I am a husband and a father. I am a veteran and a Trump supporter. I love this country and hang the American flag proudly outside my home. I am absolutely devastated by the murder of Charlie Kirk.
Now, I understand that I do not represent the majority of people in our town. But if you are still reading, thank you. I believe we are about to find common ground.
This letter is primarily in response to Jimmy Kimmel being taken off the air. To be clear, I think what he said about the assassination was entirely inappropriate, and he was obviously just using the platform to voice his personal opinions.
So, should he have been suspended over it? Free speech, right? I believe that decision resides with those who employ him. If what he said does not align with the values of the company he works for, then yes, they have every right to terminate him. The company I work for has a code of conduct that we must abide by, and if we violate that code, we can be terminated. What self-respecting business wouldn’t have a policy like that?
A private company absolutely has jurisdiction over its employees. However, that’s where it should end. There are reports that Brendan Carr’s FCC pressured Disney into removing Jimmy Kimmel. If those reports turn out to be true, Carr is in direct violation of the conservative values for which I stand.
Many of those on the left have been celebrating the death of Charlie Kirk. I personally believe it is disgusting, but they absolutely have the right to do so. The companies they work for absolutely have the right to fire them for doing it.
However, and most importantly, Pam Bondi and the DOJ do not have the right to interfere.
If Office Depot doesn’t want to print a picture of Charlie Kirk for a mural, that’s their prerogative. If you don’t like it, then don’t spend money at Office Depot. If a Christian baker doesn’t want to bake a cake for a gay wedding, that’s their prerogative. If you don’t like it, then don’t spend money at that baker. Bud Light is the premier example of how our free society will naturally work this out without the federal government getting involved. Pam Bondi and Brendan Carr need to stay out of it.
The problem is that we have started to define certain types of speech as “hate speech.” The government should get involved when hate speech is used, right? No. Absolutely not.
Hate speech is being confused with hateful speech, which is simply just a type of speech with which you may disagree. I’m not talking about threats or inciting violence — that’s different. I’m talking about speech that you just don’t like.
The negative things being said about Charlie Kirk since his murder are definitely hateful, but it is not “hate speech.” Defining speech as hate speech is too subjective, and most often, the consequences for using this type of speech will be determined by those in charge.
The right dealt with this for many years under the Biden administration and the cancel culture, and today the left understands the feeling now that conservatives are in charge. It needs to end.
Traditional conservatives stand for individual liberties and minimal government intervention. The government cannot infringe on the rights of its citizens because those in charge don’t like what people are saying. This is solidified in the Constitution.
As the dust settles from last week, Pam Bondi, Brendan Carr and the rest of the administration need to cut it out. For those of you who call yourselves fellow conservatives, please listen because of this I am certain: One of the greatest advocates of free speech in a generation would unequivocally object to the government silencing our opponents in his memory.
Brian George
Park City