Charlie Kirk Shooting

[fafalone]

The level of toxicity here is stifling. But I suppose that is exactly the point.

Here is a warning from a couple who have lived under a leftist regime and escaped it.




The pud-pounding here over "January 6th" is beyond absurd. America knows who its enemies are and how violence is their response.

Dude you started the toxicity with your "left wing hate o sphere" projection.

Then right after complaining about toxicity you post propaganda falsely implying the left wants Cuba-style communism like that has anything to do with people on the left beyond a fringe smaller than the swastika-tattooed nuts on the right.

[wes4dbt]

The level of toxicity here is stifling. But I suppose that is exactly the point.

You could lower that immensely by not constantly spouting insults.

If you want to engage in a conversation that exchanges ideas I think jmc pointed out how to achieve that goal,

If you could engage honestly with the positions that left-wingers actually held, maybe we could take you seriously.

To post a random couple as proof that the left want to be like Cuba shows a complete lack of integrity. It's just more name calling. If you believe in that position that provide something the left is doing that is comparable and I don't what some fringe loner did. What policies/laws has the left been pushing for that justifies that comparison.

[wes4dbt]

I'm not surprised that the same people who a few years ago that were demanding their first amendment rights to hate speech not be trampled on are now pushing for punishment for people that say anything bad about Kirk. In fact the government is planning on "targeting" these people.

Their current stance is just dripping with hypocrisy. But not surprising.

I was against hate speech than and I am now. But I also find hypocrisy unsavory.

[fafalone]

Yeah it's been hilarious watching all these "free speech absolutists" who a few days ago were declaring war on the left with all sorts of calls for political violence (complete with "kill the violent left! Bomb their cities" hypocrisy) now going on a cancel culture crusade (now a good thing!) trying to get people fired for not canonizing a hatemonger.

Even for your basic "He didn't deserve to be murdered but here's some of his own words that show what kind of person he was" posts. Like yeah of course it's wrong to *actually* celebrate a political assassination (something the right vehemently disagrees with when it's a liberal who dies), but their definition of celebrating is anything short of abject worship. So little self awareness that if just quoting the man feels like an attack, maybe he wasn't Jesus reborn?

If it weren't for double standards the Republicans would have no standards at all.

(For hate speech, I do think it's reasonable to be against hate speech, for social consequences for hate speech, but against government criminalization of it; weakening the first amendment would ultimately hurt the people the left thinks it would protect- for proof look no further than Pam Bondi with her 'screaming n- n- n- isn't hate speech but saying CK was a racist is and we're coming for you' style 1984 play)

[wes4dbt]

I find this baffling and disturbing. They pulled the Jimmy Kimmel show for this comment,

“The MAGA Gang [is] desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it,” Kimmel said. “In between the finger-pointing, there was grieving.”

Late night shows criticizing the left/right is a daily occurrence and has been since I can remember and that's a lot of years. All of a sudden MAGA criticisms aren't allowed???

ABC's move comes just hours after Federal Communications Commission Chair Brendan Carr threatened to “take action” against Disney and ABC over Kimmel's remarks.

In an interview with conservative commentator Benny Johnson, Carr described Kimmel’s remarks as “the sickest conduct possible,” adding that the FCC could move to revoke ABC affiliate licenses as a punishment.

FCC commissioner Anna Gomez, a Biden appointee and the lone Democrat on the panel, sharply criticized Carr on X, saying, “This Administration is increasingly using the weight of government power to suppress lawful expression.”

Following Carr's comments, Nexstar Media Group, Inc. announced that the company’s ABC affiliates will pre-empt “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” for the foreseeable future beginning with Wednesday night’s show. Nexstar has more than 200 stations in the U.S., and is currently waiting on FCC approval for a $6.2 billion acquisition of TEGNA.

The last line of that quote probably explains why they submitted to Carr's extortion so easily.

All the crying from the right about the weaponizing the government have stopped since January. Now it's OK. Go figure.

[Niya]

How does that saying go? It's not so much fun when the rabbit has got the gun?

[wes4dbt]

How does that saying go? It's not so much fun when the rabbit has got the gun?

Cute. Wasted on me though. I don't find hypocrisy fun from the right or left. Never enjoyed killing rabbits either but it would be interesting to see a rabbit packing a gun.

[FunkyDexter]

it would be interesting to see a rabbit packing a gun.

Got your back:-

[jmcilhinney]

How does that saying go? It's not so much fun when the rabbit has got the gun?

In this case though, the hunter was killing a few rabbits to feed his family but now the rabbit is going to kill the hunter, the hunter's family and every other human being because they look like the hunter, so it's not really symmetrical.

We've seen people in the US lose their jobs for saying or doing something racist in public, so I don't actually see losing your job for actively celebrating the murder of Charlie Kirk as especially different to that. As an aside, I find it ironic that Americans like to claim that they have free speech but countries like Australia don't when no one in Australia would be losing their jobs for either of those things, except in the few rare cases where it would impinge on their ability to do their job, e.g. they were the public face of a company. Having said that, it should be obvious that celebrating someone's death and simply criticising someone are very different things and yet we're also seeing people lost their jobs for the latter, sometimes even for simply quoting Kirk's own words. That is taking things a significant step further and yet that's not even the worst of it. We're also seeing Tramp and his administration stating outright that they are going to target people who do criticise Kirk. That is fascism in action right there. Even if they don't follow through, they are trying to scare people into being silent. If you don't want to be called a fascist, don't be a fascist.

On the subject of fascism, we've also seen both Stephen Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel have their shows cancelled and, while that may not have been due to direct action by the government, there's a very high probability that it was done to gain favour with the government, particularly given that, in both cases, the parent company is in need to FCC approval to complete a merger. Does anyone really believe that Tramp is above using those approvals as a means to reward or punish a company that did or didn't do what he wanted them to? If you do, you might be in a cult.

[PlausiblyDamp]

In this case though, the hunter was killing a few rabbits to feed his family but now the rabbit is going to kill the hunter, the hunter's family and every other human being because they look like the hunter, so it's not really symmetrical.

We've seen people in the US lose their jobs for saying or doing something racist in public, so I don't actually see losing your job for actively celebrating the murder of Charlie Kirk as especially different to that. As an aside, I find it ironic that Americans like to claim that they have free speech but countries like Australia don't when no one in Australia would be losing their jobs for either of those things, except in the few rare cases where it would impinge on their ability to do their job, e.g. they were the public face of a company. Having said that, it should be obvious that celebrating someone's death and simply criticising someone are very different things and yet we're also seeing people lost their jobs for the latter, sometimes even for simply quoting Kirk's own words. That is taking things a significant step further and yet that's not even the worst of it. We're also seeing Tramp and his administration stating outright that they are going to target people who do criticise Kirk. That is fascism in action right there. Even if they don't follow through, they are trying to scare people into being silent. If you don't want to be called a fascist, don't be a fascist.

On the subject of fascism, we've also seen both Stephen Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel have their shows cancelled and, while that may not have been due to direct action by the government, there's a very high probability that it was done to gain favour with the government, particularly given that, in both cases, the parent company is in need to FCC approval to complete a merger. Does anyone really believe that Tramp is above using those approvals as a means to reward or punish a company that did or didn't do what he wanted them to? If you do, you might be in a cult.

From an outsider's point of view the current attitude to free speech in America seems to mean you are free to say anything you want, as long as Trump likes what you say. If you suggest the idea of murdering homeless people (Brian Kilmeade on FOX) then you are perfectly fine and that is absolutely okay to say.

If on the other hand you say something like why are we being ordered to have flags at half staff for the guy who was happy to have school shootings as long as he could keep guns, while not ever lowering the flag for any of the school shooter victims - then you are an enemy of the state and deserve to lose your job (and possibly passport).

Not only has Trump praised Colbert and Kimmel losing their shows, he also wants Fallon and Meyers to lose theirs as well - this is absolutely a dictator censoring any alternate opinions.

Then again he is also suppressing all evidence regarding his inclusion in the Epstein files and the likelihood he is implicated in paedophilic behaviour. I mean obviously it is more important to protect rich and powerful paedophiles and crack down on comedians, after all how else do you bring the cost of living down. Or something.

[dilettante]

These are not "alternate opinions" but propaganda targeted to whip up hatred. And it has clearly worked, the left is more hateful than anything we've seen since The Confederacy.

People should be better than this. Seek professional help if that's what it takes to strike off the chains of your emotional oppressors.

The real reasons for these cancellations and firings across the leftist machine were economic. Fewer people every day were willing to put up with such disgusting crap any more. Their ratings have been tanking for several years as their audience shrank to the small, hateful, and increasingly irrelevant margins of society.

The revolution is here, and it is being televised now.

[dilettante]

From an outsider's point of view the current attitude to free speech in America...

Ahh, the peanut gallery speaks. From a place where posting simple opinions can get one jailed. Tend to your own garden. Maybe start by deposing Mullah Charles?

[FunkyDexter]

Sharing an opinion won't. Inciting crime will.

[PlausiblyDamp]

These are not "alternate opinions" but propaganda targeted to whip up hatred. And it has clearly worked, the left is more hateful than anything we've seen since The Confederacy.

People should be better than this. Seek professional help if that's what it takes to strike off the chains of your emotional oppressors.

The real reasons for these cancellations and firings across the leftist machine were economic. Fewer people every day were willing to put up with such disgusting crap any more. Their ratings have been tanking for several years as their audience shrank to the small, hateful, and increasingly irrelevant margins of society.

The revolution is here, and it is being televised now.

https://www.tvinsider.com/1202434/la...olbert-fallon/

I know that recorded statistics aren't your thing, but check where colbert and kimmel came regarding audience figures.

Then justify your repeating of Trump's lies regarding their popularity.

I don't know if you have realised this, but Trump is a compulsive liar who will lie about anything to anyone if it serves his own needs.

[wes4dbt]

Their ratings have been tanking for several years as their audience shrank to the small, hateful, and increasingly irrelevant margins of society.

If you truly believe that then your out of touch with reality. The reason for Kimmel's cancelation has been publicly stated.

ABC, which has aired “Jimmy Kimmel Live!” since 2003, announced the suspension Wednesday shortly after Nexstar Communications Group said its stations would not show Kimmel because his Kirk remarks were “offensive and insensitive.” Nexstar operates 28 ABC affiliates

Whether that was the true reason or it was because of Carr's threats we don't know. But it had nothing to do with rating.

[wes4dbt]

Having said that, it should be obvious that celebrating someone's death and simply criticising someone are very different things and yet we're also seeing people lost their jobs for the latter, sometimes even for simply quoting Kirk's own words. That is taking things a significant step further and yet that's not even the worst of it. We're also seeing Tramp and his administration stating outright that they are going to target people who do criticise Kirk.

That's true. What baffles me is this comment is not saying anything about Kirk. It's a criticism of MAGA.

“The MAGA Gang [is] desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it,” Kimmel said. “In between the finger-pointing, there was grieving.”

Where's the hate speech? Where's the celebrating of Kirk's murder?

Yet a MAGA supporter FOX commenter can say this about the homeless,

"Or involuntary lethal injection, or something," Kilmeade said. "Just kill 'em."

With no threat from the FCC or Carr of pulling FOX's license and he isn't canceled.

[wes4dbt]

On the subject of fascism, we've also seen both Stephen Colbert and Jimmy Kimmel have their shows cancelled and, while that may not have been due to direct action by the government, there's a very high probability that it was done to gain favour with the government, particularly given that, in both cases, the parent company is in need to FCC approval to complete a merger. Does anyone really believe that Tramp is above using those approvals as a means to reward or punish a company that did or didn't do what he wanted them to? If you do, you might be in a cult.

There does seem to be a significant effort by this administration to control the media, that would be a major step towards fascism. All they need to do after that is control the courts.

[Niya]

so it's not really symmetrical.

True. One side uses rhetoric and the other uses bullets.

[jmcilhinney]

True. One side uses rhetoric and the other uses bullets.

So you're another one that simply denies reality? Apart from the fact that statistics show that right-wing political violence is more prevalent than left-wing, are you suggesting that bullets weren't used in Minnesota a few months ago or just ignoring that it happened? Or maybe you're going with the conspiracy theory that it was a hit arranged by Tim Walz because someone didn't vote the way he wanted them to. I'm interested to know which it is.

If you're in a right-wing information bubble then you may not have heard but in news that should shock no one, the US DOJ deleted a report from their web site, just after Charlie Kirk was killed, that showed that political violence in the US was predominantly a right-wing phenomenon. Now, I'm sure that right-wingers will say that that report was wrong but when your justification for that is "trust me bro" then it's hard to take you too seriously.

[jmcilhinney]

All they need to do after that is control the courts.

You're being facetious, right? Tramp just ignores what lower courts say anyway because he knows that his corrupt SCOTUS will give him what he wants almost every time anyway. The SCOTUS that is in his pocket in large part because of Mitch McConnell's corruption.

[FunkyDexter]

It's a criticism of MAGA.

^Read that bit back. It should remove your bafflement

he knows that his corrupt SCOTUS will give him what he wants almost every time anyway.

...and when they don't the process will have taken long enough for whatever he did to have become a fait acompli. He does seem to have found the silver bullet.

[jmcilhinney]

One thing I find interesting is that many people don't believe that the text exchange between the shooter and his roommate/girlfriend is genuine and that's on both sides of the aisle. Obviously, many people on the left don't trust the FBI at the moment and with good reason. Kash Patel is obviously incompetent and it seems to be a hotbed of Tramp sycophancy at the moment, so it's not hard to believe that they would manipulate or outright falsify evidence to support their narrative but there are also two theories that I've heard for it not being genuine doing the rounds on the right as well. One I heard is that it was staged by the shooter to throw suspicion off the roommate/girlfriend and the rest of the trans terror cell that actually orchestrated the whole thing. It shouldn't come as a surprise that a contender for the world's biggest transphobe - Matt Walsh - is one prominent figure pushing this nonsense. I think that Nole Skum might be in on the action too. Another I've heard is that the FBI faked it at the behest of Israel because it was actually Israel that orchestrated the whole thing. To be frank, the second option sounds way more plausible to me. I bet Margarine is being tortured, having to choose between her hatred of the political left and her hatred of Israel. It's ironic that she's one of the few politicians on the right with the proper stance towards Israel but, in her case, it actually is driven by antisemitism.

[jmcilhinney]

...and when they don't the process will have taken long enough for whatever he did to have become a fait acompli.

It is outrageous that, on more than one occasion, they have basically said "we don't have time to decide whether what you're doing is legal or not at the moment so let's ignore the lower court's decision, assume that it's legal and we'll work out whether it really is at some indeterminate time in the future". If they can't provide a proper decision right now then it seems a no-brainer that you go with the lower court's decision until such time as you do. I don't think that this is a completely new phenomenon but I'm not sure why that wouldn't have always been the case. Based on numbers I've seen, these decisions seem to be favouring Tramp far more than they did Biden, but I'm sure it's just coincidence that SCOTUS is conservative right now.

[PlausiblyDamp]

It is outrageous that, on more than one occasion, they have basically said "we don't have time to decide whether what you're doing is legal or not at the moment so let's ignore the lower court's decision, assume that it's legal and we'll work out whether it really is at some indeterminate time in the future". If they can't provide a proper decision right now then it seems a no-brainer that you go with the lower court's decision until such time as you do. I don't think that this is a completely new phenomenon but I'm not sure why that wouldn't have always been the case. Based on numbers I've seen, these decisions seem to be favouring Tramp far more than they did Biden, but I'm sure it's just coincidence that SCOTUS is conservative right now.

Seems an utterly strange approach, after all why have the lower court if their decisions have no meaning at all? If they make a decision and you take it to the higher court you expect more from them than "meh, not sure - ignore the law for now"

Then again what difference does it make when the president is technically above the law anyway?

[Niya]

Apart from the fact that statistics show that right-wing political violence is more prevalent than left-wing, are you suggesting that bullets weren't used in Minnesota a few months ago or just ignoring that it happened?

In a country with approximately 20,000 murders a year, those are hardly as consequential as two botched hits on a former president and the assassination of a high-profile political activist. The left takes its violence seriously.

[wes4dbt]

You're being facetious, right? Tramp just ignores what lower courts say anyway because he knows that his corrupt SCOTUS will give him what he wants almost every time anyway. The SCOTUS that is in his pocket in large part because of Mitch McConnell's corruption.

I think you have the wrong impression of what's been going on here. They have tried ignoring court decisions a few times but it didn't work(so far). My bigger worry is how much the courts are being called on to decide the hundreds of activities of various government agencies. The agencies themselves are being run by people who have no respect for the law/constitution and must be forced to follow them by the courts. Add to that a SCOTUS that has let personal politics become more present in their case decisions. Many of the cases they are making the final decision on would have been turned away by the court in the past. They didn't really get involved in the day to day decisions.

[wes4dbt]

Another baffling moment, Ted Cruz gave an honest assessment of the Kimmel situation,

Republican Sen. Ted Cruz of Texas sharply criticized Federal Communications Commission Chairman Brendan Carr for his comments related to late-night host Jimmy Kimmel shortly before ABC pulled his show off the air.

Cruz said he took issue with Carr threatening to cancel ABC’s broadcast license over Kimmel’s remarks about the death of conservative activist Charlie Kirk.

“He says, ‘We can do this the easy way, or we can do this the hard way,’” the senator said of Carr in the latest episode of his podcast, “Verdict with Ted Cruz,” which aired Friday morning.

“And I gotta say, that’s right out of ‘Goodfellas,’” Cruz said, referring to the classic mob film.

“That’s right out of a mafioso coming into a bar going, ‘Nice bar you have here, it’d be a shame if something happened to it,’” he said.

“Look, I like Brendan Carr. He’s a good guy, he’s the chairman of the FCC. I work closely with him, but what he said there is dangerous as hell,” Cruz said at another point in the episode.

Cruz’s comments put him at odds with President Donald Trump, who applauded Kimmel’s suspension and later called Carr “outstanding.”

Cruz said he’s no fan of Kimmel’s and that he is “thrilled that he was fired” over his comments about Kirk.

“But let me tell you, if the government gets in the business of saying, ‘We don’t like what you the media have said, we’re going to ban you from the airwaves if you don’t say what we like,’ that will end up bad for conservatives,” Cruz said.

The only thing he got wrong was Kimmel's comment were about Kirk. They were not about Kirk.

[Shaggy Hiker]

The only thing he got wrong was Kimmel's comment were about Kirk. They were not about Kirk.

Uhhh, what? I think I know what you meant to say, but that isn't quite it.

[wes4dbt]

Uhhh, what? I think I know what you meant to say, but that isn't quite it.

You need to be more specific. It seems straight forward to me.

Cruz said

“thrilled that he was fired” over his comments about Kirk

But Kimmel's comment was about MAGA's reactions after the murder. I never was strong in English class but MAGA seems to be the subject of the sentence in question.

“The MAGA Gang [is] desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it,” Kimmel said. “In between the finger-pointing, there was grieving.”

Maybe "kid"??

[fafalone]

These are not "alternate opinions" but propaganda targeted to whip up hatred. And it has clearly worked, the left is more hateful than anything we've seen since The Confederacy.

People should be better than this. Seek professional help if that's what it takes to strike off the chains of your emotional oppressors.

The real reasons for these cancellations and firings across the leftist machine were economic. Fewer people every day were willing to put up with such disgusting crap any more. Their ratings have been tanking for several years as their audience shrank to the small, hateful, and increasingly irrelevant margins of society.

The revolution is here, and it is being televised now.

If you're wondering why it seems like nobody is being "civil" towards you, it's because this is just straight dishonest lying propaganda. It's bad faith and the complete opposite of reality. You're not being reasonable, you're not interest in facts, it's just lie lie lie projecting the qualities of the right onto the left.

[jmcilhinney]

those are hardly as consequential

Well that's awfully convenient. You make your point using an arbitrary standard of importance that you pulled out of your ass to make your point, so the bullets from your side don't count as bullets. Bravo. Let me ask you this then. It was only by pure luck that the Minnesota shooter was limited to killing two inconsequential people and injuring two others. He apparently had a list of over 70 nominally left-wing targets, including state governor and previous VP candidate Tim Walz. How many of them would he have had to kill for you to consider his murders consequential enough? Also, the guy who attacked Paul Pelosi didn't use bullets but he sure wasn't there to torture and kill Nancy Pelosi with rhetoric. He seemed to be taking things pretty seriously. Please assume that my opinion of your comment is not allowed on this forum.

[fafalone]

In a country with approximately 20,000 murders a year, those are hardly as consequential as two botched hits on a former president and the assassination of a high-profile political activist. The left takes its violence seriously.

Confusing comment when all 3 of those were by a right winger, even if the right wants to bury their heads so deep in the sand about it they risk getting burnt up by Earth's molten core.

[Niya]

Well that's awfully convenient. You make your point using an arbitrary standard of importance that you pulled out of your ass to make your point, so the bullets from your side don't count as bullets. Bravo. Let me ask you this then. It was only by pure luck that the Minnesota shooter was limited to killing two inconsequential people and injuring two others. He apparently had a list of over 70 nominally left-wing targets, including state governor and previous VP candidate Tim Walz. How many of them would he have had to kill for you to consider his murders consequential enough? Also, the guy who attacked Paul Pelosi didn't use bullets but he sure wasn't there to torture and kill Nancy Pelosi with rhetoric. He seemed to be taking things pretty seriously. Please assume that my opinion of your comment is not allowed on this forum.

Charlie Kirk and Donald Trump were consequential enough to get threads here, the Minnesota shooting was not. Why should I care more about that than you do?

Confusing comment when all 3 of those were by a right winger, even if the right wants to bury their heads so deep in the sand about it they risk getting burnt up by Earth's molten core.

So you say. Why should I believe you over anyone else saying otherwise?

[wes4dbt]

Charlie Kirk and Donald Trump were consequential enough to get threads here, the Minnesota shooting was not. Why should I care more about that than you do?

That's just a disturbing statement. "Why should I care"

[Niya]

That's just a disturbing statement. "Why should I care"

https://www.google.com/search?q=minn...hrome&ie=UTF-8

Not a single mention of it anywhere on this site except when it's convenient to promote your own political opinions in this thread but...

https://www.google.com/search?q=dona...hrome&ie=UTF-8

Donald Trump's name is everywhere, and Charlie Kirk gets a whole thread named after him. So again, why should I care about the Minnesota shooting more than you guys do? Very simple question.

[jmcilhinney]

why should I care about the Minnesota shooting more than you guys do?

You can care or not care all you want. My issue is that you're simply ignoring it when making the claim that the bullets are coming from one direction. That's lie. Whether or not you care about people being shot doesn't change whether or not they were shot. Again, you're just making up your own reality.

[jmcilhinney]

Confusing comment when all 3 of those were by a right winger

I think that you're pushing it a bit there. The shooter in "The Miracle of the Regenerating Ear" has been reported as being a right winger, although not overly political from what I've read. That one actually sounds like someone doing it for notoriety rather than to make a political point. The guy at the golf course who never had the opportunity to take a shot seems to have been a bit all over the place politically but seemed to be more left than right at that time of the incident.

The guy in Utah is still a bit of an unknown. It appears that the evidence that he was a groyper may have been rather overplayed but even many right-wingers don't trust what's coming out of the FBI at the moment, so their claims that he was a leftie should probably be taken with a grain of salt. Ironically, the right playing up the trans angle actually makes the attack seem more personal than political. Of course, right wingers consider the very existence of trans people to be political, but that's their bigotry talking. Trans people exist and if you were actually in love with a trans person and someone like Charlie Kirk was using his platform to make their life worse, that would be personal motive to take him out, not a political one.

The thing is, it really doesn't even matter whether they were all far left. Actual statistics show that right wingers commit more political violence than left wingers, whether those they commit it against are famous enough for some people to care or not, and the rhetoric coming from the left is no worse than that coming from the right. Right wingers will deny that, of course, but we've seen how truthful the more prominent right-wing voices in this thread have been, so that rates pretty high on the BS scale.

[Niya]

My issue is that you're simply ignoring it when making the claim that the bullets are coming from one direction.

They are coming from one direction. The right didn't try to assassinate Kamala Harris twice and only mocked the left's high-profile activists with memes instead of shooting them in the neck.

[wes4dbt]

https://www.google.com/search?q=minn...hrome&ie=UTF-8

Not a single mention of it anywhere on this site except when it's convenient to promote your own political opinions in this thread but...

https://www.google.com/search?q=dona...hrome&ie=UTF-8

Donald Trump's name is everywhere, and Charlie Kirk gets a whole thread named after him. So again, why should I care about the Minnesota shooting more than you guys do? Very simple question.

What a pathetic way to judge whether to care about something.

[Niya]

BTW, Vance Boelter killing that legislator in Minnesota being an act of political violence is speculation at best. No one knows why he did it.