Five years ago, misleading narratives regarding policing and racism were waiting at every turn. And even then — in the midst of COVID-19 lockdowns and craziness — Charlie Kirk was out fighting to make the truth known.
“Three hundred eighty-five million police interactions happen every single year in America; 385 million. And 15 unarmed black men die. Fifty-two police officers were killed last year in 2019. Twice as many black police officers have died in the last two weeks than unarmed black men,” Kirk told BlazeTV host Allie Beth Stuckey on “Relatable.”
Kirk then named two police officers, David Dorn and David Patrick Underwood — two men, one a police officer and one a federal security officer.
“Do you think Black Lives Matter activists know those two names? Do you think they know the names of the 179 individuals that have been shot due to black-on-black crime in Chicago, Atlanta, and Philadelphia?” Kirk asked.
“So I think if we’re serious about having this conversation about unjust death in America, we can’t allow an entire emotive quasi pathological conversation to hijack the entire narrative in our country,” he continues. “And I think it’s very dangerous, and also, it leads us to a place that does not create good public policy and divides the country unnecessarily.”
However, when people bring up statistics to prove their point, it’s often met with accusations and personal attacks from the left.
“Something I’ve been really sad about is seeing women, and especially Christian women, say that it is callous to talk about those facts and to talk about the statistics or to bring up the side of the police officers at all, the good police officers, because it is not showing proper compassion or it’s not showing enough sadness surrounding the tragedy,” Stuckey said.
“But what I want people to understand is that you don’t bring up statistics to say, ‘Oh, no bad people exist or no bad cops exist or we can’t talk about racism ever.’ It’s because exactly what you said. If we allow narratives to go unchecked without talking about statistics or facts, that’s how people, especially on the left, build public policy,” she continues.
When the left can run with these false narratives, Kirk explains that it becomes the “Ferguson effect.”
This was when the media lied and said, “Michael Brown put his hands up and said, ‘Hands up, don’t shoot.’ Never happened. Did not happen. And it’s been proven through witness testimony and also through an autopsy,” Kirk explains.
“But still, that lie became a narrative within the media, and the Ferguson effect in Ferguson, Missouri, ensued, which essentially is the police retreated,” he continues.
“People said, ‘We don’t want the police.’ Fine. Crime went up, rapes went up, violent arrest went up, violent crime, I should say, went up,” he says, adding, “Every sort of category of crime went up imaginable.”
To enjoy more of Allie’s upbeat and in-depth coverage of culture, news, and theology from a Christian, conservative perspective, subscribe to BlazeTV — the largest multi-platform network of voices who love America, defend the Constitution, and live the American dream.
New York Mets announcer Gary Cohen said he thought it was strange for Chicago Cubs third baseman Matt Shaw to miss a game to go to Charlie Kirk's memorial.
After Kirk was murdered on Sept. 10, Shaw missed a Sept. 21 game against the Cincinnati Reds to attend Kirk's memorial service in Glendale, Arizona.
'Gary Cohen wants us to believe he's making sound arguments ...'
On Tuesday, Shaw told reporters that he was invited to the event by Kirk's widow, Erika Kirk, and subsequently discussed the idea of attending with about a dozen teammates. He also said he went through the proper team channels including the legal team, front office, and management, who all approved.
Shaw also said he received support from his teammates for the decision. However, during Tuesday's game between the Cubs and the Mets, announcer Cohen criticized Shaw's decision.
"Shaw had Cubs world in a tizzy this weekend when he was not here for the Cubs' game with the Reds. A game they lost 1-0 and in which his lack of presence was felt," Cohen declared. "It was later revealed that he had been given permission to attend Charlie Kirk's funeral."
Cohen continued by saying that while did not want to "talk about any of the politics" surrounding the ordeal, he stated, "the thought of leaving your team in the middle of a race for any reason other than a family emergency really strikes me as weird."
As Cohen's commentary circulated online, fans quickly pointed out that the announcer might be guilty of taking a hypocritical stance on the issue.
RELATED: Chicago Cubs' Matt Shaw gives powerful message after missing game to attend Charlie Kirk memorial
In April, Cohen missed a Mets game against the St. Louis Cardinals when his dog sadly passed away, resulting in reporter Steve Gelbs stepping in to call the game, according to Awful Announcing.
"I want to thank you guys and Steve for doing such a great job covering for me on Friday night," Cohen told his peers at the time.
Other fans cited that Cohen had no qualms when Mets players suspended play during a game in 2020, the day before Jackie Robinson Day, to protest with "Black Lives Matter" T-shirts, even draping one of the clothing items over home plate.
"Gary Cohen wants us to believe he's making sound arguments, when in actuality he just wants us to think it's awful to attend funerals for our conservative neighbors," baseball analyst Gary Sheffield Jr. told Blaze News. "For liberals the world should stop."
Sheffield added, "Reality is that sports are secondary to anyone's life, regardless of how they vote."
RELATED: Dave Portnoy offers the most sensible take on Jimmy Kimmel's suspension — but it will anger liberals
Cohen was joined by analyst and former MLB player Keith Hernandez in his criticism of Shaw on Tuesday. Hernandez said he felt the Cubs player missing the game was "unusual."
"I think it's unprecedented, at least from my experience as a player," Hernandez added.
Like Blaze News? Bypass the censors, sign up for our newsletters, and get stories like this direct to your inbox. Sign up here!
The average American parent has no idea who Ta-Nehisi Coates is — and that would normally be a blessing. His writings on race offer nothing new or edifying. He is a darling of the intellectual left who advances its racialist philosophy through anecdote and grievance.
But his recent denunciation of Charlie Kirk in Vanity Fair should prompt parents to take notice. If your kids plan to attend a university — especially a public one — they will be taught Coates’ worldview: that America is a systemically racist nation steeped in “heteronormativity” and “exclusion.”
Coates substitutes personal narrative for reasoned debate, even as he cashes checks and accepts awards from the very nation he condemns.
Much of my career has been spent exposing the radical left’s capture of the humanities. The method is always the same: sweeping declarations, superficial evidence, and endless personal stories of mistreatment that become excuses for remaking the world. Coates’ work fits the pattern perfectly. It is not inspirational. It is self-pity repackaged as wisdom.
In his postmortem of Kirk, Coates warns that memorializing him might overlook his faults. At first, that sounds like a truism — we all fall short. But funerals are not for airing grievances. They are for remembering what we loved in the departed. The “bad things” fade into insignificance, and the dead cannot defend themselves against unfair caricature.
Yet caricature is exactly what Coates serves up. He repeats leftist talking points with such confidence that casual readers may mistake them for facts. They are not. They are distortions that reveal the low academic rigor of today’s radical left. For Coates, everything revolves around feelings of “hate,” never truth or argument.
This has always been Coates’ style. He substitutes personal narrative for reasoned debate, even as he cashes checks and accepts awards from the very nation he condemns. The hypocrisy is obvious. Consider Ibram X. Kendi, another star in Coates’ circle, exposed for wasting millions meant to “end racism” while achieving nothing of the kind. The pattern is grievance rewarded, not results delivered.
What Coates really offers is a window into a mind shaped by anger, envy, and resentment. A man showered with praise and wealth should rejoice in the opportunities America provided and use his platform to inspire others. Instead, he insists that structural racism explains every hardship. He never considers alternative interpretations or the role of moral choices in shaping outcomes.
Staying in school, avoiding drugs, marrying before having children — these choices matter. The statistics are clear. None of them hinge on “structural racism.”
Kirk understood this. When confronted by students claiming that poverty forces crime, he rejected the premise. That view dehumanizes the poor, excuses immorality, and reduces human life to material conditions. Kirk countered with a vision rooted in responsibility, virtue, and perseverance.
Coates, by contrast, repeats the falsehood that Kirk hated immigrants and LGBTQ people. He didn’t. He hated the sins that enslave people. He loved them as fellow humans and wanted them freed through Christ. He urged compliance with immigration laws not out of hate but out of respect for the rule of law — the same standard applied to Americans abroad. These facts are easily verifiable if one is willing to look.
The hypocrisy goes deeper. When Jimmy Kimmel was recently suspended, comedian Jim Gaffigan urged people to read his words directly rather than rely on secondhand distortions. Good advice. Why won’t the left follow it when it comes to Charlie Kirk? President Barack Obama claimed he never censored opponents, but his record shows otherwise. For decades, the left has policed speech, thought, and hiring.
Coates claims to fear that American history is being covered up. What he really fears is that his interpretation of history has been challenged and found wanting.
He dwells on slavery but ignores the hundreds of thousands of young men who died to end it and the countless Christians who fought for abolition. He invokes Jim Crow and redlining but skips over the Democratic Party’s role in enforcing them. He wields “racism” as a bludgeon against dissent. But that weapon has lost its power.
RELATED: Joy Reid said the quiet part out loud — and it’s ugly
American history is human history — the story of sinners, yes, but also of a nation shaped by Christians who proclaimed that true freedom comes only through Christ. Charlie Kirk preached that message. He affirmed the dignity of his opponents by debating them. He loved his country, he upheld its laws, he wanted its people to flourish — but above all, he loved Christ and urged students to turn to Him as Savior.
That is what we should remember. And that is what Coates cannot understand.
It was just four years ago that Bravo’s Real Housewives of Potomac cast member Wendy Osefo was running around blabbing to whoever would listen about how “unfair” it was that “black parents have to break their children’s innocence.” By which she meant exposing them to the myth that black men are gleefully gunned down by […]
If Antifa is to be defeated, its godless utilitarianism and Marxist identity-obsession that excuses in advance any and every action taken by the 'oppressed' against the 'oppressor' must be entirely rejected.
The rot in the so-called data pushed by leftist scholars studying political violence gets worse the deeper you dig.
If violence can be cloaked in the language of 'justice,' then terrorism is transformed into activism.
If Americans want to live in a country where young men aren't assassinated for articulating truth, the political ideology that led to Charlie Kirk's murder must be utterly and completely defeated.
www.theblaze.com