Special place in hell...

For those people who openly lie to spread a false narrative.

Let me start off by stating that I simply do not agree with everything Charlie Kirk stood for or argued. For instance, I think his patriarchal views were archaic, but I also accept that these views are prevalent in most religious communities. There are billions who believe in a patriarchy, including Muslims who believe women should cover their faces, as well as Pentecostal Christians who believe women should not wear pants or cut their hair (just to name a couple). The idea of putting your husband and children first is less offensive in comparison and to some degree I understand the concept.

In fact, if he didn't go so far as to use terms like submit to your husband, I may even agree with him on that principle as well. As a husband and father, if I were to die tomorrow, I would hope I was not remembered for having a successful career. I would hope I would be remembered for being a good husband, a good father, and a good friend. I would rather be remembered for the time and effort over the years I have put into the various Coldheartedtruth websites, than be remembered for being a good software engineer. I don't live to work, I work to live, something I think Kirk understood and a concept he tried desperately to bring awareness to. But that is an outdated concept to many liberals, especially liberal feminists.

Overall, Kirk was a decent honest man who was willing to go into hostile territory and politely debate all comers. He had a positive message that he truly believed was in the best interest of society. He was hated not because of what he believed, but largely because of how people spun his beliefs, twisted his beliefs, or downright lied about his beliefs. I provided an example the other day where people suggested he was racist because he questioned a DEI policy by an airline. They flat out lied and took everything out of context to make a point that didn't exist. But that is just the tip of the iceberg.

Meanwhile the NY Times ran a hit piece the other day where they literally attributed an antisemite quote to him, when in fact he was just reading a social media post, and then disagreed with it. Those were not his words, but they pretended they were. Now it would be inconceivable to me that the NY Times did not know better. They absolutely knew what they were doing and did it simply to smear him. They knew the truth but were more determined to push a false narrative to their readers than to just provide objective facts and the full truth. The saddest part about that is that there was no apology. Just a correction that they knew would get 5% of the attention than the lie did.

Now this is not unusual. In fact, people who attend journalism school in 2025 are taught that objective truth is not just meaningless but runs counter to true journalism. True journalism, they argue, is advocacy journalism. If you are not advocating for something, and doing everything in your power to advocate, then why bother. If you have to spin, deceive, or downright lie to make your point, then that is still a better option that just telling the truth. Anybody can just report. Nothing good comes from that. Unfortunately, this sort of media thinking is what led to 90% of the hatred of Kirk as well as the hatred to many other conservatives who are in similar positions of influence. Liberals, especially those in the media, have been slowly but surely losing the narrative and losing the culture war. It has become clear that they are willing to do whatever it takes to try to reverse this, even if it means demonizing good people in the process.

They did this to Charlie Kirk. Now he is dead because of it. The country is worse off for too many reasons to provide here.