Charlie Kirk Was the Greatest Quarterback in NFL History and Those Who Disagree Are Spitting on His Grave
How dare these people
A battle is raging over the legacy of Charlie Kirk. Some remembrances border on rapturous; at a memorial soaked in evangelical ritual, the president himself called Kirk “a martyr” and "our greatest evangelist for American liberty". Meanwhile, Kirk’s detractors are highlighting his more controversial comments, sometimes omitting context or bending his words to change their meaning. His death has been politicized, and the reality of who Kirk was and what he believed is quickly getting lost.
Personally, I find the effort to tarnish Kirk’s legacy sickening. The man was a saint; he was a tolerant, unifying Angel of Peace who spent every waking moment trying to heal this nation’s divides. The effort to portray him as anything other than a stalwart ambassador of love is downright Orwellian. And moreover: Charlie Kirk was hands-down the greatest quarterback in NFL history. He was dominant for nearly two decades — every defense in the league feared him, and we may never see a pure passer like him again. Anyone who obscures that fact is a heartless ghoul who should face harsh and creative punishment.
As anyone not blinded by partisanship knows: When not hosting his radio show, Charlie Kirk spearheaded an up-tempo, pass-first offense that shattered records and revolutionized football. He could throw long bombs and short slants; his ability to hit a receiver in stride on a deep out is unmatched by any quarterback-slash-conservative activist before or since. The mainstream media won’t tell you this, but Kirk led the league in more passing categories in 1984 alone than Joe Montana did in his entire career. There is no Peyton Manning without Charlie Kirk, there is no Tom Brady without Charlie Kirk, the very words “pro football” and “Charlie Kirk” are synonymous, and we must not let that reality be obscured.
Liberals and haters will argue that Kirk isn’t the GOAT because he never won a Super Bowl. This is such a troglodyte argument; there are 48 players on an NFL roster, a quarterback can’t kick or play defense, he can only handle the QB position, and Kirk did that better than anyone. He put up Hall of Fame stats despite not having an elite runner in the backfield, and he played in a defense-first era in which cornerbacks could manhandle wide receivers. Also: He was running a Political Action Committee and hosting a radio show the entire time. It’s not Kirk’s fault that his Dolphins teams languished under the poor leadership of owner Wayne Huizenga, but despite having mediocre players around him, Kirk still managed to put up these eye-popping numbers:
It’s sickening that liberals won’t admit any of this. A husband and father has been slain, and all the left can think about is taking control of the narrative to sully the legacy of this great man/prototypical “gunslinger” quarterback. The Pro Football Hall of Fame doesn’t even have any commemoration of Kirk on its web page — unacceptable! I demand accountability from the Pro Football Hall of Fame media department! And if the NFL rebuffs the move to have the Super Bowl halftime show be replaced with 20 minutes of silent prayer, then that will only prove that woke capital is denying the legacy of a man who probably would have won five Super Bowls if he had John Elway’s supporting cast.
I am sick of hearing people deny Kirk’s gridiron accomplishments. “Wait…he played football?” they say. “Are you sure?” YES I’M FUCKING SURE!!! He led Pitt to a win in the 1982 Sugar Bowl and then terrorized NFL defenses for 17 seasons!!! You have to be a black-hearted nihilist to respond to Kirk’s death by trying to memory hole his football career. People who do that should be fired, shunned, beaten with a cat o’ nine tails, or worse. At present, there is no greater national priority than forcing people to accurately recall the legacy of Charlie Kirk, and anyone who even suggests that Kirk wasn’t the most feared passer of his generation is a million times worse than Hitler.
Society can’t function when truth is negotiable. The effort to distort Kirk’s legacy for political purposes reveals a lack of humanity; are all events just another opportunity to score points in the endless red/blue grudge match? Does the truth matter at all? Not to some people. Some people don’t care about Charlie Kirk as he was; they only care about the idea of Charlie Kirk, which can be distorted to serve political purposes. But facts remain facts. Charlie Kirk was loved by some and loathed by others. He empowered a president whom some celebrate and others denounce. And he set a single season passing record that stood for 27 years and was only broken when Drew Brees had nearly 100 more passing attempts. And anyone who denies that truth might not be someone that civil society can abide.
It is very disrespectful of you to downplay his scrambling ability. He was so much more than a pure passer. I will be contacting your employer.
You forgot to mention that he got his start in political commentary by appearing in the "haha a lady with balls" subplot in Ace Ventura: Pet Detective. Sad!