In modern times, the number of women who have found themselves in this unenviable and tragic situation in the United States is small. The group is largely limited to the widows of the men slain in the tempestuous mid-1960s. Some biographers who chronicled the lives of those men — Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X and John F. and Robert F. Kennedy — are wary of drawing historical comparisons that might by extension elevate Charlie Kirk, who made numerous disparaging remarks about Black people...
Inflammatory characterization casually inserted.
... to the stature of an iconic civil rights leader or a president. But they see important distinctions between the ways the widows of the ’60s acted in their unwanted roles and the ways Erika Kirk is defining it.
“It’s such a different era and the partisanship is so much more extreme now,” said David Margolick, who wrote a book on the relationship between Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert F. Kennedy, and whose journalism is being turned into a documentary about Coretta Scott King and the Kennedy widows flying RFK’s body home after he was killed. “And people are all in their respective political communities and have very little interaction with people on the other side. In [the era of the earlier widows], as partisan as it was — and some people really hated the Kennedys — there was respect for the presidency that crossed party lines. The mourning wasn’t red and blue.”
“They didn’t point fingers. And they certainly didn’t speak with any certainty about who did it, let alone their motive,” he said. “I think all of them recognized that the country was terribly wounded and ... first do no harm. The idea of any of them lashing out [was] just unthinkable. That was the public expectation, and they met the moment.... They didn’t say anything. They just were... It’s about them and who they were, but also the era, the broader consensus and the mores of the era, the politeness and decorum.”
And what of this era — this era of widows of assassinated men? There's only Erika Kirk to define it... and there's no more "politeness and decorum" to save her from criticism for failure to model the "politeness and decorum" of the past — the past, to which she and Charlie seemed to want to return.
ADDED: What "numerous disparaging remarks about Black people"? Here's my discussion with ChatGPT looking into the accuracy of that phrase. You'll see some specific quotes and my suggestion that the "disparaging remarks" are all disparaging affirmative action.
Posts
78 comments:
What is the problem? A strong woman leader?
She is woman, we'll hear her roar.
WAPO is asshole.
I played for Vigil Mass last night. One of my choir members, a progressive, gave me the “Charlie Kirk was a bigot, so he got what was coming to him,” talk last night. A very nice old lady. Retired French professor. Ghastly. The cruelty and hatred is wearing me out.
@Alhouse, I recollect you writing that it angered you y see words like “shrill” and (I suppose) “strident” associated with women. Good to see you apply that rule evenhandedly to women who are right of center.
Ah, the Post wouldn’t happen to have examples of Charlie Kirk making “disparaging remarks about Black people,” would it?
they certainly didn’t speak with any certainty about who did it, let alone their motive
Does the WaPo not know?
The idea of any of them lashing out [was] just unthinkable.
That's not a message to Erika. When it was George Floyd, the WaPo wasn't arguing against lashing out and calling it unthinkable.
I entered a fake email address (fuckwapo@gmail.com) in an attempt to read the article and it said that account was already registered. lol
Did it ever occur to that WaPo writer that women’s roles in society were much more constrained in the 1960s than today?
Regardless of who pulled the trigger and his motives, it is so-called Liberals and Progressives who endorse the murder of a dissident.
It’s not at all unusual for widows of people in politics to step into their husband’s place. The Post has defined the category (widows of assassinated political men) specifically to support an argument that denigrates Erika Kirk. That is, they are working backwards from a conclusion.
“We’ve never been more polarized” is a popular notion among stupid people who don’t know history, so I’m not surprised to see it in a WaPo column.
I have disparaged blacks many times, and rightly so so, but I’ve seen no record of Kirk doing it
Does disparaging blacks merit the death penalty?
Erika Kirk has an opportunity not seen before in America. Time will tell how things play out.
We all know she will be downplayed/ignored/mocked, where an equivalent D or L would be praised/loved/glorified.
An example for me, occurred on 9/14/2001, when George W Bush was with the firemen, megaphone in hand.
W was stuggling trying to say something beautiful/motivating, when one of the crowd yelled, "We can't hear you".
His response electrified the crowd, and the nation. He was smart enough to wrap up the speaking at that point. He probably learned that from George Costanza.
That was a beautiful moment of a person in the crowd, a common man, influencing the President of the United States to speak beautifully and passionately.
That NYC and other blue cities do not have prominent sculptures of that moment is a shame. A strong shame.
I don't recall anybody going on TV to mock JFK, MLK, or RFK after their death.
Once again the Republican reaction is the story.
I asked Gemini about these "numerous racist remarks". It pointed me to a recent article in The Guardian. This is what they listed:
On race
If I see a Black pilot, I’m going to be like, boy, I hope he’s qualified.
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 23 January 2024
If you’re a WNBA, pot-smoking, Black lesbian, do you get treated better than a United States marine?
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 8 December 2022
Happening all the time in urban America, prowling Blacks go around for fun to go target white people, that’s a fact. It’s happening more and more.
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 19 May 2023
If I’m dealing with somebody in customer service who’s a moronic Black woman, I wonder is she there because of her excellence, or is she there because of affirmative action?
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 3 January 2024
If we would have said that Joy Reid and Michelle Obama and Sheila Jackson Lee and Ketanji Brown Jackson were affirmative action picks, we would have been called racists. Now they’re coming out and they’re saying it for us … You do not have the brain processing power to otherwise be taken really seriously. You had to go steal a white person’s slot to go be taken somewhat seriously.
– The Charlie Kirk Show, 13 July 2023
***************************************************************
Sounds he said publicly what many people think privately.
"We've never been more polarized," say the people working overtime to polarize us.
flying RFK’s body home after he was killed
My recollection was that he came back home on a train, which ran over a mourner-crowd member in NJ somewhere. Causing my father, who was interested enough to watch it on TV, to crack "The Kennedys are killing everybody."
Was that some other Kennedy?
STRIDENT adjective characterized by harsh, insistent, and discordant sound - a strident voice; also commanding attention by a loud or obtrusive quality.
The widow can try whatever she wants - the Republicans are certainly helping to the extent of making it a soap opera sensation to get back at the democrats - but she's entitled to less consideration playing it to her advantage. A priority switch that nullifies an expectation of reserved sympathy.
How ironic that the Washington Post would disparage an organization being led by the widow of the leader. I can’t roll my eyes enough.
The NYTimes cannot help themselves. I hate the MSM
Sabine Hossenfelder sometimes has a register called shrill Hausfrau which is responsible for husbands at the beer hall.
Sorry, the WashPost. I just woke up. My apologies
We've always been at war with Eastasia.
The widows of famous men in our past- Jackie Kennedy, Coretta Scott King, Ethel Kennedy, etc. didn't have to face half the country literally spitting out of their mouths with hate at their murdered husbands. They didn't have to see videos of half the country doing gleeful dances or 'he deserved what he got' videos.
And they didn't have to put up with major brands of failing news organizations perpetuating ridiculous slanderous claims on their husbands.
But with WaPo, Narrative uber Alles. One would love to see some examples of their claim that Charlie Kirk "...made numerous disparaging remarks about Black people...".
He did the opposite. He worked- obviously and religiously- for the betterment of all people.
WaPo should do us all a favor and just end. Just close the doors. Send those sick minds to the far corners of New England where they can tsk-tsk their years away while sipping artisan gin with a splash of kombucha.
Washington Post: Erika Kirk pounces!
‘…wary of drawing historical comparisons that might by extension elevate Charlie Kirk…’
Some animals are less equal than others.
Should the widow stand back and know that her place is to quietly mourn and to express no opinions?
Well, that depends on her politics. If they are the "right" ones, she can say anything she wants. But if they "wrong", then she needs to shut her stupid whore pie-hole.
She's going to tell 30 million followers not to vote for Democrats, so they're going to assassinate her too.
they are wretched arent' they, they don't know anyone with real courage or conviction, 'only the worst with passionate intensity' only if you see this through spiritual dimension, do you realize the nature of this struggle, 'against principalities and powers of the air'
“One would love to see some examples of their claim that Charlie Kirk "...made numerous disparaging remarks about Black people...".
WaPo keeps up the slander. Let’s see the proof. Charlie was just against DEI.
look at the idiots they extoll jazmine crockett, the runner up of the sheila jackson lee bonus prize, the squad, as I say the worstt
same for sandy cortez, vicious and stupid in special ways,
Some biographers who chronicled the lives of those men — Martin Luther King Jr., Malcolm X and John F. and Robert F. Kennedy — are wary...
So we are to believe at least 4 biographers (the experts) spoke to the WaPo and said, 'I'm a biographer, it's true and I know there's some biographing that must be done now and I'm certainly willing to shoulder my share of that burden, but I tell you, I'm wary, very wary indeed, of drawing historical comparisons in this case. Any biographer who says he's not is either a liar or a damned fool!'
Come on, man.
It seems to me this article is an attempt to disparage Erica Kirk, especially among those past-loving conservatives, and in the immortal words of the Wicked Witch of the West, "These things must be done delicately."
those of us, with a keen sense of the past, can distinguish, if you are talking your cues from David French and co, well god help you,
More bullshit, trying to deflect responsibility and absolve the Left.
No sale.
https://billquick.substack.com/p/shaving-charlie-kirks-murder-with
How many times have we noticed this sneaky trick? So and so said or wrote something racist! or homophobic! or Islamaphobic! (pick your poison) but they don't bother to tell us the actual words used. At this point the only thing I can conclude is that some aspect of progressive orthodoxy was questioned. We hates them, Precious!
Well come on, WaPo, spit it out. What easily identifiable group is now acting with such insane stridency? How will we ignorant rubes ever know if you won't tell us?
Does the Washington Post believe it has a role granting Mrs. Kirk permission to take up a more active role?
the post has descended from when isikoff stated 'evengelicals are poor uneducated and easy to command' the reverse turned out to be true,
Failing to publicly mourn a murdered person is different from publicly celebrating the crime. That's what I think. Inga is free to prove me wrong.
WaPo said...
“They didn’t point fingers. And they certainly didn’t speak with any certainty about who did it, let alone their motive,” he said. “I think all of them recognized that the country was terribly wounded and ... first do no harm. The idea of any of them lashing out [was] just unthinkable. That was the public expectation, and they met the moment.... They didn’t say anything. They just were... It’s about them and who they were, but also the era, the broader consensus and the mores of the era, the politeness and decorum.
History intrudes...
When offered fresh clothes to replace her blood-stained pink suit, Jacqueline Kennedy replied, "No. I want them to see what they have done to Jack". She refused to change her attire even for the swearing-in of Lyndon B. Johnson on Air Force One, choosing instead to wear her husband's blood to bear witness to the violence of the assassination.
The topic of race has given the left an infinitely expandable array of tools with which to accuse their adversaries of racism. Opposition to affirmative action, or DEI, or crime can all be racist. So can observations concerning sociological problems relating to disparities between races. The fact that WaPo has to resort to it's always at the ready cudgel of implying racism tells us that they can't find any legitimate critiques of their hated adversary Charlie Kirk. They don't need Karen Attiah. They've got a slew of them to take her place.
“My recollection was that he came back home on a train”
You’re showing your age. That was Lincoln.
Jackie Kennedy didn't get political in the wake of JFK's murder. She was never heard to publically speak until years later and that was brief and not about her husband, his political career, or Dallas. Every Democratic politician would have given his right arm for her endorsement. Every conspiracy theorist longed to interview her. But she kept silent. Though her grief wasn't audible, it was visible. She kept herself to herself because that was her personality, but there was also a world-historical element that applied to that assassination of a President that Jacquelin Kennedy acknowledged and respected.
Lee Harvey Oswald never came to trial. The case against him is still open. No motivation has been established. Conspiracy has not been disproven. Assassinations have ignited wars. That one could have done so as well. Jackie kept her peace, and we can be thankful she did.
https://www.newsbusters.org/journalists/michelle-boorstein here's your sign
oswald did have some interesting ties, not only to kostikov, their wetwork guy, but two upcoming cuban intel trainees in minsk,
Wait until you folks read the NYT profile of the widow...
She was raised by a single mom, so she's not really all that concerned about not having Charlie around, who spent a lot of time in his condo near his home and Turning Point. She didn't even get up that morning to see him off on the start of his tour. He slept alone the night before... Sad, but TP was his job, and he died a martyr.
She's hoping to get into heaven, so Tyler Robinson might get the death penalty only if the State demands it over her religious beliefs...
She no "tit for tat" widow. Go read the NYT piece, and yes, Charlie Kirk believed White People were supreme/superior to blacks. Do you all believe that too, "behind closed doors"?
Hit ann and meade's beggar cup today in your time of grief. They have needs too, you know! Getting into Heaven ain't cheap!
NYT link to the better Erika Kirk profile:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/21/us/politics/erika-kirk.html
NYT link to the better Erika Kirk profile:
https://www.nytimes.com/2025/09/21/us/politics/erika-kirk.html
Fabian Escalante and future General Abrantes, the former rose to the ranks of internal security, and fooled many Americans, who don't understand how Communists behave,
.."stridently determined to advance her husband’s work..."
They said 'strident', but they want you to think, 'shrill'.
how dare she, (hrumpf)
The other widows all had plenty of prominent people and institutions going to defend and define the legacy of their dead husbands.
For Erika Kirk there is no machine like that. The gaslighting around the politics of his assassin is a prime example of this fight and the ends to which people will go to tarnish or control (think of the fight about his views toward Israel) thus narrative.
Unfortunately she is almost obliged to step into the arena to defend the truth.
It's hardly a redefinition. The widow picking up the role of leader is a repeated theme in history, from St. Olga of Kiev to Corazon Aquino to Isabel Peron to Coretta King.
Ambrose said...
Does the Washington Post believe it has a role granting Mrs. Kirk permission to take up a more active role
Sir, you cut perfectly and succinctly to the heart of the matter.
WaPo thinks Kirk should shut up. So dies the (very brief) leftist embrace of freedom of speech.
Jackie Kennedy didn't get political in the wake of JFK's murder.
----------
Are you kidding me?
She went into overdrive on all the details and cemented the Myth of Camelot and the worship of our (now beloved) dead young president. JFK was not universally loved nor mourned in 1963. Ask your aging great-grandparent conservative republicans if you still believe that myth...
Erika Kirk knows the value of Charlie's political legacy and she too will go into overdrive to get women like ann to swallow the myth of St. Charlie. For many, because of the horrible assassination caught on file and the "handsome" young good looks of the dead father, it will work...
Other critical thinkers will mourn his violent death but remain firm in their beliefs that neither Charlie nor Erika Kirk is morally or intellectually up to the task of "leading" America's government leaders. God help them.
Interesting video that raise a lot of questions about the Kirk shooting.
Image may have captured the bullet in flight one frame before impact and it didn't come from in front, but from the side. This former Marine scout/sniper contends the neck wound gushing blood was exit wound.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ltakvGyzfZs&rco=1
Of course, in these past examples, the media was an eager supplicant to the Subject, rather than a complicit party in his murder.
I also recalled Bobby Kennedy on a funeral train so I checked in with Google.
RFK’s body was brought from California to New York on a plane sent by President Johnson. New York is where his funeral was held. The body was then brought by a 21-car funeral train to Washington, DC, for internment at Arlington National Cemetery.
So the body traveled by both plane and train.
@Eva Marie, I yield to no on in my love of snark, but a little research before commenting is a good thing.
How many times have we noticed this sneaky trick? So and so said or wrote something racist! or homophobic! or Islamaphobic! (pick your poison) but they don't bother to tell us the actual words used.
This is so true. Start consciously reading articles in which someone objects to someone else's speech, and you will notice how shockingly few of those articles will actually quote the allegedly offensive speech. It is all paraphrase, no quote.
"Shut up," he explained.
Ring Lardner and the WaPo.
Before the Vietnam War and the borking of Robert Bork, US partisan politics routinely "stopped at the border." People knew when to stop and when to pull back. But, road rage and social media knee jerk emotions took over.
Kirk and his intellectual progenitor Steven Crowder tried very hard to engage with political opponents. Still, I'm wondering if some of this anger is more appropriate for the young Crowder than Kirk. Crowder was aggressively inflammatory and confrontational in his early years, and per his Mohammed and Che Guevara comments may still be on hit lists.
Yet, Crowder matured (a bit) and Kirk may have never been that harsh.
being knowledgable about Mohammed, islamognosis and Che is never off the mark
particularly the latters' racism, well he was a very priviledged Argentine aristocrat
You people love to wallow in a state of permanent whining and rendering of garments based on the shitty things that the 1% vomits up prominently on social media as if it's widely popular among the general public.
I feel so sorry for all of your misery even though they're a series of endless self inflicted paper cuts. That seemingly intelligent people have given up their emotional agency to LLMs is disgusting. Fortunately for the 80% of us normies, we are just fine living out our lives taking care of business and being rocks for family and friends.
Mr. Howard... loving living the status quo! lol.
Enjoy your retirement, boomer.
the leading papers have 'washed their hands' of their culpability in indulging this pagan horror, in stigmatizing christians except their pet poodles like russell moore,
you should be silent,
"my suggestion that the "disparaging remarks" are all disparaging affirmative action. "
Yes. And don't think those who are using those comments to characterize Kirk, and his followers, as racist don't know what they're doing. And don't think we don't know that's what they're doing, either.
russell moore who recently tried to downplay the crucifixion, the quintessential symbol of the Faith,
miss borstin has removed all doubt about where she stands,
How many times have I heard a Democrat or progressive (hard to tell them apart these days) get up on her hind legs and declare that the mother/widow/or child of a deceased person has "absolute moral authority" to speak on some issue? The answer to that question is "many". As is so often the case, where you stand depends upon where you sit. Well Erika Kirk is a widow--so doesn't she have "absolute moral authority"? Well actually I don't think, so, but then I'm no longer a Democrat. But I do think she's free to speak her mind.
Erika Kirk is being warned here- "We silenced your husband and we can silence you, too" is the basic point of all of these articles.
yes in so many words,
My parents, and most of my friends' parents, were not big fans of the Kennedys or MLK, Jr., but most were not pleased when they were gunned down.
Even some of the more racist righties (and I mean "John Birch was a softie" righties) saw little good coming from the killings even if they felt some personal satisfaction, and even racist women openly expressed sorrow and sympathy for Coretta.
Different times.
"Charlie Kirk, who made numerous disparaging remarks about Black people..."
Kirk made at least one disparaging remark about MLK Jr. No doubt he criticized Obama too. So? Are blacks above criticism by virtue of being black? That's rather patronizing.
Reminds me of the brouhaha over Marianne Pearl and "terror widows" after 9/11.
Post a Comment
Please use the comments forum to respond to the post. Don't fight with each other. Be substantive... or interesting... or funny. Comments should go up immediately... unless you're commenting on a post older than 2 days. Then you have to wait for us to moderate you through. It's also possible to get shunted into spam by the machine. We try to keep an eye on that and release the miscaught good stuff. We do delete some comments, but not for viewpoint... for bad faith.