rob

I agree, but I can't imagine myself ever treating a friend the way TTK treated Rob: Come on, you know I'm not *that* thin-skinned. Besides, I'm used to people getting upset when I devastate them with my superior grasp of cold, hard, classical logic. It's just the cost of being such a polymath, I guess.

Your argument goes something like this: The tea-party has some crazy guys in their base who seem to want to shoot politicans. --> This arizona guy was crazy, and wanted to shoot politicians. --> Therefore, this guy did it on behalf of the tea-party. --> Therefore, this guy wouldn't have done anything like this without their prodding. Those logical jumps would make an olympic longjump champion feel impotent.

I haven't seen any evidence that this guy even LIKED the tea-party.

That's what I'm saying. This wasn't "on behalf" of the tea-party. Or even the republican party. At least, not as far as I've read about the guy. Al Qaeda also advocates violent terrorist acts. Was this on behalf of them, too? I haven't seen any evidence that indicates to me that this guy was egged on by the "tea-party." Could he have been? Maybe. He's crazy. He was probably egged on by all the mind-control that he believed in. This doesn't mean that I don't think the tea-party needs to stop using angry, hateful rhetoric, btw.

Obviously, the political rhetoric in our country really needs to cool down. I would LOVE to stop seeing the political become the personal. It's perfectly fine to disagree, but I don't understand why both sides have to hate each other. That said, I still think that it's a totally sophist argument to claim that this never would have happened if it wasn't for the right, and that their fiery rhetoric caused him to do this, and that he never would have, otherwise. I know what this sort of illness is like, and what people with this sort of illness are like. Trust me, if it wasn't the republicans then something else would have set him off, and he probably would have killed someone else, entirely. Maybe he'd have gone off in a shopping mall, or had a stand-off at his house. Or committed suicide. Who knows. But he would still be a dangerous individual. But to try and pin this entire thing on the republicans seems totally unfair to me, and representative of the divisive way we practice politics, as I mentioned above. I guess I'm a dumbass, or whatever, but when you try to pin ALL of the blame of this situation on the political party you happen to be at odds with, it makes me sad. I know a lot of republicans and a lot of tea-baggers (heh), and I don't know a single person that isn't completely saddened and shocked by this. OF COURSE there are people out there that probably support this. They're crazy. They show up on forums, etc. And many of those crazies have, recently, taken on with the right-wingers and they show up at events with guns and "second ammendment solution" signs, etc. But even without the republicans, those guys would still be out there. Maybe they'd have a different banner, and a different slogan, but they'd still be out there. If they were left-leaning, I bet the Democrats would take advantage of them, too. Mental illness was not *caused* by the republican party, or glenn beck, and getting rid of the republicans will not cure this kind of disease. At the end of the day, there will always be this sort of ugly extremism, and EVERYONE needs to do what they can to discourage it, not take advantage of it and foment anger (cough cough Glenn Beck). But, that doesn't mean we should take advantage of this to vanquish our political enemies. Being in favor of small-government, anti-taxation, pro-corporation, pro-freemarket, anti-abortion, etc. is a valid position for someone to take, and even though many of those ideas are personally offensive to me, I don't think they "need to be destroyed" or whatever. Are they anti-american?

sure, the westboro baptist church is totally the official spokesman for every right-leaning american. He's crazy, so they must all be too. They should be stopped!

You sure can be a little bitch when somebody disagrees with you. If you were a little bit closer, I'd slap you in the face with 8 inches of limp dick. You sure have an interesting way of engaging in civilized debate.

My kids school has a poster with a book, and the book is covered with a crosshair, and it says "Target good grades!" Terrorism? I can't believe I'm defending Palin, but I don't see her crosshairs as the same as painting a swastika on a truck. I really don't think she meant that. Was it tasteless? Yeah, probably. Should she feel bad? Yeah, probably. Did she want anyone to get shot, or was violence the intention of that poster, in any way? I'm not sold on that. Sounds like a reach. It's OK to disagree on that. Isn't it? Or are dissenters the enemy now?

clearly they were crosshairs. Even still, do you really think that sarah palin intentionally intended them to mean that these people should be shot?

and so it goes

Left-wingers like Ivan regularly wish for the deaths of their political adversaries. After all "they deserve it". MOST Left-wingers don't wish for this anymore than MOST right-wingers do. These sort of generalized, polemic, personalized "us-vs-them" attacks that I'm decrying. Do you really thing Ivan regularly wishes for the deaths of his political adversities? Sigh.

there is a lot I don't know, and a lot I'm wrong about, but one thing I'd fairly certain about is that I think this mess is a lot more complicated than "us good, them bad."

Have you read Ted Rall's book, "The Anti-American Manifesto?" Have you read his interview with liberal journalist Dylan Ratigan? (http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2010/11/msnbc-guest-suggest-violent-revolution/ -- aretarded source, I know, but that's not the point.) I'm sure you'll have a comeback for that.

Did you read the article about the crimes she was accused of? This is the first sentence. (italics added) Again, explain to me how property damage and murder are equivalent in any way. My point is that we live in an extremely polarized politcal climate, and the fault of that does not lie ONLY with the republicans. My point has nothing to do with which side is "worse." It's an easy point to grasp. I know you can do it.

Do you believe that the conservatives on this board secretely applaud this shooter? Do you believe republican party leaders do? Republican politicians? What percentage of tea-baggers do you think are secretely applauding this psychotic's actions? I'm curious. Clearly, the right has taken advantage of extremely divisive and angry rhetoric among right-leaning citizens. But's that's not really my point. You seem to miss my point, entirely. You're like a dog with a bone.

I could be wrong, but I believe the practice of shooting congresswomen in the head at grocery stores is also denounced, Pat.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Elizabeth_Ann_Duke

liburuls are purfect! I promise I won't stray from the party line any longer. Our shit doesn't stink, either.

Anyway, he was probably a republican, so who cares.

I stand corrected, tree-spikes are not a problem.

I've never said they were "equal." Clearly a tree-spike in not the same as shooting 20 people. YOU guys keep putting those words in my mouth. I'm just responding to rediculous claims of "Show me just ONE example of left-wing violence." ANd when I show you the example, you say it doesn't count. Those are republican tactics. I'm just saying that the republicans don't have a monopoly on polarizing and violently extremist political discourse. Is the tea-party worse? Maybe. Probably. That's not my point. The fact taht so many liberals in this thread are ferociously adamant about absolutely refusing to acknowledge this, just proves my point.

tree spiking is actually quite dangerous to loggers' life-and-limb, which is why it has become quite unpopular among "Eco-terrorists." But it's a moot point, since people on the left are Just Better People. If anybody on the left hurts someone, of course the example is somehow not relevant. Everybody knows that convservatives across the country are secretely hailing this attempted assasination attempt. Duh.

Yes, you're right, I'm wrong. The left has never produced an extremist, violent individual in living memory. What was I thinking?

and yet another: Rod Coronado, arson attack on Michigan State U, 1995.