- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Coaching Changes
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
1
Posted on 9/19/25 at 6:54 pm to Madking
quote:Have not done that once
So your natural inclination is to misrepresent what people say.
Posted on 9/19/25 at 7:09 pm to Roaad
quote:
He never said nor implied the shooter was MAGA, he said MAGA was more eager to acquit themselves, and use him to bludgeon the left for points and point the finger, than to grieve.
He was wrong, but he wasn't lying, because he believed what he was saying.
He believed what he was saying. He believed that the right was pointing fingers and scoring political points. When in reality the right was pointing out things known for certain to be a lie. The right wasn't trying to score points but rather correct an attempt by the left to shift blame away from themselves. Kimmel refers to this as "a new low".
Kimmel would only believe this to be a new low if he believed the lie that the shooter might be MAGA. Otherwise it makes no sense to scold the right for attempting to correct the record. In terms of the right not grieving properly as "a new low", he only points out Trump in what was referred to as a different "new low", hence the actual quote being "We hit some new lows" plural.
You posted in another thread about your wife. So if I were to say that you only did that to prove to everyone here that you are anything other than gay, that could be interpreted two different ways, correct? I'm implying that you are straight or I'm implying that you're covering for the fact that you are gay.
You give Kimmel the benefit of the doubt, most don't. Given his history I'm not sure why anyone would. But to suggest that there's only one way to interpret his meaning seems shaky.
Posted on 9/19/25 at 7:31 pm to JoeHackett
quote:
Kimmel would only believe this to be a new low if he believed the lie that the shooter might be MAGA.
quote:He isn't saying they are correcting the record
Otherwise it makes no sense to scold the right for attempting to correct the record
WTF are you even talking about.
Blaming, pointing fingers, and trying to use something for political points has nothing to do with correcting a record.
Your entire premise here is flawed
This post was edited on 9/19/25 at 7:33 pm
Posted on 9/19/25 at 7:44 pm to Roaad
quote:
Blaming, pointing fingers, and trying to use something for political points has nothing to do with correcting a record.
We're in agreement. The right was either doing one of two things over the weekend. Correcting a lie or pointing fingers to score political points. Kimmel believed that they were pointing fingers to score political points, which means quite clearly that he didn't believe that the right was correcting a lie.
Which means he didn't believe that the shooter being MAGA was a lie. Even though that was known by all reasonable people.
Posted on 9/19/25 at 8:00 pm to JoeHackett
quote:And exactly that is what Kimmel said.
We're in agreement. The right was either doing one of two things over the weekend
And people heard that and immediately fabricated " He said/implied the shooter was MAGA"
And the "he was lying"
And I pointed out that He never said nor implied that the shooter was MAGA.
As well as pointing out that I don't think he was lying, because he is a lefty loon and believes what he is saying is accurate.
I believe he is factually inaccurate in what he ACTUALLY said, but not lying.
quote:Where did he address that the right was correcting anything? Are you saying that pointing the fingers means the assumption was already made.
Kimmel believed that they were pointing fingers to score political points, which means quite clearly that he didn't believe that the right was correcting a lie.
So for that, I need you to show me where he established the prior assumption.
Because I keep reading the quote, and I am having. . .well, just the Dickens of a time finding it.
Was that from before the "offending" quote?
This post was edited on 9/19/25 at 8:05 pm
Posted on 9/19/25 at 8:07 pm to Roaad
quote:
And exactly that is what Kimmel said.
That's not true, he never mentioned a separate motive for the MAGA gang to push back against the bluesky narrative that the shooter was far right. His only explanation was that they were pointing fingers to score political points.
quote:
And people heard that and immediately fabricated " He said/implied the shooter was MAGA"
I don't think it's a fabrication, I do think there are different ways to interpret his comments. That's why I tried to present a case for why he shouldn't be given the benefit of the doubt.
"You only mention your wife to convince people that you are anything but gay" could absolutely be a sarcastic remark meant to imply that you're gay.
quote:
As well as pointing out that I don't think he was lying, because he is a lefty loon and believes what he is saying is accurate.
We're in agreement here as well. In an either or situation, given his "new low" comment, he believes that the shooter might be far right. Which is why I think there's an easy case to be made that he meant to imply that the shooter was MAGA.
Posted on 9/19/25 at 8:12 pm to JoeHackett
quote:Correct, he never addressed the political motivations of the shooter in the offending quote.
That's not true, he never mentioned a separate motive for the MAGA gang to push back against the bluesky narrative that the shooter was far right.
That is pretty damaging to your point, actually.
quote:Correct. They were pointing fingers at the left, the dems, and trannies to score political points.
His only explanation was that they were pointing fingers to score political points.
quote:Because you are adding to his words.
I don't think it's a fabrication,
quote:I fixed your analogy
"You talk about your wife to convince people that you are anything other than unmarried"
quote:False.
given his "new low" comment, he believes that the shooter might be far right.
He is calling it a new low that they are more interested in pointing the finger for political points, than grieving.
I'll check back in the morning. Do better peeps. Impress me.
This post was edited on 9/19/25 at 8:20 pm
Posted on 9/19/25 at 8:23 pm to Roaad
quote:
Correct. They were pointing fingers at the left, the dems, and trannies to score political points.
Except that's not what they were doing, correct? They were pushing back against an obvious lie. There's no way Kimmel calls it a new low unless he believed the lie. Otherwise the scolding makes no sense.
"You only mention your wife here to convince people that you are anything but gay"
Could that be interpreted two different ways? You say no, I say yes. Since I believe yes, I'm making the case for why Kimmel probably meant it to mean what most people think.
quote:
He is calling it a new low that they are more interested in pointing the finger for political points, than grieving.
The grieving part seems to be reserved for Trump and the second of the "new lows".
Posted on 9/19/25 at 8:29 pm to Roaad
quote:
Where did he address that the right was correcting anything? Are you saying that pointing the fingers means the assumption was already made.
So for that, I need you to show me where he established the prior assumption.
Because I keep reading the quote, and I am having. . .well, just the Dickens of a time finding it.
He didn't address that the right was correcting anything. I never said that he did.
Posted on 9/19/25 at 8:42 pm to JoeHackett
Kimmel cucks have lost. After his comments on Monday ABC asked Kimmel to take the temperature down but Kimmel refused saying that he was going to double down on what he said Monday. Thats why he was suspended. It wasn’t satire, there’s no ambiguity on what he meant. He should’ve been fired, it’s an outrage he wasn’t. Road is 100% wrong
This post was edited on 9/19/25 at 8:43 pm
Posted on 9/19/25 at 11:03 pm to Madking
quote:Because he’s not a greedy pussy like the CEOs of Nextstar and Sinclair. Amazing how you frickers throw the cuck word around and celebrate every shill who bends the knee to Trump.
ABC asked Kimmel to take the temperature down but Kimmel refused saying that he was going to double down on what he said Monday.
Posted on 9/19/25 at 11:32 pm to Fewer Kilometers
(no message)
This post was edited on 9/20/25 at 12:29 am
Posted on 9/20/25 at 12:24 am to dawgfan24348
this isn't cancel culture, it's consequence culture.
Posted on 9/20/25 at 12:28 am to Fewer Kilometers
“Because he’s not a greedy pussy”
An elitist whose family is in the 1%? He’s doing this for money you sweet summer child.
An elitist whose family is in the 1%? He’s doing this for money you sweet summer child.
Posted on 9/20/25 at 8:47 am to dawgfan24348
Yep, this is an egregious example of Cancel Culture( this time from the right)
Any honest person would agree.
Any honest person would agree.
Posted on 9/20/25 at 11:38 am to VOR
quote:I completely disagree
Yep, this is an egregious example of Cancel Culture( this time from the right)
Any honest person would agree.
I am certain Kimmel was the next one to go, irrespective.
I am betting ABC has some morality/whatever clause in the contract.
I think they want the excuse to dump his ratings toilet for something somebody may watch.
Colbert had the best ratings of the network late night guys (smartest retard argument to be sure), and he was losing the company millions per year, iirc. Imagine how much Kimmel is losing ABC, all that considered.
If Kimmel and Carolla brought Netflix "The Man Show", I bet they'd jump at it.
Posted on 9/20/25 at 11:42 am to JoeHackett
quote:The left started that shortly after the kid was caught. The right was calling the kid a tranny commie from the moment the bullet struck Kirk.
Except that's not what they were doing, correct? They were pushing back against an obvious lie.
quote:because he says they are trying to point fingers anduse the murder to score points on the left
Kimmel calls it a new low
That is the "new low" he is talking about
quote:nope, all part of the same bit.
he grieving part seems to be reserved for Trump and the second of the "new lows".
Posted on 9/20/25 at 11:54 am to Roaad
quote:
I responded to his post directly. He proved nothing of the sort, as I proved.
Dude, just take the "L"
He clearly said that MAGA was trying to push a narrative, rather than the fact that the shooter was "one of them"
ABC gave him a chance to save his job, and he was going to double down on blaming MAGA
And its been days since, and he still hasnt 'clarified' his comment on any form of social media
Kimmel is batshit insane. Hes ate up. He fully intended to say that a white kid, raised in Mormon Utah, from Repub gun-owning parents, was "one of them". And that is who killed Charlie Kirk
Just accept it. And move on. You missed on this one. It happens
Page 18 of 23
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News