Tucson Shooting Victim (Veteran) Blames Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Sharron Angle

[Hissyspit]

Source: Politico

Tucson shooting victim blames Sarah Palin, Glenn Beck, Sharron Angle

By KENDRA MARR | 1/14/11 12:13 PM EST

A wounded survivor of the Tucson shooting that critically injured Rep. Gabrielle Giffords is blaming Sarah Palin, House Speaker John Boehner, Fox TV host Glenn Beck, and former Nevada GOP Senate candidate Sharron Angle for the tragedy.

“It looks like Palin, Beck, Sharron Angle and the rest got their first target,” Eric Fuller said in an interview with Democracy NOW.

“Their wish for Second Amendment activism has been fulfilled — senseless hatred leading to murder, lunatic fringe anarchism, subscribed to by John Boehner, mainstream rebels with vengeance for all, even 9-year-old girls,” he added, referring to the death of Christina Taylor Green.

Fuller, a 63-year-old veteran, had campaigned for Giffords during her re-election and was at the supermarket for her “Congress on Your Corner” event.



Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47620.html#ixzz1B2WXkiKK

Read more: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0111/47620.html

[deacon]

1. I think Mr. Fuller is on to something. n/t

[slackmaster]

2. He should file lawsuits against them and let a jury decide who is at fault

That's how civilized people settle their differences.

[tridim]

3. Yes, and in the mean time he should say exactly what he thinks to whoever will listen.

[slackmaster]

4. On this we agree. He is entitled to formulate and express opinions.

:grouphug:

[AlbertCat]

64. He is entitled to formulate and express opinions.

Especially when they are based on facts and as obvious as the nose on your face.

[slackmaster]

84. Then he should have no problem winning a lawsuit, and being awarded damages

I really hope he files, and quickly.

[AlbertCat]

92. Then he should have no problem winning a lawsuit,

Oh please! Facts always prevail in court! Right OJ?

[slackmaster]

94. I'm glad you mentioned OJ Simpson, as the example is quite relevant.

The state of California failed to obtain a criminal conviction, but in spite of the acquittal the families of the victims did win a substantial civil suit against Simpson.

They were awarded millions in damages, and the judge put a proscription on Simpson ever making any money from publishing his story.

It's often a whole lot easier to win a civil case than to get a criminal conviction. A civil suit would be successful if any damages are awarded.

:hi:

[femrap]

98. did't he lose in civil court?

That's where he could take Faux and palin....hit them where they understand....in their wallets.

[ladjf]

7. I doubt that he would win the case. But, the publicity might do some good.

nt

[slackmaster]

13. I am strongly in favor of him or other victims filing. Unlike most of us, they have legal standing.

I'd like to see the matter settled. The bleating and braying about it coming from both sides is nauseating.

[ladjf]

15. Good points, If I were an attorney, I'd take their cases pro bono. nt

[bobzilla69]

99. I would contribute for a lawyer

I think he has a case,i would contribute to his suit!!!

[Name removed]

45. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[slackmaster]

67. You have given us a fine example of the No True Scotsman logical fallacy

I find your lack of insight amusing.

[No Elephants]

60. A lawsuit would not settle this matter. Besides, settling this one matter is beside the point.

We already know, for just one example, that Limbaugh inspired one nut job to shoot up a supposedly liberal church.


The real issue is whether anyone should be saying things like, "If we do not win with ballots, we'll use bullets."

[calimary]

73. No, it's the bleating and braying about the "Both Sides! Both Sides!" canard that is nauseating.

Again, it's like insisting that a brick and a grain of aquarium gravel are absolutely equal just because they're made of a hard substance.

[slackmaster]

78. I'm trying to be fair and impartial, calimary

I haven't attempted to assign metrics to anything. There's nonsense coming from all over the map. Quantity is irrelevant.

[Paladin]

83. What You're Trying To Do Is Deflect Scrutiny Of The Gun Rights Movement.

The movement which you're a part of, the movement which has gone to extraordinary lengths to ensure that nothing prevents public slaughters like the one in Tucson....

[slackmaster]

86. Then he could sue the Gun Rights Movement as well

I think he should.

[fascisthunter]

118. thank you

[No Elephants]

79. +1 Most blatantly false equivalencies from the right are nauseating.

[drm604]

88. So is Mr. Fuller bleating or braying?

Which are you calling him, a sheep or a mule? Are you really stating that this unfortunate injured man is making you want to vomit?

Why are you setting up an equivalence here? What do you believe? Answer carefully because whichever side you take you're bleating or braying.

Can't we please discuss this without that kind of denigrating language?

[slackmaster]

89. Neither. Unlike most of us, Mr. Fuller actually has an actionable beef with someone.

I'd like to see him make it official.

Are you really stating that this unfortunate injured man is making you want to vomit?

Reading comprehension doesn't seem to be one of your strong points. That is not at all what I wrote.

What do you believe?

I believe Mr. Fuller could and should file a lawsuit against the individuals he has named. I believe any court in the country would find that he has standing to sue. I think a court could determine a fair amount of money for those people to pay Mr. Fuller and the other victims in damages. I believe that Mr. Fuller prevailing in such a suit would have a widespread calming effect on the intensity of violent rhetoric in our country.

[drm604]

90. Believe me, I have no problem with reading comprehension.

Perhaps you need to look up the word "nauseating".

[slackmaster]

91. I said that I was nauseated by the behavior of people OTHER THAN THE VICTIMS.

The victims are privileged because they are the ones who have been harmed, and they are the ones who are legally in a position to pursue damages, i.e. "Unlike most of us, they have legal standing."

I'm sorry if that wasn't clear to you. I hope you aren't being intentionally obtuse.

[closeupready]

25. Depends upon what the standard of proof is.

And what evidence comes out. Too soon to say, either way.

[TBF]

44. Civilized folks like Jared Loughner? I hope Mr. Fuller continues to speak

out as loudly as possible. "Civilized people" need to hear what he has to say.

[slackmaster]

77. Court of law is the ideal place for Mr. Fuller to speak up on what really matters in this situation

There is a dispute that needs to be settled. A man has informally accused several people of being responsible for some damages.

That's exactly what civil courts are for. I say make the accusations formal. Let a judge say what law applies. Then a jury will decide the relevant facts in light of the applicable law, then assign a dollar amount to the liability of the defendants.

[TBF]

97. I have no problem with that - and I also believe he is free to speak to the press.

God knows the right wing certainly gets enough press, about time the rest of us are allowed to talk.

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

111. Mr. Fuller is probably going to ignore your sage advice and keep speaking freely.

Sorry if that annoys you. No, wait, I lie, I'm not sorry at all.

[slackmaster]

117. I have never said that he should stop speaking freely, CPD

But I do believe he should retain an attorney ASAP.

ETA the issue is probably moot now that Mr. Fuller has gotten himself arrested and committed for psychiatric observation.

[DailyGrind51]

55. Keep them tied up in court, so that they can't make any public comments!

[Commie Pinko Dirtbag]

110. Do you sue everybody you disagree with?

[progressoid]

5. 63-year-old veteran?

How can that be? I thought Democrats hated the military.

[smaug]

11. Look up Democratic Veterans Caucus :)

Lot more veterans are in the Democratic Party than the Republican Party; enough so that we have our own caucus within it. Now you know why the Pentagon has Rush Limbaugh (you know, the draft dodging pimple convicted drug addict) on AFR but not, surprisingly, anything with an opposing viewpoint.

[secondwind]

38. Welcome to DU! Great post.

[Rhiannon12866]

43. Not to mention the number of veterans who are right here on DU...

Many of the avatars/sigs are a giveaway... :hi:

[quarbis]

29. Veteran

I'm a 62 year old Veteran

[progressoid]

108. Yep.

My Dad too. 72 and life-long Democrat. :thumbsup:

[Enthusiast]

33. That and we are "Weak on defense."

Say it again with more gusto! Democrats hate the military! And Democrats are weak on defense! Rah Rah! :sarcasm:

[No Elephants]

61. Yep. That's why Bubba and Obama appointed Rethugs as Sec. of Defense.

:sarcasm:

[Enthusiast]

101. Otherwise we would fall into

a deep pit of military weakness. You know, we would be open to all sorts of attacks if our military fell below a level greater than the rest of the combined world. :sarcasm:

[sarge43]

62. 68 year old military retiree here. We really do. Just like this.

Frost warnings in hell before a Democrat would do this. Oh yeah, almost forgot -- the number the Chickhawk party did on Max Cleland.

[progressoid]

109. What they did to Max was a disgrace.

Still pisses me off to think about it.

[newspeak]

112. I agree, what they did to Max Cleland was one of the lowest

foulest election moves seen. Someone who actually fought for this country and made the ultimate sacrifice--to liken him to terrorists so that a sniveling chickenhawk could win. Of course, don't forget they had the new touchscreen voting machines.

The MSM make villians into heroes (want to be cowboys, strutting want to be fighter pilot) and heroes into villians (John Kerry and Max Clelan-vietnam under fire). And the truly sad thing is that people buy into it so easily.

[w8liftinglady]

63. lol. .My partner,dad, cousins, uncles ,grandpas might all have something to say about that.

very proud Democrats,every one(even my dad-who made the switch when Bush took office.)
A lot of military and their families would strongly disagree.(P.S. - satire well taken)

[progressoid]

107. My Dad, uncles, etc too.

My Dad always gets POed when he reads stories in Vet magazines that slant to the right as if there aren't any liberals in the military. And he's always willing to voice his opinion at the VFW meetings! :evilgrin:

[K8-EEE]

6. Blood Libel! Blood Libel!

He's going to incite VIOLENCE with his words although it's impossible to incite violence with words and people used to FIGHT DUELS! Or...something....

[TBF]

46. Funny how only Sarah Palin is allowed to say what is on her mind -

anyone else who speaks out is libeling her, blood or otherwise.

(of course she may mean "slander", but then "blood slander" would take original thought of which she is clearly incapable)

[No Elephants]

65. I doubt "blood slander" would have flown any more than blood libel did.

Both would literally mean a lie about having innocent blood on one's hands. In general, slander is a spoken lie, while libel, with a few exeptions, is a written lie. So, if using blood libel is offensive to Jews, blood slander would probably be offensive as well.

[TBF]

66. Yes I was just making the point about definitions. nt

[No Elephants]

74. ? Plenty of claims about Palin's having some responsibility for Giffords were written.

[TBF]

96. And plenty of people are right about that. She is responsible though she denies it. nt

[AlbertCat]

69. Funny how only Sarah Palin is allowed to say what is on her mind -

Oh god how I wish Sarah Palin would just say what's on her mind. Then there'd be silence!!!!

But she will continue to parrot whatever her handlers insert into that vast empty space.

[Maineman]

8. I notice the shooter did not go shooting at his former school, or

a restaurant, a police station, a bus depot, a Walmart, etc. Where did he get the idea to shoot his Congresswoman??

PS Did he start acting bizarre about the time Sharon Angel started talking about second amendment remedies - suggesting he was preparing his insanity defense?

[LisaL]

32. Where did he get the idea?

My guess would be, Loughner held a grudge since 2007, when he went to meet Rep. Giffords and she didn't answer his question to his satisfaction (not that anyone could).
There is zero evidence at this time that Palin influenced Loughner in any way, shape or form.

[Enthusiast]

34. Why promote the right wing side?

I don't get it.

We can't be certain, but we know for sure that other perpetrators of violence have been inspired by Glenn Beck. Again, why promote right wing talking points on DU?

[melm00se]

39. why make claims to fit

preconceived notions that are not backed by evidence?

[Enthusiast]

40. But incendiary words

did cause Glenn Beck watchers to act out violence. Words have consequences. So this is backed by evidence.

[No Elephants]

59. Nor disproven by evidence.

[AlbertCat]

71. that are not backed by evidence?

said melm00se.... ignoring evidence.

[fascisthunter]

119. there's plenty of evidence

you ignore it though

[SlimJimmy]

47. "Facts are stubborn things;

and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passion, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence." - John Adams. Just a reminder that there is no evidence linking Beck, or Palin, or anyone else for that matter, to this crime. It's not a RW talking point, it's a fact. And if DU wants to go off the deep end trying to tie Palin or Beck to this, then all we actually accomplish is to look foolish and petty.

Not too long ago, some here were happy to "target" Giffords for defeat because she was a BLue Dog Democrat. What happened? Did she become a saint all of a sudden because some maniac shot her? Doubt it? Do a search for "Target Blue Dog Democrats" and see what pops up.

[SharksBreath]

50. "Target" was a term used by all. I don't remember any gun sights. Oops.

I meant Surveyor's Mark.

[SlimJimmy]

105. Please show any evidence that he had even seen her website. By

many accounts, he didn't even watch news on television, listen to talk radio, or visit political web sites. He was more into gaming. I'm really getting tired of the BS about it here. Even the President has called for a halt to it. Yet, DU insists on continuing the stupid.

[Enthusiast]

57. Giffords didn't become a saint

and no one is specifically tying Palin or Beck to this particular act. We are, however, saying that their practice of inciting violence is obvious. I certainly don't understand you defending them. Just a tad strange that a Democrat would repeat Fox News points.

[SlimJimmy]

104. I'm not defending them, I am pointing out the obvious. There is no connection.

And I find it curious that we wouldn't value facts over fiction here.

[No Elephants]

70. Please see Reply ##s 34, 59, and 60, Slim.

Besides, DU is a message board, not a court of law.

And what on earth does wanting to primary a Blue Dog have to do with being shot unjustly? Or with whether someone is a devil or an angel?


If I would prefer a libeal, does that mean I have no right to condemn big mouths who use inciting language loosely?

Regardless of her politics, everything I've heard about Giffords suggests she is, as a human being, far more angel than devil. Besides, this thread isn't even about Giffords.

No clue what you think your point is.

[SlimJimmy]

115. Have you read some of the comments about her here prior to the shooting? Have you read

some of the comments directed toward Blue Dogs here? Big tent, my ass. And it doesn't surprise me one bit that you don't have a clue.

[LisaL]

93. Because I am actually interested in the facts rather than

promoting a side.
Jeez.

[Enthusiast]

100. But, LisaL, da facts

they be on our side. The other side, you know the Roger Ailes side, they could care less about facts. That's why I can't conceive of a Democrat promoting the Rupert Murdock/Palin side. See?

[LisaL]

103. I haven't seen any facts supporting the idea that Loughner

was somehow influenced by Sarah Palin. If you know something I don't, you should share it with the world.

[SlimJimmy]

116. They won't. They'll just jump like lemmings off a cliff rather than think for

themselves. I got the same reaction when I said we'd get our asses kicked in the midterms. (they didn't want to hear it). But when I also said that we needed to concentrate on a very strong lame duck session - not a peep.

[CLANG]

9. Better he says it than we do. He may be more persuading to the gun-totting vets.

[No Elephants]

81. Meh. The more folk who say it, the better. No reason for us to be silenced by RW whining.

[Jefferson23]

10. Excellent..I want to see which foolish Democrats in power will try and silence him.

SUE THEIR ASSES OFF!

[Permanut]

12. This 65 year old veteran

agrees 100% with Eric Fuller. Doesn't seem like rocket science to me.

[indepat]

14. I'm sure those named and others of the extreme RW who spew their hatred continuously

will take heed and modify their behavior and speech to conform to reasonable standards of sanity and civility. Yeah! ;)

[slackmaster]

16. They would change their behavior in a heartbeat if a court found them liable and fined them

That would be the right way to attack the problem.

[Iliyah]

17. Fake news

and company will have a field day ripping apart this person. I hope he is strong enough for the fight b/c they are going to lie about him something terrible and although he is a veteran (which 99% of fake news is not) one of the first words that will come out of their nasty mouths will be UN-PATRIOTIC.

[Enthusiast]

36. You have their behavior down.

Smear the messenger! There exists a massive industry that works 24/7 with the sole aim of manipulating public perception -mission one is to denigrate Democrats.

[No Elephants]

82. No.

[Downwinder]

18. Who is going to pay his medical expenses?

I doubt Jared Loughner has the funds or prospects available to cover the costs. Let Beck and the others chip in, I'm sure they wouldn't want the taxpayers to have to pick up the costs.

[lucky leftie]

19. Wait, the military is supposed to be

on their side.

Wonder if this will provoke another round of right wing caterwauling? 'Cause, you know, violent rhetoric is just "spirited debate," but people who criticize that rhetoric, are "reprehensible".

[slackmaster]

20. My dad served in the Navy before, during, and after World War II

He was as staunch a Democrat as I've ever met in my life.

He grew up in deep poverty. After the war he was a strong advocate for the poor, and a pacifist.

[lucky leftie]

24. I was being ironic.

I know there are plenty of dems who served in the military. In fact, I volunteered for several dem candidates this past fall-my much admired congressman Joe Sestak, Bryan Lentz and Manan Trivedi; all veterans, and great people.

[cloudythescribbler]

21. I like the fact that Fuller is saying this, but a lawsuit'd be counterproductive (IMAO -- in my ...

arrogant opinion)

The issue here is freedom of speech under the law. If people can be held liable with such a tenuous causal link, you KNOW this would be used MAINLY against progressives

But the CULTURAL acceptance of the RW vitriol, the impunity fed by the (NY Times-praised) bromides from Obama needs to be challenged

BEWARE of anything that threatens free speech -- it will INVARIABLY be used to come around and bite progressives in the ass

In Britain, they banned "racist" speech, and the law was used mainly to prosecute ... yep, black nationalists

[Kali]

26. ...

:thumbsup:

the pressure needs to be from the audience, not from more loss of rights

people need to stop buying the crap advertised on those shows and voting for the people that say those things

[Enthusiast]

37. Not withstanding the right wing's claims to

the contrary, we no longer have any 'black nationalists'. To speak of, that is. Unless you count the silly Fox News fabrication -the New and Improved Black Panthers.

[SharksBreath]

52. This is the wrong lawsuit. I wish someone from the city's or states where

beck's and billo's followers acted would sue Fox.


In beck's case. They have the court records and the jail statements. They have family members
that told the court these people were listening to Beck.

How many times did billo say "Dr Tiller the Baby Killer" or wished someone would kill him.

[DeSwiss]

22. K&R

[verges]

27. Great cartoon!!

I just put it on my FB.

[MrMickeysMom]

23. No lubrication.... sir

and..... I ...... mean... NONE!

[MadMaddie]

28. 10.....9.....8....7

Waiting for the Rightwing attack against a military veteran and a victim of the shooting.

[Ter]

30. Yet the shooter wasn't a follower of any of those people

Gotta tell it like it is folks, this nut gunman was no Timothy McVeigh to say the least.

[No Elephants]

72. How do you know? What proof do you have, one way or the other?

[Ter]

95. His YouTube, everyone who knows him...

His nutjob writings, his pics, his lack of military service, his views...Need more?

[Leithan]

31. Let's watch the wingnuts spin

Kinda hard to argue with someone who's taken a bullet.

[Lucky Luciano]

53. Don't put it past them. They went after Max Cleland. nt

[crazyjoe]

35. why not sue limbaugh, church, savage, and cheney while were at it?

[RSillsbee]

41. Maybe I'M nuts

But I blame Jared Loughner

[druidity33]

42. Plenty of blame to go around. nt.

[julian09]

54. As long as Jared Loughner lives

he may someday, give his reasons and what influenced his actions.
So anyone defending the wingnuts should be careful; the truth may come out yet from Jared himself and those treating him.

[No Elephants]

75. If he lives AND returns to sanity, maybe I will put stock in what he says.

Unless he's a Rethug. Sanity never stopped a Rethug from lying.

[LawnKorn]

56. Loughner's mind was like a furniture dolly

The vitriolic right wing rhetoric, which has been increasing in both tempo and amplitude over time, gave direction to Jared Loughner because his mind was incapable of steering itself.

[creon]

48. He is right

Those people that he blames are pandering.
They are using the fear and anger of people for their own gain.

[1American]

49. Gun Moll Palin and her crew

Arguing that these people were indirectly responsible for the Arizona tragedy is like arguing about religion--you can't. The Tea Party types are the very same people who condemn everything which does not fit into their self-righteous piety.

Democrats everywhere need to wake up to the fact that Republicanism and radical Christianity are one and the same. When anyone criticizes any Republican, their pulpit spokespeople like Beck, Limbaugh, Hannity, Palin, Maulkin, etc., conservative Republicans react as if Jesus is being attacked.

Ronald Reagan recognized early on that Christian zealotry was a powerful force to get elected, and he he capitolized on it. It has worked ever since--that is how Geeorge W. Bush got elected, twice.

[AlbertCat]

76. react as if Jesus is being attacked.

Same with gun nuts.... left and right. One mention that more guns are not the solution, or maybe some tiny little sensible gun laws be enacted and all logic and sense flies out the window and is replaced with absurd panic. It's "Our gun, who art in heaven".....

[Hubert Flottz]

51. Well the RNC did just make a teabagger their new front man.

The Reich wing wants blood!

[JitterbugPerfume]

58. Stochastic terrorism--

when people such as Limbaugh , Beck etc encourage emotionally and mentally fragile people (such as Laughner ) to violence with their words


Google it !

[Can of Whoop-ass]

68. Indict Sarah Palin

Petition to Indict Sarah Palin
http://open.salon.com/blog/stuartbramhall/2011/01/08/petition_to_indict_sarah_palin


Please sign the on-line petition to indict Sarah Palin for incitement to violence, related to designating Arizona Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords with a gun target on her website:

CLICK HERE:
http://www.petitiononline.com/IndictSP/

There is ample evidence from Palin’s public speeches and commentary that the image was used with the specific intent of inciting violence against Democratic congressmen labeled with these gun targets.
The other congressmen targeted by Palin are at serious risk if the DOJ fails to pursue this vigorously. Allowing Palin and others to continue to promote this type of gratuitous violence sets a dangerous precedent. It’s actually quite reminiscent of the activities of Hitler’s brown shirts – which unfortunately were never investigated or prosecuted by the German government.
Palin has wisely taken the gun targets off her site, but this is what it looked like:

[hughee99]

80. Though he may be right,

I'm not exactly sure how being shot by someone (or being a veteran for that matter) provides special insight into the shooter's motivations?

[No Elephants]

85. Who said being shot gave him special insight? Besides, none needed. Only horse sense.

Please see Reply ##s 59, 34 and 60.

[hughee99]

87. Done, it didn't help

I'm not arguing these people can't or haven't incited violence in the past, but that's not what the OP is about. A victim is blaming specific people for THIS shooting. I'm unclear how this victim was provided any special insight to the motivations of THIS shooter. I'm not saying he's necessarily blaming the wrong people, but his guess as to the shooter's motivations is just as good as anyone else's. In fact, I'd be more interested in the opinions of those that knew the shooter personally over and extended period of time, than those who had one brief, tragic encounter with him. Having been shot, or being a veteran for that matter, doesn't make him necessarily more insightful on this particular issue.

[Dookiestix]

106. It does...

In the sense that this guy HAD a political motive to kill Gifford and many others on that fateful day. If we are to be a better society, then we HAVE to hold those accountable for their words. It's really that simple. Palin doubled down on her hateful rhetoric with her "blood libel" comment. She really is a pathetic excuse for a human being, and I feel truly sorry for her children having to go through her narcissistic BS on a daily basis.

Why hasn't Bill O'Reilly been charged for inciting the murder of Dr. Tiller? He was the one who, on a national stage, pushed the "Tiller the Killer" meme to the point where somebody finally acted out. I see not difference between this and yelling fire in a crowded theater.

Since Obama got elected, it's been mostly right wing murderous lunatics who've lashed out, and who have been proclaimed fans of the violent rhetoric of O'Reilly, Hannity, Levin, Savage, Limbaugh, and others. This is a trend, not a flash in the pants coincidence.

[hughee99]

113. So, if someone shoots me, I will have a better understanding of why

than someone else? Does that knowledge get transferred though contact with the bullet, or is it more of a metaphysical thing? I'm not sticking up for the RW idiots, attacking the victim for his comments, or even suggesting that I know better what the killer was thinking than anyone else, I'm just saying that until we find out more, we don't know what motivated him to do this. Certainly the RW COULD be the motivation for this. They're not big on "academics" either, but I didn't hear anyone blaming them for the VA tech shooting. Al-Queda COULD have, in the same sense, been responsible for the Fort Hood shooting, but I don't recall any DUers jumping at the chance to blame them for it. The RW was supportive of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, but that doesn't mean everyone who enlists is doing it because of something they said.

In the end, if we're going to start blaming public figures for what the most mentally unbalanced of their followers is capable of, no one is going to be happy with the laws that are passed to address it.

[Bozvotros]

102. Put yourself in his shoes and change the scenario a bit

Lets say you were recovering from multiple slash wounds from a maniac wielding a Samurai sword. Let's imagine that leading up to this for months Joe Biden, Howard Dean and Dennis Kucinich had been demonizing Republicans while constantly using knife metaphors like "let's put some scalps on our belt" and "we won't sheath our swords this year" and "there is more than one way to skin a cat" Imagine they were blogging pictures of themselves throwing knives or kneeling next to some bleeding carcass they were field dressing. Further, lets say a potential Dem presidential candidate was posting maps with knifes stuck in Republican congressional districts. And lets say people were coming to Republican rallies brandishing Bowie knives and the same talk just kept going on and on. And imagine if Olberman, Maddow and Schulz were echoing and encouraging this talk while portraying Republicans as satanic fascists hell bent on destroying the Republic. You think most people might draw the same conclusion as this guy?

[Blandocyte]

114. The truth is unpopular, but it is the truth.