destruction these past 5 plus years in America? No leftist hatred on the streets of Portland today?

anti-leftist hate mongering — praxis

Hate mongering, like wearing a red hat (punched in the face), or a shirt with an American flag (ripped off and beaten), or holding a vigil and burning some candles (stomped on and pissed on).

MAGA “hate mongering” like that? So scary when those MAGA folks monger that hate.

During the summer of Floyd a woman was murdered for saying “all lives matter”.

What a joke.

It was a commentary on your denial — DingoJones

Which is?

That there is nothing to what Fire is saying but dishonest Maga talking points. If Im wrong about that view then apologies.

Do you deny the Left hates MAGA? — Fire Ologist

You can look at approval ratings on sites like this I guess: New Marquette Law School Poll National Survey

Do you deny hatred from the left is behind all of the protests and assaults and deaths and billions in property destruction these past 5 plus years in America? — Fire Ologist

Wasn't that about police brutality? If not, what exactly are you referring to?

No leftist hatred on the streets of Portland today? — Fire Ologist

Isn't that about ICE raids?

That there is nothing to what Fire is saying but dishonest Maga talking points. If Im wrong about that view then apologies. — DingoJones

I've said that his views regarding what woke is are "inaccurate" and "skewed" by MAGA rhetoric.

The point is the left is way, way better at hate. Hate is an important ingredient to leftism.

The democrat candidate for governor in Virginia tells everyone to “let your rage fuel you”. Rage isn’t hate. But the democrat candidate for attorney general in Virginia was caught fantasizing and texting about the death of republican rivals and piss on their graves.

My point is, your point about MAGA using Kirk to hate monger is just so inconsequential. Kirk was shot. I’m sure the shooter bumped into some woke hate. What about woke hate? Anything there?

Forget it…

Trump is not 'political' at all. He is an immoral opportunistic bully, aligned with colleagues who value his opportunism and weird charisma to empower their own opportunistic agenda....

— Jeremy Murray

That seems a little naiive to me. Trump is clearly highly political and cares deeply about political issues. He is, though, a moron with only glimpses of moral scruples. But I don't quite understand this characterisation - just as I don't when words like 'dictator' are thrown around. It's just not serious enough. — AmadeusD

I mean, he was a Democrat most of his life? He changes his mind weekly? What political issues does he care deeply about? Dictator, sure, pass, that gets abused.

I imagine the man does care about his base. Is that political?

I think it's fair to say that he is anti-war. Otherwise, I see little deeply held belief.

None of this is hard to see
— Jeremy Murray

It does seem to be, though. — AmadeusD

You don't see people increasingly connecting the 2025 project to Trump's actions? I only made this connection myself after reading commentary making the connection. The Kimmel thing is the obvious example. Perhaps the rest of it 'remains to be seen'?

To me, he has been telling people what he was going to do for years, with the insurrection the most obvious. People are still surprised when it happens, but that's not because the statements aren't there to see. It's that the actions are so outrageous.

I've said that his views regarding what woke is are "inaccurate" and "skewed" by MAGA rhetoric. — praxis

Ok. Inaccurate..sure, a broad stroke rather than nuanced. Skewed by Maga rhetoric? A broad stroke. Its possible to express opinions that overlap with Maga without being a maga drone.

If this interests you so much just read the damn thread. :roll:

The point is that you’ve been influenced by divisive political rhetoric — and are even proudly promoting it — rather than seeing things as they truly are. For example, your definition of woke is inaccurate because it essentializes “woke” into a narrow, partisan frame. It portrays wokeness as treating race, sex, and power as the most important factors in all choices, when in reality most who identify with or are labeled as “woke” simply emphasize awareness of systemic inequities alongside other concerns. It also reduces wokeness to “behavior and ideas” tied to progressive liberals and DEI initiatives, reflecting a common conservative critique rather than a neutral or self-described meaning. In practice, “woke” is a broader, contested term rooted in social awareness, not just a partisan ideology. — praxis

The democrat candidate for governor in Virginia tells everyone to “let your rage fuel you”. — Fire Ologist

This is a good example of how you let divisive rhetoric influence you.

Abigail Spanberger prefaced it by saying it was advice from her mother, responding to political frustration:

“Let your rage fuel you.”
“And so, Mom, I love you. I thank you for the sage advice. And to the rest of us, every time we hear a new story, we let it fuel us.”

She went on to elaborate how she meant to use it:

“Every time we turn on the news, we let it fuel us. Every time something bad is happening … we say, ‘Oh that’s motivation.’ Every time something happens in the world … we just say, ‘Boy, am I motivated today.’ We write more postcards, we knock more doors, we make more phone calls, we tell more friends about the importance of this election.”

She also said that disagreements over policy, perspectives or even worldviews should never lead to violence in the same speech.

Her Republican challenger Winsome Earle-Sears has been citing Spanberger’s “let your rage fuel you” quote in ads, alleging that Spanberger is encouraging violent rhetoric.

If this interests you so much just read the damn thread. :roll: — praxis

Ive been following along.

No leftist hatred on the streets of Portland today? — Fire Ologist

It may get there. (Though the incessant us-versus-them thing is getting old.)

Federal agents knock down elderly couple during Portland protest (— The Oregonian / OregonLive · Oct 4, 2025)

Anyway, these trends have raised some concerns. You don't see anything to worry about?

Ive been following along. — DingoJones

In that case maybe you can show me where I said “That there is nothing to what Fire is saying but dishonest Maga talking points.”

It was my summation of your view not a direct quote. I followed up by offering apologies if that wasnt your view.

DEI and wokeism has always been more of a moral system, or religion, than a political/legal/practical system. Woke does not need to use reason or debate to persuade and coerce. And in fact, anyone who doesn’t just get it and accept the proclamations of DEI, must be deficient and incapable of reason anyway - like a sinner. That is the only clarity - they are certain of what is evil. — Fire Ologist

I do view woke as a secular 'religion'. John McWhorter's "Woke Racism" is great on this issue - he refers to the leaders as "The Elect" - a self-appointed priestly class. Talks about the rituals (land acknowledgements), the genuflecting, etc.

McWhorter is essential on the subject of woke - a gentle, genteel, witty and insightful liberal, a musical theatre enthusiast, a black man who has condemned wokeness as racist, a 'tyranny of low expectations'. I really enjoy listening to him in conversation with Glenn Loury on the Glenn show - the kind of show you talk about as needed, a conservative and liberal discussing race and other issues intelligently.

But I agree - I wish there were more liberals like you. Independent liberal thinkers. Who show good faith and accept good faith from their opponents. And who want to create/discuss practical solutions for all people not just moralize about who is good and who is bad. — Fire Ologist

Thanks! I know there are plenty of conservatives like you - I grew up with them. When my life hit rock bottom, rocked by tragedy (and cancelled by woke) it was conservatives that showed up for me, more than progressives, despite my being surrounded by progressives.

I go back to the at least the 1960’s (could go further first) and point out the anti-Vietnam War western baby-boom generation - rebellion glamorized in music and for the first time the movies and then the press, but mostly in protests against government oppression, and rich man’s oppression, and then male oppression of women and white oppression of colored. — Fire Ologist

Joseph Heath's "Rebel Sell" starts with this position, and then uses it to dismiss the 'radicalism' of the likes of Michael Moore and Naomi Klein. I loved Moore and Klein back in the day, still respect them, and yet agree with Heath completely. It's a morally empty stance.

possibly all woke ideas are left-leaning. — Fire Ologist

Trans concepts of 'female' identity are pretty conservative. Grotesquely so, at times, if you read the likes of Andrea Long Chu. She seems to really value being on the receiving end of the male gaze.

It portrays wokeness as treating race, sex, and power as the most important factors in all choices, when in reality most who identify with or are labeled as “woke” simply emphasize awareness of systemic inequities alongside other concerns. — praxis

I agree with you here, but you omit the fact that the influential voices within woke do not view things this way. Wokeness requires three groups - John McWhorter's 'Elect', the leaders (neoliberal technocrats, generally) who determine the policy, the 'true believers' who spread the word, and the masses, of whom you speak.

I agree that the average woke individual is well intentioned and well meaning. But they are also generally moral relativists, who can't see the moral failures of their leaders.

Kirk did have a following of outraged Christian nationalists, if that counts as organic. — jorndoe

I imagine it does. The non-organic portion of his martyrdom are the opportunistic 2025ers. Plenty of regular people reacted organically.

Correct -- my position is that what the left is doing in terms of free speech is not even 1% of the threat of the right wing currently. Serious estimate. — Mijin

Seriously? 1%? Name another issue with that sort of disparity. Can't? Right. It's not a sane stance to take. Unless, of course, you fancy yourself objectively right? Which puts you in John McWhorter's self-appointed priestly caste.

Was anyone besides the shooter rounded up because of political speech — Fire Ologist

Loads of people got fired for social media posts that were hostile to Kirk in the wake of his murder.

It amazes me how ill people think of Christians, even though it’s always been that way since Christ was hung on a cross. — Fire Ologist

Amazes me too. Ayaan Hirsi Ali talks about how Islam needs it's own reformation. My opinion of the Old Testament is radically different than the New Testament. You know I'm an atheist, but I can still respect and value Jesus. It certainly seems to me that Christianity is more closely aligned with woke morality than Islam (speaking in wildly broad terms) and yet the woke tend to despise Christianity and venerate Islam.

Yet another example of the moral incoherence of woke.

Any evidence of the injustices and suppression of free speech and free assembly that you're saying is a significant problem on the left, right now. — Mijin

Okay. From my readings in the past few days.

https://jonathanturley.org/2025/09/29/scottish-police-arrest-serial-speaker-women-arrested-for-holding-sign-offering-to-discuss-abortion/

https://jonathanturley.org/2025/10/05/freedom-shirts-reportedly-banned-in-kansas-elementary-public-school/

https://www.spiked-online.com/2025/10/02/how-the-west-failed-the-test-of-the-danish-cartoons-controversy/

https://unherd.com/2025/10/the-terror-of-the-anti-israel-machine/

https://courage.media/2025/08/16/ending-the-muslim-brotherhoods-american-experiment/

Some of these are directly on the topic of free speech, others less direct. That took me ten minutes, to review articles I've bookmarked and find recent examples.

But if you are blind, you can't see, no matter how urgent the images.

That ten minute effort of mine represents more evidence than I've seen from you this entire thread.

I do recall you correcting my spelling though. In case you've been reading my posts, you are the commenter that puzzles me via Andrew Doyle's question...

Am I talking to a twelve year old or a sociology professor? And yet other woke doctrinaires think you are doing 'good work'? Sigh.

It was my summation of your view not a direct quote. — DingoJones

I haven’t even suggest that “there is nothing to what Fire is saying but dishonest Maga talking points.” Why are you being dishonest about this?

I haven’t even suggest that “there is nothing to what Fire is saying but dishonest Maga talking points.” Why are you being dishonest about this? — praxis

Im not. Apparently mistaken, but not dishonest.

But if you are blind, you can't see, no matter how urgent the images.

That ten minute effort of mine represents more evidence than I've seen from you this entire thread. — Jeremy Murray

:up:

That took me ten minutes — Jeremy Murray

Those added to my examples too. Too many examples of woke stifling, or just unjustly responding to, speech.

And what is happening in the UK is unbelievable to me. The loss of free speech and incarceration of violators (who say shit the government doesn’t like) is way more real and tangible and more dangerous for more people than things like trans rights issues or even racism in the US. The average woke person has no idea of the harm they are doing.

a black man who has condemned wokeness as racist, a 'tyranny of low expectations'. I really enjoy listening to him in conversation with Glenn Loury — Jeremy Murray

Right. Is that the one when they are speaking about Thomas Sowell? I think I heard of Loury. But yes, people talking. Not as a black man or whatever identity box. Not as a victim pointing at oppression. Just as men. I will check that out, thanks.

self-appointed priestly caste. — Jeremy Murray

It may be that the woke thinks they are always right, but it’s certain that they think right wingers are always wrong. I mean a bit of both maybe.

Was anyone besides the shooter rounded up because of political speech
— Fire Ologist

Loads of people got fired for social media posts that were hostile to Kirk in the wake of his murder. — Jeremy Murray

I was saying what the Government did in response to Kirk, they only arrested the one person. They got serious about antifa now, but no one rounded up (and we’ll see what comes of that).

But there was an intervening event regarding those who seemed hostile to Kirk being fired. No one was fired for being leftist or because of their political views, or even for hating Kirk. They were fired for being pigs about a murder.

Mind you, I’m sure many people just made stupid mistakes and deserved a chance to apologize and move on, so I agree there may have been some injustice in the firing of many of those people.

But that said, all of that firing was in the private sector, and people get fired for all kinds of reasons. It’s not the same free speech issue as government action against people for speech, as in the UK, soon in California (although I bet the law will be struck down, because speech laws make no sense…).

(Though the incessant us-versus-them thing is getting old.) — jorndoe

That seems to be the nature of politics. But I agree. It’s next level now.

The trick is to pick your team and then play fair, be an example, with respect for the game both sides want to play. We have to play together to play at all.

The woke team got too greedy. They assumed too much. It backfired into Trump. Trump made a new team called MAGA, made of all the people the woke team shit on, shouted down, beat up, shot at, hated, called racist, called sexist, called fascist - team Trump is full of people fed up with being called bad for basic things, like being white, or being a man, or being conservative, or being a believer in God.

Woke took advantage, and went to far with the poor Trans people (who are all pawns now).

I hope it is ending.

What needs to be saved in the demise of woke is liberalism and progressivism. And it will be saved even if woke truly ends (which I doubt).

——

Here is a weakness on the left, and evidence of how it has been hyjacked by its extreme woke elements: the left thinks working together with republicans is losing to them, because republicans are subversive (and just always bad). So woke can’t even try to cooperate with them. It’s why the only unified message of the democrats is “we must fight and resist Trump”. They never have positive ideas, just plans to subvert all things hateful by republicans (which is everything republican haters say!).

So Dems can’t just show common sense and reasonableness. If a conservative idea is a good one (like let’s not over sexualize children or chop off their body parts), the left still can’t even entertain the idea. Even if it is common sense. And unable to use republican “totalitarian”…common sense… it leaves them to have to work with nonsense so often.

And this is why delusion works to answer questions and calm woke nerves. As long as the language opposes conservative language, the argument is assumed to be sound enough and the facts are good enough. No need to question woke authority or logic or validity. And anyone who questions it can be dismissed. This is their main tactic - dismissal of debate. That is fascist, if you ask me.

I want to raise the sombrero cartoon again, because I think it is such a good way to see woke things more clearly.

The left sees the cartoon and see that a white guy like Trump and his team of evil doers is making a joke of a sombrero and Mexican stuff. The left assumes this is so racist they can be indignant, and call Trump out. That has to be racist, right? Everyone with any moral scruples will have to agree - Trump is a pig for mocking his opponents like that.

But are they really indignant for Mexicans or Mexican-American immigrants? Is anyone really so offended that the cartoon does more harm than good? Trump is always called Hitler - given a funny mustache and
all. And this image is used to smear all republicans who agree with anything Trump. So what’s the harm in giving Hakeem Jeffries and Schumer a cartoon hat so republicans can laugh at them? And make it a sombrero, because they pretend to love illegal immigrant Mexicans so much. :grin: Guaranteed the people who are laughing the most are LEGAL Mexican American immigrants, many of whom love Trump because they love America.

The woke don’t know what is important and what is not. According to the woke, the cartoon is about a white man using the poor downtrodden Mexican to make fun of someone. Well I’m sure many Mexicans hear that from the woke left and think - screw you too - “we aren’t downtrodden, and your policies suck, and why are you falling for such a silly provocation with your pretend outrage for me who isn’t outraged at all - I think it’s funny too!”?

The woke left calls a silly joke “hate speech” and wants to give the government the power to fine and/or arrest people who say things that might “offend” a “protected class”.

They are wrong about what is racist, and wrong about what to do with “racist” speech. And if such racist speech was finally stoppable by the good government policies, all we would be stopping is a few laughs. It’s not offensive enough to warrant “say it to my face” bullshit from Jeffries. He seems self-important. And too woke for the current moment.

This is an example of their weakness - they see oppression where it does not exist and their solutions for oppression stink anyway.

The Dems keep blowing opportunities to take back the narrative. Jeffries should have laughed. Dummy. He was too worried he’d further offend the seven Mexicans who were upset (3 of whom will still vote for Trump). Because he doesn’t know how to handle racism (if it was even racist to make the cartoon.)

——

I haven’t even suggest that “there is nothing to what Fire is saying but dishonest Maga talking points” — praxis

Maybe not nothing, but you certainly don’t make much of all I’m saying.

@DingoJones assessment that you over simplify and to simply categorize me doesn’t seem far off to me.

It is insulting to say I’m just parroting talking points, you know that right? Dingo was just trying to help, because I think he saw this too.

It would be kinder if you would just assume I am telling you what I think in good faith, my own observations (which is all I am doing), and just talk about it, or tell me what you think.

I mean, I could say you sound like woke propaganda and misinformation too, but instead, I assume you are a thoughtful person, like me. Just wrong a lot. :razz:

And yet other woke doctrinaires think you are doing 'good work'? Sigh. — Jeremy Murray

Yeah - that is weird to me too. Out of nowhere - fist bumps, like we reached peace in the Middle East.

The trick is to pick your team and [...] — Fire Ologist

I do it differently.

Decide on whatever topics/issues; work out who to vote for accordingly; if none found, then figure out if second best is good enough, or if there are additional concerns to take into account; ...

Someone (Goldwater?) once mentioned that politics involves compromise.

Maybe not nothing, but you certainly don’t make much of all I’m saying. — Fire Ologist

What exactly have I not made much of?

It is insulting to say I’m just parroting talking points, you know that right? — Fire Ologist

I just gave an example of you mindlessly parroting twisted political rhetoric a few posts above on this page:

The democrat candidate for governor in Virginia tells everyone to “let your rage fuel you”.
— Fire Ologist

This is a good example of how you let divisive rhetoric influence you.

Abigail Spanberger prefaced it by saying it was advice from her mother, responding to political frustration:

“Let your rage fuel you.”
“And so, Mom, I love you. I thank you for the sage advice. And to the rest of us, every time we hear a new story, we let it fuel us.”

She went on to elaborate how she meant to use it:

“Every time we turn on the news, we let it fuel us. Every time something bad is happening … we say, ‘Oh that’s motivation.’ Every time something happens in the world … we just say, ‘Boy, am I motivated today.’ We write more postcards, we knock more doors, we make more phone calls, we tell more friends about the importance of this election.”

She also said that disagreements over policy, perspectives or even worldviews should never lead to violence in the same speech.

Her Republican challenger Winsome Earle-Sears has been citing Spanberger’s “let your rage fuel you” quote in ads, alleging that Spanberger is encouraging violent rhetoric. — praxis