Thursday, June 11, 2009

'Extreme right-wing rhetoric'
for Joan Walsh? Two words . . .

. . . and it ain't "thank you," ma'am:
I was on "Hardball" today talking about the climate of extreme right-wing rhetoric today, and whether it had anything to do with Wednesday's tragic shooting at Washington's Holocaust Museum, or the May 31 murder of Dr. George Tiller by an antiabortion crackpot. . . .
Still, it's hard not to think about the extreme right-wing rhetoric, especially about Barack Obama, and whether it could conceivably lead to more right-wing violence.
OK, sweetie, that's two "extremes" and three "right-wings" in two paragraphs, which is laying it on a bit thick, don't you think? As for the Tiller murder, I'll let Becky Banks speak for the pro-lifers. Having done a bit of sifting of the facts on James Von Brunn, exactly how does a neocon-hating 9/11 Truther (e.g., Rosie O'Donnell) qualify as "right-wing," extreme or otherwise?

There's a definitional problem here, and when you blame Rush Limbaugh, Ms. Walsh, you are trying to have your neocon-hating cake and eat it, too. (Via Memeorandum.)

UPDATE: Sorry, had to delete the video, which evidently contained some buggy script that was causing the page to malfunction. Speaking of buggy scripts, the fact that the Weekly Standard apparently was on the shooter's target list is kind of interesting, eh? I mean, OK, I didn't like Fred Barnes' last book too much but . . .

Wait a minute. Bill Kristol is a known associate . . . .

Just like Terry McAuliffe is a known associate . . . .

A conspiracy so immense! These "extremists" will next be gunning for . . . Jeff Goldstein?

5 comments:

  1. Both von Brunn and Scott Roeder are longstanding wackos with a long history of outrage at the targets of their violence. Concluding that they're moved by contemporary commentary is utterly asinine.

    Pablo

    ReplyDelete
  2. Yo. Something on this page is grabbing and reloading the page every five seconds. Please figure this out and delete whatever script is doing this.

    ReplyDelete
  3. The guy was in the paleoconservative family, so he was of the right, yes.

    ReplyDelete
  4. I won't endorse '9/11 truthers,' but neo-con hating is right-wing in my book. Proudly so!

    ReplyDelete