Sarah Palin and others have directly advocated physical violence, using firearms, as a means of "solving" the problem of losing an election.
Where has Palin done that? The bullseye map thing really isn't what you're saying, no matter how much bad taste it was. Angle's talk of "Second Amendment remedies" talk was far worse than anything I know of that Palin said, but even that's a borderline case, because she wasn't actually advocating that people do that in the circumstances we live in.
Even advocating the eventual violent overthrow of the government is not illegal, and nor should it be, IMO, so long as one doesn't say that now is the time and get specific about how it should be done. and Angle didn't even go as far as saying that we would necessarily reach a point where such a course would be desirable.
I do think both Palin and Angle bear some moral responsibility. But I think things have to be much more clear cut before you want the government saying whose speech will be subject to penalties and what speech will not.
no subject
Date: 2011-01-09 04:19 am (UTC)Where has Palin done that? The bullseye map thing really isn't what you're saying, no matter how much bad taste it was. Angle's talk of "Second Amendment remedies" talk was far worse than anything I know of that Palin said, but even that's a borderline case, because she wasn't actually advocating that people do that in the circumstances we live in.
Even advocating the eventual violent overthrow of the government is not illegal, and nor should it be, IMO, so long as one doesn't say that now is the time and get specific about how it should be done. and Angle didn't even go as far as saying that we would necessarily reach a point where such a course would be desirable.
I do think both Palin and Angle bear some moral responsibility. But I think things have to be much more clear cut before you want the government saying whose speech will be subject to penalties and what speech will not.