Editor’s note: This is a lightly edited transcript of today’s video from Daily Signal Senior Contributor Victor Davis Hanson. Subscribe to our YouTube channel to see more of his videos.
Hello, this is Victor Davis Hanson for The Daily Signal. Not long ago, the House of Representatives passed a resolution commemorating the tragic shooting of the speaker of the Minnesota State Legislature and her husband and the wounding of another representative and his spouse. And it was unanimous.
All, I think it was 425 votes of the 436 or 437 representatives that were present, voted unanimously. It was nonpartisan.
The shooter was a fanatic anti-abortionist, but he also had been appointed to, I think, a board by Minnesota Gov. Tim Walz. So, nobody really quite knew what his politics were, other than he was violent.
So, this time there was another resolution to honor the life and legacy of Charlie Kirk. But this time there was no such bipartisanship. One hundred and eighteen of the Democratic members of the House either voted “no” or voted to abstain from voting “yes” by voting “present,” or just wouldn’t vote or didn’t show up. That was a majority of all the Democrats.
It did pass, but 118 Democrats wished that it hadn’t. In other words, they didn’t even want to have the courtesy, after a man had been assassinated, who had such a wide influence on youth of this country, to honor what he had done.
And this brings up a greater question: Why?
Well, if you listen to what Rep. Ilhan Omar said about him, that he was a racist and he was a racist every day of his life. And Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said she was not going to honor him.
And Rep. Jasmine Crockett said Caucasians, only two Caucasians—that was not true, by the way, as everything she says is almost not true. She was angry because only two Caucasians, she said, had voted “no.” In fact, if you include the presents and those who didn’t vote, there were quite a lot of proverbial white people that did not want to honor him.
But all three of those representatives that are often mentioned as the future of the new Democratic Party had one thing in common. They either did not quote or cite evidence that Charlie Kirk was a racist or, to the degree they tried to quote or refer to something he said, they did it inaccurately. Because he was not a racist.
In fact, there are plenty of clips when he is the master of ceremonies, and someone in the audience says he is a racist, a white supremacist, Charlie Kirk gets very angry and debates him and refutes him. So, it was just the opposite.
What they’re angry about was—what was Charlie Kirk?
I said in an earlier video, he was very successful in channeling the natural rebelliousness of youth to focus against the establishment. He’s saying to young people: The establishment are baby boomer leftists, and these are the people who are responsible for a lot of our unhappiness. And that’s why they’re angry. And he was also angry at racialists, tribalists—like Jasmine Crockett, like AOC, like Ilhan Omar—who self-identify, essentially, by their skin color or appearance rather than incidentally.
You got to collate when this event, this callousness took place. This is at a time when Tyler Robinson just simply killed Charlie Kirk, murdered him, and was a hardcore leftist, and had trans issues.
This was at a time when, we talked about earlier, Iryna Zarutska had been murdered by a 14-time released felon.
This was a time when Luigi Mangione assassinated a UnitedHealthcare executive and was canonized by the Left.
This is a time when my governor, Gavin Newsom, in a series of tweets, just recently said to Kristi Noem, the homeland security secretary, who oversees the Border Patrol and Immigration and Customs Enforcement, that you’re going to have a bad day.
In fact, just today, as I am speaking, a left-wing gunman who engraved his bullets with “Get ICE” or “Hate ICE,” or something to that effect, started shooting at an ICE detention center in Dallas, Texas. Killed one and severely injured two. And these were probably detainees.
So, in addition to that, Gavin Newsom, in August, had said that he wants to take on the bully president and beat him up, smash him “in the mouth.” Then he said, to half the country, I want to take these SOBs and hit “them in the mouth.” This was a governor of a state.
Collate it all. I have a final question, for all of us. Does this hatred that manifests itself among the Left, is it top-down? Does it trickle down from Gavin Newsom? Does it trickle down from Jasmine Crockett? And it goes all the way down and then we see people like Tyler Robinson absorb it? Or Luigi Mangione absorb it? Or Antifa absorb it? Is that what’s happening? Or is it bottom-up?
In other words, the Black Lives Matters of the world, the Antifas of the world, the shooters of the world, the crazy trans shooters, lately, they are the shock troops and their attack on Tesla or their attack on ICE facilities, that filters up. And then the politicians are in panic, start to reflect those views and amplify them, so that they don’t feel they’ve lost their base.
What’s the answer? I don’t care. I don’t care if it’s top-down or bottom-up, or both, or neither. Something is very wrong with the Left. They have embraced violence. And they have justified it. They feel that their superiority, in terms of morality and wisdom, justifies any means necessary. And they become very dangerous people.
Thank you for tuning into The Daily Signal. Please like, share, and subscribe to be notified for more content like this. You can also check out my own website at victorhanson.com and subscribe for exclusive features in addition.
We publish a variety of perspectives. Nothing written here is to be construed as representing the views of The Daily Signal.
Related posts:
- Democrat Criticisms of Charlie Kirk Do Not Cease After Assassination
- AOC Blasts Jeffries, Schumer for Reluctance to Endorse NYC Socialist Mamdani
- Quarter of Young Voters Think America ‘Better Off’ After Kirk Assassination: Poll