The recent recall elections in two other Colorado districts elicited the term “gun fanatics” by Herald editorial writer Megan Graham in her column (Sept. 15). In other words, people on the other side of the issue than she was deserved name-calling, regardless of the Constitutional right to arms. Why is that?
The people trying to implement authoritarian measures, whether about guns or plastic grocery bags, are fine, according to Herald editorials, presumably because they are doing God’s work. Name-calling appears fairly often in liberal discourse, even to the point of President Obama calling out Republicans by name and using words like “extremists” and so on. Liberal political leaders referred to President George W. Bush as a “traitor,” a “liar,” and worse. Anyone who has beliefs other than the liberal orthodoxy becomes a “denier,” a “phobe” of some sort, a racist and worse. In other words, provocative name-calling has become the norm among liberals. I’ve sat in meetings and listened to liberals casually call conservatives names, and I’ve been intrigued that few of them see anything wrong with it.
A poll that was taken before the IRS scandal began developing showed that up to 40 percent of people think that there will have to be an armed uprising in the United States, because we’re drifting toward an authoritarianism never seen before. Since the revelations about the IRS, the NSA, Benghazi and other cover-ups, I wouldn’t expect that polling about an uprising to have decreased. However, I don’t think that the name-calling helps anything, either. Maybe there’s a better way to express ideas – a way that doesn’t include character references.