The Real timschochet

There is nothing wrong with this statement and I actually appreciate it. But why did you reserve it for a guy criticizing Trump and MAGA? Why didn’t you respond to the ten days of statements from literally hundreds on the right, both here and in the public arena, blaming liberals for Charlie Kirk’s murder?

Hopefully not.

Sounds like an AOC speech.

Yet more interference with capitalism and the free market. Yet another effective tax on the consumer. Hooray for socialism I guess.

A big part of the problem. What does “we think” mean? Who thinks? Who makes that decision? What if we get it wrong? Is your response “oh well?” I don’t want government killing people based on “we think”. As an aside: you’re using the word “murder” incorrectly. A murder is a wrongful killing by definition. Your position is that these are justified killings therefore you should write “we should kill”.

Two of the best restaurants I’ve been to in my life: Oliver’s Osteria in Laguna Beach. Fiskbaren in Copenhagen.

Well for one thing they both regard transgenders as normal people who aren’t mentally ill. Unlike most of the morons here. For another, both have very strict gun laws (though Laguna Beach is limited in this regard by the Federal government refusing to enforce common sense gun restrictions.) Both places are woke and filled with good people. (Also as an aside: both places have some of the most beautiful women on the planet.)

By the way while I don’t believe this applies to me I do appreciate you’re being willing to criticize Trump in this context.

1. Laguna is a very woke community. (As compared to Newport Beach which is very Trumpy). Newport Beach is beautiful but has all sorts of unpleasant people living there. Laguna on the other hand is warm and welcoming. Black Lives Matter signs everywhere, rainbow flags everywhere, pro-amnesty, pro-trans. It’s a hippie paradise and a great place to be. 2. You ask about specific policies. It’s certainly a sanctuary city for undocumented people. But beyond that I can’t tell you. All I can point out is that it’s had liberal leadership for years and there is almost no crime. But I am NOT arguing that liberal leadership creates less crime. I am simply pointing out how absurd it is for conservatives to claim that liberal leadership creates MORE crime. Rather than for me to disprove, that would up for you guys to prove. And you can’t. You can certainly point to high crime areas run by liberals. But if those areas were run by conservatives there would be just as much crime. 3. Pointing out the percentage of any given race is simply racism. It is historically very clear that any race of people will create the same level of crime given the same economic and societal conditions. If you had an all white population living in Chicago with the same economic and social conditions you would have the same number of shootings, same amount of violence. If you had an all black community living in Laguna Beach with high incomes matching the folks living there now it would be just as safe. If you don’t believe this you’re a bigot.

Actually I’m not.

I’m not in favor but I don’t care.

Yes I did. Proud of that.

What hate?

Well you’re welcome to link a post in which I supported honoring George Floyd.

When and if you disagree with something I actually wrote here rather than a straw argument I will be happy to respond to you.

This post is deliberately ignorant of the actual facts.

I’m not actually.

Just an embarrassing, ridiculous, and probably disingenuous statement. I say probably because I don’t believe you’re a bigot or a racist. That’s a compliment to you. But how to reconcile that with your amazing and absurd statement here? Because OF COURSE there is everything wrong with Kirk’s statements: forget liberal or conservative, no moral person could read the stuff I quoted earlier (courtesy of the Guardian) and fail to find them problematic. I’m left with 3 alternatives: 1. You’re simply ignorant of what he said (doubtful because at this point it’s been all over the news plus I’ve directly exposed you to it here.) 2. You’re simply trolling, trying to get a reaction. In your case this is always at least partly the case IMO. 3. You are so invested in winning the partisan game between conservatives and liberals, so intent on being right, that you automatically defend voices on “your side” and can’t admit even to yourself that they might be in the wrong. I think it’s mostly #3. I think you’re being dishonest but mainly to yourself. And no I’m not going to engage in breaking down Kirk’s statements so that you can find legalistic or false context explanations (as you love to do.) I’m not interested in getting that deep into his ugliness. You want to believe it’s all OK and part of normal conservatism that’s your call. But it isn’t either.

I would certainly have voted against this. If it had simply been a bill condemning political violence that would have been fine. But I am not going to vote for a bill that honors Charlie Kirk. He didn’t deserve to die but he was not a good person. He spewed hateful, bigoted. ignorant and dangerous rhetoric on a variety of subjects. He had the absolute right to do so. But I don’t want my tax money honoring that. Disgraceful.

From Reagan to these clowns? How did we get here?

First off sorry I missed this post after I went to sleep last night. Second what I wrote is that in the past I’ve been guilty of IGNORING political violence from the left. That is NOT the same as endorsing it. I don’t and never have. What I have done is drawn attention to violence from the right and not drawn attention to violence from the left. That was wrong of me and I acknowledged it. Now I’m not quite sure why you continue to harp on this. You know, or you should know by now, that I don’t endorse violence. So what’s the point? Are you that desperate to catch me with the “l”, as you wrote?

I used to laugh too but in truth it’s really not a laughing matter. As I wrote yesterday @Strike is not only constantly wrong but a lot of what he writes is dangerous ignorance.

It has everything to do with it.

Your arguments are just lame excuses. The head of the FCC threatened Disney: “We can do this the easy way or the hard way.” Trump himself bragged about it afterwards. You can try to pretend this was self inflicted, or justified. Buy you’re wrong as usual

It still works for decent people. It may never have worked for you.