Profile
Photos
Comments
Who was it that told me that there were no right wing extremists. Tell that to the two dead in this church...From Alternet.
Tennessee Church Shooting an Inevitable Consequence of Shock-Jocks’ Hateful Rhetoric
When police searched the car of the gunman who opened fire in a
Unitarian Church in Tennessee, they found a 4-page letter expressing
his hatred of the "liberal movement." A regular consumer of Bill
O'Reilly, Michael Savage and Sean Hannity, Jim David Adkisson was only
following the arguments they make day in and day out to their logical
conclusions.
From the Knoxville News Sentinel:
Police
found right-wing political books, brass knuckles, empty shotgun shell
boxes and a handgun in the Powell home of a man who said he attacked a
church in order to kill liberals "who are ruining the country," court
records show.
Knoxville police Sunday
evening searched the Levy Drive home of Jim David Adkisson after he
allegedly entered the Tennessee Valley Unitarian Universalist Church
and killed two people and wounded six others during the presentation of
a children's musical.
Adkisson targeted
the church ... "because of its liberal teachings and his belief that
all liberals should be killed because they were ruining the country,
and that he felt that the Democrats had tied his country's hands in the
war on terror and they had ruined every institution in America with the
aid of media outlets."
Adkisson [said]
that "he could not get to the leaders of the liberal movement that he
would then target those that had voted them in to office."
Inside the house, officers found "Liberalism is a Mental Health
Disorder" by radio talk show host Michael Savage, "Let Freedom Ring" by
talk show host Sean Hannity, and "The O'Reilly Factor," by television
talk show host Bill O'Reilly.
The
shotgun-wielding suspect in Sunday's mass shooting at the Tennessee
Valley Unitarian Universalist Church was motivated by a hatred of "the
liberal movement," and he planned to shoot until police shot him,
Knoxville Police Chief Sterling P. Owen IV said this morning.
Adkisson, 58, of Powell wrote a four-page letter in
which he stated his "hatred of the liberal movement," Owen said.
"Liberals in general, as well as gays."
Adkisson said he also was frustrated about not being able to obtain a job, Owen said.
Owen said Adkisson specifically targeted the church for its beliefs, rather than a particular member of the congregation.
"It
appears that church had received some publicity regarding its liberal
stance," the chief said. The church has a "gays welcome" sign and
regularly runs announcements in the News Sentinel about meetings of the
Parents, Friends and Family of Lesbians and Gays meetings at the church.
Owen said Adkisson's stated hatred of the liberal movement was not
necessarily connected to any hostility toward Christianity or religion
per say, but rather the political advocacy of the church.
The church's Web site states that it has worked for "desegregation,
racial harmony, fair wages, women's rights and gay rights" since the
1950s. Current ministries involve emergency aid for the needy, school
tutoring and support for the homeless, as well as a cafe that provides
a gathering place for gay and lesbian high-schoolers.
Conservatism
used to be an ideology -- conservatives believed in getting government
off of people's backs, they believed in fiscal restraint and small
central government, they believed we should have a humble foreign
policy focused on watching out for ourselves and not trying to rule the
world and they detested experiments in social engineering.
In the
post-World War II era, it was a widely-loathed ideology and liberalism
was dominant. Democrats were proud liberals who wanted to build a more
just society and most Republicans were liberals who believed we should
do so much more gradually and carefully than their opponents.
Beginning
in the middle of the last century, conservatives abandoned any
semblance of ideological coherence -- when in power, they spend more on
pet projects than liberals, are more interventionist in their foreign
policy than their liberal counterparts and are all-too-happy to meddle
in the most private affairs of the citizenry (think: opposition to
birth control; Terri Schiavo). Conservatism gave way to "backlash"
conservatism, which is, in practice, little more than an ideology of
resentment. Thomas Frank, in a less tragic context, coined the phrase
"conservative plenty-plaint" to describe it -- a list of grievances,
great and small, that are all somehow attributed, rightly or wrongly,
to the supposed evils of liberalism.
It was a strategic choice,
one that may be attributed to Joe McCarthy or Spiro Agnew or Richard
Nixon, and it has consequences. As villifying the left became
incredibly lucrative -- Rush Limbaugh has a contract worth $400
million, Ann Coulter makes a fortune on her pabulum -- the competition
became fierce, and the charges against liberalism went further and
further over the top.
David Neiwert calls it "eliminationist" rhetoric -- putting forth the idea that one's opponents are not simply in
disagreement, do not simply have a different and competing political
philosophy, do not just believe that their approach to solving problems
is superior but are bent on destroying the country, the culture, even
the family unit from within. And, more importantly, that they must be
destroyed or exiled.
Consider the narratives we hear so
frequently, from right-wing talk radio, to the right-blogs to Fox News.
Liberals are traitors. Liberals hate the troops, stab them in the back,
hate America. They are "anti-family", they hate God. They want America
to be destroyed by its enemies, whether Soviet shock troops or
"Islamofascist" terrorists.
I'm not denying for a second that
progressives and liberals are filled with anumus towards the right, but
it is an animus of a different nature. Most progressives believe that
conservative leaders are greedy, self-interested and represent only the
interests of the very wealthy, and their followers are simply chumps
dazzled by social issues into voting against their own interests. We
don't consider them to be bent on the destruction of our country (even
if some of us believe that is the likely outcome of their governance).
The
difference manifests itself, not infrequently, in incidents like what
went down in Tennessee. It's certainly not isolated -- just last week,
a group of teens beat a Latino migrant to death.
And why not? People like Michelle Malkin don't make arguments about the
costs and benefits of immigration; they paint a picture of an invading
army bent on our destruction. They say that illegal immigration is part
of a plot to "reconquer" parts of America -- literally to annex the
SouthWest. Abortion clinics are bombed, and providers are assassinated,
and the bombers and assassins inevitably see the procedure as "killing
babies" -- who wouldn't act to stop actual babies from being killed?...
More in the link provided.
