There is 1 comment and point here that I want you to concentrate here on and, before I show you the rest this story as far as what I'll be talking about here today: Katie Phang said:
"I know we're more divided now today because of people like Donald Trump and others in the far-right have decided that use of violent rhetoric, the use of hate speech is appropriate to go after their perceived political enemies and opponents. When Donald Trump calls the media "the enemy of the state", when Donald Trump says horribly disgusting, depraved and denigrating language to describe people who are just of a different political ideology of his, that contributes to the environment that we're in which is exceptionally and horribly toxic.
And before you come at me, saying I contribute to it, I'm a truth teller. So when I call out people for their incompetence and stupidity for their roles in making this country less than what it should be... less than what we deserve as Americans... I'm doing nothing but being a truth teller."
Unlike Katie Phang, I'm not even a lawyer, let alone a skilled lawyer. But what I'm going to do here is something that skilled lawyers do, perhaps especially during cross-examination and use the words of the witness (in this case Katie Phang) words against her.
Katie Phang said so herself on her own video: "It's not what we know that should concern people about this story, but what we don't know already that should concern us. (That's a paraphrase, but very close)
I think Katie Phang's 2nd point here... is the point. We don't even know who Charlie Kirk's murderer is, let alone the motive or motives for this murder. But, she's already blaming Kirk's murder on Donald Trump and the far-right. So it's easy to see why Katie Phang is now part of independent left-wing activist media, instead of MSNBC. And I'm sure feels a lot freer to say what she thinks and reports what she knows now.
Now, to get into what I really want to talk about here. The New Democrats didn't have anything to say about this story yesterday, intentionally. It was literally breaking as the blog post was going up that day and we didn't want to weigh in on it, especially as every Democrat, including even some left-wing Democrats, were going out-of-their-way to express that "political violence has no place in American politics". Which is simply false, it obviously does. And anytime you hear a politician say otherwise, they're lying to you. Or they are so dumb, they routinely misspell their own name and tie their shoes together. I don't think it should be part of our politics, but it obviously is.
The other reason, TND (unlike the mainstream media) we wanted to have more information and facts to come out before we started talking about this story. The mainstream media, especially cable media, that has 24 hours a day to fill, everyday, will talk about goldfish swimming in water (of all places) all day, everyday, if they think it will draw ratings for them. Even if they don't have 1 damn bit new of information to report about goldfish swimming in water. As well as give these long editorials "but what does it say about America that we have political violence in it", as if they're trying to win an Oscar, or something. "The 2025 Oscar for fake emotion on live air goes to...
Well, 24 hours later, we still don't know much more about this story. But, we do have a long track record of just ridiculous, hateful statements made by the late Mr. Charlie Kirk. And because of that, I could speculate for why someone might have murdered him. Sort of draw theories like how big city homicide detectives do (not just on TV) on why the murder was committed in the first place. Here are just a few of Mr Kirk's past controversial statements.
"Unfortunately I think it's worth have some gun deaths every year, so we can have a 2nd Amendment and our other God-given rights. That's a prudent deal. That is rational."
If what we've seen so far about who the possible killer is and that person is a man and he has kids... maybe he lost a son or daughter to gun violence, you could see why that Kirk statement would piss off this man so much, that he would want to kill Charlie Kirk because of that. I don't justify that, but there's your reason.
Charlie Kirk on Dr. Martin L. King back in 2023:
“MLK was awful,” Kirk said. “He's not a good person. He said one good thing he actually didn't believe.”
Charlie Kirk on abortion, showing exactly why he was never a doctor:
"It is a growing consensus in the pro-life world that abortion is never medically necessary," he told one female student, who then asked, if someone raped his hypothetical 10-year-old daughter, would he want the child to be born."
Charlie Kirk on American women:
"Young women, they don't value having children. Trump voters, young men, they want family, children and legacy. Young women who voted for Kamala Harris, they want careerism, consumerism and loneliness."
I'm not saying any 1 of these quotes are the reason why Charlie Kirk was murdered yesterday. If the killer is a father, who has lost a kid, or kids to gun violence, Mr. Kirk's quote about the 2nd Amendment, I think would qualify as a damn good motive. But that's an if.
But I'm also not going to say that "America is worst off now because we have 1 less Charlie Kirk". Because I would lying if I said that. I don't feel sorry for him. I do feel sorry for his young son and young daughter. Growing up without your father and not even knowing him very well... I wouldn't wish that on anyone, even if you are the son or daughter Charlie Kirk. But he may have thought his kids having to grow up without him, might have been worth it in his grand quest to "take back America and return America to the real Americans", anyway.
No comments:
Post a Comment
All relevant comments about the posts you are commenting on are welcome but spam and personal comments are not.