Salmo claims that Kirk called Martin Luther King Jr. a "bad person," a man awful and flawed. Salmo is a boomer who probably didn't read MLK's FBI file but Kirk was citing King's infidelity and communist ties that Kirk unearthed in his research. Yet Kirk acknowledged King's one great speech with lines on character over color, even if he doubted King's belief in it. This was no blind malice, but a call to question the deification that, in Kirk's view, masked deeper societal ills like rising poverty and family breakdown. Was this hate, or honest scrutiny of history's icons? Yet Salmo says Kirk promoted hate; and Salmo is an honorable man.

Kirk claimed the Civil Rights Act was a bad idea, a "huge mistake" in Kirk's words, not for its intent to end discrimination, but for birthing a sprawling bureaucracy that Kirk argued twisted into DEI mandates, enforcing anti-white policies and chilling free speech, like the Title IX expulsions he decried. Kirk sought a colorblind meritocracy, evolving from earlier praise to warn of unintended chains on liberty. Was this racism, or a plea to reclaim equality without overreach? Yet Salmo says Kirk spread divisiveness and racism; and Salmo is an honorable man.

Salmo notes the irony of Kirk's shooting, assassinated on September 10, 2025, at Utah Valley University by a 22-year-old suspect now facing capital murder, gunned down while speaking freely, his life ended in a hail of political violence that investigators have yet to tie to any group. Kirk did say gun deaths are an "unfortunate cost" worth bearing for the Second Amendment's protection of God-given rights, but he condemned such acts, mourning school shootings and calling for fortified security, not surrender. This was no acceptance of assassination, but a defense of freedom against tyranny; the true irony is that Kirk's words on risks for rights were twisted, while he himself fell to the very hate he opposed. Yet Salmo sees only irony in his demise; and Salmo is an honorable man.

Salmo recalls Kirk scorning empathy as a "made-up, new-age term" that does damage but Salmo does not recall that Kirk preferred sympathy instead. Kirk criticizing its misuse in politics, where it might cloud judgment, as in empathetic rulings over just ones. Yet Kirk showed compassion in action, decrying crime's victims, aiding the vulnerable through his activism, and building bridges where he could. Salmo withholds empathy for Kirk's family, confident Kirk wouldn't want it, yet in doing so, echoes a selective hardness that Kirk warned against. Was Kirk's view hate, or a call for clarity amid emotional fog? But Salmo denies sympathy; and Salmo is an honorable man.

You all did see that Kirk fought for conservative truths, exposing what he saw as leftist excesses, from unchecked crime to cultural erosion; not to divide, but to unite under merit and faith. He built Turning Point USA to empower youth, not sow discord; his "host of other ideas" challenged the status quo, yes, but with facts and fervor, not racism. While critics labeled him hateful, yet he pressed on, undeterred. Which of us here would be a spreader of hate? Salmo says he was no saint, no good guy. Yet saints are rare, and good men still fall to bullets from the shadows.

Has Salmo's charge of hate blinded you to Kirk's zeal for America? The man who rallied against division was felled by it, shot for speaking under a banner saying "prove me wrong", his legacy twisted by those who claim virtue. Kirk sought a stronger nation. Hate? No, a fierce love for freedom. You, judge now: Was Kirk the hater, or the hated? Mourn him, for he deserved better than irony's bullet.