Charlie Kirk shot for debatign ideas

I can’t follow the logic of this statement. If he was so effective at changing hearts and minds then no one would have wanted to hurt him. Originally Posted by txdot-guy

You don’t kill the ineffective person, they’re not a threat. Think JFK, MLK, Trump(almost).

I never said this or suggested that violence is OK and I find it offensive that you think so.

”Apparently you think speaking divisive words justifies violence.” Originally Posted by txdot-guy

You claimed Kirk wasn’t killed because he was effective but because and you quote the murderer because he spread “hate that could not be negotiated out.”

If if he wasn’t killed for be effective, nor for hate, then why do you think he was murdered?

You claimed Kirk wasn’t killed because he was effective but because and you quote the murderer because he spread “hate that could not be negotiated out.”

If if he wasn’t killed for be effective, nor for hate, then why do you think he was murdered? Originally Posted by texassapper

I didn’t say he wasn’t effective I said he was effective at stoking hatred.

Hatred begets hatred.

“The more people justify violence from their side of the aisle, the more unhinged, aggressive people will commit violence from that side,” Kleinfeld said. “And the more that will justify the other side in doing the same.”

I didn’t say he wasn’t effective I said he was effective at stoking hatred from the left.

Hatred begets hatred.

“The more people justify violence from their side of the aisle, the more unhinged, aggressive people will commit violence from that side,” Kleinfeld said. “And the more that will justify the other side in doing the same.” Originally Posted by txdot-guy

fify

fify Originally Posted by offshoredrilling

Nothing to fix. That’s what I meant. I thought it was apparent.

I said he was effective at stoking hatred. Originally Posted by txdot-guy

Is he responsible for the Lefts inability to control their emotions?

The left has said for a decade that words are violence so that they could justify violence against those who speak.

You are simply proving that you got brainwashed along with the leftards.

Love him or hate him at least he had the guts to talk and debate people unlike all the cocksuckers in Congress and well actually all politicians in general

The killer said why he killed him. He was tired of Kirk spewing hatred.

The killer said why he killed him. He was tired of Kirk spewing hatred. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

... Well, CRIKEY!

... Glad to see that admission.

... NOW - the slow-informed over at CBS-News can SEE that
there WAS a CLEAR MOTIVE for the shooting.

... We'll surely watch what they say...

... Looks like Charlie Kirk WAS killed for debating ideas.

#### Salty

The killer said why he killed him. He was tired of Kirk spewing hatred. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Spewing hate = stating facts that leftists don’t want to hear, punishable by death.

The killer said why he killed him. He was tired of Kirk spewing hatred. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

so what would you charge this asshole with counselor?

perry mason wants to know


bahhaaaaa

Spewing hate = stating facts that leftists don’t want to hear, punishable by death. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

exactly

Murder

premeditated Murder Originally Posted by 1blackman1

ftfy counselor

I didn’t say he wasn’t effective I said he was effective at stoking hatred. Originally Posted by txdot-guy

I'm curious as to how you think he was stoking hatred. Can you show any examples?

Seems a 2024 DOJ report on left/right political violence has been 'disappeared' by the Federal Government...though the wayback machine still has it.

“What NIJ Research Tells Us About Domestic Terrorism,”


https://web.archive.org/web/20250911...nij/306123.pdf

“The number of far-right attacks continues to outpace all other types of terrorism and domestic violent extremism,” the opening paragraph of the study reads. Originally Posted by RX792P

REALLY?! Those little maggies doing donnys bidding are working overtime.

I'm just not that interested in your answer. And no supposition, everyone here sees it constantly. Originally Posted by Ducbutter

Doth Protest too Much. I love that a one word response with a smiley (which I most always add to show humours intention) really got you panties in a wad.

And insult? Since you don't care you don't have to reply because there is no insult that I can see. Y'all righties have expressed that "maggie" is a derogatory term. It is FAR from that. It's slang for your slogan. And y'all love to yell and make a ruckus about it. Just like a bunch of Magpies. Except Magpies are melodious with warbles and songs. And ima sure the educated maggie knows that a term of endearment for Magpie is Maggie.

Get over yourselves and develop a spine. Your skins and egos are as thin as the melange one you adulate.

As this thread's title says, Charlie Kirk was shot for his ideas.

As Rush Limbaugh did before him, Charlie Kirk showed that Democrats, and progressive liberals in general, cannot compete in the arena of ideas. Kirk refuted their agendas in every topic and exposed their mendacious intellectual dishonesty and moral bankruptcy publicly every time he sat under that awning. . . .and they killed him rather than talk with him.

So much for the often expressed desire to " . . .have a conversation about . . ." whatever. Originally Posted by ICU 812

Never listened to this guy. And this so called arena was not a pit of harmonious ideas. They were a fountain of toxic believes. If you want see a true place for open dialogue, Margret Hoover (?) reboot of William F Buckleys program is a much more adult venue.

Then you must be new to logic.

He was effective at leading large numbers of young people to Christ and to conservativism. Lefties can't have that.... you can see that by all their ICE protests filled with 60 year old whites from the local nursing hime.

The left has always claimed that words are violence so they can justify violence against those that speak out against their policies.

Apparently you think speaking divisive words justifies violence.

I think your words are violent...

Would everyone understand if I shot you in the throat? Originally Posted by texassapper

I don't know who his "christ" was but it sure wasn't the one of Judeo Christian concept. IMO his combining of religion and politics was pretty volatile.

Is he responsible for the Lefts inability to control their emotions?

The left has said for a decade that words are violence so that they could justify violence against those who speak.

You are simply proving that you got brainwashed along with the leftards. Originally Posted by texassapper

Ah! I see what you're doing there
Now get those blinders off. The maggies are a much better fit for the profile the FBI presents for the subject of this thread.

Love him or hate him at least he had the guts to talk and debate people unlike all the cocksuckers in Congress and well actually all politicians in general Originally Posted by Stockinglover

I can agree to that. Except there was something about him when it hit the news. The slogan on the canopy said "Prove me wrong." That definitely didn't make me want to be curious about him. The line is just an invitation to only argue a slim point of view. Definitely says narrowminded.

The killer said why he killed him. He was tired of Kirk spewing hatred. Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Not justification to do so.

Spewing hate = stating facts that leftists don’t want to hear, punishable by death. Originally Posted by Jacuzzme

Fact that being anti-gay, abortion, twisted christian values, etc does not equate to stating facts. Except the fact the guy was not really an upstanding person. But who among us is?

Murder Originally Posted by 1blackman1

Premeditated.