By Steve Levy
Many on the left, including, most notably, Congresswoman Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-Astoria), have been deliberately distorting the words of Charlie Kirk to make him appear to be a diabolical figure.
Take, for instance,how they tried to define him as being an antisemite for allegedly saying Jewish money was “ruining American culture.”
They took things out of context to make it appear that Kirk was anti-Jewish and anti-Israel. To the contrary, Kirk was a strong supporter of Israel and was lamenting the fact that many liberal Jewish donors were donating their money to far-leftist causes that were actually calling for the destruction of Israel and the harassment of Jews.
He was saying in his own words: “Stop supporting causes that hate you.”
Makes sense to us.
They claim further that Kirk was against the Civil Rights Act and equality for African-Americans and other minorities.
While it is true that Kirk had concerns about some of the provisions of the 1965 Act, it is absurd to say that he was against equal rights for all. Kirk has claimed that the passage of the act has led to a “permanent DEI-type bureaucracy.” That much is true, but we still believe that Kirk was wrong to claim that the law itself was not worthy of passage.
Yet, we in no way deemed his comment to be that he was against granting equal rights to minorities. In fact, he wanted equal rights without the bureaucracy that he believes traps many minorities in a culture of poverty.
One could believe that Kirk’s view on this is incorrect, but it doesn’t make him a racist.
He was also lambasted for allegedly being indifferent about people getting shot. He indeed said the Second Amendment is worth the cost of some gun deaths. That does not mean he was encouraging these deaths. It has to be placed in the context. You must look at the full passage, which goes on to note,.“Having an armed citizenry comes with a price and that is part of liberty.“
It’s the equivalent of saying that you can’t shut down the entire airline industry because there will be an occasional crash and loss of life.
Charlie Kirk was a man of great faith who had an incredible ability to connect with young people, and those who felt their voices were silenced.
Whether you agree or disagree with his opinion, you have to respect the fact that he called for dialogue and debate, not violence and canceling.
The left hated him because he was so effective. That’s why they feel the need to destroy his legacy. It’s unlikely they will be successful.