A Nationwide Tribute
Yesterday a National Day of Tribute to Charlie Kirk. Mike Johnson and Steve Scalise led a memorial from Statutory Hall at the Capitol. There were candlelight vigils on American campuses across the nation. Vice President Vance filled in on Charlie Kirk's show, saying:
"Hey everybody, JD Vance here live from my office in the White House complex and filling in for somebody who cannot be filled in for, but I'm going to try to do my best... The last several days have been extremely hard for our country. They've been hard for me, hard for my family, hard for the countless people in this building who knew and love Charlie Kirk."
“Filling in for somebody who cannot be filled in for,”: Vice President JD Vance hosts the Charlie Kirk Show after his death
It seems that Kirk or at least his assassination may have had a bigger impact on American society than any of us could have imagined. The left's reaction to it is having an impact as well. Many on the left (and I no longer think that is only the far left) have reacted to Kirk the same way they reacted to Donald Trump: with vicious hatred.
One individual wearing an identical shirt as the killer of Charlie Kirk stomped and kicked his way through a memorial for Charlie. He was stopped by patriots and arrested by police:
In the meantime, the Trump administration is calling for groups or organizations that have secretly funded riots and violence to be prosecuted. That would include the violence that took place against Teslas (owners & dealerships) and the violence launched against ICE agents. NGOs that have supported violence may also be included and last but not least certain organizations may be officially designated as terrorist organizations, such as antifa.
Charlie Kirk was the straw that broke the camel's back. (It is a famous saying - I didn't lift it)
Tags
Who is online
84 visitors
I think it is time for the country to return to traditional American norms.
Most of the time I see this, it’s nonsense. Your norms are just fine. You’d have a harder time defining those norms than anyone else would destroying them. It’s just something people say to perpetuate the myth that someone is out to get you, when they’re not.
In case you forgot, the “normies” control everything now. The presidency, Congress, the Supreme Court, but you want to pretend someone else is destroying our society.
Are you old enough to remember elections before the Vietnam War protests?
Did Kennedy call Nixon a Fascist or did Nixon smear Kennedy likewise?
You see, back then before the left took to the streets we had something called common decency & civil discourse.
How someone who supports Donald Trump can talk about common decency and civil discourse is one of the great mysteries of this existence.
Right, which is why JFK, RFK and MLK were assassinated, such wonderful decency and civil discourse. /s
If your complaint is about a lack of civil discourse, how can you possibly support Donald Trump?
We had McCarthyism. And we're veering that way again.
But some folks think that's a good thing.
There were valid reasons for the "red scare." The atom bomb was either stolen or given to the Russians.
We are not suffering from McCarthyism, our problem is wokeism.
Defending McCarthyism. That tracks.
No, because neither of them were demonstrably Facist.
I think the country was doing well, violent stupid people ceasing to act outwardly in response to people going about their daily lives and not harming anyone. You are just incensed because you refuse to acknowledge that all people are deserving of the same rights as everyone else by virtue of being human.
That's what you call losing your norms.
What does McCarthyism have to do with the problems we are now facing. We have the left inciting violence, putting aside all their radical views, places us at a watershed moment. We cannot continue on this way Sandy.
People celebrating an assassination is a new low for the country.
Calling people fascist and comparing them to Hitler 24/7 is what is different. That wasn't done in those days back when we had insane asylums.
Today we not only allow the mentally ill to walk about, but we don't punish certain people. Take this Robinson kid for an example. They say he became radicalized. He hated Charlie Kirk and what he was accomplishing. Think about what went through his mind. First off, he sees that when people commit violent crimes, they aren't held accountable as they once were. He also may have thought that even if he didn't get away with it, he would at least be held as a hero in the Pantheon of the left.
How much money was raised for Mangione?
Did the mob not cheer when certain charges were dropped?
Who did Trump kill?
People didn't celebrate those assassinations back then.
We needed the left to get us here.
Did McCarthyism exemplify the "common decency and civil discourse" you claim was present before "the left took to the streets"? That, BTW, is not a civil statement, and does not exemplify decency.
Putting all the blame on the left is dishonest, given what happened on January 6th, 2021. The right also prefers to ignore the politically-motivated attacks, some fatal, in Minnesota, the arson committed targeting Pennsylvania's Governor Shapiro.
But ignoring the wrongdoings of one's own political tribe is hardly a new phenomenon, and hardly surprising from the folks who lost their shit when Obama wore a tan suit, but didn't care when Trump tried to steal an election, or kept classified documents, or threatened to curtail freedom of the press.
Your knowledge of history has some glaring prejudiced holes in it.
Why would that be indecent?
Funny how we suddenly started caring about riots in 2021. We're not supposed to remember the hundreds of them in 2020.
As is putting it all on the right.
What color was Washington’s white horse? I mean, are we just going to exchange nonsense questions now?
I asked you a specific question, and you responded with a non sequitur.
You brought up McCarthyism. Could you define it for us?
Putting all the blame on the left is dishonest, given what happened on January 6th, 2021.
I blame the American left for the vast majority of problems facing the country. What have they done to Academia or the media or our justice system?
But ignoring the wrongdoings of one's own political tribe
I don't ignore what others have done, but they pale in comparison. Simply compare, if you will Jan 6th to the 5 months of riots and murder during 2020.
Which I have not done.
McCarthyism was the persecution of Americans for their imagined political ideologies, whether there was evidence to support that they adhered to those ideologies or not.
It was not decent. It was not civil.
The usual vague bellyaching.
Were they witnessed throwing huge parties on the tenement rooftops, oops, wait, that was a different fabrication by a different liar.
Ok, fair enough. It wasn't about conversation or debate. McCarthy claimed to have a list that never existed and played on the red scare. How does that relate to today?
The usual vague bellyaching.
There is nothing vague about it. They tried to kill Trump twice, hitting him once. Charlie Kirk was just assassinated. We almost had a Supreme Court Justice assassinated, During the 2020 riots about 34 people were murdered. Few were punished. You call it vague bellyaching.
Two people tried to kill Trump. Not the entire left.
The "vague bellyaching" was in regards to
You didn't go to college, but you're absolutely sure that what happens there is indoctrination. Because somebody told you that's what's happening, and it's what you want to believe, so it's what you believe.
The justice system? The one that allowed Trump to appoint judges who would dismiss charges against him for retaining classified documents? That justice system? The one that seems to have no idea about the separation of powers intended by our founders?
Yeah, vague bellyaching at best. Willful blindness at worst.
List them.
They were sick people who acted after hearing that Trump was like Hitler and a Fascist and racist, etc, etc, etc. So, who stoked all that hate?
You didn't go to college, but you're absolutely sure that what happens there is indoctrination.
I didn't go to Vietnam either, yet I know it was a self-destructive exercise. What has happened in our universities has been widely written about by academics themselves such as Harold Bloom and the great Thomas Sowell. Those doing the indoctrinating have because well known in their own right. The father of Critical Race Theory, for example, was Derrick Bell whom Harvard Law School proudly describes as its first black tenured professor. Many of them became famous.
The justice system?
Yes, the justice system that was once the envy of the world but now has district judges (of a single ideology) making nationwide policy decisions. A system which has been so corrupted that fair decisions are not even expected in certain places. Do you recall the FBI lawyer who confessed to tampering with a FISA request? His name was Kevin Clinesmith, and he is the only person that ever got to the point of being held accountable for the Russia hoax and it was only because he was forced to confess. Did he receive any punishment? No Sandy, he got probation and the judge who handled that case was little known or even mentioned at the time but became quite infamous recently. His name is Judge James Boasberg. We needed Harry Reid to change Senate rules to get such radical judges appointed.
I am always here to discuss the American left and all they have done to this country.
So, you're going to equally be calling out Trump's inflammatory statements about those who don't support him?
Sure you are. I won't hold my breath.
You realize that the vast majority of college students aren't going to Harvard, yes? That they're majoring in subjects that aren't especially likely to involve political discussion at all? I couldn't tell you my professor's political views, with the exception of one, and that was only because he wrote columns for a newspaper. Columns he didn't discuss in class. He was a Baptist minister The only other professor I ever heard having anything to do with local government was a biology professor who was urging water restrictions during a drought when the town was hesitant to impose them.
Yes, very indoctrinating.
Probation is punishment.
And Aileen Cannon let Trump get away with keeping classified documents he shouldn't have had in a bathroom at his home. She is not "the left".
Hilarious from someone who calls everything he knows nothing about fascist.
If & when Trump calls his opponents Fascists and threats to democracy, I'll denounce it. Feel free to post any occasion when he did so.
You realize that the vast majority of college students aren't going to Harvard, yes?
Ok Sandy, we can use many other examples. Would you like to discuss the antisemitic ideology of Columbia University? How about all the universities that allow segregated dorms and segregated graduations or safe spaces. There are so many examples. The left diminished the once highly respected institution of higher education.
That they're majoring in subjects that aren't especially likely to involve political discussion at all?
I specifically focused in on "The Humanities."
I couldn't tell you my professor's political views, with the exception of one, and that was only because he wrote columns for a newspaper. Columns he didn't discuss in class. He was a Baptist minister The only other professor I ever heard having anything to do with local government was a biology professor who was urging water restrictions during a drought when the town was hesitant to impose them.
I assume you went to a medical school? I appreciate your experience, but I really don't want to make it personal, so let's stick with the evidence, ok?
And Aileen Cannon let Trump get away with keeping classified documents he shouldn't have had in a bathroom at his home.
I believe Judge Aileen Cannon concluded that special counsel Jack Smith’s appointment violated the Appointments Clause of the Constitution, correct?
We haven't heard Trump call anyone fascist, white supremacist, Hitler, nazi, etc.
He may have at some point, maybe in response to being compared to Hitler and being labeled a "Fascist" 24/7. I'm sure that if he did somebody will dig it up and then I'll denounce him for it.
It took me 5 seconds on Google
I denounce that. It should not have been said.
If Trump doesn't want to be called a fascist, he shouldn't act like one.
Funny how politicians can say one thing, but don't always live up to their slogans.
How has he done that?
A crook is synonymous with stealing money. Was Nixon on safe ground by insisting that he wasn't a crook?
The passive voice. LOL. Predictable.
I pulled down a list of characteristics of fascism for another article. One of the characteristics of fascism is:
Let's see, DJT assumed the power of the purse from the complicit and cowed Republicans who are in control of congress by 1) using novel interpretation of the constitution which assumes that he is not obligated to spend the money that has already been allocated for specific purposes for those purposes, 2) threatened congress in order to pass legislation that will act against congress in the next election cycle.
Also, the tacit submission of the SCotUS to the effect of allowing the administration's actions to stand while adjudication is occurring (even though this can be reasonably argued as having irreparable damages on the plaintiffs much more so than the defense) thereby entrenching the effects of the actions, while signaling the court's probable decision, all while providing limited to no legal justification for the ruling.
There exists factual and documented evidence for the rest of the characteristics that to a greater degree document the slide towards a fascist government.
This topic would lend itself well to a series of articles... hmmmmm
As has been pointed out DOZENS of times, woke simply means aware, your opposition to being "aware" only proves that the right wing wants to be stupid and unaware. That's pretty fuckin sad Vic.
According to Gemini
He went back and changed it.
Hilarious.
Who's?
Sad to see a number of these marred by protesters.
the left has almost completed its transformation into wesboro Baptist.
As I have said may times, the democrat party became dominated by the far left and basically became a revolutionary party.
Revolutionaries tend to want to blow up things, and they tend to lean left, probably following today's democratic party platform to resist everything that is good for this country at all means. . Case in point the two people who tried to blow up a Fox van in Utah the other day. I'm surprised many on the left have not tried to associate them as right wing.
They may have finally crossed the line. The people are tired of them and this assassination was the final straw.
Therefore what?
Therefore, the best tribute the American people can give him is to vote in the midterm and make it one of those rare occasions when the administration's party retained power.
MAGA already controls all of government. Holding on to that power could be done by actually doing good things for this country and persuading voters that the right people are in power.
But since that’s not happening, MAGA knows they have to redraw congressional districts mid-decade in hopes of just clinging to power in the House. On top of that, you want people to have some kind of emotional response to Charlie Kirk’s murder and vote in a way they wouldn’t have? As a tribute??
Do you not see how clearly that shows that the current administration is not earning more time in power? As much as the Right claims to care about merit, none of this reflects that.
I think we need to redefine right and left since the terms encompass everything from simply supporting free speech and lgtbq rights to rightwing extremists shooting cops trying to start a civil war or leftwing extremists stupidly assassinating bigoted morons who needed to be laughed at, not shot at.
Perhaps we can use the term "Siberia" for those on the far-right extremes and perhaps "Death Valley" for those extremists on the left. Two extremes, one in Russia where rightwing conservatives seem to feel more comfortable and the other extreme in California.
Then we can all condemn the Siberian conservatives and Death Valley liberals without smearing those on the right or left of center making them feel as if they're to blame for what the extremists on either side do.
When has that happened?
"Perhaps we can use the term "Siberia" for those on the far-right extremes and perhaps "Death Valley" for those extremists on the left. Two extremes, one in Russia where rightwing conservatives seem to feel more comfortable"[✘]
Sounds like the Boogaloo murders in Oakland.
I admit, my invented terms were meant to be a bit tongue-in-cheek. But in all seriousness, the fact that those on each side just say "left" or "right" to define such an immensely wide range of political views is what is truly moronic.
To take this kid who shot Kirk and paint him as being just like all the other 70 million "leftists" as if there is no difference between the woman who holds up a sign that says, "My Body, My Choice" and a kid who apparently planned out an assassination and then carried it out is frankly absurd. That's like saying anyone who has ever been upset by their banks fees is guilty of armed bank robbery where a teller was killed. "You had bad feelings toward the bank! You thought they were unfair! And that bank robber who shot a teller felt the same way! He admitted to hating overdraft fees and was sick of bank tyranny which is why he did it! So, you're all going down for murder you filthy bank haters!".
And all they can do is blame the left... sad.
Can't ever rule out the stupidity element.
Sad that you can't tell your right from your left.
Individuals and private groups can commemorate his death and legacy any way they want. Having the federal government memorialize someone like him is very unfortunate.
Are we , as a nation, going to give high honors to an actual racist and misogynist and xenophobe?
Apparently we are.
He wasn't any of those things. Those who faced him were at a loss of words to prove such shit.
The good news is that his widow has courageously amid her moment of grief to keep the flame alive. I heard that since her speech, Turning Point has gained about 18,000 new members and new chapters are springing up on college campuses.
People on the right such as yourself have been led to believe Kirk was some sort of great debater. Nope. He had a list of right wing talking points that he would throw at college students in so-called debates. College students that were not prepared to engage with him.
When he went to Cambridge a few months ago to debate British students, some of them made him look foolish because they had time to prepare.
How can that be? Charlie chose not to go to college. Where they not more educated than he was?
Or maybe education does not equal more intelligent?
Please post a tape of that. I'm sure that all our readers would love to judge for themselves.
Well, why not? The indoctrination by the radical left professors hadn't penetrated their thick skulls yet?
They seemed to be well prepared to offer uninformed misinformation and ignorant opinions.
Truth is, they couldn't refute his opinions and views
medium.com /@iiqra/charlie-kirk-came-to-cambridge-it-didnt-go-well-615f0cbb69ee
Charlie Kirk Came to Cambridge. It Didn’t Go Well.
Iqra Taimur 3-4 minutes 5/26/2025
3 min read
May 26, 2025
Press enter or click to view image in full size
Charlie Kirk is used to controlling the room. But in Cambridge, applause isn’t handed out, it's earned .
Charlie Kirk’s brand of conservatism thrives in echo chambers. At the Cambridge Union, he found himself in a room that echoed back, not with cheers, but with laughter, groans, and surgical rebuttals. Applause lines don’t win debates at Cambridge; they’re won by arguments that hold up. Whether defending Israel’s bombing of Gaza or dismissing feminism as ‘female misery’, Kirk’s rhetoric collapsed under the weight of facts.
Kirk’s first real test came during a confrontation over Israel’s assault on Gaza, a topic where his usual ‘good vs. evil’ framing is dismantled through Cambridge’s demand for nuance. Defending the indefensible, Kirk’s consistent dismissal of the mounting civilian death toll as mere ‘casualties of war,’ reducing a humanitarian catastrophe to a Fox News talking point. Students armed with casualty figures and legal arguments, Cambridge students forced him into unfamiliar territory: accountability.
This one question crystallized the cracks in Kirk’s argument; he deflected, blaming Hamas, invoking October 7th, dodging the scale of destruction. But in Cambridge, evasion is its answer. His defaulting to diversion when pressed on Gaza’s obliterated hospitals and starving children only amplified the hollowness of his moral certainty. If Palestine exposed the limits of Kirk’s moral blind spots, feminism exposed his historical ones.
Kirk’s vision of female happiness, a 1950s spectacle of aprons and obedient smiles, lasted exactly as long as it took a Cambridge student to dismantle it. ‘You keep citing ‘surveys’, as she noted,
Kirk began spluttering about birth rates and ‘careerist misery,’ but his own logic had already been weaponized against him. Laughter erupts as Kirk’s ‘data’, which are glorified anecdotes about cat ladies and depressed feminists, curdles under the heat of actual history, the soaring suicide rates of pre-feminist eras, and the OECD nations where gender equality positively correlates with life satisfaction. His argument didn’t just age poorly, it fossilized in real time.
What Kirk mistook for a ‘woke mob’ was simply a room allergic to intellectual laziness. Palestine proved it couldn’t defend its moral absolutes with collateral damage. Feminism proved he couldn't distinguish nostalgia from reality. Both times presenting his pattern of retreating to slogans, then rage, then the smug certainty of a man who’d rather be wrong than reconsider.
In the end, the room erupted in applause, not for Kirk’s ideas, but for their demolition. Even in defeat, he got what he came for: a lesson Cambridge was happy to teach.
I didn't ask for an editorial. I asked for the film so our readers could judge.
Here:
He got an A + on the first question.
Let's go on.
Did anyone catch the first question from the girl in the hijab?
Anyone else?
So much for Kirk get stymied at Cambridge & Oxford!
The second question came from a "medical student" asking for Kirk's position on abortion.
Did anyone catch that?
So, I can now declare this statement false:
"When he went to Cambridge a few months ago to debate British students, some of them made him look foolish because they had time to prepare."
Basically, that statement was opinion and very partisan at that.
It depends on how well you are able to follow what was being said.
You mean conservative ideals in which the little leftist babies had never had exposure to such things since most of them were indoctrinated into left wing education facilities.
"College students that were not prepared to engage with him. "
Most of them read their talking points they are given o their phones and that is the extent of their arguments. They had no idea how to respond when asked a question.
But, as usual, they have to call him something based solely on the fact he had opposing views. It's really nothing new.
He was 100% all of those things. Just Google his name plus any of those words and you will find multiple video examples of him showing exactly who he was.
Count if you will how many use the term fascist on a daily basis to describe their opponents.
You give us an example.
Multiple clips of him are in this video, and there is a conversation about those clips. I don’t expect you to watch the whole thing, but you could just slide the video to the places where you can see CK is speaking.
"Or maybe education does not equal more intelligent?"
There are those who are highly "educated" but have low intelligence. There are those with little education, i.e. book learning, but are greatly intelligent. Very few are both but many are neither.
It's all relative.
Yes, and Kirk's moronic response was expected. "Why did I fly 5000 miles blah blah blah" dodge, dip, duck.
Laughable that you believe that. Thank you for linking this, I hadn't watched it and its hilarious watching Kirk get stopped and then get all indignant. His answer about about claiming a soul exists claiming there is an invisible thing that lives on. His attempt to out-science the guy on a zygote was hilarious.
You do know that the size of font doesn't give your [removed] [✘] opinion any more weight, right?
can you point to the time mark where we get the good stuff?
All the while attributing a definition that is nowhere close to the actual definition.
They went through racist to nazi to fascist. I can't wait to see what they come up next. Maybe ranafas
he just kept repeating himself. She was right, he dodged the question
I like the med student.
DNA is not created. It's a fusion of sperm and an oocyte
Don 't give them any ideas. They are having problems with existing words and their definitions.
Explain how you dodge someone you debated with twice.
LMAO!!!!
honors to an actual racist and misogynist and xenophobe?
it’s hard to take this seriously when (1) the left has has spent every minute since his death having to fabricate quotes or take them out of context to show this and (2) they would say this about pretty much anyone when it suits their purposes.
total nonsense
Look how many times they mentioned Jan 6th in which the only person killed was a protestor/trespasser versus the 35 that were killed in the 5 months of rioting, looting and mayhem during the 2020 riots in which few were ever held accountable.
Everyone sees it for what it is.
If Kirks were such a (insert Democratc buzzword) they should be able to show it without making up quotes right? Shouldn't be difficult.
Yet they've spent days promoting transparently fake quotes....
They have lied about him and I'm still waiting for the student who called him a fascist to explain why.
It is really fascinating to see them finally go down this way.
Charlie Kirk was a total 2020 election denier.
What would be the logical basis for honoring him by displaying his casket in the Capitol rotunda?
Without him being an elected official there isnt even a fig leaf of a reason.
Yeah, it’s pretty impressive how apparently the Left is focused, united, and technically savvy enough to do all this. And to this one guy in particular. I mean, it’s either an incredible achievement or he really was like that.
I’m curious to see how you think quotes were fabricated or taken out of context. I also wonder what it is you’ve heard that was so bad that you want to believe they were fabricated or taken out of context. Must be pretty bad stuff.
We'll let us work our way back. Shortly before Kirk was assassinated he made a statement on the murder of Iryna Zarutska. After Kirk was assassinated, and unable to respond, Van Jones said he should have been ashamed of those comments.
Do you recall what Kirk said?
Do you recall the Zarutska murder?
Let me help. Iryna Zanutska (a Ukrainian refugee) got on the light rail in Charlotte. She sat down minding her own business. There were 4 other passengers shown in the film (all of them black). The man sitting behind her stabbed and slit her throat. They say he was mentally ill, yet he chose her, not any of the black passengers. As he walked away, he murmured "I got me a white girl." (BTW If anyone can prove that audio was doctored, I'd be willing to consider.) Then the other passengers who had been watching got up and left. None did a thing to help her. Not even hold her hand as she was dying.
Feel free to respond.
Do you? If you do why didnt you post his words?
Is lying that impressive? I don't find it so. It's really doesn't take "tech savvy" to simply lie about what's contained in a video when the audience would rather believe the lie.
m curious to see how you think quotes were fabricated or taken out of context. I
It's really easy. Shrill leftist says "CK said this racist thing" Ask for proof. Shrill leftist provides link to video where Kirk did not say what Shrill leftists claims and that shrill leftist simply changed the words Kirk actually used.
Must be pretty bad stuff.
Sure is . Imagine lying about someone who was just murdered and claiming they called for gays to be stoned to death. That's about as low as you can get.
I’ve seen it. He didn’t have to “call for it.” He cited it in the Bible and called it “perfect.” That’s close enough.
You are in danger of making too much sense.
Then you didn't understand it.
He didn’t have to “call for it.” He cited it in the Bible and called it “perfect.” That’s close enough.
How dishonest. At least Stephen King had the decency to apologize for making that argument after he watched the tape of what Kirk actually said.
. He’ s literally just making the point that it ’ s hypocritical for Ms. Rachel, a YouTuber for kids, to quote Leviticus to justify her pride month celebration when Leviticus also says men who “lay with men” should be stoned. You people are dangerously stupid.
Kirk's problem may have been that's he too nuanced for some audiences.
I dont think that happened
I think it was even in the edited video you posted.
She cited a verse to support her gay pride position. He asked her why she ignored another. It's not that complicated.
Even Stephen King could figure it out.
Nothing in there about Leviticus. Why would it be hypocritical for her to look at and accept Matthew 22 where it says love your neighbor as yourself ? Is she supposed to be hypocritical because she doesnt agree with Leviticus?
Kirk seems to be saying if you want to love your neighbor as yourself be ready to stone them.
People do that all the time, there is nothing hypocritical about it.
I'm not going to keep having the same discussion. Snuffy got it right already four days ago, which makes me wonder why you keep misrepresenting what he said:
If that's what you to believe, fine. Though I'll note that doing just that is a frequent tactic used by the leftists here when attacking Christians for what they believe.
Regardless, it still doesn't change that Kirk was pointing her hypocrisy out, not advocating for gays to be stoned to death.
Who cares what Stephen King said. I dont think its totally clear he was criticizing the woman either.
What Kirk did was to suggest there is an alternative to "love your neighbor as yourself" when it comes to gays. Why would any decent person say that?
She said we are supposed to love our neighbor as ourselves, and he said not really.
The most famous verse in Leviticus may be the command, “Love your neighbor as yourself” ( Lev. 19:18 ).
Apparently the lady never mentioned Leviticus.
He's an outspoken progressive who at least has the integrity to walk back a slander after he investigated the source. That should be a role model.
Even if that's correct, he's not advocating for gays to be stoned.
She cited the law set first set forth in Leviticus. It's the origin of her claim, whether she knows it or not.
Frankly, it doesnt really matter. She says we are supposed to love others as ourselves and Kirk says hey, hold on a minute there is a second opinion. .
Just like I said. CK called it “perfect.” Some people don’t want to admit it, though, because some hidden-away part of them understands how terrible that sounds.
Charlie Kirk didn't say gay people should be stoned to death | Snopes.com
And then of course we had the case of a Washington Post columnist who posted a fake quote from Kirk complete with quotation marks:
"The Washington Post fired a longtime staff member and columnist after she posted a fake Charlie Kirk quote and other inflammatory rhetoric just hours after the conservative activist’s assassination.
On Monday, columnist Karen Attiah revealed that she had been fired by the Washington Post the week before. In a Substack post , she claimed she was fired for having “spoke out against hatred and violence in America.” However, she then admitted that the exact reason for her firing was her social media posts on Bluesky, including a bigoted, fake quote attributed to Kirk, just hours after his assassination."
Washington Post columnist fired after posting fake Kirk quote
Imagine a "columnist doing that?
nonsense
He didn’t say they shouldn’t, either.
You keep forgetting that there are such things as video cameras. Pretty much every phone has one. First you accuse folk of putting words in Trumps mouth and now the same with Kirk. All folk can watch videos of both of them talking hate mongering fascism.
It'd be great if they did instead of fabricating quotes to spur their outrage.
“And it says, by the way, Ms. Rachel, might want to crack open that Bible of yours, in a lesser referenced part of the same part of scripture is in Leviticus 18, is that thou shall lay with another man shall be stoned to death. Just saying."
I believe the crux of this argument lay in that phrase he uses just after saying the bible says gays should be stoned to death.
"Just Saying". It's the dishonest persons way of saying "This isn't MY opinion, so don't blame me for the "truth" I just dropped on you!". If you confront them with an argument that challenges that supposed "truth", they can duck and dodge claiming it's not their opinion, completely dismissing any responsibility for their words.
You can tell that was the intent of his comments, especially when you look at what he said just before that sentence. "So you love God, so you must love his law. How do you love somebody? You love them by telling them the truth, not by confirming or affirming their sin.”. So, for anyone with an above 5th grade reading comprehension, you can clearly see what Kirk is saying which is "If you love the bible, which is God's word and thus perfect, you must love Gods law and that law says gays should be stoned to death. Not my opinion, but Gods, so don't blame the messenger." Is that Kirk calling for stoning gays? Not exactly, which is likely why Stephen King backed off, but he's clearly saying he supports a God who he believes thinks the right punishment for gays is stoning to death and that he wants to live in a society where that God's laws are the law of the land. Not really a lot of daylight in my opinion, between him wanting to stone gays to death or him wanting to live in a society that stones gays to death. Just saying.
You must mean al Sharpton
The idiots on the left gave honors to a drug user that overdosed.
Oh boy. You are going to open up that can of worms again.
It's not like I'm lying. Did they not give a drug user "high honors"?
Yes they did but you know that narrative (the truth about his death) is not allowed in left wing circles. They will once again rehash what they have been educated on over and over.
I've posted the autopsy report a few times. And every time they TRY to argue it with their "story" of what happened as if it will change fact.
And that is where education failed them.
Who is this ODd person you're talking about?
He used to go by the name George Floyd
What of the teachers & professors gloating over Kirk's death?
What could they have been teaching our children?
It's the hate mongering fascism that Kirk was teaching children that folk seem to take offence at
Can you post real links to what you claim?
Expressing an opposing viewpoint isn't "hate mongering fascism".
No, it isn't, but unfortunately, someone else used that excuse to assassinate Charlie Kirk.
They don't realize it but they carried out a real fascist act?
They probably don't think attacking ICE facilities in Portland is an act of fascism, either.
Funny thing is, they try and say Antifa is "anti fascist", but if you look at the letters, "Anti" and F(irst) (A)mendment, they are the real fascists.
Imagine, if you will, being so ignorant and dumb that you protest and fight AGAINST having safer streets and communities.
Nobody said they were smart.
In Italy, from one of the leading newspapers:
I assume that is a far right Italian newspaper.
Zeroing in on a widow holding a rosary and committed to carrying out her husband's work is something that captures the attention of Italians. It is beyond politics.
A vigil in Europe:
Europe, the birthplace of fascism. What's your point?
From South Korea:
Its possible that most of Americans didnt know who Charlie Kirk was until last week, but we are supposed to believe that masses of people in other countries are in mourning. No. Right wing political groups, yes.
Is that how the left is going to report it. They do so at their own peril.
A sleeping giant has now been awakened.
That is a valid point. I guess an indoctrinated killer brought him to the attention of the world.
No, the giant morons have been awake for a while. They're just too stupid to think for themselves so now they're sad that they lost one of their rightwing fascist leaders who was doing all the thinking for them.
And you call my posts moronic.
SMMFH
I had heard of him but hadn't known he was such an insane fascist hatemonger. It saddens me that there are so many fascist hate mongers who followed him. Just think of all the things I miss out on for not watching Fox or Newsmax.
Have you noticed that the left-wing rags that reported it like that are the same ones that told us Biden was capable of running for a second term?
They simply have no shame!
One has to have integrity to have shame.
[✘]
From London:
picture of testimonial for kirk in london - Search / X
Yeah they had a fascist rally in London the other day. Elon Musk was there.
I think I see some of the same faces in this photo.
You see some of the same faces!
You should be helping the police with missing persons
Your proof of a "fascist" rally is?
Do you believe everything that does not fall in step with illogical left wing ideals as fascist?
There is another poster here that likes to use that word and not know what it means.
Maybe you can get with that person and try and figure out what it does mean.
Yep, she does have that wide-eyed fascist look to her.
You left out the case of wine.
Look at all the right wingers racing to dance on Kirks grave for political points....sickening.