Except, now they are "suggesting" that these things be done to everyone with whom they disagree. Rather than random acts, they are calling for a more unified, larger, response. And they have raised outright nastiness to new lows. Are you sure you want folks this warped to be in charge?

That link takes us to equal-opportunity violence. It also takes us to recriminations on the part of democratic officials who deplore the violence, etc.



Interestingly, there's nothing similar from a representative of the Bush-Cheney campaign to object to violence against Democratic party offices and so on. Similarly, I don't hear any such objections now from Republicans. There's also a quasi officially-sanctioned aspect to the current violence and nastiness. Whether it's Tea Party organizers or organizers of some other kind of group political activism, people in such organizational capacities are encouraging the activities--and indeed some federal officials, like congressmen, are actually fundraising on the basis of their obstreperousness, which may not rise to illegality (calling a congressional peer a baby killer from the floor of the House, for instance), but which is certainly obnoxious. Or perhaps those folks suffer from Tourettes Syndrome and can be excused. I have yet to hear any anti-health care reform Republican object to people hurling the n-word at black representatives, or spitting on a black representative, or calling for the assassination of the president.

So yes, political nastiness has a long history. Political nastiness that seems to have license from party officials, of any party, not so much.

But democrats say that's not enough - seemed to be enough when Michael Meehan made similar statements.

Oooh! He used the C word!

What he did not do was distance himself from those who are behaving that way.

The other thing here is they tried to paint Ayers as a terrist and anyone who may have been in the same county with him, once, as a terrist sympathizer and anti-Merican. Now, they are employing the very same tactics as their "patriotic" duty.

I would suggest that denouncing violence and threats IS distancing yourself from those behaving that way - or is the only acceptable penitent act to switch over to the democrat party?

If that's the case I would suggest that all the democrats should leave their party because of the wingnuts they have that have "taken over their cause"!!

Accept it, both sides have their fair share of wingnuts and dangerous crazies - and that's what the news media is going to bombard us with day in and day out, while it remains fashionable to do so. If you want proof that republicans ARE denouncing the threats you need to wait more than 10 minutes for them to react, OR search off the standard liberal favourite media outlets - because once again you're not going to hear a liberal admitting that a republican denounced violence against democrats, in exactly the same vein you won't hear Rush Limbo admit that a democrats would denounce violence against republicans.

I haven't seen very many Democrats denouncing leftwing whackos and then openly courting them for their support. Democrats tend to want to stay away from such nut jobs. Sure, there are nut jobs on either side, but the current crop on the right are way beyond nuts.

Actually Boehner began his statement by saying that the Democrats are to blame for not listening to the people, and (referring to the violence) that they have every right to be angry. He made sure that his denouncement of violence was prefaced with a statement that Democrats were the cause of it. That's why many of us see him as a political douche, and with that I see why many think his statement was half-baked.

And then he concluded his statement that rather than violence these people should seek positive change by going out to vote. What he failed to say was these people need to go to jail with threats of nooses, threats to Congressman's lives and their families, cutting gas lines to their homes and throwing bricks...

You forgot to have them called terrorists, too.

I think his response was half baked.

He should have also chastized the GOP politicians that egg them on... many did, the Sat. before the vote. as someone said, "you rebuke them or own them"... no middle ground.

Perfect example is Gov Perry (TX), in private w the Tea Party members he advocates secession... but he doesn't have the balz to say it on the 6 o'clock news...

same as many GOP voted against the stimulus, but took the $$ for their district and even went to public events claiming they got it for their district (bringing home the bacon) ... it's pandering and lying !

I wouldn't put it past Karl Rove to stage the GOP break-ins in 2004 as cover for the DNC break-ins . Sadly he's that underhanded. I Don't think that was true in all cases, but who knows.

And as far as MY reaction to any independents or progressives participating in the break-ins, it pisses me off..

who do they think they are Rush-Beck Republicans ?