You’re right, that has been corrected. He did not say that.

Here’s something he did say, however, including a source:

> "Black women do not have brain processing power to be taken seriously. You have to go steal a white person's slot."

https://ca.news.yahoo.com/fact-check-charlie-kirk-once-17000...

Ignoring the ironic typo: is this dialogue? Is this “crossing political divides” for productive discussion? Or is it just bog standard racism/sexism? I’m curious what your thoughts are on that one, which was a pretty typical comment from him mind you.

Charlie Kirk was a cruel person to those he considered outside his tribe. I will not participate in the GOP’s cynical, opportunistic attempt to brand him as a martyr for free speech. It’s whitewashing nonsense.

Saying people that *say they were only there because of AA* are obviously only there because of AA is a pretty reasonable point. Linking to the video (with someone’s angry wrapper) directly: https://x.com/alluring_nyc/status/1965931096539017536?s=46

I wasn’t aware they said they were there because of AA, this is worthwhile information.

That is clearly not the assertion/part I am talking about, though I certainly have an opinion on that too.

He literally said the above quote I mentioned. It was sexist/racist. It was wrong. You can weigh in on it or not that’s your choice. But this man was not the saint the right is making him out to be. It’s flagrant revisionist history

Edit: I also forgot to respond to your Hortman comment. That does not matter. She and her husband were brutally murdered in their home for the crime of being democrats and holding office. How is that not worthy of national attention? How is that not kind of political violence that the right pretends to care about right now? If they had been Republicans we would still be hearing about it and you know it.

> That is clearly not the assertion/part I am talking about…

> He literally said the above quote I mentioned.

Which was discussing self confessed AA hires.

If you’re going to respond with barely any substance and ignore 80% of what I write then this isn’t going to be productive. Charlie Kirk was a cruel person who did not lead a life worth celebrating or emulating. He was murdered and did not deserve it. These are both true statements.

He lived and profited as a right wing troll. He provoked people to get a rise which was rewarded with clicks and money. His entire enterprise was indicative of what is wrong with this country right now and anyone heralding him as this MLK Jr. figure should be ashamed of the white washing they’re participating in.

This was a man who had a “woke professor” list (TP USA’s professor watchlist) which published the names of professors he considered “dangerous Marxists,” people that I know personally and who have subsequently received death threats and other fun treats as a result of his actions.

I won’t keep rattling off his sins because at some point it’s just unproductive. He did not deserve to die, but I will not be compelled to celebrate a person who did not exist.