>>>>>>>>How about if we say that all of that is over the line? Anyone on either side suggesting or even hinting that the right way to deal with a political opponent is with a weapon is behaving badly, in my book.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Tamar, just a yes/no....do you think the Palin crosshairs map is "suggesting or hinting that the right way to deal with a political opponent is with a weapon"?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Yes. I'd put that in the "hinting" category.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>Tamar
>>>>>>
>>>>>>What category would you put this in?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>http://www.newscopy.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/01/dlc-targeting-map.gif
>>>>>
>>>>>Similar. Not quite the same, but probably also a bad choice.
>>>>>
>>>>>Tamar
>>>>
>>>>Or maybe Ex-Rep. Paul Kanjorski's (a Dem from your state) comments:
>>>
>>>>That Scott down there that's running for governor of Florida," Mr. Kanjorski said. "Instead of running for governor of Florida, they ought to have him and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him. He stole billions of dollars from the United States government and he's running for governor of Florida. He's a millionaire and a billionaire. He's no hero. He's a damn crook. It's just we don't prosecute big crooks."
>>>>
>>>>Now he's calling for civility. Hopefully he means it and intends to change his behavior as well.....
>>>>
>>>>http://washingtonexaminer.com/blogs/beltway-confidential/2011/01/dem-congressman-who-called-gop-gov-be-put-against-wall-and-shot-n
>>>
>>>I think what you fail to see is that coming from the Left such comments are understood to be Post-Modern and Ironic. And besides since all right-thinking people with any education and and IQ over 50 agree with them, we needn't worry. Such comments are perhaps "ill-advised" ( more likely quoted "out of context") but you have to admit they are justified because of the nasty mean people on the right who hate nature and puppies and dolphins.
>>
>>Becoming a bleeding heart for the right then Charles. Are those cynical lefties saying bad things about guns mom and apple pie :-)
>
><bg> As I said, the Progressive Left and the Religious Right have a remarkable lot in common - and the sanctimonious air of moral superiority is certainly part of it. And, as my cousin would say, that's what "get's up my nose". The Religious Right lampoons itself so effectively I don't need to, but the Left attempts to claim not only moral but intellectual superiority, using as its platform tenured academic positions and a commanding position atop a mountain of white middle class guilt. ( Since I am not burdened with being a nice person and my moral failings are obvious enough to preclude dissembling, I don't worry too much about the fair opinion of mankind.)
>
>Personally I don't have a problem with any of the rhetoric. Anybody who goes out and shoots up a shopping mall because Obama talks smack about taking a gun to a knife fight or Palin puts a crosshair on somebody's picture is going to do it sooner or later because the voices in his head tell him to. I'm for forced institutionalization of pretty much anyone who has a propensity to this level of crazy ( and I would be happy to point them out )
>
>Also wouldn't hurt to round up and ship off to a remote atoll anyone who, after this kind of tragedy, immediately begins to opine on where did "we" go wrong <g>

I'm probably fairly left on your spectrum but my main problem with the left is it does tend to intrude in your life more. Not called the nanny state for nothing.

I agree that its too easy after this unfortunate event to start throwing blame around and that mad young man could easily have been triggered off by something else anyway. The good side of political polarisation and heated debate is that people are concerned about there lives and how their country is run. Better that than a middle of the road consensus where eventually people stop caring and the state can slowly and quietly intrude in more areas or business can go about maximising revenue and destroying lives with no comeback.