AOC’s lies about Charlie Kirk reveal the truth – Latest News
Fifty-eight Democrats opposed a decision to honor the life — and condemn the assassination — of conservative activist Charlie Kirk on Friday.
The decision consists of a easy description of Kirk’s accomplishments and beliefs as he himself understood them, in addition to an articulation of the seemingly uncontroversial precept that “leaders at every level — government, education, media, and beyond — must stand united in unequivocal condemnation of political violence, regardless of their ideology.” “The tragic loss of Charlie Kirk must not be allowed to deepen the divides in our Nation, but instead serve as a turning point to recommit ourselves to better angels, and to the timeless American principles of liberty governed by truth and the virtues of peaceful dialogue,” it learn.
Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (D-NY) was amongst the dissenters to those sentiments.
“The majority proceeded with a resolution that brings great pain to the millions of Americans who endured segregation, Jim Crow and the legacy of bigotry,” wailed Ocasio-Cortez on the House flooring.
‘Ignorant’
“We should be clear about who Charlie Kirk was, a man who believed that the Civil Rights Act that granted Black Americans the right to vote was a mistake,” she declared. “His rhetoric and beliefs were ignorant, uneducated, and sought to disenfranchise millions of Americans.”
Ignorant? We know you’re, however what was Charlie Kirk?
Ocasio-Cortez not solely reminded the nation of her deficit of character by smearing Kirk, however of her deficit of information by flubbing the most simple info.
Newsflash: African-American males had been granted the proper to vote by the fifteenth Amendment.
They had been subsequently denied that proper in lots of jurisdictions by discriminatory Jim Crow legal guidelines.
But it was the Voting Rights Act of 1965 — not the Civil Rights Act of 1964 — that remedied this great mistaken.
Perhaps Ocasio-Cortez must spend much less time on TikTok and more time hitting the books; the least the congresswoman’s constituents must count on of her is a remedial understanding of America’s civic historical past.
If solely that was the place the lazy, dishonorable lies ended.
It’s true that Kirk known as the Civil Rights Act a mistake, and that it was amongst his most inflammatory opinions — one worthy of interrogation, and arguably harsh critiques.
Twisted argument
Yet Ocasio-Cortez and the legion of leftists echoing her online are destroying their own reputations, quite than Kirk’s, by taking his phrases out of context.
“Parts of the Civil Rights Act were great,” defined Kirk after being confronted on his stance by a scholar.
“The intent was noble, which was to say that no American can be not allowed into a place of business based on the color of their skin, or their ethnic heritage,” he continued, stressing his settlement with that goal.
The downside, as Kirk noticed it, is that lately, it’s used to “force men in female bathrooms” and “push forward the trans agenda.”
It additionally “created a massive, anti-racist DEI army, that then gave us affirmative action,” he lamented.
There’s nothing mistaken with rejecting Kirk’s argument because it was really made.
Get opinions and commentary from our columnists
Subscribe to our day by day Post Opinion e-newsletter!
Thanks for signing up!
But twisting it past recognition to color him as a bigot days after one of your ideological bedfellows robbed a spouse of her husband and their youngsters of a father is unbecoming of any grownup, a lot much less the chief of America’s progressive political motion.
Ocasio-Cortez and her depressing band of self-righteous know-nothings see Kirk’s death as, above all else, an alternative to virtue-signal about their opposition to his life’s work.
By appearing on this ignoble impulse, they’ve solely marketed their own surplus of contemptible vices — ignorance and spite chief amongst them.
