Ted Nugent is freaking scary

The following is crossposted from my blog (http://www.jeffseemann.typepad.com) and Daily Kos

Maybe you've heard about Ted Nugent's address to the NRA Convention over the weekend?  I read about it this morning, and something about it has been bugging me all day.

Well, something besides the fact that it smacked of radical extremism (he even used the words himself), it demanded exclusivity ("No one is allowed....unless they are an NRA member"), it was racist (well, what do YOU call "Remember the Alamo!  Shoot 'em!"?), and it was anti-Constitution ("No court case....I want 'em dead" REALLY goes against that whole 7th Amendment, you know?).

But I couldn't quite put my finger on the pulse of what was really bothering me about this guy's comments.  All day I was trying to figure it out when the name James Huberty popped into my head.

James Huberty was born and raised in my hometown of Canton, Ohio.  Spent most of his life working hard, but had a few problems.  He was working as a welder in neighboring Massillon when the plant he worked at shut down.  He eventually picked up his things and he and his wife moved to San Ysidro, California, where the job outlook wasn't much better (keep in mind, we're talking early-to-mid 80's here).

Huberty held his beliefs with great passion, especially his large gun collection (which included semi-automatic weaponry) and his distaste for Hispanic people, whom he blamed for a lot of problems.

He spent more time unemployed and grew angrier as each day wore on, until mid-July of 1984.  On July 18th, he kissed his wife goodbye and went a quarter-mile down the street to a packed McDonald's.  Taking three large weapons into the restaurant, he opened fire.  Over an hour later, a police sniper took him down, but not before he unloaded over 250 rounds, killing 21 people and wounding 19 more.  The horrendous rampage took over an hour to complete, during which Huberty took his shotgun to the head of a 9-month old infant.

No, this is not a blogging about gun control.  Sure, one wonders how a man with a history of mental instability obtained so many weapons legally, but that's not the point.  No, I'm not blogging to claim that Ted Nugent is the equivalent of Huberty....he's not.  Nor am I claiming that Nugent had no right to say such hateful words...he has every right to it, just as I have every right to protest his words on this very webpage.

The problem is that Nugent was TALKING to James Huberty with that speech.  He was speaking Huberty's language.  On a platform that millions would hear about, he spoke directly to the anger and fears of people just like Huberty.  He gave them the thumbs-up to murder others simply because they can.  He advocated and encouraged people to take the law into their own hands if they" don't belong", especially against Hispanic people (and don't kid yourself....why exactly do people scream "Remember the Alamo" again?)

James Huberty smiled when Nugent went on his little temper-tantrum at the NRA Convention.  Maybe someday they'll be in the same place so Huberty can thank him.  But that's not my call.

Ted Nugent's words were scary, however.  AMERICAblog says that he must have run out of time to say "Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out", and that sounds about right.  It certainly isn't because he was being subtle.

Think about what the outcry would be if a member of a group was speaking to a crowd of thousands, on their feet and cheering as the speaker encouraged everyone to kill Americans without trial.  To kill them because they don't belong to your group.  To kill them because they're not radical enough.  These are the words that create fear in everybody.

Don't mistake it.  Your words have an effect on those who hear them.  Nugent's words could spark another Huberty incident easily.  THAT'S why he's freaking scary.  He had a RESPONSIBILITY to choose his language carefully, and he failed that reponsibility dreadfully.  Playing a red, white and blue guitar does not absolve you of your responsibilities to your fellow human beings.  Let's all hope that in his attempt to protect the 2nd Amendment, Nugent doesn't try to throw out the 7th and 1st as well.  After all, they are of equal importance.

Tags: (all tags)

Comments

7 Comments

Nugent is a rock and roll burnout
He's no different than Ozzie Osborne, except the NRA likes rock and roll burn outs and Hollywood has beens.

I used to see him on Hannity and O'Liely. He's an articulate burn out, but he's still a burn out. He may be putting on an act for grins. I think Coulter does the same thing. Whaddaya gonna do? I think ridicule is more effective than taking them seriously.

by Gary Boatwright 2005-04-18 03:33PM | 0 recs
Whoa there sport
At least Ozzy has some talent and changed Rock and Roll as the original Metal god. Nugent had how many hit songs again and did what again for Rock?
by michael in chicago 2005-04-18 03:44PM | 0 recs
I stand corrected
That's a very good point. I was thinking more about the burn out part than the actual musical talent of both men.
by Gary Boatwright 2005-04-18 08:23PM | 0 recs
You wanna know who's scary?
The DLC is scary. The DLC is like a cancer on the body politic of the Democratic party. It has no function except to funnel corporate campaign contributions to Democrats who can be bought off.

Republicans are not the enemy of the Democratic party. DLC Democrats are the enemy of the Democratic party. I made a comment that if Harry Reid was tacitly collaborating with Karl Rove, it would not have made a bit of difference in the legislation that Bush pushed through with the active participation of DLC Democrats.

Biden, Feinstein, Lieberman, Dodd and all the rest of the DLC Faux Republicans Du Jour have formed a rotating corp of reliable votes for Bush victories. We need to get some Democrats like you and Pennacchio into Congress so the Democratic wing of the Democratic party has some representation in Congress.

by Gary Boatwright 2005-04-18 03:51PM | 0 recs
Re: You wanna know who's scary?
non sequiturs are scary too.
by johnny longtorso 2005-04-18 04:43PM | 0 recs
Punch for the true Democrats.
I've become more and more attached to the idea that the true battle for the party will be fought in 2006 Congressional primaries against DLC members.

I think that if a few DLC "Dems" are taken down by progressives in a primary, that'll get the message across. I think that the widespread distancing from the DLC by Obama, Corzine, etc. demonstrates that this vunerabilty exists. It's up to a few good campaigns and local progressive Dems to capitalize upon this in 2006.

by Danno11 2005-04-18 05:03PM | 0 recs
Re: Punch for the true Democrats.
It seems like a reasonable expectation that a Democratic Senator should be more popular with Democrats in his home state than he is with Republicans. We need an organizational equivalent of the Club for Growth. I think a Liebeman primary challenge is getting more and more likely.

There are rumors that Feinstein has said this will be her last term so she isn't concerned about what her constituents think. I don't know if it is true, but it exemplifies the arrogance of the DLC. They have demonstrated their contempt for their constituents and a preference for their corporate campaign contributors.

by Gary Boatwright 2005-04-18 08:29PM | 0 recs

Diaries

Advertise Blogads


----------- myDD - skin -----------