Thank you for this article. Also thank you for your efforts to stop the push to give immunity to the chemical companies. That would be a disaster. I would love to see MAHA provide more updates on that topic. I hope you can get Secretary Rollins on board.
I disagree with everything Charlie Kirk stood for, but always defended his right to say it. Political violence, be it in the homes of Minnesota legislators or at an Utah university, has not place in America. The rhetoric on both sides, is out of hand.
I would publicly suggest your comment vile and quite frankly stupid.
Worse than stupid. Both sides error of equivalency jargon.
This is a public forum. If you wanted to say something significant mention 2 important issues you disagree with and why? But you will not take the offer, as it is far easier to proclaim "everything" Prove me wrong.
Everything?! I have a hard time believing that! He was for free speech wasn’t he? He was for having discussions. You disagree w/that?! You think the left isn’t 100% worse w/their rhetoric?! I don’t recall anyone on the right calling people nazis!
Disagree with placing blame at Left winger hatred when nothing is known yet at shooter. Sniper shot then vanished. I have seen several clips of Kirk questioning Israel’s actions. I’m a peace liking Leftie DemExit voted Trump 2024 to get rfk and tulsi in positions because Biden/Trump each do damage but needed free thinkers. Tulsi seems ignored. Song: Home on the tundra, where musk oxen roam so Don’t box me in.
Thank you John. I, too, feel a deep sense of loss for yet another brother in Christ who was slain simply because he spoke as a free man, with civility and respect. Charlie was killed for speaking as our Lord spoke -- without the guile of political correctness, and with the authority of truth in his words. And from somewhere deep within I am crying "How long, O Lord?"
Thank you John Klar for this well thought out article. The nation has lost a bright star in Charlie's death as I feel strongly that he would have gone on to achieve great strides in bringing the country forward, toward unity. He would have made an outstanding governor or congressman, or perhaps even further up the ladder. I grieve for his wife and children as they have been robbed of a partner and father so unfairly. I pray that enough people in our nation see that this path of violence leads to a dead-end and come together to work on our nation's problems in unity, not division.
thank you John for your beautiful story about Charlie. I've been on Team Kennedy since Bobby began his campaign, now on Maha Action. Not being of college age nor having any children or grandchildren, i didn't follow Charlie much but i knew what he stood for and i haven't stopped crying since Wednesday, both for Charlie and his family and for what has become of our country
I am more than deeply disturbed by this event and there are no words. This is one of those times for sure. My heart felt love, prayers and compassion extend to Charlies family and kin. When our first Constitutional Amendment ends with an assassination like this....there are no words.
Yes, let’s be bold, and especially do it with other like-minded individuals around us whenever we can.
Loud confrontation is a common way they people operate - draw attention by being loud and making false statements to hopefully embarrass you and make you go away. They certainly aren’t embarrassed by their behavior. Stores won’t interfere anymore, rather than throw the obnoxious acting person out, they let all their other customers be disturbed instead, so they have to deal with these type of people, or risk a lawsuit.
I don’t like confrontations, but I am to the point when I see unjust behavior I must speak out. My husband tells me I need to be careful, that someone may physically hurt me for speaking out. If not now, then when?
During the times I see something gathering steam I think of “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing,.” Or the poem, “First They Came” by Martin Niemoller, or MLK, Jr.’s “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” (“Letter from Birmingham Jail”). If they do it to someone else, they can most certainly do it to you.
When I speak up it might not be for grave violations, but small infractions nonetheless.
When my first son was a toddler. I was in a store and someone tried to leave with a stolen item. One of the clerks, a male, spoke up and told him he was not going to let him leave until he put the item down. As this escalated, I felt helpless. I wanted to say something and yet here I was with my 10 month old. What do I do? As the thief tried to leave the store, the clerk went to grab him and the man turned around and they started wrestling and fist fighting. I wanted someone to stop it, I wanted someone to help. Another employee came over as a second thief went to jump on the first clerk fighting the first thief. Thank God, the second man had come along or this man would’ve had been beaten to a pulp by these two thieves while everyone stood and watched. I was so upset. I wished I said something or asked someone to help him or had done SOMETHING. The first clerk’s glasses had been punched off his face and were broken and had cut him. That was 33 years ago.
Since then, I speak up. I hate having to confront someone, but I hate letting wrong actions go more. Even if actions are not changed, I feel I’ve done right by speaking up. That unacceptable behavior cannot go unchecked.
I know the good Lord does not want me to curse or belittle, of course, but I can speak the truth. I can call someone out when they’re doing something against someone else, or myself. If they want to yell and jump about, feel free. But I can speak calmly and directly about what’s going on and how it it is unacceptable.
But I also find when other like-minded individuals speak up when I do, or I speak up and support them when they do, sometimes those that act unjust stand down. When we pull together rather than let a person speak up for all but is left flapping in the wind solo, it feels like good has won out. We rightly stood our ground.
If I can’t practice this in the little things, then, when it is of the utmost importance, will I be able to do it?
When President Trump first got in office, then Covid and all the crap withe masks and vaccines, at that time I felt like I had to speak indirectly to other like-minded individuals. That clothes, nods, or brief comments were a segue to directly or indirectly communicate with others - our speech was being monitored, judged, some fear lingering in the air that we better stay within the unwritten boundaries. If you had on certain clothes or bumper stickers on your vehicle, you could be a target. That those who absolutely abhorred Trump for whatever reason made it loud and clear in the workplace so others would feel intimidated to speak up, esp if they were management. It was there. Like an ugly thick blanket. I wrestled with this. I had a Trump sign in my yard for 2020. Someone stole it. I live in a suburb, not a lot of crime at the time, but that right to have a sign in my yard, someone wanted to take from me. I had a second sign I wanted to put up, but inside my front window. My husband said he was concerned about the safety of our home. He thought someone would throw a brick through the front window. I was angry about someone coming onto our property and helping themselves, but then I asked myself if I was possibly involving my family when I shouldn’t be.
Thank God the level of intimidation has gone down, but I DO think that is because others have been brave enough to speak up and that there is the current administration. Without both, I don’t know where we’d be with freedom of speech. Clearly with Charlie’s death we have a lot further to go, but it is all the more reason to not allow others to run roughshod over our rights. Bravo to those who speak up - at school board meetings, at government buildings holding “read with a drag queen,” not buying products that support DEI or stores that allow trans to walk into women’s bathrooms, and those who speak up about men competing in women’s sports. Do you remember when conservative speakers weren’t even allowed on college campuses without some sort of on campus riots going on? Again, these obnoxious acting people, students, we’re free to behave in any manner. To the point or other people couldn’t come and speak.
Charlie Kirk and many others have helped things come a long way. When we speak up for the little wrongs, we can speak up for the big wrongs and push back the evil and discord that keeps trying to push forward.
Stay strong, have courage, and a calm temperament!
Speak loud, speak clear. Let our voices carry on the mission. Humanity must learn to listen to each other even when we disagree. Censorship and murder can never be tolerated.
Your reply is the reply of an intellectual and dogmatic coward, who has just stated a response of generalities. What EXACTLY in my responses are partially true and mostly false ? What is out of context? I stated many of his vile positions , and you did not refute any , except for conceding the Martin Luther King Jr. insult. Do you think that I went through all the trouble of writing these posts if I thought there was no chance of getting through to someone ?You are the closed minded one , not me. Why did you even write the little imprecise slop that you did ?
Let me reiterate the foulest of Kirk's positions : ( from an article in USA Today )
"In 2024, Kirk criticized children's YouTuber Ms. Rachel for arguing that the bible verse "love thy neighbor" in the Leviticus 18 scripture should apply to gay people. On the podcast, Kirk said: "by the way, Ms. Rachel, you might want to crack open that Bible of yours. In a lesser reference, part of the same part of scripture, is in Leviticus 18, is that ‘thou shall lay with another man shall be stoned to death.' Just saying."
This is a direct quote from his podcast about his clear HATE for gays. What is out of context here ? What is partially true and mostly false here , Susan ? Did Kirk disagree with that Bible quote after mentionning it clearly ? NO! (The quote is Leviticus 20:13 ) . So we must assume he agreed.
Tel me what you think about that Bible quote, Susan, supposedly the "Word of God" ? Would you quote that verse in a room full of gays, to supposedly try to save their souls from damnation , in the spirit of Kirk' s "Prove me Wrong " , dialoguing with his enemies? I don't think so , because you are a coward.
Marc, you will not get through to me with this post. I should not have replied to you initially because you used The Nation as your source. The only important word in my reply to you is "context". The sentence fragments are indeed words spoken by Charlie. You state above "So we must assume he agreed." No, we should assume that a single biblical verse does not encompass his views, a point he was attempting to make to Ms. Rachael.
I am not the person to have this discussion with. I do not believe that the Bible is the "word of God". My interpretation of Charlie's belief is "hate the sin, love the sinner". You seem to require everyone to subscribe to your beliefs. Charlie believed homosexuality a sin. That does not mean he wished gays dead. You ask that Charlie and I affirm that homosexuality is just another lifestyle. I don't believe Charlie would affirm that. I would. I respect our differences, which you do not.
If that makes me a coward, so be it. I don't resort to name-calling over a difference of opinion or belief.
Well I tried to get through to some people, but I see now that it was a waste of time, not just with you but with everyone. Like all of the other commentary from each side that I have read has reciprocally convinced no one else on this issue . The divide is too great.
But I have to say that I do at least read opinion from a wide variety of sources on certain other issues, and ,sometimes but rarely, conservative opinion, and left of centre opinion makes sense. I am not dogmatic like you, not wanting to consider what comes from The Nation just because it is the Nation. You live in your own little MAGA bubble, and are too afraid and -or encrusted to consider anything else. To repeat: what an intellectual coward !
As far as the gay issue, you at least admit he said what he said. Everyone else on your side that I exchanged with never even admitted that, or said that if it came from The Nation ( and USA Today which I quoted ) then, it must be false. What kind of slimy thinking is that ! But then you say that it probably does not encompass all his views on the issue. Well what else do you think he thought about it ? There are 3 choices: 1) One either accepts gays, or 2) if not, one rejects and marginalises them from housing and much employment ,from marrying non-criminally ( that is, they do not lose their freedom) , or 3) if it they are deemed criminal for being gay, then what penalties do you propose ? Fines? Imprisonment ? the death penalty ( by firing squad, lethal injection, stoning ) ? What do you think Kirk would have proposed ?
Again, why did he even mention that Biblical verse ? Probably because that is what he thought deep down. But he knew that was not possible in current society, but that was what he was working towards, in my opinion. Of course that will be never be possible in American society.
You know, a few days ago, some filthy Fox commentator, Brian Kilmeade said that maybe homeless people should be killed. Here is what he said on Fox :
( “A lot of them ( the homeless ) don't want to take the programs, a lot of them don't want to get the help that is necessary. You can't give them a choice. Either you take the resources that we're going to give you and — or you decide that you are going to be locked up in jail. That's the way it has to be now,” he (Lawrence Jones ) added.
Kilmeade interjected: “Or involuntary lethal injection… or something. Just kill ‘em.”
“Yeah,” Jones adds. ) FROM FOX NEWS
He then apologised for these comments. I think his apology was hypocritical, but probably to save his job ,he came out with his lie. But did Kirk apologise for his reference to stoning gays? NO! Why? Because he meant it !
So this is the kind of deranged immoral people you admire , Susan.
I ask that you please leave me alone. I have not called you names. I simply disagree with you. I have made no assumptions about you. You have made assumptions about me. Your commentary is unwelcome.
YOU replied to me and started the discussion. And you want the last word ? Typical coward. OK, you can have the last word if you want, and I promise not to reply . I am wondering why I even took you on, you are so ludicrous.
I just saw some addition to your post. Either I missed it or you happened to edit it while I was composing my reply.
You think you know what Charlie thought about homosexuality. Where is your proof ? What you wrote is more a product of what you wish Charlie to have really beleived, rather than what I accuse him of, for which I gave proof. You are not only a coward, you are an intellectual mediocrity. So I insulted you a bit. So what ! Sue me. Trump insults people all the time, but for the wrong reasons. I do it for the right reasons. For left-wing reasons. For socialist reasons. For moderately Radical Left Anarchist reasons. In other words for good reasons.
Thank you for this article. Also thank you for your efforts to stop the push to give immunity to the chemical companies. That would be a disaster. I would love to see MAHA provide more updates on that topic. I hope you can get Secretary Rollins on board.
Thanks John. Btw, 9/11 was an inside job.
Yup.....
Yes, I, too, am moved to stand up and stand out. Every little bit matters.
At the root of liberalism is jealousy and deep feelings of inadequacy.
Of course, their predicament is not helped by awful white liberals that manipulate their self loathing.
Liberalism has never lifted up anyone.
Each and every day liberal men and liberal women become less.
Each living in a hell of their own making.
The proof is in the violence.
They have extinguished their political capital.
Thank you,John.
And Amen!
I will wear my FREEDOM shirt in honor of Charlie until it falls off me
I disagree with everything Charlie Kirk stood for, but always defended his right to say it. Political violence, be it in the homes of Minnesota legislators or at an Utah university, has not place in America. The rhetoric on both sides, is out of hand.
I would publicly suggest your comment vile and quite frankly stupid.
Worse than stupid. Both sides error of equivalency jargon.
This is a public forum. If you wanted to say something significant mention 2 important issues you disagree with and why? But you will not take the offer, as it is far easier to proclaim "everything" Prove me wrong.
You could not be more wrong, this is hardly the rhetoric out of hand you crow about...
Everything?! I have a hard time believing that! He was for free speech wasn’t he? He was for having discussions. You disagree w/that?! You think the left isn’t 100% worse w/their rhetoric?! I don’t recall anyone on the right calling people nazis!
Disagree with placing blame at Left winger hatred when nothing is known yet at shooter. Sniper shot then vanished. I have seen several clips of Kirk questioning Israel’s actions. I’m a peace liking Leftie DemExit voted Trump 2024 to get rfk and tulsi in positions because Biden/Trump each do damage but needed free thinkers. Tulsi seems ignored. Song: Home on the tundra, where musk oxen roam so Don’t box me in.
Waiting for the fake news echo chamber to program you on what to believe is positively sophomoric. Don't box yourself in.
Thank you John. I, too, feel a deep sense of loss for yet another brother in Christ who was slain simply because he spoke as a free man, with civility and respect. Charlie was killed for speaking as our Lord spoke -- without the guile of political correctness, and with the authority of truth in his words. And from somewhere deep within I am crying "How long, O Lord?"
Thank you John Klar for this well thought out article. The nation has lost a bright star in Charlie's death as I feel strongly that he would have gone on to achieve great strides in bringing the country forward, toward unity. He would have made an outstanding governor or congressman, or perhaps even further up the ladder. I grieve for his wife and children as they have been robbed of a partner and father so unfairly. I pray that enough people in our nation see that this path of violence leads to a dead-end and come together to work on our nation's problems in unity, not division.
thank you John for your beautiful story about Charlie. I've been on Team Kennedy since Bobby began his campaign, now on Maha Action. Not being of college age nor having any children or grandchildren, i didn't follow Charlie much but i knew what he stood for and i haven't stopped crying since Wednesday, both for Charlie and his family and for what has become of our country
I am more than deeply disturbed by this event and there are no words. This is one of those times for sure. My heart felt love, prayers and compassion extend to Charlies family and kin. When our first Constitutional Amendment ends with an assassination like this....there are no words.
Yes, let’s be bold, and especially do it with other like-minded individuals around us whenever we can.
Loud confrontation is a common way they people operate - draw attention by being loud and making false statements to hopefully embarrass you and make you go away. They certainly aren’t embarrassed by their behavior. Stores won’t interfere anymore, rather than throw the obnoxious acting person out, they let all their other customers be disturbed instead, so they have to deal with these type of people, or risk a lawsuit.
I don’t like confrontations, but I am to the point when I see unjust behavior I must speak out. My husband tells me I need to be careful, that someone may physically hurt me for speaking out. If not now, then when?
During the times I see something gathering steam I think of “The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing,.” Or the poem, “First They Came” by Martin Niemoller, or MLK, Jr.’s “Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere” (“Letter from Birmingham Jail”). If they do it to someone else, they can most certainly do it to you.
When I speak up it might not be for grave violations, but small infractions nonetheless.
When my first son was a toddler. I was in a store and someone tried to leave with a stolen item. One of the clerks, a male, spoke up and told him he was not going to let him leave until he put the item down. As this escalated, I felt helpless. I wanted to say something and yet here I was with my 10 month old. What do I do? As the thief tried to leave the store, the clerk went to grab him and the man turned around and they started wrestling and fist fighting. I wanted someone to stop it, I wanted someone to help. Another employee came over as a second thief went to jump on the first clerk fighting the first thief. Thank God, the second man had come along or this man would’ve had been beaten to a pulp by these two thieves while everyone stood and watched. I was so upset. I wished I said something or asked someone to help him or had done SOMETHING. The first clerk’s glasses had been punched off his face and were broken and had cut him. That was 33 years ago.
Since then, I speak up. I hate having to confront someone, but I hate letting wrong actions go more. Even if actions are not changed, I feel I’ve done right by speaking up. That unacceptable behavior cannot go unchecked.
I know the good Lord does not want me to curse or belittle, of course, but I can speak the truth. I can call someone out when they’re doing something against someone else, or myself. If they want to yell and jump about, feel free. But I can speak calmly and directly about what’s going on and how it it is unacceptable.
But I also find when other like-minded individuals speak up when I do, or I speak up and support them when they do, sometimes those that act unjust stand down. When we pull together rather than let a person speak up for all but is left flapping in the wind solo, it feels like good has won out. We rightly stood our ground.
If I can’t practice this in the little things, then, when it is of the utmost importance, will I be able to do it?
When President Trump first got in office, then Covid and all the crap withe masks and vaccines, at that time I felt like I had to speak indirectly to other like-minded individuals. That clothes, nods, or brief comments were a segue to directly or indirectly communicate with others - our speech was being monitored, judged, some fear lingering in the air that we better stay within the unwritten boundaries. If you had on certain clothes or bumper stickers on your vehicle, you could be a target. That those who absolutely abhorred Trump for whatever reason made it loud and clear in the workplace so others would feel intimidated to speak up, esp if they were management. It was there. Like an ugly thick blanket. I wrestled with this. I had a Trump sign in my yard for 2020. Someone stole it. I live in a suburb, not a lot of crime at the time, but that right to have a sign in my yard, someone wanted to take from me. I had a second sign I wanted to put up, but inside my front window. My husband said he was concerned about the safety of our home. He thought someone would throw a brick through the front window. I was angry about someone coming onto our property and helping themselves, but then I asked myself if I was possibly involving my family when I shouldn’t be.
Thank God the level of intimidation has gone down, but I DO think that is because others have been brave enough to speak up and that there is the current administration. Without both, I don’t know where we’d be with freedom of speech. Clearly with Charlie’s death we have a lot further to go, but it is all the more reason to not allow others to run roughshod over our rights. Bravo to those who speak up - at school board meetings, at government buildings holding “read with a drag queen,” not buying products that support DEI or stores that allow trans to walk into women’s bathrooms, and those who speak up about men competing in women’s sports. Do you remember when conservative speakers weren’t even allowed on college campuses without some sort of on campus riots going on? Again, these obnoxious acting people, students, we’re free to behave in any manner. To the point or other people couldn’t come and speak.
Charlie Kirk and many others have helped things come a long way. When we speak up for the little wrongs, we can speak up for the big wrongs and push back the evil and discord that keeps trying to push forward.
Stay strong, have courage, and a calm temperament!
Speak loud, speak clear. Let our voices carry on the mission. Humanity must learn to listen to each other even when we disagree. Censorship and murder can never be tolerated.
Your reply is the reply of an intellectual and dogmatic coward, who has just stated a response of generalities. What EXACTLY in my responses are partially true and mostly false ? What is out of context? I stated many of his vile positions , and you did not refute any , except for conceding the Martin Luther King Jr. insult. Do you think that I went through all the trouble of writing these posts if I thought there was no chance of getting through to someone ?You are the closed minded one , not me. Why did you even write the little imprecise slop that you did ?
Let me reiterate the foulest of Kirk's positions : ( from an article in USA Today )
"In 2024, Kirk criticized children's YouTuber Ms. Rachel for arguing that the bible verse "love thy neighbor" in the Leviticus 18 scripture should apply to gay people. On the podcast, Kirk said: "by the way, Ms. Rachel, you might want to crack open that Bible of yours. In a lesser reference, part of the same part of scripture, is in Leviticus 18, is that ‘thou shall lay with another man shall be stoned to death.' Just saying."
This is a direct quote from his podcast about his clear HATE for gays. What is out of context here ? What is partially true and mostly false here , Susan ? Did Kirk disagree with that Bible quote after mentionning it clearly ? NO! (The quote is Leviticus 20:13 ) . So we must assume he agreed.
Tel me what you think about that Bible quote, Susan, supposedly the "Word of God" ? Would you quote that verse in a room full of gays, to supposedly try to save their souls from damnation , in the spirit of Kirk' s "Prove me Wrong " , dialoguing with his enemies? I don't think so , because you are a coward.
Marc, you will not get through to me with this post. I should not have replied to you initially because you used The Nation as your source. The only important word in my reply to you is "context". The sentence fragments are indeed words spoken by Charlie. You state above "So we must assume he agreed." No, we should assume that a single biblical verse does not encompass his views, a point he was attempting to make to Ms. Rachael.
I am not the person to have this discussion with. I do not believe that the Bible is the "word of God". My interpretation of Charlie's belief is "hate the sin, love the sinner". You seem to require everyone to subscribe to your beliefs. Charlie believed homosexuality a sin. That does not mean he wished gays dead. You ask that Charlie and I affirm that homosexuality is just another lifestyle. I don't believe Charlie would affirm that. I would. I respect our differences, which you do not.
If that makes me a coward, so be it. I don't resort to name-calling over a difference of opinion or belief.
Well I tried to get through to some people, but I see now that it was a waste of time, not just with you but with everyone. Like all of the other commentary from each side that I have read has reciprocally convinced no one else on this issue . The divide is too great.
But I have to say that I do at least read opinion from a wide variety of sources on certain other issues, and ,sometimes but rarely, conservative opinion, and left of centre opinion makes sense. I am not dogmatic like you, not wanting to consider what comes from The Nation just because it is the Nation. You live in your own little MAGA bubble, and are too afraid and -or encrusted to consider anything else. To repeat: what an intellectual coward !
As far as the gay issue, you at least admit he said what he said. Everyone else on your side that I exchanged with never even admitted that, or said that if it came from The Nation ( and USA Today which I quoted ) then, it must be false. What kind of slimy thinking is that ! But then you say that it probably does not encompass all his views on the issue. Well what else do you think he thought about it ? There are 3 choices: 1) One either accepts gays, or 2) if not, one rejects and marginalises them from housing and much employment ,from marrying non-criminally ( that is, they do not lose their freedom) , or 3) if it they are deemed criminal for being gay, then what penalties do you propose ? Fines? Imprisonment ? the death penalty ( by firing squad, lethal injection, stoning ) ? What do you think Kirk would have proposed ?
Again, why did he even mention that Biblical verse ? Probably because that is what he thought deep down. But he knew that was not possible in current society, but that was what he was working towards, in my opinion. Of course that will be never be possible in American society.
You know, a few days ago, some filthy Fox commentator, Brian Kilmeade said that maybe homeless people should be killed. Here is what he said on Fox :
( “A lot of them ( the homeless ) don't want to take the programs, a lot of them don't want to get the help that is necessary. You can't give them a choice. Either you take the resources that we're going to give you and — or you decide that you are going to be locked up in jail. That's the way it has to be now,” he (Lawrence Jones ) added.
Kilmeade interjected: “Or involuntary lethal injection… or something. Just kill ‘em.”
“Yeah,” Jones adds. ) FROM FOX NEWS
He then apologised for these comments. I think his apology was hypocritical, but probably to save his job ,he came out with his lie. But did Kirk apologise for his reference to stoning gays? NO! Why? Because he meant it !
So this is the kind of deranged immoral people you admire , Susan.
I ask that you please leave me alone. I have not called you names. I simply disagree with you. I have made no assumptions about you. You have made assumptions about me. Your commentary is unwelcome.
YOU replied to me and started the discussion. And you want the last word ? Typical coward. OK, you can have the last word if you want, and I promise not to reply . I am wondering why I even took you on, you are so ludicrous.
I just saw some addition to your post. Either I missed it or you happened to edit it while I was composing my reply.
You think you know what Charlie thought about homosexuality. Where is your proof ? What you wrote is more a product of what you wish Charlie to have really beleived, rather than what I accuse him of, for which I gave proof. You are not only a coward, you are an intellectual mediocrity. So I insulted you a bit. So what ! Sue me. Trump insults people all the time, but for the wrong reasons. I do it for the right reasons. For left-wing reasons. For socialist reasons. For moderately Radical Left Anarchist reasons. In other words for good reasons.
Bless you John, for these words about and for Charlie, and your efforts to stop immunity for chemical companies.