668 Comments
User's avatar
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Sep 11Edited
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

CORRECT

Expand full comment
Drunkonunleaded's avatar

24 years ago today, didn’t they say this exact thing?

Expand full comment
Ice Age's avatar

15 centuries of conquest and attempted conquest have proven two things about Islam: That all Muslims are either monsters, accomplices or sympathizers and that Islam isn't a religion, it's a criminal conspiracy.

Its original adherents were a horde of bandits, murderers and rapists. Nothing's changed.

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

dont underestimate the propaganda

Expand full comment
Flashman's avatar

How did we get onto Muslims from this? It was Christians who were most successful at conquering the world. .

Expand full comment
Henry C.'s avatar

September 11.

Expand full comment
Flashman's avatar

Means nothing to most of the world.

Expand full comment
Henry C.'s avatar

The US used the event to justify two wars, dragged European support, and set the tone for foreign interventionism for decades.

Expand full comment
Jack Baruth's avatar

I'm pinning your comment because it's useful and it provides humanity in the discourse.

You make the cogent point that "we" are rarely acquainted with, nor do we support, the "they" who do awful things in our political cause.

I sure wouldn't celebrate if someone killed AOC -- but there's a jerkoff out there who WOULD.

That being said, I agree that the Left has tended to behave like they have a monopoly on violence in this country. The vast, overwhelming majority of street action in America is left-wing. The reason people keep harping on Jan 6 is because they can't think of another right-wing protest that went sideways -- but during the Summer of Love, every city in the nation had a left-wing looting spree.

So far, we've all behaved pretty reasonably in this topic. Thank you, and thanks to everyone else.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Sep 11
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Henry C.'s avatar

No. Not at all. The bombings in '68 were all Weathermen and FAL. Hardcore leftists that still run the incubators including that which birthed Barry Obama.

The Murrow building was probably a Fed honeypot that they failed to stop in time. There are no 'militias', not of any consequence anyway. Perhaps a few that larp in the woods away from everyone and everything.

There is no organized Right in the US of any import. The left is very organized, well funded and holds nearly all the levers of power.

Expand full comment
-Nate's avatar

Thank you for proving my point .

You're still afraid of president Obama who's been out of office a long time now and under whom we had a good economy and so on .

Your abject fear of a successful black man is duly noted .

-Nate

Expand full comment
Henry C.'s avatar

Bill Ayers was a Weatherman and groomed Obama for politics out of whole cloth. Lay off the ad hominems.

Expand full comment
-Nate's avatar

Say the man who uses adhominem attack in his bullshit reply .

-Nate

Expand full comment
Rick T.'s avatar

DataRepublican (small r) over on X has been doing yeoman’s work to expose this funding. Of course right now it’s all Charlie Kirk.

Expand full comment
Jeff Zekas's avatar

When you have Maxine Waters telling Democrats to attack representatives when they’re out for dinner, you can be pretty sure that the left and it’s party are preaching violence, officially, or unofficially.

Expand full comment
sgeffe's avatar

Yes.

Thank you, I couldn’t remember her name, only the fact that she is a rather annoyingly loud and profane woman of color with the further annoying trait seeming to affect that general cohort in the past few years or so, that being eyeglasses with frames about eight sizes too big for their faces!

Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

For those keeping score at home, "Civil War 2.0 is also just one of the possible bad outcomes. Fascist regime suppressing the leftist opposition, thus preventing the Civil War at the cost of freedom an democracy, is another" translates to

"lay down and tolerate your dispossession and murder at the hands of globalists and their infinite golems."

This is bad advice.

So is fedposting IRL,

But more than any group in recent history, the American right has morality on their side.

Lashing out will not work. Community building might, if it's not too late. Good luck to all of those who deserve it.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Sep 11
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

But only ONE of those two people has actually read history.

And definitely only one of them has read Melgunov.

I take it you haven't? 😑 Here it is, in case you wish to better apprise *your own history* lol https://archive.org/details/RedTerrorInRussia1918-1923/page/n7/mode/2up

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Sep 11
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Jeff Zekas's avatar

Jack, your reply is better than mine. Also, as a former Democrat of over 40 years, I’ve seen how the Democrats have gone to the far left for support, and abandoned guys like me, working white dudes, who belong to unions and work inside the system. After two assassination attempts against Trump, we can safely say that the left thinks it’s OK to kill people they don’t like. But I’ve never heard a conservative Say it’s OK to kill people, in order to get what you want. Again, I was a Democrat for over 40 years and now I’m independent, But I also belonged to the socialist party at one time, as well as peace and freedom and CP USA. All of those groups thought it was OK to use violence when necessary, and it was in their official platforms. I’ve Never seen use of violence in the official platform of the Republican Party

Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

Appreciate this (and many of your other comments). Contra Vojta's claims, I would bet that you and I agree on maybe even 80% of subjects. Sure, polarization is real, and yet the populist center is large and holds much in common: it is the powers that be and the media who attempt to hide the truth of commonality of belief among decent people everywhere.

Expand full comment
sgeffe's avatar

I don’t condone violence, and wouldn’t go so far as to use violence against someone just because of their leftist ideology and politics.

Not to say that I would shed few tears if one or two of the most strident, bombastic ones were to come to an early demise.

After 9/11, I always thought that the best way was to fight toe to rhetorical toe, and give them a taste of their own medicine, because every time the Right turns its cheek, it gets its collective jaw busted!

But the shit that’s going on today is so far outside the boundaries of good and evil, it’s unfathomable! And it is from mostly one side, like it or not! As Mr. Kirk might’ve said, “prove me wrong.”

I kinda wish that I had followed Charlie Kirk; I was and am mostly a Rush/Hannity/Mark Levin/David Webb guy, and Glenn Beck before he went off the rails around the time DJT came down the stairs. Perhaps taking an example from him and emulating a bit of his love for the debating game and his doing so without being condescending or insulting. (I go from zero to ad hominem in a heartbeat!) Then ending it with “prove me wrong.” Even being a Gen-Xer who missed out, know that we in my aging-faster/than-we-realize-or -want-to-admit generation grieve with the Millennials and Gen-Zers who were more in the demographic cohort in his center of outreach. And not just for his kids who will grow up with pictures and not memories, to borrow the poignant remark of the First Lady, or his loving wife and the rest of his family. But what the country is becoming, and may continue to become if we don’t correct course. And immediately, if not sooner.

Expand full comment
Tim's avatar

Lots of murders went along with that looting.

Expand full comment
-Nate's avatar

" The vast, overwhelming majority of street action in America is left-wing. " flat out lying .

Remember all those liberals who beat up hecklers at gop political events ? . yeah, no one else neither .

trump openly suggested his supporters to violently attack any hecklers .

And, how about those awful democrats who tried twice to assassinate trump ? . oh, right ~ once again trump supporters .

The right who's paranoia and abject fear has always propelled them towards violence, is the party of violence in fact even if you lie about it .

-Nate

Expand full comment
Mark Baruth's avatar

You think Trump supporters tried to assassinate Trump?

Expand full comment
-Nate's avatar

It was proven to be so .

-Nate

Expand full comment
Mark Baruth's avatar

You cannot possibly be this naive.

Expand full comment
-Nate's avatar

If by 'naive' you mean honest, then yes, I am .

There's a gear deal I think but has not been proven, I don't comment then .

If being dishonest is okay with you, expect pushback from me .

-Nate

Expand full comment
BKbroiler's avatar

"That being said, I agree that the Left has tended to behave like they have a monopoly on violence in this country. The vast, overwhelming majority of street action in America is left-wing."

I agree... but the nature of being "progressive" (that is, to push for progress and change) naturally coincides with public protest far more than being "conservative" (that is, the desire to conserve and maintain).

Everyone hates the looters, but the loudest voices on the left are - at best - horrible at condemning them.

Expand full comment
Jack Baruth's avatar

This is thoughtfully said. Thank you.

Expand full comment
sgeffe's avatar

Yes. 👍

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

"YOUR side is always the one that's full of diverse opinions and the true freedom of expression"

one side is literally more open to freedom of expression than the other

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Sep 11
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

Yet more disingenuity:

One side attempts to allow and proscribe their freedoms through debate, social norms, and as a last resort, law.

The other enforces norms by any means necessary; subversion, infiltration, bad faith, ruination, rape, murder, dispossession.

One side truly is totalitarian.

They didn't call the politics of "The Party" in 𝘕𝘪𝘯𝘦𝘵𝘦𝘦𝘯-𝘌𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵𝘺 𝘍𝘰𝘶𝘳 "IngSoc" for nothing.

Conservatives wish to ban the sale of weed and weed products, Liberals in several states have laws on the books enabling Child Protective Services to steal your CHILDREN if you do not let public school teachers convince them that they are trans and should have irreparable, permanently disfiguring surgery.

These are total category differences. Most honest people know this!

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Sep 11
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

THis is what the news media, controlled by the greatest evil in the history of humanity, would have everyone believe.

In reality, "far enough to one side [right version]" looks substantially more like "America, 1777"--there is no need to slander rightism with its worst forms, as even contemporaneously, right wing order has many attractive forms, Singapore and Switzerland being easy examples. There is not a single example of unfettered leftism that did not eventually come to resemble Cambodia in the 70s.

But dishonest people will allege otherwise!

Expand full comment
Drunkonunleaded's avatar

Nah man, Drumpf supporters will totally turn things into a Netflix show if they have their way. This is exactly what Voldermort did.

Peak feminine thinking.

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

I just want the potheads to stop smoking that nasty shit in public. I was pro legalization until it happened and went full gob

https://media.tenor.com/x9LOF4HF7_AAAAAC/ive-made-a-huge-mistake-mistake.gif

Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

To not be able to drive into the nations capital on a weekend without secondhand vape pen weed smoke filling my car is an abomination worthy of any level of violence in order to solve

Expand full comment
sgeffe's avatar

I just can’t believe that any high of any kind is worth walking around in public smelling like you just got sprayed by Pepé LePew!

Expand full comment
Panzer's avatar

As a Czech man, are you really trying to relativise both sides here?

Does a New Zealander really have to explain to -you- why left wing extremism/authoritarianism is uniquely bad and has to be fought tooth and nail?

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Sep 11
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Panzer's avatar

The thing is though, the 'right wing authoritarianism' you speak of is a reaction to the last at least -90 years- of American history where the left has reshaped the American state for its own ends, from the New Deal, through to the Great Society down to COVID

We do in fact need this current moment in order to extirpate the institutional left and return control of politics to those who are elected.

If in the process of that, certain decorum is ignored, that's the cost of doing business.

Again, it's not the same.

I don't think either that the Czech experience of Nazism was worse either.

Despite being Slavs, your people were not deliberately targeted for extermination like the Poles and Ukrainian (The 25% of your country that was German certainly was however)

It was enlightening when I visited Poland, and I heard even from them that the Germans were better than the Russians..

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Sep 11
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Christopher Cosma's avatar

His handle is "Panzer." Triggering WWll vets seems to be the Lose-Lose option chosen.

Expand full comment
Panzer's avatar

I think the story of German armour during the war is a fascinating and heroic one.

That can be true even if they 'lost'.

But hey I'm not gonna get in the way of you enjoying your History Channel/Marvel slop

Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

"Communism directly killed thousands. Forced hundreds of thousands into exile, destroyed lives of others, but killed many, many times less."

Is this level of brazen dishonesty legal?

https://archive.org/details/RedTerrorInRussia1918-1923/page/n7/mode/2up

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Sep 11
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Ataraxis's avatar

Vojta, I like you and your posts and you are obviously an intelligent and well meaning person, and I’m glad you stated your nice sentiments here.

But respectfully, your characterizations of the American right and left and the split between them are at best, a very hazy view from a long distance, and not what we Americans know and live everyday in plain sight.

I will continue to value your opinions.

Expand full comment
Jack Baruth's avatar

It's okay, he puts up with my Temu characterizations of Euro politics, I owe him a bit of fuzziness over here! :)

Expand full comment
Ataraxis's avatar

Oh, I know. I am just in a foul mood today.

But one of these days I’m really gonna let loose about the next mayoral election in Prague!

Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

Make sure your response conflates evil with goodness and is rife with gaslighting and victim-blame though

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

Nazis were were around for tenish years. Communists were around for fifty and had much higher kill numbers. Given a binomial choice, ill take the nazis.

Expand full comment
JasonS's avatar

When you say "urgent cause", I just shake my head. The left is railing against a party that as a whole, is almost like the Clinton democrats of the late 90's. I lived through that era. Is the cause so urgent because 20-30 somethings don't understand history? Than one inch right of them is "Nazi"?

Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

"The Nazis were still a bit worse than the Communists."

Folks, another person, in this case from a formerly-communist satellite-state of the former Soviet Union (😑😑😑) , who has not read Melgunov: https://archive.org/details/RedTerrorInRussia1918-1923

You shouldn't be able to passably create such a character in FICTION, yet here we are

Expand full comment
Steve Ward's avatar

Thank you.

Keep reminding us we need to step back and tone things down.

I too fear we are headed for some form of civil war. And I don’t welcome that.

The center is getting hollowed out. I consider the vast majority of people here on ACF to be in the center. Our differences are minor.

The blame goes on the multinational corporations, the “elites”, the rampent globalists. Not sure what we can do about it. But something needs to be done. Keep thinking we need a new set of Bill of Rights, that put the individual persons back above corporations and governments.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Sep 11
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
David Holzman's avatar

I'm a leftist, from a family of leftists. (See my comment below.)

Expand full comment
Chuck S's avatar

I'm relatively far to the left and would have voted for Sanders had he been the nominee.

Expand full comment
Jack Baruth's avatar

I'm relatively far to the right and I also would have voted for Sanders in a primary.

Expand full comment
David Holzman's avatar

Back then I had the impression that a lot of people on the right would have voted for Sanders. I was very unhappy that the Democrats ran Hillary Clinton. I strongly suspect Sanders would have been president had they run him. And we'd have a much better country today.

Expand full comment
BKbroiler's avatar

The populism horseshoe basically puts Sanders and many on the right virtually next to each other.

Expand full comment
Jeff H's avatar

Sorry... but it is the absolute height of delusion to think "we'd be so much better off if Bernie Sanders was president"...

Expand full comment
sgeffe's avatar

Don’t many of his policies actually put him on the Marxist scale?

If he’d been President, we’d have become Europe of the Americas, with all the fun that would entail.

Including all the EVs nobody wants, but that we’d have gotten anyway! And laundry pairs that wouldn’t even get clothes cleaned, because of the law of diminishing returns for environmental regulations.

Expand full comment
VTNoah's avatar

Long time leftist who is now way more of a centrist.

Expand full comment
Rick T.'s avatar

I don’t see a way forward in reconciling “my side” with the “other side” who believe in no bail catch and release for violent criminals, completely open borders and subsidizing people when they get here, skin color and ethnicity trump merit, and legally killing babies up to and including during birth.

I’d love to see the plan.

Late edit: hear the TMZ people cheering in the background. I can’t hate them enough.

https://x.com/lauraloomer/status/1965904777193070922?s=61

Expand full comment
Chuck S's avatar

except that's not actually what most Democrats believe.

Expand full comment
CJinSD's avatar

Then they shouldn't vote for Democrats, because that's what the party does with the power that it has.

Expand full comment
Rick T.'s avatar

That’s how they vote which is really all that matters.

Expand full comment
Henry C.'s avatar

The loudest ones do believe those things, act on it, and the people with money are funding them and protecting them through the legal system.

Expand full comment
JasonS's avatar

I think they are turning around on this issue. I've seen many die hard left Californians saying enough of the crime and violence in the streets.

Expand full comment
Acd's avatar

Maybe most democrat voters don’t believe in those things but a hell of a lot of democrats they are putting in offices around the country do.

Expand full comment
Nplus1's avatar

I think you're wrong on that. My parents, siblings, their significant others all vote D. They are all "peaceful" people in that none own guns, have ever fought another person, etc., but they will sit at a dinner table and wish for the death of anyone who just happens to be a republican or doesn't want "trans kids" or thinks non-medically necessary abortion is wrong.

Expand full comment
Chuck S's avatar

Counterpoint: I live in Oakland, a blue bubble within a blue bubble. Not one of my friends wishes for the death of anyone who holds views they oppose. Not one of them, as Rick claims, and I'll quote directly, "believe in no bail catch and release for violent criminals, completely open borders and subsidizing people when they get here, skin color and ethnicity trump merit, and legally killing babies up to and including during birth." I do not know anyone who wishes for those things, nor do I know anyone who is anything less than horrified by the Kirk assassination.

no offense and with all due respect, but if your family is genuinely wishing death upon those they disagree with, the problem is with them as individuals, not Democrats. politics is not their problem.

Expand full comment
Nplus1's avatar

We are using anecdotes so we can't establish majority. The 7 democrats I know best all think those things.

Expand full comment
Chuck S's avatar

oh I agree that these are anecdotes, and I'm sure we could go back and forth offering them all day and never exhaust the list. but the point remains: anyone who genuinely wishes death upon those who hold political views they disagree with is a deeply, and morally, flawed person. political identity is not their fundamental problem.

Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

This is a very thoughtful comment.

Even if my personal anecdata/priors may be different, +1

Expand full comment
Drunkonunleaded's avatar

I promise you that this is not bait. What do most of them believe?

Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

Legitimate question. (and one the news media "couldn't possibly comment" on)

The other follow up comment is:

To what extent does each major part endorse, support, cater to, and power the election of, their more extreme elements?

I may have my supposition but I'd rather not air it absent quality data that, again, prob won't be forthcoming.

Expand full comment
Rick T.'s avatar

Fan of Francis Urquhart are we?

Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

Ahh, I always had you pinned as a man of fine taste- pleasing to have it confirmed

Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

Not to merely recapitulate your discussion with @Nplus1, but my anecdata does differ.

Truly, I wonder what the truth is. Who has the most extremists per capita? Per voters? Whose median voter holds views the broader population would consider extreme? etc.

Shame we cannot, and will not, ever get this from any mainstream news media or polling source.

Expand full comment
Tim's avatar

I will shoot someone who is trying to kill me.

I don't mean stringing some sophistry together to justify the act, I mean I will only use lethal violence when I face the immediate threat of death or grave injury.

When someone tries to shoot you, you don't give much of a fuck about why they are doing it.

I say that from personal experience.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Sep 11
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

Charlie kirk shouldve avoided the life threatening situation of thinking

Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

Even better:

he should have avoided the inherently life-threatening situation of trying to have an open and honest debate with university students, many of them with opposing views.

Expand full comment
Ataraxis's avatar

It is obvious that the left is losing power and can no longer debate ideas, so they have turned to violence.

This is no different than what the KKK did starting in 1865 after they lost the Civil War and could not debate slavery publicly.

Back then the Klan was the militant arm of the Democrat Party, and today the trans lizards are the new KKK for the Dems. The Dems love the trans violence because they can write it off by saying the perpetrators are mentally ill.

Expand full comment
David Holzman's avatar

I probably don't agree with Charlie Kirk on anything. My maternal great uncle ran the Colorado Democratic Party for most of the first half of the 20th century. Not surprisingly, given that, my parents were left wingers and so are their three children, and probably their four grandchildren. But people should talk to people they don't agree with, just to try to understand where they are coming from, and to learn to see them as fellow human beings. One of my close friends is a right winger, but he's also one of the nicer H. sapiens on the planet. And he's sad for the USA for the same reasons Vojta Dobeš has given for being sad for our country. Thank you Vojta Dobeš for an excellent comment.

Expand full comment
Rick T.'s avatar

“ But people should talk to people they don't agree with…”

Yes but it got Charlie Kirk murdered. As per usual “we will likely never know the motive” but by some accounts he had some success in changing young minds.

Expand full comment
David Holzman's avatar

I don't think I have enough information to comment on your comment.

Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

To explain the comment, aside from his radio show, some astonishing percentage of Charlie's life revolved around traveling to places to have *open* debates on various subjects in the hopes of both convincing and learning.

"talking to people he doesn't agree with" was in a sense, Charlie's literal day job, what he did almost every day of the week

Expand full comment
David Holzman's avatar

Sounds like a very interesting character.

Expand full comment
sgeffe's avatar

He probably had a better take on the zeitgeist than most other people in the media, or other spheres of influence.

Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

There are those who have argued "the left [wanted to] kill him because he was effective." People, myself included, may have failed to appreciate the size, dedication, and effectiveness of his organizations.

But some reports are suggesting this was another troontifa shooting. In which event, simply being a public figure publicly discussing pro-nature views might be signing ones own death warrant

Expand full comment
Rick T.'s avatar

I knew his name mostly from the short clips on X where he debates college kids. I have heard of Turning Point. Never connected him with that.

Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

He built two massive organizations, news, action (GOTV), and if I am not mistaken, a third focused on faith

Just an astonishingly productive individual

Expand full comment
silentsod's avatar

In America the left has overwhelmingly been the party of political violence for the past 100 years if you know your history.

Commie bombings in the 20s, black panthers, weather underground, LA riots, all the way through the street violence against Trump rally attendees, the summer of love, the attempted assassinations of Trump, et al.

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

Im kinda sick of this “both sides” it’s 80/20 at best for both sides. Gut the universoties and arrest commies. And i mean actual commies not slight of left people i mildly disagree with. The summer of george had lawyers throwing molotov cocktails. I should probably take a time out like when im mad at the wife and shut up for a day or two

Expand full comment
Chuck S's avatar

"arrest commies," first amendment be damned, eh?

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

They just executed a guy for speaking. I should think about this for a few days but right now. Yes

Expand full comment
Chuck S's avatar

ah, so rescind the rights of those whose ideology you oppose? that blade can just as easily be turned against you.

I am in no way defending the person who killed Charlie Kirk, and I condemn the killer and his ideology regardless of his political background. but rescinding constitutional rights is never the answer.

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

Again. I will think about this but the blade has already turned against my side. A father of two has jist been murdered for banal speach

Expand full comment
JasonS's avatar

The moderates have been talking about this for years. Liberalism allows for illiberal voices. Regardless off which side you are on.

The problem I see is that for far too long we've had a very biased media and up until recently a very biased social media.

Now that bad ideas can be pushed back on in the public forum, those with the bad ideas believe the push back is "violence" and retaliate, sadly, with real violence.

Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

The argument Scott is making is dependent on what one might consider "antiquated conceptions of pluralism." Pluralism 1.0 was voting only for propertied men of good standing and character, who by dint of available technologies and the huge burden of even GETTING to America, were a group of people with much in common and a broad portfolio of shared values. Modern pluralism is, everyone has a voice no matter what level of bad-faith anti-traditional-americanism they bring to the table. 1776 constitutional norms basically can't abide huge constituencies of bad-faithers/defectionistas.

[I say this as a person neither completely on your, nor completely on Scott's side of this particular issue. Suspect all of this will be used to empower the totalitarian anti-popular center left; imagine RoboCop, except Hillary is the human grafted into the robot]

Expand full comment
Sherman McCoy's avatar

“They.”

We don’t even know who pulled the trigger or what their motivations were!

Expand full comment
Morgan's avatar

Hey, a very well known right wing figure was killed, in public, at a speaking event.

Must have been a spurned lover or angry business partner.

Expand full comment
Nplus1's avatar

Well, the Utah governor said it's politically motivated. What else do you need to know?

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

maybe it really was a mossad agent

Expand full comment
KoR's avatar

Luckily, we have two, uh, "esteemed" podcasters (the highest class of society as I'm sure you of all people would agree) in charge of the FBI right now with Patel and Oingoboingo. So I'm sure this investigation will be wrapped up quickly and without controversy!

Expand full comment
Jay's avatar

Antifa is the SA of left-wing liberalism. Time to root them out on terrorism, RICO charges etc. Trump talked about them being terrorists in his first term, and his failure to act has gotten us to this point.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Sep 11
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Jay's avatar
Sep 11Edited

I wish you were right but I am convinced that antifa is fully embedded in the left-liberal establishment and political regimes of the NATO/USAID type. Despite their violence, antifa was never forcefully prosecuted either in the US or in Europe, while the "cordon sanitaire" against the political right is jealously guarded - for an example, consider the merciless crackdown on the clownish and utterly harmless "Proud Boys" while the BLM riots, the violent Seattle camp etc. went largely unpunished. In Europe, antifa is at the core of the Green movement, which is a highly esteemed coalition partner for centrist parties and continues to set the agenda in Brussels and in the MSM. And no one seems to have the slightest problem with it.

Expand full comment
User's avatar
Comment deleted
Sep 11
Comment deleted
Expand full comment
Jay's avatar
Sep 11Edited

I gather that in Germany, where antifa is particularly virulent, it is not only partially financed by the government but also praised by leading Greens and Social Democrats. I believe there is even a Christian Democrat minister that referred to antifa in positive terms. If that's not part of the establishment I don't know what is. I certainly wish the president would ask Germany's chancellor about it next time that guy tags along with Selenski.

Expand full comment
Ataraxis's avatar

This goes back to the assassination of President Lincoln.

Expand full comment
G. K.'s avatar

Do I celebrate the fact that Charlie Kirk was killed? No. I also don’t think this is going to go anywhere good.

But this is someone who has advocated for the Second Amendment above all else, and who was quoted as saying something to the effect of it being worth it to have a certain number of gun deaths per year.

This is the system he’s been championing, at play. He’s become one of the deaths that was allegedly worth that Second Amendment sacrifice. I think a lot of people are pointing out just how ironic the whole thing is, is all.

Expand full comment
gt's avatar

Statistic of "gun violence" vs targeted poltical assassination are two different things, and you're smart enough to appreciate the difference.

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

He was killed for his first amendment beliefs.

Expand full comment
Ataraxis's avatar

A Christian man martyred by the demonic left.

Expand full comment
KoR's avatar

Maybe.

Or maybe martyred by the Actual Nazi right with whom he has had many disagreements recently.

Or maybe none of the above.

Worth waiting a beat to see if the podcaster-led FBI can actually do their jobs first.

Expand full comment
Ataraxis's avatar

I seriously can’t believe that I have to write this in 2025, but here goes:

NAZI = National Socialist German Workers’ Party

Expand full comment
KoR's avatar

I am aware of what the Nazi party is.

The "actual nazi" part was partially a jab at everything and everyone being called "actual nazis." and also partially in reference that there are Nazi groups in the US who have committed acts of violence like 09A, Atomwaffen, The Base, and so on.

Expand full comment
Dan's avatar

The bluesky crowd are a bit past "tee hee, isn't it ironic that le pro gun advocate got shot".

All of those people would be saying the same things if he'd died because he made the mistake of taking public transit and got stabbed like Iryna Zarutska.

Expand full comment
G. K.'s avatar

BlueSky and Reddit are cesspools of groupthink and I wouldn't expect any intelligent political discourse to occur there.

Expand full comment
Aaron's avatar

I have seen this sentiment a lot in response to this murder and I think it is a disingenuous take.

I have watched the Kirk statement you are referencing and the point he was making was that all freedoms cause unintended collateral harms (e.g., allowing people to drive faster increase traffic injuries and fatalities). However, as a matter of policy, he (and others) believe that the social benefits of allowing people the legal right to bear arms outweigh the societal harms caused by people abusing those legal rights to break other laws. Even the other side of the argument to ban guns is making a similar type of reasoned plea. They are willing to deprive vulnerable people of the right to effective self-defense because they believe the societal costs of allowing legal gun ownership are too great.

I have certainly seen the same policy arguments made for allowing the legal right to purchase alcohol, narcotics, etc. Does someone who advocates for increasing the rehabilitative aspects of criminal justice “deserve” to be attached because an ex-convict commits an illegal act against them?

If Kirk was advocating that it was acceptable to commit physical violence or kill people you disagree with, I think this “take” would be more on point and genuine. Everything I have ever seen of Kirk’ statements (and what I have seen is limited because I did not follow the guy) was explicitly pro-conversation/debate in an effort to avoid violence.

Stating that Kirk would believe his murder was “worth it” to have the Second Amendment, is no more “ironic” than rain on your wedding day.

*** edited for wording

Expand full comment
G. K.'s avatar

I’m with ya.

There’s a difference between being assassinated and ordinary gun violence against a fellow man. Which, to be fair, this might have been. There’s a 95% chance it was an assassination by a dissenter or someone hired by one, but a 5% chance it was someone with a personal grudge to settle. Perhaps Kirk slept with someone else’s wife, and they were particularly adept with a bolt-action rifle.

I also think that’s the point Kirk was trying to make, that the Second Amendment is too important to enact outright bans. So the irony point was bad on my part, I agree.

But that was a particularly ineloquent way to state it, and it handed uninformed people—including me, initially, because I only had a passing awareness of who he was—a lot of cause to feel flippant about his death. Someone who was quicker on their feet in that moment would have said something different, such as “We can’t prevent all gun violence (which is true), but we can try our hardest because the only acceptable number of innocent gun victims is zero. At the same time, the Second Amendment must be preserved.”

Having since read up on him and looked at speech transcripts, I don’t agree with any of the Christian sentiment that Kirk espoused, because I’m not a Christian and I don’t think it has any place in government. I also don’t think I need that framing in my life to be a good, moral person.

I’m also not a Democrat or a Republican.

Now that I’ve considered it more, I still can’t bring myself to be sad about Kirk’s death, but that’s more to do with feeling desensitized in general about public violence; it happens *so* often. And I don’t know him. But it is an unethical, dangerous and crude practice to assassinate people who merely disagree with you, and I think for that reason alone, this is a net loss for the American people. It doesn’t move the conversation and is just going to provoke further dissent and violence.

Expand full comment
Wyatt LCB's avatar

Well said, GK

Expand full comment
Hex168's avatar

"I’m not a Christian and I don’t think it has any place in government. I also don’t think I need that framing in my life to be a good, moral person." I agree with this, but fully support anyone who is helped by that framing. The media has at various times tried to sell the idea of a cabal of Dominionist Christians in government who want a war in the Mideast to trigger the Book of Revelations stuff, but I certainly have never met one and that story is resting comfortably with all the other conspiracy theories I ignore. I think modern Christianity is laudable and a good influence on people.

I respect Charlie Kirk for all he's done in a short life and feel considerable sadness that he's gone and that it has come to this.

Expand full comment
sgeffe's avatar

I just get pissed at the green light..when I’m already late!!

Sorry, it had to be said. 🙂

Expand full comment
Acd's avatar

Being for gun rights—which are guaranteed to us in the founding document of our country—does not mean that someone is pro-murder. I am pro-car but taking a car and intentionally mowing down a pedestrian with it is a terrible use of an automobile.

Expand full comment
G. K.'s avatar

Aww, c'mon. You've never played “20 points if you hit the old lady with your car" before? You're missing out.

Expand full comment
sgeffe's avatar

This may not be the Comment under which to make this point, but it’s 4:00am, and for some reason I’m wide awake burning through these Comments, so forgive me: even if all firearms were confiscated from all law-abiding citizens, the bad guys would still get their hands on them!

Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

"Well... I would like to believe that no ACFer would be genuinely happy if, say, AOC got killed. Or Hillary Clinton. Or George Soros. Or Greta Thunberg. Or someone else. I'm not so sure that it is the case, though."

[Advertistment voiceover] Succeed in LIFE, when you purchase MasterClass: Gaslighting from legendary disingenuist Vojta Doobies. Only you can learn these epic, 4-D gaslighting and victim-blaming techniques, to succeed in the workplace and in forums of otherwise well-intentioned people.

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

with cannons like that i hope aoc doesnt get killed

i have less charitable thoughts about clinton and soros though

Expand full comment
Wyatt LCB's avatar

no haha dont get assisinated, your so sexy tho

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

correct

Expand full comment
sgeffe's avatar

I do feel sorry for her boyfriend or spouse!

Talk about someone having to walk around with his testicles in a lock box, as Rush Limbaugh used to say.

Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

The one good in this lengthy victim blame comment:

"I'm sad that even a place full of interesting and intelligent people can get so bogged down in the "us and them" mentality."

THis is correct. The Powers that Be use public trauma events to move their preferred agenda forward, to divide and conquer pitting man against woman, race against race, religion against religion, and even young against old. They often stage events, like the Kirk assassination, to redirect attention away from their own 100% endorsed atrocities (Gaza, Qatar mass-assassinations of alleged Hamas funders along with entire BUILDINGS of innocent bystanders) and toward an atrocity that they think will enable them to push their agenda (Digital ID + CBDC) forward.

"It's the same from the other side. They will see YOUR side as the violent one. Planned Parenthood shooting, Jan 6, Oklahoma bombing, various right-wing shooters in between and after."

Both true and false: yes, brainwashed libs will see conservatives as being fomentors of unprovoked and unjustified violence. But even a cursory look into e.g. the Oklahoma City Bombing reveals it was in essence a staged act perpetrated by the Clinton admin FBI (https://xcancel.com/Inversionism/status/1702051987976577131#m ) to legitimate public approval for a country-wide roll-up of right-wing alternatives to lib totalitarianism.

If folks don't know the facts, (and libs, disingenuists such as Vojta (and even many centrists) never do), that lack of knowledge or mistaken understanding of what really happened WILL come to haunt those such propaganda is directed at.

Against vojta's points, everyone I know even vaguely right wing will have an open debate. They are open to discussion of even their dearest pet peeves. It is the left that is "done with debate," in this case literally by killing a guy who made it his job to travel around the country day in day out having productive and open minded debates with anyone who was open to discussion.

I don't need to tell anyone here: you are correct in assessing that the right is orders-of-magnitude less violent. Only fools, the violent, the dishonest, the totalitarian think otherwise.

That doesn't mean that the right should be.

You cannot accomodate evil forever. Accomodation of evil will end for the US as it did for the Russians. https://archive.org/details/RedTerrorInRussia1918-1923

Expand full comment
Donkey Konger's avatar

For anyone who sees this comment:

functionally, credulism, trust in authority, disingenuousness and dishonesty all look the same.

In times of cold, warm or hot Civil War, try not to forget that the MASSES are a WEAPON.

And this weapon is wielded by whoever controls the means of dissemination of information.

Expand full comment
Wyatt LCB's avatar

Vojta, thanks for putting my thoughts into words better than I could do myself.

Expand full comment
VTNoah's avatar

Well said. This is bad for everyone, not just right or left.

Expand full comment
G. K.'s avatar

It’s going to incite violence and discord. Assuming this *was* politically motivated, does the Left really think the Right is just going to say “Okay, you got us; we’ll be quiet now?”

I mean, they literally provoked the party with the guns.

I disagree with assassinating people on grounds of policy disagreement, unless they pose an abject and immediate physical threat to oneself or the general public. Least of all because it lowers the standard for when that sort of action is required. How will we know what an actual threat looks like when everyone who disagrees with us is a threat? Everyone can’t be Hitler.

The killer on the train that murdered that Ukrainian woman…is someone who needed to be taken out, by contrast.

Expand full comment
VTNoah's avatar

At the very least he should have been removed from the public after the first few violent offenses.

Expand full comment
Henry C.'s avatar

First *few* !?!

Expand full comment
VTNoah's avatar

You got me there. Yeah he should have been removed from society for the appropriate amount of time after violent act number 1. I should have also said "Permanently after repeat offenses"

Expand full comment
sgeffe's avatar

I’m sure if someone would have been carrying on that train, things might have been different. Or more people might’ve jumped in to help. (A similar tragedy was prevented at the end of July at a Traverse City, MI Wal*Mart by someone who was carrying, if memory serves. BTW, how in the name of the wide world of sports do you print the name of that retailer? Like I did here? All one word? With or without CamelCasing each syllable?)

We say we’d do whatever is necessary in that situation.

But what if you’re the one across the aisle from the nutjob. Unarmed. And say you’re going home to your family.

Yeah. Me neither, probably.

Unless I was carrying.

Of course, THEN, YOU’RE the one going to the clink.

Expand full comment
G. K.'s avatar

I’m pretty sure it’s Walmart. No camel-case, no hyphen, no asterisk.

Expand full comment
sgeffe's avatar

Much obliged for the clarification! 👍

Expand full comment
Jeff H's avatar

I find it fascinating to watch the same reaction over and over again from the mainstream American Left...

...if the Left perceives "injury", it's a call to action... some repeat felon OD's in police custody, then it's a call to dismantle the police... a school shooting is a call to repeal the 2A...

...but if it's the Right who's injured, the reaction is a mandate for everyone to "turn down the rhetoric"... how no one should be hasty to react... a lecture on "being judgemental about the actions of a few"...

American Leftism is a sociopathic ideology... this isn't a mischaracterization. It actually is "one side" weaponizing institutions, gunning people down in the streets, and assassinating political opponents.

Expand full comment
silentsod's avatar

MotoGP in Catalonia this past weekend:

Marc Marquez, in shocking form, qualified far down the field in 3rd! Time gets us all, I suppose, but people who had better lap times than him were Quartararo in 2nd and Marc's brother Alex Marquez in pole position.

In the sprint race Alex Marquez rocketed off and looked to have an easy victory in hand with over two seconds gap with a few laps left to click off. However, he lost the front in turn ten and threw away a points gain to big brother who completed the race in first and picked up 12 points, a healthy chunk marching him toward mathematical certainty in victory well before season end. Quartararo finally managed to hold position and finished second place after an extremely poor performance for all the Yamahas at the Red Bull Ring and middling performance in Hungary. Digiantonnio would rise from 6th on the grid to finish 3rd in the sprint. Bagnaia's sprint performance was outright disastrous after failing to get into Q2.

Aprilia had bum luck with Bezecchi being wiped out by Ferdinand Aldeguer and Martin crashed into by Frankie Morbidelli who never fails to impress me as an outright menace on the track.

In the race proper Marc and Alex would go toe to toe for a few laps before Alex managed to gap Marc and, this time, didn't flub the race. Alex wins over big brother and shrinks his weekend championship gain to 7 points in a futile effort to hold Marc back from the title. Marc finished second and looked extremely proud of his brother whom he insisted carry the Spanish flag around the cooldown lap in celebration. THE BEAST, 23, is back in shape after illness and finally clicking with the KTM putting them up on the podium and besting Binder and Acosta in a head to head fight for the final podium spot.

Quartararo finished 5th; Ai Ogura 6th in a good showing for the rookie who has been overshadowed by Aldeguer of late; Bagnaia turned things around and finished 7th; both factory Hondas finished in the points (Zarco crashed out on his lonesome); and Somkiat Chantra continues to solidify reasons to demote him out of MotoGP with another poor finish, ahead only of Honda's test rider Aleix Espargo.

There are 259 total points remaining in the championship and Marc Marquez has a lead of 182 points. If Marc finishes in 1st in the sprint and race then there will be 222 points left after this round and Marc will have 219 which would put him on match point in Japan at Motegi.

First, though, they will race in Italy this weekend.

WorldSBK continues to deliver!

In supersport with nutty battles for the first place finish between Can Oncu (Denis Oncu's, of Moto2, big brother) and Stefano Manzi.

SBK proper has been the Toprak wins by a huge margin show which is eh less enjoyable to watch.

I'm not watching the 300s or women's racing at all!

Expand full comment
Adam 12's avatar

Keep these up. Reminds me to watch and at least see what I can.

Expand full comment
silentsod's avatar

While some of the backfield racing has been great Marquez' return to dominance has been just unreal to watch.

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

I probably like f1 more and it’s mostly drive to survive giving me someone to hate. (Its lewis) but damn these moto gp guys are cool

Expand full comment
silentsod's avatar

F1 seems like a snoozefest when compared to watching two men elbow each other for room on 300hp motorcycles.

No offense to all the women and effeminate men who prefer the tameness of F1.

Expand full comment
Jack Baruth's avatar

You need to be braver to race bikes than you do to race cars, but sport isn't just about raw bravery. Were that the case, the Starboyz from Akron would be the greatest motorsport athletes of all time!

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

Motogp needs better marketing. It’s so cool but hard to watch. Literally

Expand full comment
silentsod's avatar

Mostly I am joking as any motorsports is high risk. I find the whole connected to the pit with a radio thing on the dull side and hope they never do two way comms in MotoGP. Yes, there's strategizing and all that but there seems to be much less emphasis on the individual's ability to strategize in the moment while piloting the vehicle.

Reference Marquez' history of brilliant flag to flag races vs Martin's huge fuck up last season. Each makes their call.

Or even Marquez' general management of one set of tires and when to attack vs when to wait. Usually he is not doing a dangerous lunge from way the hell back, as some less talented riders will do.

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

F1 is about the drama. Its male soap operas. Motogp needs a netflix special. But man, i am loving motogp. Give me a guy to hate. Give me a toto and a Lewis

Expand full comment
silentsod's avatar

It's been a while since there was an obvious bad blood rivalry (Marquez-Rossi). I agree the people seem too likeable all the time!

Expand full comment
Tim's avatar

Today has been clarifying. Watching people celebrate or "oh well!" the murder of Charlie Kirk has provided clarity on who and what they are.

Appeals to reason are in vain. Pointing out that whether you liked what he had to say or not that he committed entirely to *debate* and speech to hammer out differences like civilized people are supposed to do only to be met with "LOL" from people who are not even remotely trying to hide their mirth that someone murdered him...

I have said here before that I'm on bended knee begging people not to pull the pin because they don't want to live in the world they would create in their arrogance. The pin moved today.

A lot.

Look at DNC leaders. Obama is out there saying this is awful and unacceptable. But Blue Sky and Reddit are laughing about it.

Obama, as corrupt and awful as he is, understands what's on the line here.

Reddit, unsurprisingly, doesn't.

There's no two sides on this one. There's only right and wrong. If someone is so high on their own supply that they can't grasp how much more dangerous the future became for everyone because of today then they quite literally are the problem.

Mark it.

Expand full comment
Colin's avatar

So sad, he was quite obviously trying his best to move the social needle towards civility and unity while pursuing the truth. I shouldn't have watched the videos and it made it worse, I've been sick to my stomach all afternoon. No amount of 'justice' is going to bring him back or raise his kids.

Expand full comment
Ice Age's avatar

Not sad. Infuriating.

Let Kirk's family be sad. Let the rest of us burn with anger at his murder.

Expand full comment
Colin's avatar

While I agree with you in principle, the problem with anger is that it leads to violence, and I REALLY don't want this country to have a second civil war. There are SO many people out there who will smirk and 'fuck him' and 'good!' that they can't possibly all be dealt with. The Donald might have won the election but there were monumental numbers of folks on the other side of the street.

Expand full comment
Henry C.'s avatar

Jeez.

/Cpt. Barbossa meme. 'Well you're in one.'

Expand full comment
Colin's avatar

Single tear.

Expand full comment
Ice Age's avatar

You don't use Marquess of Queensbury rules against an opponent committed to winning using MMA.

If it comes, it's because THEY started it.

Expand full comment
Colin's avatar

Agreed. Full spectrum dominance.

Expand full comment
sgeffe's avatar

Yes.

God help us.

Expand full comment
John Van Stry's avatar

I do. I want a second civil war. Because nothing else will stop these people. They are entitled to kill whoever they want because they know they won't be punished and they'll be celebrated.

Time to end that.

Time for violence TOO BEGET VIOLENCE.

Because that is the only lesson that people will remember.

That is the only action that has EVER brought peace.

Expand full comment
Ataraxis's avatar

John, you are correct. I’m reading a book on how the war with Japan ended. The adults who ran the US military realized that nothing less than unconditional surrender by Japan was the only way to end the war, even if it meant a ground invasion where the Japanese would fight to the death and launch waves of suicide attacks.

We are now at that point with the war on Western civilization by the demonic left. They need to be driven into submission.

Expand full comment
Jack Baruth's avatar

'The adults who ran the US military realized that nothing less than unconditional surrender by Japan was the only way to end the war, even if it meant a ground invasion where the Japanese would fight to the death and launch waves of suicide attacks.'

With respect, you mean "the bloodthirsty morons who ran the US military." Read your Toland. The Japanese spent a year trying to surrender to the United States before the bombs dropped. Every avenue was rebuffed -- because Truman wanted to use his new toy and he wanted the Soviets to see it in use.

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

the same people will tell you that violence solves nothing becuase as luck would have it violence solves a lot of things

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

I cant imagine how bad civil war 2.0

Will be but i get it. This one bothers me. I sorta get the luigi thing, dont agree but i get it. I get shooting the asshole judge who tore your family about. Again indont agree but inget it. Indonnot get shooting a normie

Expand full comment
Jeff Winks's avatar

Agree!

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

the vid was gruesome

there was a LOT of blood

Expand full comment
Colin's avatar

The way he went stiff I knew he was dead. I've hunted and youtube'd enough to know. Like why can't it be the bad guys?

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

i dont know how anyone could have recovered from a blown out artery

some people will have the same thought as you and might start taking shots at lefties now

Expand full comment
Colin's avatar

It looked like it hit his spine.

Expand full comment
Rick T.'s avatar

I’ve read there’s an AI fake out there that pretty gory. I haven’t seen it or the real one.

Expand full comment
Pete Madsen's avatar

The expert shooter hit Kirk off-center in the neck, maximizing the possibility of getting the jugular, the carotid, and the trachea with one shot. The bleeding showed the success of that aiming point.

It was a carefully planned and expertly carried out assassination by some pretty damned scary people. Who are apparently still at large.

Expand full comment
sgeffe's avatar

I’m not going out of my way to watch it!

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

reddit is a cesspool of retards (good ai material somehow) so these people will be caught and blindsided by the aftereffects of this event

and as usual will mock them

Expand full comment
Rick T.'s avatar

Kurt Schlichter has written all the second civil war porn one can handle. Some of it quite prophetic, though.

https://www.bookseriesinorder.com/kurt-schlichter/

Expand full comment
Hex168's avatar

It is ridiculously exaggerated and mimics an over-the-top shooter thriller. I enjoyed every minute of it.

Expand full comment
Henry C.'s avatar

Worse were the responses about the poor girl. Kirk was a somebody. A small somebody but still. She was a nobody. They opened a Go Fund me for Brown until it was closed. 'She deserved it for slavery or Daniel Penny or the magic word, etc.' It was everywhere. There is no reconciliation for this.

Expand full comment
Ice Age's avatar

Let America's crazy homeless be crazy and homeless in central Alaska.

Remember how Rainbow Six ended?

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

rainbow six the game?

Expand full comment
Ice Age's avatar

Oh no. Oh no.

The novel.

Expand full comment
Dan's avatar

Which speed should read

Expand full comment
Ice Age's avatar

It's a great book!

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

by tom clancy right?

Expand full comment
Ice Age's avatar

Yep.

It's about a thousand pages, but they're compelling!

Expand full comment
sgeffe's avatar

Yup! 😇

Expand full comment
TheGr8Landini's avatar

You'd have to read about five thousand pages of prequels to really get it--Without Remorse, Clear and Present Danger, Patriot Games and The Hunt for Red October, at least--but it's a fun book, and it'll make you think.

Expand full comment
Dan's avatar

Anyone who watched the video of that and wasn't horrified by the look on her face isn't entirely human

Expand full comment
Jay's avatar
Sep 13Edited

isn't it remarkable that the Ukraine didn't even let her father travel to her funeral? He is, after all, still needed as cannon fodder in a war instigated by the West...

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

He supports the second amendment so murdering him is ok came up in the lefty circle. I will say almost everone called that guy a loon

Expand full comment
Adam 12's avatar

Amen.

We have moved from right and wrong which is horrible. The victims death is horrible and the cowards on the train are part of the problem. Looked away rather than helping. Even if you don’t actively intervene rendering aid is still honorable. Yet nothing. Having been to and ridden the trains on the Queen City I can assure you only if I didn’t think I could stop him would I have put a bullet in him. 4906 or H9 Daniel Defense. Depends on the day.

Having real discourse is what I love about this group. Want to and would love to have this do this dialogue in person but the sickness and resulting death of a loved one kept me from First Principles.

Don’t know Charlie, never watched him, but want people to speak their mind. The fact that Obama said that is redeeming in some respect and means he gets it, but anyone associated with the working end and part of the only two political parties I have issues with. All in it for keeping power. Once they go, the US moves forward.

No way we will have single item bills, term limit so no one is in power too long, the ban on PAC money and individual donation are the only way to go. A corporation can only give as much as an individual and all donations to anyone are logged and public.

So many issues.

Great watch review, but so many issues

Expand full comment
Jeff Zahorowski's avatar

Incidentally, how do you like that H9? I'm hoping you'll say, "Its great, I love it" so I can continue my envy and admiration.

Expand full comment
Jay's avatar

Charlie Kirk, requiescat in pace. There is a good chance that this horrific event will actually become a Turning Point (ugh), and much depends on whether the administration will finally assume sweeping powers to go after the antifa terrorists and their many enablers. (Which is what it was elected for.) But the pessimist in me says it will blow over as quickly as the assassination attempt on Trump himself.

Expand full comment
BKbroiler's avatar

I'm wary of any more "sweeping powers." What one side wields today, the other wields tomorrow.

Expand full comment
Henry C.'s avatar

Ah yes, Queensbury rules.

Expand full comment
Colin's avatar

Yes, coins have two sides.

Expand full comment
Jay's avatar

The left has always acted in a Schmittian way. It's time to reclaim and properly implement him.

Expand full comment
Sherman McCoy's avatar

The thermostatic response will be more and more extreme.

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

does the edge count

Expand full comment
Colin's avatar

squinty eyes

Expand full comment
Scott's avatar

Less power, not more, for the Presidency, congress and judiciary. What Trump does today, a democrat will do in some future administration, but probably worse.

Expand full comment
LyriqalGenius's avatar

The pendulum will swing the other way again, and I fear you are correct. I said this same thing when Obama made his statement about the power of his pen and the executive orders that followed. Sure enough, Trump took that torch and ran with it.

Expand full comment
Panzer's avatar

Nah, I don't think this is the right take, reminds me of a meme where the two dudes are about to be executed, and one says to the other

'No but we can't fight back, what if they start doing that to us?'

And the other guy just rolls his eyes..

No, the issue of left wing blowback is a lesser problem to be solved down the line, right now, we need to control the border, deport the illegals, and smash all the lefty NGO's with RICO.

Otherwise there is no 'another day' to live to fight for

Expand full comment
Scott's avatar

Trump is pushing some legal limits, and probably exceeding them, with the tariffs as one example. I don’t want one person being able to destroy a certain industry they don’t like, or, in the case of Brazil, tariffing them extra because of their prosecution of a Trump ally. Trump’s pettiness will come back to haunt us when a democrat does something in a similar way, maybe tariffing ammunition 200%?

We need to win on ideas, not by executive orders or dubious legal interpretations of existing laws.

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

We burned down the country for a drug addict and an accidental death. I would mind a response in kind for a father of two. I dont really want civil war but this is getting ridiculous

Expand full comment
Scott's avatar

This is a real issue. The left cares when a criminal loser dies in a police altercation, and ignores the suffering of everyone in blue cities where crime is harming citizens daily. The left wants to ruin children by trans-ing all of them, and can’t be bothered when tmultiple trans wackos kill children in school shootings. The left says Trump and Kirk are fascists and Hitler, and a negative word about Obama is racism worthy of destroying whomever spoke negatively about him. It is a total con-job by the media, selling the right as the enemy when the left is destroying our country and culture. This is political.

I think most of us want to be left alone by the government, and you will not get that in a world where the left has the power they seek. You will agree with them or you will suffer.

Expand full comment
Ice Age's avatar

This Decarlos Brown character is a mad dog, and we should put down mad dogs. Doesn't matter if he was insane, or for some other reason couldn't understand the consequences of his behavior. He's a danger to society and should've been welded into a cage or shot dead years ago.

And I'll just say what we're all thinking: The fact that he was named Decarlos instead of Gary or Mike or Joe should've been a giant goddamned red flag he was gonna hurt SOMEBODY at some point.

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

yup

one time treatment with lead administered at high velocity

Expand full comment
Ice Age's avatar

Or my aforementioned bobcat bag treatment.

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

im against animal cruelty

you can in fact just shoot them and be done with it lest you revel in torment of some other being

Expand full comment
Ice Age's avatar

Society's psychos must be made to fear the law the way normal people do.

If that takes creativity, so be it.

If it makes you feel better, we could use raccoons instead of a bobcat.

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

you can just whip them man you dont have to bring innocent animals into it

Expand full comment
Ice Age's avatar

Canada geese, then!

Surely your heart doesn't bleed for them!

Expand full comment
Adam 12's avatar

Thank you

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

Tell me about the rabbit’s George

Expand full comment
Henry C.'s avatar

It is righteous to hate both Brown *and* his enablers. The judge that kept him free happened to have part ownership in whatever rehab facility he was entrusted to.

Bystanders eventually attempted to render aid. It was too late and likely fruitless from the hit she took.

Also, Cobb and Cook are sorority sisters.

Kirk was as normie right as they come. From here there be dragons.

Expand full comment
Gianni's avatar

Wasn’t even a judge. Was a magistrate with a law degree but was not able to pass the bar exam multiple times.

Expand full comment
Jeff Weimer's avatar

FTR, Charlie Kirk wasn't the "Change my Mind" meme-maker. That was Steven Crowder.

Expand full comment
Jack Baruth's avatar

Oh man! That accidentally makes a secondary point -- he was so inoffensive that I confused him with another inoffensive tradcon.

Expand full comment
Jeff Weimer's avatar

IKR?

Expand full comment
Erik's avatar

What are you talking about? Aren’t they both far right? Alt right? Some right?

Expand full comment
Jack Baruth's avatar

I'd say they are very far from "far right".

The media has done their level best to apply "far right" to "Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign platform", but for the record, FAR right is:

* Repatriate all ethnic minorities

* Expel the Jews

* Voting restricted to male heads of property owning households

* Abortion is illegal

* Pornography is illegal

* No welfare

* Nationalize major companies

* One party state

Charlie Kirk's politics basically boiled down to, "Gosh, it would be nice if we only had 30 million foreigners in the country instead of 100 million".

Expand full comment
KoR's avatar

Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign platform is 33 years old at this point and perhaps shouldn't serve as the Mendoza line for what determines the degree of left and right in 2025.

Expand full comment
silentsod's avatar

Ratchet only goes one way?

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

more of a torque wrench in that regard

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

theyre really far from far right but still technically right of center

which is kinda old liberal in a way

Expand full comment
Mark Baruth's avatar

If you thought Charlie was far right, wait until you see who replaces him.

Expand full comment
JasonS's avatar

Neither are far right, but I think Crowder over the years is farther right than Charlie Kirk. Crowder was slightly more libertarian on certain issues, but not anymore.

Expand full comment
sgeffe's avatar

The steering’s gone!

Jane, how do you stop this crazy thing??!!

Expand full comment
smitherfield's avatar

Jack was probably thinking of "prove me wrong."

Expand full comment
Jeff Weimer's avatar

Fair

Expand full comment
BKbroiler's avatar

FWIW, I've followed Kirk and TP for a while, and it's not like he was participating in the Munk Debates. While he wasn't exactly Eric Cartman, his campus performances were more that than not.

That said, this is a horrific act and crime, and bodes badly for everyone, regardless of political stripe.

As for Lisa Cook, I'd be 100% on board with her removal... if the Administration actually bothered to hold its own people to the same standard. When the Cook news broke, it became a pretty open secret in DC and NY which senior people in the Administration are guilty of the same exact thing.

Expand full comment
Ice Age's avatar

I GUARANTEE you they already have all the high-brow apologetics in place for when the cops catch the tranny psycho that iced Charlie Kirk.

Expand full comment
countymountie's avatar

Sadly the tranny angle was my first thought given recent history

Expand full comment
Ice Age's avatar

Yeah...

I figure somebody who's so messed up they don't accept even the most basic facts about themself can't be too many steps from premeditated murder.

Expand full comment
Tim's avatar

The last Munk debate I saw showed Malcom Gladwell spewing slanderous invective in place of even attempting to engage in a debate.

Expand full comment
Erik's avatar

That was an embarrassing night for Gladwell. And he rightfully got his ass handed to him.

Expand full comment
Gianni's avatar

I saw Gadwell at a MS Research talk when he was flogging Blink. Didn’t hit me as being exceptionally bright.

Expand full comment
Tim's avatar

Ripping off other people's work and yakking about it without grasping the nuance of it was his entire schtick as a "public intellectual".

Expand full comment
Chuck S's avatar

Labor Secretary Lori Chavez-DeRemer, Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy, and EPA director Lee Zeldin all have two primary residence mortgages.

odds they'll be fired and prosecuted?

Expand full comment
Thomas Hank's avatar

I uh…you know what? I really am just over all of it and everything.

Flood it again. I’m ready.

Expand full comment
Ice Age's avatar

"There's a rogue comet headed for earth, and the United States government just asked us to save the world. I told 'em I'd call 'em back."

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

"On second thought, we're all just gonna get hammed for the next 7 days"

Click

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

theres a solution to all of this

it is very difficult

Expand full comment
Drunkonunleaded's avatar

Thankfully Lockheed owns Sikorsky and not Boeing. We are going to need a lot more helicopters.

Expand full comment
Steve Ward's avatar

Boeing makes the CH-47.

Expand full comment
Gianni's avatar

Predates the McD “acquisition” so it’s probably not a PoS as far as the design goes.

Expand full comment
Jay's avatar

The Ukrainian Flags have failed to show any interest in the fate of Iryna Zarutska; I can only assume they don't want to alienate the USAID cabal (Democrats, neocons). They won't bite the hand that feeds them

Expand full comment
Jack Baruth's avatar

Your typical "FREE UKRAINE" person is a woman who has less than zero interest in seeing 100,000 tall white women in her home town.

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

wait theyre tall

how do i order one

Expand full comment
Colin's avatar

To the googles with you!

Expand full comment
Steve Ward's avatar

there's probably an app for that.

Expand full comment
Adam 12's avatar

My brunette cousin in Poland said they are everywhere around her.

Expand full comment
Erik's avatar

And where exactly is this place? :)

Expand full comment
Adam 12's avatar

Gadansk, Gadynia, Warsaw.

About a million of them in Poland and she would be happy to have you take some away. She has asked me, but I had to defer.

Expand full comment
Erik's avatar

I’ll ask mama what she thinks. My only interest is to assist these poor refugees. Just coincidental that they are all tall, blonde and gorgeous.

Expand full comment
John Van Stry's avatar

Tall and hot. And Traditional.

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

An Eastern European woman will eat your alive if your game isn’t tight

Expand full comment
S2kChris's avatar

I live this every day.

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

My wife is half. American but the code is still there.

Expand full comment
Rick T.'s avatar

Same. Half Polish half Irish.

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

"just died from a shot to the neck during a campus speech"

wasnt a huge fan of the guy or some of what he belived in but getting shot in the neck is going to boil the water pretty damn quick. or maybe nothing will ever happen about it

"She came from Ukraine to find safety, but in reality Vladimir Putin couldn’t have killed her as surely and heartlessly as Decarlos Brown did"

wrong guy got shot in the neck today. i dont care that he was failed by multiple elements but the fact remains that hes a danger to everyone around him and should never have been anywhere outside of a cell. im sick of things of this nature happening and nothing being done or even attempted. these are the people that need to be removed from society by being put in a cell or in the ground.

"If she was too stupid or ignorant to know what she was doing, she shouldn’t be on the Board to begin with"

oh cool a retarded obese black woman who is just breaking whatever laws she feels like becuase she thinks she can get away with it. super. this really makes america look like a superpower.

maybe this really is clownworld

Expand full comment
Colin's avatar

QUIET! A black woman is speaking!!

Expand full comment
Jack Baruth's avatar

...but I just want to eat my popcorn and watch the movie!

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

DAS WASIS

Expand full comment
Ice Age's avatar

I believe Al Bundy would've called her a "pudding of a woman."

Expand full comment
Richard Clarke's avatar

TIL that you can be a judge in America without passing the bar

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

i still have no idea how thats even possible (i can guess)

Expand full comment
Gianni's avatar

You call them a magistrate instead of a judge.

Expand full comment
S2kChris's avatar

I would put money she can’t spell (or pronounce) that word.

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

Let me axe you a question

Expand full comment
Gianni's avatar

Apparently she has ties to some mental health NGO.

Expand full comment
Drunkonunleaded's avatar

Ties? The public LinkedIn listed her as CEO. If you can find the name of the Nonprofit, you can look it up in Propublica’s Nonprofit Explorer and look at their financials. It was pulled before I got a chance to do that.

Expand full comment
Harry's avatar

I know that is true in NY, but I thought it was some kind of Ditch colonial relic.

Expand full comment
Nplus1's avatar

"All rise fo yo Majesty!"

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

Id suspect we would be better if less judges werr lawyers

Expand full comment
John Van Stry's avatar

It is not required to have a law degree, be a lawyer, or pass the bar, to be a Judge.

Expand full comment
Colin's avatar

can't you get in by election?

Expand full comment
John Van Stry's avatar

Election, appointment, however it's done.

But there's no requirement to pass the bar that I've ever heard of. That would create a privileged class.

Expand full comment
Colin's avatar

Like a Sheriff who's never been a cop. Pretty wild.

Expand full comment
John Van Stry's avatar

Sheriff's have to get training when assume office.

Expand full comment
Jason Kodat's avatar

This may be state dependant.

That said, an awful lot of county sheriff's offices are big enough that sheriff is really an administrative job anyway.

Expand full comment
Gianni's avatar

The person that let him go the last time was a magistrate. Per N Carolina’s Judiciary site:

“ Magistrates are not elected, but are nominated for office by the clerk of superior court, appointed by the senior resident superior court judge, and supervised by the chief district court judge. A magistrate serves an initial term of two years, with subsequent terms of four years.”

Expand full comment
Tim's avatar

Given how absolutely loony the legal academy is these days not having a law degree is a feature not a flaw.

Expand full comment
Adam 12's avatar

Depends on the state. In North Carolina to be a superior court judge you do need to be a licensed attorney. Arnold O Jones Senior was the last non-attorney to be a superior court judge in North Carolina. I practiced before him, and to be truthful, he was probably better than most attorneys. His son was no chip off the block. Nice guy, and an attorney, but not the same as his father.

Expand full comment
Gianni's avatar

The most senior N Carolina superior court justice appointed the magistrate that did the release part of Brown’s Catch & Release.

Expand full comment
Adam 12's avatar

Not the most senior in the state but the Senior Superior Court judge for that district.

Literally part of the job description. I am in the eastern part of that state. Charlotte is totally different

Expand full comment
JasonS's avatar

Where I live you can be a judge, usually only probate, without a law degree. You can also be a county coroner without any criminal forensics degree or even a medical degree.

Expand full comment
LyriqalGenius's avatar

Same! 🤯

Expand full comment
Shooter's avatar

I just want to hop on my bike and ride. And never stop.

The world is broken.

Expand full comment
Jeff Weimer's avatar

In any case, there exists a number of people willing and able to assassinate those inoffensive, willing-to-engage tradcons. This is not good.

Expand full comment
Jay's avatar

some antifa moron fell for their own propaganda. In fact, Kirk was to the left of the better part of the current admin. There's a lot of hand-wringing going on...

Expand full comment
Henry C.'s avatar

Make no mistake, he didn't 'fall for it'. They are steeped in this. True believers and much as any bomb vest carrying Mohammadean.

Expand full comment
Drunkonunleaded's avatar

Exactly. I’ve repeated this countless times to anyone who would listen. These people are not dumb. This is their religion and thus, their Jihad.

Expand full comment
Joe griffin's avatar

Agreed

Expand full comment
sgeffe's avatar

Or “we vant to fly de plaaanes, but not lant!” At least that’s how it was 24 years ago tomorrow!

Jesus fucking Christ!! 😥😥

Expand full comment
Jeff Weimer's avatar

It doesn't matter where Kirk "fell," it only mattered that he was fairly prominent on the political right. He brought attention to a competing argument ; therefore, he must be destroyed. Pour encourager les autres.

Expand full comment
Jay's avatar

? I was referring to the assassin.

Expand full comment
Jeff Weimer's avatar

Sorry, meant it didn't matter where he was in relation to the admin.

Expand full comment
Jack Baruth's avatar

New theory, continuing with this:

As a liberal pundit, you are at essentially zero risk of targeted harm.

As a conservative pundit, you are at risk of harm in direct proportion to -- not how extreme you are -- but how well-known and effective you are. Charlie Kirk will get shot well before any actual "neo-Nazi", and the reason for that is because the media will more openly fantasize about harm coming to Charlie Kirk.

Expand full comment
Henry C.'s avatar

/Archer meme: 'Do you want Nazis? Because this is how you get Nazis!'

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

And then one day for no reason at all. Im at the “throw them out of helicopters” if this turns out how i suspect it will.

Expand full comment
Drunkonunleaded's avatar

Welcome to the party pal.

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

weimar problems require weimar solutions

Expand full comment
Jay's avatar

you are at zero risk as a liberal unless you take public transportation

Expand full comment
Colin's avatar

Well, you might get your baseball stolen.

Expand full comment
Adam 12's avatar

Ha. Yes. Nice.

Expand full comment
Ice Age's avatar

And then, only randomly.

Expand full comment
Drunkonunleaded's avatar

It’s cultural enrichment. No different than eating at Cava.

Expand full comment
Jay's avatar

Zero risk? Thinking about it, what about Jussie Smollett?

Expand full comment
Jack Baruth's avatar

True. He was attacked by the MAGA COUNTRY!

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

We have a strong presence on the south side of Chicago

Expand full comment
Sherman McCoy's avatar

The alleged episode occurred in one of the least MAGA areas of Chicago: Lower Wacker.

The only thing remotely GOP-coded in that area is the Iwan Ries cigar lounge.

Expand full comment
Jay's avatar

I bet that cigar lounge is segregated

Expand full comment
Sherman McCoy's avatar

Chicago as a city is. Far more so than, e.g., Atlanta.

Expand full comment
Joe griffin's avatar

Totally agreed, Charlie Kirk could draw a large crowd no matter where he went and he got his message out there, that is what made him dangerous to the left.

Expand full comment
Henry C.'s avatar

And yet he acted as a gatekeeper to keep normies on the reservation lest they drift into (old school) /pol territory.

Expand full comment
Jack Baruth's avatar

Yeah, I wasn't that big of a fan of him or Shapiro or any of the other lite-cons.

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

If theyre willing to kil a normie, they would kill us all. Im right of kirk, never liked or disliked the guy and they killed him anyways. Normal father of two and he had to die. Genuinely distrurbing.

Expand full comment
Ataraxis's avatar

The left wants another Rwanda here.

Coincidentally, they did not lift a finger to try to resolve the war in Rwanda.

Expand full comment
John Van Stry's avatar

Nazi's are leftists. So are Neo-Nazis. I hate that people confuse Nazi's with anyone on the right. They're socialists. STILL.

Expand full comment
Jay's avatar

it's all meaningless in a public discourse where harmless normies like Kirk get marked as "Nazis". The NSDAP is a historical phenomenon of a century ago, and I think the lolbertarian take of "Nazis" being socialists isn't just imprecise, it doesn't resonate anymore

Expand full comment
Jack Baruth's avatar

"lolbertarian take"

Exactly. This is the kind of argument that you can't make outside a very small room.

Expand full comment
Adam 12's avatar

Authoritarian

Big Brother.

All the same left or right. Control by another name and in another way.

Expand full comment
Jay's avatar

It's not at all the same, because the policies enforced are radically different. Even our beloved Western-style democracies, neither communist nor right-wing, are ruled by authoritarian methods bordering on totalitarianism.

Expand full comment
Adam 12's avatar

No one said anything about authoritarian. That would actually be different. The two parties we have are not that different.

So you’re saying that there’s a fiscally conservative party out there out of the two? I’ll wait. Show me which one doesn’t spend us into oblivion.

Expand full comment
Jay's avatar

I wasn't specifically referring to the US political landscape. And I won't claim the Republicans are fiscally conservative. But while economics is important, there are even more pressing issues.

Expand full comment
Jack Baruth's avatar

At the far right, as opposed to libertarian right, the State controls the corporations. The argument that "Nazis were the real socialists!" has zero pull with anyone and we waste time when we make it, IMO.

Expand full comment
Dan's avatar

Far Authright, the state controls the corporations.

Far Libright, there is no state, the corporations are throwing leftists out of helicopters

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

Think of what you could charge for that.

Ok kids, we can either feed the giraffes at the zoo or throw a commie out of a helicopter.

Expand full comment
sgeffe's avatar

Is it a black one?! Really 💩 with their minds!! 😂😂😂

Expand full comment
Jason Kodat's avatar

That argument does seem to have surprising pull...with people who see the word "socialist" as the S in NSDAP and can't see through it for how the party actually governed.

I suspect many such people get fooled by so many, many other things. I bet they think the stripper likes them.

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

If the state ran gm better than gm tuns gm? Just kidding. The state obviously runs gm. Just indirectly

Expand full comment
Tim's avatar

Arguing over exactly what flavor of murderous authoritarianism was worse is precisely the sort of bait I've been yakking about here for a while. Left vs. right is irrelevant. It's top vs. bottom. What flag is flying over the concentration camp you've been placed in makes no difference.

Expand full comment
Henry C.'s avatar

More to the point, are you in the camp or running the camp.

Expand full comment
John Van Stry's avatar

No, at the far right we have anarchy. The further right you go, the less government control you have. The further left you go the more government control you have.

Expand full comment
CJinSD's avatar

Collectivism is inherently authoritarian, because it isn't compatible with human nature. If you want collectivism to produce anything, then slavery is the only path.

Expand full comment
Harry's avatar

I would argue that German nazism, while having an economic policy and somewhat marginalizing the old German aristocracy, was not primarily a concerned with economics or class warefare in a way that is anywhere on the current political spectrum. One of the many reasons Godwin's law is so frustrating.

Expand full comment
Adam 12's avatar

The closer you are to the middle the more in danger you are. The two ends polarize each other and keep everyone paralyzed. Anyone close to the middle can affect change. Those are the people the parties are afraid of.

After all the “left” are afraid of the radical right and the “right“ are afraid of the far radical left. Don’t rattle them. But the people in the middle, the vast majority of people may possibly listen to.

Expand full comment
Scott's avatar

You will agree with the left or you will suffer. Those on the left fear for nothing, because the media spends 24 hours a day telling us the right is the side of evil and Hitler and fascism. It takes no courage to be of the left or to speak about leftist priorities.

Expand full comment
sgeffe's avatar

Correct.

Expand full comment
Drunkonunleaded's avatar

Charlie Kirk was not dangerous because he said mean things. That was just how his opponents justified their hate.

He was dangerous because he built a pipeline by which he could bring younger Americans into the Conservative fold. And he did so by targeting the proverbial cornerstone of the Leftist power structure, college campuses.

Expand full comment
Jeff Weimer's avatar

Yes

Expand full comment
Joe griffin's avatar

Totally agree

Expand full comment
Mozzie's avatar

I've seen some over-reactive practices in response to SOX and the fear it created in the corporate world. Even witnessed a CEO ouster due to less than stellar performance, not fraud. People in finance getting fired for financial fraud shouldn't be open for debate, stating the obvious, I know.

Expand full comment
Jack Baruth's avatar

' People in finance getting fired for financial fraud shouldn't be open for debate, stating the obvious, I know.'

Which is why it's such a show of power on the part of the judge and her sorority sister. You get to spit in the face of the President *and* the law.

Expand full comment
Colin's avatar

100%.

Isn't the Supreme Court going to review that post-haste?

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

She has clearly earned her free market position and any white boy who didnt get that job just doesnt know how to compete!

Expand full comment
S2kChris's avatar

What’s the percentage of nigresses with college degrees who work for the government in some capacity again?

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

If you get one at the irs, hang up and call back.

Expand full comment
Speed's avatar

like 65% or something insane

Expand full comment
Nplus1's avatar

I'm a federal employee. Man, the evil glares I've gotten just walking down the hallway where the "Equal Opportunity" office is...

Expand full comment
Scott A's avatar

I went to an unemployment office once 15ish years ago. I left thinking "I'm not getting unemployment" And I didn't.

Expand full comment
Ronnie Schreiber's avatar

For the second time this season, Norris drove straight onto the grass and blamed Verstappen. Also, it must have been a bit disheartening for Norris for Max to give back the lead and then pass him with a slower car and drive off to win.

Expand full comment
Steve Ward's avatar

yeah, it looked like Max was just toying with him.

Expand full comment
Ronnie Schreiber's avatar

Apparently, the Red Bull car was trimmed for minimum drag and downforce and Verstappen outbraked Norris on the pass.

Expand full comment
Gianni's avatar

Max is able to intimidate Blando at will.

Expand full comment