TP: Most of it has to do with race. Frex: 1) I get his point about the DEI/merit debate. He went too far IMHO naming specific people (Michelle Obama et al) and essentially calling them not so bright. They apparently all admitted that affirmative action helped them in one way or another. But he was unkind and it detracts from his argument. 2) I think it is wrong to throw out MLK's impact due to his personal character issues, as bad as those have been alleged to have been. 3) I understand his argument with respect to the Civil Rights Act, and agree to a point (that it has led to unconstitutional DEI programs and, as some say, has become a "second constitution" unto itself). However, its initial impact was so very good and important and I didn't see him acknowledging that. In short, while he reached out to, encouraged and mentored many young black conservatives, these comments were, at best, tone deaf.
I also diverge to a point on immigration. I think his position is rational (enforce the law) and I largely agree with that. I would personally soften the edges somewhat of what can lawfully be done under the conditions we face now due to Biden's open border policy.
I would have more exceptions for abortion.
There are other issues, and I think Charlie had other rough edges, but it seemed to me that he was a work in progress. He was still quite young. I think marriage and kids was good for him. And now we won't see what he might have become.
2025-09-25 20:58:59
GtfNC/Wonkie: I remember that too, and Wonkie's comment in particular about a campaign against her sister's church. I would be interested in that too.
2025-09-25 16:01:24
lj: The Horst Wessel comparison came first. And the FB poster's joke was more an illustration of how I wouldn't rely on him for information about Kirk than on the extremely bad taste of the joke itself. He seems to think Kirk and the CEO deserved it.
nous, I agree with your assessment of the proclamations and your use of "nettlesome." Still, AOC's response seems to show that it is more what was not in the proclamation (and the same case could have been made for Hortman). But your point is well-taken.
GftNC, AOC's response starts out strong but then devolves and illustrates two things: 1) My point above, that it wasn't really what was in the proclamation but what wasn't; and 2) her penchant for taking things out of context. I do see her point, but similar things could have been said about Hortman's legislative agenda.
2025-09-25 05:10:18
HSH: I have a problem with jumping right to Hitler as a primary means of criticism, especially after an actual assassination. It is a form of "he deserved it."
The guy you link to celebrates the murder of Brian Thompson and notes he (the FB poster) "felon love" with Luigi Mangione. He thinks Charlie Kirk's LIFE was a tragedy, not his death. All based on ideas. His comments about Kirk's debate style are simply not representative of what I have seen. I saw some Charlie Kirk stuff from time-to-time before his assassination. There was a lot I didn't agree with, and some of his interactions somewhat resemble what was described. I like long-form debate mostly, like the Monk Debates. Watch Kirk's debates at the Oxford Union and Cambridge, or his conversation with Bill Maher. He isn't riding herd on some poor college student there. He is exchanging ideas. I note that the Cambridge students he debated with mourned his death and admired his commitment to the exchange of ideas. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9wdp2ypq5vo
I disagree with many ideas on the left, and despise some. That doesn't keep me from condemning, say, the murder of Melissa Hortman and her husband. FULL STOP. The senate resolution honored her life and passed unanimously. The resolution honoring the life of Charlie Kirk, however, was opposed by 58 Democrats and 60 more either voted present or did not vote. Most said due to his ideas. Melissa Hortman had ideas too, ones that many on the right disagreed with or found repugnant, but the Republicans chose to honor her life and not temper their desire to send a unified message condemning her murder. I wish the Democrats would have done the same for Kirk.
Kirk's death feels significant. I think that is in large part to the left's (painting broadly here) reaction.
2025-09-23 04:34:20
We don't even need Godwin's law anymore. The probability is 1 from the get-go now.
TP: Most of it has to do with race. Frex: 1) I get his point about the DEI/merit debate. He went too far IMHO naming specific people (Michelle Obama et al) and essentially calling them not so bright. They apparently all admitted that affirmative action helped them in one way or another. But he was unkind and it detracts from his argument. 2) I think it is wrong to throw out MLK's impact due to his personal character issues, as bad as those have been alleged to have been. 3) I understand his argument with respect to the Civil Rights Act, and agree to a point (that it has led to unconstitutional DEI programs and, as some say, has become a "second constitution" unto itself). However, its initial impact was so very good and important and I didn't see him acknowledging that. In short, while he reached out to, encouraged and mentored many young black conservatives, these comments were, at best, tone deaf.
I also diverge to a point on immigration. I think his position is rational (enforce the law) and I largely agree with that. I would personally soften the edges somewhat of what can lawfully be done under the conditions we face now due to Biden's open border policy.
I would have more exceptions for abortion.
There are other issues, and I think Charlie had other rough edges, but it seemed to me that he was a work in progress. He was still quite young. I think marriage and kids was good for him. And now we won't see what he might have become.
GtfNC/Wonkie: I remember that too, and Wonkie's comment in particular about a campaign against her sister's church. I would be interested in that too.
lj: The Horst Wessel comparison came first. And the FB poster's joke was more an illustration of how I wouldn't rely on him for information about Kirk than on the extremely bad taste of the joke itself. He seems to think Kirk and the CEO deserved it.
nous, I agree with your assessment of the proclamations and your use of "nettlesome." Still, AOC's response seems to show that it is more what was not in the proclamation (and the same case could have been made for Hortman). But your point is well-taken.
GftNC, AOC's response starts out strong but then devolves and illustrates two things: 1) My point above, that it wasn't really what was in the proclamation but what wasn't; and 2) her penchant for taking things out of context. I do see her point, but similar things could have been said about Hortman's legislative agenda.
HSH: I have a problem with jumping right to Hitler as a primary means of criticism, especially after an actual assassination. It is a form of "he deserved it."
The guy you link to celebrates the murder of Brian Thompson and notes he (the FB poster) "felon love" with Luigi Mangione. He thinks Charlie Kirk's LIFE was a tragedy, not his death. All based on ideas. His comments about Kirk's debate style are simply not representative of what I have seen. I saw some Charlie Kirk stuff from time-to-time before his assassination. There was a lot I didn't agree with, and some of his interactions somewhat resemble what was described. I like long-form debate mostly, like the Monk Debates. Watch Kirk's debates at the Oxford Union and Cambridge, or his conversation with Bill Maher. He isn't riding herd on some poor college student there. He is exchanging ideas. I note that the Cambridge students he debated with mourned his death and admired his commitment to the exchange of ideas. https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c9wdp2ypq5vo
I disagree with many ideas on the left, and despise some. That doesn't keep me from condemning, say, the murder of Melissa Hortman and her husband. FULL STOP. The senate resolution honored her life and passed unanimously. The resolution honoring the life of Charlie Kirk, however, was opposed by 58 Democrats and 60 more either voted present or did not vote. Most said due to his ideas. Melissa Hortman had ideas too, ones that many on the right disagreed with or found repugnant, but the Republicans chose to honor her life and not temper their desire to send a unified message condemning her murder. I wish the Democrats would have done the same for Kirk.
Kirk's death feels significant. I think that is in large part to the left's (painting broadly here) reaction.
We don't even need Godwin's law anymore. The probability is 1 from the get-go now.