
After Charlie Kirk shooting, pleas for peace in CT, amid some fears
The confluence of Charlie Kirk’s assassination and a 9-11 anniversary inspired unexpected moments of introspection Thursday about the coarseness of contemporary political discourse and the contrast with how Americans found comfort and common cause in tragedy 24 years ago.
“It’s clear to me this morning how much we have lost and how far we have fallen, and how hard it’s going to be to find our way back to each other,” said Attorney General William Tong, who lost a friend and classmate when the twin towers fell in lower Manhattan.
The message was not exactly on-brand for Tong, a Democrat who has not shied from opportunities for confrontation with President Donald Trump. He is a political pugilist, a lawyer more than willing to sue. Over everything from immigration to clean energy, Tong vows to make a fight.
“We have to find a way to have policy and political fights,” Tong said, going off topic at a press conference about his demand for documents from the WNBA related to the possible sale and relocation of the Connecticut Sun. “I use that word a lot, I know I do — fight.”
The rhetoric of politics is one of conflict and warfare, if more metaphorical than literal. But a sniper’s killing of Kirk, a charismatic 31-year-old evangelist of conservatism, as he spoke to a college audience of 3,000 in Utah is the latest in a series of attacks on political figures in the U.S.
Trump was the target of two assassination attempts. The residence of Pennsylvania Gov. Josh Shapiro was firebombed. Nancy Pelosi’s husband was attacked in their home. A state legislative leader in Minnesota and her husband were killed, and another lawmaker and his wife were shot and wounded the same night.
Would Kirk’s death beget more violence?
“We’re sick, we’re sad, we’re angry, and we’re resolute, and we’re going to avenge Charlie’s death in the way Charlie would want it to be avenged,” conservative commentator Jesse Watters said on Fox. He did not explain how Kirk, a religious father of two, would want to be avenged.
On social media and cable, the recriminations over Kirk came fast and from all directions: The rhetoric of the left was at fault, or Kirk deserved his fate after mocking the attack on Pelosi’s husband and arguing that some shooting deaths must to be accepted rather than erode the right to bear arms. There were bipartisan efforts to tamp down such exchanges, nationally and in Connecticut.
“Nine-eleven was 24 years ago, and Charlie Kirk was assassinated less than 24 hours ago. I just want each and every one of us to look out for each other, be particularly kind,” Gov. Ned Lamont said. “There’s a lot of hateful rhetoric in the political marketplace. There’s some pretty tough rhetoric in the social media world, and this seems a pretty good day to be thoughtful, and particularly a time to look out for each other.”

His audience, manufacturers attending a conference at the Connecticut Convention Center in Hartford, interrupted him with applause.
Which instinct would prevail?
The young Democratic and Republican groups in Connecticut jointly denounced the murder Wednesday, a gesture that drew attention and praise. Their adult counterparts, Democratic Chair Roberto Alves and Republican Chair Ben Proto, followed suit late Thursday afternoon.
“Now is the time for public officials and advocates to step back and think about how rhetoric impacts and influences the people around us. As leaders of our respective parties and to the leaders of our government, it is imperative that we work together on this issue,” they said in a joint communique. “Violence is unacceptable whether against a Republican or a Democrat or any one of any political belief because we disagree with the opinions they hold. We bring about change through debate, discussion, and at the ballot box.”
Like Tong and the governor, they noted the date.
“On this day, the anniversary of one of the greatest tragedies our nation has ever suffered, we are reminded that America is at its greatest when we work together,” they said “The task is not an easy one, but America is worth the effort.”
By day’s end, there was another bipartisan call for unity — from the spouses of governors from 30 states and territories. They offered themselves as close witnesses of the contempt heaped on America’s elected leaders, men and women they love.
“The soul of America is corroded every time hateful violence or rhetoric takes root,” the spouses wrote. “Peacemakers are needed in every corner of our society, especially in our politics. Our children are watching. They desperately need us to show them a better way.”
Annie Lamont, the first lady of Connecticut, was among the signers.
Politicians acknowledged, however, a collective crouch, a fear of what might come next. Would angry voices on social media drown out the more temperate pleas for peace and reflection and serve as fuel for more violence in a nation led by a president whose insistence on a stolen election helped inspire an assault on the U.S. Capitol?
Luiz Casanova, the chief of the state Capitol police, emailed legislative leaders and their chiefs of staff Thursday morning urging them to have their members to begin advising his office of any official events away from the Capitol campus.
“This information will allow us to assess potential security needs and coordinate with local authorities, where appropriate, to provide coverage and mitigate risk,” the chief wrote.
House Speaker Matt Ritter, D-Hartford, said the orientation for new lawmakers includes advice on security — and social media. His suggestion on the latter is not to engage or inflame.
Rep. Jillian Gilchrest, D-West Hartford, who aggressively promotes her views on social media, will not swear off positing, but she has grown wary about engaging in on-line debates.
“It’s intense right now,” said Gilchrest, who recently announced a campaign for Congress. “As someone seeking higher office, there is a fear.”
Lamont, a Democrat who is expected to seek a third term next year, talked about a dire need to lower the temperature of American politics.
There is no thermostat that can make that happen.
Proto, the GOP state chair, signed the statement with Alves, but he was pessimistic in an interview earlier Thursday about taking down the heat, especially in the pundit class and on social media.
“Do we need to turn it down? Yeah,” Proto said. “Do we have the ability to turn it down?”
Without mirth, Proto recalled the jokes in the earliest days of Twitter and Facebook about social media one day being the undoing of democracy.
“Well, we’re watching it,” Proto said. “We’re watching it happen.”
Kirk’s death showed signs of resonating more widely and loudly than some other recent acts of political violence.
The attack was captured on video. He was upbeat and marveled at the size of the crowd, some of whom likely there to accept his invitation to debate his defense of gun rights and all things Trump, a gambit that added to his draw on college campuses.
“He was doing the right thing when he was murdered,” said state Sen. Ryan Fazio, R-Greenwich, who just began a run for governor. “He was using his words to reach out to people who disagree with him in places he was most likely to find them, college campuses.”
Kirk took questions. The last one in Utah was, “Do you know how many mass shooters there have been in America over the last 10 years?”
His reply: “Counting or not counting gang violence?”
There was a single shot, Kirk fell and his audience fled in confused panic.
Fazio, more or less a contemporary at 35, said he appreciated the column published in the New York Times by Ezra Klein, a liberal thinker. The headline was, “Charlie Kirk was practicing politics the right way.”
Causal observers on the left might dismiss Kirk, who began organizing as an 18-year-old college student, as just another right-wing provocateur, loyal to Trump and hostile to liberal causes, transgender rights among them.
“You can dislike much of what Kirk believed and the following statement is still true: Kirk was practicing politics in exactly the right way,” Klein wrote. “He was showing up to campuses and talking with anyone who would talk to him. He was one of the era’s most effective practitioners of persuasion. When the left thought its hold on the hearts and minds of college students was nearly absolute, Kirk showed up again and again to break it.”
Fazio said Kirk was a cultural phenomenon, drawing Gen Z to conservative causes — or inspiring liberal ones to oppose them. Proto agreed, saying, “He clearly was the instigator in getting younger Millennials and Gen Zers engaged in this conversation.”
Rep. Vincent J. Candelora of North Branford, the leader of the Republican minority in the Connecticut House, said, “I was getting phone calls from my kids. This one really struck them.”
Tong offered public condolences.
“I want to say how sorry I am to the family of Charlie Kirk, how sorry I am for the loss of Charlie Kirk, to the people that loved and supported him. We should all be able to say that,” Tong said. “Everyone has a right to be safe.”
This article first appeared on CT Mirror and is republished here under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.