uncle bernard

Yeah, I "love" that the government is moving to use his death as an excuse to crack down on left-wing political speech. I "love" that the president got on TV and demonized the left as murderous criminals. His death is a disaster. I don't think he was a good person, but his death is a tragedy in a macro-political sense, but also for his family. By all accounts he was a great husband and father, so I feel very deeply for his wife and children. The videos of him speaking of his daughter and of her running to him are very tough to watch. People are complicated.

Kirk did exactly this actually. Didn't get into West Point and instead of going to another college - which if he was actually qualified for West Point, he would have gotten into most schools - he befriended a wealthy 70-year old conservative activist who bankrolled his early career, which he first built by claiming that "He would have gone to West Point, but an unqualified minority took his spot" with zero evidence (and if you know anything about how college admissions work, you know this is ludicrous). It's actually not even clear Kirk ever officially applied to college or was that interested in attending. He was already starting his career as an online right wing influencer during high school.

It's not a trans kid and all of a sudden you guys don't seem to care about who the shooter is. Hmmm.. By the way, the other shooting from Wednesday, the school shooting in Colorado, was done by an online neo-nazi who idolized the Columbine shooters.

Shane Gillis is very funny (and left-wing) and again, the point of this joke, runs completely counter to your point. It's exactly why top-down, generalized thinking falls apart. Things are more complicated.

What is this data you speak of? And I gave you concrete examples of how leftists do value individualism and merit and you just ignored them. Hell, all the woke stuff you hate is founded on individualism. Not to mention your understanding of wrestling is so shallow. It can be those things for some people, but it's also fundamentally a game that is fun to play. And it's a game where creativity thrives. Playing and creativity aren't conservative values, stereotypically. Hard work is valuable in wrestling. It helps you improve. But I didn't fall in love with wrestling because it made me work hard. That's something I value independent of wrestling and it's something that applies to almost everything in life. Football rewards hard work. Chess rewards hard work. Reading rewards hard work. I fell in love with wrestling because it's fun. I loved competing and working out the puzzles of positioning while my opponent was trying to do the same. I loved crafting an arsenal of moves that fit my natural physical skills and traits.

Dressed as a kid getting a piggy back ride from Trump here: Could be genuine or ironic like the first one.

Dressed as a groyper for Halloween which means he either is one or is sufficiently online enough to know what they are. Either one explains why Kirk would be a target for him. No more visible face in hyper-online political discourse.

They were the foundation of your argument and you insisted that they were valid when people pointed them out. Glad you've decided to stop dying on the hill though.

You still going to insist it was a trans person?

Straight white kid with a retired cop, now minister, father who grew up loving guns and wrote borderline homophobic messages on the bullets. (Also potentially donated to Trump. Still waiting on confirmation that it's the same Tyler Robinson, so set that aside for now.) I was a lot closer than you lol.

I know it's not a 30-06. I was just showing a picture of their bullets as an example. But yes, I jumped the gun. Where I'm different from most on here is I'll admit I'm wrong when new information comes to light.

Yes, seeing this now, so I'll retract. Based on those messages, I did get one thing right. This is an internet-brained person. Potentially a left-wing troll instead of a right-wing troll.

As I posted a few minutes ago, nothing makes you madder than when people post what you say you want them to say. I posted that this was a terrible event. You want me to celebrate the murder because then you can get mad and that makes you feel good (I noticed that spelling of "cum" btw). The only sick fu#k here is you.

What is sick about that?

Good luck! They've already walked back the "ammunition had pro-trans messages" leak because it turns out it was probably a dumb cop not realizing that a very common brand of ammo has "TRN" stamped on it because the manufacturer is named Turan.

It does if you understand the dynamics of the online right. That's why my money is on a groyper. The exact type of young right winger that typically commits violence AND there is a long history of strife with Charlie Kirk specifically. For the groyper movement, Kirk is the face of the "fake white nationalist" who sells out his own race by not being racist enough.

I'm glad you're starting to see the flaws in your worldview. "When you have a prevailing dogma [a stereotype in your case]....and you present facts which take chunks out of this dogma, then you present people with a problem. They can either modify their worldview to include the new knowledge, or discount the new as 'bogus.'" That is exactly what you did in this thread. You presented the common stereotypes that align with your priors as fact and rejected the ones that don't align with your priors as dangerous and incorrect. There's no more justification for "liberals are lazy/don't work hard" than there is for "conservatives are racist." But one is dogma for you and the other isn't. And that's where your thinking stops. The real world never actually comes into play.

Good luck with this with Jimmy. No matter how many times you say what he wants you to say, he'll still pretend you didn't say it. In fact, he actually gets even madder when you do say the right thing.

It's amazing seeing all these people for whom Charlie Kirk was so important and beloved be seemingly totally unaware of the things Charlie Kirk actually said.

Officially placing my bet on a far-right groyper who also happened to have some interaction with an undercover FBI agent (who likely played a part in his radicalization).

Conservatives also mostly do not like wrestling. It is an unpopular sport. Again, if we're going to use @jross generalizing logic, we should accept the following as true: Conservatives do not like wrestling? How do we know that? Because most conservatives do not watch, follow, or support wrestling. The hole in that logic is obvious. The reason most conservatives do not like wrestling is because most people don't like wrestling. But that's the exact kind of logical hole that @jross misses over and over again.

We can do this all day. You've already acknowledged your initial question was stupid, though you haven't realized that yet. You are unable to see past your ideological blinders. You think leftists are undisciplined, lazy, not committed to personal responsibility, etc...because you have an extremely narrow conception of what those things mean and how they can manifest. Let's use an extreme example: The Palestine protestors on campus. It takes tremendous discipline to camp in one spot for weeks, foregoing fun social activities and comfort, all while facing serious personal and professional consequences for doing it. It takes a lot of hard work to organize such a venture. It requires organizing supplies, shelter, and people to act as one cohesive unit. It's incredibly tough and gritty to stand in the face of police officers in riot gear as they try to strike you and drag you away. Imagine the discipline it takes to stand in place while your lungs fill with tear gas. And why were they doing this? Because they felt personally responsible, as citizens of the country to funds and arms Israel, for Israel's actions in Gaza. That's an abundance of personal responsibility! You are narrow-minded, and I mean that very literally. You don't understand how core principles can manifest in different ways.

Do leftists support personal responsibility ChatGPT said: Yes, many leftists do support personal responsibility—but they may define and prioritize it differently than conservatives or libertarians. Here's how personal responsibility is viewed from a leftist perspective: What Leftists Generally Agree With: You should take care of yourself and others (e.g., health, education, financial planning). People are accountable for their actions (e.g., you can't just blame society for everything). Personal responsibility and social responsibility go hand in hand. The Nuance: Structural Context Matters Where leftists often diverge from conservatives is how much weight they put on systemic factors that influence personal outcomes. Examples: A conservative might say: “If you're poor, it's because you didn’t work hard enough.” A leftist might respond: “Hard work matters—but access to education, healthcare, and fair wages plays a big role too.” In other words: Leftists believe people should take responsibility—but they also believe society should provide fair conditions so that personal responsibility is actually possible and meaningful. Key Leftist Beliefs Related to Responsibility: Principle Leftist View on Responsibility Healthcare People should manage their health, but access must be equal. Education Study hard, but quality schools should be available to all. Crime & Justice Actions have consequences, but root causes should be addressed. Poverty Budgeting matters, but wages, housing, and social safety nets matter too. Summary: Leftists do support personal responsibility, but they don’t see it in isolation. They emphasize that individual effort is important, but fair social structures are essential to make that effort meaningful and achievable. Do leftists support personal responsibillity ChatGPT said: Yes, many leftists do support personal responsibility—but they may define and prioritize it differently than conservatives or libertarians. Here's how personal responsibility is viewed from a leftist perspective: What Leftists Generally Agree With: You should take care of yourself and others (e.g., health, education, financial planning). People are accountable for their actions (e.g., you can't just blame society for everything). Personal responsibility and social responsibility go hand in hand. The Nuance: Structural Context Matters Where leftists often diverge from conservatives is how much weight they put on systemic factors that influence personal outcomes. Examples: A conservative might say: “If you're poor, it's because you didn’t work hard enough.” A leftist might respond: “Hard work matters—but access to education, healthcare, and fair wages plays a big role too.” In other words: Leftists believe people should take responsibility—but they also believe society should provide fair conditions so that personal responsibility is actually possible and meaningful. Key Leftist Beliefs Related to Responsibility: Principle Leftist View on Responsibility Healthcare People should manage their health, but access must be equal. Education Study hard, but quality schools should be available to all. Crime & Justice Actions have consequences, but root causes should be addressed. Poverty Budgeting matters, but wages, housing, and social safety nets matter too. Summary: Leftists do support personal responsibility, but they don’t see it in isolation. They emphasize that individual effort is important, but fair social structures are essential to make that effort meaningful and achievable. If you're looking at a specific policy or issue, I can break down how personal responsibility is seen through a leftist lens in that context. You said: Do leftists value discipline and hard work? ChatGPT said: Yes, many leftists do value discipline and hard work—but again, the way they frame these values often differs from conservative or capitalist narratives. What Leftists Generally Believe About Discipline and Hard Work: Value Leftist View Discipline Important for personal growth, education, activism, and solidarity. Hard Work Respected—but shouldn't be exploited or used to justify inequality. Key Differences in Emphasis: 1. Hard work should not equal exploitation Leftists tend to reject the idea that hard work justifies extreme wealth gaps or low wages: “If a farm worker toils 12 hours a day, and a CEO works 8, why does only one get a livable wage?” They argue that hard work is everywhere, but rewards aren't fairly distributed. 2. Discipline is often tied to collective action In leftist movements (like labor unions, anti-racist organizing, or climate activism), discipline is essential: Staying committed to long-term goals Organizing protests or strikes Building institutions (e.g., co-ops, community orgs) So while the language of discipline may be less emphasized in mainstream leftist culture than, say, in military or business culture, the practice of it is absolutely there. Countering Misconceptions: Myth: “Leftists want handouts and don’t want to work.” Reality: Most leftists support public investment, fair wages, and dignity for all work—not laziness or dependency. Summary: Leftists do value discipline and hard work, but they also: Critique how capitalism rewards some labor over others unfairly Believe everyone deserves dignity and basic needs, regardless of job type See discipline as part of sustained, collective efforts for justice—not just individual success

We know quite a bit about Thomas Crooks. It just doesn't track with the juicy headline people want, so they ignored it. He had an extended descent into mental illness. Father reported finding him dancing and talking to himself in his room. His internet search history shows him researching severe depression. Started buying guns and explosives. Wrote an essay on the evils of divisive political campaigns for class. Here's some good reading: https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/08/us/thomas-crooks-trump-shooter-butler-rally.html?searchResultPosition=1 I think the general takeaway is this kid had fairly middle of the road politics (came from a mixed politics family and peers report moderate opinions) and generally disliked how hostile American politics have become. Then he suffered a mental breakdown of sorts that eventually led to violent inclinations. The most divisive politician of his lifetime visited his hometown and, after the effects of the mental issues, it "made sense" to him to kill him. The golf-course assassin's case is more clear. He had a long criminal history and was a generally strange guy. Voted for Trump in 2016. Hated him by the end of his first term. Became obsessed with the war in Ukraine (tried to volunteer to fight for Ukraine). That is his stated motivation for the assassination attempt. This actually is a another good example of why your reliance on stereotypes is dangerous. The *accuracy* of your stereotypes is only as good as your knowledge of the world and you seem to have very little drive to learn about the world (lack of personal responsibility imo). All of this stuff has been out there for along time and is easily accessible. Instead, you just assumed because you hadn't seen it, it didn't exist.

That is the foundational premise of your original question. If you understood that not all leftists are the same, you would never ask how leftists can like wrestling. You think you're including far more nuance in your use of stereotypes than you actually are.