A Showdown
- Karen Levi
- Sep 13
- 4 min read
Updated: Sep 14
Words matter. To me, this remains a major sticking point on all sides of our political divide. I turned the car radio onto C-span today, wondering what was happening in Congress. Instead I got the Charlie Kirk Show, with a new announcer. I thought C-span was neutral? The speaker bemoaned political violence and the inability to speak one's mind (when referring to the assassination of Kirk on Wednesday). That in itself is a reasonable statement. The man idolized Kirk and characterized him as a martyr for free speech. This was the "line in the sand for me." From what I have read and watched, Charlie Kirk was not merely a proponent of the right to speak freely. He expressed bigoted views on current issues.
Incendiary words provoke anger, which to an unbalanced person with access to guns, can lead to unforgivable action. That is exactly what transpired on Wednesday in Utah and in July to two liberal Minnesota state politicians (and a spouse and dog). In April 2025, the governor of Pennsylvania survived a fire bombing of his house. In July 2024, Trump himself survived an assassination attempt. Access to guns makes murder feasible which was an issue Kirk addressed. Ironically, he became a victim of his own cavalier statement. Once, he said that 2nd amendment gun rights are so important that a few lives lost for the cause were justified. The trouble begins with words which lead to actions. Kirk was closely associated with Trump. Kirk provocated with his words; Trump and his accolytes have acted and transformed our country into an autocracy.
Turning Point USA (TPUSA) was founded by Charlie Kirk at the age of 18 and Bill Montgomery, a Tea Party member and marketing entrepeneur. Kirk was encouraged by Mr. Montgomery, an adult, who should have known better. TPUSA is the mechansim by which Kirk spread the MAGA doctrines which helped Trump win a second term.
Ostensibly, the organization advocates for conservativism on high school and college campuses. Statements on the website which summarize the purpose of TPUSA are benign. Various categories on the Home page showed me the actual mission of Kirk's organization. First and foremost, the Christian church is one of the foundations of the advocacy group. This in itself omits a segment of the population if prospective members happen to be atheists or followers of other religions. Faith based advocacy groups on college campuses are not new. However, the website for TPUSA goes one step further, and states that education should reflect Christian teaching. On Islam, Mr. Kirk stated during a presentation that "Islam is the sword the Left is using to slit the throat of America." On religion, in general, he has said "There is no separation of church and state," the latter being a hallmark of our democracy.
The organization caught the attention of the Anti Defamation League (ADL) and the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). Support for the replacement theory was one cause for concern. Replacement theory suggests that Jews and others aim to destroy the United States by having racial minorities replace white people (primarily through immigration). Both ADL and the SPLS also took issue with other racist comments and affiliations with white supremacist groups. Kirk himself called the COVID-19 vaccination programs, "Apartheid Open Air Hostage Situation(s)."
To be honest, I do not know how the gap between MAGA conservatives and moderate to liberal Americans will be closed. The views are so disparate. For years, I have believed certain truths about the U.S.A., for example separation of church and state.
Being a Jew has not been easy. Living in a Christian oriented country has its challenges if one is not Christian. Over my lifetime, the general attitude has changed. Now, Americans seem to acknowledge different faiths, even if just lip service. In the last 20 years that progress has gradually reversed. We have elected officials who promote Christian prayer in the schools, tax payer support for religious schools, and other policies that counter our cherished position of the separation of church and state. This is but one example of how radical the Right has become.
MAGA followers would counter that my ideas about LGBTQ, racism, voter rights, immigration, and fiscal responsibility are radical. I would say my positions are extensions of what the Constitution--based on principles of liberal and enlightenment thought--guarantees . The more the Right makes a stand, the more I get angry, and vice versa.
The untenable situation of two opposing sides reminds me of the Westerns of my childhood. Two big guys on a dusty street walking towards each other, hands on their pistols. There is no referee or sheriff around. How could there be a sheriff in the middle when one guy or another might shoot? Is this our legacy? Two sides--one wins the other loses, back and forth, with no end. There is no resolution of the disagreement. Coming back to 2025, how can I say to a Charlie Kirk, oh sure go ahead and spew sexism or antisemitism when these go against my morals? The same is true for the MAGA followers. How do they give up what they believe is sacred? What is a middle ground, a compromise? How do we take the good points from both sides, omit the dangerous, and come to an agreement on truth?
©Karen Levi 2025
Comments