Charlie Kirk shot at Utah Valley University

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All people had to do was to be fully opposed to murdering someone over their political opinion. It’s shocking how many people failed that simple moral test.

Agreed. Even people here have said they are happy he is dead.

I've read nearly every page of this thread since the day it happened and I can't remember a single commenter saying they were happy he's dead.

+100. Me too and if I did, I would have immediately reported it to Jeff.

+1

I’m a conservative and I haven’t seen this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All people had to do was to be fully opposed to murdering someone over their political opinion. It’s shocking how many people failed that simple moral test.

Agreed. Even people here have said they are happy he is dead.

I've read nearly every page of this thread since the day it happened and I can't remember a single commenter saying they were happy he's dead.

+100. Me too and if I did, I would have immediately reported it to Jeff.

+1

I’m a conservative and I haven’t seen this.

DP, I’ve seen a lot of so called examples of people “celebrating CK’s death” elsewhere on the internet and I’m shocked some people haven’t hurt themselves twisting into pretzels to label fairly tame comments into the supposed inciting of political violence.

Sharing his own quotes, criticizing his views, not feeling sad that he is dead, pointing out the irony of his views on gun violence etc. are not “celebrating” anything. These are social and political commentaries.

Of course on the internet you’re going to find abhorrent views and I’m sure an extreme fringe did celebrate. But it’s so incredibly disingenuous for our own president to totally ascribe political violence to liberal ideology. Sad we cannot have a leader who will unite us and instead we get more lies and inflammatory propaganda to divide us.

[Anonymous]

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All people had to do was to be fully opposed to murdering someone over their political opinion. It’s shocking how many people failed that simple moral test.

Agreed. Even people here have said they are happy he is dead.

I've read nearly every page of this thread since the day it happened and I can't remember a single commenter saying they were happy he's dead.

+100. Me too and if I did, I would have immediately reported it to Jeff.

+1

I’m a conservative and I haven’t seen this.

DP, I’ve seen a lot of so called examples of people “celebrating CK’s death” elsewhere on the internet and I’m shocked some people haven’t hurt themselves twisting into pretzels to label fairly tame comments into the supposed inciting of political violence.

Sharing his own quotes, criticizing his views, not feeling sad that he is dead, pointing out the irony of his views on gun violence etc. are not “celebrating” anything. These are social and political commentaries.

Of course on the internet you’re going to find abhorrent views and I’m sure an extreme fringe did celebrate. But it’s so incredibly disingenuous for our own president to totally ascribe political violence to liberal ideology. Sad we cannot have a leader who will unite us and instead we get more lies and inflammatory propaganda to divide us.

This

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All people had to do was to be fully opposed to murdering someone over their political opinion. It’s shocking how many people failed that simple moral test.

Agreed. Even people here have said they are happy he is dead.

I've read nearly every page of this thread since the day it happened and I can't remember a single commenter saying they were happy he's dead.

+100. Me too and if I did, I would have immediately reported it to Jeff.

+1

I’m a conservative and I haven’t seen this.

DP, I’ve seen a lot of so called examples of people “celebrating CK’s death” elsewhere on the internet and I’m shocked some people haven’t hurt themselves twisting into pretzels to label fairly tame comments into the supposed inciting of political violence.

Sharing his own quotes, criticizing his views, not feeling sad that he is dead, pointing out the irony of his views on gun violence etc. are not “celebrating” anything. These are social and political commentaries.

Of course on the internet you’re going to find abhorrent views and I’m sure an extreme fringe did celebrate. But it’s so incredibly disingenuous for our own president to totally ascribe political violence to liberal ideology. Sad we cannot have a leader who will unite us and instead we get more lies and inflammatory propaganda to divide us.

He didn’t ascribe it to liberal ideology. He ascribed it to the rhetoric and language of liberals
When someone is a “Nazi,” isn’t it necessary to get rid of that person????

I'd settle for Nazis changing their ways to be more decent people, or at the very least not trying to indoctrinate others into also being Nazis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All people had to do was to be fully opposed to murdering someone over their political opinion. It’s shocking how many people failed that simple moral test.

Agreed. Even people here have said they are happy he is dead.

I've read nearly every page of this thread since the day it happened and I can't remember a single commenter saying they were happy he's dead.

+100. Me too and if I did, I would have immediately reported it to Jeff.

+1

I’m a conservative and I haven’t seen this.

DP, I’ve seen a lot of so called examples of people “celebrating CK’s death” elsewhere on the internet and I’m shocked some people haven’t hurt themselves twisting into pretzels to label fairly tame comments into the supposed inciting of political violence.

Sharing his own quotes, criticizing his views, not feeling sad that he is dead, pointing out the irony of his views on gun violence etc. are not “celebrating” anything. These are social and political commentaries.

Of course on the internet you’re going to find abhorrent views and I’m sure an extreme fringe did celebrate. But it’s so incredibly disingenuous for our own president to totally ascribe political violence to liberal ideology. Sad we cannot have a leader who will unite us and instead we get more lies and inflammatory propaganda to divide us.

He didn’t ascribe it to liberal ideology. He ascribed it to the rhetoric and language of liberals
When someone is a “Nazi,” isn’t it necessary to get rid of that person????

I'd settle for Nazis changing their ways to be more decent people, or at the very least not trying to indoctrinate others into also being Nazis.

Not being a Nazi is super easy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All people had to do was to be fully opposed to murdering someone over their political opinion. It’s shocking how many people failed that simple moral test.

Agreed. Even people here have said they are happy he is dead.

I've read nearly every page of this thread since the day it happened and I can't remember a single commenter saying they were happy he's dead.

+100. Me too and if I did, I would have immediately reported it to Jeff.

+1

I’m a conservative and I haven’t seen this.

It was deleted.
It was appalling.

Well, then. Sounds like this liberal platform is better at policing it's own than any of the conservative platforms. No one canceled Donald Trump for laughing at Paul Pelosi. You all laughed along with him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Christ Almighty let her be. You guys suck

Hey, if you choose to be in the public eye, and you choose to make millions while doing it, you are opening yourself up to public scrutiny.

If she were focusing on her family or staying out of the limelight, then I would a hundred percent agree with you. But if you accept a public role, then, No, absolutely no one needs to let her be. Why would we?

Also, she has issued a battle cry, in her own words. After the show said these words, how can we not pay attention to what she is doing:

"They should all know this: if you thought that my husband's mission was powerful before, you have no idea what you just have unleashed across this entire country and this world."

"You have no idea the fire that you have ignited within this wife."

"The cries of this widow will echo around the world like a battle cry.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Christ Almighty let her be. You guys suck

Hey, if you choose to be in the public eye, and you choose to make millions while doing it, you are opening yourself up to public scrutiny.

If she were focusing on her family or staying out of the limelight, then I would a hundred percent agree with you. But if you accept a public role, then, No, absolutely no one needs to let her be. Why would we?

Also, she has issued a battle cry, in her own words. After the show said these words, how can we not pay attention to what she is doing:

"They should all know this: if you thought that my husband's mission was powerful before, you have no idea what you just have unleashed across this entire country and this world."

"You have no idea the fire that you have ignited within this wife."

"The cries of this widow will echo around the world like a battle cry.

Right. She’s not asking for sympathy. She’s spoiling for a fight.

[Anonymous]

Wife is clearly ethnically Jewish with bleached hair. Overnight she went from playing trad wife to an ice cold shrewd girlboss CEO who can’t generate tears. And helping her run point in the power grab is her dead husband’s Jewish exec producer, who claims to have been her husband’s best friend. Guy’s wife and best buddy were vipers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wife is clearly ethnically Jewish with bleached hair. Overnight she went from playing trad wife to an ice cold shrewd girlboss CEO who can’t generate tears. And helping her run point in the power grab is her dead husband’s Jewish exec producer, who claims to have been her husband’s best friend. Guy’s wife and best buddy were vipers.

The “best buddy” is also who claimed an unnamed surgeon told him Charlie had super man bones. The guy is so full of shit and has made himself famous off this crisis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Wife of the grifter gets in on the grift. I doubt she loved him. THey were "set up" by Dump Inc. She was probably trafficked from Colorado by Epstein to be a bride of the right. Also, Kirk, may he RIP, gives off a very gay vibe.

Whaat??
She is smiling in this picture.

It would be more respectful if she would just stay out of the public eye for a little bit so she can properly grieve the loss of her beloved husband.
Aside from appearing at his memorial it is weird to see her so soon after her husband’s assasination.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Yes, Elisabeth Kübler-Ross's perspective on the stages of grief evolved; she later acknowledged she identified more stages than the commonly known five, included the idea that these stages are not linear, and also applied her model to the non-dying process of change and loss. Her later work emphasized that the stages are not a rigid, prescriptive, or sequential pathway but a set of flexible guidelines for individuals to understand their emotional experiences during grief and loss.

As anyone who has loved and lost and thus began the lifelong journey of grief knows, it is not a linear process and it never ends.

Listen, I am a very liberal person who believes in the true teaching of Christ, and thus I have no respect for the worldview of Charlie or Erika Kirk.

But I am getting very sick of the attacks on her grieving process from people on this board and elsewhere in the social media universe.

Erika Kirk is motivated undoubtedly by her own conservative worldview and her desire to continue building the empire her husband had spent a decade or more building, including not only building political influence but also financial wealth - but also she is finding comfort in being surrounded by his people, his legacy, his work.

The notion that the only proper way to grieve is to melt into a puddle and sit home crying rivers of tears into endless hankies is just ridiculous and also incredibly condescending. Would critics like this woman and the many here bring the same criticisms to women like Hattie Caraway? Margaret Chase Smith? Doris Matsui? Debbie Dingell? Marie Curie? Laurene Jobs? The list of women who inherited their husband's legacies and continued their work is long and storied.

Work is a generally noble distraction from what could become self-indulgent and toxic wallowing in grief. Many people here and out there just hated Charlie and now they hate Erika, too. However those same people, had Barack Obama been assassinated, would have celebrated with great joy if Michelle Obama chose to take up his mantle and continue his work.

Just stop already with the character assassination of this widow, it's truly disgusting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who set them up?

Started an international nonprofit when she was 16 or 17? Where are the form 990s? Sounds like cover for something more nefarious or maybe she was serving in the IDF.

[Anonymous]

The framing of this all seems so amateurish. Sure the AI videos are sort of believable at first, but come on. Watch Erika’s and Stephen Miller’s speeches in particular. These speeches were created by the same person. I’m not sure if Miller’s speech was AI but wouldn’t be surprised. Erika’s campy widow battlecry speech was absurd and clearly AI.