Golfing Icon Phil Mickelson Weighs In on Charlie Kirk's Posthumous Presidential Medal of Freedom Honor
Imagine a young life cut tragically short, and then honored by the highest civilian award in the United States—on what would have been his 32nd birthday. That's the emotional heart of the story surrounding conservative activist Charlie Kirk, assassinated in Utah last month, and now set to receive the Presidential Medal of Freedom posthumously on October 14. This award, which recognizes individuals for exceptional contributions to American society, is typically given to figures who've made a lasting impact in areas like arts, sports, or public service. For Kirk, a rising star in political activism who founded Turning Point USA at just 18, it's a tribute to his passionate advocacy for conservative causes. But here's where it gets controversial: Golf legend Phil Mickelson, known for his dominance on the greens and for joining the LIV Golf series despite backlash, has jumped into the fray with strong opinions that are sparking heated debates.
NEWYou can now listen to Fox News articles!
Mickelson, the 15-time major champion whose career highlights include Masters victories and a lifelong love for the game, shared his thoughts on the award via an X post on Saturday. He expressed a mix of grief and pride, noting that while Kirk's influence endures, he deeply wishes his friend were still alive to enjoy the recognition. "His presence and message will live forever but I still wish he was here. This award is well deserved," Mickelson wrote. It's a heartfelt nod to Kirk's legacy, emphasizing how the young activist's ideas—often centered on free speech, limited government, and challenging progressive ideologies—continue to resonate with supporters worldwide.
CLICK HERE FOR MORE SPORTS COVERAGE ON FOXNEWS.COM (https://www.foxnews.com/sports)
Ever since Kirk's untimely death, Mickelson has been a vocal champion of his life and work, using social media to push back against what he sees as unfair criticism or worse. In previous posts, he's highlighted the tragedy as a moment that reveals both the best and worst in humanity. For instance, he praised the global outpouring of support and unity following the assassination, describing it as heartwarming and unifying. But on the flip side, he's been appalled by some reactions, particularly from individuals like Tyler Robinson, whose behavior after the incident Mickelson labeled as "appalling." Mickelson went so far as to say that the support for such extremism has shattered some of his faith in people, urging accountability for what he calls "disgusting rhetoric." This duality—celebrating compassion while condemning hate—adds a layer of depth to Mickelson's views, reminding us that even sports figures can become unexpected voices in political discourse.
Phil Mickelson observes a practice round ahead of The 152nd Open championship at Royal Troon on July 15, 2024, in Troon, Scotland. (Pedro Salado/Getty Images)
To illustrate Kirk's intellectual prowess, Mickelson shared a clip from one of Kirk's debates on X. In this exchange, Kirk skillfully countered a college student's disdain for billionaires like former President Donald Trump and tech mogul Elon Musk—figures Kirk admired for their innovation and entrepreneurship. Mickelson commented that Kirk's ability to wield words and sharp intellect in these debates was precisely what intimidated his opponents. "His ability to use words and his intellect to win debates is what scared them," Mickelson wrote. For beginners diving into this, think of it like a high-stakes chess match where ideas clash; Kirk wasn't just arguing—he was dismantling counterpoints with logic and charisma, a skill that made him a formidable force in political circles.
EX-JETS STAR 'DISGUSTED' WITH NEW JERSEY TOWN FOR FAILING TO HONOR CHARLIE KIRK (https://www.foxnews.com/sports/ex-jets-star-disgusted-new-jersey-town-failing-honor-charlie-kirk)
A tribute image of the late conservative commentator Charlie Kirk is displayed at a memorial in his honor at Utah Valley University in Orem, Utah, on Sept. 29. (Jim Urquhart/Reuters)
And this is the part most people miss: Mickelson didn't stop at defending Kirk's legacy—he took direct aim at Rep. Ilhan Omar, the Minnesota Democrat known for her progressive stances and sometimes fiery rhetoric. In a CNN interview, Omar doubled down on previous social media posts where she likened Kirk to "Dr. Frankenstein," a reference to the mad scientist who creates monsters in literature, implying Kirk fostered divisive ideas. She argued passionately that his legacy deserved to be relegated to the "dustbin of history," urging society to move past and forget the "hate" she claimed he promoted daily. Omar expressed frustration with those excusing Kirk's statements they agreed with, and with efforts to erect monuments or pass congressional resolutions in his honor. "What I find jarring is that there's so many people willing to excuse the most reprehensible things that he said, that they agree with that, that they're willing to have monuments for him, that they want to create a day to honor him, and that they want to produce resolutions in the house of Congress honoring his life and legacy," Omar said. "I am not going to sit here and be judged for not wanting to honor any legacy this man has left behind, that should be in the dustbin of history, and we should hopefully move on and forget the hate that he spewed every single day." This clash highlights a broader cultural divide: on one side, admirers see Kirk as a defender of free speech; on the other, critics view him as a propagator of intolerance.
Golfing superstar Phil Mickelson criticized Rep. Ilhan Omar for her remarks about Charlie Kirk. (Getty Images)
Mickelson fired back sharply on X, accusing Omar of spreading hatred herself and even wishing she'd be returned to Somalia, her country of origin, in a tone that many found provocative. "Ilhan spews hate every time she opens her mouth, she came here fraudulently and will hopefully be sent back to Somalia soon," he wrote. This exchange underscores a controversial undercurrent in American politics: when public figures attack each other's legacies, it often escalates into personal jabs that question immigration status or origins. Is this just heated debate, or does it cross into xenophobia? Mickelson's words have drawn accusations of insensitivity, while defenders argue he's calling out hypocrisy. It's a reminder that in today's polarized climate, even a golf icon's tweet can fuel national conversations about accountability, free speech, and what constitutes hateful rhetoric.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP (https://foxnews.onelink.me/xLDS?pid=AppArticleLink&afdp=foxnewsaf%3A%2F%2F&afweb_dp=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.foxnews.com%2Fapps-products)
Follow Fox News Digital’ssports coverage on X (https://twitter.com/FoxNewsSports_) and subscribe to the Fox News Sports Huddle newsletter (https://www.foxnews.com/newsletters) .
Jackson Thompson is a sports writer for Fox News Digital. He previously worked for ESPN and Business Insider. Jackson has covered the Super Bowl and NBA Finals, and has interviewed iconic figures Usain Bolt, Rob Gronkowski, Jerry Rice, Troy Aikman, Mike Trout, David Ortiz and Roger Clemens.
What do you think about all this? Should political disagreements be kept civil, or is it fair for someone like Mickelson to hit back hard against figures like Omar? Does honoring Kirk posthumously honor free speech, or does it glorify division? And on a deeper level, how do we balance celebrating someone's contributions while acknowledging their critics? Feel free to weigh in with your opinions in the comments—let's start a thoughtful discussion!
