4 minutes ago, amykat said:

Impulse: I’m just shocked.  Do you enjoy the lack of freedom of speech and the press in China?  You get to sidestep it for the most part and are free to leave anytime you want so it’s not the same for you but is that want you want for the US?

 

You can be Republican all you want but that never included a belief that we don’t have freedom of expression or a free press.  Do you enjoy Dictators?  What is going on here?  Are you still American?  Are you a bot? 

 

My Chinese GF of 25 years has cancer and I didn't want to be a sh*theel and leave her alone during her last remaining time on earth.  As if that's any of your judgmental business.

2 hours ago, WDSmart said:

Yes, I agree with your first sentence above - Kirk believed in meritocracy over DEI. These are racist opinions because he believes Blacks are always less qualified than Whites because of their race. Meritocracy is not a fair system as long as the judgment of merit is being made primarily by one class, in this case, White people. DEI is a much better system than meritocracy, since it is based on facts - percentages. DEI, in fact, attempts to right the wrongs that White-dominated meritocracy has, and continues to enforce, on our society. 

 

He believes nothing of the sort, which you would know if you made the effort to do your own due diligence before slandering the murdered father of 2 young kids.  He believes in a meritocracy and DEI policies prevent the best people from always getting the job.   Even if the black person is the best person for the job there is always doubt that they are the best person for that job, that is the point he makes.  Imagine getting a job and always having to wonder if you got it on merit or just because someone had to tick a box, that would be an awful feeling for anyone who doesn't walk around believing they are a victim all the time.

 

So since you think DEI is the best policy I presume you would like the NBA to address the under representation of white players which I believe is around just 17% and start enforcing a 50% white player quota on each team?   I know they are not as good as their black counterparts but since meritocracy is such a terrible system its the right thing to do, even if it means more talented black players have to look for different jobs on lower wages than they would have got if they could compete fairly on merit.   

59 minutes ago, impulse said:

 

My Chinese GF of 25 years has cancer and I didn't want to be a sh*theel and leave her alone during her last remaining time on earth.  As if that's any of your judgmental business.

I already knew that.  What does that have to do with your beliefs now as an American changing to not include fundamental rights such as freedom of speech and wanting people to get punished for it …oh and let me help you do it?   I didn’t ask WHY are you in China.  Have you never studied communism ?  People turning on each other, turning each other into the government?  Having to belong to the Party?  Rubio threatened to take away or withhold passports of US citizens the other day …for political speech.  This is no longer just radio shock talk.

20 hours ago, WDSmart said:

Well, so much for the Right's claim to want to protect free speech... 🥺

Spewing hate,  and celebrating assination/murder is not free speech

19 hours ago, spidermike007 said:

I'm not saying that there aren't many other haters out there and I'm not saying that there aren't many other racists out there, some with positions of great influence. I'm just trying to bring context to this Kirk debacle, and I think it's important to recognize who who and what he was. 

No Kirk was just another one on your hate list.

14 hours ago, jvs said:

Even people that just are posting what Charlie Kirk had said or re posting his videos are being a target now.

 

probalby because they are saying or posting things which are taken out of context.

12 hours ago, WDSmart said:

DEI

Go figure, were you a DEI hire?

Newsday is a major U.S. newspaper.  The cartoon in question was extremely offensive and I'm surprised the editors had allowed it to be printed.  They must have known it would cause a firestorm.

 

Long Island newspaper Newsday apologizes for 'insensitive and offensive' Charlie Kirk assassination cartoon

Newsday, a daily newspaper serving Long Island, New York, apologized for an "insensitive and offensive" editorial cartoon referencing the tragic assassination of Charlie Kirk after sparking calls for a boycott. 

...

The editorial cartoon, which appeared in Saturday’s paper, featured an empty chair with a blood splatter under a tent labeled "Charlie Kirk" and "Prove Me Wrong" while an arrow labeled "Turning Point USA" pointed to the empty seat. 

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/long-island-newspaper-newsday-apologizes-for-insensitive-and-offensive-charlie-kirk-assassination-cartoon/ar-AA1MBOTJ?ocid=msedgntp&pc=W230&cvid=68c892b05d9747839a09f0e969d00c06&ei=14

14 hours ago, jvs said:

Do you want some examples of experienced White male pilots who screwed up badly?

I just checked and by far the most airplane accidents caused by human error are caused by White male pilots.

You see if you play the numbers game it always works both ways.

Of course there are going to be more male engineers but not because women are less intelligent.

 

 

Not possible. White men are vastly superior to others, brilliant and make few mistakes in life. 

On 9/15/2025 at 2:44 PM, CG1 Blue said:

So you're in favour of importing people from poor countries to do farm and factory work for rich whiteys? Doesn't sound very ethical for a lefty. 

Well, somebody has to work harvesting the melons in Alabama or assembling the RAM. Or building a Hyundai factory. 

I'm sure there are not many "Americans" who would do it.

 

22 hours ago, James105 said:

 

He believes nothing of the sort, which you would know if you made the effort to do your own due diligence before slandering the murdered father of 2 young kids.  He believes in a meritocracy and DEI policies prevent the best people from always getting the job.   Even if the black person is the best person for the job there is always doubt that they are the best person for that job, that is the point he makes.  Imagine getting a job and always having to wonder if you got it on merit or just because someone had to tick a box, that would be an awful feeling for anyone who doesn't walk around believing they are a victim all the time.

 

So since you think DEI is the best policy I presume you would like the NBA to address the under representation of white players which I believe is around just 17% and start enforcing a 50% white player quota on each team?   I know they are not as good as their black counterparts but since meritocracy is such a terrible system its the right thing to do, even if it means more talented black players have to look for different jobs on lower wages than they would have got if they could compete fairly on merit.   

You, as most right-wingers, don't know how DEI is implemented. In DEI, there first needs to be requirements listed for the position. Only applicants who meet these requirements are eligible to get the position. Then, the racial, gender, and other demographic makeup of the location where the position will be based is compared with the current makeup of the employees in that location.  If there is a considerable difference in one or more of these areas, applicants who will help improve the makeup of the company to better match the makeup of the community. 

This could be applied to a sports team, but the first issue, the requirements, which might be, "We want the best center coming out of college." would be difficult for most applicants to meet. Regular businesses are easy to apply DEI to. They might have a requirement that the position requires someone with a college degree. In that case, an applicant who only has a BA or BS would be just as qualified as someone with a PhD. 

12 hours ago, Luuk Chaai said:

Spewing hate,  and celebrating assination/murder is not free speech

Revealing the issues Charlie Kirk supported to show he was on the extreme right, and in this case, very much anti-LBGTQ and anti-trans, is not spewing hate. It's providing background information.

I don't know anyone who is "celebrating" the assassination. I'm sure there are a few somewhere, but they are not representative of the left, like me. The most I do, which is anything like that, is wonder why so many people on the right are treating this like the assassination of someone who was very important, like an elected member of the House or the Senate. 

12 hours ago, flexomike said:

Go figure, were you a DEI hire?

That's a good question. I'm now almost 80 years old, so when I graduated from college and began looking for a job, that was in the late 1960s or early 1970s. That was also when Affirmative Action was being required to be applied by most large employers. My first IT/computer job was with United Airlines, and yes, I was subject to Affirmative Action and was hired along with about 20 others to attend training in Denver to learn about UAL's computer systems. The 20 were a mix of races and genders that were quite different from the established IT/computer employees. 

So, yes, you could say I was something similar to a "DEI hire."

I am a White, heterosexual male, and we only made up about half of the 20 that were hired.

The following pretty much encapsulates the massive hypocrisy of MAGA

 

“When you see someone celebrating Charlie’s murder, call them out,” said Vice President J.D. Vance earlier today on Kirk’s show, where he was guest hosting. “And hell, call their employer.”

It should be noted that earlier this year, J.D. Vance encouraged Elon Musk to rehire a DOGE staffer who had resigned after a reporter revealed that he had authored several racist tweets, including a call to “normalize Indian hate.”

After criticizing the reporter for breaking the story, Vance declared, “I obviously disagree with some of Elez’s posts, but I don’t think stupid social media activity should ruin a kid’s life.”

Defending a man who called for the normalization of hate against an ethnic minority that includes your own wife and children on the basis of combating cancel culture seems like a principled stance—but if you’re unwilling to extend the same grace to people who aren’t on Team Red, it isn’t a principle at all.

https://www.thefp.com/p/his-wife-called-charlie-kirk-a-nazi?utm_source=substack&utm_medium=email

On 9/15/2025 at 6:29 PM, mikeymike100 said:

You are absolutely correct.

With reference to folks being fired for saying hateful/bad things about Charlie Kirk's death.

No, the First Amendment does not protect these individuals from being fired by their private (or even public) employers in this context. Here's a clear explanation.

The First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution states: "Congress shall make no law... abridging the freedom of speech." This protects against government censorship or punishment for speech, but it applies only to actions by federal, state, or local governments—not private entities. In other words:

It prevents the government from jailing you, fining you, or restricting your speech (with exceptions like true threats, incitement to imminent violence, or defamation).

However, it does not create a right to say whatever you want without consequences from non-governmental actors, such as employers.

It is amusing that the left was all for firing and or canceling anyone that spoke out against trans issue, covid issues, or election issues, but all the sudden firing someone is the end of democracy, 

3 hours ago, newbee2022 said:

Well, somebody has to work harvesting the melons in Alabama or assembling the RAM. Or building a Hyundai factory. 

I'm sure there are not many "Americans" who would do it.

I'm sure immigrants would appreciate you thinking all they are good for is harvesting melons...

1 hour ago, WDSmart said:

You, as most right-wingers, don't know how DEI is implemented. In DEI, there first needs to be requirements listed for the position. Only applicants who meet these requirements are eligible to get the position. Then, the racial, gender, and other demographic makeup of the location where the position will be based is compared with the current makeup of the employees in that location.  If there is a considerable difference in one or more of these areas, applicants who will help improve the makeup of the company to better match the makeup of the community. 

 

I guess she won't be considered. There was a beautiful racial harmony and colour blindness about the persecution of those cheering the death of Charlie Kirk hurtfully and provocatively. Black women were chasised by black men, who put righteousness above racial affiliation. It was a beautiful thing.

 

 

2 hours ago, WDSmart said:

You, as most right-wingers, don't know how DEI is implemented. In DEI, there first needs to be requirements listed for the position. Only applicants who meet these requirements are eligible to get the position. Then, the racial, gender, and other demographic makeup of the location where the position will be based is compared with the current makeup of the employees in that location.  If there is a considerable difference in one or more of these areas, applicants who will help improve the makeup of the company to better match the makeup of the community. 

This could be applied to a sports team, but the first issue, the requirements, which might be, "We want the best center coming out of college." would be difficult for most applicants to meet. Regular businesses are easy to apply DEI to. They might have a requirement that the position requires someone with a college degree. In that case, an applicant who only has a BA or BS would be just as qualified as someone with a PhD. 

 

If the color of someones skin is more important than the content of their character then this is racism, pure and simple.  I don't care what you call it, or how it is implemented, if someones skin color is relevant in any way to them getting a job over someone else then its racist.   Try and be a bit less racist.  Perhaps you could take some inspiration from Charlie Kirk on how not to be a racist.

 

 

  

12 hours ago, James105 said:

If the color of someones skin is more important than the content of their character then this is racism, pure and simple.  I don't care what you call it, or how it is implemented, if someones skin color is relevant in any way to them getting a job over someone else then its racist.   Try and be a bit less racist.  Perhaps you could take some inspiration from Charlie Kirk on how not to be a racist.

The color of someone's skin is not more important than the content of their character. The problem, historically, in the USA, is that most employers believed the color of someone's skin reveals the content of their character. The color of someone's skin, under DEI, may be important in determining which applicant is selected, but that is because the color of someone's skin has been highly relevant historically in the USA. White's were not only given preference, but in many instances were the only ones even considered. DEI ensures that applicants of all races who meet the requirements for the position are considered. 

Chalie Kirk was a far-right racist, as has been shown in multiple previous posts on this forum. 

 Here's an interesting variation:  a news anchor was pressured into resigning because of a TRIBUTE to Charlie Kirk on a social media account.

News anchor who resigned after being suspended for Charlie Kirk tribute speaks out

EXCLUSIVE– A former Illinois TV anchor said she gladly quit her job rather than have to be silent about the recent assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

Former WICS-ABC20 Springfield anchor Beni Rae Harmony spoke to Fox News Digital about resigning after she was suspended for airing a tribute to Kirk last Friday and refusing to remove it from her social media accounts.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/news-anchor-who-resigned-after-being-suspended-charlie-kirk-tribute-speaks-out

6 hours ago, WDSmart said:

The color of someone's skin is not more important than the content of their character. The problem, historically, in the USA, is that most employers believed the color of someone's skin reveals the content of their character. The color of someone's skin, under DEI, may be important in determining which applicant is selected, but that is because the color of someone's skin has been highly relevant historically in the USA. White's were not only given preference, but in many instances were the only ones even considered. DEI ensures that applicants of all races who meet the requirements for the position are considered. 

Chalie Kirk was a far-right racist, as has been shown in multiple previous posts on this forum. 

It's people that judge people by the color of their skin that think everyone else judges people by the color of their skin. Bur it makes them feel guilty, so, at the expense of others, they want to throw a bone to those they look down on.

 

DEI in a nutshell. 

 

9 minutes ago, Evil Penevil said:

 Here's an interesting variation:  a news anchor was pressured into resigning because of a TRIBUTE to Charlie Kirk on a social media account.

News anchor who resigned after being suspended for Charlie Kirk tribute speaks out

EXCLUSIVE– A former Illinois TV anchor said she gladly quit her job rather than have to be silent about the recent assassination of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

Former WICS-ABC20 Springfield anchor Beni Rae Harmony spoke to Fox News Digital about resigning after she was suspended for airing a tribute to Kirk last Friday and refusing to remove it from her social media accounts.

https://www.foxnews.com/media/news-anchor-who-resigned-after-being-suspended-charlie-kirk-tribute-speaks-out

Surely the left will come to her aid...

 

21 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

I certainly don't think Kirk's assassination should be celebrated, but I don't believe those who let everyone know they vehemently disagreed with most of what Kirk stood for should be fired. There have been people who have celebrated many murders before, and I don't think any of them were fired from their jobs. 

14 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

I certainly don't think Kirk's assassination should be celebrated, but I don't believe those who let everyone know they vehemently disagreed with most of what Kirk stood for should be fired. There have been people who have celebrated many murders before, and I don't think any of them were fired from their jobs. 

You say: "I certainly don't think Kirk's assassination should be celebrated,..."

 

Then you go on to say that you "...don't believe those who let everyone know they vehemently disagreed with most of what Kirk stood for should be fired."

 

Why the switch? It's just dishonest. The people being fired, are, or at least were celebrating the death. 

 

One was expelled from school for loudly celebrating Kirk's death and assaulting people at a memorial service for Kirk.

 

24 minutes ago, WDSmart said:

I certainly don't think Kirk's assassination should be celebrated, but I don't believe those who let everyone know they vehemently disagreed with most of what Kirk stood for should be fired. There have been people who have celebrated many murders before, and I don't think any of them were fired from their jobs. 

 

I know you don't. You're a decent person. You have always articulated your left wing view in a respecftul and dignified way. 

 

I do not think people are getting fired for saying they disagree with Kirk. They are getting fired for cheering assassination. There is something unusually repellent about a human being celebrating another human being's death. And I think it is legitimate for those people to face employment consequences..

 

We have women literally dancing in the street celebtrating someone was shot, guys singing delightedly about it, to state officials calling for more martyrs and saying violence should be an option.

 

None of that is acceptable.

 

 

19 minutes ago, Yellowtail said:

You say: "I certainly don't think Kirk's assassination should be celebrated,..."

 

Then you go on to say that you "...don't believe those who let everyone know they vehemently disagreed with most of what Kirk stood for should be fired."

 

Why the switch? It's just dishonest. The people being fired, are, or at least were celebrating the death. 

 

One was expelled from school for loudly celebrating Kirk's death and assaulting people at a memorial service for Kirk.

 

I said I don't think Kirk's assassination should be celebrated. Vehemently disagreeing with someone who is killed is not the same as celebrating their death.

If the people who were fired or expelled from school were publicly celebrating Kirk's death, I'll reluctantly accept that, but I think it's way too much of a punishment. People who do things like this in political circumstances are extreme right- or left-wing, but I am concerned that actions like this will dampen free speech in our country.   
 

35 minutes ago, Cameroni said:

 

I know you don't. You're a decent person. You have always articulated your left wing view in a respecftul and dignified way. 

 

I do not think people are getting fired for saying they disagree with Kirk. They are getting fired for cheering assassination. There is something unusually repellent about a human being celebrating another human being's death. And I think it is legitimate for those people to face employment consequences..

 

We have women literally dancing in the street celebtrating someone was shot, guys singing delightedly about it, to state officials calling for more martyrs and saying violence should be an option.

 

None of that is acceptable.

 

 

Thank you for acknowledging the way I express myself here on the forums, but I'm sure not everyone agrees with you. 🤭

Above, you say you think "There is something unusually repellent about a human being celebrating another human being's death. And I think it is legitimate for those people to face employment consequences." Let's see if you change your mind about that if Robinson is convicted, sentenced to death, and the day comes when he faces a firing squad (the method of execution in Utah). I expect that there will be many right-wingers "dancing in the streets" then. 😞 Will you?