What is amazing is that no matter how much their bias towards the right is presented before the public, those on the left continue in their accusations of the right regarding the shooting in Tuscon, AZ. You would begin to think that the constant exposure would be enough to silence them, but they press on in their idiocy.
Here is this from Foxnews:
On Sunday, Washington Post columnist Dana Milbank defended an earlier column of his in which he wrote that Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck should still be held accountable for inspiring gunman Loughner and others to violence.
Appearing on CNN’s “Reliable Sources,” Milbank said: “Both are finally being held to account for recklessly playing with violent images in a way that is bound to incite the unstable.”
But that stance simply ignores the truth, said Tim Graham, director of media analysis at the conservative Media Research Center.
“Facts are secondary,” he said. “I think that liberals are invested in story line of Oklahoma City — incivility leading to Oklahoma City– (and) they’re going to try to do it again with Obama.”
Milbank’s remarks on CNN stem from his Washington Post column from Jan. 11, in which he wrote: “While the accusations sometimes go too far — there’s no evidence that either Palin or Beck inspired the Tucson suspect — the heat is well deserved. Both are finally being held to account for recklessly playing with violent images in a way that is bound to incite the unstable.”
Citing no evidence on the CNN program, Milbank said Palin and Beck deserve to be in the hot seat.
“It probably wasn’t a driver in this case—we don’t know for sure—but it’s a driver in so many other cases,” Milbank said.
When asked by CNN host Howard Kurtz whether it was fair to hold a talk show host responsible for what some violent or perhaps unbalanced person does because they like a media personality, Milbank replied: “Yes, Howie, in the aggregate … [they] need to worry about that fraction of 1 percent who just might be driven over the edge.”
This is there attempt to lay blame simply in terms of silencing anyone on the right. As in, “if its possible that what you say, espouse or believe might lead to someone committing horrendous acts of murder, especially when there is no evidence that the two are related, then you need to shut up… or ‘be civil’ as we on the left like to say.”
What they are saying, as those in the Nanny State love to say, is: if someone gets hurt, then we must make a law to stop anyone else from getting hurt, and prosecute anyone who opposes our own view as co-conspirators. See the next cartoon for that one.
I really love the part about spoons and Oprah.
