Relevant Quote Of The Moment b/w Prophecy In Song

And you knew that it was going to come from Glenn Beck:

....They believe in communism. They believe and have called for a revolution. You're going to have to shoot them in the head. But warning, they may shoot you.

They are dangerous because they believe. Karl Marx is their George Washington. You will never change their mind.

Now certainly, the modern American Right will say that he was speaking metaphorically, that "votes" are bullets. Yeah, right.

Immediately, this song from Corrosion of Conformity came to mind. I'm honestly surprised that Sharron Angel didn't have this as a campaign theme song, even though Pepper Keenan and crew wrote this track to reflect the state of the Right Wing in America - in 1991.
.


Blaming the music that Loughner listened to is something that is not exactly a new strategy from the modern American Right. They've been doing it in conjunction with violence and Marilyn Manson for years.

Check out the barrage of comments this video got in light of Loughner's rampage.

No, Please, Keep It Up

The modern American Right isn't so much afraid of losing their freedom of speech as they are afraid of admitting the obvious - that there are actually people out there that can, will, and have taken what they have said as gospel and gone on to perpetrate heinous acts of violence.

Whether they are gnashing their teeth over unrealistic fears of a reimplementation of the Fairness Doctrine - something I would think that the modern American Right would welcome, as they are always eager to shout that there is consistent and clear bias against allowing any conservative/libertarian point of view be shown in the media, as it is obviously controlled by evil liberals - or that the FCC will begin shutting down stations that carry Limbaugh, Beck, or Hannity, there hasn't been a hush given to Right Wing rhetoric as it has actually amplified since Tuscon.

And to that, the modern American Right is proving the point of the Left.

Ever since word broke that a Democratic Congresswoman was shot, that a Federally appointed Judge was killed, the modern American Right has been in full damage control mode. From insisting that all violent acts against political figures in America, that all murders in America that even hint at the final solution of an anti-government activist, were carried out by members of the Left to continuing to stoke the fires of "they're coming to get you" by people like Beck, Limbaugh, and Fox"News", the modern American Right can't seem to see the irony in what is transpiring.

They are increasing their anti-government, anti-democratic, pro-uprising language.

Not only that, but we are beginning to see their rising stars begin to diminish. Take a look at modern conservative messiah Chris Christie on Palin and Obama:



In the weeks and months prior to Tuscon, Christie was being heralded as a solid Presidential candidate, and how he's the RINO Messiah?

To all this, I say "keep going" to the modern American Right.

But what are the far reaching implications of all this?

Has Palin increased her chances of getting the nomination from the Republican Party for President?

Are other aspiring Presidential candidates, like Pawlenty and Romney - the later soundly crushing her in early polling - going to use this against her?

Is the modern American Right going to split in two by using what happened in Tuscon between now and election day 2012.

Keep it up, guys.

Placing Blame And Absent Accountability

While prominent conservatives like Michelle Malkin attempt to cobble together disparate "examples of left wing hate" - keeping in mind that her particular definition of "hate" shifts multiple times throughout her meandering and seemingly endless preamble - it should be pointed out that what happened Saturday in Tuscon is clearly a direct act of violence against a specific target perpetrated by a person who has far more in common with the modern anti-government movement in America than a person whom is simply a Palin fan or one that reads Saul Alinsky.

But while it is all too easy to try and pin this on one particular person, there is a shared responsibility within the modern anti-government movement; both on the LEft and Right. This isn't specifically about Palin, Angel, Glenn Beck, Fox"News", or any Right Winger on AM talk radio. This also isn't about those on the fringes of the Left either, be they the Black Panthers, Code Pink, La Raza, or any anti-war group still railing against our continued presence in Iraq or Afghanistan. There are people unstable enough on both sides with the potential to perpetrate heinous acts of violence against anyone with whom they disagree.

The problem on the Right is that they are more concerned with removing themselves from being accountable on any level, no matter how innocuous it may seem to them. The problem on the Left is that they are going to try to make the Right understand that there are consequences to violent rhetoric.

Let's examine this from both sides of the socio-political spectrum, based on the information on Loughner that we have that is of a verifiable nature. I think it is important that regardless of the incident being discussed that the data used can be accurately sourced. Much of what is being used - primarily by conservative outlets across multiple media platforms in order to blur issue - is what could be described as specious. A good example of this is the heavy usage of opinions from people who once knew Loughner but have not had contact with him in a number of years. Recent accounts from fellow students at the community college where he was ultimately dismissed from do paint the picture of a "strange" person that caused others to be concerned for their own safety do have a more credible tone to them.

So, let's take a look at the message coming from the Right.

Despite the fact that virtually all conservative - and more than a handful of self-identifies Libertarian - commentators, bloggers, television, and radio hosts have the same information available to them, there is so much noise being generated around this story that the line between accuracy and speculation has been completely erased.

A good example of this is how, despite a much larger list of books being highlighted on Loughner's YouTube page, conservatives are focusing solely on The Communist Manifesto.

Phillip Klein at The Spectator pontificates.

Liberals who have attempted to exploit the tragedy in Arizona for political gain by trying to connect Sarah Palin to the shooting should be ashamed of themselves. At this point, we have more reason to blame the revolutionary writings of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels for what happened....

From a pure journalistic perspective, there is absolutely no evidence that alleged shooter Loughner had ever seen Palin's famed target map, let alone that he was motivated by it. Yet in a YouTube page believed to be created by Loughner -- and widely cited in the media as such -- the alleged shooter actually names the Communist Manifesto as one of his favorite books and, unlike the subliminal message liberals attribute to Palin's map, Marx and Engles explicitly advocated political violence.

But when one takes a look at Loughner's "favorites" as a whole, there isn't so much a cogent theme, but a picture certainly taking shape of a person that is attempting to make connections between a variety of belief systems in order to validate an apparent world view.

Here's the list:

Animal Farm, Brave New World, The Wizard Of OZ, Aesop Fables, The Odyssey, Alice Adventures Into Wonderland, Fahrenheit 451, Peter Pan, To Kill A Mockingbird, We The Living, Phantom Toll Booth, One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, Pulp,Through The Looking Glass, The Communist Manifesto, Siddhartha, The Old Man And The Sea, Gulliver's Travels, Mein Kampf, The Republic, and Meno.

What immediately jumps out is that there are books that both the Right and Left have used as validation tools for a variety of social and political issues. To say that one book, and one book only, was the catalyst for what happened in Tuscon is quite the stretch.

Secondly, the Right are making this more about how there shouldn't be ANY accountability for any rhetoric coming from their side. This is the ultimate narrative that comes from the modern conservative movement - the perpetuation of the culture of their own victimhood status. Rather than focus on the motives behind what Loughner has done, the Right are attempting to shift focus from the crime to what they perceive will be direct attacks against their "freedoms".

I can't but wonder how anyone aligning themselves with the modern conservative movement would be more concerned with the specter of unwritten legislation they perceive will take away a "right" in light of a tragedy of this scope rather than show active concern over the fact that a man deemed too mentally unstable to be in college or be accepted into the Armed Forces could walk into a retail outlet and - despite a background check that didn't even pay attention to Loughner's arest record - could legally purchase a gun.

Moreover, this assassination attempt was motivated by political mistrust, as Rep. Giffords was the intended target. Documents found at Loughner's residence reinforce this. But the discordant noise is beginning to drown out what should be the central focus of this tragic event. From speculation that Loughner was a "Truther" to recent assumptions that he was involved in the occult the Right is gaining more leverage to push their own pre-formatted narrative.

But what of the Left? Are they no less guilty of using what happened to Giffords?

One of the problems of the liberal/progressive movement is that they try to put a very sharp focus on a variety of issues while not realizing that this has always been used against them. This is in direct contrast to the American Right, whom distort and blur better than anyone. The problem with placing direct responsibility on a person like Sarah Palin, Sharron Angel, or even Glenn Beck, is that many on the Left ultimately ignore the fact that they weren't the ones that perpetrated the act. Are they complicit in any way? I am comfortable in saying that they nurture an environment of governmental distrust and are more than capable of understanding that there may be those out there that take what they say to the utmost extreme. But this takes us directly to the second problem that the Left in America face - that they think the Right will stand by what is allegedly one of the keystones of their ideology; calls for accountability.

I'm reminded of a scene from Mark Pellington's film Arlington Road, where Jeff Bridges' character Micheal Faraday - a teacher obsessed with Right Wing extremism - tells his class about how America has a "need" to find "one person" to blame for an incidents that are so large and so evil in scope that we can't seem to bring ourselves to reconcile them on our own. To me, this reflects the consumerist nature of modern Americans. We need a set of iconography to define whom we are and to rationalize specific acts by others. What the Left needs to understand - and this is something that I have struggled with as I have become more and more involved in the modern American socio-political discussion - is that things that fall in parallel with what transpired in Tuscon are much bigger than Palin or Beck or anyone that the Right identifies with. There are those within the Left that realize this, but they aren't going to be the voices you hear on CNN or even MSNBC and most certainly not on Fox"News" - though the later will certainly be sure you don't pay attention to those voices either. They are out there though.

I keep asking myself why the Left continually think that the Right are going to own up to the fact that "free speech" is not without consequence? I also keep asking why the true voices of the Left simply can't make it out there while those that harm our cause more than help it get all the attention. Does the LEft really believe that each and every time they hold a mirror up to anyone on the Right think that they are going to admit that it is, in fact, their own reflection they are looking at?

So who is Jared Loughner?

Is he a Right Wing extremist? Maybe

Is he a Left Wing radical? Who knows.

Who is to blame? Well, Loughner is, of course.

People like Loughner are precisely the ones that succumb to anti-government sentiment and fear-mongering. To this, the modern American Right should be given pause if they wish to continue to deify people like Palin and Beck as "leaders" of their movement. But the Left faces just as many challenges as they are more often than not particularly religious or read and research topics from a variety of sources to gain a deeper understanding of how certain groups act. To that end, the Right has a tool to make almost any Democrat who posts on Daily Kos and doesn't go to church look like a potential violent offender. Both sides will claim that Loughner belongs to the other.

But there are other questions we should look at.

Was Giffords targeted because of who she was politically or simply because of the proximity she had to Loughner? I doubt that her legislative stance had nothing to do with it, as Loughner could have gone after a number of governmental figures in his region.

Why did Loughner wait over three years to enact his "vengeance"? Is it pure coincidence that this happened in a state that has so dominated socio-political discussion over the last year? For those claiming that his original contact with Giffords back in 2007 exempts Palin, Beck, or any highly vocal member on the right should really look at the timing of this incident.

Will this happen again?

The Unhinged

It's just this sort of incident that allows conservatives to continually cast themselves in the role of "victim", question the integrity of media outlets that aren't Fox"News", and provide specious claims that it's actually The Left that is to blame for moments like this:



A look at Duke's Facebook page - which has been taken down, naturally - reveals this about the man.

Duke's "Favorite Quotes" section contains a number of links to political websites—mostly pretty out-there 9/11-truther-here-comes-the-new-world-order stuff, but also the mainstream liberal Media Matters and, of course, a Wikileaks mirror. (Expect these sites to be the ball in the exciting "Clay Duke Was a Dangerous Liberal" vs. "Clay Duke Was a Nutcase Conservative" game we'll all get to watch over the next few days.) His "Religious Views" are "Humanism" and his "Political Views" are "Freedom Fighter."

And Glenn Beck is already launched into this game, albeit with a half-hearted caveat that Media Matters really wasn't responsible for the shooting.

Considering that Duke's Facebook page is gone, we really don't know what he had to say about Media Matters, but Beck certainly continues to paint a dark and venomous picture of who runs MM. Look for Beck's writers to fold this story into a new chalkboard meme in the coming days.

Other conservatives are even framing this from the angle that Media Matters and liberals/progressives aren't even going to be remotely curious as to why Duke read, watched, and listened to the information sources he listed on his page. Naturally, the "truther" aspects of Duke's digital footprint get no mention from conservatives. Typical.

But looking at Duke's "suicide note", you get a clear picture that this man was pretty screwed up, and is more on par with an Alex Jones fan than a liberal or progressive.

My Testament: Some people (the government sponsored media) will say I was evil, a monster (V)… no… I was just born poor in a country where the Wealthy manipulate, use, abuse, and economically enslave 95% of the population. Rich Republicans, Rich Democrats… same-same… rich… they take turns fleecing us… our few dollars… pyramiding the wealth for themselves. The 95%… the us, in US of A, are the neo slaves of the Global South. Our Masters, the Wealthy, do, as they like to us…

As far as the "V" symbol, this will likely become part of the Beckian analysis of this story, though it just appears to be yet another example of how plain-old batshit crazy this guy was.

Profits, Prophecy, And Preposterous Notions

Here's a heaping helping of Glenn Beck doing his best impersonation of Jack Van Impe, complete with "Soros Doomsday Clock".



Despite the fact that all Americans benefit from "socialism", Beck feels that Lawrence O'Donnell's admission that he is a "socialist" while debating "Glennzilla" Greenwald on Morning Joe was clearly a a send-up of conservative fear of the word, those same conservatives - including Beck - have latched onto this like this is the missing puzzle piece in a grander puzzle that is going to rend the fabric of space/time in two.

I will, however, have to pause a moment and say that Beck's concern that Mark Penn saying Obama "needs another Oaklahoma City" incident is actually grounded in reality. But using this as a jump-off point to claim that liberals/progressives actually embrace this idea isn't grounded in anything at all, as liberals/progressives have clearly expressed their outrage at such a suggestion.

Beck is quite adept at taking completely disparate moments in time and connecting them in his chalkboard style to create a deceptive web of intruige. And adding George Soros to the mix isn't exactly a new tactic - he just goes a lot further than O'Reilly has ever done.

The part that really gave me a great laugh is Beck's claim that people on Facebook or Twitter who point out the ignorance of those citing him as a credible source are all too often paid operatives of Soros. And while it would actually be nice to get paid for doing this blog, I have yet to receive a check from George Soros.

But while Beck completely brushes off the very real aspects of what he does and how it has affected certain viewers of his program, I think we are beginning to see the culmination of what Beck wants - a conservative, preemptive strike against a foe that really isn't there.

Likely, Beck will also talk about this segment from the Dylan Ratigan program on MSNBC:



This is already something that conservatives are already claiming that Ratigan, his guest, and the entire network are advocating violence. The trouble with that, is that these people obviously didn't pay attention to the interview and will likely not read the book.

And this guy is clearly not a fan of Obama - just in case Michelle Malkin decides she's going to cyber-stalk this guy and find out who is "really is".



Beck does make one claim that is so off the charts that I think I should end with it, as it is something the entire Fox"Network" loves to tout without fulling realizing it's complete irrelevance.

The fact that a large number of people watch his show has no correlation to it being even remotely accurate. It's a lot like saying that since more people went to see Avatar in theatres instead of The Hurt Locker, that James Cameron's film is more factually accurate than Kathering Bigelow's film. The next time some conservative points to Fox's and Beck's ratings as a signifier of accuracy, hit them with that movie reference and see what happens.

Reality Shifting

Anything to excuse a man from violently assaulting a woman.

At POWIP, video of the girl rushing to Rand Paul's car and, yes, assaulting him, by pushing a placard against his face.

Yes, that's assault and battery. You cannot just reach out and touch whoever you like. Particularly when you're doing so in a menacing manner -- like running up to an open car window while wearing a disguise to hide your appearance.

They allowed her to commit assault once -- how many times should she be permitted to commit? When she rushed him a second time -- her intentions already made clear by the first assault -- should she have been permitted to re-offend?

Let's see this "assault":



This sign never even makes it in the car, so how was he "assaulted". Well, I do suppose that attempting to hand someone a non-lethal piece of cardboard constitutes a terrorist action when it comes to the Tea Baggers.

But more to the point, if Rand truly was assaulted, why didn't he say so in his interview on Fox"News" regarding the incidents of that night?

The more conservatives attempt to deflect from the real crime of the evening, the more that they come off as the unhinged masses they claim the left is.

And where was this "second assault"?

Randian Responses

Not only does Tim Profitt, the man who stomped MoveOn.org's Lauren Valle's head into a curb, think it's perfectly acceptable to attack a woman, but he also thinks that she owes him something:

Lexington Police began an assault investigation identifying Profitt as a suspect. "Well I'll just say it, if the police had done what they were supposed to do, it would have never happened," Profitt said.

The Paul campaign is not alone in its reaction. Another man involved in the altercation, Mike Pezzano, who held down Ms. Valle, tells NEWSFIRST he doesn't condone Profitt's actions. Valle has said she believes Paul supporters planned an attack on her. Pezzano asked not to appear on camera for an interview, but he denies that accusation and says he barely knows Profitt and didn't even know Profitt was there. As for Profitt, he remains defiant. "I don't think it's that big of a deal," Profitt said.

And when asked if he would apologize to Valle. "I would like for her to apologize to me to be honest with you," Profitt said.

The modern conservative movement has just moved from metaphorically attacking women to the quite literal and blatantly vulgar reality of having nothing more than unvarnished contempt for them.

UPDATE:

Far-right conservative blog First Things, a site that is often featured on the Fox"News" hate-site Fox"Nation", seems to think they have the smoking gun that shows Valle meant to do Rand Paul harm and that she isn't some innocent victim.

Apparently trying to hand someone a sign is grounds to violent physical assault:



As an interesting aside to this, the defacto leader of the Republican party is putting forth narrative that what is clearly seen in the video isn't what really happened:



It doesn't surprise me in the least that Limbaugh would go to bat for a Tea Bagger that assaults a woman. But apparently he didn't watch the video - or is more than willing to explain the subtle nuances of how to stomp on someone.

But what is readily apparent, and should honestly give all his listeners pause, is that he is claiming that this Lauren Valle got precisely what she deserved.

Who Are The Thugs Again? Part II

Let's take a look at Beck's continued insistence that conservative Tea Baggers aren't the violent ones - it's those evil liberals and progressives.



Too bad that doesn't square with what happened in this clip:



And while the predictable conservative chant - lead by the mouth agape throngs at Fox"Nation" - is that this is some sort of "plant", a "hoax", one has but to look at what people like Beck and the Fox noise machine are cultivating - an atmosphere of fear, hatred, and conspiracy.

Hot Air and Ed Morrissey take a more interesting approach when discussing this issue: insisting that conservative candidates use the "Joe Miller Approach" and bring your own security force:

This is one of the reasons why it’s incumbent on candidates to provide their own security. While guard firms rely on the same legal principles of citizens’ arrest that apply to everyone else, they get a lot more training in it than rally attendees. Paul has his own security with him, as the video seems to show, and they knew better than to react to an obvious provocation, and especially not to overreact to it.

The person in this video shown stomping on the prone woman should be facing charges of assault and battery today, just as Gladney’s attacker should have to answer for his assault. And in the future, perhaps calmer heads will prevail.

That's right Ed, gloss over the fact that this woman was about to be curb-stomped by a completely unhinged Paul supporter, conflate this with the utterly specious claims surrounding Kennth Gladney, and insist that Rand Paul's security team acted accordingly. Guess what Eddie, they didn't do anything. They didn't stop this from happening and they certainly were within proximity to do so. They were, as many in the video show, nothing more than spectators.

And while Paul supporters are more than willing to push this incident aside as nothing more than socio-political theatre, Rand's campaign - as well as he himself - are looking at this from an entirely different perspective:



Rand seems kind of disconnected from the "issue", don't you think?

Something else that caught my attention - there was only one person, at least from the video footage, that attempting to help this woman. The remainder of those surrounding the violent assault simply watched.

While we are a voyeuristic people by nature - how many times have you slowed down to look at a car wreck, or house fire, or police subduing someone - when you are literally this close to someone being attacked by those you call "fellow patriots", perhaps it's time that you reconsider the fact that Tea Baggers are a peaceful lot.

Some Thoughts For Your Afternoon

- Apparently it's not good form to teach kids to eat healthy anymore. Michelle Malkin takes after Michelle Obama like she's built up a police force that is going to prevent parents from feeding their own children what they think is good for them. It wouldn't surprise me to find out that some conservatives are intentionally getting fatter to show their hatred of Mrs. Obama. Rush Limbaugh has already got a good start on this.

- It seems that some people in Alaska are starting to wake up to the fact that Sarah Palin is a complete and utter disaster. Some within the conservative realm are claiming that the release of her next book will boost her ratings, I have to question that. After all, people thought that here Fox"News" special would be a ratings phenomenon, but it turned into something wholly unspectacular. I'm fairly certain that her "nature program" isn't going to be a shining star on her record either.

- For conservatives to continually claim that there is no violent rhetoric directed at liberal/progressive, this little stunt doesn't really help their cause.

- You can generally tell when a conservative is completely out of rational ways to discuss any given topic when they result to homophobic/sexist blatherings. I can recall when Newsweek ran a cover picture of Sarah Palin and conservatives went completely bat-shit insane, calling it a blatant, sexist, attack. Personally, I didn't find it sexist at all, as Palin posed for and signed off on the picture herself. But there certainly are different rules for anyone outside the conservative sphere, isn't there.

- Much in the same way that Glenn Beck is completely misrepresenting what Net Neutrality is, Megyn Kelly is doing here part to misinform people by actually censoring the realities of what the FCC is trying to do. What happened to "fair and balanced"?

- Seems that Arizona has a serious problem not only with Hispanics, but takes issue with students even learning about them. I'm sure the term "racial animus" will be striken from any English text within the next few months as well. The one question I have is this - does this just do away with only learning about hispanics or anyone that isn't white and from America?

Let's Get Physical

I'm pretty sure that Steve King is going to be lauded for his passion in this clip by fellow Tea Baggers. Then again, there may not be anything said by conservatives, as they tend to shy away when they realize it's they that tend to get violent when their actions and words are thrown back at them.



It's quite clear that Victor Zapanta never once accused King of being a murderer, so King's outburst is not only unjustified, but completely and totally out of line.

Isn't there some recourse against King for assaulting Zapanta in such a way? I'm certain that when pressed about it, people will say "it's not like he hit the guy", but you have to understand that this is a sitting member of Congress and is held to a higher standard than others. His behavior, and that of the remaining members of Congress, are looked upon as representative of his/her districts.

Then again, I'm honestly not surprised that it was Steve King to pull this kind of stunt. With his viewpoints and his rhetoric, it was bound to happen sooner or later. I'm fairly sure that King knew he was pushing the edges of what he could and couldn't do and stepped just enough over the edge to where he would escape any damage to his political appointment should the time arise where people started considering whether or not he was fit to represent them. Then again, I could be wrong.

Tea Bagger Polling

According to a new CBS/NYT Poll, 25% of those within the Tea Bagger movement think that violence against the government is acceptable.

While this number is dwarfed by those that call it unacceptable ( 71% ) it only takes one act of violence to tarnish the entire movement. Some have argued that recent terrorist activities in America are somehow connected to the Tea Baggers. But the jury is technically still out on those.

What's more interesting to me is the fact that a plurality of Tea Baggers consider Glenn Beck's and Sean Hannity's programs on Fox "news programs".

Considering the eliminationist rhetoric that comes from Beck and the continual hype of Obama's "anti-Americanism" by Hannity, I'm quite surprised that the number of those accepting of violence against government is as low as it is.

But likely the most bizarre of realizations coming from a poll of Tea Baggers is that more than half of them think their tax burden is fair.

Yet while some say the Tea Party stands for "Taxed Enough Already," most Tea Party supporters - 52 percent - say their taxes are fair, the poll shows. Just under one in five Americans say they support the Tea Party movement.

Is that 52% made up of people that are just wanting to feel like they are part of something? Do they realize what they are a part of? My guess is no for the later.

Think Progress has more.

Pay Attention To Mother

Seems that Gregory Giusti's mother doesn't think Fox"News" has the best interest of America at heart.



The charges against Giusti will be revealed in court today, so this will likely be a big story across the internet. To the accusations that he was a Tea Bagger - those haven't been verified yet, but we'll see.

But the broader view of this story is that now since his mother has spoken out about Fox"News", we are likely to hear people like Beck, Hannity, and Limbaugh dive headlong into the shallow end of the pool in order to defame, denigrate, and smear this lady with every ounce of their being. Then again, they could ignore it, like they do when people rightly point out how their hatred and anger go too far.

It's Come To This

It's starting to get ugly. But we knew this was coming.

No one was inside when the brick was hurled through the Democratic Patry Headquarters on University Avenue. Attached was a note quoting conservative Barry Goldwater: “Exremism [sic] in defense of liberty is no vice”. [...]

[Rep. Louise] Slaughter has been at the center of the push for reform. Last Thursday she received a chilling recorded message at her campaign office. “Assassinate is the word they used…toward the children of lawmakers who voted yes.”

The FBI is now investigating.

The death threat business was almost expected, but threatening a child is just beyond the pale. What happened to conservatives compassion for kids? Well, I suppose that only applies to their OWN children.

And now there's this:

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

And John Cole has it right on as always.

The next plan for these clowns is to march on Washington on 19 April (the anniversary of Waco and the Oklahoma City bombing) with their guns to… well, you know why they are doing it, because you have a working brain. No doubt, however, it is time for another thought piece at Reason on the myth of right wing violence (prefaced, as always with “Other than Oklahoma city, the abortion murders, the Atlanta Olympics… what have the Romans done for us?”). Because remember- it is just a coincidence that gun nuts, militia movements, and angry mobs are on the rise. It has nothing to do with the fact that Clinton Obama is President and Republicans are whipping people into a froth on a daily basis.

I mean, what can wrong, right. Angry, right-wing, nutjobs ( with guns this time ) that aren't distancing themselves from threats to kill children. The exponentially increasing insanity amongst conservatives is literally going to get someone killed. Regardless of your political affiliation, no one needs to get murdered over any of this.

Some Thoughts For Your Morning

- Glenn Beck may have had a moderately central role is seeing that Van Jones was removed from his position in the Obama administration, but he's still losing advertisers.

- If most Democrats in congress still hold the same positions on healthcare reform, were the raging, ignoranct, masses at local townhalls proven completely irrelevant?

- If you have kids in school, are you keeping them from seeing a positive message from Obama encouraging them to stay in school?

- Do you realize that "Tort Reform", espoused by many if not all conservative republicans in favor of actual reform of the health insurance industry, will prevent you, your family, or someone you know from filing medical malpractice suits? It's simply another way that conservatives favor the "business" and not the "consumer".

- Why do conservatives have such regard for Labor Day yet utter contempt for labor unions that are responsible for the holiday even existing?

- With the very real and very disturbing fact that violence against women happens every day, why is it that it suddenly gets national attention because of Tila Tequila? It's horrible what was done to her, but why is she more important than any other woman that actually contributes to our society?

- Why are conservatives so enamoured with what Michelle Obama wears? Is there really nothing better for them to discuss?

- I wonder why conservatives, who are staunchly pro-military and claim to "support the troops" on a virtual hourly basis, don't seem to realize that our military benefits from socialized healthcare?

- With more than a few "Christians" ( some preachers of the faith ) coming out and openly advocating for the death of Obama, one has to wonder exactly how many "Christians" feel this way