(02-11-2026 06:26 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 06:16 PM)miko33 Wrote:  Well - he got rich at the same time he was doing everything else. I take the skeptics stance when it comes to anyone who happens to make millions while advocating for God and spreading the gospel.

So in other words, YES. You were criticizing or questioning him because he dared earn money for his family while being a Christian.

Which is exactly what I suspected you were doing.

You have no real evidence the man did anything nefarious or illegal, you just don't like the fact that he dared make money for his family while proclaiming to be a Christian.

Because apparently in your view its perfectly fine and even noble for everyone else in the world to make money for their family, unless your are a Christian. That somehow makes you a questionable person and character in your view.

And of course there is also the other elephant in the room here that CK was not running a church, he was openly running a political organization.

By your own admission you're not bothered that he made money, your bothered by the fact that he was a Christian who made money.

You're reading way too much into my comments. Me alone, my personal opinion only: I do not trust anyone who evangelizes and also gets rich while he's evangelizing. I'm not saying he's stealing money from people for "God's work" like those filthy televangelists or cult leaders. I understand he's primarily a political actor.

All that aside, I do not trust anyone on matters of faith who advocate for God while they're chasing money to get rich. Same goes for pro athletes, celebrity business gurus or anyone in general. That's my opinion. If you don't like it - I don't care. But I'm not going to allow you to assume I'm looking for anyone's downfall simply because they are a Christian. I never said that and don't advocate for that.

(02-11-2026 06:16 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 04:08 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 03:48 PM)miko33 Wrote:  I'm going to look at it for what it is. Regardless of Charlie Kirk's motivations - he got rich as a result of his activism. That Spanish style home in Scottsdale, AZ that they sold was very much top end luxury.

When you fit the pieces of the puzzle together, there's zero doubt in my mind that those in charge of TPUSA had money as a part of the motivating factor. Was it solely for the money? Was it mostly for the message? Who knows. But for a couple who wanted to spread the Gospel...they got rich doing it.

https://kbsd6.com/news/why-charlie-kirks...e_vignette

You need to be a little more careful throwing those kinds of accusations around. And you can say "well I'm not suggesting....", but yeah you really kinda are on some level.

CK didn't take any salary for a number of years, he actually made a large amount of his money through the stock market by studying how to work and grow your assets and we all know how much the stock market grew during the last 15 years.

Most people who worked with him during the last decade plus were open about how they almost had to force him to begin to collect any salary and how that is not really how he became wealthy. It was really through the stock market and real estate.

Its not wrong for a Christian to be financially successful if its done honestly, and there is no evidence that this is a man who scammed the public just to enrich himself through TPUSA. In fact all the evidence seems to point to the opposite of that in pretty dramatic fashion. By all accounts and evidence this appears to be a man who was very much the genuine article.

Well - he got rich at the same time he was doing everything else. I take the skeptics stance when it comes to anyone who happens to make millions while advocating for God and spreading the gospel.

Politically, I agreed with CK's stances. I'm glad he did the advocacy to get more young people to consider conservative viewpoints as a viable option in politics. I hated that he was killed. Wish it didn't happen. But...I'm not going to consider him as being more of an altruist than anyone else. He obviously was motivated by money in his life. You don't get rich unless money is really important to you.

You can still do positive things and also be chasing money.

"You can still do positive things and also be chasing money"

You can still do positive things and also be rewarded money for your hard work.

(02-11-2026 06:30 PM)miko33 Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 05:58 PM)GeminiCoog Wrote:  Oh, no. How dare TPUSA honor their co-founder as fast as they could. Perish the thought!

Some people, man.

TBF though, it wasn't a good look by TPUSA. Elvis brings up a legitimate point that TPUSA didn't even wait for the body to get cold before they were selling CK merch to honor his life. And it sold out pretty fast.

It did look similar to the Paul Wellstone memorial service where Democrats turned what should have been a day of mourning for his family into a political rally.

I'm not trying to denigrate CK or TPUSA. But this is what people do. It's human nature that we instinctively try to capitalize on any advantage we can get. Rahm Emanuel said to never let a crisis go to waste. That phrase is very much a universal truth that all humans take advantage of. It's who we are.

Full disclosure: I ruined the "Sound of Music" for my MIL when I told her what really happened with the von Trapp family. I have a penchant for ruining things for people... :(

Miko,

CK was just another member of the Conservative Media Inc. machine.

You know the Ben Shapiro, Steven Crowder types.

He was mild in comparison to say someone like Alex Jone or Michael Savage.

He certainly didn't deserve to die the way he did, especially with his children in his presence.

But the way TPUSA has handled his death is very sketchy, IMO.

I stand by my comment that both shows were terrible, and I didn't waste a minute of my time watching them.

America deserves better, especially with its 250th Anniversary coming up this July 4th.

(02-11-2026 06:37 PM)miko33 Wrote:  You're reading way too much into my comments. Me alone, my personal opinion only: I do not trust anyone who evangelizes and also gets rich while he's evangelizing. I'm not saying he's stealing money from people for "God's work" like those filthy televangelists or cult leaders. I understand he's primarily a political actor.

All that aside, I do not trust anyone on matters of faith who advocate for God while they're chasing money to get rich. Same goes for pro athletes, celebrity business gurus or anyone in general. That's my opinion. If you don't like it - I don't care. But I'm not going to allow you to assume I'm looking for anyone's downfall simply because they are a Christian. I never said that and don't advocate for that.

Which is exactly what I thought you were saying so thank you for confirming it.

Nowhere in my post did I accuse you of wishing for his downfall. Your issue is not that he made money for his family, your issue is that he was a CHRISTIAN who made money for his family. That is what bothers you.

I think that speaks pretty plainly for itself.

CK died with a net work of about 12 million, which is pennies on the dollar compared to what most politiccal actors who run an organization the size and scope of TPUSA.

With the connections at the highest levels of our country that CK had, he could have easily been worth in excess of 100 million by the time he was assassinated. For a man that had authored the books he had, had the podcasts and TV connections and other media projects and founded an organization the size and scope of TPUSA, I was sunned he was only worth 12 million at his death. Almost anyone else would have been worth 10 times that.

(02-11-2026 06:55 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 06:37 PM)miko33 Wrote:  You're reading way too much into my comments. Me alone, my personal opinion only: I do not trust anyone who evangelizes and also gets rich while he's evangelizing. I'm not saying he's stealing money from people for "God's work" like those filthy televangelists or cult leaders. I understand he's primarily a political actor.

All that aside, I do not trust anyone on matters of faith who advocate for God while they're chasing money to get rich. Same goes for pro athletes, celebrity business gurus or anyone in general. That's my opinion. If you don't like it - I don't care. But I'm not going to allow you to assume I'm looking for anyone's downfall simply because they are a Christian. I never said that and don't advocate for that.

Which is exactly what I thought you were saying so thank you for confirming it.

Nowhere in my post did I accuse you of wishing for his downfall. Your issue is not that he made money for his family, your issue is that he was a CHRISTIAN who made money for his family. That is what bothers you.

I think that speaks pretty plainly for itself.

CK died with a net work of about 12 million, which is pennies on the dollar compared to what most politiccal actors who run an organization the size and scope of TPUSA.

With the connections at the highest levels of our country that CK had, he could have easily been worth in excess of 100 million by the time he was assassinated. For a man that had authored the books he had, had the podcasts and TV connections and other media projects and founded an organization the size and scope of TPUSA, I was sunned he was only worth 12 million at his death. Almost anyone else would have been worth 10 times that.

That does surprise me he was only worth 12 million. That said, he earned it all with an organization he started from scratch---and he was only 31 when he died---barely out of his twenties. lol---of course, its funny we are talking about 12 million like its nothing----when I suspect most kids at 31 barely have begun to build any real net worth at all at that age (I sure dont remember having a whole lot at that age).

(02-11-2026 06:55 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 06:37 PM)miko33 Wrote:  You're reading way too much into my comments. Me alone, my personal opinion only: I do not trust anyone who evangelizes and also gets rich while he's evangelizing. I'm not saying he's stealing money from people for "God's work" like those filthy televangelists or cult leaders. I understand he's primarily a political actor.

All that aside, I do not trust anyone on matters of faith who advocate for God while they're chasing money to get rich. Same goes for pro athletes, celebrity business gurus or anyone in general. That's my opinion. If you don't like it - I don't care. But I'm not going to allow you to assume I'm looking for anyone's downfall simply because they are a Christian. I never said that and don't advocate for that.

Which is exactly what I thought you were saying so thank you for confirming it.

Nowhere in my post did I accuse you of wishing for his downfall. Your issue is not that he made money for his family, your issue is that he was a CHRISTIAN who made money for his family. That is what bothers you.

I think that speaks pretty plainly for itself.

CK died with a net work of about 12 million, which is pennies on the dollar compared to what most politiccal actors who run an organization the size and scope of TPUSA.

With the connections at the highest levels of our country that CK had, he could have easily been worth in excess of 100 million by the time he was assassinated. For a man that had authored the books he had, had the podcasts and TV connections and other media projects and founded an organization the size and scope of TPUSA, I was sunned he was only worth 12 million at his death. Almost anyone else would have been worth 10 times that.

Not what I said but oh well…

(02-11-2026 06:31 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 06:26 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 06:16 PM)miko33 Wrote:  Well - he got rich at the same time he was doing everything else. I take the skeptics stance when it comes to anyone who happens to make millions while advocating for God and spreading the gospel.

So in other words, YES. You were criticizing or questioning him because he dared earn money for his family while being a Christian.

Which is exactly what I suspected you were doing.

You have no real evidence the man did anything nefarious or illegal, you just don't like the fact that he dared make money for his family while proclaiming to be a Christian.

Because apparently in your view its perfectly fine and even noble for everyone else in the world to make money for their family, unless your are a Christian. That somehow makes you a questionable person and character in your view.

And of course there is also the other elephant in the room here that CK was not running a church, he was openly running a political organization.

By your own admission you're not bothered that he made money, your bothered by the fact that he was a Christian who made money.

Your saying it’s OK for them to make money, which is fine, but the post several people were responding to is this :

“Ok, I'll be quick, then out. Kirk's mission was to spread Christianity, not primarily to make money. TPUSA would never look at something strictly as an opportunity to make money. They would look at it as an opportunity to spread the gospel.“

Which is claiming that these people are too Christian to even worry about making money. Which based on the mansion is BS.

Guess what? TPUSA does NOT make money. Did you miss the part where they are a non-profit? Totally funded by donations, not by profit-making ventures.

https://donate.tpusa.com/

After expenses, they forward their donations to political and/or Christian causes. Are their "expenses" a bit extravagant? Maybe, but they don't look at ventures on the basis of making money, which is exactly what I said.

So no, they would not produce a show like they just did and sell tickets to make money, unless they donated any profit to charity. Or anything else like that.

And Charlie's money came from several sources, other than his TPUSA salary:

Quote:The organization is funded by conservative donors and foundations, including Republican Party politicians...

...Turning Point board member Mike Miller said: “He wrote 16 books and had the royalties for those. He had a radio show every day, a podcast, and he made money on all that stuff..."

...Charlie earned a salary of $390,493 from June 2023–June 2024 at TPUSA, according to filings.

LINK

The salary is not close to being enough to afford a $4.75M mansion (now worth more), plus 2 other homes, so he obviously was making the bulk of his money from those other ventures.

(02-11-2026 07:25 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 06:31 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 06:26 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 06:16 PM)miko33 Wrote:  Well - he got rich at the same time he was doing everything else. I take the skeptics stance when it comes to anyone who happens to make millions while advocating for God and spreading the gospel.

So in other words, YES. You were criticizing or questioning him because he dared earn money for his family while being a Christian.

Which is exactly what I suspected you were doing.

You have no real evidence the man did anything nefarious or illegal, you just don't like the fact that he dared make money for his family while proclaiming to be a Christian.

Because apparently in your view its perfectly fine and even noble for everyone else in the world to make money for their family, unless your are a Christian. That somehow makes you a questionable person and character in your view.

And of course there is also the other elephant in the room here that CK was not running a church, he was openly running a political organization.

By your own admission you're not bothered that he made money, your bothered by the fact that he was a Christian who made money.

Your saying it’s OK for them to make money, which is fine, but the post several people were responding to is this :

“Ok, I'll be quick, then out. Kirk's mission was to spread Christianity, not primarily to make money. TPUSA would never look at something strictly as an opportunity to make money. They would look at it as an opportunity to spread the gospel.“

Which is claiming that these people are too Christian to even worry about making money. Which based on the mansion is BS.

Guess what? TPUSA does NOT make money. Did you miss the part where they are a non-profit? Totally funded by donations, not by profit-making ventures.

https://donate.tpusa.com/

After expenses, they forward their donations to political and/or Christian causes. Are their "expenses" a bit extravagant? Maybe, but they don't look at ventures on the basis of making money, which is exactly what I said.

So no, they would not produce a show like they just did and sell tickets to make money, unless they donated any profit to charity. Or anything else like that.

And Charlie's money came from several sources, other than his TPUSA salary:

Quote:The organization is funded by conservative donors and foundations, including Republican Party politicians...

...Turning Point board member Mike Miller said: “He wrote 16 books and had the royalties for those. He had a radio show every day, a podcast, and he made money on all that stuff..."

...Charlie earned a salary of $390,493 from June 2023–June 2024 at TPUSA, according to filings.

LINK

The salary is not close to being enough to afford a $4.75M mansion (now worth more), plus 2 other homes, so he obviously was making the bulk of his money from those other ventures.

Plenty of non-profits are used to pad people’s pockets. Just because they are a non-profit doesn’t mean they aren’t in it to make money. You can burry a lot of personal lifestyle and travel in the $21M meetings and conventions budget.

As you said, Charlie made money through other things like his podcast. Would he have even had his podcast income if not from TPUSA…

Also non-profits need exposure to fundraise. TPUSA is well known for taking advantage of exposure to fundraise.

Charlie Kirk died on 9/10 and they send out these texts asking for money on 9/14:
“Erika Kirk: I refuse to let the movement Charlie built die. It will only grow — stronger, bolder, louder. Join me,” read a Sept. 14 text signed by Kirk's wife, with a link to a fundraising page suggesting donations from $25 to $100,000.“
https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/pol...210427007/

Now you’re telling me that an organization that was using the name of the widow of their dead founder to beg for money four days after he died is somehow above or better than putting on a Super Bowl half time show to make money? They were texting people fundraising FOUR days after he died but you don’t think they care about money?

Oh don't worry Elvira, soon enough we will see who was doing the work God intended for them and whose lives never rose higher than smearing murdered Christian husbands and their widows on internet boards.

This awful freak show halftime is the gift that keeps on giving

(02-11-2026 09:10 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Oh don't Elvira, soon enough we will see who was doing the work God intended for them and whose lives never rose higher than smearing murdered Christian husbands and their widows on internet boards.

Yet again actual evidence has reduced you to name calling and threats to my immortal soul.

(02-11-2026 10:05 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 09:10 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  Oh don't Elvira, soon enough we will see who was doing the work God intended for them and whose lives never rose higher than smearing murdered Christian husbands and their widows on internet boards.

Yet again actual evidence has reduced you to name calling and threats to my immortal soul.

Evidence of WHAT? That a non-proft that operates from donations asked for continuing donations?

Cry us a river you big baby.

(02-11-2026 08:15 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 07:25 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 06:31 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 06:26 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 06:16 PM)miko33 Wrote:  Well - he got rich at the same time he was doing everything else. I take the skeptics stance when it comes to anyone who happens to make millions while advocating for God and spreading the gospel.

So in other words, YES. You were criticizing or questioning him because he dared earn money for his family while being a Christian.

Which is exactly what I suspected you were doing.

You have no real evidence the man did anything nefarious or illegal, you just don't like the fact that he dared make money for his family while proclaiming to be a Christian.

Because apparently in your view its perfectly fine and even noble for everyone else in the world to make money for their family, unless your are a Christian. That somehow makes you a questionable person and character in your view.

And of course there is also the other elephant in the room here that CK was not running a church, he was openly running a political organization.

By your own admission you're not bothered that he made money, your bothered by the fact that he was a Christian who made money.

Your saying it’s OK for them to make money, which is fine, but the post several people were responding to is this :

“Ok, I'll be quick, then out. Kirk's mission was to spread Christianity, not primarily to make money. TPUSA would never look at something strictly as an opportunity to make money. They would look at it as an opportunity to spread the gospel.“

Which is claiming that these people are too Christian to even worry about making money. Which based on the mansion is BS.

Guess what? TPUSA does NOT make money. Did you miss the part where they are a non-profit? Totally funded by donations, not by profit-making ventures.

https://donate.tpusa.com/

After expenses, they forward their donations to political and/or Christian causes. Are their "expenses" a bit extravagant? Maybe, but they don't look at ventures on the basis of making money, which is exactly what I said.

So no, they would not produce a show like they just did and sell tickets to make money, unless they donated any profit to charity. Or anything else like that.

And Charlie's money came from several sources, other than his TPUSA salary:

Quote:The organization is funded by conservative donors and foundations, including Republican Party politicians...

...Turning Point board member Mike Miller said: “He wrote 16 books and had the royalties for those. He had a radio show every day, a podcast, and he made money on all that stuff..."

...Charlie earned a salary of $390,493 from June 2023–June 2024 at TPUSA, according to filings.

LINK

The salary is not close to being enough to afford a $4.75M mansion (now worth more), plus 2 other homes, so he obviously was making the bulk of his money from those other ventures.

Plenty of non-profits are used to pad people’s pockets. Just because they are a non-profit doesn’t mean they aren’t in it to make money. You can burry a lot of personal lifestyle and travel in the $21M meetings and conventions budget.

As you said, Charlie made money through other things like his podcast. Would he have even had his podcast income if not from TPUSA…

Also non-profits need exposure to fundraise. TPUSA is well known for taking advantage of exposure to fundraise.

Charlie Kirk died on 9/10 and they send out these texts asking for money on 9/14:
“Erika Kirk: I refuse to let the movement Charlie built die. It will only grow — stronger, bolder, louder. Join me,” read a Sept. 14 text signed by Kirk's wife, with a link to a fundraising page suggesting donations from $25 to $100,000.“
https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/pol...210427007/

Now you’re telling me that an organization that was using the name of the widow of their dead founder to beg for money four days after he died is somehow above or better than putting on a Super Bowl half time show to make money? They were texting people fundraising FOUR days after he died but you don’t think they care about money?

Go back to school and learn how non-profits work.

Evlis is such a disingenuous crybaby.

(02-11-2026 10:35 PM)BartlettTigerFan Wrote:  Evlis is such a disingenuous crybaby.

Just expressing his glee that a good man was murdered in a thread about sub 80 filth debasing our culture.

Prog filth doing what they do.

Billboard reports Bad Bunny scored a big hit with the Super Bowl halftime show.

Bad Bunny’s halftime performance showcased in spectacular fashion all the reasons he has become one of the greatest pop stars of his generation: a combination of meticulous design, brilliant creative instincts, and universal messaging, tied together with a singular voice, an ineffable cool, and some of the best hit songs (and deep cuts) of the past decade. And while he seemed happy to invite everyone to party with him at his casita, if you were one of those watching who still questioned his right to be there, he had some words and images for you as well.

The singer closed with ‘two extremely Puerto Rican anthems that made for an appropriate soundtrack to his waving his home territory’s flag’ then added ‘his most powerful words of the night.’

“God bless America… sea [be it] Chile, Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, Bolivia, Perú, Ecuador, Brazil, Colombia, Venezuela, Guyana, Panama, Costa Rica, Nicaragua, Honduras, El Salvador, Guatemala, Mexico, Cuba, República Dominicana, Jamaica… United States, Canada, and my motherland, mi barrio, Puerto Rico, seguimo aquí [we’re still here].””

The reporter adds:
Following that and the quick “Fotos” chorus run-through, he celebrated the performance’s culmination with a literal football spike—with a ball that read “Together, We Are America”—as the message. “The only thing more powerful than hate is love” was displayed on the screen.

https://www.billboard.com/music/latin/ba...236176013/
___

Did the NFL just open the door for competitors to siphon off viewers from its premier event by choosing such a polarizing non-English speaking act to perform.

Views are approaching 50 million for a 30 minute show that took TPUSA just 5 months to put together.

What if a more savvy competitor decides to put on an alternative program opposite the Super Bowl from the start of the second quarter until the end of the third quarter.

How many bands could perform during that time? How many sponsors would pay to be part of this event….

Going to be interesting watching how this develops over the next few months.

(02-11-2026 10:19 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 08:15 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 07:25 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 06:31 PM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  

(02-11-2026 06:26 PM)ericsrevenge76 Wrote:  So in other words, YES. You were criticizing or questioning him because he dared earn money for his family while being a Christian.

Which is exactly what I suspected you were doing.

You have no real evidence the man did anything nefarious or illegal, you just don't like the fact that he dared make money for his family while proclaiming to be a Christian.

Because apparently in your view its perfectly fine and even noble for everyone else in the world to make money for their family, unless your are a Christian. That somehow makes you a questionable person and character in your view.

And of course there is also the other elephant in the room here that CK was not running a church, he was openly running a political organization.

By your own admission you're not bothered that he made money, your bothered by the fact that he was a Christian who made money.

Your saying it’s OK for them to make money, which is fine, but the post several people were responding to is this :

“Ok, I'll be quick, then out. Kirk's mission was to spread Christianity, not primarily to make money. TPUSA would never look at something strictly as an opportunity to make money. They would look at it as an opportunity to spread the gospel.“

Which is claiming that these people are too Christian to even worry about making money. Which based on the mansion is BS.

Guess what? TPUSA does NOT make money. Did you miss the part where they are a non-profit? Totally funded by donations, not by profit-making ventures.

https://donate.tpusa.com/

After expenses, they forward their donations to political and/or Christian causes. Are their "expenses" a bit extravagant? Maybe, but they don't look at ventures on the basis of making money, which is exactly what I said.

So no, they would not produce a show like they just did and sell tickets to make money, unless they donated any profit to charity. Or anything else like that.

And Charlie's money came from several sources, other than his TPUSA salary:

Quote:The organization is funded by conservative donors and foundations, including Republican Party politicians...

...Turning Point board member Mike Miller said: “He wrote 16 books and had the royalties for those. He had a radio show every day, a podcast, and he made money on all that stuff..."

...Charlie earned a salary of $390,493 from June 2023–June 2024 at TPUSA, according to filings.

LINK

The salary is not close to being enough to afford a $4.75M mansion (now worth more), plus 2 other homes, so he obviously was making the bulk of his money from those other ventures.

Plenty of non-profits are used to pad people’s pockets. Just because they are a non-profit doesn’t mean they aren’t in it to make money. You can burry a lot of personal lifestyle and travel in the $21M meetings and conventions budget.

As you said, Charlie made money through other things like his podcast. Would he have even had his podcast income if not from TPUSA…

Also non-profits need exposure to fundraise. TPUSA is well known for taking advantage of exposure to fundraise.

Charlie Kirk died on 9/10 and they send out these texts asking for money on 9/14:
“Erika Kirk: I refuse to let the movement Charlie built die. It will only grow — stronger, bolder, louder. Join me,” read a Sept. 14 text signed by Kirk's wife, with a link to a fundraising page suggesting donations from $25 to $100,000.“
https://www.azcentral.com/story/news/pol...210427007/

Now you’re telling me that an organization that was using the name of the widow of their dead founder to beg for money four days after he died is somehow above or better than putting on a Super Bowl half time show to make money? They were texting people fundraising FOUR days after he died but you don’t think they care about money?

Go back to school and learn how non-profits work.

You spend a lot of time on here talking about your business acumen, but thinking that non-profits don’t care about revenue is naive. Hell, the fact that bad bunny’s half time show ended with the message “Together we are America” and the TPUSA show ended with a QR code begging for money should be your clue. That would be in addition to the fact that within a week of Kirk’s death they made all new merch to sell, and sent out a text campaign begging for money. Obviously they care about taking advantage of revenue opportunities, and are also a little ghoulish.

Your other level of naivety is thinking that nonprofit execs can’t structure their “work” to offset their lifestyle events and drive a lot of money back to their own benefit.

(02-12-2026 06:34 AM)CardinalJim Wrote:  Did the NFL just open the door for competitors to siphon off viewers from its premier event by choosing such a polarizing non-English speaking act to perform.

Views are approaching 50 million for a 30 minute show that took TPUSA just 5 months to put together.

What if a more savvy competitor decides to put on an alternative program opposite the Super Bowl from the start of the second quarter until the end of the third quarter.

How many bands could perform during that time? How many sponsors would pay to be part of this event….

Going to be interesting watching how this develops over the next few months.

If I never watch another National Freak League game again I will be fine

(02-12-2026 08:07 AM)U_of_Elvis Wrote:  You spend a lot of time on here talking about your business acumen, but thinking that non-profits don’t care about revenue is naive. Hell, the fact that bad bunny’s half time show ended with the message “Together we are America” and the TPUSA show ended with a QR code begging for money should be your clue. That would be in addition to the fact that within a week of Kirk’s death they made all new merch to sell, and sent out a text campaign begging for money. Obviously they care about taking advantage of revenue opportunities, and are also a little ghoulish.

Your other level of naivety is thinking that nonprofit execs can’t structure their “work” to offset their lifestyle events and drive a lot of money back to their own benefit.

As someone who works for a non-profit, they definitely do care about revenue and profitability. They still have to make enough money to keep their doors open. But other than that, you are making accusations that may or may not be happening here. I get that you don't like TPUSA and their message, but that doesn't necessarily mean that they are bad, are grifting, or anything of the like.