Jimmy Kimmel Cancelled over Charlie Kirk comments!

[WestCanMan]

8 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

Yes, it’s true that killing someone for their speech is also wrong.

Wrong?

For gawd's sake, Chrissy, it's not just wrong. It's diabolical. 

People walked around Canada chanting "from the river to the sea", most of them knowing that they were advocating for the slaughter of millions of women and children. Did any of them go to jail? Did anyone say that they should go to jail? 

TBH, when criminals like that want to go out in public and say those kinds of things, it's important to let them go out in public and say those kinds of things, because you need to know who you need to keep track of. 

Call it a police state if you want, but it's important to know who's planning to run around and kill a bunch of people: the opposite of crying about "a police state" is saying "How did they get away with plotting such a massive terrorist attack? Why did authorities not protect us?"

[Chrissy1979]

2 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

You kind of go back and forth on that, but the left definitely disagrees with you

Yes, but it was actually 100% true

Irrelevant anyway. If you’re opposed to something, you’re a hypocrite when you accept your team doing it. Fake stories of “whatabout 10 years ago” are always just a lame attempt to distract from your own hypocrisy.

Just now, WestCanMan said:

Wrong?

For gawd's sake, Chrissy, it's not just …
 

Yes, now try and get the MAGA mass shooters, like the kid in the Colorado school last week, to stop it.

[CdnFox]

7 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Well it’s cancel culture with a salient difference - it’s coming from the head of government, not from righteous nitwits online.

Makes no difference whatsoever and frankly it has come from the democrats just as much. "If I had a son he'd look just like Trayvon Martin". Etc

You can't split the hair now

[West]

Unacceptable views. Sad

[WestCanMan]

4 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

Well it’s cancel culture with a salient difference - it’s coming from the head of government, not from righteous nitwits online. That’s a sinister turn in any country claiming to value free speech. 

Just because trump commented on something doesn't mean that ABC execs weren't thinking the same thing. 

imagine this, Spanky: Trump makes a comment, and your natural urge is to just do or say the exact opposite thing, but you know that his comment is 100% correct, and if you follow through on your plan of opposing him, you will seen to cede the moral high ground to him. 

Would you cede the moral high ground to Trump? Would you come off looking like the hateful bigot while Trump walks off looking like a saint? 

I think that you'd do the right thing, and just hate the fact that you had to do it. 

In this instance, Kimmel has been an over-the-line dirtbag for years now, he just never took a shit there while the cameras were rolling before that incident. 

[SpankyMcFarland]

10 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

Wrong?

For gawd's sake, Chrissy, it's not just wrong. It's diabolical. 

People walked around Canada chanting "from the river to the sea", most of them knowing that they were advocating for the slaughter of millions of women and children. Did any of them go to jail? Did anyone say that they should go to jail? 

TBH, when criminals like that want to go out in public and say those kinds of things, it's important to let them go out in public and say those kinds of things, because you need to know who you need to keep track of. 

Call it a police state if you want, but it's important to know who's planning to run around and kill a bunch of people: the opposite of crying about "a police state" is saying "How did they get away with plotting such a massive terrorist attack? Why did authorities not protect us?"

From the river to the sea…now where have I seen words like that a long, long time ago? Ah, yes.

Quote

 

The Right of the Jewish People to the Land of Israel (Eretz Israel)

a. The right of the Jewish people to the land of Israel is eternal and indisputable and is linked with the right to security and peace; therefore, Judea and Samaria will not be handed to any foreign administration; between the Sea and the Jordan there will only be Israeli sovereignty.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party

Getting too attached to one side in a tribal war is folly personified. 

Edited September 18, 2025 by SpankyMcFarland

[CdnFox]

5 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

Irrelevant anyway.

Completely relevant entirely relevant. Just not something you like so you're trying to dismiss it

Quote

If you’re opposed to something, you’re a hypocrite when you accept your team doing it.

Not at all. I was clear and said that I don't like it when either side does it but it is a fact that if it's allowed for one it must be allowed for both whether I like it or not. So I would prefer to see both stop it but if one is going to do it the other must be allowed to to balance the field

There's nothing remotely hypocritical about that. It's not like when you criticize trump for how he treats women and then support a rapist and his enabling wife. That's hypochrissy  LOL

 

1 minute ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

From the river to the sea…now where have I seen words like that a long, long time ago? Ah, yes.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party

Are you trying to pretend that from the river to the sea isn't a Palestinian call for genocide?

Do you think being dishonest like that strengthens your case?

[WestCanMan]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

But it's refreshing to have cancel culture increase its scope I heard.

Meh, doesn't matter...

It's not "cancel culture" when you get fired for taking a dump on live TV. 

What you consider art, isn't necessarily ABC's definition of art. 

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, WestCanMan said:

It's not "cancel culture" when you get fired for taking a dump on live TV. 

What you consider art, isn't necessarily ABC's definition of art. 

I mean there is that argument, it would definitely be canceled culture if he was banned for something he did his personal account or on his free time, but he did take a stance on national television.

At the same time it's kind of his job to make fun of people and make this kind of commentary, I'm still conflicted.

But at the end of the day I know that if the situations were reversed and it was a conservative they'd be gone and the left would be cheering so loudly it would be deafening. So until that changes I'm not going to worry too much about it. It's got to be the same rules for everybody

[Shady]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

But it's refreshing to have cancel culture increase its scope I heard.

Meh, doesn't matter...

It’s not cancel culture.  Cancel culture would he if someone dug up Some old tweet or some old joke or skit he did on the man show.  When you behave abhorrently and jeopardize your employer, it’s being held accountable for your current behaviour.

[WestCanMan]

2 minutes ago, SpankyMcFarland said:

From the river to the sea…now where have I seen words like that a long, long time ago? Ah, yes.

https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/original-party-platform-of-the-likud-party

Getting too attached to one side in a tribal war is folly personified. 

Are you pretending to not know the difference Spanky? 

The "Israelis" is a term for a group of people that includes 2M muslims. When they say "from the river to the sea" it is not a call for genocide, it is a statement that "they intend to keep their sovereignty over that 0.5% of the middle east, while muslims hold the other 99.5%."

Hamas's constitution or whatever you wanna call it called for the extermination of all Jews. Several Hamas leaders have openly called for that. It is written in the islamic Hadiths that the Jews would be exterminated.  

 

It is 100% true to say that

1. "Israel's sovereignty between the river and the sea is not based on any intent to murder anyone"
2. Hamas's call of "from the river and the sea" is an open declaration of their intent to murder 10M people, and they are not kidding. They would actually do it if they got the chance. They showed you on Oct 7th that they can gleefully murder thousands of women and children by hand. Who could you gleefully murder with a machete, or by burning, Spanky? I'm not asking you to name anyone specifically, just tell me if there is a unnamed group of people that you hate so much that you could spend 8 hrs a day slaughtering their women and children for 7 straight days, and you'd still be smiling. Who could you do that to, Spanky? If you say that there is a group of people that you would do that to, then I will understand your sympathy for Hamas. 

[Chrissy1979]

17 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

It's not "cancel culture" when you get fired for taking a dump on live TV. 

What you consider art, isn't necessarily ABC's definition of art. 

The government literally said if ABC doesn't fire him, the FCC will revoke their license

[WestCanMan]

10 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

I mean there is that argument, it would definitely be canceled culture if he was banned for something he did his personal account or on his free time, but he did take a stance on national television.

At the same time it's kind of his job to make fun of people and make this kind of commentary, I'm still conflicted.

But at the end of the day I know that if the situations were reversed and it was a conservative they'd be gone and the left would be cheering so loudly it would be deafening. So until that changes I'm not going to worry too much about it. It's got to be the same rules for everybody

He wasn't "making fun of people". He was trying to tell America that the killer was a conservative and that all conservatives were blah, blah, blah.... There was no entertainment value in that. There was no comedy in that. It was divisive propaganda, or even hate speech. 

It was basically an unhinged rant, representing ABC TV no less.

Nah. Sorry, Jimmy Kimmel. If I'm running that TV station, you gotta stage your unhinged rants in your own basement, and out of the public eye. 

I would have walked on stage and fired him during the show. Used the old Vaudeville cane to pull him off stage"

 

[WestCanMan]

3 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

The government literally said if ABC doesn't fire him, the FCC will revoke their license

It's really, really sad if that's what it took to get ABC to do the right thing. 

If what you said is true, then this is almost as bad as the vax mandates. 

Edited September 18, 2025 by WestCanMan

[WestCanMan]

13 minutes ago, Shady said:

It’s not cancel culture.  Cancel culture would he if someone dug up Some old tweet or some old joke or skit he did on the man show.  When you behave abhorrently and jeopardize your employer, it’s being held accountable for your current behaviour.

Exactly.

Saying "When you were 16, you used the word f4g in a FB post! You can never work in Hollywood again!" is cancel culture. 

Firing someone for an unhinged rant about how evil gay people are isn't cancel culture. 

[LinkSoul60]

The march toward a dictatorship continues... The world according to Trump.  It's going to be an interesting next few years.

[Chrissy1979]

41 minutes ago, WestCanMan said:

It's really, really sad if that's what it took to get ABC to do the right thing. 

If what you said is true, then this is almost as bad as the vax mandates. 

Yes, he stated the obvious--- that you guys are exploiting Kirk's death for political purposes. He should have just called for the extermination of homeless people. Then he could have kept his job 

[Hodad]

Well, it looks like that bullet killed both Charlie Kirk and the first amendment. 

Let's be clear: this was direct government retaliation, the most aggressive censorship, against legitimate political commentary. Not hate speech, nor calls to violence, nor even a celebration of violence, but simple criticism of political behavior. 

The masquerade is over, the costume set aside. Now it's just naked fascism. And MAGA America is really turned on by what they see. 

Whatever legacy Kirk might have had as a free speech advocate is now destroyed. Ironically, not by the people who disliked him, but by his own "friends" using his death as a final excuse to end free speech.

 

 

Edited September 18, 2025 by Hodad

[Deluge]

3 hours ago, Chrissy1979 said:

There is no free speech in a fascist state. Just ask Boges.

There WAS no free speech until January 20th. Now its back! MAGA!!

Edited September 18, 2025 by Deluge

[CdnFox]

12 minutes ago, Hodad said:

Well, it looks like that bullet killed both Charlie Kirk and the first amendment. 

Let's be clear: this was direct government retaliation, the most aggressive censorship, against legitimate political commentary. Not hate speech, nor calls to violence, more nor even a celebration of violence, but simple criticism of political behavior. 

The masquerade is over, the costume set aside. Now it's just naked fascism. And MAGA America is really turned on by what they see. 

Whatever legacy Kirk might have had as a free speech advocate is now destroyed. Ironically, not by the people who disliked him, but by his own "friends" using his death as a final excuse to end free speech.

 

 

It's hate speech according to the definitions of the left. Sorry but that bar was set low by the left and this would qualify if the roles were reversed.

You guys don't like to admit it or acknowledge it but you were the ones that started this and you're reaping the benefits and that's not anybody's fault but your own

[Chrissy1979]

1 minute ago, Deluge said:

There WAS no free speech until January 20th. Now free speech is making a return! 

You're not even making sense anymore. You're just frothing at the mouth for Trump's balls.

[Chrissy1979]

1 minute ago, CdnFox said:

It's hate speech according to the definitions of the left. Sorry but that bar was set low by the left and this would qualify if the roles were reversed.

You guys don't like to admit it or acknowledge it but you were the ones that started this and you're reaping the benefits and that's not anybody's fault but your own

Classic logic for four-year-olds: When you lack a defence, just say "he started it!" Even if everyone knows you're lying.

[West]

Lucky for Kimmel he's not right wing. They tend to get shot in the neck over speech the other side doesnt like. See Cory Comparatore and Charlie Kirk

[Deluge]

2 minutes ago, Chrissy1979 said:

You're not even making sense anymore. You're just frothing at the mouth for Trump's balls.

 

[Chrissy1979]

1 minute ago, West said:

Lucky for Kimmel he's not right wing. They tend to get shot in the neck over speech the other side doesnt like. See Cory Comparatore and Charlie Kirk

A MAGA kid shot up a school in Colorado last week and you didn't say a word. How come?