The Frankish Reich

Good response. But what do you think about the threats of prosecution coming from Bondi, Stephen Miller, even JD Vance? I'm not talking about prosecutions related to the actual murder of Kirk. I'm talking about prosecutions for protected speech. In what way is it o.k. for the highest law enforcement officer in the land to even threaten such clearly unconstitutional prosecutions in order to keep people from exercising their constitutional rights?

I think you may be onto something here ...

The Bondi statement on "hate speech" is just stunning coming from the nation's chief law enforcement officer. Anyone who wrote that on a bar exam would fail. And what's more troubling: a lot of Trump fans (including obviously many here) think that this is good policy and constitutional. I thought this was supposed to be about undoing the excesses of Wokism. The kind of thing where saying something innocuous and even true about George Floyd ("remember, he was a career criminal") could get you canceled. Now we're seeing that it is about substituting Right Wing Wokism for Left Wing Wokism. Say something innocuous and true about Charlie Kirk ("remember, his style of rhetoric is what inflames people") and you can get canceled. And now if Pam Bondi has her way, you can get indicted too. I guess that's what you voted for.

No, but I'm just a teensy weensy bit upset that Trump is asking for federal employees/military men and women to rat out any colleagues that might not say only wonderful things about the late Charlie Kirk.

No, not self-hating. You have much to learn.

Horseshoe Theory, my friends. Horseshoe Theory. When you can't actually tell which political camp a meme is supposed to be mocking or expressing support for, it just may be that the poster isn't following grandpa's left-middle-right political orthodoxy ...

Who is this person, and why are you posting his photo?

Would free speech champion Charlie Kirk be in favor of firing people who spoke ill of Charlie Kirk on social media? Hmm .... ... Trump always seems to know how to cede the moral high ground within roughly 48 hours.

Have you watched it? RFK says he spoke to Charlie and then mentions only what he (RFK) allegedly said to Charlie. Nothing from Charlie himself.

Why would corporate America take any official action here? His assassination was a tragedy and a dark moment for America. I've been trying to think of a similar figure on the left. He wasn't a pure political consultant turned pundit like a James Carville. He wasn't a talk radio guy like Limbaugh (although I think he fits perfectly as a successor to Limbaugh for the social media age). My best comparison: John Oliver, who just took home another Emmy or two. Or maybe Jon Stewart. If some weirdo takes out John Oliver or Jon Stewart, what would you expect from corporate America?

In which RFK, shockingly, makes it all about RFK.

Really important that Philly put them in a hole early on here. They are completely unimpressive, but somehow I worry that it'll be like the waning years of the Pats dynasty, where they stick around and then suddenly have that playoff burst left in them.

Everyone keeps talking about Xavier Worthy, but Troy Franklin of the Broncos is stepping up big-time. I'm not sure why he slipped all the way to the 4th round. Kid is a winner.

Ooh, that's good ... had me fooled.

Thanks. I will check that out. The NFL/CBS is giving me Giants-Cowboys as my sole early game. I'm about to go cut the grass which will be significantly more fun.

Thank you for the reminder. I will be sitting this one out as I didn't buy the Sunday Ticket this year. And it's too early here to hit some bar.

It's fair to call him part of the LGBTQ+ "community." But that category is not wholly separate and apart from groyper culture. I think the Venn Diagram would show a significant overlap. I'm pretty much on the cusp of Boomer/Gen X as currently defined, so I realize I am prone to that either/or categorization of people. The whole Gen Z thing is very different. And I'll admit I don't get a lot of it. Those things he wrote on the bullet casings are so Gen Z, so completely immersed in multiple levels of Gen Z social media/gamer culture, that it probably isn't comprehensible to most of us here.

Utah Governor Spencer Cox: a pitch perfect response to this tragedy. Watch him on CNN's State of the Union. I know Utah well (lived there as a kid, supervised an office there as an adult), and yes, it does have a different political and social culture informed by the Mormon church. But maybe in these times its a better political culture. He is stable, rational, projects a sense of being in control. It's been a long time since we've seen that on the national level.

So no limits on 2nd Amendment rights means everyone at a Trump (or other) campaign rally may bring in one or more firearms. You really think this is what the 2nd Amendment means?

So after this assassination, do we agree that: - It would make sense to make public assembly areas like this one at UVU gun-free zones? - It would make sense to have security checks before entering a public assembly featuring a political speaker? A controversial political speaker? - It would make sense to have a drone in addition to cameras to make sure that no one has brought a gun into the immediate vicinity? We seem to all agree that there is some limit to 2nd Amendment rights. Does anyone think it is a good idea to have open/concealed carry in a forum where the President is speaking? So what is the limit? Someone adjudicated mentally ill should be prohibited from possessing a firearm, right? And I understand that some on the right thing trans people are per se mentally ill, so it would extend to them, right? What about the lover/spouse/partner of a trans person? So what is the limit?

Despicable act, but some here are getting a bit carried away with the St. Charlie thing. I would never call for political violence, and I never thought there was anything amusing about a man trying to kill Nancy Pelosi with a hammer and instead almost killing her husband with a hammer.

IN: Howard Lutnick OUT: Elon Musk. https://www.axios.com/2025/09/12/doge-elon-musk-howard-lutnick

I could explain why this is a better constructed joke headline, but you know what they say about explaining a joke.

I guess it's a common name?

Sounds eerily like the National Socialist parties of days of yore.