ChaoticMusings

Digger · Admin

RE: Charlie Kiirk Shot.

Maddog · Go Outside

I don't know how any of the women got their jobs, only that using race or gender as a criteria for selecting people is racist, yet in the convoluted world where up is down, pointing out that racist is considered racist..

-- Edited by Maddog on Friday 12th of September 2025 03:09:46 AM

Date: Sep 12 7:32 AM, 2025

Digger wrote:
Fluffy wrote:
Everywhere. Even on this knackered laptop.
It's not nonsense just because you don't know it MD.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/charlie-kirk-says-michelle-obama-among-black-women-who-steal-a-white-persons-slot_n_64b19633e4b0ad7b75f2de01

Again, I've had a good look at this. Firstly, he doesn't actually say black women are not as intelligent, he names four women who happen to be black - and accuses them of taking white jobs in order to further their careers

I might have missed out on something here, but what on earth is a 'white job'?

Vam · 1000 Posts!?

Vam wrote:
Maddog wrote:
Investigators found ammunition engraved with expressions of transgender and antifascist ideology inside the rifle that authorities believe was used in the fatal shooting of Charlie Kirk, according to an internal law-enforcement bulletin and a person familiar with the investigation.

The older-model .30 caliber hunting rifle was discovered in the woods near the scene of Wednesday’s shooting at Utah Valley University, wrapped in a towel with a spent cartridge still in the chamber, the sources said. There were also three unspent rounds in the magazine, all with wording on them.

From the WSJ.

Could be he tossed the rifle off the roof.

From the pics posted it appears a young man, not completely in black (which would look weird) but in a black shirt with some sort of American flag on it.
Chuck all the rolls of tinfoil at me you want to. But I’m still gonna say: How convenient!
And if Kash Patel’s FBI is heading up the investigation….puh-leeese …..

https://x.com/mikenellis/status/1966314854194508145?s=61

Vam · 1000 Posts!?

Anonymous wrote:
Vam wrote:

Seriously, Dawg 🤷🏻‍♀️ You have a population of circa 340 million. Is this motley bunch of MAGAt halfwits really the best the American electorate can come up with to represent them?
It is called Democracy. Are you proposing ending Democracy because the result was not what you consider to be acceptable? It is a small step from imagining half the American electorate as halfwits and maggots to creating something similar to the early 1940s in certain parts of Europe. Maybe history repeats itself but not in a form that those pushing for change recognise but it is staring at them in the mirror.

Yeah, ok…thanks for the civics lesson…..Now, please point out where I’ve called anyone a ‘maggot’?

America is looking less like a democracy with each passing day, because trump is a democracy slayer.

I’m always bemused by a voter who sees and listens to a babbling fool like that congressman, and then decides ‘Yep! That’s the guy who’ll represent my interests best’. And that’s the point I was making.

The current US congress seems to be filled with incompetent, mediocre people, at best, and rabid, neon-god-worshipping MAGA activists, at worst.

Digger · Admin

Anonymous wrote:
Digger wrote:
Fluffy wrote:
Everywhere. Even on this knackered laptop.
It's not nonsense just because you don't know it MD.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/charlie-kirk-says-michelle-obama-among-black-women-who-steal-a-white-persons-slot_n_64b19633e4b0ad7b75f2de01

Again, I've had a good look at this. Firstly, he doesn't actually say black women are not as intelligent, he names four women who happen to be black - and accuses them of taking white jobs in order to further their careers
I might have missed out on something here, but what on earth is a 'white job'?

Displacing jobs originally held by white people, I'm assuming. The trouble seemed to be with Kirk that was he was outspoken to the point of tactlessness. He definitely could have worded it differently. Not sure how true that is, perhaps he knew something we don't.

And I definitely don't agree with his stance on abortion, though I do agree that women have no right to use abortion as a means of contraception.

Fluffy · Getting Gobby

Anonymous wrote:
Digger wrote:
Fluffy wrote:
Everywhere. Even on this knackered laptop.
It's not nonsense just because you don't know it MD.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/charlie-kirk-says-michelle-obama-among-black-women-who-steal-a-white-persons-slot_n_64b19633e4b0ad7b75f2de01

Again, I've had a good look at this. Firstly, he doesn't actually say black women are not as intelligent, he names four women who happen to be black - and accuses them of taking white jobs in order to further their careers
I might have missed out on something here, but what on earth is a 'white job'?

Quite Anon. I'm hoping Digs or Maddog can qualify that. What's interesting about this is Kirk was open and proud about believing black people were inferior to white people in many regards so I'm not sure he would thank people for saying he thought otherwise.

This is the exact quote he said on his show that is listed in the articles above.

The four black ladies he refers to including former first lady Michelle Obama

"DO NOT HAVE THE BRAIN PROCESSING POWER TO OTHERWISE BE TAKEN REALLY SERIOUSLY. YOU HAD TO GO STEAL A WHITE PERSON'S SLOT TO GO BE TAKEN SOMEWHAT SERIOUSLY"

Why did he think these black women had a lack of "brain processing power"?? If it wasn't due to their ethnicity why did he say these four black ladies who were far from stupid "stole a WHITE PERSON'S slot"?? If it was due to them lacking intelligence as individuals then he wouldn't have made his whole point about ethnicity.

He didn't hide his thoughts that black people were inferior to white people, this is what makes this rather fruitless. They were his beliefs and he was open about them.

-- Edited by Fluffy on Friday 12th of September 2025 09:56:17 AM

Vam · 1000 Posts!?

Until recently, I knew little about Charlie Kirk’s widow. Media has now brought her into the spotlight.

And I have to say, she’s an impressive presence in her own right. She’s erudite, charismatic, attractive and supremely confident. She’s too much of a bible-thumper, though, and almost certainly more extreme Right than her late husband.

I wouldn’t be surprised to see her as the obvious shoo-in to replace Charlie as head of Turning Point USA.

-- Edited by Vam on Friday 12th of September 2025 09:55:19 AM

Digger · Admin

Fluffy wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Digger wrote:
Fluffy wrote:
Everywhere. Even on this knackered laptop.
It's not nonsense just because you don't know it MD.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/charlie-kirk-says-michelle-obama-among-black-women-who-steal-a-white-persons-slot_n_64b19633e4b0ad7b75f2de01

Again, I've had a good look at this. Firstly, he doesn't actually say black women are not as intelligent, he names four women who happen to be black - and accuses them of taking white jobs in order to further their careers
I might have missed out on something here, but what on earth is a 'white job'?
Quite Anon. I'm hoping Digs or Maddog can qualify that. What's interesting about this is Kirk was open and proud about believing black people were inferior to white people in many regards so I'm not sure he would thank people for saying he thought otherwise.
This is the exact quote he said on his show that is listed in the articles above.
The four black ladies he refers to including former first lady Michelle Obama
"DO NOT HAVE THE BRAIN PROCESSING POWER TO OTHERWISE BE TAKEN REALLY SERIOUSLY. YOU HAD TO GO STEAL A WHITE PERSON'S SLOT TO GO BE TAKEN SOMEWHAT SERIOUSLY"

Yes, I should have quoted that. I've found out that he wasn't referring to jobs but to University placements. In other words, he implied that those four women got into Uni not on their own merit but because of their ethnicity and because of DEI.

Digger · Admin

Vam wrote:
Until recently, I knew little about Charlie Kirk’s widow. Media has now brought her into the spotlight.
And I have to say, she’s an impressive presence in her own right. She’s erudite, charismatic, attractive and supremely confident. She’s too much of a bible-thumper, though, and almost certainly more extreme Right than her late husband.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see her as the obvious shoo-in to replace Charlie as head of Turning Point USA.

-- Edited by Vam on Friday 12th of September 2025 09:55:19 AM

Bible thumping seems to be a thing in America.

Vam · 1000 Posts!?

Digger wrote:
Vam wrote:
Until recently, I knew little about Charlie Kirk’s widow. Media has now brought her into the spotlight.
And I have to say, she’s an impressive presence in her own right. She’s erudite, charismatic, attractive and supremely confident. She’s too much of a bible-thumper, though, and almost certainly more extreme Right than her late husband.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see her as the obvious shoo-in to replace Charlie as head of Turning Point USA.

-- Edited by Vam on Friday 12th of September 2025 09:55:19 AM
Bible thumping seems to be a thing in America.

Their bible is the shield that is supposed to rationalise and offset all their excesses. Not dissimilar to radical Muslims who hide behind the Quran, really.

-- Edited by Vam on Friday 12th of September 2025 10:05:28 AM

Fluffy · Getting Gobby

Vam wrote:
Until recently, I knew little about Charlie Kirk’s widow. Media has now brought her into the spotlight.
And I have to say, she’s an impressive presence in her own right. She’s erudite, charismatic, attractive and supremely confident. She’s too much of a bible-thumper, though, and almost certainly more extreme Right than her late husband.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see her as the obvious shoo-in to replace Charlie as head of Turning Point USA.

-- Edited by Vam on Friday 12th of September 2025 09:55:19 AM

I do feel terribly sorry for her. What happened to her husband should not have happened to anyone, regardless of their views.

Kirk was open about believing white people were superior, they were his beliefs and he cited them often on his show. He also stated that those who passed due to gun crime was not a good enough reason to alter gun laws. Sadly the gun laws were made less restrictive only months before his death.

I can understand why people would take great offence to his beliefs regarding race and I certainly do. But there is no excuse for the plethora of tik toks celebrating his death. He leaves behind two young children and ultimately was a family man. I do fear there may be a backlash from the far right against those callously openly relishing his death and the last thing America needs is more violence and hostility.

Digger · Admin

Fluffy wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Digger wrote:
Fluffy wrote:
Everywhere. Even on this knackered laptop.
It's not nonsense just because you don't know it MD.
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/charlie-kirk-says-michelle-obama-among-black-women-who-steal-a-white-persons-slot_n_64b19633e4b0ad7b75f2de01

Again, I've had a good look at this. Firstly, he doesn't actually say black women are not as intelligent, he names four women who happen to be black - and accuses them of taking white jobs in order to further their careers
I might have missed out on something here, but what on earth is a 'white job'?
Quite Anon. I'm hoping Digs or Maddog can qualify that. What's interesting about this is Kirk was open and proud about believing black people were inferior to white people in many regards so I'm not sure he would thank people for saying he thought otherwise.
This is the exact quote he said on his show that is listed in the articles above.
The four black ladies he refers to including former first lady Michelle Obama
"DO NOT HAVE THE BRAIN PROCESSING POWER TO OTHERWISE BE TAKEN REALLY SERIOUSLY. YOU HAD TO GO STEAL A WHITE PERSON'S SLOT TO GO BE TAKEN SOMEWHAT SERIOUSLY"
Why did he think these black women had a lack of "brain processing power"?? If it wasn't due to their ethnicity why did he say these four black ladies who were far from stupid "stole a WHITE PERSON'S slot"?? If it was due to them lacking intelligence as individuals then he wouldn't have made his whole point about ethnicity.
He didn't hide his thoughts that black people were inferior to white people, this is what makes this rather fruitless. They were his beliefs and he was open about them.

-- Edited by Fluffy on Friday 12th of September 2025 09:56:17 AM

He didn't hide his thoughts that black people were inferior to white people, this is what makes this rather fruitless. They were his beliefs and he was open about them.

He also stated that he didn't care what colour a person was so long as they were qualified to do the job. I don't think he was racist, I think he was just too outspoken and blunt. There are plenty of black people who respected his views, I've seen them all over Twitter and YouTube agreeing with a lot of what he says.

When a person is assassinated in the way he has, it's because they are feared, or too popular or a danger to free thinking. He was opening up the minds of young people all over America and beyond, giving them different perspectives from the narrow negative narratives being pumped into them from radical lefties. Our Universities seem to be ideological battlegrounds and this isn't new, young people particularly students seem to all charge down the same avenue of rebellion against society until they 'grow up' get shackled to a mortgage and have kids. It always makes me smile when you watch these kids spouting their illogical ideals when you know in ten or twenty years' time they'll be thinking just like Charlie. There are exceptions, of course, like Goblin Greta, but watch that space. She's still got time.

Digger · Admin

Fluffy wrote:
Vam wrote:
Until recently, I knew little about Charlie Kirk’s widow. Media has now brought her into the spotlight.
And I have to say, she’s an impressive presence in her own right. She’s erudite, charismatic, attractive and supremely confident. She’s too much of a bible-thumper, though, and almost certainly more extreme Right than her late husband.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see her as the obvious shoo-in to replace Charlie as head of Turning Point USA.

-- Edited by Vam on Friday 12th of September 2025 09:55:19 AM
I do feel terribly sorry for her. What happened to her husband should not have happened to anyone, regardless of their views.
Kirk was open about believing white people were superior, they were his beliefs and he cited them often on his show. He also stated that those who passed due to gun crime was not a good enough reason to alter gun laws. Sadly the gun laws were made less restrictive only months before his death.
I can understand why people would take great offence to his beliefs regarding race and I certainly do. But there is no excuse for the plethora of tik toks celebrating his death. He leaves behind two young children and ultimately was a family man. I do fear there may be a backlash from the far right against those callously openly relishing his death and the last thing America needs is more violence and hostility.

The gun laws will never change in America because the gun culture is too ingrained. Your law abiding citizen might honour any changes but do you think the gangs, criminals etc will? So that would leave the law abiding citizen at the mercy of the ones who still have the guns. Would you live like that? I know I wouldn't.

Digger · Admin

Vam wrote:
Digger wrote:
Vam wrote:
Until recently, I knew little about Charlie Kirk’s widow. Media has now brought her into the spotlight.
And I have to say, she’s an impressive presence in her own right. She’s erudite, charismatic, attractive and supremely confident. She’s too much of a bible-thumper, though, and almost certainly more extreme Right than her late husband.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see her as the obvious shoo-in to replace Charlie as head of Turning Point USA.

-- Edited by Vam on Friday 12th of September 2025 09:55:19 AM
Bible thumping seems to be a thing in America.
Their bible is the shield that is supposed to rationalise and offset all their excesses. Not dissimilar to radical Muslims who hide behind the Quran, really.

-- Edited by Vam on Friday 12th of September 2025 10:05:28 AM

One thing I eschewed very early in my life was religion.

Vam · 1000 Posts!?

Fluffy wrote:
Vam wrote:
Until recently, I knew little about Charlie Kirk’s widow. Media has now brought her into the spotlight.
And I have to say, she’s an impressive presence in her own right. She’s erudite, charismatic, attractive and supremely confident. She’s too much of a bible-thumper, though, and almost certainly more extreme Right than her late husband.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see her as the obvious shoo-in to replace Charlie as head of Turning Point USA.

-- Edited by Vam on Friday 12th of September 2025 09:55:19 AM
I do feel terribly sorry for her. What happened to her husband should not have happened to anyone, regardless of their views.
Kirk was open about believing white people were superior, they were his beliefs and he cited them often on his show. He also stated that those who passed due to gun crime was not a good enough reason to alter gun laws. Sadly the gun laws were made less restrictive only months before his death.
I can understand why people would take great offence to his beliefs regarding race and I certainly do. But there is no excuse for the plethora of tik toks celebrating his death. He leaves behind two young children and ultimately was a family man. I do fear there may be a backlash from the far right against those callously openly relishing his death and the last thing America needs is more violence and hostility.

No excuse, at all. They’re every bit as feral as those pushing the ‘civil war’ narrative (mostly bot farms, I suspect).

I could never get onboard with pretty much anything Charlie Kirk said. His and now his wife’s rhetoric is opportunistic, divisive, and it insidiously resonates with the disaffected youth they deliberately target. It is messaging tailored to give pissed-off kids a sense of ‘belonging’. If Erika Kirk decides to perpetuate her late husband’s legacy, I’m betting she’ll be wildly successful. Girls will want to BE her (kinda like a Taylor Swift thing).

The Kirks epitomise the term ‘Smooth Operator’. I wish the Democrats could find a credible, inspiring presence to offset that!

Fluffy · Getting Gobby

Digs, Kirk stated that he didn't believe those black ladies had the "brain processing power" to hold down the jobs they "took from white people". In that quote he is saying white people should have had those jobs. Why?

That is a racist statement because he is making a link between intelligence and white people. Those jobs belonged to white people Kirk stated. Because he doesn't doubt the" brain processing power" of white people.

If you note the white individuals who these jobs apparently belong to don't need to have any other merit except their race.

Ergo his statement has nothing to do with the intelligence of the individuals themselves, their lack of brain processing power lies in their ethnicity. It's a transparent racist statement and he wasn't ashamed of his views. Indeed they gained traction.

People just couldn't get away with saying such sinister and vicious things only a decade ago. Times really have changed and not for the better. But I will always maintain the man should not have paid for his views with his life. Those celebrating have made themselves as bad as him.

Fluffy · Getting Gobby

Vam wrote:
Fluffy wrote:
Vam wrote:
Until recently, I knew little about Charlie Kirk’s widow. Media has now brought her into the spotlight.
And I have to say, she’s an impressive presence in her own right. She’s erudite, charismatic, attractive and supremely confident. She’s too much of a bible-thumper, though, and almost certainly more extreme Right than her late husband.
I wouldn’t be surprised to see her as the obvious shoo-in to replace Charlie as head of Turning Point USA.

-- Edited by Vam on Friday 12th of September 2025 09:55:19 AM
I do feel terribly sorry for her. What happened to her husband should not have happened to anyone, regardless of their views.
Kirk was open about believing white people were superior, they were his beliefs and he cited them often on his show. He also stated that those who passed due to gun crime was not a good enough reason to alter gun laws. Sadly the gun laws were made less restrictive only months before his death.
I can understand why people would take great offence to his beliefs regarding race and I certainly do. But there is no excuse for the plethora of tik toks celebrating his death. He leaves behind two young children and ultimately was a family man. I do fear there may be a backlash from the far right against those callously openly relishing his death and the last thing America needs is more violence and hostility.
No excuse, at all. They’re every bit as feral as those pushing the ‘civil war’ narrative (mostly bot farms, I suspect).
I could never get onboard with pretty much anything Charlie Kirk said. His and now his wife’s rhetoric is opportunistic, divisive, and it insidiously resonates with the disaffected youth they deliberately target. It is messaging tailored to give pissed-off kids a sense of ‘belonging’. If Erika Kirk decides to perpetuate her late husband’s legacy, I’m betting she’ll be wildly successful. Girls will want to BE her (kinda like a Taylor Swift thing).
The Kirks epitomise the term ‘Smooth Operator’. I wish the Democrats could find a credible, inspiring presence to offset that!

Excellent post and I agree completely.

The only caveat I will add is I can understand people of colour being very frightened of the traction that the Kirks views were gaining and of course Trump suggesting "diversity equity and inclusion efforts were at fault for many ills in society".I'm all for freedom of speech but this is racism hiding in plain sight.

I confess I was ignorant of how widespread this disturbing rhetoric is in America under this administration.I will make more of an effort to go on the Trump thread. The reason I don't Vam is the man upsets me so much. You are angry but eloquent with it.. I am just so so upset at times by the man and the chaos and fear he has caused I don't think I would be able to remain coherent. But no change there then!

Digger · Admin

Fluffy wrote:
Digs, Kirk stated that he didn't believe those black ladies had the "brain processing power" to hold down the jobs they "took from white people". In that quote he is saying white people should have had those jobs. Why?
That is a racist statement because he is making a link between intelligence and white people. Those jobs belonged to white people Kirk stated. Because he doesn't doubt the" brain processing power" of white people.
If you note the white individuals who these jobs apparently belong to don't need to have any other merit except their race.
Ergo his statement has nothing to do with the intelligence of the individuals themselves, their lack of brain processing power lies in their ethnicity. It's a transparent racist statement and he wasn't ashamed of his views. Indeed they gained traction.
People just couldn't get away with saying such sinister and vicious things only a decade ago. Times really have changed and not for the better. But I will always maintain the man should not have paid for his views with his life. Those celebrating have made themselves as bad as him.

These men say it better than anyone. Watch it.

Digger · Admin

Let's look at David Lammy. The guy went to Harvard. Does that make him smart? Is he super intelligent? The man who went on mastermind and couldn't answer the simplest questions?

David Lammy fails at celebrity mastermind.

Q: Who succeeded Henry VIII? A: Henry VII

Q: What blue cheese traditionally goes with stilton? A: Red Leicester

Lammy criticised Stacey Dooley for photographs she posted on social media of her trip to Uganda for Comic Relief, and said that "the world does not need any more white saviours" The donations received for the Red Nose Day broadcast in March 2019 fell by £8 million and the money raised that year was the lowest since 2007, which some have blamed on Lammy's remarks.

The above ignorance might cause folks to assume he got into Uni and Harvard because of his ethnicity not because of his brain power.