Democrats Condemn Racism While Republicans Embrace It

There are many differences between the two parties, but one of the starkest is that while Democrats support diversity and fight racism, Republicans do just the opposite -- tolerating and even cheering racist hate speech. 

The following op-ed is by Dean Obeidallah at MSNBC.com: 

“When a Democrat says something racist or antisemitic, we hold Democrats accountable. When a MAGA Republican says something racist or antisemitic, they are embraced by cheering crowds and become celebrated.”

Those two lines - uttered Tuesday by White House press secretary Karine Jean-Pierre in response to bigoted comments made during a conversation involving three Los Angeles Democratic city council members - perfectly sum up the difference between today’s Republican and Democratic parties when it comes to embracing or rejecting hate. You don’t have to look any further for proof of this than how the two parties responded this week to racist remarks made by their respective elected officials.

On Sunday, the Los Angeles Times reported about a secretly recorded audio tape that captured a private meeting in October 2021 between Los Angeles City Council President Nury Martinez, council members Gil Cedillo and Kevin de León, as well as Ron Herrera, the president of the Los Angeles County Federation of Labor. While the meeting was ostensibly about political strategy, the recording featured an exchange of racist and bigoted remarks.

Some of the worst comments came from Martinez. One vile example was when she referred to the adopted Black son of fellow council member Mike Bonin — who is white and gay —as a “changuito” – Spanish for “little monkey.” She went on to slam Los Angeles County District Attorney George Gascón, saying, "F--- that guy. He's with the Blacks."

The backlash by fellow Democrats was swift, with local Democratic officials from fellow council members to Los Angeles Mayor Eric Garcetti demanding the three lawmakers’ resignations. By Tuesday afternoon, President Biden — via his spokesperson Jean-Pierre — stated that “he believes that they all should resign.” As Jean-Pierre explained, “The language that was used and tolerated during that conversation was unacceptable and it was appalling.” And at Tuesday’s Los Angeles mayoral debate, the two leading candidates (both Democrats) — Rep. Karen Bass and Rick Caruso — joined the callfor resignations. Facing vocal protests, Martinez resigned from the city council, while Herrera left his labor post.

The message sent was clear: Racism and bigotry have no place in the Democratic Party. Compare this to the reaction of the GOP leaders to Alabama Republican Senator Tommy Tuberville’s racist remarks in Nevada Saturday, during a Donald Trump rally for GOP candidates running in the state. Tuberville told the crowd that Democrats are “pro-crime. They want crime. They want crime because they want to take over what you got. They want to control what you have.”

Then the former college football coach — building to a scream — bellowed: "They want reparation because they think the people that do the crime are owed that. Bulls---! They are not owed that." The rally attendees roared in approval.

This connection of crime and racial reparations was less a dog whistle, more a bull horn. As NAACP President Derrick Johnson put it in a statement on Monday: "Senator Tuberville’s comments are flat out racist, ignorant and utterly sickening. His words promote a centuries-old lie about Black people that throughout history have resulted in the most dangerous policies and violent attacks on our community."

Numerous Democratic officials also denounced Tuberville’s remarks, such as Rep. Terri Sewell, the first Black woman elected to Congress from Alabama: “His words were painfully reminiscent of the racist tropes that have been used to vilify African Americans for generations.”

Meanwhile, many Republicans have chosen silence when asked about Tuberville’s comments.

On Sunday, Meet the Press host Kristen Welker asked Rep. Don Bacon, R-Neb., to react to Tuberville’s comments. Bacon at first responded, “I wouldn’t say it the same way.” When Welker pushed harder on whether he saw the remark as bigoted, Bacon responded: “I’m not going to say he’s being racist, but I wouldn’t use that language, be more polite.” To Bacon, racism is apparently OK when it’s more “polite.”

One Republican member actually defended Tuberville. Florida Rep. Byron Donalds, one of the two Black Republicans in the House, justified Tuberville’s racist comment by dishonestly claiming Black Lives Matter activists had made the same connection as Tuberville. Donalds even argued that since Tuberville had previously helped Black players as a football coach, that somehow made the remark OK.

Just as Democrats are sending a clear message that racism has no place in the party, the GOP is sending an equally clear message that they will tolerate — and even cheer hate. The takeaway is that while not all Republicans are racist, all racists feel comfortable in the Republican Party. And that must be by design. After all, if GOP leaders truly didn’t want racists in their midst, they could easily denounce the bigoted comments made by Republican officials. But they’d rather win at any cost — even if that includes embracing and defending the indefensible.

Trump Still Has A Serious Problem With Women Voters

This chart reflects the results of the latest Economist / YouGov Poll -- done between August 17th and 20th of a national sample of 1,111 registered voters, with a margin of error of 3 points.

It shows that currently Donald Trump trails a generic Democratic candidate by 8 points among registered voters. This is primarily due to the distaste of women voters for Trump and his policies. While he leads among men by 5 points, he has a huge 13 point deficit among women -- and women outvote men in our national elections.

Trump may actually be waking up to his problem with women voters. His campaign is sending women (like Kellyanne Conway and Jan Brewer) to battleground states to try and convince women they are wrong, and should support Trump in the 2020 election.

I doubt they will have much success. On the same day this effort was announced, Trump doubled down on some things that bother women voters. He announced an executive order that would allow him to keep immigrants (including children) in detention facilities for an unlimited time. He said any Jewish person voting Democratic was being disloyal. He flip-flopped on background checks. and he continued his hate speech on Democratic women of color.

As long as he continues this kind of policies, hate speech, and support for white supremacists, he not going to win over women voters.

Trump's "Deplorables" Hear His Hate Dog Whistle & Respond

(Cartoon image is by Jesse Duquette on Facebook.)

Trump apologists have been busy on cable news shows denying that he promotes hate and violence. But the evidence shows that is not true. His "deplorable" hear what he is saying, and they respond to it with violence and hate crimes. Consider this article by Ayal Feinberg, Regina Branton, and Valerie Martinez-Ebers in The Washington Post:

During an interview with CBS’s “Face the Nation” this past Sunday, Sen. Tim Kaine (D-Va.) lambasted President Trump for emboldening white nationalism after a young man killed at least 50 people at two New Zealand mosques. Kaine was referring to Trump’s answer after a reporter asked whether he sees "today that white nationalism is a rising threat around the world?” Trump responded, “I don’t really.”

This is not the first time Trump has been accused of catering to white nationalists after a terrorist attack. At an August 2017 Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, a young white man rammed his car into a crowd of counterprotesters, killing Heather Heyer. Afterward, Trump insisted that “there’s blame on both sides” for the violence.

Then in October 2018, a gunman killed 11 congregants at the Tree of Life synagogue in Pittsburgh. When Trump announced plans to visit the synagogue, many people in Squirrel Hill, the city’s predominantly Jewish neighborhood, took to the streets demanding first that Trump renounce white nationalism before paying his respects to the victims.

Trump has strongly rejected any charges that he’s to blame. . . .

Our research finds that Kaine could be correct, however: Trump’s rhetoric may encourage hate crimes, as we explain below.

Does Trump’s political rhetoric have a measurable link to reported hate crime and extremist activity?

We examined this question, given that so many politicians and pundits accuse Trump of emboldening white nationalists. White nationalist leaders seem to agree, as leaders including Richard Spencer and David Duke have publicly supported Trump’s candidacy and presidency, even if they still criticize him for not going far enough. The New Zealand shooter even referred to Trump as a “renewed symbol of white identity.”

So, do attitudes like these have real world consequences? Recent research on far-right groups suggests that they do, especially when these attitudes are embraced and encourage by peers. Specifically, the quantity of neo-Nazi and racist skinhead groups active in a state leads to increased reports of hate crimes within that state.

How we did our research

Using the Anti-Defamation League’s Hate, Extremism, Anti-Semitism, Terrorism map data (HEAT map), we examined whether there was a correlation between the counties that hosted one of Trump’s 275 presidential campaign rallies in 2016 and increased incidents of hate crimes in subsequent months.

To test this, we aggregated hate-crime incident data and Trump rally data to the county level and then used statistical tools to estimate a rally’s impact. We included controls for factors such as the county’s crime rates, its number of active hate groups, its minority populations, its percentage with college educations, its location in the country and the month when the rallies occurred.

We found that counties that had hosted a 2016 Trump campaign rally saw a 226 percent increase in reported hate crimes over comparable counties that did not host such a rally.

Half Of Americans Say Trump Incites Political Violence

Chart reflects the results of the latest ABC News / Washington Post Poll -- done between October 29th and November 1st of a national sample of 1,255 adults, with a margin of error of 3.5 points.

Trump claims he has none of the responsibility for the political violence in this country, and Republicans back him up on that. But the rest of the country isn't buying his denial. About 49% of the general public (including 50% of Independents and 76% of Democrats) say his divisive rhetoric encourages violence.

Behavior of Republicans And Democrats Are NOT The Same

There is an idea going around on cable news and in the media that is infuriating me. It is the idea, propagated by some stupid pundits, that our politics is too uncivil and both sides are doing the same thing.

That is a ludicrous idea. It equates yelling at a politician in a restaurant with sending mail bombs, shooting random Black people, and executing Jews as they pray. But those acts are not equal. While some Democratic politicians may be promoting incivility, Republicans (especially Trump) are engaging in hate speech, and emboldening terrorists to carry out vicious acts that kill people.

Here is how Paul Krugman (pictured) describes this in his New York Times column:

In America 2018, whataboutism is the last refuge of scoundrels, and bothsidesism is the last refuge of cowards.

In case you hadn’t noticed, we’re in the midst of a wave of hate crimes. Just in the past few days, bombs were mailed to a number of prominent Democrats, plus CNN. Then, a gunman massacred 11 people at a Pittsburgh synagogue. Meanwhile, another gunman killed two African-Americans at a Louisville supermarket, after first trying unsuccessfully to break into a black church — if he had gotten there an hour earlier, we would probably have had another mass murder.

All of these hate crimes seem clearly linked to the climate of paranoia and racism deliberately fostered by Donald Trump and his allies in Congress and the media.

Killing black people is an old American tradition, but it is experiencing a revival in the Trump era.

When the bombs were discovered, many on the right immediately claimed that they were fake news or a false flag operation by liberals. But the F.B.I. quickly tracked down the apparent source of the explosive devices: A fanatical Trump supporter, whom many are already calling the MAGABomber. His targets were people and a news organization Trump has attacked in many speeches. (Since the bombings, Trump has continued to attack the news media as the “enemy of the people.”)

The man arrested at the Tree of Life synagogue has been critical of Trump, who he apparently believes isn’t anti-Semitic enough. But his rage seems to have been fueled by a conspiracy theory being systematically spread by Trump supporters — the claim that Jewish financiers are bringing brown people into America to displace whites.

This conspiracy theory is, it turns out, a staple of neo-Nazis in Europe. It’s what our own neo-Nazis — whom Trump calls “very fine people” — were talking about in Charlottesville last year, when they chanted, “Jews will not replace us.”

It’s also the barely veiled subtext of the manufactured hysteria over the caravan of would-be migrants from Central America. The fearmongers aren’t just portraying a small group of frightened, hungry people still far from the United States border as a looming invasion. They have also been systematically implying that Jews are somehow behind the whole thing. There’s a straight line from Fox News coverage of the caravan to the Tree of Life massacre.

So how are Trump apologists dealing with this ugly picture? Partly through denial, pretending not to see any link between hateful rhetoric and hate crimes. But also through attempts to spread the blame by claiming that Democrats are just as bad if not worse. Trump supporters try to kill his critics? Well, some Trump opponents have yelled at politicians in restaurants! . . .

 Trump supporters aren’t the only people trying to pretend that he’s only doing what everyone does, that Democrats are just as bad and equally liable for the explosion of hatred.

False equivalence, portraying the parties as symmetric even when they clearly aren’t, has long been the norm among self-proclaimed centrists and some influential media figures. It’s a stance that has hugely benefited the GOP, as it has increasingly become the party of right-wing extremists.

You might have thought that the horrifying events of recent days would finally break through that norm. But you would have been wrong. Bothsidesism is, it turns out, a fanatical cult impervious to evidence. Trump famously boasted that his supporters would stick with him even if he shot someone on Fifth Avenue; what he didn’t point out was that pundits would piously attribute the shooting to “incivility,” and that Sunday talk shows would feature Fifth-Avenue-shooting advocates and give them a respectful hearing.

This needs to stop, and those who keep practicing bothsidesism need to be shamed. At this point, pretending that both sides are equally to blame, or attributing political violence to spreading hatred without identifying who’s responsible for that spread, is a form of deep cowardice.

The fact is that one side of the political spectrum is peddling hatred, while the other isn’t. And refusing to point that out for fear of sounding partisan is, in effect, lending aid and comfort to the people poisoning our politics. Yes, hate is on the ballot next week.

Open Letter From Jewish Leaders Should Be From All Of Us

(Cartoon image is by David Fitzsimmons in the Arizona Daily Star.)

After the tragedy in Pittsburgh, Trump didn't even suspend his political hate speech for one day. He did however say he might go to Pittsburgh. I hope he doesn't, because he is likely to try and turn it into another self-serving political event.

Many others feel the same way. After hearing he might go to Pittsburg, 11 Jewish leaders penned an open letter to Trump -- a letter that has now been signed by over 36,000 people. That letter, which was read outside the White House on the day after the shooting, is printed below.

Personally, I would take it further. Decent people around the country should make it clear that Trump is not welcome in their cities either -- until he apologizes for his odious behavior and learns to act like a decent human.

Here is the letter from Bend The Arc:

President Trump:

Yesterday, a gunman slaughtered 11 Americans during Shabbat morning services. We mourn with the victims’ families and pray for the wounded. Here in Mr. Rogers’ neighborhood, we express gratitude for the first responders and for the outpouring of support from our neighbors near and far. We are committed to healing as a community while we recommit ourselves to repairing our nation.

For the past three years your words and your policies have emboldened a growing white nationalist movement. You yourself called the murderer evil, but yesterday’s violence is the direct culmination of your influence.  

President Trump, you are not welcome in Pittsburgh until you fully denounce white nationalism.

Our Jewish community is not the only group you have targeted.  You have also deliberately undermined the safety of people of color, Muslims, LGBTQ people, and people with disabilities. Yesterday’s massacre is not the first act of terror you incited against a minority group in our country.  

President Trump, you are not welcome in Pittsburgh until you stop targeting and endangering all minorities.

The murderer’s last public statement invoked the compassionate work of the Jewish refugee service HIAS at the end of a week in which you spread lies and sowed fear about migrant families in Central America. He killed Jews in order to undermine the efforts of all those who find shared humanity with immigrants and refugees.

President Trump, you are not welcome in Pittsburgh until you cease your assault on immigrants and refugees.

The Torah teaches that every human being is made b’tzelem Elohim, in the image of God.

This means all of us.

In our neighbors, Americans, and people worldwide who have reached out to give our community strength, there we find the image of God.  While we cannot speak for all Pittsburghers, or even all Jewish Pittsburghers, we know we speak for a diverse and unified group when we say:

President Trump, you are not welcome in Pittsburgh until you commit yourself to compassionate, democratic policies that recognize the dignity of all of us.

Signed,

Bend the Arc: Pittsburgh Steering Committee

Trump And GOP's "Illegal" Immigration Rhetoric Is Being Used As A Scare Tactic To Change "Legal" Immigration Policy

(This chart, by the Migration Policy Institute, is from Think Progress.)

Donald Trump, and his Republican cohorts in Congress, continue to spew a torrent of vile rhetoric about undocumented immigrants. They want you to believe we are being flooded with these immigrants that are stealing good American jobs and boosting crime in this country.

It is not true. The truth is that undocumented immigration is currently at about a zero level (meaning as many are leaving the country as entering it). That "flood" just doesn't exist. And those immigrants who are here do not steal "good" American jobs. They take what they can find, which is the dirtiest and most dangerous and lowest-paid jobs -- the jobs American citizens don't want.

The Republicans know this. And they also know that the only effective way to curb undocumented immigration is to severely punish the employers that hire these immigrants. They won't do that though, because it would damage the flow of campaign funds from the business sector (who wants that flow of cheap labor to fill their dirty and dangerous jobs).

So, why all the vile rhetoric about "illegal" immigrants? Two reasons. First, it keeps their racist and xenophobic base happy. But most important, it paints all immigrants with a broad brush (both documented and undocumented). That helps them do what they really want -- to change immigration policy in general (documented immigration).

Why do they want to do that? The chart above explains it. Note that 60% of documented immigrants come from only 10 countries, and all of them are countries where the people are nonwhite. And a good portion of the other 40% are also from nonwhite countries. In other words, the current so-called "legal" immigrants are overwhelmingly nonwhite. Trump and other Republicans want to change that.

It is easy to understand why Trump wants the change. He is a racist, and always has been. His dream of "making America great again" is to maintain the white dominance and privilege in the United States -- which is being threatened by the shifting demographics.

It is also easy to understand why congressional Republicans want the change. They see the demographic change as threatening their political power. They know that the racist policies they support have driven nonwhite voters away from their party. Since they can't change those policies (something their base would not allow), they think they can do it by initiating an immigration policy that excludes nonwhites and encourages immigration of whites.

To accomplish this goal, they want to stop family-based immigration (which they label as "chain migration) and discontinue the "lottery" visa immigration (which helps immigrants from mainly nonwhite countries). They would replace this with what they call a "merit-based" system. That would give preference to immigrants who have education and skills (who they believe will be mostly white).

Their major campaign donors (corporations) would also love this, because it would allow them to pay lower wages to foreign workers (who will accept that to get into the U.S.). That would depress wages for educated and skilled American workers who would be competing with those foreign workers for the "good" jobs.

The desired changes to immigration policy by Trump and the Republicans would not be good for this country. That's why they are using the vile rhetoric against undocumented immigrants. They hope it will mask their real desire -- to institute a more racist immigration policy.

The Terrorism That Republican Candidates Won't Talk About

(This image of Republican debaters is by DonkeyHotey.)

Throughout this campaign the Republican presidential candidates have repeatedly brought up the specter of jihadist terrorism in this country -- and they did it again in their debate a few days ago. This is a naked attempt to appeal to their base's fear and hatred of muslims -- both here and abroad. It is not a real effort to hold a rational discussion on terrorism in the United States.

I say that because they all completely ignored a recent act of terrorism in this country -- the terrorist attack on a Planned Parenthood facility in Colorado. They were eager to talk about the terrorist attack in California, because it was done by muslims. But they don't want to talk about terrorist attacks done by right-wing christians.

If they did, then they would have to admit that many of the right-wing christian terrorists are radicalized by the words of Republican candidates -- and by their propaganda organization, Fox News. The GOP candidates (and Fox News) have been preaching hate for all they consider to be "enemies" (muslims, President Obama, immigrants, Democrats, liberal, minorities, Planned Parenthood, etc.) -- saying all of these "enemies" are destroying the United States. It is more than a bit disingenuous to say that this continual hate speech has not radicalized many of the right-wing christian terrorists.

And their refusal to recognize that terrorism in this country is not done by jihadists alone, means they have no real solution to terrorism in this country. Their only "solution" is to discriminate against muslims and broader the U.S. participation in the war in Iraq/Syria (both of which would just cause more American deaths and radicalize more jihadist terrorists). It is a bumper sticker solution that won't work in the real world.

Another reason it won't work is because most terrorist attacks in the United States are not done by jihadists, but by home-grown right-wing christian terrorists. Americans are far more likely to be the victim of a right-wing terrorist than a jihadist terrorist, as it is just a fact that most terrorist incidents in this country are carried out by right-wing christian terrorists.

We do need to have a rational discussion on how to suppress terrorist attacks in this country, but the Republicans are not willing to participate in that debate. They are only interested in bigoted hate and fear mongering.

Thoughts On Rush Limbaugh

(The caricature of Limbaugh on the left is from the inimitable DonkeyHotey.)

Let me preface my remarks by saying that I have never liked Rush Limbaugh very much. He has spent years trying to divide this country, and vilifying anyone with the temerity to disagree with his vicious right-wing politics. And while the Constitution guarantees him the right to spread his vile hate speech, I personally consider him to be a nasty and infected boil on the butt of our society.

But I also don't think he's going away any time soon. Much has been made in some liberal blogs (and on Facebook) recently about the story at Politico.com that says he could be dropped by Cumulus Media's 40 stations that carry him. I don't know if this threat by Cumulus to drop Limbaugh (and Sean Hannity) is just a negotiating ploy to lower what they currently pay Clear Channel to air Limbaugh's show, or whether Cumulus is just tired of the controversy surrounding Limbaugh.

What is obvious is that Cumulus has lost a ton of money, thanks to an effective boycott that has caused over 1200 national advertisers to drop their support of the show -- and demanded that their advertising no longer appear on that show (or on Hannity's show). While some of those advertisers may agree with the hateful ideas Limbaugh propagates, they care a lot more about making money -- and they are not about to let the controversy surrounding Limbaugh affect their profit margin. And the same is true of Cumulus Media. They are not in business to lose money.

Cumulus may decide to continue carrying Limbaugh's show, but if they do it will be at a much, much lower price. And if they drop Limbaugh, Clear Channel will likely find other channels to carry him -- but that will also be at a much lower price. The golden days are over for Limbaugh, and his next contract with Clear Channel (if there is one) will be for far less money than his previous contract.

The boycott of Limbaugh's advertisers has been very effective -- and it should continue. While Limbaugh has the constitutional right to spew his hate, other people have the right to oppose that. But if Cumulus does drop him, that does not mean it's the end of his show. However, it might be the beginning of the end -- and for now, that's enough.

Limbaugh Show Bleeding Money

Premiere Networks is the organization that Rush Limbaugh actually works for. They are the company that distributes his radio show to small stations around the country to be aired. They make their money by selling expensive national advertisements, which the stations that carry the show are obligated to run. After running the national ads for Premiere, the local stations then run some local ads to make money for themselves. Until a couple of weeks ago, it was a lucrative arrangement for everyone concerned.

As the chart above shows, Limbaugh's unwarranted, abusive, and defamatory attacks on a young college student (and on women in general) has thrown a big monkey wrench in the business of hate radio. Decent people across the country have risen up and demanded the companies supporting Rush by advertising on his show stop it immediately or be subjected to boycotts of their products -- and that pressure has become so great that the advertisers are deserting Limbaugh's show in droves. It has now climbed to more than 150 companies that have refused to allow their ads to be aired on Limbaugh's show.

It has become so bad that Premiere Networks has informed the local radio stations that for two weeks there will be no breaks for national ads (the weeks beginning on March 12th and March 19th). They didn't give a reason, but the reason would seem obvious. They don't have any ads to run in those breaks (and even some charities have refused to allow free public service announcements to run on Limbaugh's show), and they don't want the show surrounded by "dead air" (radio silence). That would make the flight of advertisers away from the show even more obvious.

And it has gotten even worse for Limbaugh. Not only has he hurt his own show, but he's also hurt the shows of his fellow hate radio talkers (like Hannity, Savage, and Beck). Many of the advertisers have pulled their ads from not just Limbaugh's show, but from all of the hate radio shows.

Limbaugh has made a half-hearted apology (actually a non-apology apology), and I'm sure he and Premiere Networks are hoping the furor will die down in a couple of weeks, the advertisers will come back, and things will return to normal. There's a good chance that won't happen though. The demographic that most advertisers want is the 18 to 54 age group (especially women), and there aren't too many of those in his audience. He has mostly older white men as listeners, so the advertisers may just look elsewhere to spend their advertising dollars -- where they can get more bang for their buck.

And a new poll shows that the public didn't think much of Limbaugh's "apology" anyway. A Rasmussen Poll showed that only 29% of the public thinks Limbaugh's apology was sincere, while 53% thought it was not. In other words, he's not out of the hole he dug for himself yet -- and he may not get out of it.  

Hate Preacher Denied Entry Into U.K.

You may remember hate-filled preacher Terry Jones of Dove World Outreach Center in Gainesville, Florida. He's the preacher that made headlines by arranging to burn the Koran last September 11th (a threat he didn't follow through on). This nut has made it his mission to preach hatred toward another religion -- islam.

Well, now Jones wants to take his message of hate to the United Kingdom. He has been invited to go there and preach his anti-islam message by the England Is Ours group (a British-based hate group). But he has a problem. The government of the U.K. doesn't want him in their country spreading his hate. And last week they denied him entry into their country.

British Home Secretary Theresa May banned Jones entry into the country saying the government "has the right to exclude people who are not conducive to public good or on national security grounds." A British Home Office spokesman said Jones had been barred because his "numerous comments. . .are evidence of his unacceptable behavior."

Of course, Jones is incensed by this. He said being banned from entry into the U.K. sabotaged his "rights of freedom of speech and freedom of expression." I have to wonder just what rights he is talking about. Someone needs to tell him that his constitutional rights are only applicable in the United States. The British don't have to extend him any rights or courtesies that they don't want to extend.

Frankly, I don't blame the U.K. for banning him. Jones is just a hatemonger and a trouble-maker, and would just cause problems for them.

Right-Wing Hate Kills Again

It's happened again. This time, an 89 year-old racist and anti-semite enters the U.S. Holocaust Museum and immediately begins shooting with a rifle. He shoots and kills a museum security guard, and probably intended to kill many other innocent people. Fortunately, security reacted courageously and professionally, and shot the racist nut before he could hurt anyone else.

How do we know this man, James Von Brunn, was a right-wing nut? Easy. He has a web site and a book promoting his racist and anti-semitic ideas. And in 1983, he was convicted of trying to kidnap (and kill?) the members of the Federal Reserve Board. He served six years for that crime.

Last week, it was the murder of Dr. Tiller in Wichita by another right-wing nut -- Scott Roeder. He had also been previously convicted -- for possession of bomb-making materials. Many on the right would like for us to believe these were isolated and rare incidents, but frankly, it's just happening too often.

It hasn't been very long since another right-winger, a follower of Coulter, Hannity, Beck, Limbaugh, etc., entered a Unitarian Church and started killing innocent people. He thought they deserved to die because they were "liberals". He just took the right-wing hate-speech he heard on a regular basis to its logical conclusion.

And there's more. A couple of weeks ago, a man was arrested in Utah, because as he was pulling his money out of the bank, he told the teller of his plans to kill the president. He's just one of several people arrested for planning to kill the president.

Many on the right became very upset after a government report warned of possible violence from the right. It's beginning to look like the report was right on target. And we shouldn't forget that with the exception of the 9/11 attack, the most deadly terrorist attack on American soil (Oklahoma City) was done by a home-grown right-winger -- Timothy McVeigh.

The nuts on Fox News and right-wing radio churn out their hate-speech on a daily basis, aimed at the president and all "liberals". But when one of their acolytes actually acts on their words, they want to claim their innocence. It doesn't work that way though. If you are going to paint the left as demons destroying America, then you must accept at least partial responsibility when your followers take the words to heart and muder innocent people.

I don't expect bi-partisanship. The Republicans have made it clear that won't happen. But can't we disagree without demonizing our opponents?