Who do you think will undoubtedly win the debate Candace is hosting at her house Friday with Andrew Wilson?
- Candace Owens will win. Charlie Kirk’s murder should not be swept under the rug. Team Candace here.
- Andrew Wilson is an interesting choice for debating Candace, but it should come as no surprise that Wilson has this in the bag. Andrew Wilson will expose Candace for the liar she really is.
I will be watching very intently. For the longest time I’ve been wanting to believe Candace, because I’ll admit, to this day I don’t know if I can get on board with some of Candace’s accusations. I know I can get on board with some of them, but some of them I’m not sure about. I’m curious as to who will win this debate, cause in my opinion, whomever the victor is will definitely help me decide if I should listen to Candace again or not. She’s been receiving a lot of backlash for some of her “theories” but this debate will definitely be helpful if I should continue to listen to her.
I like Candace. She admittedly does not know that much about the Catholic Faith, but at one time neither did I. Many years of listening to “Catholic Answers Live” had helped me grow in my understanding of our Faith.
I also love that people trust Candace more than they do the Feds and thus, Candace has received information that never would have seen the light of day, had it been the Feds who were given the information.
It has been a fun ride so far. I am glad that Andrew is willing to sit down with Candace, because otherwise, she just accuses everyone until they defend themselves (which she calls “fishing” in the one episode where she shared an image and a story about the time she and Charlie went fishing.)
So, if I were these individuals, I would sit down with her and help to try to solve this mystery, because the Fed’s narrative is not making any sense.
Well, she really holds my attention, cause she’s not playing into anyone’s b.s. narrative. She’s a critical thinker, which is why I can really get behind most of the stuff she’s talking about. But, this debate will help solidify certain things. I hope she actually pulls up some of her evidence and she explains her reasoning behind everything she says. If I’m being honest, I’m pretty sure Candace will win, but I for one would like to actually see what she’s got and see if the shoe really fits. But, honestly, I have no doubt I’ll be blown away from what she brings to the table.
It sounds like she is holding onto even more things. It reminds me of Andrew Breitbart’s book “Righteous Indignation” where he talks about how he taught James O’Keefe (who I’m not convinced is not a Fed) that when you release something incriminating, you have to leak it slowly, otherwise the media will discredit you in one swoop. But, if you do it in increments, each release bigger than the one before, it makes fools of those who try to discredit you.
Candace is smart for doing the same. Let them call you crazy and play dumb if you need to, and then later they will be the ones discredited. I think playing dumb is also a pretty good tactic for collecting more information.
It definitely has been a fun ride thus far. I just wish Erika would have taken the money she received from Charlie’s death (life insurance & the thousands in donations) and chosen to be there for their two children who lost their Dad! I do not believe Erika killed her Husband. I just think she is not doing the right thing, nor that she is qualified to lead Turning Point.
Well…and no offense to Mrs. Kirk, but with all due respect, she should have never become a mother. Your kids are your entire life and because they’re little, they need more attention and more care. And I get it, your husband dying isn’t an easy thing to get over, and I know that as a single Mother it’s got to be tough to raise children, but this is what Erika Kirk signed up for. She didn’t have to be a Mother, but she’s a Mother now, and I agree I don’t think she’s really thinking all of this through.
There’s absolutely no shame in admitting you wouldn’t be a good parent. I told you this once already but, I wouldn’t be a good parent. I love my freedoms way too much, so much so that I don’t really want to give that up. And as a parent, your life is your children and revolves around your family. Family comes first before anything. But, I couldn’t have children. My parents both came from broken families and I’ll be dang if I would want my own son or even daughter to have to go through that. It was tough enough for me growing up, no way Jose (Hose-A).
Josh, thank you for being so good to me. I know I haven’t always been good to you, but you’ve always been good to me. I’m so glad I have a Catholic friend. Now if I can have a Jewish, a Buddhist, a Hinduist, a Muslim, and other different types of friends, I’d love that!
As a father, I understand what you are saying, Earthsstudent, but I disagree that children should be one’s life. Jesus said that He is the life, and that anyone who loves children more than Him is not worthy of Him. (But who is worthy of Him?)
I’ve seen parents make bad decisions, such as approving children’s wrong behavior, for selfish reasons of the parents, such as fear of losing the children’s affection.
I think that Gayle Sayres’ attitude “I am third” (the title of his autobiography) is better. The Lord is first, others are second, I am third. (I reread that book a few years ago.)
Parents, spouses, people of any vocation–we are called to spend our lives on a calling, often more than one calling. But there are priorities in how we spend our lives. Children and all others are second. I am third. The Lord is first.
1 Like
That’s fair. Yeah, technically God should come first and then family. I was just, more or less, saying that when you’re a parent all the running around, and the partying, and the being able to do what you when you want, that once you’re a parent, all of the stuff you used to do, you can’t really do anymore. I mean you can, just not as often. And I’m not saying children are a pain, or they’re an “added expense,” no having children is great. It’s a good thing. All I’m saying is, there are a lot of people out there who have children for not so good reasons. If you’re going to have children, you should have them because you want them and you want to be a guiding force for them. You should have them because you want to be a good caregiver. But sadly there are some people out there (men and women alike) who have children because of the tax break they get, or a woman wants to keep a man around so she decides to get pregnant and uses that as leverage to keep the man around.
That’s all I’m saying. It’s one thing to have a kid because you really want a kid and you really want to help them in their growth and development, but it’s a completely different thing to want a kid for selfish reasons like the examples I gave above. But, I agree, God should be your first priority always.
I have attempted to watch this “debate” three times now. I keep falling asleep. It is painful to watch. They just kept interrupting each other and then never getting back to the topic they were expanding upon prior to being interrupted. I think they should have each presented their case. Then, each rebut certain key points of the other’s evidence or argument. I like that each had three fact-checkers and were able to put up on the screen proofs for their claims, but it was not very well done.
And the YouTube ads every three minutes was also painful!
Will try to finish it this week, but I still have about of a quarter left to watch.
I’ll be honest with you, the whole thing went about how I pretty much thought it would go. My faith in what Candace says has basically just been confirmation that yeah…something about this case doesn’t add up.
And, this Wilson guy…look, I can get behind some of the things he says. He’s one of those people who doesn’t really put up with other people’s stuff. He’s very no-nonsense and very to the point. Which, isn’t necessarily a bad trait…but this man honestly has gone into this debate without any real talking points. He may have brought up like 2 or 5 talking points the entire time, while Candace was literally walking through all of her talking points.
What happened was, Andrew went into this way too casually. Sorry, but the man did not have any really good arguments, other then what we are told from the Court and Police. But even then, Candace basically said “I agree. We really don’t know what happened. But, something isn’t adding up.” So it’s not like Candace was disagreeing with him, because unfortunately based on what it is we were told from media, Netanyahu, and others, we really don’t have a whole lot to go off of. And whenever someone assassinates someone, that means it was planned. The point Candace was trying to make was yeah, we’re told how this all went down, but there’s certain things that happened that day that just doesn’t sit well with her. And to me she makes decent points and I think that she makes enough of them that this deserves to be investigated more thoroughly.
I hate to say it Josh, but, I have a feeling this is going to be another Epstein case. This would not surprise me if this was orchestrated by a 3-letter agency. This would not surprise me if this was another kind of Epstein situation where there’s very high profile people involved in this. You know, if I’m being completely honest, we’ll probably never get answers. I don’t want to be that person, but the fact that we’re getting nothing but vague or even ambiguous answers seems like that’s the direction this case is headed. I think it won’t be till years down the road when we might start getting answers. The whole thing is so messed up…it’s just sad. But yeah, now I’m definitely going to be listening to Candace. That Wilson guy was terrible LOL.
1 Like
When I heard that Steven Crowder’s team were Andrew’s Fact Checkers, I now know why Comedian Owen Benjamin’s name came up in the debate. Owen used to write jokes for Crowder back in the day and when he was critical of “The Jews,” Crowder didn’t like that too much. So they had a falling out.
Then Steven, who prided himself on being a Christian and waiting until Marriage, it came out that he was verbally abusing his Wife and so she filed for divorce.
Crowder is kind of a dirt bag and I think his CEO, Gerald Morgan, is too (in my opinon).
The way Crowder treated “Not Gay Jarred” and “Sven the Computer” back in the day was pretty crappy too.
Conservative Inc. is destroying itself. Turning Point USA, DailyWire and Louder with Crowder, among others, are blaming others, when it is their loyalty to Israel donors that is hurting them. I’m not even anti-semitic and I can see this.
When you are not allowed to be critical of a foreign State or make fun of a group, that is the very definition of “privilege” or “entitlement” (and idea that I thought Conservatives were against).