" Oh but hating on America is an American value so you're going to punish for that?? Interesting.

#27 | POSTED BY LAURAMOHR AT 2025-09-17 01:19 PM | REPLY"

Punish? No. That's why I am so opposed to revoking VISA's. Among other things it sends a chilling message. What I was saying is that obtaining a VISA is a privilege, not a right. We should not extend the privilege of granting a VISA to people who have demonstrated hatred for our country and/or cheered the assassination of a public figure.

Mixer = murder

Johnny Hotsauce,

Sorry. I meant to answer last night. Got distracted with something else and went to bed.

Here is my answer:

As a strong proponent of 1A we do not revoke VISA's simply because the applicants have repugnant viewpoints and may well hate this country. The viewpoints are repugnant but no criminal act has taken place So, yeah, I strongly oppose this. Moving forward ... .VISA's are residential access for a specified time period. Once a VISA expires all bets are off. One of the D- bags applies for a renewal? Nope. Get your America hating mixer celebrating ass out of this country and don't let the door hit your rear on the way out.

" Cool story. Tell us what you think about this new wave of government censorship from the Trump administration.

#18 | POSTED BY JOHNNY_HOTSAUCE AT 2025-09-17 01:35 AM | REPLY"

Where do you draw a line at VISA revocation? I'm not trying to argue. I'm curious.

" #16 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2025-09-16 11:30 PM | FLAG: "

Applications for new TPU chapters have been massive since the assassination.

" We should probably find out what happened before getting all worked up.

Same as when Kirk got shot.

#6 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2025-09-16 07:30 PM | FLAG: "

Yep.

'Far right' rally.

It's amazing the vast numerical disparity supposedly unbiased media outlets are when using the term 'far right' vs 'far left'.

"I know why he wouldn't. Because that wouldn't have gotten him the big bucks in conservative circles."

Are you actually suggesting that if he had gone on the record of being against gays being executed for being gay it would have cost him in conservative circles?

Actually, it might have but for a completely different reason than what you are implying.

"No, the clip I was talking about was the one where he says that Haitians were raping women in Alabama.

#60 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2025-09-16 12:17 AM |"

Well, I watched that clip in its entirety and given he brought numbers from Biden's head of ICE his comments made sense to me.

"It sounds like he meant someone should have beat the trans athletes up the way they would have back in the 50s when men were men and not low testosterone sissies.

#59 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2025-09-16 12:14 AM"

That's one interpretation. Another is that real men simply never would allowed a male to compete against women and accessed women only spaces.

"I don't know what he thought because he doesn't say. He could have said, God says to stone gay people, but I don't feel that way. I have a very close gay friend, and I certainly don't think he should be stoned.

#56 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday"

Why would he? It's such an absurd allegation in the first place. It's why I asked a question such as this:

"How could Kirk have possibly become good friends with a man who is openly gay and is married to a man? If I am to believe his detractors, he would have actually wanted Rubin to be stoned to death.

#40 | Posted by BellRinger at 2025-09-15 11:38 PM |"

You come across as an intelligent and reasonable woman. Please re-read what I just reproduced and apply some logic to the question I posed. To add further, in the video where he is debating that young man with a British accent, he repeatedly brings up an unbroken chain of tradition. Throughout it's history where the Protestant church has had any degree of state power when was the last time an execution was carried out by the Protestant church for the sole sin of being gay?

"In the link I provided there is a link to Kirk's website that has the entire conversation from that day.

#54 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday"

You didn't provide a link to any video regarding Kirk advocating the killing of gays and trans based upon biblical scripture.

I watched the 3+ minute clip you provided by Media Matters and encouraged you to watch the video clip as well.

In the interest of moving things forward, are you done talking about the Kirk wants to stone gays accusation?

"taking care of trans people like we did in the 50s. wtf

#53 | Posted by Alexandrite"

I don't even know what that means. Again, like so many other instances, I really want to see more of the clip so I can get the full context. I had the same reaction to that Kilmeade comment due to when the video was cut off. Then I saw him backtracking and apologizing and that signaled to me that no additional context was necessary.

#46 Again, that is the same 18 second clip that all of his detractors have been bandying around. What does he say immediately after this:

"The chapter before affirms God's perfect law when it comes to sexual matters.".....

I've tried to find a more extensive version of that and haven't been successful. I've also provided 3 contextual video clips that really do disabuse any notion that he actually favored killing gays.

My video clips have been completely ignored, at least so far.

#41 Did you watch the video clip provided by Media Matters? If you didn't, I recommend that you do.

Gal Tuesday,

Do you believe based upon the evidence I presented and the evidence TH presented, that Kirk was in favor of stoning gays to death?

Gal Tuesday,

One at a time. TH is claiming Kirk wanted gays (and trans) to be stoned based upon biblical text, specifically leveticus 20:13.

Here is a clip of Dave Rubin day after the assassination.

"I don't think there is a context in which most of the quotes TH provided or I did in the above post would make those quotes read differently. Since you do, why don't you provide the ameliorating contexts.

#31 | Posted by Gal_Tuesday at 2025-09-15 11:02 PM | Reply | Flag"

I've provided 2 videos and I'll provide another in my next post...

Truthhurts,

I've given you two videos that are far more illustrative than the one sentence quotes you are providing. Maybe he was all of the things you are saying he was. But to be convincing you need to provide full context, not cherry-picked sentences. If you want to make the accusations you are making, then provide actual context. Selective editing can be, but is not always, extremely deceptive.

Truthhurts,

IF you are open-minded, here is a contextual debate along the lines of what you are quoting. These 2 really get into the weeds but it's far more representative than the 18-second clip that you are citing:

#13 I've seen that clip. What does he say immediately after "God's perfect law when it comes to sexual matters."?

I've looked but haven't been able to find it.

Also, square that with this:

"Hypocrisy, thy name is MAGA.

#60 | Posted by moder8 at 2025-09-15 08:42 PM | Reply | Flag:
(Choose)
"

Actually, in this case - Hypocrisy, thy name is Fox News.

"You have an answer you'd care to suggest?
Or just ... trolling?
Jayzus, you're a sad specimen.

#79 | Posted by Doc_Sarvis at 2025-09-15 06:18 AM | Reply | Flag:"

If I did, I wouldn't have asked the question.

Apparently he walked it back and apologized. I have a very difficult time accepting his apology.

"#6 | Posted by Sycophant"

You clearly have not been keeping up with the news regarding the alleged shooter.