Spawn of Satan, murder threats. Can politics ever get better? | Opinion
Welcome back to Agree to Disagree, in which I discuss topics with people on different sides of the political spectrum.
A few weeks ago, I noticed a Facebook post from state Sen. Chris McDaniel, the Taylor Mill Republican and chairman of the Senate Appropriations and Revenue Committee. It was about a Northern Kentucky judge executive candidate who blamed Charlie Kirk’s death on the Democratic Party, calling the party of “insanity, demonic possession, and radical extremism,” whose members “represent Satan’s spawn on earth.”
McDaniel called him out, saying that while he disagreed with Democrats on virtually every issue, “They’re not the spawn of Satan. They’re not the evil enemy. They are people that you go to church with. People that you work with. People who raise their families and love their neighbors. And while I’ll fight most of the ideas that they espouse tooth and nail, I’ll respect them as fellow children of God and treat them with the dignity that our mutual humanity demands. I encourage everyone, on both sides of the aisle, to do the same.”
I asked McDaniel if he’d be willing to discuss political discourse and civility, and he graciously agreed. The conversation was conducted by email, mostly.
Linda Blackford: Hi Senator, this might be a case where we agree to agree, because I was really struck by your Facebook post in response to some incendiary language by a Northern Kentucky politician after the Charlie Kirk assassination. Why do you think political division has gotten so bad that people who disagree on policy now characterize each other as evil and spawns of Satan?
Sen. Chris McDaniel: I think that the causes of the current rhetoric becoming so heated to the point where we see politicians call the opposing party “spawns of Satan” or telling colleagues that they wish for opponents family members to get a “bullet to the head” are very deep. However, they start at home. As we continue to see across this nation, when the teaching of basic morals and the worth of other people is not emphasized at home, the ground becomes fertile for terrible thoughts to take root. Further, the erosion of church attendance exacerbates the problem of the lack of emphasis of morals and service to others. Tim Carney writes very eloquently about this in his book “Alienated America”. When the home and church are reduced in their value for the provision of moral guideposts, we are then to rely on schools.
However, moral instruction, especially its grounding in religion, is banished from that sphere, as well. With these institutions of instruction reduced in their impact on society’s moral framework, the ability to corrupt minds is expanded. With the modern addition of social media to the mix, some of the worst instincts of people can then be exploited to further push them into philosophical corners from which they cannot view others with basic dignity.
Unfortunately, as the importance of true morality has become degraded, its imposition by or removal from, the public sphere becomes a tenant of political faith. Thus, you see people descend into a space where they simply cannot see the basic humanity of those with whom they disagree politically.
LB: Yes, although church attendance has been pretty low for a long time before this current political time. And there are many people who use the mantle of religion to spout terrible and divisive things. Social media is no doubt behind many of our societal fissures. I would also point out gently that we are in the second term of a president— the likes of which we have never seen from either party — who speaks constantly of his perceived enemies in terms of evil. He even said this at what could have been a real national turning point: When Erica Kirk forgave her husband’s killer. So, the kind of morality you speak of is not being modeled at the highest levels of our society. Is there a way to do so at the more local levels? And, what would that look like?
CM: We would be remiss to think that the current political speech is anything but an extension of what has been occurring for quite some time. I think that, if you looked for the start of this type of rhetoric, the ad against (Republicans) Paul Ryan and Mitt Romney that showed Paul Ryan throwing a grandmother off a cliff would be the starting point of the decline of decency.
Politics has always been a rough endeavor. It will always be a rough endeavor. And free speech is a rose with countless thorns. But, aggressive advocacy of a position is critical to our democracy and the ability of a free people to speak and assemble freely is essential. It is left to the leaders to show the way, through word and deed, about where the lines of decency are.
That applies to leaders at every level. Whether it is city or county government, private enterprise, editorial boards, or more, the descent to incivility can only be reversed by a concerted effort. Further, unless there is an underpinning of morality taught in homes and societal institutions, we will continue to struggle with these issues.
LB: Well, we have seen in the past two weeks the President of the United States, who is the head of the Republican Party, is more disrespectful to Americans than any leader in our lifetime, and he’s got his press secretary calling Democrats Hamas terrorists for protesting. And then we saw the racist texts from the Young Republicans nationally. (Although I was happy to see the Kentucky Young Republicans push back on that.) And the chair of the Hardin County Republicans with her AI video depicting the Obamas as apes. So, how do you fight back against that?
CM: I boil it down to a willingness on an individual level, to speak out when you can and where you can, and to conduct yourself in a way that hopefully draws people towards you. Because, while you see problematic statements out of the President, you see problematic statements out of the other side, as well. It’s because those are statements that are motivating people right now.
People always talk about hating negative campaign ads. I hate negative campaign ads. Most everyone hates negative campaign ads, but ultimately, those are the things that prove to move the needle. If people weren’t providing the electoral stimulus of winning elections, politicians would change the types of ads that come out. We have to model a type of statement that we want to see.
LB: Yes, politics is rough on both sides, as Lee Atwater showed us back in the 1980s. And morality is a tricky business, one that’s difficult to mandate, although I think the vast majority of people are doing their best. So what is more specific? Do we need more debates? Do we need to find people from opposite parties in coffee shops and talk to them? Do we need more posts like the one you made on FB?
CM: There are so many things that we could all do better. As individuals, we could remember the admonition to not look at the speck in someone else’s eye while ignoring the plank in our own. On a person to person basis, we need to be able to talk with people and disagree without being disagreeable. As a society, we need to remember that we collectively strive for individual freedom. Too many times we focus on the individual freedom and forget about the collective striving.
Finally, we need to model civility for the younger generations and insist that they show that civility to their peers. None of these things are easy but none of them are hard. They are a discipline that will make our society better. How about you and I start by setting the example….let’s grab coffee next week.
(And so we did.)
.
This story was originally published October 30, 2025 at 4:21 AM.
