An American martyr
I didn't think I'd have the chance to memorialize Charlie Kirk here, but I feel it important enough to offer it up though it is a few days late. It is hard to find someone so young who had accomplished what Kirk did. He created a political organization from scratch, which helped register young Republicans and helped counter some of the terrible things happening in our country. How terrible? Just look at what happened to him.
He quietly administered that organization which was known as "Turning Point USA," which has over 3,500 chapters in high schools and colleges nationwide. He was a natural debater. He had only one year of college yet was able to hold his own at some of the most prestigious colleges in the world. He engaged anyone who wished to debate him and when he gave his talks it was without notes. He believed in listening to the other side and trying to find common ground. He was proud of his religion, which reminds me of a member I got to know here (known as "Jefferson.")
His legacy cannot be underestimated. There are few individuals that had so much influence among the young and that may have been part of the motivation for the assassin. The strange thing is that the individual who killed Kirk most likely has only increased Kirk's influence. Kirk will long be remembered and though I am reluctant to use the term, Kirk left an indelible mark on American society.
Tags
Who is online
88 visitors
The lesson boys & girls is that when you call your political opponents "Fascists" or you bring a baseball bat to a press conference, or you threaten members of the Supreme Court it filters down to elements who would normally stay hidden in the woodwork.
The lesson also applies to the daily demonization of people and ideas by Trump and associates.
There is no both sides to this,
No, it's just one big cluster fuck.
Even a stopped watch is right twice a day!
When you find anything comparable to the 2020 riots let me know.
Bernie has always been on the side of free speech. He also spoke out when kids at colleges tried to cancel conservative speakers. Good for him
If you listen to some reports of Jan 6th it sounds like it went on for months instead of hours.
And the violent 2020 riots which took the lives of approximately 35 people and injured many police officers and actually did go on for months seems to have been reported as a minor footnote.
Go onto our wonderful Google and search for "the 2020 riots," and see how many times Jan 6th pops up.
“If you listen to some reports of Jan 6th it sounds like it went on for months instead of hours.”
Diminish the ramifications of the event as you will, but do so In continuing disregard for the intent…an obvious attempt to discredit if not overturn a duly held and incontrovertible election result. It will always be remembered as one of the darkest of days in our history as it was a self inflicted affront to our democratic ideals. No oblivious partisan deflection will alter that fact.
Not even close.
Do you think they will actually learn the lesson? History shows they would rather blame it on someone else or say they have a messaging issue.
They aren't interested in learning. Now they are legitimizing violence.
Last night Fox News showed a video of Kirk taking questions from a young woman who had just called Kirk a "Fascist." Kirk asked her to explain what made him a "Fascist." She stammered for a bit but couldn't come up with an answer. Kirk sat and patiently waited for her to come up with something. Eventually the crowd of students began to boo her. Kirk then went to the next person in line.
It's so very easy to toss that label around. But when asked to explain why the person considers another a fascist or a nazi, they just cannot formulate anything or they just shut up and go away. It's so very sad that there's a largish group of people who prove they cannot think for themselves but rather just follow the crowd.
I think you nailed it. The reason for the murderous mayhem as well as why such radical people are being elected to office.
Like Trump.
Well, fortunately, we don't have that problem here on NT!
A bulletin needed to be distributed to our wonderful "educators" in the state of Florida:
I saw a joke that we used to have to check our kids social media, now we have to check our kids’ teachers.
It took us a long time to realize what was going on.
"A dean at a Tennessee university was fired over social media posts saying she has "zero sympathy" for slain conservative activist, Charlie Kirk."
MTSU Associate Dean Laura Sosh-Lightsy fired over Charlie Kirk post
My daughter is a first grade teacher. She rarely uses facebook and when she does it is to show vacation pictures or pictures of her son. If teachers don't think people are looking to complain about something on their page they are mistaken
And don't try to say she wasn't bringing those views to professors and students.
I hate to say it, but when it comes to what has come to be called "the humanities" as are now being taught at American universities, it has become a detriment to our society.
And the parents sending them either don't know or don't care.
Good to see that Florida is making public the repercussions of making these hateful responses to a death.
I've heard of several people being fired to include MSNBC firing Matthew Dowd over his pathetic on air comments.
Now lets see if there is something that can be done about THIS INSUFFERABLE OXYGEN THIEF .
Dowd essentially blamed Kirk for his own death. Social media is full of the hate.
There are no surprises.
[✘]
Do you remember when Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg died?
There was a memorial posted here and there was an official warning attached (BE RESPECTFUL).
I do. I also remember the tantrums if anybody even remotely spoke ill of her.
Kirk delivering a lesson:
co-pilot seems to be partisan & dishonest. Kirk questioned DEI. Would you want a pilot flying your plane who was chosen because of race. I don't think it is "racist" to question DEI. And btw the American left has admitted to pursuing the so-called "great replacement theory":
Left Championed Demographic Change Decades Before 'Great Replacement Theory' | National Review
So, all of co-pilot's points are nothing more than partisan opinion.
And the hate is gonna keep coming, eh?
That is because you dont understand reality. DEI doesnt pass the requirements to be a pilot for you. It possibly gets you into the program where you have to prove yourself.
Charlie Kirk implied that no black pilot should be trusted , because they are black. It was despicable.
No John, one's merit gets one into the program.
You , in your ignorance, think DEI gets you the job as a pilot for an airline. It doesnt.
I guess I'll just have to wallow in my ignorance for another week.
will you please shut the hell up about this ?
co-pilot
The whole point of these programs is to give minorities who aren't as qualified as their competitors entry into the programs.
It's amazing to watch this. Kirk is criticizing AA, a position which a majority of people agree with him. And leftists try and call him "far right"
Even if one agreed with that statement, it is irrelevant to the safety of flying on a passenger flight with a black pilot. If you cant understand that I cant help you.
There are two ways to silence people. Thankfully I wasn't silenced the way Kirk was. I guess they went easy on me.
No—there is no evidence that Black airline pilots are hired despite being underqualified due to DEI (Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion) initiatives.
Oh, a lack of evidence! Wouldn't it be better if we simply hire the most qualified or doesn't co-pilot and the democrat party think that qualified black pilots would be hired without DEI?
(Oh my, we are actually having a conversation about it. Charlie Kirk would have been proud of us.)
You are fucking ridiculous. The airlines have requirements. Black pilots have to meet those requirements just like everyone else. The AI commentary makes that abundantly clear.
People who think flights are less safe because they have a black pilot are engaging in lunacy.
is irrelevant to the safety of flying on a passenger flight with a black pilot.
Maybe. Because you don't know if better qualified pilots were not hired because of DEI goals.
Would you rather fly with a pilot who just passed certifications, or one who aced it? I'd prefer the best possible pilot on all flights I take, regardless of their color or sex. When you to the doctor, do you want one who finished at the bottom of their class and struggled to get certified before finally succeeding, or one who finished at the top of their class?
Passing the low bar of certification doesn't make everyone equally good at their jobs.
DEI isn't fair to those who succeed on their own merits because it explicitly makes race or other biological characteristic a factor in the hiring process, and the outsider doesn't know if biology played a role in the hiring .
It is amazing that I've made it to be 73.
The airlines have requirements. Black pilots have to meet those requirements just like everyone else.
And nobody would question that had it not been for DEI. Don't you see what DEI has done?
People who think flights are less safe because they have a black pilot are engaging in lunacy.
I see.
Maybe my cardiologist is "less qualified" because he was a legacy admission to his university. I've never asked him because I can see he knows what he is doing. There is no "more qualified" after pilots finish their training. They are qualified or they are not hired. The absurdity of your arguments is mind blowing.
Take your grievance to someone who cares.
I will assume the airlines would not appreciate you calling their qualification requirements a low bar.
It only costs $32 per month and I get the world!
Yeah its made dumbasses out of people, on the right, who dont need to be.
And the radicals on the far left are the intelligent ones.
I have some bad news: most of the country is fed up with this racial shit.
John, you just wrote this, which might be the dumbest thing you've ever claimed: "There is no "more qualified" after pilots finish their training."
Do you think all carpenters are equally qualified? In your world, are all people who pass a drivers license exam equally skilled drivers? I can't believe anyone with any experience in the world would claim that everyone who passes some baseline certification is equal in skill to everyone else who did.
Your criticism is stupid. In natural languages, such as English, words have different meanings in different contexts.
John was using the word "qualified" in the context of "meeting the required qualifications".
You are using the word "qualified" in the context of "a level of skill".
Both are valid uses of "qualified".
As an example, an individual who passes the Bar exam is qualified to practice law. But practicing attorneys have different levels of skill and thus are not all equally qualified for a particular task. They all met the qualifications to practice law but are not equally skilled.
No shit. That's my entire point. People actually want an attorney with a higher level of skill. And pilots. And doctors.
John's entire argument that is there's no difference in pilots' skills because they all passed some base certification.
I just explained this and you come back with an amazingly obtuse response to completely misrepresent JR's argument. The intellectual dishonesty of your response is staggering.
Sean seems to think if you are not at "the top of the class" you shouldnt be flying a plane. I have to wonder how many white pilots were "underqualified".
Their fitness to be a pilot is determined after they take the training, not before.
ean seems to think if you are not at "the top of the class"
Nonsense. My point is that airlines should hire the most qualified person they can, regardless of their biology.
Your whole point is premised on their being no difference in skill between professionals who are simply certified so it's okay to give preferential treatment to minorities (which can only mean hiring the less qualified) because they've passed the bar of certification. .
Once you make race/gender a factor in hiring pilots, or any other profession then you are intentionally prioritizing something other than skill in hiring and will result in hiring pilots who are not the most qualified. That's logic you can't defeat.
[deleted][✘]
Of course, when your argument is destroyed, go personal.
My WHOLE POINT is that pilots who pass through airline pilot training and the other requirements are fit to pilot a passenger jet and should not be diminished on the basis of race.
Your argument only works if pilots were hired because of DEI and were not required to meet objective standards.
Perhaps you can enlighten the whole of us on those requirements and the curve of pass/fail.
You prefer to fly with an 70% passing or 95%? Somewhere in that 25% difference could be the very pilot you are flying with. And, what was the 30% that pilot number one missed?
It isn't really black and white
And how would you know if white or black pilots achieved 95 or 75 percent grades in their pilot training?
when your argument is destroyed, go personal.
Who said this? The intellectual dishonesty of your response is staggering.
And That's exactly my point. You claim that there is no difference between pilots who pass the minimum requirements.
works if pilots were hired because of DEI and were not required to meet objective standards
The whole point of having a DEI program is to hire people because of DEI. It's amazing to see people who claim DEI is so critical turn around and deny it actually plays a role in hiring.
They are not minimum requirements, they are the requirements.
I don't. But the people who are responsible for staffing aircraft do. And a 70 is passing.
Query was...........
Of course they are minimum requirements. That's how it works. But again, the point is that not everyone who meets the minimum requirements is equally skilled.
Where do you see anyone claiming that meeting the minimum requirements means they have identical skills? Meeting the minimum requirements to fly a plane means one is qualified to fly. It does not mean that every pilot has the same abilities.
Who in the flying fuck cares except you. I don't give a shit if they are green as long as they earned what they achieved. I don't necessarily care for a pilot to be placed just because he/she/it was a minority.
In case you have never seen it, "DEI = Didn't Earn It".
please dont waste my time
[✘]
AI engines are only as good as the prompts.
LOL, ouch ...
Search engines are only as good as the queries.
Cross-examinations are only as good as the questions.
Theories are only as good as the underlying evidence and methods used.
Mathematical conclusions are only as good as the data and model.
Btw, in case anyone is interested, here is the full context of the conversation that John is referring to:
The full context of the quote was as follows (beginning at 50:19):
The topic came up after a 2021 Axios interview with United Airlines CEO Scott Kirby talking about diversity in United's pilot training program recirculated in conservative circles following revelations of a December 2022 midflight incident in which a jet lost altitude shortly after departure before the crew recovered, according to Reuters .
Real Charlie Kirk quote about Black pilot qualifications circulates online
Who programs it?
All of the criticism of DEI is dependant upon one assumption, and that assumption is that the person of the (hopefully) formerly discriminated against group has, by definition, lower scores on whatever the metric is for achievement of the position and has been raised up beyond their ability level. This assumption is inherently bigoted and most probably erroneous in most cases.
Before implementation, the people who were discriminated against had next to no chance at hiring or admission even if they were far and away the best candidate. It was to rectify this situation that Affirmative Action was created.
Charlie Kirk was a bigot, as is everyone else who makes this assumption. So basically all of the people on here arguing against DEI hiring and admissions have made this bigoted argument in the past, some very forcefully and strenuously.
Just sayin'
I'm at a complete loss as to why you think this makes Charlie Kirk look any better.
-
co-pilot
I hope you guys read not only this excerpt, but also the whole article
No, that is not the only assumption. It also assumes that DEI discredits the actual achievements of black Americans. The point Kirk made was that everyone ends up questioning if an individual actually earned what they got. We are all better of with a system based on merit like Martin Luther King advocated for.
If everyone has to meet the same standards, why do we need DEI?
Here is another one
White men have ruled the sky as airline pilots, but that’s finally changing - Chicago Sun-Times
It’s amazing that the people who defend DEI can’t even to its purpose or how it’s implemented. It’s stunning. Not that facts matter here, but the objective date from the college admissions cases is overwhelming about the difference in outcome form which race box is checked.
Or read the emails form universities where hiring committees make explicit their intent to hire a POC for a job, regardless. If objective data won’t convince you, talk to a friend or family member involved in hiring for a Fortune 500 compsny. I know from personal experience they can tell stories about explicit directives to hire minorities. All the evidence in the world exists outside of the left wing bubble.
The most ridiculous thing about this whole argument is the whole point of DEI programs is to advantage some minorities st the expense of others, there’d be no point to it otherwise,
sad so many progressives can’t even honestly admit what their own policies entail.
Pilots are not hired because of DEI, they are given a chance to go into the training programs.. If and only if they successfully complete the training programs, just like whites do, then they might be hired.
Exactly. It’s the question they can’t answer. It’s ridiculous for them to pretend the purpose of DEI is to treat everyone equally and to ensure the best candidates get the job. It must be Opposite Day on the left.
And what happens when the DEI divisions of the airlines decide who get hired?
I'm not going to keep going with this forever. I have presented you with facts related to why pilots are hired by the airlines. They all MUST have the same qualifications. You are for some reason arguing that blacks might have less skills than whites, even though they meet the same qualifications.
You haven’t addressed the question. You claim DEI is only access to training, which is blatantly false. Though of course, since training spots are not unlimited, it means the best qualified candidates are, by definition, not selected to receive training.
What happens when DEI is involved in actual hiring?
I think it's amazing that every bit of your argumentation yesterday against DEI was exactly based on minimum qualifications.
I dont know, I have posted articles by people with knowledge of the airline industry that say every pilot must pass the same qualifications. Apparently that sentence confuses some.
Unless "DEI" hires are afforded lesser standards to comply with your argument is pointless. So tell us about these mythical lesser standards.
And here we are again, where you have to pretend all pilots who pass the minimum standard of "qualified" have exactly the same skill.. It's delusional.
Yeah, it's sad people apparently think everyone who can satisfy the minimum qualification position threshold is equally qualified for the job and no distinction can be made among them, so than its okay to pick based on race. .
No, the idea that everyone who passes the qualifications is not equally qualified is delusional.
Are the white airline pilots who meet the qualifications all equally skilled? No, but they are all equally qualified.
Again there are no "minimum qualifications", there are only qualifications.
They don't want to admit that they don't trust anyone to be fair.
It wasn't long ago that a magistrate needed a JD degree. Now it is only a BA degree, and criminals are being set free. An obvious example of the evil of DEI.
No, they aren't equally qualified..
Let's make this simple. Two white candidates pass the bar and apply to a prestigious law firm and apply for a job doing highly technical work. .
both are "qualified" as lawyers which would be the minimum qualification for the job. One went to Yale, finished top of his class, had prestigious internships, and received all sorts of academic awards in school.
The other barely graduated from one of the worst law schools in the county, failed the bar twice and has no hands on legal experience.
In your world, they are both equally qualified, because they both passed the bar and are certified lawyers.
Yeah, scary that some states require more training to be a barber than a magistrate judge who decides criminal cases.
You see there weren't enough blacks with a JD degree, therefore it must be racist.
Everything is racist....
In the modern era, the Bar exam is just another hurdle thrown by the white man. Although the Bar exam must be taken by all wishing to become a licensed attorney, it disproportionately affects black, indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC) compared to their white counterparts.
A piece of paper created by the white man as a barrier / S
Context is everything, until it is ignored
So if everyone in the pool of candidates aces the qualifications, how is one supposed to determine the best candidate? That situation is one that is never covered by any anti-DEI person.
And from your previous comment regarding hiring a POC for a position, what is wrong that, especially if the makeup of your personnel looks like it originated in the 1930s? Your assumption is that a qualified candidate cannot be found within that group. Hmmmm
That's just it. Who says that the people formerly discriminated against are at the lowest (or possibly lower) threshold for qualifications? Every comment on this site that says "Person A is a DEI hire," is assuming that by virtue of being in a group, that person is necessarily not as qualified and took the position from a more qualified candidate. Every single one. That is called prejudice.
In general, one cannot tell that a person is qualified or not to do a particular job or task just by looking at them. But Some commenting on this site apparently think that they are gifted with special talents not available to the average mortal.
Has that ever happened? Every candidate is perfectly equal? In that case it obviously wouldn't matter who was hired.
I've seen the data in the college admissions cases and I'll tell you that situation has never been even close to occurring.
nd from your previous comment regarding hiring a POC for a position, what is wrong that, especially if the makeup of your personnel looks like it originated in the 1930s?
You need me to explain why racial discrimination is wrong?
If the qualification for being a member of the bar is passing the bar exam they are equally qualified.
If you have two "students" at the airline sponsored pilot training school , one of them white and the other a black who was admitted to the program through DEI, and they both proceed through the program and graduate and pass the additional pilot requirements. Are you going to tell us they are not equally qualified because one of them was "DEI". It makes zero sense.
If the personnel is all white, one should diversify. There are plenty of qualified candidates out there. Racial discrimination is what you are pushing by insinuating that qualified candidates cannot be found.
Interesting that is what DEI seems to do. Give special attention to some classes of folks because they aren't smart enough to do it by themselves.
That's textbook racial discrimination. You are literally advocating discriminating against people over their race, no matter how you dress it up. And, per left wing ideology, the great grandchildren of the white person you discriminated against is entitled to systematic discrimination on his behalf.
How Orwellian. I'm pushing hiring the most qualified person regardless of race. In bizzarro leftist world, that's pushing "racial discrimination" Up is down....
No, that's not what I'm talking about. I'm talking about actually hiring someone once they've cleared the minimum qualification of passing the bar. You can't possibly believe the two candidates I described are equally qualified.
Are you going to tell us they are not equally qualified because one of them was "DEI". It makes zero sense.
No, I'm telling you one will be better qualified because they are the better pilot.
You are going off the rails. There are no "minimum qualifications" for airline pilots. There are qualifications. You are imagining things.
You need to get on the rails. This is so easy i don’t know how you cannot understand it. Would you rather have a pilot flying the plane you are on that barely met the qualifications, or one that passed the qualifications with flying colors?
It’s insane
What makes you think that black pilots dont pass with flying colors?
You’ve been explaining this very clearly for quite some time. You’ve got more patience than i do.
I dont why I bother posting facts on this site. No one gets a job as an airline pilot unless they meet the requirements, including a certain number of hours of flight time, passing written tests , medical examinations and other factors. There are some pilots who start from scratch, white or black, and attend a flight training school.
Where the wiggle room is to suggest blacks are less qualified is a mystery.
Where did i say that? I didn’t because i don’t care what color or gender a pilot is. I want the pilot that passed all necessary qualifications with flying colors over the pilot that barely met qualifications. Race has nothing to do with it.
All I can say is that you dont seem to understand the written material that has been provided here.
Lol, no, it is as clear as it gets that you don’t understand what Sean is saying.
I've become convinced people who support DEI either willfully block why it exists or how it works at the ground level from their brain to avoid the cognitive dissonance that they support racial discrimination and they can't handle that reality.
Only explanation I can come up with.
To discredit DEI you would have to prove that after all is said and done black pilots are less qualified. You CANNOT do that. In fact, information from the airlines disproves that.
You assume blacks are less qualified because they are DEI. Your evidence is the assumption that because they were CONSIDERED due to their race they dont have to excel at the job. You do not have a shred of evidence of this.
i am finished with this
Don't worry, it's probably the one that is the DEI.
Almost surely out of my depth, here, but doesn't it teach itself?
No. That's not how that works.
In order to support DEI on a logical basis, you would have to show that protected minorities are discriminated against specifically because their minority status, and that DEI initiatives are a key reason that isn't happening. You would be very hard pressed to do that.
It needs to be programed, thus fed.
For example:
"CBS News identified 10 posts by Grok, X's AI chatbot, that misidentified the suspect before his identity, now known to be southern Utah resident Tyler Robinson , was released. Grok eventually generated a response saying it had incorrectly identified the suspect, but by then, posts featuring the wrong person's face and name were already circulating across X."
AI fuels false claims after Charlie Kirk's death, analysis reveals
I have apologized. Charlie Kirk never advocated stoning gays to death.
Stephen King
Too bad left wing media has flooded the internet with that and similar lies the last few days.
No, he only said the biblical passage that instructs stoning gays was "God's perfect law". But its true, he didnt call for enforcement of that law.
But Charlie Kirk didnt take issue with "God's perfect law", did he?
But you do???
Your point?
Today, Botswana decriminalised homosexuality. President Trump’s global push to decriminalize homosexuality is achieving results across the world.
He obviously didn't support it. Couldn't be more clear.
What was Charlie Kirk really doing in that segment? Do you know?
I also think he was just parroting what Ms.Rachel said about another section of Leviticus, which was his whole point in discussing the topic.
I'll post this again because it makes the point succinctly:
Here's an excellent point about how so many on the left simply accepted the absurd "he wants to stone gays" :
He was a staunch supporter of Israel. That means a lot to me.
So is Trump.
Most people who dont know much about politics think Charlie Kirk was just a "conservative pundit". In truth he was one of the most divisive public figures in America for the past couple decades.
And all he did was express opposing views publicly. And was shot for it.
I guess you weren't alive in the 60's, huh?
want to buy my '68 george wallace "stand up for america" campaign button? it still cracks me up to look at it ...
It is something to watch people who publicly pat themselves on the back for being empathetic either openly celebrate his death or use asinine logic to string together a idiotic reasons to justify why no one should feel bad for a murder victim.
He knew right from wrong.
I am a staunch supporter of Jewish people wherever they may live. As for the government of Israel, they are much like most other western style democracies which are an important and strategic ally of the United States in the middle east. Kirk, however, supported Israel for a completely different reason.
Kirk has stated his support for Israel is based on his evangelical Christian faith, which views the existence of the modern state of Israel and the ingathering of the Jewish people as significant biblical events . He has referred to the Bible and "Judeo-Christian" values to frame his support, a common position among Christian Zionists. - Charlie Kirk on Reels | Facebook
I think supporting people because you care about them and want them to have the opportunity to live and thrive the same way you do is praiseworthy. On the flip side, supporting people because you believe in a prophecy that says they need to be in a certain place at a certain time so that your hoped for Armageddon can come and wipe out all those people for the crime of murdering the Messiah and everyone else who doesn't kneel before your Christian God, not so praiseworthy.
If hoping that the Jews will all be murdered to fulfill a prophesy is his only reason to support Israel, then of course I do not support that. However, if his support is for other than that, my comment stands. Do you have evidence that the prophesy is his only reason? I don't believe it is Trump's reason, nor was it Alexander Haig's, who said that Israel was like America having it's biggest carrier in the Middle East without needing any soldiers on board.
Of course it isn't. It's just more heavy handed propaganda designed to obscure their own de facto support for terrorists and denigrate those who oppose them with blood libels about their motives.
Is there evidence that he supports terrorists? Supporting Hamas has not seemed to me to be one of the aspects of such right-wingers.
If you look into Christian Zionists like Kirk you'll realize that their smile and friendly demeanor is used to either convert or to hide their true beliefs, which are, in a nutshell, that anyone who doesn't bow to them and their Jesus when he returns is off to the lake of fire so they grin when others are talking about their faiths, but in their minds they're just biding their time till they believe they'll get to burn all their enemies into ash and take the earth for themselves.
Right, cause anyone that would smile at you and engage you in conversation..... nevermind
Thanks for the bible lesson, DP, but IMO the possibility of the "End Times" happening is about the same as the Martians invading Earth. I'm too old to believe in such a fantasy, but if it's good for Israel let the "Christian Zionists" dream their dreams.
I completely agree that there is no divinely backed apocalypse on the horizon, I have seen no evidence of anything divine or supernatural. I do, however, believe in self-fulfilling prophecies. If certain groups are desperate to see the events of a prophecy unfold they will either interpret reality to fit their prophecy or alter reality through action to make their prophecies seem to be coming true. If you're hoping and praying each day for "turmoil, violence and misery caused by natural disasters, by war and by dictatorial regimes" you can claim any time in the last half century as a fulfillment of that prophecy and you're certainly unlikely to work towards preventing any of those things if your entire world view is built on hoping they happen.
When Trump moved the US embassy in Israel to Jerusalem during his first term , he held an elaborate ceremony. The two evangelical ministers who were flown from the US to Jerusalem to take part in the ceremony were both "End Times" ers. The evangelical community wanted to be prominent at that ceremony BECAUSE Jerusalem is one of the keys to the end times biblical prophecy.
Exactly. If the machinations needed to fulfill the prophecy are created by the desire for it, Israel and the world could go up in smoke whether the fulfillment of the prophecy in terms of the return of Jesus is real or not.
If my old friend was here, he would have posted this:
At the press conference announcing the capture of the suspect, the governor of Utah is making a political speech.
Perhaps he should have said nothing.
This person claims to be a doctor I guess. Keep her away from me.
(1) Mary Ann Beth on X: "I'm sorry but this is SENDING ME https://t.co/LRB1xgbWOs" / X
Along with Joe Rogan I bet many dems wish they had a Charlie Kirk on their side that could actually energize their youth and show the ignorance of many on the other side like he did.
In conclusion:
The best way we can honor Charlie Kirk is to get out and vote in the midterm election.
Be sure to vote against anyone with a (D) following their name.
It seems the dems have lost their way and the support for Mamdani shows they are not interested in coming back.
I don't know that Kirk would support that statement. He was willing to engage with anybody in a conversation. Yes his political views drifted right over time but what didn't change was his willingness to overlook the political label and engage with everyone. He seemed to really want the best people in the job.
Of course this is just my opinion so I'm confident other people can have other opinions.