Reactions to the hate Wellstone letters to the editor in the StarTribune.

[Brucey]

On the anniversary of the death of Paul Wellstone, Oct. 25, several disgraceful, hateful letters appeared in the Minneapolis StarTribune. Today there were three letters in response:

Toxic tone of politics


Was it really necessary, on the first anniversary of the death of Sen. Paul Wellstone, to print hateful letters ("No to Lake Wellstone," Oct. 25)? Those two letter writers are a prime example of what turns most people off to politics today -- you can't just disagree with a person's opinion, you have to hate the person as an individual as well.

Rod Joyal, Mankato.


Grieving the Wellstones


There were three extremely mean-spirited letters, regarding the suggestion to rename Lake Calhoun after Paul Wellstone, published on the first anniversary of his death.

The writers demonstrated a great deal of insensitivity and disrespect for the grieving families and the many Minnesotans who are still hurting from their loss.

I cherish anyone's right to disagree with Paul and Sheila Wellstone's philosophies and accomplishments; however, Paul's staunchest political opponents could not express personal animosity, but sadness for the loss of a genuinely kind, personable man they often disagreed with. Could anyone oppose Sheila Wellstone's tireless advocacy for battered women and children?

Michael N. Hindin, St. Louis Park.


Enough with the hate


I gasped in disbelief when I read the tasteless, offensive Oct. 25 letter in which the letter writer objected to renaming Lake Calhoun as Lake Wellstone on the grounds that "Lake Calhoun already suffers from significant pollution. Why add to it?"

It is one thing to disagree with another person's political perspective. It is quite another thing to display naked, mean-spirited hatred.

Paul Wellstone strove to make this a better world because he was here. I hope I am not alone in deploring the sickening spectacle of a pygmy kicking a dead giant around.

The writer tells us nothing about Wellstone. He reveals much about himself.

William E. Oyler, West St. Paul.


The repugs are beyond belief. They are monsters. How did it come to this? How could they hate Paul Wellstone so much? And how do they have the gall to write nasty letters about the deaths of several people? I recall seeing repugs grinning and excited when Paul died. We really have to expose these people and get them out of office. Jail seems like an appropriate place for such animals. (Sorry for the insult to animals!)

[trotsky]

1. It is so sad.

Repukes here at work basically only stopped short of dancing a happy jig. It is atrocious, that they can't put politics aside even on the occasion of a man's death, and instead have to continue to bash him. And worse, take joy in his passing.

And yes, some of them are putting up the hateful bumper stickers mocking Paul's death.

[La_Serpiente]

2. How can we fight so much hate?

Their vitriol is so disgusting, I don't know how we can fight it. We can be assertive, but will it be enough? It is just beyond the hate barrier and into another realm.

I am very very concerned about where our country is going.

[trotsky]

3. And on top of it, we have to deal with their projection.

THEY rip on us for "hating" * when we criticize his failed policies.

But they don't hate Wellstone when they equate his name with pollution.

Uncaring, unfeeling, horrible bastards is what they are. They've bought into the "me first" mentality of entitlement that the new Republican Party sells, and anyone who disagrees with them is not only worthy, but deserving of ridicule, scorn, and yes, hate.

[prolesunited]

6. Here's some insight on hatred

Hatred ever kills, love never dies. Such is the vast difference between the two. What is obtained by love is retained for all time. What is obtained by hatred proves a burden in reality for it increases hatred.
— Mohandas K. Gandhi

The remarkable thing is that we really love our neighbor as ourselves: we do unto others as we do unto ourselves. We hate others when we hate ourselves. We are tolerant toward others when we tolerate ourselves. We forgive others when we forgive ourselves. We are prone to sacrifice others when we are ready to sacrifice ourselves.
— Eric Hoffer

We have just enough religion to make us hate, but not enough to make us love one another.
— Jonathan Swift:

[William Seger]

4. Short answer: Rush Limbaugh

... and of course the demagoguery industry he spawned. Before Limbaugh, the general tone of right-wing propaganda was that liberalism was bad for you and the country, and the main problem with liberals was that they believe in liberalism. Limbaugh turned that around, promoting the thesis that the problem with liberalism is that it's the belief system of liberals, who are evil, deceitful vermin with a hidden immoral agenda. Since he allowed no liberals to interfere with his message, that style of argument was not only easier for Limbaugh to make -- virtually no thought required -- more importantly, it was a lot easier for dittoheads to follow than a policy debate. It plays directly to the inate "conservative" fear, mistrust, and pessimistic worldview. The essense of demagoguery is to offer up someone to hate.

[Brucey]

8. Good point, and welcome to DU!

Nice to have you here. Keep posting, like to hear your thoughts.

[liberalmuse]

5. Any decent person would find this sickening...

and evil. Paul Wellstone was one of the more decent human beings to grace our human race with his presence. The world is better off for him having been here. It seems these days that conservatives are more and more willing and eager to crawl out of the slime to expose the true ugliness they have had festering inside of them for a long time now. Good. Maybe the more moderate among us will take notice and become appalled at what passes as 'conservatism' these days. I refuse to become like these hatemongers, but I refuse to bow to them or let them dominate political discourse in this country, or in the office.

[Brucey]

9. Nice response, and I'm wondering

what in the world Paul said or did to generate such hate? I guess they thought he wanted to raise their taxes (he did want a fair tax system) and that, for greedy people, is the most despicable of all things. Was that what made them hate him so much? Truth is, everyone who knew him said how kind and generous and caring he was. Surely they couldn't have hated him for wanting to help children, poor, elderly, veterans, minorities, etc.? What was it? Oh, it just dawned on me that some of the hatred was bigotry! Paul did support minorities and gays. Maybe Sharpton is correct: It's the Christian right against the right Christians. (Funny line)

[Lydia Leftcoast]

7. I was delighted to note

that one of the three letter writers cited here is a former professor of mine. :-)

And here I had always thought of him as a conservative. Perhaps he's one of the true conservatives who argues on the basis of ideas instead of personalities.

[Iverson]

10. the simple answer:

They hate us for our freedoms.

They hate us for our intellectual freedom, our compassionate spirits, and our dedication to the (abstract) idea of a government of the people, by the people, and for the people.

They want none of it, don't believe in it, and do believe in the rule of the iron fist. Their only qualms with fascism in WWII were that the fascists were on the wrong side. Likewise, they accept terrorism with enthusiasm so long as it serves their agenda. Critical evaluation is for them just a liberal ploy to undermine absolute allegiance to their world view.

So you see, they hate us for our freedoms.

edited typo

[grannylib]

11. Total agreement

I would like to echo La_Serpiente's question: how can we counter so much hate?? I too am seriously grieved and concerned about the direction our country is taking, and am really starting to resent being thought of as a traitor, unpatriotic, etc. etc.
"Dissent is the truest form of patriotism." Thomas Jefferson
Love the line about the "Christian right against the right Christians" had not heard that onee!
Seriously, friends, how CAN we deal with this? What is the most effective means of communicating without succumbing to the tactics of the "right" - name-calling, false accusations, planted smear stories, and other dirty tricks?
Do we really need to adopt such methods? Do we need a liberal version of Ann Coulter or Rush Limbaugh - a strident, obnoxious, rude, boorish, factually-unencumbered, loudmouth shill? Or is it really possible for us to make our points to the American public in such a way as to garner the attention deserved but without becoming pond scum ourselves (tongue in cheek here, peeps ;-) )