Name That Hater!

[paft.livejournal.com]

Last July a man named Jim David Adkisson walked into a Unitarian church in Knoxville Tennessee, where a children's show was being performed, and began shooting.

His stated reasons? They were liberals and therefore they were enemies of America. He'd planned for the attack to be suicidal, to keep shooting Unitarians until the police killed him. Liberals turned out to be a bit tougher than he'd thought. Members of the congregation wrestled him to the ground, but unfortunately not before he'd shot seven people. Two of them, both in their sixties, died.

The other day he smiled as he was sentenced to life without parole. He seems to be quite firm in his belief that he was marching off to war with America's enemies.

Now where could he have gotten that idea?



A manifesto/suicide note he'd left behind was released to the press. It makes for some interesting reading. Not original -- but interesting.

What follows is a quick compendium of quotes lifted both from Adkisson’s note and from various prominent right wingers, some of them bestselling writers, some of them talk show hosts. I want to emphasize that these are not merely obscure comments lifted from right-wing blogs and Free Republic posts. You will probably instantly recognize at least two of them. As for the rest…

I invite readers to attempt – without reading Adkisson’s manifesto or using Google -- to distinguish the statements made by certain right wing talk-show hosts, cable news pundits, etc. from the quotes lifted from Adkisson’s “suicide” note:

I think he's [Harry Reid] a propaganda minister for our enemies. He's emboldening our enemies, and he's taking away the morale of our troops.

…the Democrats – far too many of them – are evil, pure and simple. They have no redeeming social value. They are outright traitors themselves or apologists for treasonous behavior. They are enemies of the American people and the American way of life.

…engage the terrorists allies here in America. The best allies they’ve got. The Democrats! The Democrats have done everything they can to tie our hands in this War on Terror. They’re all a bunch of traitors.

The liberal tree needs to be pruned.

Liberalism is a mental disorder that has undermined our families, our society, and our national security.

… the culture of treason right now, it just has become so pervasive that you just expect Democrats to side with Al Qaeda.

My fear is that if the Democrats win, and I'm afraid that they might, you're going to see America melt down faster that you could ever imagine. It will happen overnight, and it could lead to the breakup of the United States of America, the way the Soviet Union broke up.

We need to execute people like John Walker in order to physically intimidate liberals, by making them realize that they can be killed, too. Otherwise, they will turn out to be outright traitors.

It saddens me to think back on all the bad things that liberalism has done to this country. The worst problem America faces today is liberalism… Liberals are evil, they embrace the tenets of Karl Marx. They’re Marxists, Socialists, Communists.

We’re gonna get ‘em. (liberals) Come the revolution they’re gonna be hanged.

Liberals are a pest like termites. Millions of them. Each little bite contributes to the downfall of this great nation.

Cakes and circuses and too many dumb people. I mean, we should thin out the herd, you know what I mean?

Even fanatical Muslim Terrorists don’t hate America like liberals do.

I hate the damn left wing liberals. There is a vast left wing conspiracy in this country and liberals are working together to attack every decent and honorable institution in the nation, trying to turn this country into a communist state.

…they're (liberals) like termites that have worked into the woodwork of our academic society and it's appalling.

The day will come when unpleasant things are going to happen to a bunch of stupid liberals. It’s going to be amusing to watch…very amusing to watch.

Adkisson was apparently an avid reader of some of these pundits. Two books by people whose quotes are included were found in his house. I guess the usual explanation we hear from apologists for people like Coulter, Michael Savage, etc. -- that it’s all “hyperbole” -- was lost on this man, who wrote near the end of his letter:

Who I wanted to kill was every Democrat in the Senate & House, the 100 people in Bernard Goldberg’s book. I’d like to kill everyone in the Mainstream Media. But I knew these people were inaccessible to me. I couldn’t get to the generals and high ranking officers of the Marxist movement, so I went after the foot soldiers, the chicken shit liberals that vote in these traitorous people. Someone had to get the ball rolling. I volunteered…

The only way we can rid ourselves of this evil is kill them in the streets, kill them where they gather. I’d like to encourage other like-minded people to do what I’ve done. If life ain’t worth living anymore, don’t just kill yourself. Do something for your country before you go. Go kill liberals!

Given the quotes I’ve offered, does anyone find this conclusion surprising?

Comments

[smokystein.livejournal.com]

Yeah, that freedom of speech is a bitch. This is why we have laws to prosecute nut-jobs like this who kill people. That does not mean people like Coulter and Savage should stop writing. I don't agree with anything they say, but I am glad they have the right to say it.

Best way to counter free speech is with more free speech.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

I agree with you, however, freedom of speech does not include the right to incite people to kill other people.

[vee-ecks.livejournal.com]

"I don't agree with anything they say, but I am glad they have the right to say it."

What, that I should be killed because I'm a godless, loveless, traitorous monster, all day long?

I'm not glad about that. In fact, I'm pretty fucking sick of hearing it.

[paft.livejournal.com]

s: That does not mean people like Coulter and Savage should stop writing.

Who says they should. This isn't about censorship. It's about responsibility.

Coulter, Savage, et. al are irresponsible as Hell.

[chessdev.livejournal.com]

Honestly, I'm surprised we haven't seen this MORE with the flaming of the nutjobs that McCain and Palin did near the end...

[paintmeamovie.livejournal.com]

agree.

[ellie-kay.livejournal.com]

what's your point here?

one guy who is obviously mentally unstable shoots up some "liberal" kiddos.

he has a mental disorder. he took things a little too far.

again, what is your point? should we now ban certain ideas and/or speech because it might lead a mentally ill person to shoot up a school?

i don't get it.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

i don't get it.

There's a surprise. Shocked, shocked I am...

[vee-ecks.livejournal.com]

"he took things a little too far"

Just the fact that you can call walking into a church where children are rehearsing Annie and opening fire taking things "a little too far" speaks volumes about you.

And no, nobody talked about banning anything, so you can quit humping that straw man, please.

[paft.livejournal.com]

eK: what's your point here?

My point here is that inflammatory rhetoric has consequences. Repeatedly calling a group of people traitors and engaging in borderline and not-so-borderline violent language about them is eventually going to lead to violent action.

EK: one guy who is obviously mentally unstable shoots up some "liberal" kiddos.

He wasn't aiming at the children. Does that make it okay?

What makes you so sure he was "unstable?"

ek: he has a mental disorder. he took things a little too far.

A LITTLE too far?

What makes you think he has a "mental disorder?"

ek: should we now ban certain ideas and/or speech because it might lead a mentally ill person to shoot up a school?

No.

ek: i don't get it.

Ever hear of a man named Julius Streicher? How about someone named Thomas Dixon Jr.? Are you really unable to grasp the connection between violent rhetoric and violent actions?

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

"a little too far"

little?

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

How exactly did centuries of calling Indians Untermenschen and declaring their fading away before superior white Ubermenschen work out again? And what's the difference between saying "Nits make lice" in reference to Shoshone and Chiricaua and "Nits make lice" in terms of Liberal Traitors who should be all shot with the exception of a few university professors?

I find Limbaugh's rhetoric mildly better than Ernst Rohm, but then Rohm was also more honest about what he intended to do.

[savagemind.livejournal.com]

"he took things a little too far"

I don't even have anything to witty to say about what a mindless little shit you are. I'm just disgusted.

[paintmeamovie.livejournal.com]

As far as I know it your FoS rights ends where it puts other in danger (incited violence). Would this fit into that rule in any way? Or would it have to be more specific? I think you could argue it for the "We need to execute people like John Walker..." and The "liberal tree"

[paft.livejournal.com]

P: As far as I know it your FoS rights ends where it puts other in danger (incited violence). Would this fit into that rule in any way?

This isn't about freedom of speech. It's about responsibility. The people I quote here are not obscure bloggers. Some of them are bestselling writers who are plainly comfortable accusing fellow citizens of treason simply for disagreeing with them.

One of the rotten things about "Godwin's Rule" is that we seem to have forgotten what should have been one of the most enduring lessons of that era -- the connection between violent rhetoric and actual violence.

P: Or would it have to be more specific? I think you could argue it for the "We need to execute people like John Walker..." and The "liberal tree"

I'm sorry, I have no idea what you're saying there. Could you rephrase it?

[reality-hammer.livejournal.com]

I'm not surprised that liberals are only now concerned about "hate" speech. Where was this concern during the eight plus years of Bush Derangement Syndrome?

As for nutjobs:

Steve Kangas.

Not to mention that there are a few people here I would not be shocked to see in such headlines. Their posts routinely boil over with such hatred.

Shall we arrest all of them?

[paft.livejournal.com]

rh: I'm not surprised that liberals are only now concerned about "hate" speech.

What makes you think liberals are "only now concerned?"

rh: Where was this concern during the eight plus years of Bush Derangement Syndrome?

Liberals have been concerned about Coulter, Savage, et. al for the past eight years.

rh: As for nutjobs: Steve Kangas.

Who did he kill other than himself? And was he a prominent pundit like Coulter and Savage? Did he have a radio program? Was he frequently invited to speak on news shows?

rh: Not to mention that there are a few people here I would not be shocked to see in such headlines. Their posts routinely boil over with such hatred.

Is their rhetoric repeated and reflected in the rhetoric of well known radio and tv personalities?

rh: Shall we arrest all of them?

No. Who's talking about arresting people?

[mahnmut.livejournal.com]

One more proof what a power do words have.
The proverb 'A word makes no hole' is incorrect.
Ideas and the ability to propagate them are the most powerful weapon. And people use it too irresponsibly.

[headhouse.livejournal.com]

Oh thank god, we didn't get enough "free speech is only a good thing if I agree with it" dumbness during the election.

First, as a couple of other people have already done, I invite you to clarify your point. Are you saying that the people you've quoted should not be allowed to have said these things? Should there be some sort of legal consequences for their speech? Because if not, how is this post not just a long-winded "conservatives are teh evuls" wank, perhaps best kept in your personal LJ?

Speaking of that, I'll add that I've seen parallels of almost every statement you listed, coming from the left and aimed at the right. (No, you don't get source citations; you'll have to accept it, unless you'd like to propose that no liberal has ever said anything similar about conservatives). Are these people wingnuts? Yes. But they're on your side, too. Every major political philosophy has a handful of idiot cousins at the family picnic.

[paft.livejournal.com]

HH: we didn't get enough "free speech is only a good thing if I agree with it" dumbness during the election.

Where have I said this?

HH: First, as a couple of other people have already done, I invite you to clarify your point. Are you saying that the people you've quoted should not be allowed to have said these things?

And as I said to those other people who asked me that question -- no.

HH: Should there be some sort of legal consequences for their speech?

No.

HH: Because if not, how is this post not just a long-winded "conservatives are teh evuls" wank, perhaps best kept in your personal LJ?

Are you saying that political speech is not political speech if it doesn't involve the threat of legal consequences? I can't object to, for instance, someone using the word "nigger" unless I'm also in favor of making use of the N word illegal?

HH: Speaking of that, I'll add that I've seen parallels of almost every statement you listed, coming from the left and aimed at the right. (No, you don't get source citations;)

And are those statements coming from liberals who have the same clout, the same level of exposure as Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, etc?

HH: unless you'd like to propose that no liberal has ever said anything similar about conservatives).

My premise is not that "no liberal has ever said anything similar about conservatives." My premise is that if there are prominent, widely broadcast liberals speaking about conservatives as Limbaugh and Coulter, etc. speak of liberals, they are very far and few between.

HH: Are these people wingnuts? Yes. But they're on your side, too. Every major political philosophy has a handful of idiot cousins at the family picnic.

But not every political philosophy has these "idiot cousins" speaking from a bully pulpit.

[gunslnger.livejournal.com]

Name That Hater!

paft

lol

[justgoto.livejournal.com]

You beat me to it!

[paft.livejournal.com]

M: Lunatics or people trying to come off as "edgy" will always say of the wall things. It's just part of life.

Sure. And when those "lunatics or people trying to come off as "edgy" get a very large audience and start wielding influence, the situation can become very dangerous.

M: The conservative talk show hosts in question say the things they say to get a reaction out of people, and also for entertainment value. They are well paid entertainers. Nothing more. Their opinions have no more value than the reader/listener cares to place in them.

Similar statements were made about Julius Streicher in the 1920s and 30s, and about Thomas Dixon's book THE CLANSMAN. "Streicher is just a clown" "The CLANSMAN is just a silly novel made into a Hollywood film." The impact of this "clown" and that "silly novel" was nevertheless very real and very ugly.

M: Sloganizing or the inventing of words or phrases to use as labels for other groups of people is nothing new.

Did I say it was?

m: Democrats love to refer to Republicans as fascists. Republicans love to refer to Democrats as Communists. Both are just exaggerating the facts in order to get people riled up. Activists thrive on those very same tactics.

I've not seen many prominent Democrats or liberal commentators casually referring to all Republicans as "fascists." And referring to Democrats or liberals as Communists has had, in the past, very real and often dire consequences for the people so labeled. There is no left-wing equivalent in this country to the Red Scare, no era when large numbers of writers, civil servants, performers, teachers, etc were called up before committees and asked "are you now or have you ever been a fascist."

M: Spout hatred to get people up in arms about issues they would otherwise not feel passionately enough to act on. I am not a huge fan of ants, but if you were to show me supposed proof that ants were plotting my demise, I might pay closer attention to the ants' behavior next time I see them running around on my sidewalk.

What's your point here? That the kind of frenzy whipped up by people against Communists/Jews/Muslims/blacks, etc. is no more dangerous than ants on a sidewalk? There are still many people with a strong enough memory of the 20th century to refute that.

M: To suggest that the people who originally said the above mentioned quotes should be in some way held responsible for the actions of a mentally unstable person just doesn't make any logical sense.

You don't feel that people should be held morally, if not legally responsible for the things they say?

M: That would be akin to filing a lawsuit against a videogame developer any time someone who has played the game goes out and does something stupid.

Where have I suggested that lawsuits be filed?

Name That Hater!

[justgoto.livejournal.com]

paft

Re: Name That Hater!

[prog-expat.livejournal.com]

justgoto

[malasadas.livejournal.com]

Water seeks its own level.

You have your cause and effect mixed up. This is like the kids who play violent first person shooter games and then go shoot up a mall -- the person who sought the activity (or in this case media) was ALREADY unstable and prone to this before he began the activity and/or media habit.

The proof that the causal chain goes in the other direction are the 99.9999999999999999% of listeners who DON'T go on shooting sprees.

[paft.livejournal.com]

M:You have your cause and effect mixed up. This is like the kids who play violent first person shooter games and then go shoot up a mall -- the person who sought the activity (or in this case media) was ALREADY unstable and prone to this before he began the activity and/or media habit.

So everyone who participated in lychings during the lynching epidemic in the US, and in both the institutional and extra-legal violence against Jews/Roms/homosexuals/communists during the Third Reich was unstable?

[jlc20thmaine.livejournal.com]

The liberal tree needs to be pruned.

"The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." -- Thomas Jefferson

[underlankers.livejournal.com]

Said the man until Daniel Shays decided to take him up on it. And while he kept slaves.

[savagemind.livejournal.com]

This is not the fault or responsibility of Limbaugh, Coulter, Malkin, O'Reilly, Palin, Hannity, or Savage. They should know better, they are hateful, they are cancers, but they are not responsible.

[paft.livejournal.com]

Not legally perhaps. But morally, yes, they are responsible.

[prog-expat.livejournal.com]

To everyone that thinks this is a pro-censorship post: you're missing the point completely. Supporting freedom of expression does not mean you shut your pie-hole when some loony starts spouting off. You still have the right, I dare say the moral obligation, to exercise your freedom of speech by telling the loony he's wrong, and why.

What's being shown by this post is that there a number of right-wing pundits who not only get away with spouting lunacies, they're rewarded for it. This is partially because their completely unfounded slurs against the people on the mythical "other side" of the political fence go unchallenged, because those that disagree would rather just ignore them than make the effort to point out their bullshit.

You have no proof that Adkisson is just a psycho. You assume he is because you don't want to accept that perfectly well-adjusted people can perform horrific acts if convinced they're for a greater good, and given the right stimulus. History is chock-full of examples of how you're wrong, that not just individuals, but entire societies can be convinced to do evil things if no-one challenges the dehumanization of the Other.

This specter of the Other isn't even limited to race, culture, or religion, it can be raised just as easily based on opinions and worldviews. The United States itself has had at least two (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Red_Scare) periods (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/McCarthyism) where people were actively prosecuted for political views they might have held. Some of their methods (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red-baiting) are still with us.

[dwer.livejournal.com]

The Spear in the Other's hand is the spear in your own; you are she.

[shadowyphantom.livejournal.com]

Saying that Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, Coulter, etc., caused the man to snap is very much like saying videogames (or twinkies) cause people to kill. It's the man's fault for going insane, not some right-wingers; just like it's some snot-nosed brat's fault for shooting up his folks, not Halo.

[paft.livejournal.com]

It's not as simple as saying that Limbaugh, Hannity, Savage, and Coulter "caused the man to snap." They have created an environment where the language used by that man in his "suicide" note is identical to that used in nationally published editorials and books and widely broadcast speeches. The link between the mainstreaming of violent political rhetoric and violence is quite well established.

No, Julius Streicher -- as he himself pointed out -- did not point at individual Jews and say, "burn down that Jew's house." He simply said, "Jews are the enemy of all that is right and just. Jews are traitors. Jews are destroying this country. Jews control the media and the government and they are being allowed to get away with treason and murder."

IF someone believes this, what is their next logical course of action?