Murder isn't always wrong, if youre a republican

"The political party that legalized running over protesters is appalled at this climate of political violence." beige.party/@geekysteven...

/9 ....I'm more inclined to say that giving the state the power to suppress speech leads to worse results and worse injustices, and less inclined to say that free debate inherently leads to better results and the truth. I'm negative-consequence rather than positive-consequence focused.

/7 So I question the proposition that just because Charlie Kirk didn't go around killing people, but went around belittling and demeaning and dehumanizing them instead, that he's inherently admirable. Would I be a hero if I said I will debate ANYONE about whether black people are human? No.

/5 But if I am willing to go anywhere and tell anyone that black people don't deserve to be where they are, that Jews are funding the destruction of America, and that gay people should be stoned, does that make me a hero? Seems like a low bar.

/3 But I could be wrong; perhaps Charlie Kirk talked about how the wave of protests against Israel was a manifestation of free speech that should not be suppressed. However, I don't find TPUSA's professor list to have a particularly free speechy vibe, culturally or otherwise.

Democrats have a golden opportunity:
Introduce the Charlie Kirk Gun Control Act of 2025 that would ban open carry as well as call for universal background checks, safe storage and red flag laws. ;)

@gtconway.bsky.social if you think this would be a great way to use him as a bad example, plz copy

More receipts:

Minnesota shooter was a Republican, recently interviewed by Glenn Beck, so a hard nope to all who spread that it's only "teh libz"