Savant

if you lost your job, then what would you do?

Get another job. Even if that's not feasible, I don't see how anyone is obligated to employ people. Because if you apply that consistently, it just means everyone is obligated to hire everyone, or at least everyone they can afford to employ. Which is just silly.

The goal of a company should be to focus on profit margins

The goal of a company is whatever the owner wants it to be. Similar to the goal of an organization or any socially constructed entity. Why does it need to be profit margins?

Firing takes away their income (so they might starve)

Why is the employer required to keep paying them if they don't want to? I mean by this logic, everyone is obligated to hire as many people as they can.

That hypothetical Nazi worker (I'm not a Nazi) hates Jews, but it's merely talk.

And firing them is merely firing...seems to me as reasonable and non-harmful as talking.

establish that the freedom of verbal speech takes precedence over the freedom of association speech

Why should it though? Should a Jewish boss have to keep working with someone who talks about how much they hate Jews the whole time they interact? You're basically forcing people to tolerate a hostile work environment.

I thought FCC is there to regulate the content in television

Yeah but I'm against it being used to support a political party, regardless of which party is doing it.

Nope, the US Military was never intended to be weaponized against the American people for political purposes.

Yeah I get your point I was just being facetious. If I really wanted to be pedantic, I would bring up the Civil War.

He's weaponized the FBI, the Justice department, even the US Military

I mean I get your point, but isn't that literally the point of the military? To be weaponized?

there is nothing anecdotal about it, I lived through it

That's what anecdotal means. Personally I saw more hatred from the left after the Kirk shooting, so in terms of anecdotes, we are at a stalemate.

you are not saying Tyler is responsible for the shooting, you are saying the left is

No, only Tyler is responsible. But I do think he's on the left.

Clearly, the cultural pendulum has dramatically shifted the other way in America. Live by the sword precedes dying from it.

I oppose weaponization of the FCC regardless of which party is doing it. The damage this kind of thing causes outweighs whatever political win one side thinks they are scoring.

No, my reasoning is that had Tyler Robinson been from a family of democrats, living in a town of mostly democrats, and consequently, had not been exposed to the echo chamber of right wing violent and divisive rhetoric, Kirk would not have been assassinated.

I think we can be significantly more certain that if Tyler Robinson himself had been a Republican, Charlie Kirk wouldn't have been assassinated. Difference is that Tyler is directly responsible for the shooting and his family isn't.

Jimmy Kimmel was pulled off the air over the same comments you're throwing here.

Much as I find Kimmel unfunny and disagree strongly with Sidewalker here, I don't like that the FCC is being weaponized to threaten a network over what a comedian said.

The MAGA insistence that the left is cheering Charlie Kirk’s death

They mean a lot of people on the left, not literally everyone on the left. You made the same kind of generalizations about the right, I'm not sure why you have two different standards here.

a much higher percentage of the MAGA base did

You need a reliable source if you're going to make a claim like that, not just anecdotal evidence. You're doing the same thing you were criticizing others for doing.

I just forgot gender identity and sexual orientation were considered evidence of being on the left

How many people on the right would be described as pro-trans and say Charlie Kirk was "spreading hate"? I mean that's two pretty unlikely things for a person on the right to do.

if I don't buy into the MAGA lies I'm spreading misinformation

Do you think the texts are fake and his mother is lying? If you do, then argue that. If you don't, then how are they MAGA lies?

I'm certain this tragedy would never have happened if he didn't live in the MAGA universe of violence and intolerance

I'm gonna guess the guy who committed murder was far more intolerant than the Republicans in his community.

By the way, do you have any proof that the people gloating were gay, trans, or black? If not, then how do you know they are from the left?

The comments were on Bluesky and they were calling for right wing figures to be killed. One of the usernames was "ACAB." Also, I'm not sure what point you're trying to make by assuming all black people are on the left.

Yeah, I already acknowledged that "a handful of internet whack jobs gloated"

I was just responding to your statement that "I haven’t actually seen anyone cheering or gloating about this," but apparently you backtracked from that, so I'll drop it.

the core of bigotry is to negatively characterize a group based on the actions of a few, or even an individual.

So, kind of like you did when you mentioned "the joyous celebrational way that Trump and his MAGA followers responded to the maniac who tried to kill Nancy Pelosi’s husband with a hammer." Surely not all his followers celebrated?

Back in the day, when you said "left and right" you weren't talking about race, sexual orientation, and gender identity, you were talking about politics

All of those things are related to political issues. Affirmative action, women's sports, cakes for gay weddings, etc. Those are hot button issues. You claimed the dude was Republican, which the current evidence strongly suggests he is not.

the role of government, the economy, foreign policy, that kind of stuff

Well you didn't bring any of this up in your initial post, so if this is all that counts as politics, how did you conclude Robinson is right wing?

He has exploited the killing of Charlie Kirk to declare war on his opponents.

He has, but the evidence as of now still points to the assassin being on the left, not the right. You know, the opposite of what your post said. Surely you aren't intending to spread misinformation?

Trump is the one celebrating Kirk's murder.

Since you brought up celebration again, I'll respond to your claim that you "haven’t actually seen anyone cheering or gloating about this." I won't claim to know what you saw or didn't, but there are definitely people on the left gloating about Kirk being dead and calling for violence. See here. I'm not claiming this is a majority of the left, but these people exist.

Yeah, and people have dressed as Trump to mock him.

Google's AI summary now claims key parts of the 14th amendment (life, liberty, property) now only applies to citizens (in spite the literal words being "person")

What did you search to get that result? I got the opposite.

Paradoxically, the same people who support ICE, are usually the same people who oppose abortion often citing issues of due process (the right to life, liberty, property being inherent, rather than something special for citizens).

I haven't seen many people who oppose abortion do it on the basis of "issues of due process". Is this something you can link to or just something you heard people say in person? I have a hard time seeing someone who opposes abortion saying "as long as the fetus is given a trial, then abortion is fine." Especially since this only applies to the state depriving an individual of life and not a individual actor like a doctor.

I think the due process thing with immigrants is just a case of people not understanding the constitution very well. The people citing issues of due process to oppose abortion (if there are even that many of them) have at least read the constitution recently, so I don't think the groups have much overlap. They're both generally on the right, but they are probably different groups within the right.

Also where did you get that his friends called him a Trump supporter? It's possible, but I'm not seeing that anywhere.

The assassin, Tyler Robinson was not a democrat, he has never had any affiliation with any left “groups”, he has registered as unaffiliated, hasn’t voted, but friends and neighbors say they thought he was an avowed Trump supporter. In 2017 he dressed as Trump for Halloween, and his grandmother has said that the entire family are Republican, and that they don’t even know a single democrat.

You're ignoring a lot of the newer reports...his mother said he became "more pro-gay and trans-rights-oriented" and I think she would know better than his grandmother. Then there are the texts he sent to his apparently trans lover saying that he had "enough of Kirk's hatred."

Now, maybe the prosecutors just fabricated a bunch of texts to score a short-term political win at the cost of getting the case dismissed, and maybe Tyler's mother is just lying. But if most of this is true, I have a hard time seeing Tyler being closer to the right than the left. There are pro-trans people on the right, and there are people on the right who don't like Kirk. But of highly-political pro-trans people who believe that Kirk specifically is full of hate and would shoot a right-wing figure, I suspect that more of them are closer ideologically to Democrats than Republicans.

It should be fixed now.

Edit function currently not working for me.

What's the behavior you're seeing? Can you send a video on Discord?

I was comparing the solviets to the Americans, not Stalin to Igor the Tanker

So the direct comparison would be Stalin. Should be pretty straightforward why Stalin is less admired than FDR.

How many did Hitler and FDR save and kill? The killing figure is easier to quantify than the saving.

Hitler started WW2, I don't see him saving more than 50-85 million people. FDR was a driving force behind preventing Hitler from taking over the world, and I don't see him killing more than 100 million people or so (and that's probably an underestimate of how bad things could have gotten had Hitler won).

But the Solviets did the brunt of the work.

Common soldiers did the brunt of the work, yet the leaders get the credit. It's not about who did the work so much as whose seen as making the most significant decisions.

Will you hold Hitler to that standard? He saved people from the great depression. No.

You're ignoring part of what I'm saying. Hitler killed more than he saved, FDR saved more than he killed.

this is an option available to only a tiny sliver of the population so it cannot be put forward as a reasonable solution to a societal problem.

Plenty of schools already have taxpayer-funded armed guards. It's possible to scale that up, but it depends how much you're willing to spend on safety.

He did like .5% of the work to end the Holocaust; the brunt was the Soviets

Soviets would have lost without lend-lease. Stalin admitted as much. Plus the early success of the Nazis was partly Stalin's fault.

If I save 1000 people and murder 1, then I'm not moral. Otherwise, we should let volunteer doctors get away with murder. They saved thousands of lives, they can kill 5.

You can oppose something someone did while still holding them up as a symbol for the good they did. No one is morally perfect. Obviously killing people is way worse than the average person, but saving a lot of people is also much better than the average person.

But FDR both helped to prevent a genocide and created one.

But the genocide he prevented was much bigger and not one he caused in the first place.

If I murder one girl and help to save another; I'm still insane.

Or you'll be worshiped as a hero, depending on the situation and how people report it. Even Columbus was celebrated for a while.