In Defense of Gavin Newsom (and kind of Ezra Klein) Regarding Charlie Kirk

After taking a look through Bluesky (always a mistake), I need to get this off my chest:

It makes me despair a little to see so many Democrats apparently full on knives out mode against Newsom and Ezra Klein over that tweet/statement and that article around Charlie Kirk, while Trump is out there ruining this country in every possible dimension and doing the most brazen corruption scams known to humankind and maintaining a seemingly eternal 85+% of support from Republicans.

First off, do people really think Ezra Klein and the governor of California are poring over Charlie Kirk's podcasts and understanding every controversial thing he's ever said, and whether or not he technically engaged in good and proper civil dialogue? It frustrates me to see people getting this angry over some milquetoast calls for civility and dialogue after a brutal murder that was captured live on camera. Charlie Kirk was always going to get lionized whether or not Ezra Klein or Newsom made those statements or not simply due to the circumstances of his death.

And I've seen in too many places (including here) where people are twisting what Newsom meant with that tweet to imply that he meant to continue Charlie Kirk's work in terms of advancing his views (mainly by quoting that line without any of the contextual lines).

The fact is that Newsom has enormous influence on what bills gets brought up and signed due to the California executive branch traditionally being very strong + him consolidating that power even further due to COVID era governance realities + the California legislature having various leadership drama that have significantly weakened it (+ let's be honest, Newsom always being quite power hungry). This is a world in which veto override essentially does not exist. And Newsom has chosen to use that power to sign some of the most liberal abortion, environmental, LGBTQ+ (yes, including trans rights), mental health, and immigration policies found in the country during his tenure. I've left some of the more prominent examples at the bottom as reference. If you can't differentiate his record with what Charlie Kirk believed and see how diametrically opposed they are, I don't know what to tell you.

Additionally, if you listen to his Charlie Kirk podcast episode, you would have seen how completely open Charlie Kirk was in explaining his successful media strategies. It's almost shocking how open he is and how informative he tries to be here–and Newsom clearly has tried to implement some of the lessons recently with his recent tactics, and to great success. Is it all that surprising that Newsom would be appreciative of open discourse in this context?

And on a more human note, both Newsom and Ezra Klein are highly public figures. This kind of political violence is something that is a very real possibility for them, especially Newsom, who was part of the targets list of the Paul Pelosi attacker and was also the primary target of a Trump supporter who was charged with possession of pipe bombs in 2021. I'm sure the Charlie Kirk assassination elicited a more emotional response from them than from people for whom this is just not a real concern.

I'm not saying people should vote for Newsom during the primaries. There are many legitimate grievances to air against him. But is it really too much to ask to not attack him with made up or completely misleading claims while he's leading what's going to be an absolutely bruising battle for a ballot measure that has a significant chance to literally decide whether or not Trump gets any legislative checks on his power during his term? Or at the very least not ignoring all the good both have ever done simply due to a comment in the aftermath of an emotionally fraught moment?

LGBTQ+

1. Famously married gay couples as SF mayor in 2004 (more than 10 years before it became legal nationwide), a move which some people at the time thought was "political suicide"

2. SB 107 – California as a “State of Refuge” for transgender youth and their families, protecting them by refusing to enforce out-of-state laws that punish or restrict access to gender-affirming care. It blocks cooperation with out-of-state prosecutions, protects medical privacy, and allows California courts to take emergency custody jurisdiction if families flee here for care.

3. AB 1955 — “Safety Act” )– Bans school districts from requiring staff to notify parents about a student’s gender identity; protects trans & LGBTQ+ youth in schools.

Abortion

1. SB 245 – Eliminating out-of-pocket costs for abortion services
2. Abortion protections / reproductive health bill package – 12 bills with strong abortion protections signed after the Supreme Court's change of Roe v Wade
3. SB 233 — enabling Arizona providers to help people get abortions in California

Immigration:

1. Suite of Bills Signed in 2021 Supporting Immigrant Communities – ensuring rights for unaccompanied undocumented minors; removing the term “alien” from state codes; expanding access to higher education; expanding access to health care and public benefits; allowing undocumented residents over age 50 to access Medi-Cal; and other pro-immigrant protections

2. Budget Bills with Legal Aid / Defending Immigrants – allocates funding toward legal aid for immigrant communities. For instance, he signed bills that helped defend state policies against federal challenges, and protect immigrants, including those without legal status

3. “Trump-Proof” State Laws & Standing Against Federal Immigration Enforcement Overreach – taking legal and legislative measures to limit cooperation with federal immigration enforcement, preserve sanctuary provisions, and resist expansion of restrictions. He has also proposed or signed laws that restrict state and local authorities from assisting with deportations under certain conditions