Schultz Questions Contradictions in American Morality
Comedian Andrew Schultz highlighted a curious contradiction in American attitudes toward political figures and crime. He mentioned that while some people were seemingly glad about the idea of hurting Turning Point USA founder Charlie Kirk due to his views, they were simultaneously advocating for due process for individuals involved in smuggling fentanyl into the country.
During a recent episode of the podcast Brilliant Idiots, Schultz remarked on how perplexing it is that certain individuals seem to celebrate the idea of violence against someone like Kirk while also showing concern for the rights of those posing a serious threat to public safety. He questioned, “What do we even live in? Why do we feel more humane towards those profiting from the harm of Americans?”
His co-host, Charlamagne, responded with a somewhat ironic note, cautioning Schultz against becoming what he despises. “But we have to be better,” Charlamagne said, asking him not to turn into people he criticizes.
Schultz appeared momentarily confused by this statement, reiterating his stance: “I dislike people who want to harm Americans. So if you’re targeting Charlie Kirk or bringing in fentanyl, I’m against you.” It seems there’s a clear line in his mind between rhetoric and actions that jeopardize lives.
In response, Charlamagne shifted the focus away from the contradiction Schultz mentioned, offering a principled argument. He stated, “I don’t think Charlie Kirk should be targeted for his words, nor do I believe the fentanyl traffickers deserve violence.” This seemed to redefine the conversation while introducing some ambiguity about what consequences should really look like.
Schultz pushed back, asking, “So, what should the penalties be for those trying to smuggle fentanyl?” Charlamagne replied, suggesting that apprehending these individuals is necessary, humorously adding, “Don’t they know? What’s in the water?”
“Coast Guard,” Schultz interjected, seemingly seeking a practical solution.
