VitalVegas made nasty remarks about Charlie Kirk after the shooting

[mickeycrimm]

Druff's note: I separated this into its own thread. These messages were previously part of the thread where VitalVegas blocked me for questioning a shady casino visitation record he promoted.

-------------------------------




This vital vegas guy was calling Charlie Kirk a racist and fascist just after the shooting.

[Tasha]

This vital vegas guy was calling Charlie Kirk a racist and fascist just after the shooting.

Guy is a Dick.

[redietz]

This vital vegas guy was calling Charlie Kirk a racist and fascist just after the shooting.

Stop retarding up an interesting thread with something completely irrelevant.

This vital vegas guy was calling Charlie Kirk a racist and fascist just after the shooting, jdaepoo.

You know, this should probably have its own thread. I have a long-time friend who used one really tone-deaf Kirk line in a reply on a forum as a response to someone else. Well, ETSU is in the midst of firing him, and he has tenure, for that one line. And he preceded that one bad line with the statement that he never advocates violence. But that didn't matter because the line is being used in isolation as a reason to fire him.

I guess my point is, being momentarily stupid should not necessarily be a fire-able offense. If you can link exactly what the vital vegas guy said, that would be helpful in figuring out if he was a shrill nutcase or just in-the-moment exercising really bad judgement.

Calling someone a racist and fascist can be done in a Dragnet way. It may be mean-spirited and stupid, but if it's meant purely politically, then it's just a poorly-timed opinion.

Prior to the assassination I had watched Kirk for just a couple hours on tape doing his Q&A stuff and knew nothing else about him. I have been to two live Turning Point events in the last decade, one a year or so ago. Kirk was not at those events. I have no knowledge of Kirk beyond watching those two hours of taped Q&A, which I think he conducted reasonably and well.

[smurgerburger]

I find all this "momentary stupidity" talk unconvincing, particularly after seeing wall-to-wall "momentary stupidity" online over the CEO shooting less than a year ago.

These people are expressing political opinions that seem true to them and even ordinary (within their online circles anyway).

Now for some of them it may be foolish to not foresee that there could be professional consequences, but that only applies to their decision to express themselves. The sentiments that they express are not the ravings of the temporarily deranged.

[redietz]

I find all this "momentary stupidity" talk unconvincing, particularly after seeing wall-to-wall "momentary stupidity" online over the CEO shooting less than a year ago.

These people are expressing political opinions that seem true to them and even ordinary (within their online circles anyway).

Now for some of them it may be foolish to not foresee that there could be professional consequences, but that only applies to their decision to express themselves. The sentiments that they express are not the ravings of the temporarily deranged.

No, the sentiments are not "mistakes." They are their sentiments. The error, to me, is not reading the room. Or having a little common human sensitivity when online.

Another mistake is the assumption that a particular site or forum has a defined audience, as if you were in a room or at a club. All audiences are undefined and potentially unlimited.

Or, to be honest, the mistake is that they are expressing themselves in the moment as opposed to editing themselves after pausing. As a writing major (and journalism for two years), I see this as the most common problem with online communication. People don't pause to review what they just wrote. They just write and hit send. I kind of understand why because writing takes so much longer than speaking, and reading is faster than listening, so it is a self-damaging set-up. The loop is set up to make you an idiot. And because most people spend most of their time posting anonymously, when they actually post under their real-world identities, they lack that pause-and-review.

You are writing "anonymously." I use the parentheses because at some point coming soon, AI will be able to identify you pretty quickly and be able to attach your entire posting history to your real-world name. This may be only a few years away. I'm sure the CIA will be able to do this for 90% of the population shortly if they feel like looking. Scrubbing will be, at best, a partial and hit-or-miss strategy.

So everything you posted, even under an alleged pseudonymous handle, will come back to haunt you, if not next month, then certainly next decade.

[mickeycrimm]

Stop retarding up an interesting thread with something completely irrelevant.

This vital vegas guy was calling Charlie Kirk a racist and fascist just after the shooting, jdaepoo.

You know, this should probably have its own thread. I have a long-time friend who used one really tone-deaf Kirk line in a reply on a forum as a response to someone else. Well, ETSU is in the midst of firing him, and he has tenure, for that one line. And he preceded that one bad line with the statement that he never advocates violence. But that didn't matter because the line is being used in isolation as a reason to fire him.

I guess my point is, being momentarily stupid should not necessarily be a fire-able offense. If you can link exactly what the vital vegas guy said, that would be helpful in figuring out if he was a shrill nutcase or just in-the-moment exercising really bad judgement.

Calling someone a racist and fascist can be done in a Dragnet way. It may be mean-spirited and stupid, but if it's meant purely politically, then it's just a poorly-timed opinion.

Prior to the assassination I had watched Kirk for just a couple hours on tape doing his Q&A stuff and knew nothing else about him. I have been to two live Turning Point events in the last decade, one a year or so ago. Kirk was not at those events. I have no knowledge of Kirk beyond watching those two hours of taped Q&A, which I think he conducted reasonably and well.

I follow vital vegas on X. He follows me too. He’s in my feed. Thats where I saw it. The guy makes a gillion tweets a day so I dont feel like going through it to find the tweet. Besides, if he had any sense he would have taken it down.


Something strage happened a few months ago. In my twitter feed it said vital vegas blocked me. I had no clue what it was about. I didnt care because i really didnt read his stuff anyway. But then one day his Kirk is a fascist tweet was in my feed. So I thought, well, the guy is a woke ass bitch, and probably read one of my anti woke tweets, blocked me, then later decided to unblock me.

[accountinquestion]

I find all this "momentary stupidity" talk unconvincing, particularly after seeing wall-to-wall "momentary stupidity" online over the CEO shooting less than a year ago.

These people are expressing political opinions that seem true to them and even ordinary (within their online circles anyway).

Now for some of them it may be foolish to not foresee that there could be professional consequences, but that only applies to their decision to express themselves. The sentiments that they express are not the ravings of the temporarily deranged.

No, the sentiments are not "mistakes." They are their sentiments. The error, to me, is not reading the room. Or having a little common human sensitivity when online.

Another mistake is the assumption that a particular site or forum has a defined audience, as if you were in a room or at a club. All audiences are undefined and potentially unlimited.

Or, to be honest, the mistake is that they are expressing themselves in the moment as opposed to editing themselves after pausing. As a writing major (and journalism for two years), I see this as the most common problem with online communication. People don't pause to review what they just wrote. They just write and hit send. I kind of understand why because writing takes so much longer than speaking, and reading is faster than listening, so it is a self-damaging set-up. The loop is set up to make you an idiot. And because most people spend most of their time posting anonymously, when they actually post under their real-world identities, they lack that pause-and-review.

You are writing "anonymously." I use the parentheses because at some point coming soon, AI will be able to identify you pretty quickly and be able to attach your entire posting history to your real-world name. This may be only a few years away. I'm sure the CIA will be able to do this for 90% of the population shortly if they feel like looking. Scrubbing will be, at best, a partial and hit-or-miss strategy.

So everything you posted, even under an alleged pseudonymous handle, will come back to haunt you, if not next month, then certainly next decade.

You're so wrong about AI. AI will never be able to do that. It can barely tell if text was written by AI to begin with .. tons of errors and that is an easy problem to approach.

AI as we see it is basically a glorified auto-completion. It doesn't do what you think.

If you're worreid though you could have your talk fed through AI to modify it.

Your story about the guiness record was good. You should give us more stories. You old timers have great stories. Always why I liked playing poker with older dudes. They've lived a life. Kids these days have spent too much time sitting in front of a screen. Do that and stop ranting about APs and you'll be happier and better respeced, Redietz.

[accountinquestion]

This vital vegas guy was calling Charlie Kirk a racist and fascist just after the shooting, jdaepoo.

You know, this should probably have its own thread. I have a long-time friend who used one really tone-deaf Kirk line in a reply on a forum as a response to someone else. Well, ETSU is in the midst of firing him, and he has tenure, for that one line. And he preceded that one bad line with the statement that he never advocates violence. But that didn't matter because the line is being used in isolation as a reason to fire him.

I guess my point is, being momentarily stupid should not necessarily be a fire-able offense. If you can link exactly what the vital vegas guy said, that would be helpful in figuring out if he was a shrill nutcase or just in-the-moment exercising really bad judgement.

Calling someone a racist and fascist can be done in a Dragnet way. It may be mean-spirited and stupid, but if it's meant purely politically, then it's just a poorly-timed opinion.

Prior to the assassination I had watched Kirk for just a couple hours on tape doing his Q&A stuff and knew nothing else about him. I have been to two live Turning Point events in the last decade, one a year or so ago. Kirk was not at those events. I have no knowledge of Kirk beyond watching those two hours of taped Q&A, which I think he conducted reasonably and well.

I follow vital vegas on X. He follows me too. He’s in my feed. Thats where I saw it. The guy makes a gillion tweets a day so I dont feel like going through it to find the tweet. Besides, if he had any sense he would have taken it down.


Something strage happened a few months ago. In my twitter feed it said vital vegas blocked me. I had no clue what it was about. I didnt care because i really didnt read his stuff anyway. But then one day his Kirk is a fascist tweet was in my feed. So I thought, well, the guy is a woke ass bitch, and probably read one of my anti woke tweets, blocked me, then later decided to unblock me.

He is notorious for being thin-skinned. Kinda like you but taken to the next level. You block people too over silly things. This guy is just a ass-kisser of casinos - the very opposite of you.

[mickeycrimm]

Prior to the assassination I had watched Kirk for just a couple hours on tape doing his Q&A stuff and knew nothing else about him. I have been to two live Turning Point events in the last decade, one a year or so ago. Kirk was not at those events. I have no knowledge of Kirk beyond watching those two hours of taped Q&A, which I think he conducted reasonably and well.

The left did a big hit job on Kirk. Twisting his words around to make him appear racist/fascist. Even editing film to make him appear to be making racist statements. Run of the mill liberals see and think it's the truth so repeat it. But here's a short clip of Kirk on race:

[accountinquestion]

I did a deep dive on one of the quotes the liberals spread around and it was basically what it said. He had a podcast you can cherry pick reasonable stuff from but he's pretty awful. His wife is incredibly fake. Won a beauty pageant of Trumps. Just very into her looks and now that weird fake crying and performance stuff where she raises her head to the heavens choreographed to the music. So fake and gay.

[mickeycrimm]

I did a deep dive on one of the quotes the liberals spread around and it was basically what it said. He had a podcast you can cherry pick reasonable stuff from but he's pretty awful. His wife is incredibly fake. Won a beauty pageant of Trumps. Just very into her looks and now that weird fake crying and performance stuff where she raises her head to the heavens choreographed to the music. So fake and gay.

If thats what you think then you are depraved. Can’t even make a decent comment about the widow. And you wonder why we despise you lefties.

[accountinquestion]

I did a deep dive on one of the quotes the liberals spread around and it was basically what it said. He had a podcast you can cherry pick reasonable stuff from but he's pretty awful. His wife is incredibly fake. Won a beauty pageant of Trumps. Just very into her looks and now that weird fake crying and performance stuff where she raises her head to the heavens choreographed to the music. So fake and gay.

If thats what you think then you are depraved. Can’t even make a decent comment about the widow. And you wonder why we despise you lefties.

She is what she is. You're not the victim here as much as you wish to claim fellow victimhood.

She's put herself out there in the spotlight. She's not some grieving widow. She's grabbin her glory while it's still freshly minted for hers to grab. The whole thing was just a huge production like her hugging on the corpse for a viral clip. Watch the Mexican halfling for more info. He's not a uhhh "lefty",.

[accountinquestion]

They say - But he didn't say that about all black women - only about the most accomplished ones. But not about all of them!

Liberals twisting his words about !!!

Wait but they all said they were beneficiaries off DEI ! It was a statement about dei! Not about black women!

Except only 1 of the 4 said that.

Anyway kirk said a ton of shit. He argued with girls with blue hair and more emotions than sense. The he clickbaited edited that into rage inducing viral clips.

But at least he got out there and argued.. but he also had handlers that kept the smart debaters away.

In the end the only thing I can say positive about him is that he did get out and engage the other side in some capacity.

[mickeycrimm]

I did a deep dive on one of the quotes the liberals spread around and it was basically what it said. He had a podcast you can cherry pick reasonable stuff from but he's pretty awful. His wife is incredibly fake. Won a beauty pageant of Trumps. Just very into her looks and now that weird fake crying and performance stuff where she raises her head to the heavens choreographed to the music. So fake and gay.

If thats what you think then you are depraved. Can’t even make a decent comment about the widow. And you wonder why we despise you lefties.

She is what she is. You're not the victim here as much as you wish to claim fellow victimhood.

She's put herself out there in the spotlight. She's not some grieving widow. She's grabbin her glory while it's still freshly minted for hers to grab. The whole thing was just a huge production like her hugging on the corpse for a viral clip. Watch the Mexican halfling for more info. He's not a uhhh "lefty",.

Fuck off with the victimhood shit, maggot. You are the lowest piece of shit scum on the planet. Scum like you should dropped off in Tehran with FUCK RAGHEADS tattoe’d on your forehead.

[accountinquestion]

If thats what you think then you are depraved. Can’t even make a decent comment about the widow. And you wonder why we despise you lefties.

She is what she is. You're not the victim here as much as you wish to claim fellow victimhood.

She's put herself out there in the spotlight. She's not some grieving widow. She's grabbin her glory while it's still freshly minted for hers to grab. The whole thing was just a huge production like her hugging on the corpse for a viral clip. Watch the Mexican halfling for more info. He's not a uhhh "lefty",.

Fuck off with the victimhood shit, maggot. You are the lowest piece of shit scum on the planet. Scum like you should dropped off in Tehran with FUCK RAGHEADS tattoe’d on your forehead.

Lol. Watch the Mexican Halfling. It isn't just liberals who see it for what it is.

You are on a free speech forum. I'm not sure that is a good idea for someone like you.

[accountinquestion]

Get out of your liberal fake news hole Mickey. https://old.bitchute.com/video/8STaOXVXrUps/

Who is that woman? What is she? She met him well after he was famous I believe. She's just a fake person. I'm sorry to inform you of this. There are plenty plenty of fakes on the liberal side too. Once you commit to desiring to be famous and have power - you stop being a real person. Thats just how it is...

[mickeycrimm]

There are some people so morally depraved that they deserve no audience. I’ve given AQ seveal chance. But each time he comes back even worse. Disrespecting Kirk’s widow is the final straw for me. AQ is going back on ignore.

AND HE WILL NEVER BE TAKEN OFF IGNORE. I’m through with the moral dirt bag.

[accountinquestion]

There are some people so morally depraved that they deserve no audience. I’ve given AQ seveal chance. But each time he comes back even worse. Disrespecting Kirk’s widow is the final straw for me. AQ is going back on ignore.

AND HE WILL NEVER BE TAKEN OFF IGNORE. I’m through with the moral dirt bag.

Dude come up with your own thoughts. She doesn't read this forum. No one is above question. You worship Trump and anything in that world of his. Ok, we get it.

It is crazy how little Mick can't think for himself. Even if he disagrees - I said nothing that bad. The woman has put herself out there as a public figure. I can find some more clips of people dissecting her performances.

Look, she was the main character in a music video about being a pretty woman. She was in a beauty pageant. She is not your normal stay at home housewife.

I wonder what it is like to be Mickey and never grow up and see the world like an adult?

There is this moment where the music changes and she raises her head up and looks into the sky. It is a big performance. She keeps dabbing her eyes but do we see any tears? I'm not saying she killed him or anything like that but it is a ton of performance. Most people do not make viral videos of them holding their husband's corpse.

Anyway, I'm completely ok with bringing up some of Kirk's quotes. The bad ones. Of course he didn't say bad things 100% of the time and one can find plenty of reasonable statements. He did have a podcast.. I mean. you can't just be a ranting nut 100% of the time.

That however doesn't excuse the things he said otherwise. All this whining about lack of freespeech and lawfare! .. Cancel culture. It is all a joke. FaG as my friends say.

[Rob.Singer]

AQ, I'm not seeing that you even come close to comprehending why people like you don't like or appreciate people like Charlie Kirk...or even his wife.

First, they were happily married and they had two cute kids. Being alone and lonely your entire life, "getting it" doesn't ever enter into the equation for you.

Next: it seems to irk you that a self-educated Charlie Kirk could consistently out-debate--always while articulating facts--with however many strange mensa-level liberals the colleges could throw at him. And he did it with aplomb.

Next: without the amazing & non-stop efforts of TPUSA educating so many new and young voters, our great President Donald Trump would be a political prisoner, Spanish would be the country's official language, our female sports programs would all be in deterioration mode before ceasing to exist, we'd get even more obnoxious trans & faggot couples and minorities in TV commercials, shows, movies etc.

Lastly: Erika Kirk. You have no idea what the lady's going thru right now, first because you've never loved anyone but yourself, and then because you've no idea how much the surviving spouse's heart aches over knowing their children will never have really known their father--who is widely acknowledged world-wide as being a very good man.

Sure she's a former beauty contestant, a piece of ass as her critics stupidly call her trying their best to be derogatory, and a devout Christian (something else that irks you??) but she's held herself together pretty well with all the pressure she's under. All that nonsense of no tears and looking up to the sky blah blah blah----that's just losers venting bs who got continuously ticked off at Charlie Kirk's ripping liberals a new one.

And guess what? IT'S ALL RELATED TO A SERIOUS CASE OF TRUMP DERANGEMENT SYNDROME!

And I love it!!!

[kewlJ]

Who gives a shit, Rob you big ugly doofus. It is supposed to be a gambling forum. No one cares about your man crush on Trump.

And some of you people are about to find out just what your hero has done for you in about 2 weeks when SS COLA is announced at about 2.7%, way less than half what inflation really is. And that is before a 12% raise in you medicate premium next year.

So Trump will be taking upwards of $100 from all retirees (including my mother), while continuing to enrich himself with every single thing he does. Hidden in the details of EVERY stroke of his pen is something that enriches Trump. EVERYTHING!

So go ahead and celebrate as Trump takes from you to enrich himself. Fucking moron!