FFS

[cinema_babe]

Some prosecutor needs to step up to the plate and begin charging anyone who maintains anything called a "Hit List" or anything that even vaguely seems to allude to the injury or killing of a person or people with murder or conspiracy.

Come down on them with the wrath Judgment Day; no mercy. Sell all of their assets and half of their joint asses if they have a spouse/partner and give that money to the surviving victims and the survivors of the dead.

And start with Sarah Palin.

The freedom to disagree with someone is a guaranteed right. As is the freedom to be offensive, rude, disparaging, petty, mean, ignorant and a whole host of other unpleasant manifestations of human behavior. However, the right to effectively paint a bulls eye on your opponents' is as good as taking the gun into your hands and pulling the trigger or setting off the bomb. It's depriving people who might disagree with you of *their* First Amendment right through the use of fear and it is not only murder

It's fucking Un-American.

Comments

[tisiphone.livejournal.com]

No, sorry. I'm going to absolutely and categorically reject the "both sides" argument. It's not "both sides."

[barking-iguana.livejournal.com]

What's not both sides. Some things are and some aren't. Using target graphics demonstrably is. The way our language works is that examples from extreme situations, usually physical violence and sex, become analogs used to represent other situations. That happened with targeting and pictures of bullseyes decades ago. And is used by both sides.

The actual inciting rhetoric, OTOH, is not coming from both sides to anything anywhere approaching the same degree. What the right is doing is shameful and destructive of democracy. There are examples on the far left and the blogosphere that could be found to make it seem like it's a 'both sides' thing, but as a true face of the movements, it is not.