No proof from anyone and a lot of assumptions.
Recently Roger Hedgecock, a right-wing radio talk show host, asserted that several of the most recent mass shooters were registered Democrats. This prompted numerous emails making their way around the internet and social media. Keith Darling-Brekhus, a progressive liberal talk show host refutes Hedgecock’s assertions in an article, stating Hedgecock made these accusations without citing any sources.
Keith Darling-Brekhus simply took the point of disproving the direct statement of “registered Democrat”. He did not delve into the likely political ideology of the shooter. Simply disproving a registration with a specific party does not however disprove that the political ideology of the shooter is in line with that of the Democratic Party as the article would tend to imply.
Not having access to the voter roles it would be difficult for anyone to prove party affiliation without recorded declarations from an individual. Therefore the intent of this post is to look at the likely party affiliation of the shooters.
Nidal Malik Hassa (Fort Hood)
Mr. Darling-Brekhus states in his article that simply because neither Texas nor Virginia requires partisan registration that Hasan is not a registered Democrat. This in no way proves or disproves Hassan’s political affiliation. Mr. Darling-Brekhus boldly states that because of this fact, “that the claim that he is a registered Democrat is FALSE.” Based on the information cited by Mr. Darling-Brekhus, one could merely claim that the statement of Hassan being a registered Democrat is equally possibly true and possibly false.
If we delve into statements and documented facts about Hassan we could make a relatively strong case that Hassan identified more with the Democratic Party rather than the Republican Party.
- Lifelong Muslim
- Strongly opposes the wars in Iraq & Afghanistan
- Identifies as a Palestinian.
Item 1: Lifelong Muslim.
Inman Faizul Khan of the Mosque in Silver Springs, MD where Hassan regularly prayed, commented that Hassan was a lifelong Muslim.
Also it is documented that Hassan was harassed by fellow members of the military due to his Muslim faith. In one incident reported, the manager of Hassan’s apartment complex stated that his car was keyed and a bumper sticker reading “Allah is Love” was removed.
While obviously not all Muslims are Democrats, recent statistics show that the majority of Muslims do vote Democrat over Republican.
In an article from Aljazeera, they state that 90% of Muslims supported Democrats. “About nine in 10 voted for John Kerry, and a similar portion backed Barack Obama in 2008”
Item 2: He was strongly opposed to the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars.
From the Virginian Pilot: Hasan's motive remains unclear, although various sources said he is a devout Muslim who is opposed to U.S. involvement in Afghanistan and Iraq and was upset about an imminent deployment. He also had expressed some anger about the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.
Item 3: Identifies as a Palestinian.
Hassan, interested in finding a wife, filled out a form at his Mosque in Arlington, VA and listed his nationality as Palestinian according to the Iman.
In a Gallup Poll from 2002, shows that a minority of Democrats support Israel over Palestine. The same study shows a meager 8% of Republicans support Palestine over Israel.
Mr. Darling-Brekhus refutes the claim that Hassan is a registered Democrat by calling it FALSE simply because Virgina and Texas do not require partisan registration. Brekhus provides no evidence to support his justification of calling Mr. Hedgecock claim as false. To successfully claim this is false, Brekhus would have to prove he was registered to another party or prove that he has never registered with a party. He never proves any of this. While my discussion neither proves or disproves a party affiliation of Hassan, his faith, his words and claimed nationality align him significantly closer to the Democratic Party than the Republican Party.
Seung-Hui Cho (Virginia Tech)
Mr. Darling-Brekhus provides the same baseless justification in debunking the Democrat status of the Virgina Tech shooter as he did for the Fort Hood shooting. As with the Fort Hood shooter, we see that his logic is flawed and all that can be deduced using his logic is that he would be equally probable of being a Democrat or Republican. Mr. Darling-Brekhus did however, after an epiphany of citizenship, modify his justification that the Virginia Tech shooter was not legally able to register to vote. Due to widespread voter fraud cases in which ACORN has targeted non qualified immigrants, this is no way proves he has not voted in US elections for Democratic candidates. Once again, no definitive proof has been provided by the author.
- - Korean immigrant
- - Anti-Christian
- - Anti-Rich
Seung-Hui had left a note in his dormitory which contains a rant referencing Christianity and denigrating "rich kids." He also "railed against his parents' strong Christian faith."
A study from the Asian American Legal Defense and Education Fund showed that 78% of Korean Americans Voted for Obama.
Based on the overwhelming support of Obama from the Korean Community and the fact that Cho was outspoken against rich people and Christians which are commonly perceived to be conservative Republicans, statistics would put odds on Cho being more in line with the Democratic Party rather than the Republican party.
James Holmes (Dark Knight)
The amusing part to Mr. Darling-Brekhus’ article is that he bashes Mr. Hedgecock for “not providing any sources”. However the basis for his determination of the James Holmes claim being FALSE is a simple retraction due to a research error. Once again his “evidence” neither proves nor disproves the Dark Knight shooter as a registered Democrat. The author is quick to report the false reports of Holmes being a Registered Democrat but conveniently ignores the false reports of Holmes being a Tea Party Member. Hispanic Tea Party Member, James Michael Holmes identity was falsely used by ABC to tie the Dark Knight shooter to the Tea Party.
A private investigator claims that James Holmes was part of the Occupy Wall Street’s violent faction, Occupy Black Bloc. Bill Warner told how The Dark Knight Rises portrays the Occupy movement in a bad light establishing a possible motive for the choice of venue. Adam Carolla went on a rant about describing Holmes’ Occupy Ideology against the debt he incurred in college and how hard he had to work in school.
On his Match.com profile he claimed to have “middle of the road” political views and was agnostic.
The tie to Occupy would overwhelmingly suggest that the Dark Knight shooter was more in line with a Democrat ideology however I found an equal amount of articles on the internet supporting that he was involved and wasn’t involved. For this one, lacking any strong evidence, I say we stick with his own words as a middle-of-the-road when it comes to political ideology.
Adam Lanza(Sandy Hook)
So to remind you, Mr. Darling-Brekhus bashes Mr. Hedgecock for not quoting sources but then has the audacity to justify calling the claim FALSE with the statement “We can therefore claim that with no evidence to support the claim, the assertion that Lanza was a Democrat is not demonstrated and that in the absence of any evidence it is likely FALSE.” With no evidence you cannot claim anything. No evidence is an absence of proof of either position. Once again Mr. Darling-Brekhus merely proves that Lanza is equally likely to be Democrat as he is Republican.
Mr. Darling-Brekhus bases his “proof” of Lanza not being a Democrat because of 2 points; he lives in a “Republican-leaning city" and that his mother was a "prepper". To use his own stats, Lanza's state voted for Obama and his city voted for Romney with a percentage of 51.7%. 1.7% hardly screams “Republican-leaning”. As to the prepper politics of his mother, I had an awesome dinner with one of my best friends who is definitely a liberal that is way more advanced in the prepping movement that I am. I searched the internet extensively and the I don’t see a bias by any means to one party. If anything preppers seem to be more identified as Libertarian and some of the most mixed party folks that I have seen. Check out the following forum, it seems to be very mixed.
Grant it, this is not a scientific poll but Mr. Darling-Brekhus provides no scientific or any proof that preppers are predominately Republicans and makes unfounded assumptions just like he accuses Mr. Hedgecock of doing.
Mr. Darling-Brekhus proceeds to write an article providing absolutely zero facts just as he lambasts Mr. Hedgecock for doing. The basis of my post is that unless there are some facts to go from, you can’t definitively state a political affiliation yet Mr. Darling-Brekhus presents his article as debunking claims. I do not in any way profess to be ascertaining the political affiliation of any of these monsters, but I do think I have taken a closer look into their potential ideology. One fact that exists agnostic of political affiliation is that these monsters committed atrocities and we need to spend more time understanding the human condition that would cause this behavior versus assuming what political party they relate to or what device they used.
I am merely a concerned citizen and not a paid journalist. That being said I think I have provided entirely more commentary that either of these “journalists”. I welcome input from anyone on this topic. I am a Libertarian free thinker who has a fairly equal split of Liberal and Conservative friends. Attacking me on my beliefs will do you absolutely no good. Come to the table with open discussion and I will listen. Start acting like a blithering idiot, either left or right and I just honestly don’t have time for you.
“When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser”… Socrates