Saint Charile.

If we tell the truth about the evil bastard we are sent to hell.

they played football anyway.

Someone alert the media because they aren't smart enough to figure it out for themselves

The man was deeply, thoroughly vile.

The way they are worshiping him. This nation has gone insane

Sickening to say the least

and I fully expect Cheeto to be there wishing he was the corpse!

Thankfully, this story will be out of the news cycle pretty soon. There's nothing more to tell unless they find the killer. Condolences to Charlie Kirk's wife & kids, but I'm not sorry this asshole is dead. There are plenty of no-talent right-wing shitstirrers to replace him. They're a dime a dozen. Sorry, not sorry.

Famous last words eh Kirk?

he was a POS. Propagandist. Nasty piece of work who incited his followers.

For the sake of your own sanity.

of not speaking ill of the dead -- at least, not the American dead "Glorification' and "canonization" are severe exaggerations, though.

For reality-based assessments, try liberal opnion journalism, or news mixed with opinion, such as Rachel Maddow.

Stop intentionally allowing yourself to become angry. What's the point?

Are you suggesting we WANT to be "angry?"

that triggers your anger, especially when you have sone idea that it's going to do that -- like, say, the headline or lead-in -- then, yes; you choose the option to be angry.

Even on political social media, we do it all the time: we don't stop reading when we feel the anger start to rise. Rather, we plow ahead because we love an argument, regardless of its effects on us. More accurately, we love to win an argument, to be right, to have the last word.

(I use "we" quite loosely. There are people who just won't engage anyone who opposes them, for whatever reason. But, if you find them at DU, they're in the Lounge.)

your premise to be... flawed...

in that choosing to remain informed via keeping abreast of the news does not equate to intentionally looking for something to be "angry" about.

It might come as a surprise to some, but I don't start my days looking to be angry.

Before I got kicked off Fascistbook, I was following a mess o' news sites, all of which were trolled by right-wingers. I'd read their comments and become irritated at how impossibly fucking ignorant humans can be.

But then, it was my choice to read the comments and respond to some. Point being, I knew from the hed the story would piss me off, and the simple fact of the story being there and thus attracting ignorant right-wing simpletons pised me off even more. And it was all brought on by my following those nnews providers and rading the right-wing comments, both of which were by choice.

trolled by right wingers in my op. I was speaking of the evening news, national and local.

And while I understand the notion of these outlets not speaking ill of the dead, I think, given the toxicity of what Kirk preached, not acknowledging at least a "controversy" (for want of a more accurate word) surrounding many of his positions, while simultaneously (and ironically, I might add) lauding him as some champion of 'free speech'

is a deliberate misrepresentation (if not normalization) of what he preached and what he stood for.

So I guess the solution (if I understand your position correctly) to avoid being OFFENDED (a more accurate descriptive than "angry" ) would be to either not watch the news, or don't give a... care.

At any rate, thanks for your input.