Any Texans?

So I guess we're choosing to ignore AOC's comments today then along with Talib's who continues to think it's ok to call republicans fascists. You think those 2 & the other 56 along who include the likes of Islamist Ilhan Omar really want to tone down the rhetoric to help quell the violence? If so I've got some ocean front property in Kansas I'll sell you. Ilhan receives donations from a pro Hamas group.

These people thrivd on violence & division.

What does that have to do with what I'm saying? Can you not follow a train of thought at all?

You're claiming that they chose to vote no because they didn't agree with 1 of the 2 principal issues in that bill….are you not?

Then you're claiming they voted no because they don't feel like Kirk needs to be honored but they would have voted yes if the bill was soley about condemning political violence. I'm providing evidence to you that they're continuing the rhetoric that is gong to continue to lead to political violence. If you want to keep deflecting, then that's on you.

They want assassinations. They're godless. A death cult.

We need a national divorce. Irreconcilable differences. We will never see eye to eye again. The sooner the better.

whoop1995 said:

---

I really do not know how to say this and I will probably get blasted for it but here it goes…..

I am grateful they did this action to honor Charlie Kirk but I really do not understand why it was needed and what was gained from it - just like I don't understand when the other side does it for their people.

We the people can barely get congress to work at all and there are a lot of important items that they could be spending their time on and those things never get accomplished because they don't have time or votes……

Is this a gotcha moment for the next election cycle or are they truly honoring this gentleman? If it is a gotcha moment does it truly honor Mr Kirk or was it just for them and they are using Mr Kirk to achieve this outcome?

---

Yes.

It was a resolution crafted purely as political theater. An attempt to force the opposition into either endorsing the obvious charade or facing accusations that they were 'condoning his killing.' It's essentially a legislative equivalent of the loaded question, "Have you stopped beating your wife?".

And you've got 5 pages of the base frothing at the mouth over it, so it worked just as designed.

Condemn what happened to Kirk, even cast deserving blame on those on the other side of the aisle that pushed extremists to this -- but don't lend legitimacy to this legislative nonsense from either party.

AtomicActuator said:

---

No facts relevant to my argument were presented. Someone regurgitated the text of the resolution and said "look, in addition to honoring him, it also condemns the murder" which is a fact that was never in dispute.

The logical argument is simply that if a resolution contains a part you agree with and a part you don't, and you vote against it, it's more reasonable to say you voted against the part that caused you to vote no, not the part that you and everyone else agrees with.

No arguments against that have been made that I have seen.

And my best rational argument in support of my position is a reduction to absurdity. Going back to my reductio ad dahmerum, by your logic a person who votes against a resolution which condemns the prison murder of Jeffrey Dahmer and honors his life's work automatically supports the murder. While obviously one can be against prison murder and against cannibals.

---

I keep seeing people say the most chilling part of the Jimmy Kimmel scandal surrounding Charlie Kirk's assassination is ABC cancelling the Jimmy Kimmel Show. I disagree. I think the most chilling part is the assassination.

What terrifies me is if a leftist were to assassinate a leader in the conservative movement. Imagine the backlash against mostly peaceful protesters.

Proof that there are marxists in the democratic party.

They're also racist! The overwhelming majority (80%+) of "Nay" votes cast were Black Dems; I guess this was the entire "Black Caucus" voting bloc?

What an absolute embarrassment; PATHETIC!

Proposition Joe said:

---

whoop1995 said:

---

I really do not know how to say this and I will probably get blasted for it but here it goes…..

I am grateful they did this action to honor Charlie Kirk but I really do not understand why it was needed and what was gained from it - just like I don't understand when the other side does it for their people.

We the people can barely get congress to work at all and there are a lot of important items that they could be spending their time on and those things never get accomplished because they don't have time or votes……

Is this a gotcha moment for the next election cycle or are they truly honoring this gentleman? If it is a gotcha moment does it truly honor Mr Kirk or was it just for them and they are using Mr Kirk to achieve this outcome?

---

Yes.

It was a resolution crafted purely as political theater. An attempt to force the opposition into either endorsing the obvious charade or facing accusations that they were 'condoning his killing.' It's essentially a legislative equivalent of the loaded question, "Have you stopped beating your wife?".

And you've got 5 pages of the base frothing at the mouth over it, so it worked just as designed.

Condemn what happened to Kirk, even cast deserving blame on those on the other side of the aisle that pushed extremists to this -- but don't lend legitimacy to this legislative nonsense from either party.

---

And yet, when the Republicans unanimously approved similar 'political theatre' moments, I bet neither of you took this faux ethical stand against suchat that moment!!

Is this the new strategy; to attempt to minimize Kirk's assassination & especially its impact?

I guess the Dems saw a bunch of patriots publicly gathered together in record numbers, folks of all colors publicly begging for crime reduction/ prevention, & churches turned into "Standing Room Only" venues- ALL B/C OF CHARLIE; if I was a godless Democrat, these scenes would scare the hell outta me too!!

Tell me, when Congress honored the MN couple, if you didn't post the same word vomit as today, was that because y'all had a shred of dignity left unstained by TDS, so y'all understood & recognized there's ZERO reason not to show unity after a POLITICAL assassination, OR, did y'all think it was just "Good Bull" to honor the slain MN victims b/c y'all actually thought a "right-winger" did it?!?!

Ellis Wyatt said:

---

They want assassinations. They're godless. A death cult.

---

Demoscum on parade. That's all they are and they are proud of it.

The left and the democrats are satanic. Literally nothing they do can surprise me anymore.

TAMUallen said:

---

. @TPUSA please sue Representative Sherrill for defamation. https://t.co/NhcZEsHHOu

— DataRepublican (small r) (@DataRepublican) September 20, 2025

---

Good luck.