ChaoticMusings

Vam · Go Outside.

RE: Charlie Kiirk Shot.

Syl · FIRM BUT FAIR.

I had never heard of him a week ago. Since then, I have watched a lot of his vids online, he could be patronising, rude, deliberately provoking, and in the two clips above, downright nasty and aggressive.
I suppose people see and hear what they want to.

Barksdale · Musing at the Chaos

Maddog wrote:
Barksdale wrote:
If those are the shooter's messages, and I have no reason to suspect they are not except for the lack of trustworthiness of the MAGA administration, then he will probably get the death penalty. It was a pre-meditated political execution.
I see two narratives forming. On one side this event will be used as evidence of far-left, trans ideological radicalisation leading to a government crackdown of free speech, free association, and left leaning organisations being proscribed as terrorist organisations. That will lead to enormous pushback.
On the other side it will be used as example of how religious nationalism leads to a toxic culture where violence flourishes as people are marginalised. People will argue that the shooter - a wealthy, intelligent, white young male who had every opportunity before him were failed by his parents and his community as they failed to accept who he was as a person causing rage to grow in his heart, which exploded into violence as the rhetoric of right wing Conservatives like Charlie Kirk created an environment which put the person he loved, a trans woman, at danger and risk of attack. This will lead to enormous pushback as well.
You then have one of the most divisive and incompetent administrations in US history running the show and trying to manage the situation.
I doubt anyone believes America will unify. It has been split in two with little chance of reconciliation.
Are you familiar with how religiously conservative Utah is? It's basically run by the Mormon Church. No doubt that causes a great deal of issues for kids who are gay, but they have been working this out for years. Many just move.
And Charlie never said anyone should be attacked..He was very much a."love the sinner, hate the sin" kinda Christian..

Yes, I discovered that Utah is very religiously conservative by reading about this case. I also heard that the state with the highest rate of searches from trans porn is Texas

Obviously I am just speculating here and trying to predict how things will play out. I have no idea about Tyler Robinson's upbringing. Maybe he was openly gay and experienced nothing but love and acceptance from his family and community. If he was repressed and closeted then it gives more credence to the theory it left him open to anger and then his actions.

As I said before I don't know much about Charlie Kirk as I watched very little content of him. What I did see I wasn't really bowled over by his ability so directed my attention elsewhere. My point was not about him directly saying anyone should be attacked but his rhetoric contributing to an environment where minority and women were dehumanised. It seems the MAGA right have suddenly discovered that dehumanisation may be a bad thing after not seeming to be that bothered about it or even revelling in it in the past. There are undoubtedly a lot of problems on the left that need to be fixed but the hypocrisy and lack of self awareness of some on the right on how they are acting is astonishing.

Barksdale · Musing at the Chaos

Syl wrote:
I had never heard of him a week ago. Since then, I have watched a lot of his vids online, he could be patronising, rude, deliberately provoking, and in the two clips above, downright nasty and aggressive.
I suppose people see and hear what they want to.

I wasn't impressed by the little I saw either. He came across more like a rage baiter than a debater.

Also if a 30 year old can't perform well against an 18 year old in a debate something is a bit wrong. He stacked the odds in his favour which is pretty smart I guess.

Syl · FIRM BUT FAIR.

Barksdale wrote:
Syl wrote:
I had never heard of him a week ago. Since then, I have watched a lot of his vids online, he could be patronising, rude, deliberately provoking, and in the two clips above, downright nasty and aggressive.
I suppose people see and hear what they want to.
I wasn't impressed by the little I saw either. He came across more like a rage baiter than a debater.
Also if a 30 year old can't perform well against an 18 year old in a debate something is a bit wrong. He stacked the odds in his favour which is pretty smart I guess.

Yes, I noticed that too. The only older person, a man in his 70's, that took him on at some rally, was obviously not a full shilling, and Kirk just made fun of him and had the youth crowd jeering him.

I watched more of the link Maddog put up....stopped at just over 30 minutes. Those young women held their own, even though he was probing their personal lives. As soon as one of them turned the tables and asked him an intimate question...his manner completely changed, you could see his hackles rising.

Vam · Go Outside.

Syl wrote:
I had never heard of him a week ago. Since then, I have watched a lot of his vids online, he could be patronising, rude, deliberately provoking, and in the two clips above, downright nasty and aggressive.
I suppose people see and hear what they want to.

Whenever possible, I always prefer to form an opinion based on what I see and hear in real time.

I’m expecting MD to again show the clip of the guy Kirk was yelling at in that second clip - his name is Cenk Uygur, head of The Young Turks online media platform. After the assassination, Cenk publicly expressed his shock and regret, as most rational people would.

But MD did ask for an example of Kirk being a brat, so… 🤷🏻‍♀️

Btw, the subtitles are wrong in that second clip - Kirk is heard yelling “What do I do? I get dirty every single year!” and “What’s my salary? Less than his!”

Barksdale · Musing at the Chaos

Syl wrote:
Barksdale wrote:
Syl wrote:
I had never heard of him a week ago. Since then, I have watched a lot of his vids online, he could be patronising, rude, deliberately provoking, and in the two clips above, downright nasty and aggressive.
I suppose people see and hear what they want to.
I wasn't impressed by the little I saw either. He came across more like a rage baiter than a debater.
Also if a 30 year old can't perform well against an 18 year old in a debate something is a bit wrong. He stacked the odds in his favour which is pretty smart I guess.
Yes, I noticed that too. The only older person, a man in his 70's, that took him on at some rally, was obviously not a full shilling, and Kirk just made fun of him and had the youth crowd jeering him.
I watched more of the link Maddog put up....stopped at just over 30 minutes. Those young women held their own, even though he was probing their personal lives. As soon as one of them turned the tables and asked him an intimate question...his manner completely changed, you could see his hackles rising.

The set up of those podcasts like Whatever and Fresh & Fit are pretty crass as well. You usually get older men, who have prepared their talking points very well, invite usually younger female sex workers who haven't though through their belief very well to have a "debate." Then when one of the young women makes a fool of herself they clip the footage, trying to make it go viral and monetise her humiliation. It also present a distorted picture of how young women act in general which plays into harmful opinions about their actions and beliefs. Congratulations, I guess.

TBF to Charlie Kirk he was very gracious in that clip MD posted but what I have seen of other people who appear on those shows that isn't usually the case, especially Andrew Wilson.

Maddog · Go Outside

Vam wrote:
MD … ‘I still have yet to see a clip if him being offensive..’
‘K … 👇🏻
https://x.com/adamemedia/status/1968049811971858878?s=61
https://x.com/antitrumpcanada/status/1966148602490925081?s=61
Also, did you miss the compilation Barksdale posted a few days ago?

What was offensive about that..

I don't even know what the first clip was about because of its editing..

The second is Cenk and Charlie going at it. Cenk wasn't offended, I promise you..

Maddog · Go Outside

Syl wrote:
I had never heard of him a week ago. Since then, I have watched a lot of his vids online, he could be patronising, rude, deliberately provoking, and in the two clips above, downright nasty and aggressive.
I suppose people see and hear what they want to.

Imagine if there 10,000 hours of you talking on video.

I bet I could say the same about you..

I know they could say the same about me..

Maddog · Go Outside

Barksdale wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Barksdale wrote:
If those are the shooter's messages, and I have no reason to suspect they are not except for the lack of trustworthiness of the MAGA administration, then he will probably get the death penalty. It was a pre-meditated political execution.
I see two narratives forming. On one side this event will be used as evidence of far-left, trans ideological radicalisation leading to a government crackdown of free speech, free association, and left leaning organisations being proscribed as terrorist organisations. That will lead to enormous pushback.
On the other side it will be used as example of how religious nationalism leads to a toxic culture where violence flourishes as people are marginalised. People will argue that the shooter - a wealthy, intelligent, white young male who had every opportunity before him were failed by his parents and his community as they failed to accept who he was as a person causing rage to grow in his heart, which exploded into violence as the rhetoric of right wing Conservatives like Charlie Kirk created an environment which put the person he loved, a trans woman, at danger and risk of attack. This will lead to enormous pushback as well.
You then have one of the most divisive and incompetent administrations in US history running the show and trying to manage the situation.
I doubt anyone believes America will unify. It has been split in two with little chance of reconciliation.
Are you familiar with how religiously conservative Utah is? It's basically run by the Mormon Church. No doubt that causes a great deal of issues for kids who are gay, but they have been working this out for years. Many just move.
And Charlie never said anyone should be attacked..He was very much a."love the sinner, hate the sin" kinda Christian..
Yes, I discovered that Utah is very religiously conservative by reading about this case. I also heard that the state with the highest rate of searches from trans porn is Texas
Obviously I am just speculating here and trying to predict how things will play out. I have no idea about Tyler Robinson's upbringing. Maybe he was openly gay and experienced nothing but love and acceptance from his family and community. If he was repressed and closeted then it gives more credence to the theory it left him open to anger and then his actions.
As I said before I don't know much about Charlie Kirk as I watched very little content of him. What I did see I wasn't really bowled over by his ability so directed my attention elsewhere. My point was not about him directly saying anyone should be attacked but his rhetoric contributing to an environment where minority and women were dehumanised. It seems the MAGA right have suddenly discovered that dehumanisation may be a bad thing after not seeming to be that bothered about it or even revelling in it in the past. There are undoubtedly a lot of problems on the left that need to be fixed but the hypocrisy and lack of self awareness of some on the right on how they are acting is astonishing.

Saying someone is wrong isn't dehumanizing. It's an opinion. Attacking them personally is dehumanizing..

Again, Charlie was a hate the sin, not the sinner kind of guy.

Maddog · Go Outside

Maddog wrote:

Spend 5 minutes watching this. Obviously Charlie comes at these porn actress from a religious perspective, but he is kind and polite..

I still have yet to see a clip if him being offensive..

No comment?.

Not surprised. 🙄

Maddog · Go Outside

Maddog wrote:
Vam wrote:
MD … ‘I still have yet to see a clip if him being offensive..’
‘K … 👇🏻
https://x.com/adamemedia/status/1968049811971858878?s=61
https://x.com/antitrumpcanada/status/1966148602490925081?s=61
Also, did you miss the compilation Barksdale posted a few days ago?
What was offensive about that..

I don't even know what the first clip was about because of its editing..

The second is Cenk and Charlie going at it. Cenk wasn't offended, I promise you..

I rewatched the first one. He was offensive to Hamas, a terrorist organization..

Let me be blunt. Charlie was no more offensive than you. No less moral or ethical than you, and deserved to live a long, healthy life like you. Also like you, he had opinions that not everyone agreed with.

Syl · FIRM BUT FAIR.

Maddog wrote:
Syl wrote:
I had never heard of him a week ago. Since then, I have watched a lot of his vids online, he could be patronising, rude, deliberately provoking, and in the two clips above, downright nasty and aggressive.
I suppose people see and hear what they want to.
Imagine if there 10,000 hours of you talking on video.

I bet I could say the same about you..

I know they could say the same about me..

Without doubt, they could say the same about you, me anyone, but we are not advocating our lifestyle as the best. Perfect home, perfect partner, perfect children, perfect life choices....nor are we preaching to the youth of today how their lifestyle is all wrong.

I agree with some of the things he says, just not the preachy way he delivers his message.

I also watched on from the last clip you showed with the young porn star and others.

He admitted in the past he had had problems with porn, when the porn star asked him a flippant question about' had he jerked off to her' his face changed and so did his demeaner.,...he quickly recovered though, helped out by the host.

Maddog · Go Outside

Syl wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Syl wrote:
I had never heard of him a week ago. Since then, I have watched a lot of his vids online, he could be patronising, rude, deliberately provoking, and in the two clips above, downright nasty and aggressive.
I suppose people see and hear what they want to.
Imagine if there 10,000 hours of you talking on video.

I bet I could say the same about you..

I know they could say the same about me..
Without doubt, they could say the same about you, me anyone, but we are not advocating our lifestyle as the best. Perfect home, perfect partner, perfect children, perfect life choices....nor are we preaching to the youth of today how their lifestyle is all wrong.
I agree with some of the things he says, just not the preachy way he delivers his message.
I also watched on from the last clip you showed with the young porn star and others.
He admitted in the past he had had problems with porn, when the porn star asked him a flippant question about' had he jerked off to her' his face changed and so did his demeaner.,...he quickly recovered though, helped out by the host.

What did he do different than any preacher trying to convince people their way was the best because God said so?.

Or any politician that wanted people to see their ideas were the best for them.

He went into the public realm and had civil conversations with people that agreed or disagreed with him..

We need more people like that and less people attacking people that step up and do that..

-- Edited by Maddog on Thursday 18th of September 2025 04:47:37 PM

Syl · FIRM BUT FAIR.

Maddog wrote:
Vam wrote:
MD … ‘I still have yet to see a clip if him being offensive..’
‘K … 👇🏻
https://x.com/adamemedia/status/1968049811971858878?s=61
https://x.com/antitrumpcanada/status/1966148602490925081?s=61
Also, did you miss the compilation Barksdale posted a few days ago?
What was offensive about that..

I don't even know what the first clip was about because of its editing..

The second is Cenk and Charlie going at it. Cenk wasn't offended, I promise you..

Don't you think it's offensive to laugh about a territory that has been bombed so badly, where tens of thousands of innocent people have killed, and he finds it amusing that they have no tall buildings left?

And he wasn't just offensive to Hamas, his comment, which the host found hilarious was "stupid Muslims'.

Syl · FIRM BUT FAIR.

Maddog wrote:
Syl wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Syl wrote:
I had never heard of him a week ago. Since then, I have watched a lot of his vids online, he could be patronising, rude, deliberately provoking, and in the two clips above, downright nasty and aggressive.
I suppose people see and hear what they want to.
Imagine if there 10,000 hours of you talking on video.

I bet I could say the same about you..

I know they could say the same about me..
Without doubt, they could say the same about you, me anyone, but we are not advocating our lifestyle as the best. Perfect home, perfect partner, perfect children, perfect life choices....nor are we preaching to the youth of today how their lifestyle is all wrong.
I agree with some of the things he says, just not the preachy way he delivers his message.
I also watched on from the last clip you showed with the young porn star and others.
He admitted in the past he had had problems with porn, when the porn star asked him a flippant question about' had he jerked off to her' his face changed and so did his demeaner.,...he quickly recovered though, helped out by the host.
What did he do different than any preacher trying to convince people their way was the best because God said so?.

Or any politician that wanted people to see their ideas were the best for them.

He went into the public realm and had civil conversations with people that agreed or disagreed with him..

We need more people like that and less people attacking people that step up and do that..

-- Edited by Maddog on Thursday 18th of September 2025 04:47:37 PM

I don't think people like that should be attacked, I do think people should be challenged though.....Sadly, he can't respond now, but this is a debate forum, so we can still give opinions.

Fluffy · Musing at the Chaos

Syl wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Syl wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Syl wrote:
I had never heard of him a week ago. Since then, I have watched a lot of his vids online, he could be patronising, rude, deliberately provoking, and in the two clips above, downright nasty and aggressive.
I suppose people see and hear what they want to.
Imagine if there 10,000 hours of you talking on video.

I bet I could say the same about you..

I know they could say the same about me..
Without doubt, they could say the same about you, me anyone, but we are not advocating our lifestyle as the best. Perfect home, perfect partner, perfect children, perfect life choices....nor are we preaching to the youth of today how their lifestyle is all wrong.
I agree with some of the things he says, just not the preachy way he delivers his message.
I also watched on from the last clip you showed with the young porn star and others.
He admitted in the past he had had problems with porn, when the porn star asked him a flippant question about' had he jerked off to her' his face changed and so did his demeaner.,...he quickly recovered though, helped out by the host.
What did he do different than any preacher trying to convince people their way was the best because God said so?.

Or any politician that wanted people to see their ideas were the best for them.

He went into the public realm and had civil conversations with people that agreed or disagreed with him..

We need more people like that and less people attacking people that step up and do that..

-- Edited by Maddog on Thursday 18th of September 2025 04:47:37 PM
I don't think people like that should be attacked, I do think people should be challenged though.....Sadly, he can't respond now, but this is a debate forum, so we can still give opinions.

We may be able to. But anyone in the media in America (the latest being very popular late night comedian Jimmy Kimmel ) gets the sack if they give nothing but glowing praise for Kirk. The right were all about free speech, even asserting there was no such thing as hate speech. Now the President is telling the media and we'll anyone on Tele in America what they can and cannot say.

It's straight out of Nineteen Eighty four. MAGA cannot be reasoned with.

Syl · FIRM BUT FAIR.

And yet Fluffy, after Kirk had visited the UK recently, he went on about how he couldn't wait to leave and get back on American soil, because free speech is clamped down on so much here.

Oh, the irony.

Maddog · Go Outside

Syl wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Syl wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Syl wrote:
I had never heard of him a week ago. Since then, I have watched a lot of his vids online, he could be patronising, rude, deliberately provoking, and in the two clips above, downright nasty and aggressive.
I suppose people see and hear what they want to.
Imagine if there 10,000 hours of you talking on video.

I bet I could say the same about you..

I know they could say the same about me..
Without doubt, they could say the same about you, me anyone, but we are not advocating our lifestyle as the best. Perfect home, perfect partner, perfect children, perfect life choices....nor are we preaching to the youth of today how their lifestyle is all wrong.
I agree with some of the things he says, just not the preachy way he delivers his message.
I also watched on from the last clip you showed with the young porn star and others.
He admitted in the past he had had problems with porn, when the porn star asked him a flippant question about' had he jerked off to her' his face changed and so did his demeaner.,...he quickly recovered though, helped out by the host.
What did he do different than any preacher trying to convince people their way was the best because God said so?.

Or any politician that wanted people to see their ideas were the best for them.

He went into the public realm and had civil conversations with people that agreed or disagreed with him..

We need more people like that and less people attacking people that step up and do that..

-- Edited by Maddog on Thursday 18th of September 2025 04:47:37 PM
I don't think people like that should be attacked, I do think people should be challenged though.....Sadly, he can't respond now, but this is a debate forum, so we can still give opinions.

And he loved being challenged.

That was what he lived for.

And I guess what he died for too..

My point is, it's fair to challenge his stances. It's not fair to label him based on misrepresentation of his stances.

Let's take DEI. It's perfectly acceptable for him to say it led to less qualified people being promoted, because that's what DEI does.

Stating that doesn't make you racist. I'd say supporting DEI might make you a racist though..

Barksdale · Musing at the Chaos

Maddog wrote:

Saying someone is wrong isn't dehumanizing. It's an opinion. Attacking them personally is dehumanizing..
Again, Charlie was a hate the sin, not the sinner kind of guy.

I asked an AI assistant to research this for me and it states:

Yes, Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA, has repeatedly made dehumanizing and bigoted comments targeting Black people, transgender individuals, LGBTQ+ people, and Muslims, among others. These statements often framed targeted groups as threats, incompetent, or deserving of violence, contributing to his reputation as a far-right provocateur. Below are some notable examples, drawn from documented instances:

In a 2023 interview on Real America's Voice, Kirk suggested that transgender people should be "taken care of the way we used to take care of things in the 1950s and 60s," referencing an era of lobotomies, shock therapy, involuntary institutionalization, and violence against queer people.
During a 2023 speech at a megachurch, he described transgender people as an "abomination" and a "throbbing middle finger to God," while citing scripture to label swimmer Lia Thomas similarly, equating transgender existence with divine offense.
On his radio show in May 2023, Kirk claimed that "prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people," generalizing Black people as predatory criminals seeking entertainment through violence against whites.
In a January 2024 episode of The Charlie Kirk Show, he stated that when dealing with a "moronic Black woman" in customer service, he wonders if she's there due to "affirmative action" rather than "excellence," stereotyping Black women as inherently incompetent.
In a March 2024 broadcast, Kirk promoted the "great replacement" conspiracy theory, asserting it was a "strategy to replace white rural America with something different" via immigration, implying non-white populations as an existential threat to white identity.
Responding to a Pride Month post in June (year unspecified but documented in resurfaced clips), Kirk invoked Leviticus to say, "Thou shall lay with another man, shall be stoned to death. Just saying... The chapter...affirms God’s perfect law when it comes to sexual matter," framing homosexuality as warranting execution under "God's perfect law."

These quotes are part of a broader pattern documented by media watchdogs like Media Matters for America and resurfaced following Kirk's assassination on September 10, 2025. While Kirk defended such rhetoric as "free speech" or biblical truth, critics argued it normalized dehumanization and contributed to real-world harm.

I don't have direct knowledge of the above but it doesn't sound great.