No, Charlie Kirk Was Not Practicing Politics the Right Way

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

The below only mentions fox without mentioning all the other sources in the Magaverse.

Faith-Focused Tributes
Fox’s coverage has emphasized Kirk’s Christian convictions and spiritual legacy:
• A primetime special titled “Charlie Kirk: An American Original” featured tributes from pastors, conservative commentators, and Fox personalities, highlighting his role as a “gifted communicator” and “passionate follower of Jesus Christ”.
• Pastor Rob McCoy, co-chair of Turning Point Faith, called Kirk “his pastor” and described him as someone who “never feared death” because of his faith.
• Franklin Graham stated that Kirk “loved God and loved his family,” and praised him as a “courageous communicator of truth”.
• Fox News Digital published reflections on Kirk’s role in founding TPUSA Faith, a branch of Turning Point USA aimed at mobilizing Christians to defend their beliefs in the public square.

Religious Framing and Martyrdom
Fox and affiliated voices have framed Kirk’s death in overtly spiritual terms:
• Descriptions of Kirk as a “martyr” and “voice of biblical clarity” were echoed by Christian leaders interviewed by Fox.
• His final social media post—“Jesus defeated death so you can live”—was quoted as emblematic of his spiritual message.
• The network highlighted his involvement with evangelical movements and his embrace of Christian nationalism in recent years.

In short, Fox has not only acknowledged Kirk’s religious identity—they’ve elevated it to a central theme in their posthumous coverage, portraying him as a modern-day Christian martyr and cultural prophet. If you're tracking how media narratives shape public perception, this is a textbook case of spiritual framing in political storytelling.

Turning Point USA is still not a church.

 

[BULLDOG]

Turning Point USA is still not a church.

I never said it was. That is my point. He is being depicted as a religious leader. Higher ups in his organization refer to him as their Pastor. Several have said he died for them, an obvious comparison to Jesus. Magas are trying to canonize him. He used religion as a tool to further his political goals, and doesn't deserve religious adoration.

 

[Wild Bill Kelsoe]

I never said it was. That is my point. He is being depicted as a religious leader. Higher ups in his organization refer to him as their Pastor. Several have said he died for them, an obvious comparison to Jesus. Magas are trying to canonize him. He used religion as a tool to further his political goals, and doesn't deserve religious adoration.

No one depicted Charlie as a religious leader, but except your dumb ass

 

[Mashmont]

‘Tragedy is a powerful shaper of narratives. In the aftermath of the horrific assassination of MAGA champion Charlie Kirk, a husband and father of two, it was natural that his allies, including President Trump, lionized him as a patriot, free-speech advocate, and activist. And political opponents somberly denounced the terrible killing, as they should, with some hailing Kirk’s devotion to public debate. There’s a tendency in such a moment to look for the best in people or, at least, to not dwell on the negatives. That can be a good thing. Yet as Kirk is quickly canonized by Trump and his movement—on Thursday Trump announced he would bestow upon Kirk a posthumous Presidential Medal of Freedom—a full depiction of his impact on American politics is largely being sidestepped.
[…]
Here’s the problem: Kirk built that movement with falsehoods. And his advocacy was laced with racist and bigoted statements. Recognizing this does not diminish the awfulness of this act of violence. Nor does it lessen our outrage or diminish our sympathy for his family, friends, and colleagues. Yet if this is an appropriate moment to assess Kirk and issue bold statements about his participation in America’s political life, there ought to be room for a true discussion.

Kirk, a right-wing provocateur who founded and led Turning Point USA, an organization of young conservatives, was a promoter of Trump’s destructive and baseless conspiracy theory that the 2020 election was stolen from him. Two days before the January 6 riot, Kirk boasted in a tweet that Students for Trump and Turning Point Action were “Sending 80+ buses full of patriots to DC to fight for this president.”’

No, Charlie Kirk was not practicing politics the right way

His assassination deserves full condemnation; his full impact should not be sidestepped.

www.motherjones.com

Kirk’s lawless killing shouldn’t be used to conceal or whitewash the fact that he was a promoter of racism, bigotry, and hate; a conservative ideologue who was responsible for spreading all manner of rightwing disinformation, conspiracy theories, and lies contributing to current political division and acrimony.

Kirk told the truth. College students liked it. That's why he had such a huge audience. There are numerous future Charlies in training. This movement is only going to grow.

 

[BULLDOG]

No one depicted Charlie as a religious leader, but except your dumb ass

You are mistaken.

 

[Calypso Jones]

‘Tragedy is a powerful shaper of narratives. In the aftermath of the horrific assassination of MAGA champion Charlie Kirk, a husband and father of two, it was natural that his allies, including President Trump, lionized him as a patriot, free-speech advocate, and activist. And political opponents somberly denounced the terrible killing, as they should, with some hailing Kirk’s devotion to public debate. There’s a tendency in such a moment to look for the best in people or, at least, to not dwell on the negatives. That can be a good thing. Yet as Kirk is quickly canonized by Trump and his movement—on Thursday Trump announced he would bestow upon Kirk a posthumous Presidential Medal of Freedom—a full depiction of his impact on American politics is largely being sidestepped.
[…]
Here’s the problem: Kirk built that movement with falsehoods. And his advocacy was laced with racist and bigoted statements. Recognizing this does not diminish the awfulness of this act of violence. Nor does it lessen our outrage or diminish our sympathy for his family, friends, and colleagues. Yet if this is an appropriate moment to assess Kirk and issue bold statements about his participation in America’s political life, there ought to be room for a true discussion.

Kirk, a right-wing provocateur who founded and led Turning Point USA, an organization of young conservatives, was a promoter of Trump’s destructive and baseless conspiracy theory that the 2020 election was stolen from him. Two days before the January 6 riot, Kirk boasted in a tweet that Students for Trump and Turning Point Action were “Sending 80+ buses full of patriots to DC to fight for this president.”’

No, Charlie Kirk was not practicing politics the right way

His assassination deserves full condemnation; his full impact should not be sidestepped.

www.motherjones.com

Kirk’s lawless killing shouldn’t be used to conceal or whitewash the fact that he was a promoter of racism, bigotry, and hate; a conservative ideologue who was responsible for spreading all manner of rightwing disinformation, conspiracy theories, and lies contributing to current political division and acrimony.

Is that your poor attenpt at justifying the evil act that took a man from his family
You lie about his character, his words, his family, organization and his faith.

 

[yidnar]

‘Tragedy is a powerful shaper of narratives. In the aftermath of the horrific assassination of MAGA champion Charlie Kirk, a husband and father of two, it was natural that his allies, including President Trump, lionized him as a patriot, free-speech advocate, and activist. And political opponents somberly denounced the terrible killing, as they should, with some hailing Kirk’s devotion to public debate. There’s a tendency in such a moment to look for the best in people or, at least, to not dwell on the negatives. That can be a good thing. Yet as Kirk is quickly canonized by Trump and his movement—on Thursday Trump announced he would bestow upon Kirk a posthumous Presidential Medal of Freedom—a full depiction of his impact on American politics is largely being sidestepped.
[…]
Here’s the problem: Kirk built that movement with falsehoods. And his advocacy was laced with racist and bigoted statements. Recognizing this does not diminish the awfulness of this act of violence. Nor does it lessen our outrage or diminish our sympathy for his family, friends, and colleagues. Yet if this is an appropriate moment to assess Kirk and issue bold statements about his participation in America’s political life, there ought to be room for a true discussion.

Kirk, a right-wing provocateur who founded and led Turning Point USA, an organization of young conservatives, was a promoter of Trump’s destructive and baseless conspiracy theory that the 2020 election was stolen from him. Two days before the January 6 riot, Kirk boasted in a tweet that Students for Trump and Turning Point Action were “Sending 80+ buses full of patriots to DC to fight for this president.”’

No, Charlie Kirk was not practicing politics the right way

His assassination deserves full condemnation; his full impact should not be sidestepped.

www.motherjones.com

Kirk’s lawless killing shouldn’t be used to conceal or whitewash the fact that he was a promoter of racism, bigotry, and hate; a conservative ideologue who was responsible for spreading all manner of rightwing disinformation, conspiracy theories, and lies contributing to current political division and acrimony.

coming from the party calling half the country Racists , Fascists, Nazis , ect ..

 

[yidnar]

One could show him marching in a KKK rally and you would say it wasn't racist.

prove it .. you cant ..

 

[HikerGuy83]

He did not live his public life building bridges but instead burning them down. How people live is important, not how they die. It's a tragedy when anyone is killed but it doesnt white wash the life lived.

Yes yes....we get it.

You need the filler for the narrative.

Never mind reality.

 

[HikerGuy83]

EVERYBODY....

Thought I would point out that I quickly scrolled through 12 pages and Jones has not posted since the OP.

It's his MO. Throw out an incendiary article and then put a little blurb at the end where Trump and the right are racist, ignorant, blah blah blah blah blah blah.....

And you all, dutifully turn it into a light beer commercial....."less filling/taste great"

I would suggest not responding to his posts anymore. And encourage others to not respond.

He's simply trolling you.

He has no interest in staying around and debating his bs.

Just thought I'd point it out. I've looked before and he'll occasionally make an appearance. But I would bet that he has more OP's than regular posts.

 

[Correll]

Saying as you spout a label. Here, I will go along. FOOL

And you miss the point.

For decades now, the left has been instead of engaging in debate on issues, LABELING their enemies, as though is an argument.

Kirk made a real point. YOu called him racist. You think that that was an argument, but it was just you refusing to engage.


This worked while you controlled the means of information. But now thanks to the rise of alternative media, you don't. Not completely.


So, your model has... been outgrown. now, you refusing to engage is just you choosing to be irrelevant.

 

[Hafar1014]

No idea what you are talking about. The democrats picked up a house seat in the last election and will likely win the midterms. Trump and MAGA are batting about .500 when it comes to wins.. which is because we are an evenly split nation on the parties. Your nonsensical babbling notwithstanding.

Conservatives arent killing people woke progressives are. 7 trans mass shooters in 2 years 2 attempts on Trumps life and Kirks murder by a gay woke progressive with a cross dressing trans boy friend. See a pattern yet

Democrats are at the lowest approvals in history dont expect them to win anything for many years. 2.1 million voters have switched parties to the GOP

 

[Winston]

And you miss the point.

For decades now, the left has been instead of engaging in debate on issues, LABELING their enemies, as though is an argument.

Kirk made a real point. YOu called him racist. You think that that was an argument, but it was just you refusing to engage.


This worked while you controlled the means of information. But now thanks to the rise of alternative media, you don't. Not completely.


So, your model has... been outgrown. now, you refusing to engage is just you choosing to be irrelevant.

I don't know who you think you are fooling. Both sides often refuse to engage in debate. On the right that refusal can come in the form of name calling, "Communist", "Socialist". It can be by refusing to accept documentation, oh the source is bias, oh the numbers are cooked to make Trump look bad.

And I didn't call Kirk a racist. Kirk called himself a racist. Again, using his definition, judging someone based on the color of their skin, not on their training, their experience, their qualifications, is racist. When Kirk saw a black pilot he admitted, the first thing he saw was black and the first thing he assumed was that the pilot was not qualified.

 

[Correll]

I don't know who you think you are fooling. Both sides often refuse to engage in debate. On the right that refusal can come in the form of name calling, "Communist", "Socialist". It can be by refusing to accept documentation, oh the source is bias, oh the numbers are cooked to make Trump look bad.

Here is bill maher discussing how the the repubicans were willing to come on to his show, evne though he leans left and the dems were NOT.

Bill Maher slams Harris and Clintons for dodging his show, praises GOP for taking 'beating like a man'

Bill Maher said he was puzzled that Democrats were 'afraid' to join his show despite his long record as a liberal who usually votes for them

news.meaww.com

Your claim is simply false.

And I didn't call Kirk a racist. Kirk called himself a racist. Again, using his definition, judging someone based on the color of their skin, not on their training, their experience, their qualifications, is racist. When Kirk saw a black pilot he admitted, the first thing he saw was black and the first thing he assumed was that the pilot was not qualified.

If the airline has a publicly stated policy of hiring black people based on their race instead of qualifications,

that is a reasonable question.

not racism.

 

[Winston]

If the airline has a publicly stated policy of hiring black people based on their race instead of qualifications,

that is a reasonable question.

not racism.

No, it is not reasonable because it makes the crazy assumption that the airlines would hire an unqualified person based on their race,

I mean live in the real world. Every single day companies don't hire the MOST qualified person, they hire the person they think will fit best in their company. And yes, sometimes that less qualified person is hired to meet some diversity goal, but most of the time, race is not even a factor.

There are some firms that purposely refuse to hire a more qualified person, often times they are difficult to train, too set in their old ways, and not receptive to change. Some police forces have applicants take an IQ test. Test too high, no job offer for you.

 

[WEATHER53]

Libs pretending they call the shots on what is “correct” when half of them are unemployed government leeches who advocate murder of unarmed people. First Babbit and now Kirk

 

[Correll]

No, it is not reasonable because it makes the crazy assumption that the airlines would hire an unqualified person based on their race,
.....

It is completely reasonable. The "assumption" that a corportation would hire an unqualified person, to meet "diversity" goals.


is based on deacades of seeing corporations or government agencies hire unqualified people for positions to meet "diversity" goals.

I've seen it in my RL. Uppermanagement asked me to rate people to be promoted. I gave some. NOt good enough, they wanted more diversity.

I warned them that the person they were looking at was not ready. THey did not listen. THEy promoted her. She lasted a few months and got fired. Could not do it.


(ironically the bit I knew should could not do, was deal with the irrational demands of upper management, but that is another discussion)

 

[WEATHER53]

Here is bill maher discussing how the the repubicans were willing to come on to his show, evne though he leans left and the dems were NOT.

Bill Maher slams Harris and Clintons for dodging his show, praises GOP for taking 'beating like a man'

Bill Maher said he was puzzled that Democrats were 'afraid' to join his show despite his long record as a liberal who usually votes for them

news.meaww.com

Your claim is simply false.





If the airline has a publicly stated policy of hiring black people based on their race instead of qualifications,

that is a reasonable question.

not racism.

Facts are racist to those with aberrant feelings and wishes

 

[Nostra]

‘Tragedy is a powerful shaper of narratives. In the aftermath of the horrific assassination of MAGA champion Charlie Kirk, a husband and father of two, it was natural that his allies, including President Trump, lionized him as a patriot, free-speech advocate, and activist. And political opponents somberly denounced the terrible killing, as they should, with some hailing Kirk’s devotion to public debate. There’s a tendency in such a moment to look for the best in people or, at least, to not dwell on the negatives. That can be a good thing. Yet as Kirk is quickly canonized by Trump and his movement—on Thursday Trump announced he would bestow upon Kirk a posthumous Presidential Medal of Freedom—a full depiction of his impact on American politics is largely being sidestepped.
[…]
Here’s the problem: Kirk built that movement with falsehoods. And his advocacy was laced with racist and bigoted statements. Recognizing this does not diminish the awfulness of this act of violence. Nor does it lessen our outrage or diminish our sympathy for his family, friends, and colleagues. Yet if this is an appropriate moment to assess Kirk and issue bold statements about his participation in America’s political life, there ought to be room for a true discussion.

Kirk, a right-wing provocateur who founded and led Turning Point USA, an organization of young conservatives, was a promoter of Trump’s destructive and baseless conspiracy theory that the 2020 election was stolen from him. Two days before the January 6 riot, Kirk boasted in a tweet that Students for Trump and Turning Point Action were “Sending 80+ buses full of patriots to DC to fight for this president.”’

No, Charlie Kirk was not practicing politics the right way

His assassination deserves full condemnation; his full impact should not be sidestepped.

www.motherjones.com

Kirk’s lawless killing shouldn’t be used to conceal or whitewash the fact that he was a promoter of racism, bigotry, and hate; a conservative ideologue who was responsible for spreading all manner of rightwing disinformation, conspiracy theories, and lies contributing to current political division and acrimony.

Lies.

Your Murder Cult got what it asked for....

 

[Dante]

‘Tragedy is a powerful shaper of narratives. In the aftermath of the horrific assassination of MAGA champion Charlie Kirk, a husband and father of two, it was natural that his allies, including President Trump, lionized him as a patriot, free-speech advocate, and activist. And political opponents somberly denounced the terrible killing, as they should, with some hailing Kirk’s devotion to public debate. There’s a tendency in such a moment to look for the best in people or, at least, to not dwell on the negatives. That can be a good thing. Yet as Kirk is quickly canonized by Trump and his movement—on Thursday Trump announced he would bestow upon Kirk a posthumous Presidential Medal of Freedom—a full depiction of his impact on American politics is largely being sidestepped.
[…]
Here’s the problem: Kirk built that movement with falsehoods. And his advocacy was laced with racist and bigoted statements. Recognizing this does not diminish the awfulness of this act of violence. Nor does it lessen our outrage or diminish our sympathy for his family, friends, and colleagues. Yet if this is an appropriate moment to assess Kirk and issue bold statements about his participation in America’s political life, there ought to be room for a true discussion.

Kirk, a right-wing provocateur who founded and led Turning Point USA, an organization of young conservatives, was a promoter of Trump’s destructive and baseless conspiracy theory that the 2020 election was stolen from him. Two days before the January 6 riot, Kirk boasted in a tweet that Students for Trump and Turning Point Action were “Sending 80+ buses full of patriots to DC to fight for this president.”’

No, Charlie Kirk was not practicing politics the right way

His assassination deserves full condemnation; his full impact should not be sidestepped.

www.motherjones.com

Kirk’s lawless killing shouldn’t be used to conceal or whitewash the fact that he was a promoter of racism, bigotry, and hate; a conservative ideologue who was responsible for spreading all manner of rightwing disinformation, conspiracy theories, and lies contributing to current political division and acrimony.

Let them vent. Their itty bitty sensitive feelings have been hurt