Yesterday, the United States entered a new and chilling stage of what I have called the “age of rage.” After two attempted assassinations of President Donald Trump, leading conservative leader Charlie Kirk, father of two, was gunned down at a campus event at Utah Valley University. I learned the news while I was in Prague to speak on my book,“The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage” and the growing attacks on free speech around the world. I never imagined that I would be speaking about Charlie’s murder and what it represents for free speech.
I cannot claim to have been a close friend of Charlie Kirk, but I knew him and respected him. In his relatively short life, Charlie energized a generation of conservative college students at a time of intense liberal orthodoxy and intolerance.
Kirk came up with the brilliant idea of challenging liberals to simply debate issues from abortion to immigration. His group would go to campuses and invite debate with signs reading “prove me wrong” and encourage liberals to engage in dialogue rather than violence.
The left had particular reason to hate Kirk. Campuses have long been the bastions of the left, reinforced by faculties which now have few, if any, conservatives or Republicans. Higher education has long been an incubator for intolerance; shaping a generation of speech phobics who shout down or attack those with opposing views.
Kirk struck at the heart of that power base. Polls show that most students do not feel comfortable speaking about their values in our universities and many conservatives hide their views to avoid retaliation from faculty and students.
Kirk was changing that but showing students that they could be open and bold about their views. He told them that they did not have to yield to orthodoxy and the groupthink. Now he’s dead.
What is most chilling about the murder of Charlie Kirk is that it was not in the least surprising. Not anymore.
The response to TPUSA was all too often rage and violence. Liberals and anti-free speech groups like Antifa would trash their tables and threaten the students. Recently, at UC Davis, police simply watched as a TPUSA tent was torn apart and the tent carried off.
Violent speech has long been acceptable on campuses so long as it targets conservatives. Teachers have called for others to “take out” Trump supporters and for the Secret Service to assassinate him.
University of Wisconsin Professor José Felipe Alvergue, head of the English Department, turned over the table of College Republicans supporting a conservative for the Wisconsin Supreme Court. He reportedly declared, “The time for this is over!”
At universities, professors have called for “detonating white people,” denouncing police, calling for Republicans to suffer, strangling police officers, celebrating the death of conservatives, calling for the killing of Trump supporters, supporting the murder of conservative protesters, and supporting the attempted assassination of President Trump. One professor who declared that there is “nothing wrong” with such acts of violence as killing conservatives was actually promoted.
At Hunter College in New York, Professor Shellyne Rodríguez trashed a pro-life display of students, telling the students that “This is bulls–t. This is violent. You’re triggering my students.”
When the students tried to engage the professor and apologized for upsetting her, Rodríguez yelled, “No you’re not — because you can’t even have a f–king baby. So you don’t even know what that is. Get this s–t the f–k out of here.” In an Instagram post, she is then shown trashing the table.
Hunter College, however, did not consider this unhinged attack on students to be sufficient to terminate Rodríguez. It only fired her after she later chased reporters with a machete. She was then hired by another college. She was shown in a later rally exciting the group with references to “slitting the master’s throat.”
At the University of California Santa Barbara, they did not even bother to fire a professor who pleaded guilty to assaulting pro-life students on campus. Professors actually rallied around feminist studies associate professor Mireille Miller-Young. She was later honored as a model for women advocates at the University of Oregon.
In my book, I detail prior “ages of rage,” including periods of political violence by anarchists, socialists, and other groups. I previously warned that we were not only following this same trajectory, but it was accelerating. The reason is the curious nature of rage:
“What few today want to admit is that they like it. They like the freedom that it affords, the ability to hate and harass without a sense of responsibility. It is evident all around us as people engage in language and conduct that they repudiate in others. We have become a nation of rage addicts; flailing against anyone or anything that stands in opposition to our own truths.
Like all addictions, there is not only a dependency on rage but an intolerance for opposing views. The difference between rage and reason is often one’s own views. If one agrees with the underlying grievance, rage is viewed as passion or justified fury at injustice. If one disagrees with those views, it takes on a more threatening and unhinged quality. We seem to spend much of our time today raging at each other. Despite the amplification of views on both sides, there is also an increasing intolerance for opposing views. Those views are treated as simply harmful and offensive—and, therefore, intolerable. Indeed, to voice free speech principles in a time of rage is to invite the rage of the mob.”
That addiction to rage has now claimed another victim who had the audacity to speak boldly and openly about his conservative views. What will follow will be the usual perfunctory expressions of sympathy and denouncing of violence by the very politicians who have fueled the rage.
In recent months, some of us have warned Democratic politicians about their violent rhetoric. House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D., N.Y.) has called for people to take to the streets to save democracy and posted a picture brandishing a baseball bat.
Former Democratic National Committee deputy chair Keith Ellison, now the Minnesota attorney general, once said Antifa would “strike fear in the heart” of Trump. Liberal sites sell Antifa items to celebrate the violent group.
California Governor Gavin Newsom declared, “I’m going to punch these sons of bitches in the mouth.” It follows other violent rhetoric from Democratic leaders.
One House member explained to Axios, “Some of [our supporters] have suggested … what we really need to do is be willing to get shot.” Yet another admitted that constituents have told them to prepare for “violence … to fight to protect our democracy.” Others reported that liberals are talking about the need “to storm the White House and stuff like that.”
In one encounter, a lawmaker recounted that “I actually said in a meeting, ‘When they light a fire, my thought is to grab an extinguisher’. And someone at the table said, ‘Have you tried gasoline?’”
Some have. Protesters are burning cars, dealerships, and even lawyers and reporters on the left are throwing Molotov cocktails at police. We have also seen a massive increase in attacks on ICE officers, who are now covering their faces to avoid doxxing or retaliation against themselves or their families. The left has rolled out guillotines and chanted “We got the guillotine, you better run.”
Just before he was shot at Utah Valley University, Kirk rallied the group with its signature chant of “prove me wrong.” The response was to kill Charlie Kirk.
His death could succeed in forcing the thousands of conservative and libertarian students back into the shadows of our campuses and classrooms. We cannot allow that to happen. Charlie Kirk challenged not just the left to debate but the right to be heard in higher education.
Yes, this is an age of rage. However, amidst the rage and the violence, there are a special few who have defied the threats and the attacks. The writer George Bernard Shaw once said that unreasonable people expect the world to conform to them. He then added that that was why all history is made by unreasonable people.
Kirk was one of those wonderfully unreasonable people who refused to yield; refused to be silenced. Despite unrelenting attacks by the media and the establishment, he remained undeterred and unbowed. Students need to remember not how Kirk died, but why he died. His loss is Charlie’s final challenge to all those today wringing their hands and muttering the usual expressions of shocked regret. Kirk would likely say, “prove it.” Speak. Defy those who spend their time silencing others rather than speaking themselves. If you want to honor Charlie Kirk, speak out, speak boldly on both the right and the left. Prove them wrong.
Jonathan Turley is the Shapiro professor of public interest law at George Washington University and the author of the best-selling “The Indispensable Right: Free Speech in an Age of Rage.”
I doubt this was random leftist activist. They are not this good. This person was a good shot and covered their tracks. It was not some random person wandering around with a ladder looking for a rooftop.
In my opinion, this was either drug cartel (the boat) or state (Iran bombing) backed illegal immigrant with training carrying out retribution. This was a terrorist attack.
Carrying out retribution against a civilian? FOR WHAT?
On this day, you question whether civilians would be targeted to send a message? How old are you?
The shooter was not a good shot. He was attempting a head shot, did not compensate for the angle and shot Kirk in the neck.
He went for the juglar. The aorta is minutes. Headshots aren’t always fatal. Heads move alla DJT.
He went for the juglar. The aorta is minutes. Headshots aren’t always fatal.
1. You know for a fact the murderer was specifically aiming for the jugular vein instead of at the center of his head and missing by about four inches? From what source did you determine that?
2. What medical training leads you to lecture us that a jugular VEIN severed on one side is far more immediately life threatening than a severed aorta ARTERY?
USF
I am so upset with these senseless acts of murder, I want this guy and all involved to be caught. A 31 year old man with such a beautiful family and life ahead of him, a beautiful young Ukranian woman escaping war, Catholic children praying at school….Funny how Gods plan for all of us unfolds, it can seem so cruel and horrible yet we never know what the grand reasoning may be. In the
I believe Charlie knew what could happen, regardless of this possibility he stood in the shadow of God to deliver truths and moral direction to a youth that seems so badly in need.
President Trump’s address on Charlie Kirk’s killng points out what I have said about Professor Turley’s lack of acknowlegdment from his argument and the author of an article I just read clearly points it out.
“ Trump portrayed Kirk as an inspiring leader who helped spur millions of young Americans to political activism. Earlier on Wednesday, he ordered all U.S. flags to be flown at half-staff until Saturday night in honor of Kirk, calling it a “mark of respect.”
He then turned his anger toward those he believes are responsible, repeating a familiar refrain of his in blaming liberals for violence against his MAGA supporters because of their public criticisms.
“It’s long past time for all Americans and the media to confront the fact that violence and murder are the tragic consequence of demonizing those with whom you disagree day after day, year after year, in the most hateful and despicable way possible,” Trump said.
The president didn’t broach the subject of how conservatives, including Kirk, have often attacked liberals and opponents of Trump in a similar manner, in some cases leading to political violence against those on the Left.
— Josh Meyer.”
Trump is adding to the “age or rage” by assuming and blaming the left instead of waiting for all the facts to come in. This isn’t happening on one side of the isle. Both sides are guilty of it, but Professor Turley leaving out this particular fact is what feeds the rage rhetoric he says is the problem.
“. . . instead of waiting . . .”
In such cases, here’s what the Left means by “waiting:” Till infinity.
Listen X, you are not making sense. Never had. Blame Trump because he ordered the flag lowering? My word, you’ll grasp at anything to defame the dead.
When you’re super angry and raging out, nothing’s going to make sense. Just chill out for a sec. Give yourself time to really think about what you read instead of blowing up the moment you think you catch something that wasn’t even said.
I’ve got some co-workers who are big fans of Charlie Kirk and normally great to work with. But since yesterday, they’ve been totally losing it, going off about the left and how they should face consequences when nobody even knows who the shooter is or what the motivation was.
Why do you think. I good person was murder. For what? Talking to people.
Listen, George, -at 7:43 this morning, -even before shower and breakfast for some persons, -you. had. already. posted. your. first. criticism. of the good professor Turley for today, “President Trump’s address on Charlie Kirk’s killing points out what I have said about Professor Turley’s lack of acknowlegdment of….”
On a day of national sadness and remembrance, this is how you started your day.
Stop and think about your own motivations, George. Thanking you in advance, yours truly, lin.
(I correct myself. You started criticizing Professor Turley at @ 7:03 in yet another comment.)
Lin,
As always a gracious, elegant take down of the slow and dumb one with such an efficiency of words!
The slow and dumb ones motivations is to contribute to the rage and hate the good professor points out.
The president didn’t broach the subject of how conservatives, including Kirk, have often attacked liberals and opponents of Trump in a similar manner…
People like Kirk are lost on vicious Democrat liars like you. Like your fellow Democrat cretins, you cannot provide a single example of Kirk speaking unkindly or disparaging to anyone challenging or questioning him.
What made Kirk so dangerous to you and your Democrat communist theology was the fact that he could reach young people you hoped to indoctrinate with humor, reason, and thoughtful speech.
You should be hanging your head in shame for spewing that lie about Kirk. But of course, shame is a human trait that you lack, which is why you put up posts like that.
“Both sides are guilty of it”
Your statements are moronic. Both sides are filled with human beings, but the vast majority of such attacks are from the left. Look at what we see from Antifa and in the universities. But you can’t see. You wear a blindfold.
Great column. My greatest fear is that there may be a branch of the far left, perhaps called the “hard left,” that has decided this is the time for seriously kinetic action, and hired this killing. We will know better if the trail to the killer grows cold quickly.
The liberal left America cannot speak intelligently, including the media pundits and politicians, as to why their views are important to our country and why normal people should adopt them or even give them credence. The more they rant and rage against conservative America the more they appear insane because frankly I believe they are. Seeing Nancy Pelosi kneel in the Capitol to mark the death of the career criminal George Floyd convinced me the hate is not only found at the bottom rung of society but at the top as well. On this 9/11 anniversary we have more to mourn than just the violence from outside our country but from inside as well.
RIP Mr. Kirk. Condolences to his family and friends
I hit the nail on the head. Professor Turley seems to have curated a list that showcases every sensationalized incident linked to the left and violence, yet he offers little in the way of context or deeper analysis. The irony of his stance is striking: he criticizes “rage rhetoric” for stoking these fires, but conveniently overlooks the equally inflammatory rhetoric from the other side that fuels this discord.
Charlie Kirk certainly knows how to challenge liberals and push boundaries, but his approach isn’t always rooted in honesty, sincerity, or intelligence. When free speech takes on an inflammatory tone, the consequences can be significant. In the high-stakes atmosphere of today’s politics, the kind of provocative and aggressive communication Kirk employs can easily escalate emotions, where rage eclipses rationality. This, I believe, is one of Kirk’s main objectives when he debates on college campuses: to incite frustration and anger among liberal students, to “own the libs,” as he likes to put it.
Now, don’t get me wrong—there’s nothing inherently wrong with engaging in that kind of rhetoric. However, neither Charlie Kirk nor Professor Turley seems to grasp that wielding free speech as a weapon can be risky. Turley’s argument about an “age of rage” misses a crucial detail: this rage doesn’t arise in a vacuum. Figures like Charlie Kirk achieve their notoriety not solely through free speech, but through tactics designed to provoke and enrage. This talent for eliciting reactions is what draws crowds and attention. But here’s the catch: provoking people comes with unintended consequences.
Just look at how Kirk’s “prove me wrong” events have evolved. What started as a simple setup with a table and chair has transformed into a full-blown production—complete with tents, security teams, and meticulously placed barriers to control the debate environmentIt highlights the truth that shaking things up can result in unforseen consequences for everyone involved.
And your point is? Just say it out loud, that what you can hardly repress. Go ahead just say it.
Exactly right. The hot chick wearing the sexy clothing provoked the rapist.
Xs’ point is, Kirk got what he deserved.
Good Lord X, you are sick thing. Go away, just go away once and for all time.
“Good Lord X, you are sick thing. Go away, just go away once and for all time.”
Preferably via suicide.
“ Xs’ point is, Kirk got what he deserved.”
No, that was not my point. Putting words into people’s mouths because you’re angry and reading into things that are not said is how end up looking disturbed and unhinged. Perhahps you should slow down and take a breath.
That is exactly what George Svelaz said, though perhaps in different words. Earlier, George Svelaz said, ” In the high-stakes atmosphere of today’s politics, the kind of provocative and aggressive communication Kirk employs can easily escalate emotions, where rage eclipses rationality.”
That’s rich coming from someone who cheers on every riot and assassination attempt from the left, waves around children’s books showing graphic sex acts, and then clutches their pearls about “rage.” Charlie Kirk debates ideas in open forums without censorship. You peddle degeneracy and violence, pretending you are the sane one. The only thing eclipsing rationality here is you.
You sneer at Kirk for “escalating emotions,” yet it’s your side’s violence that leaves children without fathers and wives burying their husbands. You sit comfortably behind your screen while families sit at funerals. Kirk’s wife has to wonder every day if your mobs will make her children orphans. That isn’t debate. That’s terror dressed up as virtue. You, still grinning, dare to lecture about “rage” you help to ignite.
Charlie, may you rest in peace. Young ones to celebrate Charlie act like him on each and every campus. Old ones, roll up your sleeves, remove your ties and jackets to prepare a line preventing this type of violence from ever moving forward again.
He triggered the unrestrainable? Practicing jargon.
Epic fail:
Your ideas only strengthen Charlie Kirk’s challenge.
“But here’s the catch: provoking people comes with unintended consequences.”. . . . and Galileo deserved to be killed because he pointed out that the earth was not flat. And Jesus deserved his fate because he “provoked” people. Yup, you tell ’em X.
“What started as a simple setup with a table and chair has transformed into . . .”
In other words:
What enrages the Left is that Kirk was successful at spreading his message in academia. Thus proving JT’s point.
Charlie Krik’s success is due to his ability to goad liberals. What started as intimate face-to-face discussions at a simple table and chair with students transformed into a spectacle involving security teams, barriers, and careful vetting of participants. This shift wasn’t accidental; it originated from his increasingly antagonistic approach. Rather than encouraging civil discourse, his debates seemed more crafted to provoke and rile up, fueling the flames and goading to capture more attention and fame. It’s this bold goading of his opponents that appeals to his followers and catapulted him into the spotlight, where the promise of lib outrage and putting them in their place often outweighs meaningful dialogue.
He was unifying. He was on fire.
“Charlie Krik’s success is due to his ability to goad liberals. “
Charlie Kirk’s success was his knowledge of the facts and the inability of the left to dispute what he said while he was alive.
I hit the nail on the head
You were dropped on your head right after you emerged in your larval stage – that’s a very different thing
Your desperate sub-human need to disparage and lie about Kirk and how he engaged Democrats before his murdered body is cold says everything about you and why you were so terrified of him and now celebrate his murder.
When you can’t debate and win on the issues, you hate human beings like Kirk who will expose you in the arena of ideas
Yes, Kirk’s efforts were in unification. I’m supposed to say, own it, x.
Yes those on the right say men are not women
And those on the left say assassinate political enemies
Clear parity
Are you nuts ?
If we eliminate the nut jobs
Most of which are arguably left if they are not so confused in their manifestos as to defy placement
The last consequential act of right wing political violence was decades ago
The last left wing one was yesterday and the day before and ….
All valid points, Prof. Turley. One possible additional point is that Charlie Kirk’s assassination may turn out to be directed payback for TPUSA’s role in Trump’s victory in 2024. It’s pretty clear to me that the left could not risk this conservative movement that harnessed the hearts and minds of so many young conservatives to go on.
That is possible
Kirk ran the incredibly successful trump gotv effort
It would not be surprising if it turns that this assassination was planned by one of the organizations allied with the Democratic Party. Kirk was not well known to the broader public but he was well known to the organized Left. He was a threat to their dearest bastion: American colleges. He threatened to free the herd.
A lone trannie is my guess. God help us all if it is.
“Zizians” ?
So many youngsters here, the history is hidden, let’s think back to the days of rage. Patty Hearst and the SLA, the Weather Underground, the Black Panthers. Where does this crazed leftist ideology come from you may ask. Did you know it’s reported that Obama’s “Dreams of my Father “ was ghost authored by Bill Ayers, a figurehead in the domestic terrorist organization the Weatherman. Obama’s campaign was kicked off in Ayers living room, with his Weather Underground wife Bernadette Dorn assisting. These people bombed, robbed banks, killed a LEO and incited riots in the 1960’s that resulted in death and destruction. Instead of prison for life, their rewards, a Clinton pardon and tenured positions at Columbia Universities. Fanni Willis’s proud father was a founding member of the Black Panthers, think Oakland burned.
Now ask yourself, how did we get here?
“A lone trannie is my guess. God help us all if it is.”
Too meticulously planned imo. No, there is some level of organized effort behind this despicable act.
That was the question before the shot. I took it to be a signal of when to shoot. For what reason is unkn.
edwardmahl, making assumptions and creating conspiracy theories leads to further escalation of rage on the right and demands for retribution and vengeance. This is exactly what Turley leaves out with his “age of rage” argument. Making assumptions and speculating without evidence leads to more violence. Let’s wait and see where the facts lead instead of trying to fill the void with useless assumptions and speculating.
I listened to the early question and answers, Q&A. It was about trans.
Charlie Kirk followed this to a T. 10 Finally, be strong in the Lord and in his mighty power. 11 Put on the full armor of God, so that you can take your stand against the devil’s schemes. 12 For our struggle is not against flesh and blood, but against the rulers, against the authorities, against the powers of this dark world and against the spiritual forces of evil in the heavenly realms. 13 Therefore put on the full armor of God, so that when the day of evil comes, you may be able to stand your ground, and after you have done everything, to stand. 14 Stand firm then, with the belt of truth buckled around your waist, with the breastplate of righteousness in place, 15 and with your feet fitted with the readiness that comes from the gospel of peace. 16 In addition to all this, take up the shield of faith, with which you can extinguish all the flaming arrows of the evil one. 17 Take the helmet of salvation and the sword of the Spirit, which is the word of God.
18 And pray in the Spirit on all occasions with all kinds of prayers and requests. With this in mind, be alert and always keep on praying for all the Lord’s people.
According to a survey of over 1200 people, 48% of those who identify as “left of center” said murdering Elon Musk is “somewhat justified”. 55% said murdering President Trump is “somewhat justified.”
https://networkcontagion.us/wp-content/uploads/NCRI-Assassination-Culture-Brief.pdf
1200 observations is a large sample size. Assuming the respondents were randomly selected and the polling questions were asked using neutral and unbiased language, then there is considerable value in the information. In other words, assuming it was soundly created and administered, it fairly represents “left of center” attitudes within a small margin error. (And don’t forget, margin of error is +/-. The poll is just as likely to underrepresent attitudes as overrepresent them.)
If that is not evidence of an evil mindset, then why isn’t it?
The left has been hating since the days of the KKK, nothing has changed.
“It was a day of love.”
The Left wing Media & their staff and all those who have posted/celebrated the actions of an Assassin who assassin Charlie Kirk should be FIRED from their positions. Antifa and their Financial Backers should be treated as Domestic Terrorist. Those groups and financial backer of this Assassin should be arrested.
Theses outdoor venues are to risky. Security and crowd control is a challenge.
Indoor theaters and assembly halls are more manageable. Attendees can be registered, ticketed and screened when entering the facility.
Goodbye Charlie
“Theses outdoor venues are to risky. Security and crowd control is a challenge.
Indoor theaters and assembly halls are more manageable.”
OTOH, outdoor venues can attract a much larger audience, including some who might be persuaded to change their minds on certain issues. That may be part of the criteria Mr. Kirk considered when selecting this venue.
The right answer is not tobassassinate people whose political views you disagree with
I watched reels of Charlie’s every day. I was astounded by the grace, respect and dignity he gave to people that had the most opposing views. He would quiet his followers if any of the people questioning him were booed. After this happened I made the mistake of reading some comments on the article that was on People magazine (God knows how they ended up in my inbox). The comments were toxic, vile, evil. I had to shut myself off the internet yesterday and got in a terrible funk. Not just over his death, but the glee and absolutely evil stance of the left over this. My faith in humanity took a big hit yesterday. I will find my faith and bounce back but you are right- we need to keep up Charlie’s fight and take the high road like he did. One thing I know for sure, is Satan is alive and well, but my God is stronger.
This is what the dem-o-rat party has become. From Reagan shooting to the base ball shooting to Prez Trump and now Charlie.
It’s an illness of the soul. There are things unforgiven within the souls of people that harden into rock within the spirit. Search your soul. CNN and such will reveal those rocks in conservatives and Charlie Kirk reveals them in the left.
“A virus works by entering a host cell and hijacking its machinery to replicate itself. It injects its genetic material into the cell, which then produces many copies of the virus, often damaging or killing the host cell in the process.”
Our nation has been infected with a political virus with the intent of destroying its host. A young American has just been murdered by those who fear freedom of speech, truth, justice and the American way. A left wing political organization and its MSM use words to foment violence because they lack appeal from rational Americans. They’re failing to appeal to our young who are now recognizing how vile they are and the danger they represent. They appeal only to those who are incapable of knowing right from wrong, normal from abnormal. No longer can we stand by as assassination and violence goes unanswered.
The MSM feeds hate to their followers.
True and see what it’s end is because it’s madness.
RIP Charlie Kirk.
Here’s a NPR headline announcing Kirk’s death: “Charlie Kirk, a Trump ally and voice for young conservatives, dies at age 31”
Here’s an AP headline announcing George Floyd’s death: “George Floyd killed by Minneapolis police”
No comment necessary.
I watched reels of Charlie’s every day. I do not remember ever hearing Trump mentioned in one of them.
AP, the man was assassinated! They are mocking him by making it appear as though he died of natural causes or an accident. We need a new reliable press. I dont care if it cones from tv or from social media! We need a new press. Consider Okeefe. The man seems hell bent on restoring the press to its former glory. Only give official announcements to him
Sam, the Right says the violence is mostly on the Left. The Left implies ALL THE VIOLENCE is on the right by memory-holing their own crimes. That lack of symmetry says a lot about the Left. We see it every day in the MSM.
Reddit and TikTok were on fire yesterday, celebrating Kirk’s murder. The usual talking heads on TV were taking the occasion to blame Trump and Kirk for Kirk’s murder. Vox had a piece last night which suggested Trump might use Kirk’s death to threaten democracy. The writer, Zack Beauchamp, didn’t have one kind word to say about the deceased. By the end of the piece, it was all about Trump:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/other/our-country-is-not-prepared-for-this/ar-AA1MiDv3
The Left is both hypersensitive and cruelly insensitive at the same time. They think like jihadists now, not Americans.
We are in the crucible. I hope American voters wake up to what all this means and punishes the Left hard at the ballot box. I hope they make it undeniably clear that this new leftist mentality will not be tolerated; otherwise, we will see major civil conflict in this country. The Left will insist. They aren’t backing off at all. They’re escalating.
In fairness, there was one act of contrition by MSNBC: Matthew Dowd was fired from MSNBC for saying the following on air:
Dowd began by suggesting the shot might have been “a supporter shooting their gun off in celebration.” Dowd then accused Kirk of being “one of the most divisive, especially divisive younger figures in this, who is constantly sort of pushing this sort of hate speech or sort of aimed at certain groups… And I always go back to, hateful thoughts lead to hateful words, which then lead to hateful actions, and I think that is the environment we are in.”
For the record Charlie Kirk was outspoken, but he didn’t push hate speech, so Dowd is a liar to boot. I hope Dowd never works in media again.
Matthew Dowd was a buddy of George Bush and Dick Cheney but went hardcore never-Trumper, so George and Dick better pony up some public sympathy for Charlie.
Some Democrat lawmakers denounced the killing, but I think they need to vote on a resolution condemning the assassination. I would like to see who is actually on record condemning the assassination. The little brains are still celebrating. A resolution from Congress might move the Left back in the right direction.
Dowd’s comments were especially shameful and despicable. His later apology is most emphatically NOT accepted, and *should* not be accepted by any American.
Inflammatory. Which bothers you the most, Sam?
Perhaps not promote your books in every column?
Why not? Because he right. His book describes what happened to Charlie Kirk. This s the what the left does. They are celebrating his death on BlueSky. The left is filled with hate and rage.
Barb
The left is filled with hate and rage.
________________________________
The party of the KKK. That rage never went away. Just ask Maxie Waters.
Right. As Hamas dragged the bodies of dead Jewish people through the streets defiling corpses. It’s when the spirit is defiled.
“Perhaps not promote your books in every column?”
Perhaps force yourself to stop coming here for the free content if some of that content hurts your feelings?
You are using something for free, but have no respect for the one providing it for you. Typical leftist
Professor Turley, you should consider meeting and going on @BishopBarron show to discuss your shared view of America’s collapse and how to get back to the Founding Fathers America. It would do both of you alot of good to work together
Bishop Robert Barron
@BishopBarron
I first met Charlie Kirk about four years ago when I was in Phoenix for a speaking engagement. He reached out and invited me to breakfast. I was deeply impressed by him that day. He was a man of great intelligence, considerable charm, and real goodness of heart.
I reconnected with him just last year, after I saw him debate twenty-five young people who were, to put it mildly, hostile to his views. I texted him that I was so struck by how he kept his cool and his charitable attitude in the face of some pretty obnoxious opposition. I then asked him to appear as a guest on my interview program, “Bishop Barron Presents,” and he eagerly accepted my invitation. He was scheduled to come to Rochester, Minnesota in about ten days. The last contact we had was two nights ago. After I appeared on one of the evening news shows to talk about the Religious Liberty Commission, he texted me and told me how much he appreciated what I said and then added, “I’m excited to join you on your show soon. God bless you.”
That last sentence shows what was most important to Charlie. He was indeed a great debater and also one of the best advocates in our country for civil discourse, but he was, first and last, a passionate Christian. In fact, when we had that breakfast in Phoenix, we didn’t talk much about politics. We talked about theology, in which he had a deep interest, and about Christ. I know I’m joining millions of people around the world in praying that he rests now in the peace of the Lord.
https://x.com/BishopBarron/status/1965945608323158485
And that’s where you lose me, Professor. At the end you equate the left and the right. Only one side has as a matter of policy (there are always crazy people on every side) violence been advocated, claimed as a right. How can people be expected to call out fascism if we don’t name it? I know you cherish your position as a moderate, but moderate now means you call out the radicals and fascists.
LOL….BLM, antifa, democrats in congress, colleges. Not even close. The left are the fascists and don’t even know it. The left wins overwhelmingly
Remember the base ball shooting by a socialist who hated the GOP and was a Sanders supported.
“At the end you [JT] equate the left and the right.”
He did no such thing.
He gave his opinion about the proper response to this tragedy — for everyone:
“If you want to honor Charlie Kirk, speak out, speak boldly on both the right and the left.”