13 ms·

What we need is for politicians to not keep labeling their opposition with violent rhetoric. Everything from punch a Nazi, to death to communism, we've got to

What we need is for politicians to not keep labeling their opposition with violent rhetoric. Everything from punch a Nazi, to death to communism, we've got to get the violent rhetoric out of politics. Too many unstable people.

somenameforme 1y ago
The most disconcerting thing about this murder is that it seems like the killer was relatively normal beyond being excessively involved in online politics. In many of these things there's fairly obvious symptoms of major mental illness, or at the minimum it's some guy who's basically way down out in life. This was a young seemingly smart guy who just decided to throw his life away, and murder somebody else, probably as a result of spending way too much time in online circle jerks.
- mapontosevenths 1y ago
  [flagged]
  - general1465 1y ago
    Inducing rage and anger is what algorithms on social networks are optimized for. So we are sooner or later getting governments to regulate almighty algorithms driving social networks of today.
  - zahlman 1y ago
    I see no reason whatsoever to believe that he had any such intent. He simply had strongly held opinions that you and others find disagreeable.
    - yepitwas 1y ago
      His material’s all over the internet. So. May everyone go see for themselves.
      - zahlman 1y ago
        I have spent considerable time doing this. None of it has given me any reason to believe he had the intent of inciting rage. The specific quotes people are spamming in these discussions especially don't convince me.
      - reliabilityguy 1y ago
        > His material’s all over the internet. So. May everyone go see for themselves. Can you provide an example of his material where he incites rage? I am curious to see.
        yepitwas 1y ago
        He promoted the “Great Replacement Theory” (a “fact” as he characterized it) which is plainly a violent-radicalizing notion, with a long violent-radicalizing history and recent examples of violence done in its name. He promoted 2020 election denial conspiracies. Moves to mess with due process for voting, or to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power (say, promoting coup attempts) are some of the gravest threats to peace possible in a democracy, as far as speech goes. Lying about such, is right up there. [edit] sources easily searchable if you have the topics, letting people pick their own works better if search turns them up pretty easily, that way there’s no worry that I’m choosing clips out of context or something.
        reliabilityguy 1y ago
        > sources easily searchable if you have the topics, So, you made a claim. I asked you for an example of a material that you based your claim on, and instead of backing up your claim you are sending me to find a source that will prove it? > letting people pick their own works better if search turns them up pretty easily, that way there’s no worry that I’m choosing clips out of context or something. What is the source material, a video, or a text, that you based your claims on? Is there a chance that you actually never saw the source material yourself?
        yepitwas 1y ago
    - jackstraw42 1y ago
      you're still burying your head in the sand. you realize it too.
      - zahlman 1y ago
        No. Many people have shown me reasons they think I should believe it. In every single case, it has been plain and obvious to me that it's nothing of the sort. Disagreeing with you is not avoiding anything. To "realize" something, it would have to be true.
        jackstraw42 1y ago
        “Prove me wrong” Not going to engage, but you are absolutely burying your head in the sand, bud.
        zahlman 1y ago
        > Not going to engage Then commenting to repeat yourself is obnoxious and unproductive conduct. > Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. > Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.
    - logicalmind 1y ago
      Having strongly held opinion on who lives and who dies are petty heavy opinions one might say, correct? Like just pushing the opinion on whether Palestine should or should not be wiped out means that you are advocating for the lives/deaths of one group of people or another? I'm not saying people should necessarily die for their opinions. But it shouldn't come as a surprise that if your opinion, and the political policies you push for, literally result in the life or death of someone's family members, then those people may have very strong reactions to that. Like if there was an entire town of purple people and I went around saying I want all people purple people to be killed, should I be surprised if purple people might want to cause violence towards me? I mean, I'm just debating and using words, right? But those words an debates are literally about the lives and deaths of other people.
      - reliabilityguy 1y ago
        > Like just pushing the opinion on whether Palestine should or should not be wiped out means that you are advocating for the lives/deaths of one group of people or another? Can you show me a video/article/blog post where he said that Palestinians should be wiped out? I would like to see/read it myself.
        logicalmind 1y ago
        Are you looking for something where he literally says "wiped out"? Or are you looking for his stance that it doesn't and shouldn't exist? I'm not a follower of Charlie Kirk or his positions and I don't support any violence against him. However, finding his position on Israel and Palestine is a very simple google search away. You can hear it from his own mouth right here: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOd0yN_jKVs/ https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOd0yN_jKVs/
        reliabilityguy 1y ago
        How did this interaction end? Why do you show a short scene from a potentially long discussion? This one looks like a rage bait more than anything. Pretty equivalent to taking a phrase out of context, and then claiming whatever suits your narrative.
  - reliabilityguy 1y ago
    > Kirk earned a living by intentionally inciting rage By siting in a tent with "Prove me wrong" poster, inviting people to debate him, and then posting it on the internet? How is that "inciting rage"?
    - logicalmind 1y ago
      Let's not kid ourselves here. The arguments being made were often opinions on whether one set of people should be killed and another side being saved. For example, by stating the opinion that we should cut funding for Ukraine means that Ukrainian will die as a result. Saying thousands of people should be fired from their lifelong jobs in the federal government means you have had major and long-standing impacts to entire families (and there have been many suicides as a result. You can go on and on like this (Israel/Palestine for example). Yes, these are just opinions and debate. But these are opinions and debates about the lives and deaths of real people. That doesn't justify him being killed, I don't support his killing in any way. But you can't just debate who lives and dies and push policy one way or another and then be shocked that the people being impacted by those opinions or decisions are going to want to cause violence towards you.
      - zahlman 1y ago
        > For example, by stating the opinion that we should cut funding for Ukraine means that Ukrainian will die as a result.... But these are opinions and debates about the lives and deaths of real people. By this standard, so are all political debates. At the very least, if one person's position on a topic concerns "the lives and deaths of real people", then so, necessarily does the position of anyone who disagrees.
      - reliabilityguy 1y ago
        > But you can't just debate who lives and dies and push policy one way or another and then be shocked that the people being impacted by those opinions or decisions are going to want to cause violence towards you. I am a bit confused. Are you saying that now we should stop debate hot topic because opinions/claims we voice during those debates can impact people and cause them to commit violence towards us? Are you serious?
  - somenameforme 1y ago
    Have you actually watched any of his content? Like many I'd literally never even heard of him until today, and now I'm watching his videos. [1] He was going into generally extremely liberal areas and willing to openly debate and discuss his generally conservative and Christian values in 'real time', while encouraging his opponents to use the internet, chat bots, and whatever else they might like to try to get a zinger off on him. And it was real debate - not the media/talk show nonsense where two people just scream at and interrupt each other, with no real debate happening. He happily let people go off on their monologues before responding, and without resorting to typical fallacies you see online like ad hominem, straw-manning, etc. I don't really agree with a lot of his values, but I think he is an absolute icon in terms of how political discussions should happen. This is how democracy, debate, and more broadly - an Open Society should work, and he was killed for pursuing this. If this isn't the path forward for debate in society, then what is? [1] - https://www.youtube.com/@RealCharlieKirk https://www.youtube.com/@RealCharlieKirk
    - mapontosevenths 1y ago
      If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, boy, I hope he’s qualified. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 23 January 2024 If you’re a WNBA, pot-smoking, Black lesbian, do you get treated better than a United States marine? – The Charlie Kirk Show, 8 December 2022 Happening all the time in urban America, prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people, that’s a fact. It’s happening more and more. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 19 May 2023 If I’m dealing with somebody in customer service who’s a moronic Black woman, I wonder is she there because of her excellence, or is she there because of affirmative action? – The Charlie Kirk Show, 3 January 2024 If we would have said that Joy Reid and Michelle Obama and Sheila Jackson Lee and Ketanji Brown Jackson were affirmative action picks, we would have been called racists. Now they’re coming out and they’re saying it for us … You do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal a white person’s slot to go be taken somewhat seriously. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 13 July 2023 'Prowling Blacks go around for fun to target white people' – video On debate Reject feminism. Submit to your husband, Taylor. You’re not in charge. – Discussing news of Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce’s engagement on The Charlie Kirk Show, 26 August 2025 The answer is yes, the baby would be delivered. – Responding to a question about whether he would support his 10-year-old daughter aborting a pregnancy conceived because of rape on the debate show Surrounded, published on 8 September 2024 We need to have a Nuremberg-style trial for every gender-affirming clinic doctor. We need it immediately. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 1 April 2024 Charlie Kirk in his own words: 'A Nuremberg-style trial for every gender-affirming clinic' – video On gun violence I think it’s worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the second amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational. – Event organized by TPUSA Faith, the religious arm of Kirk’s conservative group Turning Point USA, on 5 April 2023 America was at its peak when we halted immigration for 40 years and we dropped our foreign-born percentage to its lowest level ever. We should be unafraid to do that. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 22 August 2025 The American Democrat party hates this country. They wanna see it collapse. They love it when America becomes less white. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 20 March 2024 The great replacement strategy, which is well under way every single day in our southern border, is a strategy to replace white rural America with something different. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 1 March 2024 America has freedom of religion, of course, but we should be frank: large dedicated Islamic areas are a threat to America. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 30 April 2025 We’ve been warning about the rise of Islam on the show, to great amount of backlash. We don’t care, that’s what we do here. And we said that Islam is not compatible with western civilization. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 24 June 2025 Islam is the sword the left is using to slit the throat of America. – Charlie Kirk social media post, 8 September 2025 There is no separation of church and state. It’s a fabrication, it’s a fiction, it’s not in the constitution. It’s made up by secular humanists. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 6 July 2022
- OutOfHere 1y ago
  [flagged]
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
lostlogin 1y ago
How do you apply what you’re saying? Apply it to current US politicians. Who is doing this, how do you stop them?
yepitwas 1y ago
I was borderline, almost, kinda, 10% rethinking whether I was actually wrong to label MAGA fascists. Then Kilmeade (multi-decade Fox News host) just casually dropped “we should lethal inject homeless people who refuse help” a day or two ago, and his co-hosts didn’t even miss a beat. I mean, that’s literal Nazi shit. They say literal Nazi shit, this isn’t isolated. What do you call it? WTF. Elon sieg-heils twice at the inauguration and they don’t disown him. What is it going to take before we get folks who still think calling them fascists is the problem, actually, to blame the party that twice elected a guy president who told his supporters they could shoot his opponent if she won?
- jackstraw42 1y ago
  "...or you know, involuntary lethal injections. Just kill em." -Brian Kilmeade, Fox and Friends
  - yepitwas 1y ago
    Yeah, it was an escalating suggestion from what another host had put on the table, which was the once-far-right “if they refuse help, lock them up” (the missing step here that someone from the left-leaning-middle would want to perform, is being curious about why homeless people refuse help and seeing if that’s something we can address without the very-expensive and sharply illiberal [classical sense] step of imprisoning them) but I guess now we have to call that moderate right because even the part of the far right that’s within Fox News’ window is saying “do Nazi stuff”. Granted, you’ve been hearing little suggestions like this for a long time from ordinary republican voters, if you’ve been in their spaces much, but hearing it from a host on the most popular “news” station in the country, with neither of his co-hosts even pausing to go “uh, haha, wait now” is… something else.
    - ModernMech 1y ago
      > hearing it from a host on the most popular “news” station in the country, with neither of his co-hosts even pausing to go “uh, haha, wait now” is… something else. Meanwhile, another Fox News host has been promoted to Secretary of "War", and is busy drone striking random boats and straight up murdering people. While yet another Fox News host has been charging people with crimes that juries refuse to indict because they're so preposterous. It seems we have a serious problem with Fox News hosts and podcaster bros running this government and directing policy. Remember, Fox News isn't just talking to its audience -- it's talking to the President, he watches religiously. He pays more attention to them than all his cabinet and advisors combined.
analognoise 1y ago
Didn’t the President of the United States say he didn’t care about bringing the people together, and has wished violence upon people who don’t support him politically? Where do you think this comes from, and, rather than arm ourselves with similarly martial language, we should be expected simply to lie flat? Ridiculous.
- ModernMech 1y ago
  Such a powerful message Trump sent when the very first thing he did in January after the inauguration was to pardon the people who tried to murder his vice president and did beat cops with an American flag. He pardoned people convicted in a court of law of seditious conspiracy against the United states. That was a permission slip. So I agree, there's a direct line from the political violence on J6, to the political violence we see today. If there is any lingering doubt, the the message from the President is clear: he literally said he doesn't consider violence from the right to be a problem. Right wing extremists are just people trying to reduce what they see as crime, according to him. Therefore we will see more of it.
seanmcdirmid 1y ago
Both sides have their nut cases. And you can’t actually restrict nut case speech with our current constitution at least, you can’t even prevent them from being elected.

somenameforme 1y ago

The most disconcerting thing about this murder is that it seems like the killer was relatively normal beyond being excessively involved in online politics. In many of these things there's fairly obvious symptoms of major mental illness, or at the minimum it's some guy who's basically way down out in life. This was a young seemingly smart guy who just decided to throw his life away, and murder somebody else, probably as a result of spending way too much time in online circle jerks.

mapontosevenths 1y ago
[flagged]
- general1465 1y ago
  Inducing rage and anger is what algorithms on social networks are optimized for. So we are sooner or later getting governments to regulate almighty algorithms driving social networks of today.
- zahlman 1y ago
  I see no reason whatsoever to believe that he had any such intent. He simply had strongly held opinions that you and others find disagreeable.
  - yepitwas 1y ago
    His material’s all over the internet. So. May everyone go see for themselves.
    - zahlman 1y ago
      I have spent considerable time doing this. None of it has given me any reason to believe he had the intent of inciting rage. The specific quotes people are spamming in these discussions especially don't convince me.
    - reliabilityguy 1y ago
      > His material’s all over the internet. So. May everyone go see for themselves. Can you provide an example of his material where he incites rage? I am curious to see.
      - yepitwas 1y ago
        He promoted the “Great Replacement Theory” (a “fact” as he characterized it) which is plainly a violent-radicalizing notion, with a long violent-radicalizing history and recent examples of violence done in its name. He promoted 2020 election denial conspiracies. Moves to mess with due process for voting, or to disrupt the peaceful transfer of power (say, promoting coup attempts) are some of the gravest threats to peace possible in a democracy, as far as speech goes. Lying about such, is right up there. [edit] sources easily searchable if you have the topics, letting people pick their own works better if search turns them up pretty easily, that way there’s no worry that I’m choosing clips out of context or something.
        reliabilityguy 1y ago
        > sources easily searchable if you have the topics, So, you made a claim. I asked you for an example of a material that you based your claim on, and instead of backing up your claim you are sending me to find a source that will prove it? > letting people pick their own works better if search turns them up pretty easily, that way there’s no worry that I’m choosing clips out of context or something. What is the source material, a video, or a text, that you based your claims on? Is there a chance that you actually never saw the source material yourself?
        yepitwas 1y ago
  - jackstraw42 1y ago
    you're still burying your head in the sand. you realize it too.
    - zahlman 1y ago
      No. Many people have shown me reasons they think I should believe it. In every single case, it has been plain and obvious to me that it's nothing of the sort. Disagreeing with you is not avoiding anything. To "realize" something, it would have to be true.
      - jackstraw42 1y ago
        “Prove me wrong” Not going to engage, but you are absolutely burying your head in the sand, bud.
        zahlman 1y ago
        > Not going to engage Then commenting to repeat yourself is obnoxious and unproductive conduct. > Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. > Please don't post shallow dismissals, especially of other people's work. A good critical comment teaches us something.
  - logicalmind 1y ago
    Having strongly held opinion on who lives and who dies are petty heavy opinions one might say, correct? Like just pushing the opinion on whether Palestine should or should not be wiped out means that you are advocating for the lives/deaths of one group of people or another? I'm not saying people should necessarily die for their opinions. But it shouldn't come as a surprise that if your opinion, and the political policies you push for, literally result in the life or death of someone's family members, then those people may have very strong reactions to that. Like if there was an entire town of purple people and I went around saying I want all people purple people to be killed, should I be surprised if purple people might want to cause violence towards me? I mean, I'm just debating and using words, right? But those words an debates are literally about the lives and deaths of other people.
    - reliabilityguy 1y ago
      > Like just pushing the opinion on whether Palestine should or should not be wiped out means that you are advocating for the lives/deaths of one group of people or another? Can you show me a video/article/blog post where he said that Palestinians should be wiped out? I would like to see/read it myself.
      - logicalmind 1y ago
        Are you looking for something where he literally says "wiped out"? Or are you looking for his stance that it doesn't and shouldn't exist? I'm not a follower of Charlie Kirk or his positions and I don't support any violence against him. However, finding his position on Israel and Palestine is a very simple google search away. You can hear it from his own mouth right here: https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOd0yN_jKVs/ https://www.instagram.com/reel/DOd0yN_jKVs/
        reliabilityguy 1y ago
        How did this interaction end? Why do you show a short scene from a potentially long discussion? This one looks like a rage bait more than anything. Pretty equivalent to taking a phrase out of context, and then claiming whatever suits your narrative.
- reliabilityguy 1y ago
  > Kirk earned a living by intentionally inciting rage By siting in a tent with "Prove me wrong" poster, inviting people to debate him, and then posting it on the internet? How is that "inciting rage"?
  - logicalmind 1y ago
    Let's not kid ourselves here. The arguments being made were often opinions on whether one set of people should be killed and another side being saved. For example, by stating the opinion that we should cut funding for Ukraine means that Ukrainian will die as a result. Saying thousands of people should be fired from their lifelong jobs in the federal government means you have had major and long-standing impacts to entire families (and there have been many suicides as a result. You can go on and on like this (Israel/Palestine for example). Yes, these are just opinions and debate. But these are opinions and debates about the lives and deaths of real people. That doesn't justify him being killed, I don't support his killing in any way. But you can't just debate who lives and dies and push policy one way or another and then be shocked that the people being impacted by those opinions or decisions are going to want to cause violence towards you.
    - zahlman 1y ago
      > For example, by stating the opinion that we should cut funding for Ukraine means that Ukrainian will die as a result.... But these are opinions and debates about the lives and deaths of real people. By this standard, so are all political debates. At the very least, if one person's position on a topic concerns "the lives and deaths of real people", then so, necessarily does the position of anyone who disagrees.
    - reliabilityguy 1y ago
      > But you can't just debate who lives and dies and push policy one way or another and then be shocked that the people being impacted by those opinions or decisions are going to want to cause violence towards you. I am a bit confused. Are you saying that now we should stop debate hot topic because opinions/claims we voice during those debates can impact people and cause them to commit violence towards us? Are you serious?
- somenameforme 1y ago
  Have you actually watched any of his content? Like many I'd literally never even heard of him until today, and now I'm watching his videos. [1] He was going into generally extremely liberal areas and willing to openly debate and discuss his generally conservative and Christian values in 'real time', while encouraging his opponents to use the internet, chat bots, and whatever else they might like to try to get a zinger off on him. And it was real debate - not the media/talk show nonsense where two people just scream at and interrupt each other, with no real debate happening. He happily let people go off on their monologues before responding, and without resorting to typical fallacies you see online like ad hominem, straw-manning, etc. I don't really agree with a lot of his values, but I think he is an absolute icon in terms of how political discussions should happen. This is how democracy, debate, and more broadly - an Open Society should work, and he was killed for pursuing this. If this isn't the path forward for debate in society, then what is? [1] - https://www.youtube.com/@RealCharlieKirk https://www.youtube.com/@RealCharlieKirk
  - mapontosevenths 1y ago
    If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, boy, I hope he’s qualified. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 23 January 2024 If you’re a WNBA, pot-smoking, Black lesbian, do you get treated better than a United States marine? – The Charlie Kirk Show, 8 December 2022 Happening all the time in urban America, prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people, that’s a fact. It’s happening more and more. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 19 May 2023 If I’m dealing with somebody in customer service who’s a moronic Black woman, I wonder is she there because of her excellence, or is she there because of affirmative action? – The Charlie Kirk Show, 3 January 2024 If we would have said that Joy Reid and Michelle Obama and Sheila Jackson Lee and Ketanji Brown Jackson were affirmative action picks, we would have been called racists. Now they’re coming out and they’re saying it for us … You do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal a white person’s slot to go be taken somewhat seriously. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 13 July 2023 'Prowling Blacks go around for fun to target white people' – video On debate Reject feminism. Submit to your husband, Taylor. You’re not in charge. – Discussing news of Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce’s engagement on The Charlie Kirk Show, 26 August 2025 The answer is yes, the baby would be delivered. – Responding to a question about whether he would support his 10-year-old daughter aborting a pregnancy conceived because of rape on the debate show Surrounded, published on 8 September 2024 We need to have a Nuremberg-style trial for every gender-affirming clinic doctor. We need it immediately. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 1 April 2024 Charlie Kirk in his own words: 'A Nuremberg-style trial for every gender-affirming clinic' – video On gun violence I think it’s worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the second amendment to protect our other God-given rights. That is a prudent deal. It is rational. – Event organized by TPUSA Faith, the religious arm of Kirk’s conservative group Turning Point USA, on 5 April 2023 America was at its peak when we halted immigration for 40 years and we dropped our foreign-born percentage to its lowest level ever. We should be unafraid to do that. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 22 August 2025 The American Democrat party hates this country. They wanna see it collapse. They love it when America becomes less white. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 20 March 2024 The great replacement strategy, which is well under way every single day in our southern border, is a strategy to replace white rural America with something different. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 1 March 2024 America has freedom of religion, of course, but we should be frank: large dedicated Islamic areas are a threat to America. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 30 April 2025 We’ve been warning about the rise of Islam on the show, to great amount of backlash. We don’t care, that’s what we do here. And we said that Islam is not compatible with western civilization. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 24 June 2025 Islam is the sword the left is using to slit the throat of America. – Charlie Kirk social media post, 8 September 2025 There is no separation of church and state. It’s a fabrication, it’s a fiction, it’s not in the constitution. It’s made up by secular humanists. – The Charlie Kirk Show, 6 July 2022
OutOfHere 1y ago
[flagged]
deleted 1y ago
[deleted]

lostlogin 1y ago

How do you apply what you’re saying? Apply it to current US politicians. Who is doing this, how do you stop them?

yepitwas 1y ago

I was borderline, almost, kinda, 10% rethinking whether I was actually wrong to label MAGA fascists. Then Kilmeade (multi-decade Fox News host) just casually dropped “we should lethal inject homeless people who refuse help” a day or two ago, and his co-hosts didn’t even miss a beat. I mean, that’s literal Nazi shit. They say literal Nazi shit, this isn’t isolated. What do you call it? WTF. Elon sieg-heils twice at the inauguration and they don’t disown him. What is it going to take before we get folks who still think calling them fascists is the problem, actually, to blame the party that twice elected a guy president who told his supporters they could shoot his opponent if she won?

jackstraw42 1y ago
"...or you know, involuntary lethal injections. Just kill em." -Brian Kilmeade, Fox and Friends
- yepitwas 1y ago
  Yeah, it was an escalating suggestion from what another host had put on the table, which was the once-far-right “if they refuse help, lock them up” (the missing step here that someone from the left-leaning-middle would want to perform, is being curious about why homeless people refuse help and seeing if that’s something we can address without the very-expensive and sharply illiberal [classical sense] step of imprisoning them) but I guess now we have to call that moderate right because even the part of the far right that’s within Fox News’ window is saying “do Nazi stuff”. Granted, you’ve been hearing little suggestions like this for a long time from ordinary republican voters, if you’ve been in their spaces much, but hearing it from a host on the most popular “news” station in the country, with neither of his co-hosts even pausing to go “uh, haha, wait now” is… something else.
  - ModernMech 1y ago
    > hearing it from a host on the most popular “news” station in the country, with neither of his co-hosts even pausing to go “uh, haha, wait now” is… something else. Meanwhile, another Fox News host has been promoted to Secretary of "War", and is busy drone striking random boats and straight up murdering people. While yet another Fox News host has been charging people with crimes that juries refuse to indict because they're so preposterous. It seems we have a serious problem with Fox News hosts and podcaster bros running this government and directing policy. Remember, Fox News isn't just talking to its audience -- it's talking to the President, he watches religiously. He pays more attention to them than all his cabinet and advisors combined.

analognoise 1y ago

Didn’t the President of the United States say he didn’t care about bringing the people together, and has wished violence upon people who don’t support him politically? Where do you think this comes from, and, rather than arm ourselves with similarly martial language, we should be expected simply to lie flat? Ridiculous.

ModernMech 1y ago
Such a powerful message Trump sent when the very first thing he did in January after the inauguration was to pardon the people who tried to murder his vice president and did beat cops with an American flag. He pardoned people convicted in a court of law of seditious conspiracy against the United states. That was a permission slip. So I agree, there's a direct line from the political violence on J6, to the political violence we see today. If there is any lingering doubt, the the message from the President is clear: he literally said he doesn't consider violence from the right to be a problem. Right wing extremists are just people trying to reduce what they see as crime, according to him. Therefore we will see more of it.

seanmcdirmid 1y ago

Both sides have their nut cases. And you can’t actually restrict nut case speech with our current constitution at least, you can’t even prevent them from being elected.