We are all Charlie.

[eric_erosfan]

In memoriam of all this trash MAGAts left behind.

https://www.reddit.com/r/therewasanattempt/s/NlZqGsHpKD

Holy shit. What the hell did they do? Camp out?

 

[Saint_Ann]

Did they bus in attendises

 

[Lazaran]

In memoriam of all this trash MAGAts left behind.

https://www.reddit.com/r/therewasanattempt/s/NlZqGsHpKD

So the typical MAGAt is on par with homeless individuals suffering from a mental disease or defect???



That ^ tracks…



We. Told. Them. So.

 

[LilKitKat]

Well, this "come say nice things about Kirk thread" sure went to shit when the lefties started showing up. But that's what we've come to expect.

How about this:

Looked like a wayyyyyy more widely attended event than Donnie's inaugurations!

 

[Saint_Ann]

How about this:

Looked like a wayyyyyy more widely attended event than Donnie's inaugurations!

And way, way more than attended Harris' inauguration. Lol.

 

[dmallord]

Did they bus in attendises

Air dropped a lot of them as well.

 

[DeluxAuto]

So the typical MAGAt is on par with homeless individuals suffering from a mental disease or defect???



That ^ tracks…



We. Told. Them. So.

They're a disgusting bunch of vile degenerates.

 

[Lazaran]

They're a disgusting bunch of vile degenerates.

In a word “Deplorables”.

Hillary was soooooo right on the mark.





We. Told. Them. So.

 

[coati]

Here's what I learned from this thread:

1) Erika Kirk spoke about forgiveness, something that is rare for MAGAts.

2) The Orange Pig promoted hate, something that is common among MAGAts.

3) BabyBoomer reminded us that We Are All Charlie Cook.

 

[HisArpy]

That you believe that says more about you than about Kirk.
Don't take my word for it, watch him get his head handed to him by a university student here:

She gave him the shuck and jive about what a woman is.

It sounds good to you numbskulls, but it's the shuck and jive where she tosses everything into the mix while making it sound clued up.

Whether you agree or disagree with her definitions and style, what you cannot disagree with is the FACT that she took the proffered opportunity to stand there with a microphone in her hand, in front of an audience, and debate Kirk on an issue of her choice with intelligence and courage.

Something most of you leftists fuckwits aren't capable of doing.

 

[LilKitKat]

She gave him the shuck and jive about what a woman is.

It sounds good to you numbskulls, but it's the shuck and jive where she tosses everything into the mix while making it sound clued up.

its ok if you didnt understand her...for those of you who dont understand how a woman can speak clearly and intelligently, we can have her use picture books or even building blocks with pictures on them for you next time.

 

[HisArpy]

its ok if you didnt understand her...for those of you who dont understand how a woman can speak clearly and intelligently, we can have her use picture books or even building blocks with pictures on them for you next time.

I don't think you actually understood a word she said. I'm not sure you even listened.

I think you saw "Charlie Kirk" and immediately defaulted to the narrative like a good little stooge.

 

[Baztrachian]

You'd do no such thing.

The problem with people who grow up in cloistered little suburban bubbles is that you think everyone outside of your bubble is just like you. And they are not.

Here's a heartwarming story about a thirteen year old migrant who was just dreaming about a better life...

 

[LilKitKat]

I don't think you actually understood a word she said. I'm not sure you even listened.

I think you saw "Charlie Kirk" and immediately defaulted to the narrative like a good little stooge.

actually watched and listened to the whole thing.
the difference is stark

you are nothing like Kirk. He listened to her and tried to offer counter evidence to support his claims.

You just didnt agree with her opening remarks, assume its all the typical Trump tactics of distract/deny and make some lame ass comment about a friendly question.

I dont think she OBLITERATED him. But I do think she made clear points that he couldnt overcome.

 

[HisArpy]

actually watched and listened to the whole thing.
the difference is stark

you are nothing like Kirk. He listened to her and tried to fofer counter evidence to support his claims.

You just didnt agree with her opening remarks, assume its all the typical Trump tactics of distract/deny and make some lame ass comment about a friendly question.

I dont think she OBLITERATED him. But I do think she made clear points that he couldnt overcome.

I think she did a good job in debating someone on an issue. I think her points were somewhat occluded by the programming she'd been given, as well as the "help" of her friends to point her on the path of illogic during her preparation for the debate, but she was able to articulate them despite her nervousness.

I never claimed to be anything like Charlie Kirk. He was charismatic and charming and his life lifted the hopes/dreams/spirits of others. But here's the thing; I'm not trying to ride on his coattails. I'm not trying to be like him. Instead, I stand or fall based on my own words and deeds and I do it proudly instead of, like you and the rest of the forum trolls, sniping from the weeds with hateful and self loathing remarks full of nothing of substance at all.

 

[DeluxAuto]

She gave him the shuck and jive about what a woman is.

It sounds good to you numbskulls, but it's the shuck and jive where she tosses everything into the mix while making it sound clued up.

Whether you agree or disagree with her definitions and style, what you cannot disagree with is the FACT that she took the proffered opportunity to stand there with a microphone in her hand, in front of an audience, and debate Kirk on an issue of her choice with intelligence and courage.

Something most of you leftists fuckwits aren't capable of doing.

According to her husband, she's not qualified to run the foundation, Derpy.

 

[HisArpy]

View attachment 2566345

According to her husband, she's not qualified to run the foundation, Derpy.

Then she will cause it's eventual failure. And failure is something you're well acquainted with, seeming as it's basically your entire life.

 

[Lazaran]

She gave him the shuck and jive about what a woman is.

It sounds good to you numbskulls, but it's the shuck and jive where she tosses everything into the mix while making it sound clued up.

Whether you agree or disagree with her definitions and style, what you cannot disagree with is the FACT that she took the proffered opportunity to stand there with a microphone in her hand, in front of an audience, and debate Kirk on an issue of her choice with intelligence and courage.

Something most of you leftists fuckwits aren't capable of doing.

She REKT Charlie; full stop.
Any HONEST observer would agree.

Charlie’s ridiculous contentions and his ridiculous counters to her salient points were embarrassingly bad.

I almost felt bad for Charlie (but I ACTUALLY did NOT feel bad for him - and I STILL don’t).



We. Told. Them. So.

 

[LilKitKat]

I think she did a good job in debating someone on an issue. I think her points were somewhat occluded by the programming she'd been given, as well as the "help" of her friends to point her on the path of illogic during her preparation for the debate, but she was able to articulate them despite her nervousness.

I never claimed to be anything like Charlie Kirk. He was charismatic and charming and his life lifted the hopes/dreams/spirits of others. But here's the thing; I'm not trying to ride on his coattails. I'm not trying to be like him. Instead, I stand or fall based on my own words and deeds and I do it proudly instead of, like you and the rest of the forum trolls, sniping from the weeds with hateful and self loathing remarks full of nothing of substance at all.

programming.

charlie was living in 1950s America.

the blonde woman was living in the present and beliefs that matched it as such

 

[HisArpy]

As I said, nothing of substance at all.

Here's the thing you dipshits on the Left are missing. Charlie's entire program was based on one simple thing; definitions. If you listen to him debate, you'll notice that it's all about definitions.

Name one thing that I said which was bigoted.
Name one thing that I said which shows I support fascism.
Can we agree on what a woman is.
And so on.

The concepts are simple to the point of being simplistic. His ENTIRE program was about getting people to engage with him regardless of the subject matter. He wrapped it all up in his faith, but the point is that he traveled to colleges to stir the pot and get engagement. Then he used that engagement as a platform for self promotion.

Had YOU DIPSHITS left him alone he'd have flamed out within a few years.

But you couldn't do that. YOUR hate was just as strong as his, though he at least covered with with a veneer of civility while you still think violence is the one and only answer to everything that stands in the way of you getting whatever it is that you want.

So you assassinated him and guaranteed he'd become a martyr and famous. His name will be used to beat you time and time and time again and you won't be able to prevent it. Because you created the invincible sword that will hack your movement to pieces.

God Damn, you fuckers are stupid.

 

[DeluxAuto]

Then she will cause it's eventual failure. And failure is something you're well acquainted with, seeming as it's basically your entire life.

No one has failed harder than the idiot (you) who tried to be the smartest person in the world only to doxx himself (you) because he's a fucking idiot (you).

 

[Lazaran]

actually watched and listened to the whole thing.
the difference is stark

you are nothing like Kirk. He listened to her and tried to offer counter evidence to support his claims.

You just didnt agree with her opening remarks, assume its all the typical Trump tactics of distract/deny and make some lame ass comment about a friendly question.

I dont think she OBLITERATED him. But I do think she made clear points that he couldnt overcome.

I WOULD say she obliterated him:

Did I actually hear Charlie talk about women in the 1950s like he was there???

Did I hear that young lady instruct Charlie to consider the FACT that women of the day (the 1950s) we’re routinely prescribed Valium (mother’s little helper???) and lobotomized to give the appearance that they were happy??? (she could have also brought up the old practice of forced hysterectomies to treat women’s "melancholia" and made Charlie’s head explode).

Yeah, I would say she obliterated Charlie; full stop (even her response to Charlie’s cheap “what is a woman” challenge left Charlie at a loss for words. Her response legitimately challenged how much of being a "modern woman" (or a "modern man") is social construct as opposed to biological.

Charlie made (past tense) a pathetic attempt to pigeonhole women, and that young lady was NOT having it.

Kudos to her.

 

[icanhelp1]

I think she did a good job in debating someone on an issue. I think her points were somewhat occluded by the programming she'd been given, as well as the "help" of her friends to point her on the path of illogic during her preparation for the debate, but she was able to articulate them despite her nervousness.

I never claimed to be anything like Charlie Kirk. He was charismatic and charming and his life lifted the hopes/dreams/spirits of others. But here's the thing; I'm not trying to ride on his coattails. I'm not trying to be like him. Instead, I stand or fall based on my own words and deeds and I do it proudly instead of, like you and the rest of the forum trolls, sniping from the weeds with hateful and self loathing remarks full of nothing of substance at all.

There is substance!! It's called hate.

 

[coati]

actually watched and listened to the whole thing.
the difference is stark

you are nothing like Kirk. He listened to her and tried to offer counter evidence to support his claims.

You just didnt agree with her opening remarks, assume its all the typical Trump tactics of distract/deny and make some lame ass comment about a friendly question.

I dont think she OBLITERATED him. But I do think she made clear points that he couldnt overcome.

The big difference I observed is that Kirk explicitly stated what "we should TELL women" to do (stop freezing their eggs and start having babies), whereas she held her own against this fundamentalist Christian patriarchy.

Most women will continue to choose their own path, whether that's submitting to traditional roles or not.

Also, this video clearly shows the intellectual benefit people can get from higher education.

 

[DeluxAuto]

There is substance!! It's called hate.

Why do you think Kirk hated brown people and women?