by Don Fredrick, The Complete Obama Timeline, ©2025
(Sep. 13, 2025) — I am half-way through my eighth decade and have never in my life seen such hatred and vitriol as I have now seen from leftists “celebrating” the assassination of Charlie Kirk. I have disagreed with many people over the years, but I have never wished death on any of them, and I most assuredly never celebrated their deaths.
From the videos I have seen of Charlie Kirk, he struck me as a person who would be a good, kind, and generous neighbor who would keep his house clean, his lawn mowed, and his car washed, and who would help me if I had a problem and ask for nothing in return. He seemed like a man who would never harm another human being, and who certainly would never revel at the death of someone who disagreed with him on some issues. I could imagine having hours-long conversations with Charlie Kirk over significant topics, with him sometimes persuading me to change my mind and me sometimes persuading him to look at an issue or two from my perspective.
Now he is dead. Why? Simply because extremely intolerant people disagreed with him. Has our society devolved to the point where merely saying you believe there are two sexes and only two sexes warrants your death? Where opposing the killing of babies in the womb means you must be killed as well? Where supporting free-market capitalism over socialism could result in a death sentence? Where preferring individual liberty over state tyranny can only mean you are a fascist and a Nazi who should be locked away in a re-education camp? Where believing that people should be celebrated for their accomplishments and good deeds, rather than their gender, race, or ancestry, causes you to be ostracized and doxxed? Regrettably, those extremely intolerant people are not limited to stray crackpots on the Internet. They include many elected officials. Do not forget that when CNN’s Anderson Cooper asked Kamala Harris, “Do you think Donald Trump is a fascist?” she replied, “Yes I do, yes I do.”1
Following the horrific assassination, elected officials and media talking heads were forced to say they oppose murder. Unfortunately, the Democrat politicians and media leftists seemed unable to stop after saying the shooting of Charlie Kirk was a terrible act. They felt obligated to add, “but…” and proceeded to suggest he had it coming — although usually in less obvious but still despicable language. Kirk certainly did not deserve to be assassinated — no one does. I vehemently oppose the ideologies of many political figures but I certainly do not want them murdered because I disagree with them.
I want controversial issues discussed and debated, without calling the other side Nazis or racists. Just as importantly, I want schools to teach children how to think, not what to think —because that is the only way we can have civil discussions and debates. Charlie Kirk was incredibly popular at college campuses because he encouraged students to debate and he welcomed back-and-forth discussions, which was probably for many (if not most) of them a distinct improvement over the one-sided indoctrination they experience in their classes. Charlie Kirk challenged them to think for themselves, while their professors merely told them, “This is what you must think, and if you do not agree there is a door at the back of the lecture hall.” A substantial number of students in Charlie Kirk’s audiences no doubt thought, “I wish my professors were like him.”
Far too many on the political left cannot tolerate disagreement at all, and that intolerance can lead to violence. We should all be tired of the increasing reliance on violence to “resolve” disagreements. Yes, killing someone with a weapon is the worst response. But we also need to stop reacting to disagreements with lesser but still unacceptable levels of denunciation and violence. If, for example, two people disagree over the safety of Covid vaccines, they should be able to have that difference of opinion without breaking up a lifelong friendship. If a person accidentally bumps into you on the street you should accept his apology, rather than clench your fist and strike him. If a police officer pulls you over for speeding you should show him your driver’s license and proof of insurance. You should not argue, claim, “I can’t breathe,” demand to see his supervisor, and then resist arrest after you kick the officer and bite his arm. If you steal merchandise from a store shelf and stuff it into your purse or pants, you should turn over the items and not claim “police brutality” after you get caught. If your neighbor lets his grass grow too long for your tastes, you should not punch him in the jaw or set his house on fire.
We should do our best to ensure that disagreements do not escalate to the level of physical threats or violence, but we should also not ignore legitimate threats. When radical Islamists pledge to kill every non-Muslim on earth, more than a few politicians and media “talking heads” tell us to be tolerant and not take those threats seriously. We should, however, take them seriously. Illinois Governor J. B. Pritzker said, “These Republicans cannot know a moment of peace.”2 Should Pritzker not be taken seriously? What did he mean if he was not condoning or promoting violence? When a politician tells constituents to “get in the face” of half the people in the nation simply because they have different views, why should we be surprised when activists enter a restaurant to surround and intimidate people who are merely trying to enjoy dinner? We should indeed take those threats seriously. But Charlie Kirk was not “getting in anyone’s face” to demand that they agree with him. Instead, he engaged in cordial debates with people of differing views. He hoped to persuade them, but he did not get angry or resort to violence if they did not. He threatened no one, yet he faced repeated death threats.
The world is getting dangerously close to the point where monumental violence could break out because of the outrageous intolerance of some people — and the absurd over-tolerance of others. The United Kingdom faces collapse because the “migrants” it welcomed responded not with gratitude, but with publicly expressed demands that the entire nation give up Christianity, ham, and bacon, and convert to Islam. When the citizens who have been ejected from their homes in order to turn them over to immigrants complain, it is those tenth-generation Brits who are punished. Why are the people of Paris wrong to complain that their streets are being filled with garbage from immigrants? Why are the people of New York City and Los Angeles wrong to expect tents and drug needles to be removed from their sidewalks?
Most of the people I know have a live-and-let-live attitude. If a man wants to wear a dress, most people will find that ridiculous but they would not demand that he change into a suit and tie. But too many on the other side of the situation not only believe men should be able to wear dresses, they believe no one has a right to snicker when they see a 200-pound man in high heels. When raising one’s eyebrows becomes “hate speech,” a culture is on a path to a bad place.
Americans have been driven into opposite corners of a fighting ring because of the increasing intransigence, intolerance, and even insanity. Decades ago a person would have been placed in a mental institution for claiming that men can have babies. Nowadays, reasonable people cannot even argue that such a person is wrong. They must instead abandon reality and endorse taxpayer-funded maternity care for men, and if they object they will be forced out of their jobs.
The most intolerant people are increasingly found on the political left. Yet they expect conservatives to accept everything that is thrown their way. If the former do not begin to show some tolerance, the latter are likely to lose all of theirs. If that happens, America’s turning point will have been reached.
Don Fredrick
September 12, 2025
You’re not alone, Don. It’s shocking AND sickening. Half of us are crazy.
So, does the normal half deal with it or “turn the other cheek?”
Me? Jail, deport or the firing squad for treason. No excuses. And none of this “swift justice BS”; do it NOW.
“You’re not alone, Don. It’s shocking AND sickening. Half of us are crazy.”
Recent polls indicate that 48% of American adults and 60% of 18-30 year olds believe in Socialism or Communism rather than Capitalism.
“So, does the normal half deal with it or ‘turn the other cheek?'”
Obviously turning the other cheek got us where we are now, therefore, it’s just as obvious that to deal with it the normal half must stop turning the other cheek.
“Me? Jail, deport or the firing squad for treason. No excuses. And none of this “swift justice BS”; do it NOW.”
Me? The firing squad for traitors YESTERDAY wouldn’t be soon enough.
Don, your post highlights the failure and hypocrisy of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI). I went through mandatory DEI training and it was like a hammer pummeling white males in particular. Charlie Kirk’s assassination and the incredible excuses condoning it prove the promulgators of DEI have little taste for the virtues they’re trying to force-feed to everyone else.
The Bible says not to resist evil with evil. This high road is becoming harder and harder to take. God help us all.