A Different Day, More Violent Invective

There is a great little article on the shooting of Theodore Roosevelt in Milwaukee during the 1912 election (see http://balkin.blogspot.com/2008/10/free-super-c...) In that election (TR came in second) invectives flew wildly and the assassin-to-be apparently was influenced by what was said by both the Democrats and the Republicans. TR gave the speech with blood running down his shirt and denounced the rhetoric that lead up to the attempt on his life.

A lesson learned, I hope.

Sorry, the URL for the TR speech is http://edgeofthewest.wordpress.com/2008/10/14/i...

My computer sucks!

"Accessories to murder" is an example of the continued violent rhetoric (and the hypocrisy, ignoring the other side's years of misconduct). Oh, well. There is still Hope [tm] that it may subside (conveniently as well as transparently) in another month.

Joe Biden, one bullet away from the Presidency.

These outrages have to be stopped immediately. With every passing day that they don’t speak out forcefully, Palin and John McCain set themselves up to be potential accessories to murder.

Why would McCain or Palin try to quell these outbursts when it's likely that neither heard them? From the links:

There were no incendiary outbursts from the crowd about Mr. Obama during Mrs. Palin's speech, as there have been during other recent McCain-Palin rallies.

However, someone did shout out, "Kill him!" during Republican congressional candidate Chris Hackett's remarks before Mrs. Palin took the stage.

I guess mentioning that Mr. Hacket was on stage when the remarks were made is too much to ask. Shaun, you're like a teacher on saturday...

PWT--why would you say such a comment? You're essentially saying the same thing as what the article is reporting.

Shaun, you've been in journalism for awhile. Why does the paper you linked to treat this as such an off-handed thing especially since it's been reported before? (i.e. "However, someone did shout out...") Are you serious? Why wasn't this in the headline? Why wasn't this what the story was about? And why isn't their a video link so we can actually hear it? Given what is claimed to be said, I just find it very hard to believe that it was treated in such an off-handed manner, especially if this is the second time.

I cannot imagine anyone condoning any of this...period. But these aren't charges you just toss out their as an afterthought--they deserve to be looked into. Wasn't the secret service looking into the last one?

I posted my comment because, A. I thought it was funny as a play on "a heartbeat away from the presidency" and, B. because thus far, all of the reporting about individuals shouting 'kill him' at republican rallies has been dubious at best; leading me to the belief that said events did not occur or did not occur as reported.

Without any context, the remark has little meaning. Without any video corroboration, I do not trust Mr. Mullen as an honest reporter of the facts as I attempted to demonstrate in my second post. Thus, this seems like a manufactured BS incident illiciting a BS response.

jchem:

I'd cut the reporters a break here.They were live blogging so the shout from the crowd just kind of rolled into the ongoing commentary.

One problem for Republicans this cycle is that Sarah Palin IS a negative campaigner.

Most of us knew nothing about Sarah Palin before Senator McCain picked her; since that first RNC Speech (which was an amusing and attractive version of a female Spiro Agnew on night that seemed like a Celebrity Roast of Barack Obama), what we have seen has been distubing

Sarah Palin delivered what her hometown paper called "Orwellian Big Lie" over the weekend (from Andrew Sullivan, the link to the paper: http://www.adn.com/opinion/view/story/555236.html).

Sarah Paln is such a disaster of a candidate, that her Big Lie was hardly commented upon. John McCain and Sarah Palin are running such a negative campaign, and their rallies are responding to the Right Radio's demand that they demonize Obama to such a degree that the best supporters can do to defend them is to offer that the cries to commit acts of violence happened before the candidate came on stage.

What America sees is a campaign that can only win if their opponent is destroyed.

As one who admired John McCain, I cannot believe he has put himself in this place.

I have just recently come to a *totally* different conclusion concerning the recent rise in invectiveness:

Democrats and Independents need to STOP complaining about the right-wing extremist cat-calls and intemperate climate at McCain rallies.

Specifically - STOP WASTING TIME on the topic.

A great deal of time and effort has been spent in media coverage concerning "Kill Him!" and "Terrorist" and all the other jawboning over the tenor of the campaign. Democrats condemn it, Republicans dismiss it (largely)...and NOTHING CHANGES.

Meanwhile, McCain and Palin continue to repeat various lies that go totally unchallenged, because the media is focused on the hate-speech issue instead. They repeat over and over again various talking points that are either total fabrications or wildly stretching reality, and because these talking points are unchallenged, they are getting absorbed by electorate as 'facts'. For example, I watch McCain at a rally today hammer away at how Obama will raise everyone's taxes repeatedly, when this is an easily disproven lie - instead of the media tackling that issue, they decide to turn back and rehash the whole 'nastiness' topic...again.

So - Democrats, Independents and intelligent Republicans, I urge you - ignore the temptation to waste any more energy on "Kill Him!". There's a limited amount of time and resources, and that time and energy could be much better spent tearing down Fibber McCain on his penchant for lying and character assassination instead.

Maybe IF Obama does win, the GOP will find a less nauseating way to campaign, as they'll see that its losing effectiveness with the public. They have to realize that for every member of the base that they galvanize, they lose an independent, moderate or conservative Democrat.

If McCain had chosen not to use Bush's campaign staff and tactics, and had picked a serious qualified candidate for VP, my guess is that he'd be giving Obama a run for his money instead of floundering around at 14 points behind.

"With every passing day that they don’t speak out forcefully, Palin and John McCain set themselves up to be potential accessories to murder"~ Author
******************
They already are leading suspects in conspiracy of any harm that might befall Barack Obama. They should realize they will be investigated and held culpable if any whacko attempts to harm Obama with a claim that s/he believed he was a terrorist because of what Palin or McCain said and de facto condoned and rebel-roused at any of their rallies/speeches.

They already are guilty of coercion to do bodily harm.

Clearly any comments like these are disgusting and should (and have been) denounced by McCain.

However I do sometimes wonder why it's acceptable to say pretty much anything about a Republican and that's just politics.

Patrick E said: "However I do sometimes wonder why it's acceptable to say pretty much anything about a Republican and that's just politics."

Where the hell did that crack come from Patrick? Threats and inciting violence are wrong no matter who says and/or does it. Your partisan gottcha is just ridiculous... Bordering on wing-nuttery.

Obama could go much more negative too if he chose to. He hasn't made an issue out of Troopergate. and Palin's dishonesty about the report's findings, he hasn't used McCain's exit from his first marriage- he's declared family off limits..

So, I 'd like to know what Patrick E means, and why the righties on here can't condemn anything McCain/Palin do without saying in effect- there's some Democrat somewhere doing the same thing!.

Sarah Palin is making a mockery of the highest office in our Republic. She will be a stain on American History.

By the way, here is a website I found that shares all the Sarah Palin dirt to support Barack Obama!