On Getting Fed-UP With the MSM Glorification of Kirk

[B.See]

TBH, I've never been much of a fan of assassination. And not just because of a natural abhorrence to such a notion. But also because the act is more likely to succeed in elevating a person to a status he/she may have never merited in real life. Which is what I think we are witnessing in the apparent MSM canonization of one Charlie Kirk.

For several days now, I've had to endure such discourse, not only from the MSM and certain political leaders, but from local TV newscasts, helmed by "reporters" whose local broadcasts I've watched for years (though may never see them again in quite the same way) - all singing the praises of Kirk as a champion of "free speech," and proponent of political discourse.

Only, seems to me that someone who believes in free speech wouldn't have made such efforts to silence and/or ostracize "woke" professors at universities, nor would've railed against the political discourse of "critical race theory" and the teaching of slavery in America's history. Wouldn't have denounced the free expression and will of those who choose to follow their own sexual identities, either, I think.

No. When Kirk and other MAGAS like him (including Trump) speak of "free speech" what they really mean is the freedom to make up whatever LIE they choose, out of thin air and often with ZERO basis in fact.

And the FACT was, Kirk was a master at conjuring up divisive, hate based, mean-spirited distortions and outright lies, to further a vile and vicious agenda.

But, hey, don't take my word for it. Read what Wikipedia says about him. Only you better hurry and copy it someplace, because it soon might all be gone.

And while I'm at it, here's another caution for the maga lurkers: You may find Wikipedia to be "woke." So happens, FACTS typically are.

Charlie Kirk - Wikipedia

[Irish_Dem]

1. All bow to the newest MAGA Nazi saint.

Saint Charile.

If we tell the truth about the evil bastard we are sent to hell.

[B.See]

2. Didn'tja know? In Bizarro-world, all evil bstrds are saints.

[GreenWave]

13. And when JFK was assassinated (was important figure therefore assassinated)

they played football anyway.

[perdita9]

3. The Oppressed are under no obligation to mourn their Oppressors

Someone alert the media because they aren't smart enough to figure it out for themselves

[Queso Delicioso]

4. Yeah, these hagiographies are disgusting

The man was deeply, thoroughly vile.

[liberal N proud]

5. I am surprised they are not giving him a state funeral

The way they are worshiping him. This nation has gone insane

[Bengus81]

6. Going to fly his racist body on AF2

Sickening to say the least

[IzzaNuDay]

8. I suspect it will be a state like funeral

and I fully expect Cheeto to be there wishing he was the corpse!

[Dulcinea]

7. I've been avoiding watching the news.

Thankfully, this story will be out of the news cycle pretty soon. There's nothing more to tell unless they find the killer. Condolences to Charlie Kirk's wife & kids, but I'm not sorry this asshole is dead. There are plenty of no-talent right-wing shitstirrers to replace him. They're a dime a dozen. Sorry, not sorry.

[Bengus81]

10. Yep and the "many" transgender mass shooters can get back to work

Famous last words eh Kirk?

[Liberal In Texas]

9. Me too. Political violence breeds more political violence...but

he was a POS. Propagandist. Nasty piece of work who incited his followers.

[Crunchy Frog]

11. Probably best to avoid MSM right now.

For the sake of your own sanity.

[Oeditpus Rex]

12. Straight news has forever been in the practice

of not speaking ill of the dead -- at least, not the American dead "Glorification' and "canonization" are severe exaggerations, though.

For reality-based assessments, try liberal opnion journalism, or news mixed with opinion, such as Rachel Maddow.

Stop intentionally allowing yourself to become angry. What's the point?

[B.See]

15. Intentionally?

Are you suggesting we WANT to be "angry?"

[Oeditpus Rex]

16. If you're watching or reading news

that triggers your anger, especially when you have sone idea that it's going to do that -- like, say, the headline or lead-in -- then, yes; you choose the option to be angry.

Even on political social media, we do it all the time: we don't stop reading when we feel the anger start to rise. Rather, we plow ahead because we love an argument, regardless of its effects on us. More accurately, we love to win an argument, to be right, to have the last word.

(I use "we" quite loosely. There are people who just won't engage anyone who opposes them, for whatever reason. But, if you find them at DU, they're in the Lounge.)

[B.See]

17. Well, with all due respect, I find

your premise to be... flawed...

in that choosing to remain informed via keeping abreast of the news does not equate to intentionally looking for something to be "angry" about.

It might come as a surprise to some, but I don't start my days looking to be angry.

[Oeditpus Rex]

18. Yeah, that used to be my justification, too

Before I got kicked off Fascistbook, I was following a mess o' news sites, all of which were trolled by right-wingers. I'd read their comments and become irritated at how impossibly fucking ignorant humans can be.

But then, it was my choice to read the comments and respond to some. Point being, I knew from the hed the story would piss me off, and the simple fact of the story being there and thus attracting ignorant right-wing simpletons pised me off even more. And it was all brought on by my following those nnews providers and rading the right-wing comments, both of which were by choice.

[B.See]

19. Well, I wasn't speaking of news sites

trolled by right wingers in my op. I was speaking of the evening news, national and local.

And while I understand the notion of these outlets not speaking ill of the dead, I think, given the toxicity of what Kirk preached, not acknowledging at least a "controversy" (for want of a more accurate word) surrounding many of his positions, while simultaneously (and ironically, I might add) lauding him as some champion of 'free speech'

is a deliberate misrepresentation (if not normalization) of what he preached and what he stood for.

So I guess the solution (if I understand your position correctly) to avoid being OFFENDED (a more accurate descriptive than "angry" ) would be to either not watch the news, or don't give a... care.

At any rate, thanks for your input.

[GoneOffShore]

14. Glad that you didn't use his first name! Damnatio memoriae.