Kirk Was Wrong Because He Was Right

 Does anyone really know how to argue? Many people say Charlie Kirk was good at it, because he prepared extensively for debate, yet he often got schpanked by his opponents, who were generally younger college students. Kids today, huh! He was 31. Though a college dropout himself, when you have ten years on somebody, you should be able to take them. You should, but that doesn't make it a given. Evidently, when up against a superior opponent, Kirk would resort to the gish gallop which is a fancy way of saying, "if you can't dazzle them with brilliance, dazzle them with bullshit". That's the internet. Many applauded Kirk for taking debate to the people, going from campus to campus, and be debating young minds, perhaps capturing those young minds for his side. Eh, at best he got some kids on his side that were probably already there anyway. More theater than debate. Performance art. A lot of it made as much sense as a rap battle to me, though I could generally keep up with both sides better in a debate.

The goal of debate isn't to win friends and influence people. It's just to win. Lucky for many, all it takes for most is to simply declare victory. Kirk seemed to do that. There's a young kid named Dean Withers whom I see a lot of REELS about on Facebook. He's super smart, prepared, and perhaps more importantly, able to get prepared very quickly. I think he smoked Kirk once in like a 5-minute round, Kirk conceded he was a worthy opponent and promised a rematch. Of course, that ship has sailed, but I doubt it would have happened anyway. Charlie could only win by winning. It would be bad for business to lose to this kid, so I seriously doubt he would have risked it. We'll never know. 

I've had a ferrer deal of success in various avenues of social media simply because I know right from wrong. These days, not a lot of republicans do. That's the Trump influence. "RIGHT OR WRONG IS WHAT WE SAY IT IS! WHAT PART OF "THE RIGHT" DO YOU NOT GET, LIBTARD??!!" Come on now, are you ever going to defeat anyone who thinks like that? 

I've got a guy who occasionally comments on the old blog and finally found this one and dropped a stupid comment. As Lord & Master of this blog, I'm not going to publish his shit. I control the comments. The dumfuck picked up on that, but he still tries because he thinks he's in my head by still posting- 15 years later. Who's in who's head? I don't post to him. 

But I digress. Debate on the internet is like the cacophony of the reporters' all shouting questions at the president as he leaves to board Marine 1. Never saw the point in that. While not actually a debate, it's a lot of noise and not at all an effective way of asking a question. It is "PICK ME! PICK ME!" Very desperate and needy. It's one of the reasons we can't get nice things from the media. 

It all comes down to "right v. wrong" and "good v. evil". Both will probably be repealed by the Robert's court before the year is out. 6-3, I bet. If so, fuck 'em. Right and wrong will never change in the minds of good men and women, no matter what the Kirks or the courts say. 

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

A Ferrerman Advisory Has Been Issued...

 The only people who read this blog are the fine folks at Blogger. They've seen fit to hang an advisory warning on two of my posts. As is the custom with media these days, no explanations are necessary. It's like being married and the wife is mad at you. "Well, if you don't know, I'm certainly not going to tell you!" So, I get that. Fair enough.
Read more

Molehills On the Battlefield

An odd exchange with a follower earlier. To another poster I added to his complaint about the recent trend of side-by-side reaction videos They are dumb and pretty much unnecessary. My addition was that I didn't like the ones where someone is telling a joke, and on the other side of the screen is a clip of someone laughing outrageously. Why? And perhaps worse, the split screen is used to tell a story, and the other side is some inexplicable B-roll of some unrelated product being made. Again- why? Are these first world problems? Yes. But I wasn't crying or praying to Trump that these 'creators' be deported to a Sudanese prison. I was just kinda bitching. Is that wrong? To one follower, it was! At first, I wondered if I was reading her wrong. Could someone read my post and take it so seriously? A quick perusal of my bio mentions something about me being a "gifted satirist and sarcasmist". Eh, who reads those things anyways. I also say that "DM's mean yo...
Read more

Flipping the Script

 When it comes to TV and movies, I don't like to know how the sausage is made. But full disclosure, I find it hard to resist the inside info when it comes to "The Sopranos". As luck would have it, there are a bazillion YouTubes about all things Soprano.  It's kinda crazy to me that people that people spend so much time gossiping about a fictional show. "Why did this happen? Why that? How 'bout this theory?"  Shit like that. My first thought is always, ask the writer. It's their story. It's not ours to add anything to it. It's not "The Bible", after all.  Story arcs are different though. I've been seeing a lot of a particular arc in The Sopranos that always befuddled me. This is the storyline of Vito Spatafore being outed as gay. They spent a lot of episodes on that, too many in my opinion. The actor who played Vito, evidently heavily  pitched it to the writers and they ran with it. It was at once an unexpected turn and then an u...
Read more