Did the continuous invectives advanced by the Left result in Charlie Kirk’s assassination?

Almost certainly. The words "hey, fascist! CATCH!" was written on a bullet casing.

The shooter presumably argued with his family that he hated Charlie Kirk, and wrote in a letter to his trans/"furry" boyfriend;

“I had enough of his (Kirk) hatred. Some hate can’t be negotiated out.”

Much of this has been covered elsewhere and I wouldn’t cover it here, except for two of the most vile people in Congress decided that they were going to carry the “I hate Charlie Kirk” torch: AOC and Ilhan Omar.

AOC used a floor speech following her “no” vote on a resolution honoring Charlie Kirk, to condemn Charlie as an uneducated bigot.

Creating a “straw man” of Charlie’s issues with the civil rights legislation, she proclaimed:

“We should be clear about who Charlie Kirk was, a man who believed that the Civil Rights Act that granted Black Americans the right to vote was a mistake.”

AOC, not the brightest bulb in the box might have done some research before opening mouth, inserting foot, as this is not at all what the Civil Rights Act did, and not anywhere close to Charlie’s argument on the subsequent failings of the result of the Act as it pertained to DEI and affirmative action.

She went on to state:

“His rhetoric, his beliefs were ignorant, uneducated and sought to disenfranchise millions of Americans.”

Not to be outdone, Omar went on several rants proclaiming Charlie Kirk a “reprehensible human being.” 

What I find reprehensible is politicians and leftists such as AOC, Omar, Rashida Tlaib, Jimmy Kimmel, Chuck Schumer, Hakeem Jeffries, Eric Swalwell, and others attacking a man, who is no longer around to defend himself. Charlie Kirk would have eagerly debated any one of these low-IQ individuals.

Aside from the strawman arguments, why do the Left and their media sycophants resort to invectives - Nazi, Hitler, fascist, racist, sexist, homophobe, transphobe, authoritarian, ad nauseum?

Simple. They can’t argue/debate in support of any of their policy positions.

The American people overwhelmingly support the commonsense policies being advanced by the president, his cabinet, and what Charlie argued in support of vigorously – economic opportunity in a free market, safety and security for ourselves and our loved ones, good schools, an unimposing federal government providing enumerated-only functions, a merit-based system that rewards effort, and the freedom to worship as one sees fit.

The current iteration of the Democrat party doesn’t support any of this. They have no discernable, affirmative policy prescriptions to offer the American people, so that must resist and divide. Invectives become their stock and trade.

We’ve erred in permitting them and their compliant media, to go unchallenged on the playing field of ideas.

You have a better idea on the border – tell us about it. Why is a wide-open, unregulated border good for America?  

You have a better idea for providing safety and security to your cities citizens – tell us how that’s working out?

You have a better plan, besides doling out more free stuff to your voters for organically improving the economic opportunity for the American people – let’s hear it.

You think you can solve Russia/Ukraine, or Israel/Palestine – let’s hear it.

Democrats can’t openly debate any of these ideas (and others). Their ideas are failing, disastrously. They rely on invective, propaganda, and now violence.

Image: Pixabay / Pixabay License