Charlie Kirk Assassinated

[Dwarvenhobble]

Hell hell think. My lad you're downright shook. Failed the vibe check. But in any case the faces of conservatism in the world are ones of whining petulance. Arguably Trump is the biggest face of conservatism right now and the dude's a giant baby about everything.

Man having to resort to petty version of "I won't because I say so"

1) I didn't bring up the other topic so if being shook is bringing that up guess that applies to others
2) A vibe check is based on personal emotional reactions generally so the vibe check is not acting like you and actually trying to form a cogent argument rather than stretching for constant ad hominin
3) You're arguing people are winning and playing the victim. After a person was murdered in cold blood in a threat about that murder. They are the fucking victim or are you so far gone you lack even the basic empathy to realise yes they do count as victims and not merely future targets?

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Man having to resort to petty version of "I won't because I say so"

1) I didn't bring up the other topic so if being shook is bringing that up guess that applies to others
2) A vibe check is based on personal emotional reactions generally so the vibe check is not acting like you and actually trying to form a cogent argument rather than stretching for constant ad hominin
3) You're arguing people are winning and playing the victim. After a person was murdered in cold blood in a threat about that murder. They are the fucking victim or are you so far gone you lack even the basic empathy to realise yes they do count as victims and not merely future targets?

I just meant you were banging out replies without proofreading because you're so upsetti spaghetti about conservatives being rightly called out for being giant babies. All I'm seeing is you complaining about moderation, because you can't interface in an argument without being a victim somehow.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

I just meant you were banging out replies without proofreading because you're so upsetti spaghetti about conservatives being rightly called out for being giant babies. All I'm seeing is you complaining about moderation, because you can't interface in an argument without being a victim somehow.

I do that normally. I tend not to poof read because this isn't a make or break end of the world this.

Also really kind of pathetic to resort to just another version of "You mad bro??" also pretty tacky.

Also the conservatives are big giant babies for not wanting to be assassinated?
That's sure is a hot take right there but hey if martyring yourself for a cause is your jam don't let me stop you proving what a mature adult you are.

I've "interfaced" with the argument plenty.
You've just refused to engage and repeated the same points in a slightly different way while refusing to address anything I said. Do you just lack the capacity to do so or are you projecting and unable to think of a cogent counterargument due to being emotionally overwhelmed?

Deliberately wrote poof not proof adding spoiler before you try to call me out again

 

[crimson5pheonix]

I do that normally. I tend not to poof read because this isn't a make or break end of the world this.

Also really kind of pathetic to resort to just another version of "You mad bro??" also pretty tacky.

Also the conservatives are big giant babies for not wanting to be assassinated?
That's sure is a hot take right there but hey if martyring yourself for a cause is your jam don't let me stop you proving what a mature adult you are.

I've "interfaced" with the argument plenty.
You've just refused to engage and repeated the same points in a slightly different way while refusing to address anything I said. Do you just lack the capacity to do so or are you projecting and unable to think of a cogent counterargument due to being emotionally overwhelmed?

Deliberately wrote poof not proof adding spoiler before you try to call me out again

I'd hardly call being dinged by moderators an "assassination". Quit being so melodramatic.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

I'd hardly call being dinged by moderators an "assassination". Quit being so melodramatic.

So am I the entire right wing in existence now?

Because your comment specifically was

conservatives being rightly called out for being giant babies.

Are they not allowed to be upset or something when some-one in their political sphere was assassinated?

 

[crimson5pheonix]

So am I the entire right wing in existence now?

You certainly whine a lot like one.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

You certainly whine a lot like one.

Not answering my point. Care to try again?

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Not answering my point. Care to try again?

I'm pretty sure I already posted my opinion of Kirk's death before, namely that the right are celebrating it. I came back because I saw someone surprised a conservative had a victim complex and asked if the day was ending in y.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

I'm pretty sure I already posted my opinion of Kirk's death before, namely that the right are celebrating it. I came back because I saw someone surprised a conservative had a victim complex and asked if the day was ending in y.

Which conservative?

 

[crimson5pheonix]

Which conservative?

Pretty sure it's on page 1 Johnny-come-lately.

 

[Silvanus]

So not

? Yes, what someone says about specific people can show their attitude towards a wider group of people. That obviously depends on what the 'what' actually is. There is no contradiction there.

but that applies to Dreiko despite him pointing out specific objections to certain people?

No. It applies to what Charlie Kirk said. That's what we were talking about.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

? Yes, what someone says about specific people can show their attitude towards a wider group of people. That obviously depends on what the 'what' actually is. There is no contradiction there.

So if it's something you deem to be about the whole group it is but if not it's just about the individual?

No. It applies to what Charlie Kirk said. That's what we were talking about.

And the specific tangent you jumped into was actually about Dreiko.

 

[Silvanus]

So if it's something you deem to be about the whole group it is but if not it's just about the individual?

Whether a statement carries insinuations or stereotypes about a wider group of people is usually pretty obvious, to anyone who isn't being intentionally obtuse.

And the specific tangent you jumped into was actually about Dreiko.

Nope. But of course, you jumped into the topic later than me, and have already talked about how little attention you pay. So its unsurprising you failed to follow it.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Whether a statement carries insinuations or stereotypes about a wider group of people is usually pretty obvious, to anyone who isn't being intentionally obtuse.

Yet only based on your judgement and if you believe it applies.

Nope. But of course, you jumped into the topic later than me, and have already talked about how little attention you pay. So its unsurprising you failed to follow it.

yes and you jumped into a specific tangent going on after me, hence me pointing out the context of the tangent in particular you were commenting on

 

[Silvanus]

Yet only based on your judgement and if you believe it applies.

Judgement is required in order to draw conclusions of any sort, well done.

yes and you jumped into a specific tangent going on after me, hence me pointing out the context of the tangent in particular you were commenting on

K, yet you got the context wrong.

 

[Bedinsis]

It's all well and good to romanticize democracy, but the reality we share is a democratic farce.

People have said that for as long as there has been democracy.

If the death of Kirk was taken with the solemnity and austerity it "ideally" deserves, the system and processes of government and ideologies on both side would not change.

Overall, politicians have reacted appropriately. Across the spectrum, they have condemned the attack. If they hadn't, things would probably change for the worse. Their subsequent attempts to tie it into other issues reflects their world view which is subject to debate but it reflects their opinion so I cannot call it inappropriate. And I've never thought private citizens expressing joy or neutrality on this to be tearing down democracy; that is the system working as intended.

I'll paraphrase a fellow forum member: "I don't wish death on anyone, but I've read several obituaries with a smile on my face." I don't celebrate Kirk's killing, but I also don't believe someone addressing embodying his brand of bullshit being promoted and propagated by the current administration by virtue of free speech rights is a loss of any kind. I won't say I celebrate Kirk's death, but at the same time, I will accept that if SOMEONE had to die, I appreciate it was someone who felt random acts of gun violence were worth the protections of an antiquated "right." He called it; it was a necessary consequence; who better than him to be an example of that consequence?

(I made an edit to one of your sentences here because I was thrown off by it. If my edit is not representing the message you intended to post please say so. It was a long sentence and I'm having a hard time understanding it.)
Feel free to feel however you feel like. I can only repeat my earlier statement about being doubtful that someone had to die.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Judgement is required in order to draw conclusions of any sort, well done.

And funny how subjective it is in this case.

K, yet you got the context wrong.

Actually you did as it was on about the specific tangent so as you chose to not actually state you were on about the wider topic and instead to reply to the points about a specific tangent I asked you to clarify as why reply to said specific posts about a specific tangent otherwise?

 

[Silvanus]

Actually you did [...]

Nope. Its abundantly clear to any honest reader that statement was about Kirk, not Dreiko. No other reading makes the slightest sense. You just made a mistake.

 

[Dwarvenhobble]

Nope. Its abundantly clear to any honest reader that statement was about Kirk, not Dreiko. No other reading makes the slightest sense. You just made a mistake.

No it's really not considering the specific comments you were responding to were relating to Dreiko not Kirk.

 

[Silvanus]

No it's really not considering the specific comments you were responding to were relating to Dreiko not Kirk.

No, this is obviously not true.

The post to which I responded is this. The specific bit I quoted was this:

He was highly opinionated and didn’t really give a shit about political correctness or identity politics, which also made it easy for critics to misrepresent his statements. Like the thing about black women, which only referred to four specific individuals.

This is very clearly about Kirk. There is even a link to an article specifically about Kirk's comments.