Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

We’ve always reserved things like flag-lowerings, national days of mourning, and “days of remembrance” for extraordinary public service or sacrifice, not for people whose careers were built on commentary, activism, or running nonprofits. Otherwise, the honor becomes meaningless. Being an activist or founding a large nonprofit is not the same as being a public servant or sacrificing your life for your country.

1

Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

That’s the point. If we start awarding these honors to every prominent political influencer, left or right, we’ll dilute the significance until it means nothing.

1

Anonymous OP 1w

I do understand the point you’re trying to make and why you’re trying to make it. National tragedies are part of what makes up national days of remembrance- you just don’t believe this to be a national tragedy because you don’t think it impacts you but it does. It was an attack on free speech for every individual who saw that video of him being assassinated, whether you want to admit it or not

-3

Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

So where's the national day of remembrance for the democratic politicians who were assassinated?

11

Anonymous #3 1w

Ask the democrats? ❤️

-4

Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

I can acknowledge that seeing someone killed on video is horrific and that attacks on anyone are tragic. But calling this a “national tragedy” on the same level as 9/11, Pearl Harbor, or the Oklahoma City bombing stretches the meaning of the term. Those events were mass-casualty attacks or pivotal national moments. One person being assassinated, even a public figure, is shocking and wrong, but it is not automatically a national tragedy that warrants a federally recognized day of remembrance.

1

Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

If we start framing every high-profile killing as a national tragedy, we dilute the term and the honors tied to it. That’s my whole point.

5

Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

Do you not realize whose administration we’re under and who actually has the power to issue these proclamations? The reason that Democratic Speaker didn’t get a Day of Remembrance is the same reason why almost all of our presidents don’t have one. These honors are supposed to be rare and tied to public service or truly historic events. That’s why it’s so bizarre that a political influencer got one.

1

Anonymous OP 1w

It wasn’t necessarily because Charlie Kirk was high profile. He was an American citizen, in public, exercising his first amendment rights, and was assassinated for it. Framing it as a national tragedy doesn’t dilute the term or honors tied to it, in fact it actually makes it even stronger! Now we set a standard as a nation saying, we will never forget this man who died for speaking freely as it is the right of every American to do so without fear of harm

-2

Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

The president does not have to be “asked” to lower the flags. That authority is already theirs under the U.S. Flag Code. Presidents routinely order flags to half-staff without anyone petitioning them, after mass shootings, natural disasters, or the deaths of prominent figures. Saying “Trump would have lowered the flags if he was asked” completely misunderstands how the process works.

7

Anonymous OP 1w

There are 53 republican senators, 47 democratic senators, and 2 independents. They’re the ones who pass things such as national days of remembrance, any of whom can suggest one in their meetings. If the democrats wanted a national day of remembrance for Melissa Hortman they could have, but as far as I’m concerned they didn’t even try

-1

Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

Framing every assassination of a public figure as a “national tragedy” sets a precedent that could quickly become inconsistent and politicized. National tragedies are typically defined by the scope of impact on the country as a whole, events like 9/11, or mass-casualty attacks. One person being assassinated, even while exercising their First Amendment rights, is horrific and tragic, but it is not automatically a national-level event.

1

Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

Not every political figure gets a National Day of Remembrance. You really should do some research before making claims about how these things work. I already outlined this, these days are extremely rare and reserved for exceptional cases, not just anyone in Congress. The fact that most presidents and even high-profile public officials do not get one proves that this is not about party numbers or “trying,” it’s about precedent and the rarity of the honor.

1

Anonymous OP 1w

This isn’t just “every” assassination. This was one that was aired to the entire world. It DOES impact the entire country. It impacts your right to free speech. It is a national-level event. Your hate for the Republican Party (and probably everyone whose opinions don’t align with yours) is just not allowing you to see that

-1

Anonymous OP 1w

Most presidents and/or high profile public officials also aren’t publicly assassinated while exercising specific constitutional rights. Charlie Kirk was an honorable man regardless, but his death is deserving of a singular day of remembrance because of how he died and the message it sends to the nation that you can no longer speak freely without the fear of dying. Like I said, I’m sorry it hurts your feelings. Can’t wait for Oct. 14th 🇺🇸

-1

Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

Let’s get one thing straight. This assassination does not impact the entire country. It does not impact my right to free speech. One man being killed, no matter how public it was, does not automatically turn it into a national-level event. The only people treating it that way are extreme MAGA supporters, the ones demanding Starbucks make a Charlie Kirk drink or claiming he’s some kind of messenger.

1

Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

Calling this a national tragedy because it “attacks free speech” is ridiculous. No one’s right to speak is infringed by his assassination. He was a political podcaster, not an elected official, and his rhetoric was often racist, misogynistic, or xenophobic. Giving him the highest honorific, a National Day of Remembrance, when most presidents and elective officials don’t even get one, is absurd.

1

Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

For the record, my disagreement with this has nothing to do with any political party. The fact that you tied it to any political party is what makes you the one creating division. You are trying to manufacture a split between parties. I never mentioned a party, what I believe in, or which political party I am affiliated with. You made that division and that assumption. You are the problem.

1

Anonymous OP 1w

It DOES impact your right to free speech. He was publicly assassinated while speaking his opinion. To every crazy fuck who watched that video, on both sides of the political spectrum, it sends a message saying hey look we can shoot people in the neck when we disagree with them. You think it doesn’t impact you because you believe most people agree with your thinking and that it could never happen to you, but that’s not the case. It does impact conservatives, EVERYWHERE.

0

Anonymous OP 1w

None of his speech was racist, misogynistic, or xenophobic. You’re just brainwashed. And even if it was (it’s not), our right to speak in those ways is still protected under the first amendment!

-1

Anonymous OP 1w

You just proved my point that you don’t think he’s deserving of the day because you disagree with his speech. YOU, my friend, are the fucking problem. Not me and not the Republican Party

-1

Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

You are misunderstanding how free speech works. His assassination does not take away anyone’s right to free speech. People have been killed for their opinions and ideologies throughout history, and that will continue to happen, but it does not nullify the First Amendment or anyone’s ability to speak freely. The fact that he was a high-profile podcaster and had connections with Trump is what made it visible.

5

Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

This could, in theory, happen to anyone, anywhere, anytime, but it doesn’t change anyone else’s rights. As for your claim that none of his speech was racist, misogynistic, or xenophobic, there are multiple documented examples. For instance:

3

Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

In 2017, he tweeted that “liberals are destroying America by promoting open borders”, framing immigrants in a consistently negative and fear-inducing way. In 2018, he called college students protesting conservative speakers “snowflakes” in ways that targeted their identity and dismissed their legitimate concerns about sexism and racial issues.

5

Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

In 2020, he repeatedly said that the Black Lives Matter movement was “anti-American”, using broad generalizations that were dismissive of racial justice concerns. Yes, he had the right to say these things,that is literally what free speech protects. No one’s right to free speech was taken away when he was killed. Criticizing his words or pointing out his rhetoric does not infringe on free speech, and his death, while tragic, does not change anyone else’s legal or constitutional rights.

2

Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

People being killed for expressing opinions or speaking publicly is not new and it will not stop. Charlie Kirk is not the first person to be targeted for their views, and treating his death as some unique national-level event is actually insane. I never said any political party is the problem...the problem here is you, not me, not the Republican Party, and not anyone else. Your misunderstanding of how free speech and national honors work is the issue, plain and simple.

3

Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

Thanks for showing trumps disregard for her life all because “no one asked” him to do his fucking job

1

Anonymous womenfortrump 1w

It’s the presidents job to make these days, so I’m asking his cocksucker

1