The big story today is Glenn Beck’s “Restoring Honor” rally in D.C.
I’m not going to get into whether Beck is “right” or “wrong” in his beliefs, nor whether I believe he is “right” or “wrong” in his beliefs. That’s not my issue with what I’ve been seeing on Facebook and Twitter today.
My issue is with the apparent “do as I say, not as I do” mentality.
First off, people [on the left] are so upset because Beck had the “unmitigated gall” to hold his rally on the precise spot where, and 47 years to the day after, Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr., delivered his “I Have a Dream” speech, saying Beck is mocking the very principle of Dr. King’s speech. Again, I’m not here to say [whether I believe] he is or isn’t. MY problem is that most of the people that do believe he is mocking Dr. King’s legacy are likely the same people that think it’s horrible that some people oppose building a mosque on the site of Ground Zero–and for the very same reason (mocking someone’s legacy). And yes, it IS the same thing.
“Do as I say, not as I do.”
Second, and this has LONG been an issue with me, why does “conservative” automatically mean “hate monger” while “liberal” automatically means “lover of all people”? And with that, why does disagreeing with a liberal- say, President Obama, for example- automatically mean “[racist] hate monger”, while disagreeing with a conservative- say, Glenn Beck, for example- automatically mean “lover of all people”? Folks, hate is hate; doesn’t matter from which proverbial side of the aisle it comes. Some of the comments I’ve seen the last couple days on Facebook and Twitter from liberals- well, okay, to be fair, I guess I should say, from Beck opponents- have been strongly infused with hate. Most notably: “Any chance Beck’s rally might be headed toward a motel in Memphis?” I’ll leave you to make the parallel. Another one I saw a couple weeks back: “I saw that Sarah Palin was in Trending Topics today. I was hoping that meant she had been shot & killed.” And let’s not forget everyone calling Beck “Glenn BecKKK”. Those all sound pretty hateful to me. ”Lover of all people [except Glenn Beck and his supporters]” sounds an awful lot like “Love thy neighbor [except them queers]“.
“Do as I say, not as I do.”
And then there is the whole opinions/beliefs vs. truths thing. Folks, if you don’t agree with Glenn Beck’s beliefs, that’s fine. Disagree all you want. But his are neither more nor less valid than yours. I’m not saying you can’t disagree; I’m not really even saying you “can’t” be hateful in doing so. I’m simply saying that combating what you perceive as hate with your own hate makes you no better. Wishing Palin and/or Beck dead? Really? Could you imagine the uproar if some rightwing nutjob said that about President Obama? Why is it “okay” in the other direction? Why was it okay for liberals to rip President Bush to shreds but anyone that dares speak disparagingly of President Obama is a racist and a hate monger?
“Do as I say, not as I do.”
Something I discovered this morning that I find most interesting, also… people say that Beck is mocking Dr. King’s legacy by holding his rally on the same spot on the anniversary of “I Have a Dream”, yet Dr. King’s niece is not only attending and speaking at Beck’s rally but, in this article, explains why. A very interesting read. Once again, I’m neither supporting nor bashing Beck, but if Dr. King’s own niece supports this rally…
Bottom line, I just don’t get why it’s okay for one side to be hateful yet the other cannot. In my opinion, ultra-leftwingers are no different and equally as “whackjob” as ultra-rightwingers. Most all of politics cannot be boiled down to a simple all-or-none, black-or-white, yes-or-no blanket statement dynamic. In order for there to be the best chance at equality for all, there must be a compromise toward the center- not left, not right; not liberal, not conservative; but somewhere in between. Exactly where can be ironed out once the foundation for a compromise is built, but trying to sway the country to the far left or to the far right is, in my opinion, a mistake that will ultimately destroy any remaining semblance of “democracy”, “freedom”, and “equality” there may still be, as well as any chance of achieving genuine “democracy”, “freedom”, and “equality”– no matter which side is ultimately chosen.
I have several conservative viewpoints (anti-abortion, pro-death penalty, pro-gun ownership). I also have several liberal viewpoints (pro-gay marriage, anti-censorship, 100% freedom of religion–INCLUDING Christianity). Why must it be all or none?! Why does one HAVE to be liberal OR conservative? Being somewhere in the middle is no less a valid choice. Honestly, I see it as a BETTER choice than one or the other, because it says that you listen to and respect both sides and that it makes you more willing to work toward a solution that benefits as many people as possible, not just “this side” or “that side”, or just the people that agree with you.
Actual true “equality” is, in my mind, minorities receiving the same benefits and “perks” and rights as whites. It is ALSO, however, whites receiving the same benefits and “perks” and rights as minorities- not just simply giving the minorities more, trying to make up for the fact that whites have been treated so much better than minorities for so long. It is women being treated the same as men AND men as women. It is homosexuals being treated the same as straight people AND straight people being treated the same as homosexuals. It is Muslims, Buddhists, and Jews being treated equally as Christians AND Christians being treated the same as Muslims, Buddhists, and Jews. It is the needy being treated the same as the wealthy AND the wealthy as the needy. In all cases, it should be without one side being given ANY special treatment, preference, favor, or advantage over the other (in EITHER direction). Until that occurs, “equality” can never exist. Entitling one person or group of people to something to which another person or group of people is not also entitled is not and never will be equality, no matter how you try to justify it.
But then, this is why I despise discussing politics, or even being around people that are. It tends to bring out the absolute worst in people, no matter their ideologies. And I hate it when people act as though it is okay for them to do what they are degrading the “other guy” for doing. ”Do as I say, not as I do.” I’ve been guilty of that before, as I imagine we all have at some point in our lives, but at least in this regard, that does absolutely nothing to work toward a solution to the problem.
|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|+|
Dr. King’s “I Have a Dream” speech contains a very powerful message. I had never actually listened to the entire speech until this morning, thanks to one of my Twitter friends providing a link. I listened to it, and I urge everyone reading this to do the same- not just to listen to it, but to hear it.
And PLEASE try to play nice, people. ALL of us.
Well said.
Comment by Marjorie
“Well said.”
Ditto!!
This whole deal over Beck holding that rally on the anniversary of King’s speech and [gasp] at the same place…Or that a mosque will be built near Ground Zero (btw, I like Bill Maher’s take on this: “Maybe if we had actually built something there in the last nine years, there wouldn’t be a place to build a mosque near Ground Zero!”)…Maybe it’s bad, but I really have no interest in stuff like this. Both are non-issues to me. Sometimes I wish we could just go back to newspapers in the morning and watching the news on television in the evenings, and then you’re done. You got the scoop. Newsmakers wouldn’t have the time or room to hypothesize crap like this. I blame CNN, Fox News, etc., as well as the countless news outlets on the Internet for going at the lengths they do to “create” these issues out of thin air. I honestly don’t think people who aren’t involved in media necessarily make the stretch to think about stuff like this until it’s presented to them.
I couldn’t agree more, Steve.