To the Idiot Who Shot Charlie Kirk: Ya Dun Goofed

A big BIG slap upside the head to the shooter of Charlie Kirk! If this killing was an attempt to silence Charlie and his message/philosophy, then the killer has monumentally failed.  Viewership of his videos has risen by about 500% at least and there are about 18,000 new chapters of Kirk's organization Turning Point USA opening all over America.  Ironically, the shooter couldn't have done Charlie a bigger favour than this.

But, is this indeed what the shooter wanted to accomplish?  We now know the name of the killer is Tyler Robinson. Was he for or against Charlie, and why? What could've been the motivation? There's been speculation that because Tyler has a trans partner that this killing was inspired by the LGBTQ community. Others are saying because his family are mostly Trump-supporting MAGA that is was inspired by Trump's base. I've seen others speculate that it may have been Israel to blame.  Well, hey, I hate tomatoes on my sandwich so I think maybe a sliced tomato shot Charlie. No, of course I don't think that.

But I do think it's rather silly and stupid how people are projecting an identity onto this killer in order to confirm their own biases.   Somewhere in Toon Town, maybe Jinx the Cat is blaming the shooting on "those miserable meeces that he hates to pieces".  Whenever this or any tragedy like it happens, please everyone stay calm and wait for the pertinent details to come out before you give your AHA pointing finger some exercise.

This shooting comes as a shock and yet sadly not as big as a surprise as one would think. Charlie Kirk was one of those figures that had many fans who loved him and many detractors who hated him so much they saw red. I personally am neither one of these people.  He was all the way over conservative whilst I am much more of a libertarian/centrist kind of person.  Charlie said many things that I would disagree with. I know many of his detractors are posting a list of the many of his statements that they find particularly egregious, but too much of those have been taken out of context as an attempt to smear him.  So, what I'll do here is post a full video of his own words from his own mouth that of which I disagree.  Watch below:

Um... yeah.  I get the point of what he's saying but I think "submit" is a very clumsy word to use here.

Marriage is more like a partnership where signing the marriage license is like signing a contract.  Both parties must honour the conditions of that contract or the marriage has grounds for being dissolved.   Much like when Warner Bros merged with Discovery, the union of John Smith and Marcia Kazerminski should result in the new partnership of John & Marcia Smith or whatever conditions they've mutually agreed upon.  No "submission" required.  If Charlie Kirk were here in front of me I would absolutely debate him on this topic.  But, I certainly wouldn't shoot him if the debate "didn't go my way".

 Either way, that clip right there shows us a glimpse of what Charlie Kirk was about, his basic philosophy and how he carried himself.  From the looks of things, he was either an evangelical Alex P Keaton or a political Ned Flanders.  What is so scary about that? 

Why would anyone feel the need to "off" this guy and/or then celebrate his killing?  Celebrate his killing?? Yes, that has and is happening. Below is just a few examples from TikTok.

I want to address this particular one below separately because it's just so out of touch:

This person is sooooooo far into her bubble that her assertion is..... well...... adorable despite the vileness of her video.  Like I said earlier, I have a foot on both the left wing AND the right wing of this big political bird so I get a good idea about what both sides are saying.  If I knew this woman in real life, I could easily tell her that the right wing is not at all talking about "giving up their guns" because of this killing.  None of them are saying "this is a gun problem", they are saying "this is a leftism problem".  Just recently, President Trump took steps to declare Antifa a terrorist organization.  As much as I'd hate to see ordinary citizens targeted for their political beliefs, I just have to say that all of the instances of people celebrating Charlie's death certainly didn't help the situation.

But, as egregious as those responses (as well as 10s of thousands just like them all over TikTok) are, I found one to be possibly the most insidious.  Here it is:

Um.......... WHAT??!!  This person just equated the utterance of the phrase "fuck your feelings" with the shooting death of a man just making a speech. Someone actually thought this up, typed it all out, possibly proofread it, and then hit send thinking it was a "banger".  If you're still wondering "how could anyone be condoning a shooting death or even celebrating it?", well the sentiment behind the above post is a glimpse into the mind set that killed Charlie.

These people actually and unironically believe that words are the same as violence.  No joke. They for real consider the act of saying words that they don't like to be the same as punching, clubbing, or even shooting someone.  So, in their mind, Charlie Kirk's words were such DAAAAAAAANGEROUS weapons that a bullet to his body was an equally balanced justification.  I'd like to use an expression from the late great George Carlin to basically describe these people:

FUCKING STUPID!

FULL OF SHIT!

FUCKING NUTS! 

Whenever I hear anyone of these people talk, that is all I hear.  They act like Charlie Kirk's words have these "magic powers" that can make anything manifest somehow. As though he's just like Dorah the Explorer every time Swiper comes around. He and his troupe can simply hold up their hands and say:

"Swiper is only one of two genders"

...and in that instant, Swiper's "triple-spirit, gender-congealed, weasel furry" gender is completely erased and all "xuhr" can do is say:

"Awwwww MAN!!"

...as in "awwwwww I'm just a cis MAN!!!"

This is NOT how reality works.  Say for instance in the case of the trans community gender dispute, if all of the genders that deviate from the binary male/female are indeed true to science genders, then it shouldn't matter WHAT Charlie Kirk or any of his allies say.  Those genders will keep being scientifically sound and that is that.  Mr Kirk saying anything "to the contrary" about it is not a "horrific act of violence" it's just his own opinion expressed in word form.  Debunk his opinion thoroughly or move on.

The same goes for any issue Charlie Kirk and his detractors had any disagreement over. In that video above, Charlie talked about wives submitting to husbands. Him just saying that does NOT automatically push women out of their careers and force them to stay at home against their will.  It's just an opinion being stated. Nothing more and nothing less.  Debunk it or drop it.

Yes, I've heard the phrase "words have power". When it comes to that, I read from the book of Lenny Bruce, the man who was always getting arrested (never shot) for the "powerful" words in his stand up comedy routines.  He always said that words only have as much power as we as individuals choose to give them.  We all have our own thresholds and our own agency.  We are free to determine just how "offensive" any word or image is to "the royal us".  Nobody and I do mean NOBODY has the right to tell us what words or images we should find offensive or not.

I would even say that trying in any way to establish certain words as not only "offensive" but also "violent" is an absolute form of tyranny.  One group of perpetually angry interlopers demanding a universal condemnation of certain utterances taken to its most inevitable conclusion leads to a man being shot and killed.  This is why I do not and can NOT accept the premise of "words being violent" ever.  So no, "fuck your feelings" and "submit to your husband" are not "forms of assault", you literal morons.

And don't get me started on "schmuck-tastic terrorism".  It's a similar yet more insidious concept to the notion of "words being violence".  The definition of this "schmuck-tastic blahblahism" is basically "things get said that create an environment of badness so to stop the badness we need to label those things being said as terrorism so that people will take it as a serious threat and then...... some stupid dumb nothingness..... blahblahblah..." it's just a bullshit term created by bullshit people used to stifle speech and spread bullshit.  Yes, I know full well the proper term is not "schmuck-tastic" but this is a more appropriate term to use because you'd have to be a SCHMUCK to unironically believe any of that.

Oh hey, by the way, I'm sure there's plenty of you out there who don't recognize the author of that above social media post. You are fortunate people who live good clean lives.  I, unfortunately, do recognize the author. I won't keep you in suspense, it's this idiot:

Rather than go into detail here about this idiot's "legacy", I'll embed a video I made (OMG) 9 years ago where I commented on some other stupid things she said at the time.  Here it is below:

Oh, hey, and one last point I'd like to make to this psycho. Dude, I get that you wanted to "take Charlie down". You didn't care for his message as well as how far it was reaching. That's understandable.  However, there are ways of "taking people down" that don't involve murder and, more importantly, are much more effective.  As a for instance, I give you: Vaush! 

For those who've never "had the pleasure" of this guy, for quite a while he was prominent figure on Youtube, or as his corner of that website is affectionately known as: Breadtube.  He gained quite a following by screaming and shouting about how first America and then the world should and must be overtaken by a full communist revolution.  He referred to any backlash or any sentiment even slightly right of Lenin as, in his words, "DOG SHIT!!!"  You can bet that the "right wing pundits" on Youtube and elsewhere were in fear of him becoming "the voice of a generation". But, where be his rantings now, Horatio? Well, he and his channel were essentially nuked immediately after one folder chock full of child porn was found on his computer harddrive.  He was also sending many salaciously explicit texts to people he knew were minors.  All his detractors were saying "I kind of knew it" and many of his former supporters were just like "I was never there".  Vaush is still very much alive and kicking wherever he is, but he is certainly no big influence on anybody.  Of course, I highly doubt anybody would find any underage porn on Charlie Kirk's computer, or any porn for that matter.  Heck, I'm sure Charlie was the kind of person who would fast forward through all of the "naughty" scenes in Show Girls........... or Anchorman.

You see, Mr. killer person, THIS is the fate you were wishing for upon Charlie Kirk.  You wanted him discredited by his base and then slunk back into anonymity, not shot and killed. By killing him, you've practically turned him into a "Malcolm X" figure.  Yes, Malcolm and Charlie had wildly different philosophies, I know.  But, they were both shot because some brain-fried crank didn't like what they had to say. Likewise, both have become symbols of a movement after their deaths that are being used to "foment change".  Many places of business are terminating the employment of so many of the above TokTokers I mentioned that posted a video celebrating Charlie's death.  Trump has also overreached with his presidential power to get Jimmy Kimmel's show cancelled after Kimmel told an "untruth" about Charlie.  (Even if Mr. Kimmel was due to be cancelled anyway, Trump should absolutely stay out of it, as per the 1st Amendment).  This is what you've started, Mr. killer.  To quasi-quote Obi Wan Kenobi, you struck Charlie down and made him more powerful than you can possibly imagine.

And now for my last thoughts about Charlie.  There's a saying that I think is attributed to Ghandii. It goes something like: First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they try to stop you, then you win.  Well, given the events of the past week, I'd say all of this has come to fruition.  I don't remember the time period of him being ignored (probably because I was one of the people ignoring him) but I'm sure that happened. Any long time and loyal member of Turning Point USA can probably remember such a time for sure.  But, I do recall seeing him being ridiculed.  There were all sorts of silly memes online depicting him with a "small face".  And there was that South Park episode that did a send up of him.  I can emphatically state that someone shooting falls under the definition of trying to stop him which has thus accelerated him into winning.  With his organization growing so rapidly in just this past week, how could you call it anything but winning?

I'll end this post with a video made by a British comedian Jonathan Pie, a man who has a much more nuanced and insightful take on this situation than I could have.Listen and enjoy!

R.I.P. Charlie Kirk. If you were the barrier between peace and violence, we need you and other slike you now more than ever.  

Don't do it, Donald

 Don't do it, I say. Take a step back and think about it, Don. You do NOT want to go there. Back off before it's too late.

For those wondering, this is the specific thing of Trump's doings that I'm talking about:

You can read the full article here: Trump's boner

I know I know.  Of all the things Trump has done since being re-elected (dropping bombs on Iran, blocking the Epstein files after campaigning on a promise to release them, adding several trillion more to America's national debt) I pick THIS to kvetch about.  Well, sit tight, dear reader, and you'll easily see why I chose this issue to address.

For the record, I'm not bothered by the thought the Washington football team being called the "Redskins" again.  That's not my issue.  I'd be fine with the name being changed to the "Washington Kaffirs" thereby upsetting every South African.

Yes....... EVERY South African

They're just words, people. Pull that bug out of your ass already. 

What DOES bother me about this move by Trump is that it could set a horrible 1st Amendment damaging precedent.  He's using his presidential power to interfere with the business of a privately owned football team franchise.  The supreme court ruled that nobody can force someone to write words on a gay couple's wedding cake that he does not want to write.  So too, that same supreme court ruling applies to a current president telling a football team what words or images they can or can not put onto their jerseys.  This is basic Free Expression 101.  Trump is really really overstepping his bounds here.

What if Kamala Harris had won that election back in 2024 and one of the first things she focused on was renaming "problematic" street names and various other properties? 

What if she did some strong arm tactics to force that cake professional and other such professionals to put words on cakes and other things?  Well, Trump and his MAGA minions would be crying "blatant censorship" and "deeply unfair" and in this case they would be correct.  And, hey, she was Vice President under Joe Biden for the past 4 years. Did she and Joe do ANY such overstepping? Did they even ever just ONCE abuse the office of the presidency to compel the speech of citizens to be either expressed of suppressed against their will?  Did they ever ever EVER......... oh shit wait, yes they did. Watch the video clip below. 

Wow! The team of "Joe-Mala" did the very thing the 1st Amendment was designed to prevent. They should've been impeached for that alone.

So, ok.  Neither Republicans nor Democrats are perfect parties.  They both have people that will usurp or bend your constitutional rights to suit their wills and/or their egos.  But, just because Joe and Kamala are terrible does NOT let Trump off this hook.  If he campaigned on being better than them then he needs to demonstrate that.  THIS right here with the Washington football team does NOT do that.

From this point on, I'm going to type as if Trump himself is reading this.  Fat chance of that, but I feel compelled to do so.  Geronimo! Here I go:

Hey, Donnie Don Don!  Did you know there were some rumblings about this team changing their name back to the Redskins anyway? Did you know that? This name restoration could've happened without your involvement, and it would've been all legal and constitutional.  Although, with this name change, there's a chance they could've gone snarky and referred to "red skin potatoes" instead...

                                

It's a possibility!

                                                                    

...but that's not likely.

Or, hey, Orangey Orange Donnie Donnie Don Don, maybe just maybe the team owners were considering renaming their team to.............. The Trumps! 

Maybe they're so loyal to you that they'd name their team after "one larger than life powerhouse of a guy who takes no guff and gets things done".  That's the kind of symbol pretty much every sports franchise wants to pattern themselves after.  "The Washington Trumps!"  It has a certain ring to it.  But, after this bizarre and unconstitutional strongarm overreach tactical move of yours, this is not possible anymore.  They might keep it as the Commanders just out of spite.

But, it might not be too late.  If you back off and leave them alone right now, you might have a chance to save your presidency, your legacy, and most importantly (as your entire campaign and movement have screeched about these past 10 years) save America.  Help restore the 1st Amendment to its absolute glory please and thank you.

Okay, my little rant is over and I new feel good. I hope everyone else out there feel the same.  Ciao for now.