So says one of the most highly rated comments at the New York Times article "Behind Charlie Kirk’s Spiritual Journey That Fused Christianity and Politics/Sunday’s memorial showcased how Mr. Kirk’s experience dovetailed with the broader story of American evangelicalism over the past decade."
That's gift link, so you can see the extent to which the NYT may have slanted the story — clearly, not enough for that commenter.
Charlie's approach was to engage his adversaries in endless, ongoing conversation — more and more speech. The commenter insists on an end to speech. That too is speech — saying you want an end to the speech on a topic you don't want to have to speak about. It has an eloquent implication: The listener may assume you don't have a powerful contradiction.
Posts
105 comments:
this is what a steady diet of corporate media has wrought, utter intellectual rot, understandably the pagan mindset would recoil, at anything like this,
there is no science behind the trans delusion, the other paths we have diverted on, took us of course,
Devo said it best (by analogy):
"Freedom of choice
Is what you got
Freedom from choice
Is what you want
(repeat)"
I can hear the Left singing this to the Right, especially regarding abortion. The Right needs such a catchy voice to counter the Left.
"a right wing provocateur known for his anti-LGBTQI, bigoted, anti-feminist, …"
I’ve sat through over 50 hours of Charlie Kirk’s videos as an ethnically Black American.
Not one racist word.
Not 1.
What Democrats do is cut snippets, strip context, and shove sound bites at the same gullible slob audience too lazy to fact-check.
That isn’t exposing racism .. it’s manufacturing lies to spark division."
We've found the religious fundamentalists and they aren't the Christians.
they prefer the preening screeds of a Hank Rogers, (Kendi) and other sophists, I don't know nor do I really care,
"Freedom of choice
Is what you got
Freedom from choice
Is what you want" is actually the gist of Dosteovsky's "The Grand Inquisitor."
If 'two weeks is enough' Kirk fans have another two days to celebrate his life. Can lefties count?
among many other things, they cannot,
i'm sure this person swallowed up the 'yes we can' destroy every foundation of this country,
What Conservative pundit has NOT been called raciss, sexist, bigot, homophobe by the Liberal/MSM? I think everyone has. Kirk was no different. And before he died the crazed Neo-Cons were calling him an "antisemite" for not supporting Bibi Netenyahu 100 percent.
Thats why I always this stupid lame Rightwing response of "Gosh, my Black friend listened to Charlie and he's no racist". Get out of the defensive crouch. Stop imagining these attacks and calls of "He's a racist" are made in good faith.
You're giving the left a weapon to beat everyone else with.
well facts are important, otherwise you end up Hamas's pied piper, don't be that guy,
Lets look at reality. No one was more against racism than Charlie Kirk. No one was more in favor of engaging the Left and talking to them. No one, except maybe some Jewish Zionists, loved Israel more.
And the result? Some Leftist murdered him. And Neo-cons were calling him an antisemite the day before he died. And now, the MSM is calling him a "racist". Yet people on Right still want to play the "Gosh gee whiz, he was no racist. See my five page Memo." Assumption being what? That if he WAS a racist, what he deserved to get kill? All this is playing the Lefts game. That's why they do it.
Biblical Context
“Jeremiah 6:10: The prophet Jeremiah laments that the people of Israel have "closed their ears" and that their ears are "uncircumcised," preventing them from hearing God's warnings.
Isaiah 6:9-10: In a similar passage, Isaiah is told by God to prophesy to a people whose hearts have become "calloused" and whose ears are "closed," so they will not understand or turn to God for healing.
Jesus' Teachings: Jesus also used this concept, explaining in the New Testament that he spoke in parables to fulfill this prophecy. Those who rejected his teachings did so because their hearts were closed, making them spiritually deaf to the truth.”
because people are misinformed by the Times the Bezos Post and other publications, they end up in this nasty place,
we don't live by lies, thats the difference between them and us,
Somebody once said, "You are entitled to your own opinions, but you aren't entitled to your own facts."
We could all get on the same page if NYT would be clear about it's allegiance. It's easy to see how the author of that popular comment was confused. He thought that the NYT was a stooge for Progressives.
Many of us think that also.
If NYT had a little panel on the front page to honestly declare what they are here for, it would help all of us.
https://donsurber.substack.com/p/charlies-job-was-bigger-than-president
"anti-LGBTQI, bigoted, anti-feminist, & pro-Christian nation rhetoric is beyond enough."
This characterization is factually wrong, but that's how the Left thinks.
One thing I want to know is how is it wrong - or anti-feminist - to think it is best for society and for women to get married and have babies.
I think it is very obvious that having a large population of children born out of wedlock hasn't worked out well for the families or society.
Two weeks is too much to tolerate the notion the other side should be heard or even discussed.
‘More curious than his choice to couch his racist, homophobic, and misogynistic grievances in evangelical terms is Kirk’s choice to wholeheartedly promote authoritarian views and arm his followers for a potential overthrow of democracy for a substantial stream of right wing largesse.’
The commenters there are quite rational…
'from a certain point of view' they have to push this agenda,
what are they smoking over there,
The reporter actually responded to a reader (under the NYT Picks):
@George One thing that's interesting to me about covering religion and spirituality is how many different experiences people have of it. What counts as "true faith" to one community differs to another. It is important in our coverage to listen to different communities and to put their beliefs in a broader context, to give readers tools to understand the complexity that is America, and especially its changing religious and political landscape.
It was not well received.
translation we want to lie about certain communities, and incite hatred against them, and affirm others,
Shorter commenter: "O wretched Man that I am, who shall deliver me from this turbulent dead guy?"
Original Mike,
What is the Xcancel dot com site? I want to click, but a tad leery.
When are they going to stop bringing up the FEDSURRECTION??
sigh that old chestnut got old years ago,
@CJinP: Well, I'm not certain, but I got the link from a Sarah Hoyt Instapundit post from last night. She will often post links to X and then post another link for those without an X account (the x-"less").
Here is here original post: https://instapundit.com/746103/
No doubt that commenter is on Bluesky as well with the rest of the Bluesheviks.
"x-less"
I found the comment that Obama presented a more progressive view of Christianity humorous. I also found the obvious concern about mixing Christianity with politics amusing given the common tactic of non-believing politicians and commentators quoting the Bible when they think it supports their positions or gives them a platform to accuse their opponents of hypocrisy.
blue scream probably
"What Democrats do is cut snippets, strip context, and shove sound bites at the same gullible slob audience too lazy to fact-check.
That isn’t exposing racism .. it’s manufacturing lies to spark division."
Sound like someone we know?
Oh, no!
Conservative Christian Nationalists are coming for out children!!!
LOL thank you Althouse. These people have absolutely no idea.
He wasn't anti-transgender spectrum, other than grooming or corruption of boys and girls. He was anti-class-disordered ideologies (e.g. racism, sexism, feminism). He was anti-Pro-Choice (i.e. selective, opportunistic religion) nation. He was anti-DEIsm (i.e. institutional, systemic class-disordered ideologies). He was unapologetically Christian and American: pro-Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of Happiness under a Constitution that mitigates authoritarian progress and Democratic/dictatorial rule in a "secular" society, a society dedicated to the People and our [unPlanned] Posterity. #HateLovesAbortion
Stop helping Trump & the gop turn him into a martyr for their cause.
Um ... we didn't turn him into a martyr, numbnuts.
wendybar said...
When are they going to stop bringing up the FEDSURRECTION??
For many of them, they'll use their dying breath to rehash it one last time.
Two weeks in and they still have no idea that the Kirk description spoon fed to them completely lacked any resemblance to reality. Having geeked themselves up on that fake hatred of the Straw Charlie character and stirred their real everpresent hatred for Republicans into a hot lance they lash out at...
The messenger who misled them about Charlie in the first place. To stop the paper from revealing any truth behind their burning Straw Man. No no no don't leak out that he loved people! NO!
Democratic Party Dead-enders.
they use words to inspire a killer.
Then scream no fair.
Political congruence ("=") is bjgoted. No discrimination for sexual orientation (e.g. pedophilia) is ethical and warped. Surgical, medical, and psycho-atric corruption of underage boys and girls is demented.
The left lie -they lie all they have is lies - they lie to themselves - the feed off more lies. They demand more lies to feed on.
NYT monitors comments. I would love to see the ones that they are not publishing because they are too over-the-top, even for NYT. That would give a truer reflection of today’s democrat left
I have zero interest reading what a pack of hive-mind democratic Party-religious-zealots are screaming about. I already know they are horrible people.
those are probably on blue scream and tiktok
"Please stop talking about someone who was murdered for trying to have discussions on college campuses. Because it might help Trump".
What is revealing is not just the comment but that it was the most highly rated. Mainstream America is shocked not only by Kirk's murder but how people have been reacting to it.
--He deserved it
--He said "hateful" things (which is code for he deserved it)
--It's okay to kill people who say things we regard as "hateful" (implied when they say Kirk deserved it)
--His wife and kids should be next (and yes people recorded themselves saying this)
--That memorial service was disgusting
They don't just disagree with us. They hate us and wish us harm. For years we thought we were in pretty good health, yeah our joints ache sometimes, our cholesteral could be lower. And one day we have a bad cough and go to the doctor and are told we have stage 3 cancer which has metastasized.
That's where we are.
Planned Parenthood umbrella corporation a.k.a. the wicked solution a.k.a human rites is the fourth choice. Keep women affordable, available, reusable, and taxable, and the "burden" of evidence sequestered in sanctuary states. #MeToo is the Choice.
I believe it was more the shooter who turned Kirk into a martyr, but that is just me...
There was also the Ukrainian refugee who was aborted with a similar method, if different weapon, motivated by Diversity (e.g. racism, sexism). His Choice to relieve a "burden".
they worship pagan gods, they privilege wiccans like the one in Arizona that called herself a moderate (name escapes me) in fact the only contempt was for the candidate who professed her belief in Christ, (and all the respectable sorts went along)
The same evil horrid demons who wanted to see Charlie murdered - and celebrated it - don't take responsibility in part for his murder.
Well Geez--I'm certain the writer was happy with Obama as The New Messiah, the New Light Worker (got that straight, Obama was one lazy guy) and the Saint of the Dims. Me--not so much.
oh without a doubt alongside the Fauci and Mueller candles,
Rick 67
The Democratic Religious Zealot Left:
--He deserved it
--He said "hateful" things (which is code for he deserved it)
--It's okay to kill people who say things we regard as "hateful" (implied when they say Kirk deserved it)
--His wife and kids should be next (and yes people recorded themselves saying this)
--That memorial service was disgusting
that.
Tyler Robinson isn’t the real problem here.
The real problem here is the people in the NYTs comment section.
"Please. Stop now." Lefties are for free speech, so they say, but not for speech that helps the other side. The very fact of Kirk speaking, the very gall of it, even regardless of content, is what progs opposed. Hence the repeated cancellation attempts, even in Utah, prior to the shooting. Kirk talk and talk about Kirk are intolerable. They need to be silenced. Speech from or for the right requires bullets from the left.
The white women in the green shirt in this video - this is who I imagine is every leftwing radical commenter at the NYT(D).
Kimmel back on TV tomorrow,Never watched him and surprised he didnt tell DISNEY take a hike but that almighty DOLLAR is a powerful incentive, Trumps buddy Carr IS GOING TO HAVE TO DO MORE, ok BACK TO OUR REGULAR PROGRAMMING, epstein files,the $50,000 bag man and Russia invading Poland while trump picks out his golf clubs Nothing new
“The simple step of a courageous person is not to take part in the lie. One word of truth outweighs the world.”
—— Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn
As usual. The comments over there are LIT!
Don't worry. Jimmy Kimmel got his show back, and he will start the hate again.....
"Two weeks of coverage for a right wing provocateur known for his anti-LGBTQI, bigoted, anti-feminist, & pro-Christian nation rhetoric is beyond enough."
How long did the Left go on about Floyd George and the others? IIRC, it was much longer than 2 weeks.
It's good to see them get uncomfortable with their own hatred.
Two weeks of prayer and commitments to be better people. Oh the horror!
"If it isn't tawdry, it isn't cool"
It wasn’t Trump and the GOP (note capitalization) who martyred Charle Kirk; it was Typer Robinson acting in response to Lefty extremist speech. Lefty extremist hate speech is still legal under the First Amendment,* but if you’re going to jump up and down and wet your pants in drooling glee as your political leaders sow the wind, you shouldn’t bitch about the whirlwind.
Or any contradiction at all.
___________________
* Or is it? Is the hate dished out by Lefty opinion-makers perhaps proscribed because of “incitement”?
Imagine a different value system and point of view being validated for two weeks! The horror!
Some people might change their minds about their basic assumptions. We can't allow that and are comforted in the thought that most won't.
The biggest threat of Charlie Kirk was his openness to engage -- Prove me Wrong -- with no insults, no screaming, no threats.
Will Kimmel double down on his snark?
"Please. Stop now. Stop printing articles about him. Stop helping Trump & the gop turn him into a martyr for their cause."
In other words....
"Please. Stop now. Stop printing articles about him. Now that we've killed him, we want you to forget about him."
"That too is speech — saying you want an end to the speech on a topic you don't want to have to speak about. It has an eloquent implication: The listener may assume you don't have a powerful contradiction."
So Althouse is fussing about some commenter on an NYT article, cause that commenter is trying to stop free speech.
How about using the position of POTUS to get money and speech control from law firms and media companies? That seems like more of a problem than some commenter responding to an NYT article.
Am I missing something especially important re this commenter, or is Althouse grasping at straws?
le Petomane said...
"How about using the position of POTUS to get money and speech control from law firms and media companies? That seems like more of a problem than some commenter responding to an NYT article.”
But enough about the Obama/Biden era.
I had a very surprising encounter with a neighbor this morning. TDS all the way. I steer clear of politics. I want peace with my neighbors. She knows I voted for Trump and every once in a while she makes disapproving comments. I don’t take the bait. She watched the memorial service. Turns out she hated all the nasty comments (especially AOC) directed at Charlie Kirk - mainly because he had left a widow with 2 little kids. And she thought Democrats should have at least waited until after the funeral. And she was impressed with Trump! I couldn’t believe it. I don’t think she’s going to become a Republican but she wanted me to know that the memorial service wasn’t hate filled but very respectful. Maybe some questioning of her news sources is about to begin.
I can’t even comment what I want to comment. So there.
“Charlie's approach was to engage his adversaries in endless, ongoing conversation — more and more speech.”
As a lifelong atheist, I disagreed with Charlie about some important things. But I don’t doubt that he was a good guy, trying to do good things. I’m sad to see him go. Especially because I don’t think his conversations ever changed anyone’s mind about anything.
"I had a very surprising encounter with a neighbor this morning. TDS all the way. I steer clear of politics."
Similar deal here. After Kirk's murder, I was asked if I'd heard of it and said "Yes, I have. It's terrible that someone who was just trying to talk to people was killed." The response was "I've heard he's made racist comments." Not interested in debating the "racist" claim, I just said "I don't think people should be killed because they might have said something someone else found to be disagreeable. What do you think?"
New topic after that.
I have to say, I'm awfully disappointed how many people segued right into a "But he said something disagreeable" argument almost without even thinking about what they were saying rather than condemning the killer.
"I have to say, I'm awfully disappointed how many people segued right into a "But he said something disagreeable" argument almost without even thinking about what they were saying rather than condemning the killer."
I 100% agree you need to condemn the killer. So you were talking to horrible people, since they don't condemn murder.
But after everyone does condemn the killer, is it okay to talk about what Kirk did when he was alive?
After people condemn the undeniable evil of the murder of Kirk (likewise all the other murder victims in the US), then what?
There are three options: 1) people must praise Kirk, 2) people must say nothing if they have nothing nice to say, 3) people can criticize Kirk if they disagree with things he said.
Seems like only one option is free speech. And technically, it's even free speech to jump to the third option w/o condemning the murder. That's the POS route which is not illegal in America. IMHO.
Free speech and religion are First Amendment things. What is happening, however, is that the elimination of disagreement is the grand push to make the President and the Supreme Court all-powerful. The American Oligarchy began with the 2010 Supreme Court decision in Citizens United v. FEC, which allowed corporations to spend unlimited money on political advertisements, significantly changing their role in political financing. So whatever the president wants is now influenced by his billionaire buddies. Unfortunately, these same oligarchs are turning over cash rewards to lifetime Justices, as well.
Article II, Section 1, Clause 1, "The Vesting Clause" is now dead.
FTR, I'm not saying that being a POS should be illegal. We would be a garbage country if it was illegal. Plus the comment section at Althouse would get really short.
Snatch!
Tyler Robinson isn’t the real problem here.
The real problem here is the people in the NYTs comment section.
The shooter is very definitely a real problem. But I agree that so many of our fellow citizens' approving of what he did and wanting to see more of the same is a bigger problem, for more people. Even for themselves - how incredibly corrosive those feelings are.
"But after everyone does condemn the killer, is it okay to talk about what Kirk did when he was alive?"
Sure. Why not? Of course, lots of people will misrepresent what he's said/done (they already have), so be careful who you trust when you get to that point.
I have already stopped talking to those people forever
I haven''t seen any solid rebuttals of Kirk's beliefs. Name-calling doesn't count.
"I haven''t seen any solid rebuttals of Kirk's beliefs. Name-calling doesn't count."
That's the mega maga American Dream! Nobody is allowed to mention things he said that were bad.
You can thank DJT for that! As if you needed any more reasons to worship your god.
A troll has been offered the opportunity to supply a rebuttal, but has chosen name-calling instead.
"A troll has been offered the opportunity to supply a rebuttal, but has chosen name-calling instead."
The left doesn't want a discussion. They want you to shut up.
See: Charlie Kirk
le Douanier said...
Seems like only one option is free speech. And technically, it's even free speech to jump to the third option w/o condemning the murder. That's the POS route which is not illegal in America. IMHO.
You supported censoring us.
Nobody gives a shit about your whining. You don't deserve first amendment protections.
tcrosse
We are not allowed to bring up his comments re gays, gals, blacks, and whatever. If you really care, you can find them with google.
I'm not going to list them for you.
Somehow, to you, my restraint means that I'm a name caller. Up is down in the DJT mega maga mind.
Sheesh.
How about the NYT commenters stop shooting people and making them martyrs. Could we please try that? And asking too much here, but maybe Botfly knowing the subject he writes about? I'll accept just stopping the shooting.
Picture couple of days ago of Kimmle driving alone in his car.
Dislike him or not, gotta give him credit for facing danger of attack by Proud Boys, buggalo, 4chan, q, religious zealots, Trump lovers, Tea Party, Magats, NRA, far right republicans, heterosexuals
and, climate change.
If anyone here has ever heard Charlie Kirk say any ' anti-LGBTQI, bigoted, anti-feminist, & pro-Christian nation rhetoric' please post a link to proof he said such things.
Somehow I doubt anyone has proof he said such. And just saying those are his views is not proof.
Jan 6 was the very definition of a "mostly peaceful protest"
"Somehow I doubt anyone has proof he said such. And just saying those are his views is not proof."
With the DJT government et. al. looking for scalps no 75+ IQ person should, in public, restate the bad things Kirk said. Restating the bad things he's said is being equated with being in favor of his murder because evil people want to use his corpse for political advantage. E.g. folks in these threads have called me pro-murder re Kirk even though I've only promoted anti-murder re Kirk. Beyond condemning his murder I've made sure I avoid harshly criticizing him in anyway.
It's not worth it for me to itemize the worst things Kirk has said. If I was a gay/gal/minority I'd have a more direct connection w/ the folks he attacked, and then maybe I'd specifically jabber about the bad things he's said. But I'm not from the groups he attacked. Plus I'm rich, and hot (just sayin'). I'm safe as safe can be. In Kirk's dreamworld I'll make out like a bandit.
I'm guilty about that because I grew up as a Clinton hating conservative that was inculcated by Christian schooling.
Nowadays DJT is WJC, but DJT is has lower character and he is dumber.
BTW one of the best Althouse posts ever was when she wanted to take a closer look at breasts re WJC. IMHO.
https://althouse.blogspot.com/2006/09/lets-take-closer-look-at-those-breasts.html
“ "Please. Stop now. Stop printing articles about him. Stop helping Trump & the gop turn him into a martyr for their cause."
What do we call people that believe this quote, free speech advocates? Anti censorship? As usual the average NYT reader defaults back to anti first amendment censorship once they have trolled everyone else about how they are for free speech, my God what transparent idiots. Their bedrock principles change day by day.
I pulled out a particularly funny Althouse comment from the link I left in this thread. For background: this comment came from Althouse way down the linked thread after she'd been blasting the thread with a bunch of comments, it seems like a dozen plus. Nowadays, folks may not be familiar with the bloggress going hard in the comments, but she definitely has done so in the past, such as:
"Mackan: "Althouse's aggressive tone"
You have not yet seen Althouse's aggressive tone. This is pretty fun-loving. I've been striving for a relatively light tone here and emphasizing how funny I found Jessica. I'm aiming a few light stabbing pokes at Clinton. But, trust me, if I wanted to be aggressive... it would be really different from this."
Oh good, another one to skip. Bye, ledou, thanks for playing.
le Douanier said...
"Somehow I doubt anyone has proof he said such. And just saying those are his views is not proof."
With the DJT government et. al. looking for scalps no 75+ IQ person should, in public, restate the bad things Kirk said.
You never actually post what he says. You post dishonest clips pulled out of thousands of hours of content.
I read your posts. You really do not understand logic in a basic way. You are kinda dumb.
Thanks for sharing these ideas about using marble in interior design.
landscape design Germany
garden landscaping Berlin
outdoor living spaces Germany
landscape architecture Munich
sustainable landscaping Germany
modern garden ideas Germany
landscape contractors Germany
urban green spaces Germany
hardscape solutions Germany
landscape renovation Germany
Trump and the GOP are not turning Kirk into a martyr. A bullet fired by someone intolerant of speech, has already done that. Trump and the GOP are merely recognizing reality; Kirk is a martyr.
"Two weeks of coverage for a right wing provocateur known for his anti-LGBTQI, bigoted, anti-feminist, & pro-Christian nation rhetoric is beyond enough."
Ah, the left wing freakout over being a believing Christian and a patriot
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.