The violent rhetoric of Senator Jeff Kruse
Kari Chisholm
Fifteen years ago, this Monday, the Alfred P. Murrah federal building Oklahoma City was destroyed in a terrorist attack. The terrorist who delivered the bombs was Timothy McVeigh, a former Army veteran and militia sympathizer.
In a letter to the editor prior to the attacks, McVeigh complained:
Taxes are a joke. Regardless of what a political candidate "promises," they will increase. More taxes are always the answer to government mismanagement. They mess up. We suffer. Taxes are reaching cataclysmic levels, with no slowdown in sight... Is a Civil War Imminent? Do we have to shed blood to reform the current system? I hope it doesn't come to that. But it might.
On Thursday, State Senator Jeff Kruse (R-Roseburg) headlined an anti-tax Tea Party protest on the steps of the Douglas County Courthouse. According to the Roseburg News-Review, Kruse said:
“We have super majorities in both Salem and in Washington, D.C., and they are moving as absolutely as fast as they can before the revolution. And the revolution is coming,” Kruse said. “This is where it starts. It is not a revolution of guns, God I hope it's not — but I do have a gun.”
The similarities are striking. Am I suggesting that Kruse is about to blow up a federal building? Absolutely not.
But words matter. Words have consequences. You can't work in politics and believe otherwise. After all, the whole point of political rhetoric is to motivate people to take action.
And to see Senator Kruse engaging in that kind of violent rhetoric - even hypothetically - before a fired-up crowd is deeply disturbing.
While I may disagree, I see no problem with conservative anti-tax activists engaging in strident language decrying policies they oppose. Fine, that's democracy. And I'll even defend his free-speech right to engage in whatever rhetoric they want, even violent rhetoric.
But why the sudden shift in the last few months to this violent rhetoric? What purpose does it serve?
April 19 is an important day to the militia crowd. It's the anniversary of Oklahoma City, the Branch Davidian siege in Waco, and - because they see themselves as patriots - the "shot heard round the world" at Lexington and Concord.
I pray that nothing happens on Monday. But if it does, Senator Kruse, Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Rep. Steve King, and so many others engaging in this violent rhetoric will have some explaining to do.
Words have consequences.
 |
More Recent Posts | |
Albert Kaufman |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
Kari Chisholm |
Final pre-census estimate: Oregon's getting a sixth congressional seat |
Albert Kaufman |
Polluted by Money - How corporate cash corrupted one of the greenest states in America |
Guest Column |
|
Albert Kaufman |
Our Democrat Representatives in Action - What's on your wish list? |
Kari Chisholm |
|
Guest Column |
|
Kari Chisholm |
|
connect with blueoregon
3:15 p.m.
Apr 17, '10
I agreed with every word you said up until the last sentence.
Words have consequences.
Oh really? What consequences do those who speak this clap-trap ever suffer? Other than an increase in contributions....
These people say this because nothing will ever happen to them and they know it. Not when they are speaking to their base.
3:43 a.m.
Apr 21, '10
Amen. It's like the plethora of "billing errors" I deal with every month. Just by coincidence, they always work to the company's advantage. Amazing how those "random" errors never vary in my favor.
In the country where business is the business of the country and fraud is how too much of that business operates, the "my bad" that just happens to work to your advantage has become a high art form.
It's more demagoguery than advocating violence. This seems to be more a case of going to the list of toxic labels and seeing which one can be used against the opposition today. If that's the motivation, I would suggest that it can be pursued more directly at the FB page, "Everytime You Tell A Bad Joke Dick Cheney Kills A Kitten".
4:28 p.m.
Apr 17, '10
I truly believe the question is not if, but when there is a violent domestic terror attack of large proportion. There have already been several people who have killed a few of their fellow citizens based upon right wing rhetoric, but there will be a Tim McVeigh size event again. The amount of hate and anger that is on the radio and the TV and the number of pyscho gun nuts is just too combustible.
8:06 p.m.
Apr 17, '10
I'm getting tired of all this. People challenging and threatening me and my friends that have Pres. Obama stickers. It's like dealing with Brownshirts. We need to start recognizing these tactics for what they are. Paranoia of communism and threats of violent recrimination is the territory of totalitarian movements.
I think that we liberals are too afraid of putting forth hyperbole in the fear that we are emulating our opposition. It's because of this that we sometimes cede the field to our increasingly unreasonable opposition. We need to start standing up to them.
Politics has been described by Karlyn Kohrs Campbell and Kathleen Hall Jamieson as Deeds Done In Words and these are some pretty foul deeds.
10:44 a.m.
Apr 18, '10
One could argue that that was Carla's approach, of late, and that seemed to only foster trolling and alienate progressives, on the ends of the spectrum. The middle cheered wildly, or so it seemed.
So, practically speaking, perhaps you're right. Guess it depends on where your nose is pointed. Seems foreign to me, because I don't look to the center. (And that's why you shouldn't vote for Chris Dudley!)
11:11 a.m.
Apr 18, '10
I absolutely intend to continue to stand up to the Teabaggers, if that's your point. They're playground bullies, imo.
If the consequences of those actions are to alienate folks on the fringes I can personally live with that. In my view, there is no good outcome "reason" with folks who choose to be squatters of the fringe.
"Fringe" being relative, I suppose.
11:14 a.m.
Apr 18, '10
'...no good outcome in "reasoning"..', that is.
11:17 p.m.
Apr 22, '10
Reasoning with people who: - believe taxes and government-funded social services are bad - believe that immigration is bad - believe that Islamic people are bad
But: - want their Medicare and Social Security - love Fox News (News Corporation: Rupert Murdoch, 46%. Prince Alaweed bin Talal al-Saud of Saudi Arabia, 7%.)
Um. Right. I'll wait for them to prove that black is white and get run over at the next zebra crossing.
11:23 a.m.
Apr 18, '10
One would have to look at the hit counter to say if anyone was alienated. I enjoy an aggressive piece and I suspect that all of the responses that result mean that others do too. As for the trolls, I like feeding them. (Original in the wrong place.)
10:38 a.m.
Apr 18, '10
There's a semantic point here that I think is important. Why is it terrorism when a person trained by the military takes matters into his own hands on US soil, but if he was still enlisted and did it in Iraq it would be a straight crime. Either it's a straight-forward criminal situation in both places or it's terrorism in both places. Which is it?
The meaning of a word is its use and if you look at the usage of the word in the American political lexicon, it's clearly from the right. Kari's post has a tone that sounds like it's leveraging that usage, while disparaging the acts that were caused by the very mindset that gave rise to the contemporary usage of "terrorism". This is what progressives mean when they say there is no difference between the parties.
The progressives I know don't find the construct useful, or that the term reveals more than it conceals. I basically agree with post; agree whole-heartedly with the sentiment. It's just that I see leveraging "terrorism" as the same violent rhetoric. Too often in our history we define an atrocity so that we can do it too. Reference the history of scalping or any number of episodes from everyday life in the Putumayo or Congo, during the rubber booms.
If want to really see this illustrated, a stark warning 100 years ago that we could have learned from, I highly recommend Roger Casement's Putumayo Report. He makes the same case about violence and language. He's more interested in words like "terrorism", though, than people saying overtly violent things.
9:01 a.m.
Apr 20, '10
The Progressive Democrats join coffeeparty.com rather than the teabaggers and the means to a better government outcome for Progressives is NOT violence! We work witin the system, promoting education and peaceful "within the system" rhetoric. Regardless of your opinion regarding Kari's post, Progressives do NOT succumb to violence and DO ignore personally damaging comments from the right wingers preferring to work within the system. We spend countless hours researching the facts behind what we say asnd countless hours signing petitions and corresponding with all government leaders especially those representing our respective states. Please do your research so you understand that Progressives are rational and teabaggers are reactive thinkers.
10:41 p.m.
Apr 21, '10
We got our wires crossed somewhere. I don't disagree with anything you've said.
11:21 a.m.
Apr 18, '10
One would have to look at the hit counter to say if anyone was alienated. I enjoy an aggressive piece and I suspect that all of the responses that result mean that others do too. As for the trolls, I like feeding them.
1:19 p.m.
Apr 18, '10
I believe the standard definition of terrorism is to use violence against civilians in order to further a political cause.
Using that definition, which has neither a right nor left bias, the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah building 15 years ago was most certainly terrorism, as was the mining of harbors in Nicaragua by forces allied with the U.S. Government in the 1980s, as was the killing of abortion doctors. I have no problem with calling those acts of terrorism.
3:33 a.m.
Apr 21, '10
Yes, that was my point.
5:39 p.m.
Apr 18, '10
Words matter. In 1988 a 28 year old Ethiopian man, Mulegeta Seraw, was killed in Portland, beaten with a baseball bat and steel-toed boots, and left to die. He was killed because of his race by members of the hate group White Aryan Resistance. In the court case, which convicted the three men who beat him, the leader of WAR, Tom Metzger, was also convicted for inciting racist violence and held liable for Seraw's death for words he said from his home in California.
The Southern Poverty Law Center estimates that known "partiot" groups have increased by 244% over recent years. Calling for a revolution, and suggesting violence IS UNACCEPTABLE, especially for our elected leaders.
7:08 p.m.
Apr 18, '10
It's important to remember that while Metzger and his organization were financially bankrupted by the the court decision, Metzger's was a civil case loss, not criminal. As far as I know, for criminal legal action based on public rhetoric you have to go all the way back to the 1960's and the indictments of H. Rap Brown, Stockely Carmichael and Bobby Seale and the Chicago 7. Can you imagine which state or federal law enforcement official is going to be willing to indict the current leadership of the right-wing crazies, even if their minions go "McVeigh" on someone.
11:41 a.m.
Apr 19, '10
Under this theory, where someone says they don't advocate or wish for a violent solution but are prepared for one--does that make Gil Scot Heron dangerous? Early Malcolm? How about Huey Newton?
There have been those in the teabagger movement who have advocated in oblique terms for armed revolution. This doesn't qualify, and to make the claim it's dangerous speech makes me wonder if you'd been playing the role of Scared Whitey home in your suburbs during the 60s.
4:54 p.m.
Apr 19, '10
Absolute rubbish. Kruse is overtly threatening violence against fellow Americans if the rightwing ideas those same Americans find abhorrent are not universally adopted. He is delusional, he is dangerous and he is borderline treasonous. Taking up arms against one's government is never something that should be taken lightly, and yet it seems like the teabagging traitors of this country equate a violent civil war with a picnic. They ought to realize they would be crushed like a wayward ant if they ever attempt such foolishness. I would personally volunteer for the military under those circumstances if it meant I could actively help put these cretins down.
In short, Kruse is playing dangerous game here, and his speech definitely should be investigated by the FBI as seditious and possibly treasonous.
8:41 a.m.
Apr 20, '10
You are correct--Roseberg has had these same whacked out politicians before. The social climate is ripe for these crazies--I'll bet he's also a Christian crazy. Unfortunately, there's BIG MONEY like from the Koch Bros. and Don Blankenship (the Massey Energy CEO that killed 29 miners recently)and other multi-billionaires/millionaires. I wonder if Palin tried to deduct her expenses with the IRS while ramping up the teabaggers at the Southern Republican Conference recently? The teabaggers probably have PTSD from Vietnam and the younger ones PTSD from IUraq/Afghanistan.
8:46 a.m.
Apr 20, '10
Taking an English class will allow you to determine "main ideas" and truely comprehend language. You need to re-read this teabagger's rhetoric. Of course, any class in Social Sciences will help you understand that such rhetoric in such social climate DOES equate to violence! I also recommend that you take a course in gun handling and recognizing threats from your local police department. You are sooo uninformed!
1:06 a.m.
Apr 20, '10
Playing a dangerous game? Undoubtedly. Espousing violent rhetoric? Not really. I've seen and and heard instances where there is action advocated against others--THAT is violent rhetoric. Saying I'm gonna defend myself against the Man is paranoid and delusional, but it's not advocacy of active violence against the state.
8:36 a.m.
Apr 20, '10
I recommend that you take an English class and learn to recognize both violent rhetoric and threats as well as propaganda! While doing so--learn the difference between facts and opinions at various levels of linguistic competency.
4:07 a.m.
Apr 21, '10
Maybe I'm missing it, but I don't see why both points aren't valid. It's been said 1,000,000 times, but we seem to forget it; "The TEA people are not a party". Jeff Kruse is a Republican. They're not identical thangs. Mark's comments are completely applicable to the post, as stated. Anna is speaking to the validity of Kari's conclusion. His logic can be suspect and the conclusion still correct. All big organizations get big milage from the statement that is illicit or illogical, but valid. See: Catholic Church.
I live in Gresham and am seeing exactly the demographics and logic Anna describes. Picking just the one nearest to me physically, he is 55, a Nam vet, very poor, and considers himself "a Christian gentleman". That seems to be a working lever. That and strength. While facts and logic make not much of an impact, "if Christianity is people like you, then it really sucks", has actually elicited civil behavior.
They're ill-equipped for most things in life. The fact that they muck up politics should come as no surprise. I will still insist that anyone that has no sympathy for their wanting to participate anyway, is a heartless hack.
8:33 a.m.
Apr 20, '10
Roseberg is the hotbed of domestic violence and the teabaggers. My daughter is the Exec. Director for Douglas' County domestic shelters. The demographics of these teabaggers is that most teabaggers are wealthy (make over $100,000--though some are very poor),they are white males over 50 years old (how many have PTSD from Vietnam?)though some are young men (how many have have PTSD from Iraq/Afghanistan ?), they are Republican and they watch Fox News to get their "propaganda and talking points"--though there are some very misguided low info. democrats. They could not be found in Portland on the day that Sara Palin and the Southern Repub. Conference teabagger leaders stated they would be there--heard they didn't want to pay for parking.