If you had a stronger counter-argument, you wouldn’t need the insult.
September 30, 2025 at 6:41 PM
If you had a stronger counter-argument, you wouldn’t need the insult.
And yet you can't provide it.
September 23, 2025 at 1:18 AM
And yet you can't provide it.
The use of Nazi fascism here is totally inappropriate. Disagreeing with coverage is fair, but equating a broadcast memorial with Nazi propaganda is unserious and diminishes real historical evil.
September 22, 2025 at 2:44 PM
The use of Nazi fascism here is totally inappropriate. Disagreeing with coverage is fair, but equating a broadcast memorial with Nazi propaganda is unserious and diminishes real historical evil.
Can you point me to what you think makes Charlie Kirk a white supremacist?
September 22, 2025 at 2:42 PM
Can you point me to what you think makes Charlie Kirk a white supremacist?
Funny how people rage at MSNBC for airing a memorial but had no problem when the network glorified riots. The point of news is to cover history, not just your comfort zone.
September 22, 2025 at 4:08 AM
Funny how people rage at MSNBC for airing a memorial but had no problem when the network glorified riots. The point of news is to cover history, not just your comfort zone.
A “KKK rally” where the wife of the man who was assassinated forgives the killer?
September 22, 2025 at 4:03 AM
A “KKK rally” where the wife of the man who was assassinated forgives the killer?
That is not true. x.com/thatskaizen/...
x.com
September 21, 2025 at 6:43 AM
That is not true. x.com/thatskaizen/...
That’s not how the 5th works. It isn’t about someone having committed a crime - wrong word choice on your part - it protects anyone accused from being forced to incriminate themselves. Big difference.
September 15, 2025 at 5:15 AM
That’s not how the 5th works. It isn’t about someone having committed a crime - wrong word choice on your part - it protects anyone accused from being forced to incriminate themselves. Big difference.
No, not committed. Accused. You’re missing the point.
September 15, 2025 at 5:14 AM
No, not committed. Accused. You’re missing the point.
Such a predictable move. You attack the person instead of the argument. That’s exactly the kind of shallow debate Charlie stood against. If you have a counter to the point, make it. Otherwise, you’ve proved what a value
Charlie was, why he was needed and why he’ll be missed.
Charlie was, why he was needed and why he’ll be missed.
September 14, 2025 at 10:11 PM
Such a predictable move. You attack the person instead of the argument. That’s exactly the kind of shallow debate Charlie stood against. If you have a counter to the point, make it. Otherwise, you’ve proved what a value
Charlie was, why he was needed and why he’ll be missed.
Charlie was, why he was needed and why he’ll be missed.
His point is that there are similar trade-offs involved when it comes to protecting our rights against government overreach.
September 14, 2025 at 10:05 PM
His point is that there are similar trade-offs involved when it comes to protecting our rights against government overreach.
That’s not quite accurate. Here’s what he actually said (paraphrased): in a democracy there are trade-offs. For example, we accept tens of thousands of vehicle‐accident deaths each year, which could be reduced if driving were banned, yet we don’t ban driving.
September 14, 2025 at 10:05 PM
That’s not quite accurate. Here’s what he actually said (paraphrased): in a democracy there are trade-offs. For example, we accept tens of thousands of vehicle‐accident deaths each year, which could be reduced if driving were banned, yet we don’t ban driving.
The whole point of the Fifth is to prevent the government from twisting your words into guilt. If you think exercising that right = confession, then you’re proving exactly why the protection exists.
September 14, 2025 at 10:01 PM
The whole point of the Fifth is to prevent the government from twisting your words into guilt. If you think exercising that right = confession, then you’re proving exactly why the protection exists.
Invoking the Fifth Amendment doesn’t mean someone is guilty. “Incriminate” means providing evidence that could be used against you, even if you’re innocent.
September 14, 2025 at 10:01 PM
Invoking the Fifth Amendment doesn’t mean someone is guilty. “Incriminate” means providing evidence that could be used against you, even if you’re innocent.
I did watch him speak. Please show me where he propagated bigotry and violence against children?
September 14, 2025 at 9:59 PM
I did watch him speak. Please show me where he propagated bigotry and violence against children?
Nice try, but I don’t play team politics. I didn’t excuse or defend any crime. I pointed out a basic fact: invoking a constitutional right doesn’t equal guilt. If you can’t respond to that without lumping me into a ‘side,’ then you’re arguing with your own projection, not me.
September 14, 2025 at 9:18 PM
Nice try, but I don’t play team politics. I didn’t excuse or defend any crime. I pointed out a basic fact: invoking a constitutional right doesn’t equal guilt. If you can’t respond to that without lumping me into a ‘side,’ then you’re arguing with your own projection, not me.