He should have cried for the school kids who died the same day as Kirk and for the innocent people dying in gaza, he should have made a big deal out of gun violence and gun access while talking about every shooting except Kirk as a tongue in cheek way of trolling them for their gun loving, racist martyr died by a gun at the hands of a white guy
No, include Kirk. Make it more awkward for them to claim it’s leftist issue. Make sure they can’t play the victim and being pissy and petty about it looks unambiguously a dick move.
Bernie had it right, recognize all the victims.
Be decent human beings.
It is… Interesting that a man that claimed guns were worth some innocent deaths getting killed by a gun, but ultimately his vitriolic rhetoric is best countered with being better. His death brought dangerous power and danger to his words that requires careful handling, would have been better if he had lived as a ripe target for mockery, maybe having experienced a humbling experience without him getting martyred.
Of those one could argue lethal violence ends up being the only realistic option for, I would not have included Kirk. He said vile words but was granted no actual authority of his own.
Yeah, when he started (fake) crying I was expecting him to pretend it was about Kirk but actually make it about children killed in school shootings. It was far more of an apology than it should have been.
Also, I hate the line (that’s often repeated) that “violence is never the answer.” OK. If that’s true, I guess we should stop celebrating those who fought in WWII, and soldiers in general? How can you celebrate war while also holding the opinion that all violence is wrong? They obviously both can’t be true at the same time, and we all know which one isn’t true.
They celebrate warriors at least, but many celebrate war too. I would say rightfully in many cases. Going to war to stop Fascists is a just war, and should be celebrated, for example.
The issue is just they say violence is never justified to protect the status quo, but when it’s useful for them then it’s totally fine, and they don’t address that contradiction. It’s obviously just a thought terminating cliche, and it’s wrong.
I agree with the idea of your comment, but to be fair, he gets choked up quite often. This isn’t a negative judgement, it’s always about things where that’s the correct response. At least until now.
He shouldn’t have…
Honestly I was a little pissed at how apologetic he was.
For real. I turned it off when he started crying for the dead fascist.
He should have cried for the school kids who died the same day as Kirk and for the innocent people dying in gaza, he should have made a big deal out of gun violence and gun access while talking about every shooting except Kirk as a tongue in cheek way of trolling them for their gun loving, racist martyr died by a gun at the hands of a white guy
No, include Kirk. Make it more awkward for them to claim it’s leftist issue. Make sure they can’t play the victim and being pissy and petty about it looks unambiguously a dick move.
Bernie had it right, recognize all the victims.
Be decent human beings.
It is… Interesting that a man that claimed guns were worth some innocent deaths getting killed by a gun, but ultimately his vitriolic rhetoric is best countered with being better. His death brought dangerous power and danger to his words that requires careful handling, would have been better if he had lived as a ripe target for mockery, maybe having experienced a humbling experience without him getting martyred.
Of those one could argue lethal violence ends up being the only realistic option for, I would not have included Kirk. He said vile words but was granted no actual authority of his own.
Why do people keep saying this? Every time I look this up, it says students were injured, not killed. It’s been very confusing.
Yeah, when he started (fake) crying I was expecting him to pretend it was about Kirk but actually make it about children killed in school shootings. It was far more of an apology than it should have been.
Also, I hate the line (that’s often repeated) that “violence is never the answer.” OK. If that’s true, I guess we should stop celebrating those who fought in WWII, and soldiers in general? How can you celebrate war while also holding the opinion that all violence is wrong? They obviously both can’t be true at the same time, and we all know which one isn’t true.
I don’t think people celebrate war in general. They celebrate the sacrifices made by people who fight in that war.
But, ya, violence is definitely necessary at times.
They celebrate warriors at least, but many celebrate war too. I would say rightfully in many cases. Going to war to stop Fascists is a just war, and should be celebrated, for example.
The issue is just they say violence is never justified to protect the status quo, but when it’s useful for them then it’s totally fine, and they don’t address that contradiction. It’s obviously just a thought terminating cliche, and it’s wrong.
Yeah, I lost a lot of respect for him. He pandred a LOT to the right.
He did nothing wrong, yet all the extrapolation into how he felt about Charlie (who wasn’t a YOUNG man, but the way) was pathetic.
It felt highly defensive, and it was inappropriate. How many times has he been choked up about kids dying in a school shooting on air?
I agree with the idea of your comment, but to be fair, he gets choked up quite often. This isn’t a negative judgement, it’s always about things where that’s the correct response. At least until now.