The tragic assassination of Charlie Kirk at Utah Valley University on Wednesday afternoon has sparked a nationwide conversation about political violence.
The incident, which saw Kirk, 31, shot while addressing a crowd, has been met with widespread condemnation, including from prominent figures on the left. However, the sincerity of these condemnations is being questioned in light of recent rhetoric from the same quarters.
According to Western Journal, the incident unfolded as Kirk was speaking under a tent. A gunshot was heard, and Kirk was seen jolting back, bleeding heavily from the neck.
The crowd dispersed in panic from the university's student center courtyard. The shooter's motive remains unclear, with FBI Director Kash Patel announcing a suspect in custody but withholding further details.
Prominent figures on the left were quick to express their outrage. President Joe Biden stated, "There is no place in our country for this kind of violence. It must end now." Former President Barack Obama echoed this sentiment, saying, "We dont yet know what motivated the person who shot and killed Charlie Kirk, but this kind of despicable violence has no place in our democracy."
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Michigan Governor Gretchen Whitmer also condemned the act, emphasizing the need to stand against all forms of political violence.
However, these statements stand in stark contrast to the left's recent rhetoric. Until recently, many on the left were advocating for any means necessary to oppose President Donald Trump and his allies. Connecticut Senator Chris Murphy, while lamenting the "dark day" and the spiraling political violence in America, also referred to Kirk's death as "gun violence."
This term, while technically accurate, fails to capture the political motivations that may have driven the act.
Murphy's comments become even more concerning when considered in the context of an interview he gave just a day before Kirk's death. Speaking with NBC News journalist Chuck Todd on digital outlet Noosphere, Murphy stated, "Were in a war right now to save this country," and added, "you have to be willing to do whatever is necessary in order to save the country." He also spoke about "fighting fire with fire" and "blowing up norms."
In the aftermath of the assassination, Todd, who did not challenge Murphy's war rhetoric during the interview, expressed his desire not to "live in a tinder box." This lack of pushback raises questions about the role of the media in challenging potentially harmful rhetoric.
The tragic irony is that Murphy, after advocating for a figurative war, joined the chorus condemning the violence against Kirk. His reference to "gun violence" conveniently overlooks the fact that Donald Trump was nearly assassinated twice during the 2024 campaign. It also ignores the left's history of rationalizing political violence, including gun violence.
When the norms of civil discourse are shattered and political violence manifests in such a horrific manner, figures like Murphy and other Democrats distance themselves. However, once the dust settles, it is feared they will have learned nothing, and the cycle of violence may begin anew.
It is time for real accountability, including holding Murphy responsible for his words in the lead-up to Charlie Kirk's assassination.
Login