Nicole Scherzinger doubling down on the MAGA Train — Page 2

Abcd12, I think I can agree on much of what you’ve said (as always I do think the summary of his positions or who he was is not 100% accurate but I absolutely accept he was a conservative Christian whose views would be intolerable to many).

And no one has to mourn Charlie Kirk’s death or agree with his views. But you should be shocked and horrified that someone has been killed for expressing their first amendment right. If someone says ‘the only person’ that started this war is the person who was a victim of a terrorist attack then it’s clear that there is extremism going on this thread and there is no shock or horrified reaction to this attack on free speech - which is extremely fringe and goes against practically every single left wing and democrat leader.


This is exactly what Hamas would say if they were criticised for October the 7th ‘the only person who started this war was Israel because of their oppression’. Or what the Charlie Hebdo attackers would say ‘the only person who started this war was the people who printed hateful things’ (ie blasphemy).

Terrorism is not ok and it’s not ok now. In terms of ‘what is coming for you’ - are you not paying attention to what is happening on the right? Do you really only look at information that seeks to reinforce your own views? Look at Elon Musk’s twitter feed if you want to see where this is headed. Just as Israel responded to the October the 7th attack ‘the right’ are preparing to come down hard. We can only hope that there will not be more violence, but I predict an extreme authoritarian response and some violence. Do you really think starting a battle with ‘the right’ who have guns, loads of guns, and who act in ways you suggest are authoritarian and fascist, is going to end well for you? (I don’t mean you personally I’m talking about the wider cultural construct as discuss).


The best thing anyone can do right now for the left wing cause is to protect freedom of speech and to try and get Gavin Newsom into office. That should be your number 1 goal, not going after people who were shocked at Kirk’s death or openly supporting his death as too many are.

It could be Gavin, or whoever. The point is to participate in the democratic process peacefully.


Yes, I’m BACKKKK. I came to see what happened to my goodbye thread and inexplicably it was deleted.

BUT I HAVE A GREAT DRAMATIC FINISHHHHHH!!!

I guess it was a sign that I shouldn’t leave. What happened? Did Sutton go over drive and cause it to be deleted? Would not surprise me if the people happy I was gone unfortunately brought me back from the dead through their own counter productive behaviour as is a common theme here.

It looks like I was correct. As I posted in the Chenoweth thread:

"For those who missed it, binau created a separate thread yesterday (now deleted) announcing they are leaving this forum. If true, it's too bad as it would have been interesting to see if they kept lecturing everyone in Bernadette's image about the evil of leftist cancel culture as more details come out in Kirk's case (the alleged killer was a young white guy from a deeply conservative family; the ongoing war between Kirk's far-right group and an even more extreme far-right group that spent the past few weeks attacking him as not being conservative enough...)

Just kidding. No matter what comes out, they'd still be determined to blame "the left." The right-wing media that started by blaming liberals in the immediate aftermath had to pivot as more details came out (though they're still trying to blame the assassination on the trans somehow...), but not binau."

And here we are. Someone can be attacked as not conservative enough by the extreme far right, but binau says all the evidence is the problem is leftist extremism. As ever, binau has no idea what they're talking about.

Sorry MemeroableUsername but you are literally not seeing reality right now. It doesn't matter that he came from a 'conservative family', do you know what ideology is? Ideology is about the beliefs someone holds - it can be a result of upbringing, but it can a result of other socialisation too (as it was in this case).

All from the BBC, one of the world's most reputable news sources: The Shooter said Charlie Kirk was hateful and spreading hate, the bullet casings had anti-facist messages (hey fascist, catch!; the the anti-fascist lyrics), it is now revealed according to the BBC that he had a transgender partner. Doesn't this sound inconsistent with conservative behaviour and thought processes? Have you ever met a right-wing conservative that calls other right-wing conservatives 'hateful' and wants to kill them while using left-wing symbolism and rhetoric, and being seemingly emersed in the LGBT community?

How can you explain why a MAGA CONSERVATIVE would want to shoot and kill Charlie Kirk AND express these ideological left-wing views while ALSO having a transgender partner? The logic doesn't work. It requires a burden of proof of a much more unlikely explanation.

You will not win the intellectual debate on the ideology here unless the fundamental premises reported on the BBC end up being wrong, which I think we should be open to because it's early days.

Ha! I literally said the right-wing was still trying to blame this on the trans, referring to the roommate situation.

Binau: TRANS ROOMMATE! RADICAL LEFT!!!!

Also, the media was breathlessly reporting the bullet inscriptions...and had to walk it back when the Justice Department said it was too early.

But at least binau continues to reveal they are a far-right extremist (and likely pro-fascist).

Also, because I saw this a few days ago and naturally thought of binau's demands

MemorableUserName said: "Ha! I literally said the right-wing was still trying to blame this on the trans, referring to the roommate situation.

Also, the media was breathlessly reporting the bullet inscriptions...and had to walk it back when the Justice Department said it was too early."

Can you please re-read my last post on this? First, I already acknowledged that the CURRENT INFORMATION we have from the BBC, which could always change for the exact same reason as the WSJ example above as that changed, is that this is clearly left-wing ideologically motivated.

If you re-read my last post, you will see the problem which is that the only way to argue it's not is to 1. Suggest the information BBC, CNN and others is inaccurate (which I agree we may find out that it IS inaccurate in time, so we need to be open to this) or if it does end up being true 2. Argue that someone who says "Charlie Kirk spreads Hate", uses left-wing symbolism, has a transgender parter and shoots someone in the neck who is critical of trans issues, is more likely to be a 'right-wing conservative' than be ideologically left. I think you will find it very difficult to argue coherently, which is why you haven't attempted to this. Right now, you've tried to call into question the truth of it (point 1). This may end up being the case, but the best information we have currently still reports these facts as true. So until we hear otherwise, the evidence most strongly supports an argument that he is ideological left.

You're doing the "but what about" and "but them" thing. It doesn't matter. That can all be true and it can still also be true that if you continue doing what you're doing, you're going to make it worse.

Again, what I'd say is compare yourselves to Palestine/Israel "but they, but they, but they" each one would say back. Someone needs to be the bigger person or you end up with the Gaza situation.

Why won't you listen to every practically ever single USA left wing and democratic leader? Instead you're trying to play into the war and it's a battle that won't be won. It will only do more damage.

binau said: "For someone that wants to use the block feature, it doesn't look like it's working lol.

Remember, YOU JUST SAID that "THE ONLY" person who 'started this war' is Charlie Kirk, a man who was shot killed for expressing his own views in a country that values freedom of speech. If you honestly believe this, you are part of the problem and you have no idea what is coming to you. For your own safety and the safety of others you need to de-radicalise yourselves. Please."

Was I having a fever dream the other day or did you start a post about saying goodbye to this site?

binau said: "For someone that wants to use the block feature, it doesn't look like it's working lol.”

For someone who keeps announcing their exit from this message board, it doesn’t look like it’s working lol.

BorisTomashevsky said: "The octopus or honey badger or elephant can evolve ahead of us, fine with me."

In your case, they already have.

The Bandstand said: "I was completely bewildered by her performance in Sunset. She did nothing for me, unlike when I saw Glenn Close who rocked my world. I don’t know a single person whothought Nicole’s performance was more worthy than Audra’s."

Same. While she sang the sh#&! out of the score, her acting was amateurish.

BorisTomashevsky said: "ER765 said: "BorisTomashevsky said: "The octopus or honey badger or elephant can evolve ahead of us, fine with me."

In your case, they already have."

I’m encouraging you to leave the ad hominem behind. You’re doing your future self no favors by relying on it."

I don’t think anyone in this thread or even on this board writ large is taking ANY advice or “encouragement” from you any time soon, beloved.