The folks at FIRE noted today that “we’re in the cancel culture phase” of the Kirk tragedy news cycle, where any seemingly insensitive comment will attract an online mob seeking vengeance.
Thank you Ryan, well said and it needed to be said unapologetically! Speaking accurately doesn't mean condoning violence, and it's ridiculous that's up for debate. MSNBC, once again, got it egregiously wrong-damned ridiculous.
Hopefully the right wing oligarch owned media in the US will be made redundant. They have earned it! Only NPR & PBS should remain & funded by us either thru a tv licence or some other way until we get this organised crime syndicate 🇷🇺🐖regime out.
And that's sufficient? I don't follow your point Sandy. I don't have a crystal ball, so I don't know what, other than market share and profit, MSNBC wants. Do you think they are being spared 'trouble from MAGA'? One doesn't have to have a crystal ball to see that there has been nothing but trouble and MSNBC has fired others before. A backbone is what is called for during this time not spineless pandering to the incumbent. Harvard hasn't backed down BTW. No excuses.
It’s a private business, Regina. Run by the suits and their lawyers, not the reporters. Expecting backbone from a profit-making business? I don’t see it.
"That MSNBC fired the contributor, Matthew Dowd, tells you all you need to know about the network’s commitment to robust debate."
I disagree. In the immediate aftermath of Kirk's murder, Dowd made some legitimate comments that were hard to hear. His summary firing was an emotional reaction that was short-sighted. He has apologized multiple times. I hope (after some cooling off time) he will be reinstated.
Ooh, I doubt it, Anne. The reaction was the same calculation ABC and CBS made. They didn't want any trouble from MAGA. Not emotional. Strategic. If he gets rehired, it will be a long time like what happened with Jeffrey Toobin. And he actually did something reprehensible.
Unfortunately I never had to listen to a single speech or interview in its entirety to know this. His views were so amplified as to become mainstream. While I’m relieved the assailant has been captured and as expected they are not one of his typical scapegoats, it’s chilling the person who murdered him is from a group that believes his ideology wasn’t extreme enough. I wonder how that vacuum gets filled. The legislators chomping at the bit reverted to Pharisees praying on the corner of the digital town square for those who may yet be converted to Charlie’s gentler ways.
All these wingnuts’ words and platforms can stay far far away from my son. We’ve had enough from the periphery.
“Bad people with bad ideas did get elected and are abusing the power of the Federal Government.” So if Charley believed in Arnn’s book, why didn’t he recognize Arnn’s warning instead of espousing it?
Kirk once said, “It’s worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights.” That’s not just policy — it’s sacrificial logic. A theology of freedom that demands blood, but never his own or so he thought and certainly never his children’s or his wife but yours or mine that’s okay.
There was no acknowledgment of the immense pain of those who have lost their children, their partners, their kin. No trembling in the face of grief. Just the smug perimeter: freedom for me, sacrifice for you. A belief that the gun is sacred, but the grief is disposable.
So, we must ask: if it were known for certain that your little Johnny or Mary — or your life partner — would be shot to death, how many right-wing advocates would still accept the trade? How many would still call it freedom?
Kirk’s death is not just a tragic irony — it is the consequence i.e. the sacrament claiming its priest.
Charlie Kirk did not deserve to be murdered. That being said, Charlie’s views did not line up with everyone else. Our country provides a platform to express different views. That being said, some of his views are extreme. The present state of American views have become extreme, despite religion becoming more mainstream and a reliable political base. These facts have been used to politicize, make news headlines, and further sharpen opinions. Fact, a sitting elected official has been impeached, started an insurrection, raped a woman, visited a brothel that employed teenagers and bragged on TV about grabbing a woman’s genitalia. At this point we know what these people are capable of doing, but we don’t really know why the population votes for it.
Americans, take notice that either you, or a family member before your time, came here
to stay away from this type of nonsense so why are you betraying your family that made enormous sacrifice to enjoy a better life?
Maybe it’s because (and those of us in the trenches) who had anything to do with the Tea Party knew this a long time ago: They had no true ideology, they were liars and they were an Astroturf entity in the pay of corporate interests. They never really believed what they said… They just parroted whatever their overlords told them to parrot. There was no there there, Ryan. That’s why liberals like me are so furious now. They never was a “there there” and yet media people like you in the acted as if there was and treated them seriously.
Character, compassion, decency, and other virtues are essential. We recognized that we possessed these qualities, whereas our opponents did not. Unfortunately, the media failed to grasp this distinction. This misconception has contributed to our current situation, as the media assumed we were equivalent to our opponents — or rather that our opponents were the same as WE were. However, we are not equal; while we may be idealistic (a terrible sin to hardened Pols and media thinkers like you), we were not driven by a desire for power and lacking in a moral compass. And THAT is why we are so furious at you all now — as you sit in exile away from YOUR corporate overlords in media.
I don’t think you will “like” my comment, but I hope you think about it as much as you seem to have thought about the empty and hypocritical “philosophy” of the tragically assassinated young man, struck down, perhaps, by one of the monsters created by MAGA. RIP Charlie. His compatriots should be learning humility and compassion from his senseless death. It seems obvious they are not.
Thank you for this very informational article. I would like to have known a little bit more about his connection to Maga and the possible falling out with them.
Absolutely on point!
Amen!
Thank you Ryan, well said and it needed to be said unapologetically! Speaking accurately doesn't mean condoning violence, and it's ridiculous that's up for debate. MSNBC, once again, got it egregiously wrong-damned ridiculous.
MSNBC just didn't want any trouble from MAGA. Just like CBS and ABC and Columbia U.
Hopefully the right wing oligarch owned media in the US will be made redundant. They have earned it! Only NPR & PBS should remain & funded by us either thru a tv licence or some other way until we get this organised crime syndicate 🇷🇺🐖regime out.
And that's sufficient? I don't follow your point Sandy. I don't have a crystal ball, so I don't know what, other than market share and profit, MSNBC wants. Do you think they are being spared 'trouble from MAGA'? One doesn't have to have a crystal ball to see that there has been nothing but trouble and MSNBC has fired others before. A backbone is what is called for during this time not spineless pandering to the incumbent. Harvard hasn't backed down BTW. No excuses.
It’s a private business, Regina. Run by the suits and their lawyers, not the reporters. Expecting backbone from a profit-making business? I don’t see it.
Yep, I know Sandy. Expecting it, no. Nonetheless-I won't excuse it either.
Agree it should not be excused.
This was an excellent and concise summary of the Right, of which I am
not a part, therefore the transmogrification timeline was enlightening
Incredibly well explained! Couldn't agree more.
"That MSNBC fired the contributor, Matthew Dowd, tells you all you need to know about the network’s commitment to robust debate."
I disagree. In the immediate aftermath of Kirk's murder, Dowd made some legitimate comments that were hard to hear. His summary firing was an emotional reaction that was short-sighted. He has apologized multiple times. I hope (after some cooling off time) he will be reinstated.
Ooh, I doubt it, Anne. The reaction was the same calculation ABC and CBS made. They didn't want any trouble from MAGA. Not emotional. Strategic. If he gets rehired, it will be a long time like what happened with Jeffrey Toobin. And he actually did something reprehensible.
Ryan Lizza, informative and well said.
Succinct. Very well written. On the nose analysis. Thank you for your clarity.
Great article. Thank you
Thank YOU!
Unfortunately I never had to listen to a single speech or interview in its entirety to know this. His views were so amplified as to become mainstream. While I’m relieved the assailant has been captured and as expected they are not one of his typical scapegoats, it’s chilling the person who murdered him is from a group that believes his ideology wasn’t extreme enough. I wonder how that vacuum gets filled. The legislators chomping at the bit reverted to Pharisees praying on the corner of the digital town square for those who may yet be converted to Charlie’s gentler ways.
All these wingnuts’ words and platforms can stay far far away from my son. We’ve had enough from the periphery.
“Bad people with bad ideas did get elected and are abusing the power of the Federal Government.” So if Charley believed in Arnn’s book, why didn’t he recognize Arnn’s warning instead of espousing it?
Because Arnn's book is bullshit. See https://open.substack.com/pub/telos/p/on-charlie-kirk?utm_campaign=comment-list-share-cta&utm_medium=web&comments=true&commentId=155705644.
Kirk once said, “It’s worth it to have a cost of, unfortunately, some gun deaths every single year so that we can have the Second Amendment to protect our other God-given rights.” That’s not just policy — it’s sacrificial logic. A theology of freedom that demands blood, but never his own or so he thought and certainly never his children’s or his wife but yours or mine that’s okay.
There was no acknowledgment of the immense pain of those who have lost their children, their partners, their kin. No trembling in the face of grief. Just the smug perimeter: freedom for me, sacrifice for you. A belief that the gun is sacred, but the grief is disposable.
So, we must ask: if it were known for certain that your little Johnny or Mary — or your life partner — would be shot to death, how many right-wing advocates would still accept the trade? How many would still call it freedom?
Kirk’s death is not just a tragic irony — it is the consequence i.e. the sacrament claiming its priest.
Charlie Kirk did not deserve to be murdered. That being said, Charlie’s views did not line up with everyone else. Our country provides a platform to express different views. That being said, some of his views are extreme. The present state of American views have become extreme, despite religion becoming more mainstream and a reliable political base. These facts have been used to politicize, make news headlines, and further sharpen opinions. Fact, a sitting elected official has been impeached, started an insurrection, raped a woman, visited a brothel that employed teenagers and bragged on TV about grabbing a woman’s genitalia. At this point we know what these people are capable of doing, but we don’t really know why the population votes for it.
Americans, take notice that either you, or a family member before your time, came here
to stay away from this type of nonsense so why are you betraying your family that made enormous sacrifice to enjoy a better life?
Maybe it’s because (and those of us in the trenches) who had anything to do with the Tea Party knew this a long time ago: They had no true ideology, they were liars and they were an Astroturf entity in the pay of corporate interests. They never really believed what they said… They just parroted whatever their overlords told them to parrot. There was no there there, Ryan. That’s why liberals like me are so furious now. They never was a “there there” and yet media people like you in the acted as if there was and treated them seriously.
Character, compassion, decency, and other virtues are essential. We recognized that we possessed these qualities, whereas our opponents did not. Unfortunately, the media failed to grasp this distinction. This misconception has contributed to our current situation, as the media assumed we were equivalent to our opponents — or rather that our opponents were the same as WE were. However, we are not equal; while we may be idealistic (a terrible sin to hardened Pols and media thinkers like you), we were not driven by a desire for power and lacking in a moral compass. And THAT is why we are so furious at you all now — as you sit in exile away from YOUR corporate overlords in media.
I don’t think you will “like” my comment, but I hope you think about it as much as you seem to have thought about the empty and hypocritical “philosophy” of the tragically assassinated young man, struck down, perhaps, by one of the monsters created by MAGA. RIP Charlie. His compatriots should be learning humility and compassion from his senseless death. It seems obvious they are not.
I like your comment. I agree completely. No there there. Why do you think Ryan won't like it.
Thank you for this very informational article. I would like to have known a little bit more about his connection to Maga and the possible falling out with them.
So, at the core of it all, is that Kirk really didn’t believe in anything. A chameleon and a grifter. Read Stuart Stevens book, ‘It Was All A Lie’.