A Rose by Any Other Name

would still smell…
Guest Post by SpiritKat
I was driving to church this past Sunday morning, and as I often do, turned on the radio to a talk show. It was in the middle of a program, and, unfortunately, I reached my destination before the program’s close, so I didn’t catch what program it was or who the speaker was. I didn’t recognize the speaker’s voice, but his message centered around the recent school shootings. It became very clear to me when this speaker began telling how all of the shooters in these recent incidents were either Democrats, or children of Democrats and “Liberals”, that he was indulging in the worst kind of hate speech. But does this person realize he has just put a target on the back of the people he is maligning? In his rant, he asked where the Republicans and Tea party activists were in this, and I couldn’t help but shout at the radio, “They’re right there coming out of your mouth you idiot!”
I find it very disturbing when people in such public forums use it for hate speeches. Yes, I certainly understand that they have the right to free speech, and I respect that right, but there is a particularly sinister insidiousness to it when a speaker does so in way that incites others into hatefulness. In my opinion, it is this inciting of hatred that is at the root of a great deal of the violence we’re seeing, including the recent school shootings. This broadcast was solely a pathetic effort to place blame on a particular group of people, and incite people to hate them–and that is just plain wrong. It actually says far more about what kind of person the hate speech broadcaster is than it does anyone else.
During the time I was listening, this radio speaker did not give any facts to support his contention that all these shooters were connected to Democrats, but it matters little, for the fact is, no matter what party, all party members are NOT alike. Granted, Republicans appear to have done their best to “purify” party leadership (kind of reminds one of Hitler’s purification efforts doesn’t it?), but while they’ve done a fair job duping the masses, they haven’t gotten to everyone.
Not all Republicans are conservatives, for example. I happen to have a Republican friend who is an intelligent, reasonable person; what some might call “old school Republican (those folks back before the party became corrupted by the pseudo religious right), or what might today be called moderates.
So, too, all Democrats are not liberals, or even progressives. In fact, not all who are registered as Democrats are even Democrats. Joe Lieberman is a good example of that kind pseudo Democrat. I, myself, am registered as a Democrat, but I absolutely am NOT a Democrat. I am very liberal when it comes to women’s rights, but on many other issues I am very much a moderate, and on a few, even somewhat conservative. But with all the attempts by the ultra conservatives to disenfranchise voters, I simply decided not to bother with changing it.
It takes all kinds to make a society, and it is from that societal “melting pot” that political parties are formed. Every party contains extremes on both ends of the spectrum, along with a wide range of diversity in between. So, even if this radio speaker were correct about the shooters’ political connections, it doesn’t mean a hill of beans, as my mama used to say, because those who in some way carry the label of Democrat are as diverse as the population stuck on this wobbling globe.
I leave you with this thought: perhaps the hate mongers would be wise to reconsider their hate messages. After all, you know what they say about shooting the messenger…

10 thoughts on “A Rose by Any Other Name

  1. The Newtown, Connecticut shooter’s mother was a Doomsday Prepper, so, his access to weapons was facilitated by a Glenn Beck nutter. Adam Lanza didn’t have any political affiliation, but he certainly wasn’t the son of a liberal.

    • Although I haven’t had the time to look them all up for a fact check, I suspected it was no more than smoke and mirrors. But someone needs to keep shining the mirrors back in these guys faces.

  2. Good post. There are many examples in our history books where hate for one group of citizens suddenly explodes into mass murder. I received a history of the world book for christmas and just last night read about the massacre in Bartholomew. The murder of the leaders of the Huguenots in France led to mass murder of thousands of Huguenots. Why? Religious beliefs of course. In the 21st Century it is amazing to me that people in our society would not blink if this happened now.

    • Thanks!
      Yes, so many attrocities have been committed over the centuries in the name of God, haven’t they! And then these “christians” wonder why they are persecuted, and why so many people want nothing to do with religion any more…

  3. I’ve seen some gunnuts on TP claiming that a bunch of these infamous shooters were Dems, or, in the Columbine case, children of Dems. They’re saying that the Virginia Tech shooter was a Democrat, and so was the Fort Hood shooter. Fucking idiots!

  4. were either Democrats, or children of Democrats and “Liberals”

    Isn’t it often true that sons reject the philosophies of their fathers? Wouldn’t it follow, then by the speaker’s reasoning, that every shooter would likely be a Democrat or the son of a Democrat?

    I’ll let slip the assumption that all Liberals are Democrats and vice versa (I’m an unaffiliated Liberal, and damn proud of it), and I will accept that they use the terms “Liberal” and “Democrat” interchangeably. Likewise, let’s just assume that all Conservatives are Republicans and vice versa.

    If a father is a Conservative (Republican), his son will likely turn into a Liberal (Democrat). And if the father is a Liberal (Democrat), then the son may turn into a Conservative (Republican). If this is true enough to be taken as a given (which is, of course, highly debatable), then what the speaker said would be correct.

    But then it’s just as valid to say that all these shooters were either Republicans, or children of Republicans and “Conservatives”. Which means his statement was completely meaningless. Pretty much like saying all the shooters were either male or female.

    Great post, SpiritKat. 🙂

    • Thanks, Wayne. Yes, I agree that it’s pretty meaningless. Those with a brain know it’s false logic, but the lunatics with microphones just can’t resist trying to keep the country stirred up. They are only following the example set by their political leaders after all…and that is who I hold most responsible for the rash of messages of hate.

    • Ok. And, thanks to the Patriot Act and the Dept. of Homeland Security, the feds know the identity, location, job, and favorite ice cream flavor of the idjit that posted that.

      You wanna keep your guns? fine. they won’t help you one iota because the feds will know your every move, if they want to. And post something stupid like that, and they will want to….

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s