Showing posts with label Charlie Kirk. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Charlie Kirk. Show all posts

Wednesday, February 25, 2026

Mythmaking


Blogger Steve M, whom I quote probably more than anyone else, recognizes that President Donald Trump's State of the Union address Tuesday

was aimed exclusively at the Trump/GOP voter base. That base -- the last people in America who still admire and respect Trump -- doesn't want the president and Congress to pass a bunch of laws. The people in the base want Trump to make them feel good, partly through simple-mided flag-waving patriotism, but mostly through endless Democrat-bashing. Like the rest of us, they've stopped expecting the political system to improve our lives. But they're content if Trump hurts the people they want to see hurt, demeans the people they want to see demeaned, and declares that America is strictly Republican.

The President presented a master class in mythmaking and "simple-minded flag-waving patriotism" designed to make people feel good.  A moment or two into his speech, Donald offered one of his golden oldies, "winning too muc," when he boasted

People are asking me, please, please, please, Mr. President, we’re winning too much. We can’t take it anymore. We’re not used to winning in our country until you came along, we’re just always losing. But now we’re winning too much. And I say, no, no, no, you’re going to win again. You’re going to win big. You’re going to win bigger than ever. And to prove that point, to prove that point, here with us tonight is a group of winners who just made the entire nation proud. The men’s gold medal Olympic hockey team. Come on in.

And then, at his command, out strode the men's gold-winning USA hockey team. It was a dramatic moment brought to the audience by a man expert in the ways of Hollywood through The Apprentice, which followed a stint as an awful businessman in New York City.

He spoke of the "spirit of 1776," and introduced 100-year-old Buddy Taggart, who fought in the Battle of Manila and earned a Purple heart and a bronze star. "From 1776 to today," declared Captain Bone Spurs, "every generation of Americans has step (sic) forward to defend life, libety and the pursuit of happiness." 

The flag-waving segued effortless into mythmaking, such as when he claimed "we just received from our new friend and partner, Venezuela, more than 80 million barrels of oil," an estimate off by more than 50 million. He later stated

Moving forward, factories, jobs, investment and trillions and trillions of dollars will continue pouring into the United States of America because we finally have a president who puts America first. I put America first. I love Aaerica. For decades before I came along, we had the exact opposite.

Trump consistently exaggerates the amoung of investment made in this presidenial term, but that's not where the critical myth lies. "I love America," states the man who called the USA "evil" and its people "bloated, fat, and disgusting."  "I put America first" contends the man who in December released from prison former Honduran President Juan Carlos Hernandez, who had been sentenced to 45 years in prison for conspiring to distribute more than 400 tons of cocaine and related firearms offenses. 

Loving America and putting America first is a myth invented by the man who in his first term alone on at least six occasions- most famously, with Vladimir Putin in Helsinki- sided with foreign governments over the USA. In Tuesday's State of the Union address itself, Trump condemned his immediate predecessor four times, including an accusation that Biden "gave us the worst inflation in the history of our country" (which did not occur then) and that he "created (our) housing problem," which was ludicrous.  Directly criticizing a former President while you yourself are President is virtually unprecedented.

Nonetheless, the most intriguing and very significant myth has gone unexplored, for fear of any politician, news organization, or pundit being accused of "political incorrectness" or worse. After boasting of an initiative of the First Lady, Donald said 

I’m very proud to say that during my time in office, both the first four years and in particular this last year, there has been a tremendous renewal in religion, faith, Christianity and belief in God. This is especially true among young people, and a big part of that had to do with my great friend Charlie Kirk. Great guy. Great guy.

So last year, Charlie was violently murdered by an assassin. And martyred, really, martyred for his beliefs. His wonderful wife, Erika is with us tonight. Erika. Please stand.

Thank you. Erika, thank you a lot. In Charlie’s memory, we must all come together to reaffirm that America is one nation under God. And we must totally reject political violence of any kind. We love religion, and we love bringing it back.



The only accurate portion is that Charlie Kirk was murdered, and for his beliefs, though even that is not confirmed. There is a critical myth circulating in respectable conservative circles that "there has been a tremendous renewal in religion, faith, Christianity and belief in God."

It is reflected in the Gallup headline from last June "More Americans See Religion Increasing Its Influence in U.S." The article's author wrote "thirty-four percent of U.S. adults believe religion is increasing its influence in American life, similar to the 35% measured in December but up from 20% a year ago."

Nevertheless, he says the increase "likely does not reflect a change in Americans' personal religious commitment, as 47% of U.S. adults say religion is 'very important' in their lives, unchanged from a year ago."  Americans, as far as we can tell, are not becoming more religious- they believe others are. (It's a comforting thought.)

The reason for this is quite simple. Americans keep hearing, from Trump and others. that religious faith is booming in this country. Donald is an accomplished actor, thus an extraodrinarily convincing liar, especially because practice makes perfect. Most of his lies are fact-checked at one point or another. However, bold would be the man or woman who would dare to check for veracity the claim that religion is gaining influence in society. "Anti'Christian" would be the least of the attacks leveled. 

Gallup found also 

The most notable increase occurred after the 9/11 terror attacks, when 71% in December 2001 saw religion as increasing its influence, up from 39% in February of that year. The 71% reading is the highest in Gallup’s trend, which dates back to 1957.

A second surge occurred amid the COVID-19 pandemic. In April 2020, 38% of U.S. adults believed religion was becoming more influential, up from a pre-pandemic reading of 19% in December 2019. The April 2020 figure was the highest Gallup had measured since 2006.

In 2016, a Duke University academic explained

After the Sept. 11 terror attacks, many expected American houses of worship to be jammed with parishioners seeking refuge, community and a place to grieve.

And that spike in church attendance did in fact occur. Briefly.

But the attacks did not have a lasting effect on American religiosity, says Mark Chaves, a Duke professor of sociology, religious studies, and divinity. Chaves directs the National Congregations Study, which examines American religious places of worship over time. He says the jolt to church attendance following the attacks lasted just a few weeks.

“People thought this type of crisis of national significance would lead people to be more religious, and it did,” he says. “But it was very short-lived. There was a blip in church attendance and then it went back to normal.”

Religious behavior isn’t usually affected in the long term by single events, Chaves says. Rather, religious practice in a society tends to change slowly over a long period of time, often owing to demographic changes. For example, changes to family structure -- like people marrying later, or not at all, or choosing not to have children -- have led to changes in church attendance and other sorts of religious involvement, Chaves says.

And though church attendance spiked briefly after 9/11, America’s overall participation in religious activities was actually in decline at that time -- a trend that was slow enough not to be identified until recently. The best data point to a slow, steady drop in religious involvement dating back to at least the 1970s, he says.

There was a flurry of increase, which then evaporated, in church attendance after the terrorist attacks of 9/11/01, whereupon religiosity continued its long-term decline in the USA. And the effect of Charlie Kirk's murder upon the American psyche, despite the GOP's effort to create the myth that Kirk was an overarching figure in society whose death mobilized right-thinking people everywhere, was perhaps 1-2% as great as "9/11."  Donald is eager to perpetuate the myth- hence, the invitation to his widow and the claim that her "great guy" was "martyred."

There is also the the disingenuous notion that America is "one nation under God." The idea emanates from the Pledge of Allegiance, which was written in 1892 without a reference ro religion. "Under God" was added by President Dwight Eisenhower in 1952 in response to "the second Red Scare, a period when U.S. politicians were keen to assert the moral  superiority of U.S. capitalism over Soviet communism, which many conservatives regarded as "godless."

Typically, individuals who believe in God recognize God as all-powerful and "in control."  The "under God," was added to the Pledge to emphasize our superiority to communist nations, To Donald Trump, a little less obviously to other individuals wishing to exploit religion for political ends,"under God" now asserts superiority over every other nation.

It's absurd to argue that the USA, under the leadership of Donald Trump, is guided by the hand of God. That may be good and may be bad, and is probably both. It would an improvement generally over Donald John Trump- but lends easily to the claim that America is a "Christian nation," all others be damned.. 

However,crushing truths perish from being acknowledged, especially those persisting to make us feel good. The untruth that our country is a land of Christian faith led by a benevolent patriot is only one. But it's bad enough.  


Monday, December 15, 2025

Deplorable



On Sunday, a tweeter on X with more than 189,000 followers commented

All I have seen is people being shocked and saddened by Rob Reiner's murder. You will always get some lunatic posting but I haven't seen one person on the right say something nasty.

This is a tragedy. He was a massively talented man.

On Tuesday, after he was criticized for "pretending" those conservatives "don't exist to protect your feelings," the tweeter responded "What are you talking about? Since last night I have seen a couple of stupid posts but the vast majority have been respectful. Now do the Charlie Kirk murder."

Unfortunately, he spoke a little too soon

When Charlie Kirk was murdered, Rob Reiner was asked by Piers Morgan "what was your immediate reaction?" The actor turned director and producer replied

Well, horror. Absolute horror. And I unfortunately saw the video of it and it's beyond belief. What happened to him. And that could never happen to everybody. I don't care what your political beliefs are, that's not acceptable. That's not a solution to solving problems and I felt, like what his wife said at the service, at the memorial they had, was exactly right, totally. And I believe- I'm Jewish but I believe in the teachings of Jesus and I believe in doing to others. I believe in forgiveness and what she said to me was beautiful and absolutely she forgave his assassin and I think that's, that is admirable.

I would have added a point and kept a couple out, and "I believe in doing to others" was inartful. However, the argument was sensitive and generous and its thrust, spot-on: "I don't care what your political beliefs are, that's not acceptable. That's not a solution to solving problems...."

Steve M. lists numerous comments from Trump supporters on the Fox News and Breitbart websites who "pat themselves on the back for not being haters while.... being haters." I've similarly been bombarded on my X timeline by MAGAts with no sense of irony. They blame the left for allegedly "celebrating" (in the word of a few) Charlie Kirk's murder and blaming the right for condoning the murders of Rob Reiner and his wife. Then they themselves admit not a whiff of regret about the latter crime.

Giving credit where credit is due, US Representatives Marjorie Taylor Greene of Georgia and Mike Lawler of suburban new York also criticized the President for his classless and cruel remark on Truth Social.  Surely, there will be many more. 

Surely, I'm joking. Although events have proven then-presidential nominee Hillary Clinton correct- though injudicious- in realizing half of Trump's supporters should be put into a "basket of deplorables," less blame should go to the President's fans than to prominent Republicans, especially members of Congress who remain silent and Donald himself.  

Among random liberals and progressives, there were very few individuals who even with the anonymity of social media expressed pleasure at the assassination of Charlie Kirk, whatever his hostile views toward the LGBTQ+ community and black women. There were even very few who pointed out the irony that he was an opponent of gun safety laws. 

That can be contrasted with the views of Trump supporters toward this past weekend's murders in Los Angeles. Even if their response were far more empathetic , however, that would not make a hill of beans difference without condemnation from Republicans on Capitol Hill.  More than any, they are the real deplorables. 


Friday, November 07, 2025

Their Enemy Within



On September 16, 2025, the USA Senate by voice vote unanimously approved a resolution condemning the murder six days earlier of conservative activist Charlie Kirk. It was introduced by Republican senator Mike Lee of Utah, who

introduced the resolution shortly after Kirk’s death last week, calling on his colleagues to condemn his assassination “in the strongest possible terms” while also honoring his life and “commitment to the constitutional principles of civil discussion and debate between all people in the United States regardless of political affiliation.” The resolution passed in a unanimous voice vote when it was brought to the Senate floor for consideration.

“This is just a flag, planted on a hill,” Lee said of his resolution. “What matters is where we carry it next.”

The Senator was not just (warning: cliches ahead) blowing smoke or whistling Dixie. There was an array of speakers at the memorial service turned political rally. held in Glendale, Arizona five days later. Among the Trump Administration notables was presidential advisor Stephen Miller, whose remarks- accurately described here as "fiery"- included

They cannot conceive of the army that they have arisen in all of us because we stand for what is good, what is virtuous, what is noble. And to those trying to incite violence against us, those trying to foment hatred against us, what do you have? You have nothing. You are nothing. You are wickedness. You are jealousy. You are envy. You are hatred. You are nothing. You can build nothing. You can produce nothing. You can create nothing.

We are the ones who build. We are the ones who create. We are the ones who lift up humanity. You thought you could kill Charlie Kirk. You have made him immortal. You have immortalized Charlie Kirk. And now millions will carry on his legacy. And we will devote the rest of our lives to finishing the causes for which Charlie gave his last measure of devotion. You cannot defeat us. You cannot slow us. You cannot stop us. You cannot deter us.

We will carry Charlie and Erika in our heart every single day and fight that much harder because of what you did to us. You have no idea the dragon you have awakened. You have no idea how determined we will be to save the civilization, to save the West, to save this republic, because our children are strong and our grandchildren will be strong. And our children's children's children will be strong.

And what will you leave behind? Nothing. Nothing. To our enemies, you have nothing to give. You have nothing to offer. You have nothing to share but bitterness. We have beauty. We have light. We have goodness. We have determination. We have vision. We have strength. We built the world that we inhabit now, generation by generation.

When you saw or read of the speech, you probably were not surprised to learn that Miller did not specify the "they" because, of course, he didn't. 

And neither has Mike Lee:



The Utah senator didn't say who "they" str who killed Charlie Kirk. Neither does he say who "celebrated his murder" or "mocked him" or "his grieving widow." 

There was a time when conservatives mocked liberals for blaming crime on "society." No longer, because now it is an undefined, collective "they." Individual responsibility- or at least a claim to individual responsibility- is out, and fostering hate and division is in. "We're under invasion from within," President Trump declared two weeks ago. No different from a foreign enemy but more difficult in may ways because they don't wear uniforms. At least when they're wearing a uniform you can take them out" (or when they're in a boat).

And a lesson to this story. Democrats in September unanimously joined Republicans in condemning the murder of an individual whose ideological stance- opposition to the LGBTYQIA community,  abortion rights, gun safety legislation, black women-  was anathema to Democrats.  But for the sake of comity (or decency) they mourned the assassination of a right-wing Republican.

We have since seen the response of Mike Lee, members of the Trump Administration, and many other conservative Republicans to the Democratic effort to stand as one with Republicans over a matter of national concern, the murder of a conservative activist with millions of supporters.  It is to blame "they" and "them."   Democrats have been warned. They should take notice.



 



Sunday, October 05, 2025

Lesson Learned, Maybe



Well, as the cool kids would say circa 2022, "that didn't age well."  It turns out that the Anti-Defamation League (nee B'nai B'rith Anti-Defamation League) was wrong- and taught us an important lesson. Al-Jazeera reported on January 22 of this year

After Elon Musk made an apparent Nazi salute at an inauguration rally for United States President Donald Trump, the Anti-Defamation League (ADL) rushed to defend the SpaceX founder.

The self-described anti-Semitism watchdog and “leading anti-hate organization in the world” dismissed Musk’s raised arm as “an awkward gesture in a moment of enthusiasm” in a social media post on Monday.

Months earlier, however, Jonathan Greenblatt, the head of the staunchly pro-Israel ADL, compared the Palestinian keffiyeh to the Nazi swastika....

While speaking at the Capital One Arena following Trump’s inauguration, Musk put his hand to his chest, then swiftly raised his arm as he thanked the crowd for electing the Republican president.

The 53-year-old billionaire then turned around and did it again.

His motion resembled the Nazi gesture — known as the “Sieg Heil”, German for “hail victory” — which has roots in an ancient Roman salute.

“My heart goes out to you. It is thanks to you that the future of civilization is assured,” Musk said.

While it is not uncommon for politicians to extend their arms to greet an audience, the combination of Musk’s rhetoric about “civilization” and the repeated gesture raised many eyebrows.

However, on January 23, Musk went punny:



Later that day on the same format, the ADL, evidently not amused, responded

Making inappropriate and highly offensive jokes that trivialize the Holocaust only serve to minimize the evil and inhumanity of Nazi crimes, denigrate the suffering of both victims and survivors and insult the memory of the six million Jews murdered in the Shoah,

There was little or no reaction to the statement from the ADL as it seemed to roll off Musk's back. However, as explained by the Guardian, on October 1, FBI director Kash Patel

denounced the group and said the agency would cut ties with the non-profit.

Patel's announcement followed days of attacks by rightwing influencers and Elon Musk on the ADL over its online database on extremism, which included a page on slain far-right pundit Charlie Kirk's Turning Point USA and the organization's link to far-right extremists. On Tuesday, the ADL deleted its entire Glossary of Extremism, a flagship project which contained more than 1,000 entries on groups and movements with connections to hateful ideologies. the move failed to quell the backlash....

Over the weekend, several influential rightwing accounts began posting screenshots of the ADL’s page on Turning Point USA (TPUSA), attacking the organization for including Kirk’s group in its Glossary of Extremism. One of the first posts, from a self-described “Twitter troll”, accused the ADL of having “blood on their hands”.

The ADL did not actually list TPUSA as an extremist organization, but instead documented incidents where its leadership and affiliated activists had either aligned with extremists or made “racist or bigoted comments”. Other rightwing activists soon followed the troll with more posts about the ADL. Some spread a screenshot of the ADL’s page on the Christian Identity movement – an extremist ideology that espouses a racial holy war against Jews and other minorities – to allege that the ADL was biased against Christians as a whole.

The attacks by rightwing influencers had  included


Musk responded on X "The ADL hates Christians, therefore it is a hate group." But the organization's criticism was not of Christians but of Christian Identity, a movement said to date to 1989 and which is

characterized by a belief in white supremacy and anti-Semitism. Followers of Christian Identity believe that the covenant recounted in the Bible was actually made between God and the Anglo-Saxons and other European peoples, who are the real Ten Lost Tribes of Israel. Christian Identity characterizes Jews as the offspring of Eve and Satan and views people of African descent as subhuman. Though it has been largely unsuccessful in persuading “white Israelites” of their purported identity, small churches are active, mainly in the northwestern United States. The movement proselytizes through publications, recordings, and the Internet. Aryan Nations, a prominent Christian Identity-based hate group founded in the United States in the 1970s, developed a strong network of white supremacist groups, many of which congregated at a compound in Hayden Lake, Idaho.

The Anti-Defamation League threw Elon Musk a lifeline in late January. A prestigious and very reputable opponent of anti-Semitism, it could have called Musk out for what did appear to be a Nazi salute.

Instead, it defended his gesture, thereby tamping down criticism in establishment circles. Yet now, it has been pummeled by the world's wealthiest billionaire and his MAGA supporters.

Compare that to the controversy surrounding Jimmy Kimmel's remark(s) about Charlie Kirk's disciples.  Disney's decision. The BBC noted that the decision 

to suspend Kimmel was met with protests in California and lambasted by the writers and actors guilds, lawmakers and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), who argued that the suspension violated free speech rights and spurs a chilling effect.

Hundreds of celebrities and Hollywood creatives also signed a letter backing Kimmel.

Ben Stiller, Jennifer Aniston, Meryl Streep and Robert DeNiro are among those who called Kimmel's suspension a "dark moment for freedom of speech in our nation".

Critics of Disney also called for people to boycott Disney+, Hulu and other services in order to cut into the entertainment conglomerate's bottom line.

As fellow comedic talk show hosts Jon Stewart, Stephen Colbert, and Seth Myers ridiculed and condemned the suspension...

Dylan Byers from US media website Puck told BBC Radio 4's Today programme there has been "a lot of hand-wringing" at Disney since last week "about how to right this ship".

The "blowback was intense" and came from figures ranging from former presidents and Hollywood stars to ex-Disney executives, he said.

"And at a certain point, I think that became too much." 

The "too much" included also denunciation from legislators, legal experts, and a social media postings from viewers who announced cancellation of subscriptions to Disney's online streaming platform and ABC's platform. And from September 17, when the suspension was announced to September 23 when it was revoked, the value of the stock of The Walt Disney company plunged 2.39%, $4.49 billion of its market value.


                 


So the furious response to the initial Kimmel decision resulted in the company changing its mind and reinstating the talk-show host. That is a different situation than what prevailed with Elon Musk following his salute to the Third Reich. Nonetheless, there is a moral to the story: the right-wing which now runs this country is not interested in the left or the center reaching out and giving it the benefit of the doubt. Fighting the onslaught will not always work but a conciliatory approach will nearly always fail. Take the advice of the late Tom Petty, and never back down.

 


Tuesday, September 23, 2025

Ambitious Disinformation


In all the commotion, Jimmy Kimmel's actual words in his remark in his monologue on September 15 seems to have been forgotten. He said

We hit some new lows over the weekend with the MAGA gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it.

Therefore- no, despite this-a former press secretary to the undisputed most dishonest and corrupt (dishonest the operative term here) president in American history had this to say about the talk show host's comment:

Kimmel made one false statement: the murderer of Charlie Kirk, whatever he is and whatever motivated him, appears not to have been a MAGAit.   However, the comedian in the same sentence maintained that "the MAGA gang" was "doing everything they can to score political points from it." Moreover, no one has been defamed, which any first semester, first year law student understands.

Tweet after tweet from self-admitted "MAGA" on Elon Musk's X represents an effort to score political points from the assassination.

But that's not all. The vast majority of these individuals (this one of thousands of examples) is (are?) not well known except by the people who read these tweets. However, this person is quite well-known and, aside from her ambivalent view of abortion rights, is extremely, loyally, "MAGA":

 


That is what we, or any sentient human being, would call "trying to score political points from" a murder. So, too, was White House Advisor Stephen Miller trying to score political points when at the rally for- uh, er, memorial to- Kirk, he bellowed (also stated on X)  (emphasis mine)

.... With God as my witness, we are going to use every resource we have at the Department of Justice, Homeland Security, and throughout the government to identify, disrupt, dismantle, and destroy these (radical left) networks and make America safe again for the American people. It will happen, and we will do it in Charlie's name.

Previously, Miller had claimed there was an "organized campaign that led to this assassination," either a lie or evidence of ignorance beyond imagination.  

On September 15, hosting Kirk's podcast a few days after the murder (no trying to score political points there!), Vice President James David Vance had stated

And importantly, we have to talk about this incredibly destructive movement of left-wing extremism that has grown up over the last few years and, I believe, is part of the reason why Charlie was killed by an assassin's bullet.

That same day, President Trump, the self-proclaimed "King of America" who has called the USA "evil," remarked ".... the radical left really is- causes a lot problems for this country. I really think they hate our country."  In his very first statement after the crime, Donald spoke from the Oval Office and blamed the radical left for the killing of Kirk, contending "this rhetoric is directly responsible for the kind of terrorism that we're seeing in this country today."

"And it must stop," the President added, explaining that the Administration will be pursuing "the organizations that funded and supported" a whole raft of high-profile incidents he blamed on the left.

That sort of thing should be an inspiration to Jimmy Kimmel as his show resumes on ABC (minus stations owned by Sinclair and Nexstar) tonight, Tuesday, September 23, 2025. As he realizes, Kimmel is only one, albeit one of the best-known,, of Trump's targets. The goal is to shut off all debate and criticism of the King, who recently whined "They're 97 percent against. They give me only bad press... I would think maybe their license should be taken away."  Donald's favorite FCC commissioner, chairman Brendan Carr, threatens "we can do this the easy way or the hard way." He knows his brave boss doesn't want his own fingerprints on the murder weapon.


 


Tonight, Kimmel should promptly omit error on one of his claim, MAGA inspiration for the murderer. Then, he should explain to the American people how the memory of Charlie Kirk is being exploited. President Trump's dreams and schemes, the President's objectives and the stakes involved, ought to be explained in the simple manner which professional entertainers excel at.  Unless he clearly and completely backtracks- very unlikely- Kimmel will be criticized by the crowd Donald manipulates and exploits. Thus, he may as well gamble on the public's interest in truth.



Monday, September 22, 2025

St. Paul? Really?


Not surprising, given it's Timothy Dolan. Still, reprehensible:

 So, let's play a common and popular game. If Charlie Kirk were a modern day St. Paul, it should be difficult to determine which individual is responsible for a particular quote, offered in no particular order. In each case, I've left one or more words blank because otherwise, it would be obvious in that instance that the words were spoken in the 1st century A.D. or the first century A.D.


1) "Well, (blank) is "an ideological, unintelligent, yet confident fanatic (who) feels entitled to this position."

2) ".... prowling (blank) go around for fun to target (blank) people, that's a fact. It's happening more and more."

3) "If I'm dealing with somebody (in a particular line of work) who's a moronic (blank) woman, I wonder is she there because of her excellence or is she there because of...."

4) "The (blank) party hates this country. They wanna see it collapse."

5) "(Blank) has now become the jive speaking spokesperson of (blank)."

6) (Blank) is a bumbling dementia filled Alzheimer's corrupt tyrant who should honestly be put in prison and/or given the death penalty for his crimes against (blank).

7) "We're taking our country back from these cockroaches."

8) "And Jewish (blank) have a lot of explaining to do, a lot of decoupling to do, because Jewish donors have been the number one funding mechanism of radical open borders, (blank), quasi-Marxist policy, cultural institutions, and non- profits."

(Credit to Steve M./No More Mister Nice Blog and to Ta-Nehisi Coates for the links to these quotations.)

The words omitted were:

1) Ketanji Brown Jackson; 2) blacks, whites; 3) customer service, black; 4) American Democrat; 5) Kamala Harris, equity; 6) Joe Biden, America 8) donors; neo-liberal.


O.K. O.K., you probably suspected that Mr. Kirk was the author of all those quotations but if he were the modern St. Paul, it would not have been such an easy call.  The eighth statement is interesting because "radical open borders" had its parallel in Old and New Testament times, and Luke wrote in Acts "all the believers were together and had everything in common." Radical capitalists, they weren't.

The point isn't that Charlie Kirk was wrong about everything, though resenting Jews, hating blacks, and supporting the execution of an American President for having disagreeable policies normally would not be an impressive character reference. It is more so the deification of Charlie Kirk in death, an effort which normally would not be something a Roman Catholic prelate would be partial to. 


Saturday, September 20, 2025

Kimmel in Context



As we all know

ABC has pulled late-night host Jimmy Kimmel off air indefinitely over comments he made about the shooting of right-wing influencer Charlie Kirk.

"Jimmy Kimmel Live will be pre-empted indefinitely," a spokesperson for the Disney-owned network said in a statement to the BBC.

In his Monday night monologue, Kimmel said the "MAGA gang" was trying to score political points off Kirk's killing.

On Tuesday, a 22-year-old suspect appeared in court charged with aggravated murder over last Wednesday's shooting of the 31-year-old conservative activist. Representatives for Kimmel did not immediately respond to requests for comment.

Kimmel said on Monday: "The Maga Gang desperately trying to characterize this kid who murdered Charlie Kirk as anything other than one of them and doing everything they can to score political points from it."

Kimmel was making two assertions: 1) the "kid who murdered Charlie Kirk is "one of them," the "Maga Gang"; and 2) the MAGA Gang is "doing everything they can to score political points from it."

The talk-show host was wrong about the first. As of late Monday when he made his remark, we knew only that alleged murderer Tyler Robinson hated Charlie Kirk, which was rather obvious from the start. Since then, we have learned that Robinson was incensed at the "hate" he believed the victim was spreading and, very likely, had become more keen on gay and transgender rights, which would have put him very much in odds with Kirk.

Jimmy Kimmel wasn't alone in being wrong about Charlie Kirk's assassin, and the evidence points to his accuracy in the contention that the far right is "doing everything they can to score political points from it." As The Guardian reports

Trump allies have sought to link Kirk’s killing – without evidence – to what they say is a coordinated leftwing “terror” movement that supports political violence, funded by progressive and liberal charities. This has led to fears of a draconian crackdown on free speech. 

One of them is the junior Senator from the state of Kansas:


Don't wait for the evidence- blame it on the left:

Prior to that, the actual Vice President of the USA, not a talk show host, had

guest-hosted Kirk’s podcast on Monday and said that people who “see someone celebrating Charlie’s murder” should “call them out”. He added: “Hell, call their employer. We don’t believe in political violence, but we do believe in civility, and there is no civility in the celebration of political assassination.”

Monkey say, monkey do. From the Oval Office only a few hours after Kirk was killed, President Trump issued a video message in which he alleged

Radical left political violence has hurt too many innocent people and taken too many lives. Tonight, I ask all Americans to commit themselves tot he American values for which Charlie Kirk lived and died.

The body was barely cold and we didn't know who the assailant was- let alone his motive- and Donald already had declared that the "radical left" had committed the murder. And in his response to the murder of Kirk and erasing any thought of Donald, House Speaker Mike Johnson stated on Fox News Sunday

People have got to stop framing simple policy disagreements in terms of existential threats to our democracy. You can't call the other side fascists and enemies of the state and not understand that there are some deranged people in our society who will take that as cues to act.

Donald Trump has called the press the "enemy of the people"' called Kamala Harris during the last presidential campaign a "fascist;" and his political enemies "communists, Marxists, fascists" and "radical left thugs that live like vermin."  (Certainly nothing that will encourage "deranged people" to act out their grievances.)

So blaming the left for the assassination of the famous podcaster and activist is not only dangerous in itself, but is coupled with an effort by Donald Trump, daddy to Republican officials, to erase and rewrite history. Oh, but Jimmy Kimmel inaccurately implied that Tyler Robinson was a supporter of the MAGA movement and must be cancelled.



Thursday, September 18, 2025

Ridiculous Comment


On Tuesday, September 16, the two US senators from Pennsylvania, Republican Dave McCormick and Democrat John Fetterman appeared on a Special Report segment Common Ground with Brett Baier on Fox News. Referring to Donald Trump, the Democrat stated in part

Don't compare  him to anyone. And if you do, then you will incite somebody to say, well, now I feel like I have to, to, stop that and take them out. People have seemed to have forgotten that the President took a shot to the head. And can you imagine if that shot would have gone the way Charlie Kirk's went? And what kind of condition our nation would be in?

This such a dangerous time right now. And no why you don't need this- an opportunity to share your opinions on it. Just again, it's appalling and allow folks enough space to grieve. The man hasn't even been buried et. And it's like that's why we wanted to have a conversation that we have to find a way to work together.

The "him" in the first paragraph evidently referred to President Trump because in its piece on the segment, The Philadelphia Inquirer has reported

Pennsylvania Sens. John Fetterman and Dave McCormick denounced the use of terms like “fascism” and “Nazism,” which have been deployed by some in the Democratic Party to criticize President Donald Trump and his allies.

If we're to have that "conversation" Fetterman advocates, we first need to be accurate. The attempt on Donald Trump's life took place on July 13, 2024. Note to the Pennsylvania senator: Trump was not elected until almost four months later, on November 5, 2024.

This is not inconsequential because 

The 20-year-old Pennsylvania man who tried to assassinate Donald Trump had photos on his phone of the former Republican president, President Joe Biden and other officials, including Attorney General Merrick Garland and FBI Director Chris Wray, according to two people familiar with the matter.

Investigators searching Thomas Matthew Crooks’ devices have also found that the shooter looked up the dates for the Democratic National Convention as well as Trump’s appearances, according to the people who spoke to The Associated Press on the condition on anonymity to discuss details of the ongoing probe.

Crooks was not dead-set (no pun intended, really) on killing Donald Trump. There were other targets- Democratic targets- he had in mind. The motive(s) of an individual planning to murder several persons or one of any group of people differs from someone intent on killing one specific individual.

But it's consequential for another reason. Fetterman argues "and can you imagine if that shot would have gone the way Charlie Kirk's went? And what kind of condition our nation  would be in?"

One need not be a mind reader to know that the Senator was horrified of the possibility that a President of the United States and Commander in Chief of the Armed Services (when the latter called into service) would be assassinated and leave the nation leaderless. However, that would not have happened; Joe Biden was, and would have continued to be, President until the following January 20.

That's not to suggest that a successful attack upon candidate Trump would have been less serious or significant than a successful attack upon a President. If a President is assassinated, the 25th Amendment is invoked. The Vice President (who is of the same political party as the president and was chosen by him) becomes President and after a period of mourning, life goes on. Assassination of the presidential nominee of one of the two major political parties, of an individual with roughly a 50% chance of being elected President, goes to the heart of our democratic republic. It eliminates the major challenger to the incumbent Party and can dramatically change the course of the nation.

Either scenario is tragic and potentially devastating. However, there is a difference and a United States Senator, the victim of a stroke, either a) forgot that Donald Trump wasn't yet President; b) thinks thee is no difference between a presidential candidate and a President; or c)intentionally spoke of Donald as a President who suffered an assassination attempt.

That's a consequential error or something worse. The Senator is either mentally impaired (a); ignorant of our constitutional system (b); or (c) is beguiled by Donald Trump. 

Fetterman claims additionally "people have seemed to have forgotten that the President took a shot to the head."  Virtually no one denies that Trump came within a whisker of being killed, and the incident was not staged. 

Nonetheless, Donald Trump either was hit by a bullet fragment- not by a bullet itself- or sustained his injuries in some other manner during the incident. This 79-year-old man takes a blood thinner- a.k.a., aspirin- takes "a shot to the head," is released from the hospital a few hours later, and is left with no scar. That strains credulity for anyone who thinks. Embracing the "shot to the head" story is assuming facts not in evidence.

Donald Trump wasn't President when he did not take a shot to the head, a violent crime people have not forgotten.  Aside from those things, Senator Fetterman is thinking clearly.



Tuesday, September 16, 2025

Rookie Mistake


Rookie mistake.

In an article published on Groundhog Day in 2024, Laurence Pevsner (say that surname three times fast) explains how refusal to apologize has been a characteristic of prominent Republican officials since President Dwight D. Eisenhower. After Ike, there has been a continuous stream of Republicans who recognized the advantage of refusing to apologize. Among others, they included Richard M. Nixon, George HW Bush, George W. Bush, and Mitt Romney.

And, of course, Donald J. Trump. In 2015, Jimmy Fallon asked him 

Have you ever apologized? Ever? In your lifetime? Close your eyes, think back to Baby Donald, when you were little Donny Trump, did you ever, did you ever apologize?

Trump’s first response was disapproval of the question: “That was not supposed to be one of the questions… we had a very nice sequence of questions.” But then he did, surprisingly, drum up an answer. “I fully think apologizing is a great thing, but you have to be wrong,” he said. “I will absolutely apologize, sometime in the hopefully distant future, if I’m ever wrong.”

Democratic officials also have learned not to apologize but no one has perfected the art of denial and claiming perfection as well as Donald has, and he has been elected President of the USA twice. Enter Matthew Dowd, who was interviewed by MSNBC host Katy Tur approximately 3:00 p.m. eastern time on September 10 soon after reports about the shooting of Charlie Kirk. And so

In part, he theorized whether the incident was “a supporter shooting their gun off in celebration.”

Dowd said Kirk had been "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," Dowd said. "And I think that is the environment we are in."

He added, "You can't stop with these sort of awful thoughts you have and then saying these awful words and not expect awful actions to take place. And that's the unfortunate environment we are in."

So far, so good, an objective, rational individual would conclude. Dowd was expressing a reasonable opinion, one which reflected the reaction of many people to the assassination. He might have survived that, but then made an uncommon error. He actually expressed regret and took responsibility.

My thoughts & prayers are w/ the family and friends of Charlie Kirk. On an earlier appearance on MSNBC I was asked a question on the environment we are in. I apologize for my tone and words. Let me be clear, I in no way intended for my comments to blame Kirk for this horrendous attack. Let us...

— Matthew Dowd (@matthewjdowd.bsky.social) September 10, 2025 at 5:33 PM

As The Guardian noted, Dowd "served as chief strategist for George W Bush's 2004 presidential campaign and was formerly a political analyst for ABC News." He should have known better. Instead, MSNBC president Rebecca Kutler issued on X a statement reading

During our breaking news coverage of the shooting of Charlie Kirk, Matthew Dowd made comments that were inappropriate, insensitive and unacceptable. We apologize for his statements, as has he. There is no place for violence in America, political or otherwise.

Then Dowd was fired. He was fired, apparently, because while there is- regrettably- a place for violence in America, there is little place for freedom of expression, as responses to responses about the murder have illustrated.

Yellow-bellied Kuttler did not maintain that Matthew Dowd had said anything inaccurate nor vitriolic. He had said something insensitive, perhaps because we had not yet learned definitively that Kirk had been hit, yet alone died. Kutler believed it was "inappropriate," which could have been for any number of reasons, justified, unjustified, or even illegitimate and found it "unacceptable," which was obvious because he was dismissed.

He could be fired in part because he had admitted error and in the absence of him defending his own remarks, few if any would defend him, nor criticize MSNBC for sacking him. (The British have a way with words.)

What Kutler didn't claim was that the analyst had said anything inaccurate nor vitriolic, worth repeating because it is fundamental to an individual's statement. Vitriol can exacerbate a situation and is an extreme expression of insensitivity.

Even that, however, is not central to the matter. (And it's a good thing that our President hasn't set the standard in vitriol.) Accuracy is, or at least should be.

Were Dowd's words accurate? Probably, but we'll never know because in honoring an individual exercising freedom of expression, the search for truth has been abandoned. 

Facts are becoming irrelevant. And in a society in which truth is optional, the assertion of rightness holds sway. As argued here, "it's long been apparent that people demanding public apologies aren't actually interested in forgiveness or whether what the person says is actually true... they want submission." Whatever people or the media (especially the media) may claim, the public "tend to still quite reasonably assume that if someone apologizes, then they must have done wrong and should be punished."

"Reasonably" does a lot of work here. Nonetheless, "never apologize, never explain" is an aphorism understood well by Donald Trump, evidently better than any public figure in American history. Matthew Dowd, apparently an individual with a sense of integrity, does not, or at least did not before this episode.



              . 



Sunday, September 14, 2025

They



You can't accuse the widow of Charlie Kirk, Erika Kirk, of cowardice. She had laid down the gauntlet and is eager to get it on.

Mrs. Kirk states "They killed Charlie because he preached a message of patriotism, faith, and of God's merciful love."  

Racial bias as the hallmark of patriotism and faith. And nothing spells "love" like describing Ketanji Brown Jackson as "an ideological, unintelligent, yet confident fanatic," Kamala Harris as "the jive speaking spokesperson of equity," and Mehdi Hasan as "a prostitute with a British accent" (for his alleged support of pharmaceutical companies) who should be "(sent) back to the country he came from. Revoke his visa."

Nonetheless, he shouldn't have been murdered. His angry widow continued

They should all know this: if you thought that my husband's mission was powerful before, you have no idea. You have no idea what you have just unleased across this country, in this road, you have no idea. You have no idea the fire that you have unleased that's in this wife. The cries of this widow will echo around the world like a battle cry.

Were I to honor Charlie Kirk, doing as he was wont to do, I'd quote Scripture, here Paul in Romans 12:19 (repeated in Hebrews 10:30): "Do not take revenge, my dear friends, but leave room for God's wrath, for it is written: 'It is mine to avenge; I will repay,' says the Lord." However, Erika Kirk has reason, even justification, for bitterness.  She can be forgiven her spitefulness and animosity.

But toward whom? In the news conference announcing the arrest of  Tyler Robinson, Utah governor Spencer Cox explained

.... Violence is violence, and there is one person responsible for what happened here, and that person is now in custody and will be charged soon and will be held accountable. And yet, all of us have an opportunity right now to do something different.

There is one person responsible for what happened here.

Cox notwithstanding, the right is typically blaming unnamed persons of the left.  Elon Musk remarked "the Left is the party of murder." Laura Loomer charged "They sent a trained sniper to assassinate Charlie Kirk while he was sitting next to a table of hats that said 47. You could be next.... The Left are terrorists."

Failed Arizona congressional candidate Blake Masters tweeted "This: A thousand times this. Left-wing violence is out of control, and it's not random."  Oath Keeper founder and January 6 criminal Stewart Rhodes asked the President to "declare the left in this country is in obvius open rebellion against th law of the United States. They're committing insurrection, they're aiding and abetting an invasion, and they're blocking the execution of federal law" (hypocrisy, anyone?) Stephen Miller wife Katie Miller wrote on Musk's platform "It's a real treat to see all these Liberals condemn political violence now. You called us Hitler. You called us Nazis. You called us Racists. You have blood on your hands."

There have been many others who blame unnamed "liberals" or the "left-wing" or "they." Some of them are prominent, and some unknowns on X twitter. And of course, Donald Trump, who on the ironically named Truth Social slammed the "radical left" and claimed "this kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we're seeing in the country today."

No, it's not. If Donald wants to find someone who has been "directly responsible" for what he irresponsibly alleges is "terrorism," he need only look in the mirror. However, even he is not directly responsible for any of it. It is the perpetrator himself who carried out these murderers- and was able to do so only with a firearm.

The Apostle Paul, understandably, will not be heeded. Mrs. Kirk appears to be very articulate and a skilled speaker. In GOP world,  her statement will be seen as an eloquent expression of macho vengeance and sense of victimhood, embodied so effectively in Donald Trump. Thus- other than "something" rather than "someone-" J.D. Vance would be wise to take heed of the famous quote of legendary black pitcher Satchel Paige: "Don't look back; something might be gaining on you."



Friday, September 12, 2025

The Backlash Will Not Be Peaceful


(Note: this post was composed shortly before the arrest of Tyler Robinson for the murder of Charlie Kirk. The apprehension, though relevant to this issue, changes little.) 

Even before FBI director Kash Patel, in the interests of transparency, came out and lied to the American people about the apprehension of the murderer of Charlie Kirk, it had begun. The allies of President Trump swung into action. TIME reports

Katie Miller, the wife of White House deputy chief of staff Stephen Miller, posted on X, “It’s a real treat to see all these Liberals condemn political violence now. You called us Hitler. You called us Nazis. You called us Racists. You have blood on your hands.”

“The Left is the party of murder,” Elon Musk, the billionaire tech mogul who has frequently espoused right-wing views, posted on his social media platform X.

Musk shared his comment alongside a post by venture capitalist and political activist Shaun Maguire, who said: “The Left lectured us for the last decade about the dangers of violence from the Right … The danger was actually on the Left.”

“The Left are terrorists,” posted far-right political activist and conspiracy theorist Laura Loomer. Loomer added that Kirk’s death only portends “more targeted” assassinations. “You could be next,” she warned. “We must shut these lunatic leftists down. Once and for all. The Left is a national security threat,” she said in another post.

With few clues as to the assassin's identity, their minds already had been made up. So had the mind of the Capitol's leading bathroom obsessive:

 More calmly, yet more ridiculously, we hear from a Senator from Oklahoma:

Referring to Democrats, Mullin claims "we're not the ones out there who are trying to silence them." 

Evidently, someone forgot to tell President Trump because

Sitting behind the Resolute desk on Wednesday, Trump nonetheless said: “Those on the radical left have compared wonderful Americans like Charlie to Nazis and the world’s worst mass murderers and criminals. This kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we’re seeing in our country today, and it must stop right now.

“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 added.

That runs contrary to the bulk of the president’s rhetoric over the past several years. On the campaign trail, Trump said that it was impossible to get along with political rivals.

“These are horrible people. Oops, we should get along with everybody. They’re horrible people. Some people you just can’t get along with,” he said in the final days of the 2024 presidential campaign.

The guy who calls the press "the fake news" and "enemy of the people," called Kamala Harris "mentally impaired" and "mentally disabled," and declared former President Obama "guilty of treason," pardoned armed and unarmed terrorists on 1/6/21 rioters while calling them "hostages," now accuses the "radical left" of being "directly responsible for the terrorism that we're seeing in our country today." 

But Trump knows what he's doing. According to TIME, Supreme MAGAt and unofficial, influential Trump adviser Laura Loomer responded to the assassination with "We must shut these lunatic leftists down. Once and for all. The Left is a national security threat." Conservative political strategist Joey Mannarino posted "The Democrat Party must be classified as a domestic terror organization and their members & leaders treated accordingly. Enough is enough."

Sean Davis, the CEO and co-founder of right-wing media outlet the Federalist, called the Democratic Party "a domestic terrorist organization whose most fanatics will not hesitate to murder their political opponents."

Other remarks were even more dangerous. Ian Miles Cheong, a well-known conservative commentator from Malaysia, referred to the right-wing cause celebre Iryna Zarutska, a Ukrainian woman murdered in a stabbing in North Carolina on August 22. Cheong posted "Charlie Kirk wasn't the first victim in this war. He was the second. The first victim was Iryna Zarutska. This is war."

Ian Miles Cheong, a conservative commentator from Malaysia, posted, “Charlie Kirk wasn’t the first victim in this war. He was the second. The first victim was Iryna Zarutska,” referring to a Ukrainian woman who was killed in a stabbing in North Carolina on Aug. 22 and has become the face of anti-crime rhetoric largely from the right. “This is war,” he added.

In one post, Wisconsin Representative Derrick Van Orden wrote "May the mighty wrath of vengeance fall upon the Brown Shirts who are responsible for this" and in another "The democratic Party has been fostering, a 21st century Civil War. I would encourage them if you look at the results of the last one that they started." 

My personal "favorite" is from the President of Students for Life, an organization which proclaims in all caps on its website "ABOLISH ABORTION:"


No better way to restore a "culture of life" than to start a civil war, apparently.  Yet, because of his prominence- a little in Hollywood and a little on social media- an even more dangerous reaction(s) came from James Woods:



Worse yet, he followed it up with

 

 

There are far more examples TIME lays out more right-wing rhetoric about "the party of murder;" "this is war;" and "the left must pay."  As a whole, they paint the picture of a GOP base which agrees with President Trump that "these are horrible people" whose "kind of rhetoric is directly responsible for the terrorism that we're seeing in our country today and it must stop now."

It probably was not "terrorism."  (Nor everything violent which we disapprove of is terrorism.) However, that's an issue for another day.  Donald is right that "it must stop now." But there will be no effort to enact gun safety legislation and little, if any, funding for mental health services cut by recent passage of the President's budget and spending megabill.

No, the hard core Trump supporters know what their god meant when he said the rhetoric "must stop now." Woods, Hawkins, Cheong, and the other prominent and relatively unknown individuals who have called for cracking down on their political opponents understand Donald Trump, as do the millions of individuals who hear and read their words. So did the violent right when President Trump in debate in 2020 recommended "Proud Boys, stand back and stand by," which was followed by the insurrection at the Capitol on January 6, 2021.

At that confrontation with fellow candidate Joe Biden, Trump added "But I'll tell you what, I'll tell you what, somebody's got to do something about antifa and the left because this is not a right-wing problem." Aided by the assassination of Charlie Kirk, the Democratic Party- which is the (somewhat) "left" party of American politics is being substituted for Antifa. . And when the individual who said five years ago "somebody's got to do something," now says "it must stop now," he's hoping that his more ardent supporters translate that to "civil war."


The New Pledge of Allegiance

Last month, Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez infamously stated "I have a local city councilman that has this saying 'Woke 1...