I Told You So. The next terrorist attack in America would come from a conservative going after liberals. Who told him where to point his gun isn’t really relevant to the fact: the terrorist was a conservative and liberals were the targets.

Other thing: liberals helped spare the little coward’s life, while the terrorist hoped he’d take the easy way out.

Ultimately everyone is responsible for their own actions. But that also means the people who stand on the sidelines and cheer them on bear the responsibility for doing that.

Welcome to the land of Stupidville, Jaim style.

But the court of public opinion, so to speak, has a right to castigate these cretins for what they are — spiteful, biggoted little hate-mongers.

Go right ahead. It still doesn’t mean they’re responsible for the actions of others.

Oh, wait. That’s right, we live on the planet Earth.

More to the point, the Savages and Hannities have a right to say what they wish. But the court of public opinion, so to speak, has a right to castigate these cretins for what they are — spiteful, biggoted little hate-mongers.

Thing is, they happen to sell lots of books. They are a reflection of the modern day Republican party. And there’s a reason why that party is sinking fast into the mud-pile of history.

I’d be curious to know the legal distinction between legal comments (Coulter’s at CPAC, etc.) and conspiracy to commit, i.e. what’s protected and what’s a crime. My first instinct is that this thread is a little thought-police, but clearly one has to draw the line somewhere.

In other words: “Jim Adkisson killed people because of what you wrote or said and you should consider that the next time you write or say something.”

You’re basically arguing the same thing this person is:

If they found something I wrote in a killer’s home, I’d stop what I was doing and begin some serious self-reflection. I’d write about it, consider my errors, and try to make amends. Wouldn’t you? Not that censorship isn’t the answer. Not every reprehensible act can be legislated away. Sometimes the most effective way to change people is to hold them accountable. That includes not only Fox News, in this case, but also CNN — who recently gave the anchor chair to hate-speaker Glenn Beck.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rj-eskow/a-murderers-bookshelf-han_b_115497.html

But they won’t, and it’s in part because you and others hold them completely blameless for their words.

I hold them completely blameless for the crimes committed by Jim D. Adkisson.

But they won’t, and it’s in part because you and others hold them completely blameless for their words. They’re just speaking! It’s not their fault if people actually listen!

Really it is a wonderful microcosm of the real world, just played out by the mentally disturbed. In short:

The leftists talk about it, the conservatives “get’er done””

Shorter duh: Left wing whackos talk about killing, right wing whackos are unhinged enough to actually DO it. Yea for us!

Except Jim Adkisson expected to die in a hail of gunfire from the police.

I’m looking for one of them to pause for a second and ask themselves if their rhetoric, which regularly trafficks in the notion that liberals are an insidious evil who must be defeated (that is, liberals are America’s Great Satan), might not be adding anything positive to the world and might potentially influence those who are already mentally disturbed.

Spider, with all due respect, you’re couching things in more polite terms, but at the same time you’re still emitting that chilling effect. Unless somebody is saying, “Go and kill….” then a person’s thoughts should not be shackled (no matter how repugnant) because of the off chance that some person (out of millions), who happened to read something they wrote is going to go berserk and start shooting. Do we start yanking copies of ‘The Catcher In The Rye’ off bookshelves? After all, John Hinckley Jr., Mark David Chapman and Robert John Bardo were all obsessed with the book. Two committed murder and another attempted to commit murder. Of course, millions of others have read it as well (including me) and I just never got the urge to take somebody out.

Do you see what I’m getting at?

Does such rhetoric have value? It depends on who you ask because it is subjective. For me, the answer is no. It’s why I don’t read such books or watch cable news shows.

Meanwhile, the left (especially in the blogosphere) gets energized by such opportunities to demonize conservatives as a whole and use it as a backdoor to muzzle free speech.

- Ann Coulter, 2002 speech before the CPAC

Now you have two quotes, and I can search for others…and before you start, I don’t care if you think Ann Coulter is not representative of conservatives. She’s hardly living in the margins of the right-wing.

I can search for more if you need them. These quotes don’t speak to everybody as a call to action, but they do speak to somebody. They spoke to Jim Adkisson. The rewards aren’t about getting something in the afterlife, they’re about getting something RIGHT NOW–that is, an America where you don’t have to deal with things like homosexuals.

I keep saying, and you keep inflating, that I think the right-wing blowhards are a low-level version of the mullahs and the RLM, and that they rarely cross the same line, so no, I’m not looking for criminal charges against Savage, et al. I’m looking for one of them to pause for a second and ask themselves if their rhetoric, which regularly trafficks in the notion that liberals are an insidious evil who must be defeated (that is, liberals are America’s Great Satan), might not be adding anything positive to the world and might potentially influence those who are already mentally disturbed. And you want to tell them, “Don’t worry about it. There’s no way your hatred could possibly have inspired somebody else’s hatred.”

I’m asking you, Jay, what value this sort of speech has, which is a debate we’re still having in terms of things like obscenity laws.

From who? Where is this language served up that people have been saying for “years and years” that you deserve to be killed because of your beliefs? Sorry dude, but you’re getting extremely melodramatic.

I’m talking about those who have otherwise no criminal activity on their record–they just foment their power by suggesting that certain groups are worthy of marginalization at least, elimination at most.

It’s still not an apt comparison. You have that sole example from O’Reilly. If he were on the air whether it was his radio show or television show and in books, every day telling people (especially impressionable young men) to commit acts of terrorism against the city of San Francisco. That it was their duty to do so and that they would gain reward in the afterlife for doing so, and somebody actually did it, then your comparison would be valid. In this case, it isn’t. Not with O’Reilly, not with Hannity, and not with Limbaugh. Hell, it isn’t even comparable to Michael Savage, repulsive as I find him.

This is nothing more than a convenient excuse for people on the left to rail about pundits and personalities from the right. If somebody thinks that O’Reilly or Michael Savage is truly in part responsible for this crime, then they should attempt to get charges file against them. Otherwise, the chorus of these voices saying louder and louder that they are responsible is doing nothing but attempting to put a chilling effect on free speech.

The left wing whackos talk up a storm, hurl ad hominem invective and generally sit around places like Kos and circle-jerk themselves off on fantasies of destroying republicans.

Right wing whackos, set a plan, and execute it to tremendous effect.

Really it is a wonderful microcosm of the real world, just played out by the mentally disturbed. In short:

The leftists talk about it, the conservatives “get’er done”

It’s dishonest to say I’m giving you apples and oranges and then for you and Rex to come back with the violent video game canard.

Violent video games/art are about doing things in a fictional setting; the people affected to do things in real life are those who can’t discern the difference between fiction and reality.

Dehumanizing, separatist rhetoric against real people is what I’m getting at. Years and years of people being told that my sociopolitical beliefs are so dangerous that, at the very least, we shouldn’t lift a finger to stop people like me from being killed. After all, we would deserve it.

By the by, you’ll notice I avoided bringing up OBL in the first place, because I agree that he’s on a different level…he did in fact plan attacks and work to carry them out. I’m talking about those who have otherwise no criminal activity on their record–they just foment their power by suggesting that certain groups are worthy of marginalization at least, elimination at most.

Metaphorically, it’s as though everybody is issued an empty rifle and the pundits I’m referring to are handing out bullets. “Yes,” you’ll say, “but the people with the rifles chose to load the bullets into the gun, chose to pull the trigger. Most people are smart and stable enough to put the shells in a drawer and the rifle on the mantle and the ones who chose to go on a rampage are just sick killers.”

And you wouldn’t be wrong. But I’m suggesting that maybe certain pundits could have chosen not to hand out those bullets.

Ding! Ding! Ding!

Rheinhard wins Stupidest Shit Written award for the day.

And that’s the end of this one for me. I’m not going to waste more seconds of my life trying to reason with idiots who think Sean Hannity is in part, responsible for that man did over the weekend.

A lot of the “netroots” people you’re talking about can always be counted on to say the most hateful, vile, and despicable things on the web. From most recently BOB NOVAK, then to Tony Snow, and pretty much anyone they oppose politically, it’s not hard to find “happy campers” on kos, huffpo, DU and the like.

Really, the most hateful? Well mccann, I urge you to scroll back upthread a few pages and take a look at the comments I reproduced from Free Republic this morning. What a collection of Little Mary Sunshines they are, eh?

So I guess I shouldn’t be surprised that (gasp) you don’t understand that left-wing activists are far more violent, fascist, and intolerant that right-wingers are.

I know y’all are really upset about all the terrible shoutings you get, but can you tell me when was the last time any right-wingers were murdered in this country by those on the left? Truth is most all of the systematic state-endorsed murder and violence in this nation has always been propagated against the left by the right. From the murder of civil rights leaders and union organizers, to brutality against gays and peace protesters, the collective “right” in the United States has a very long history of violence. Now I know it gets you little babies all upset when the mean liberals throw a pie at Ann Coulter and all, but I’d take a pie over a noose or a .38 in the head any day.

And quit acting like you care about anyone that goes to church getting shot. This story probably made some people, as sick as it sounds, slightly amused.

Fuck you mccann. Seriously. With a rusty razor encrusted dildo. Followed by a nice hot Clorox enema.

The church in question was Unitarian Universalist. Do you even have an idea what that is? I have no doubt if you ever read what the church was about you, like most of the Freeper troglodytes I quoted earlier, would regard it as a “fake” church deserving what they got because they aren’t the slick Bible-thumping fundamentalist bozos the TV has taught us that “good Xtians” are supposed to be. Most like you think of UU’s as little better than pagans or atheists, despite the fact that some of our founding fathers and earliest presidents were UUs and are buried in UU cemeteries.

Now, this is what O’Reilly said:

Hey, you know, if you want to ban military recruiting, fine, but I’m not going to give you another nickel of federal money. You know, if I’m the president of the United States, I walk right into Union Square, I set up my little presidential podium, and I say, “Listen, citizens of San Francisco, if you vote against military recruiting, you’re not going to get another nickel in federal funds. Fine. You want to be your own country? Go right ahead.”

And if Al Qaeda comes in here and blows you up, we’re not going to do anything about it. We’re going to say, look, every other place in America is off limits to you, except San Francisco. You want to blow up the Coit Tower? Go ahead.

Now, this is over the top nonsense on the part of O’Reilly, but for you to try to even get this anywhere near what fanatical Muslims direct young people to do is…well…I’ll quote Jules Winfield: “It ain’t the same fucking ball park. It ain’t the same league. It ain’t even the same fucking sport!”

You game me Red Delicious Apples and a dried up piece of horseshit.

Anybody who attempts to even get close to saying that anything Hannity, Limbaugh or O’Reilly has said or written is somehow in any way shape or form responsible for what happened at the church is engaging in some dangerous and completely irrational thinking. Like Rex said above, you sound like the same people who blame violent movies (Like Pulp Fiction for instance), video games and heavy metal music for the violent actions of teenagers.