we know what your reaction would have been if sarah palin had said this about giffords:
"Instead of running [to represent Arizona] they ought to have her and shoot her. Put her against the wall and shoot her."
and you would have been right. and i know that a number of people here, i among them, would have been with you. shooting innocent persons is a violation of their individual rights, their liberty, and individual liberty is precious to us.
okay, so: to use your favorite locution: where were you
when this was said -
"Instead of running for governor of Florida, they ought to have [Rick Scott] and shoot him. Put him against the wall and shoot him."
who said that? the terrifying teabagger paul kanjorski. y'know, the guy who airily opined in the new york times op-ed page yesterday: "it is incumbent on all Americans to create an atmosphere of civility and respect in which political discourse can flow freely, without fear of violent confrontation." "Paul E. Kanjorski (born April 2, 1937) is the former U.S. Representative for Pennsylvania's 11th congressional district, serving from 1985 until 2011. He is a member of the Democratic Party. The district includes the cities of Scranton, Wilkes-Barre, and Hazleton, as well as most of the Poconos." - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Paul_E._Kanjorski
where were you there? no targeting marks. no "hidden threat of violence beneath the surface" (the best kind of violence - the kind that doesn't manifest yet can be used against your political opponent). an open call to assassinate a political opponent.
now listen to kanjorski's excuse. it is priceless: Reached by phone Tuesday, Kanjorski said "only fruitcakes" would take his statement about Scott literally. The 73-year-old Democrat from Nanticoke, who this fall lost in his bid for a 14th term representing the 11th Congressional District, admitted he's well known for using "colorful language." "I probably would never have made the statement if I anticipated anything like this happening," Kanjorski said. "It was obviously not in humor, but not literally."
don't like the washington examiner? let's use the notorious tea party rag, the wall street journal: http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748704803604576077892006683586.html
so when a democrat openly calls for assassination, it's just "colorful language" that "only a fruitcake" (!!!) would be influenced by - and that makes it okay. but targeting marks of the same order used by dems - by the way, surveyors shoot
a line - those have magical demon powers when used by sarah palin.
okay, leftists. so where were you? how many crazies is kanjorski's call for assassination influencing right now, and how will it come out? how many crazies are being influenced by your frothing about bushitler, end of the world, global uninhabitability, etc.? and what are you going to do about - by your own premises - your own responsibility for violence.
answer. now. rationalize away kanjorski's call for assassination and your own utter lack of response. explain to us the subtle ways in which a democrat's call for murder is A-OK.