- Murdered MDs? Presidential assassination? Hangings? Military coups? What's next?



Wholesale Body Bags.



The voice of the radical right has driven 'the base' over the edge.  By the first weeks of the Obama Administration, they had cleared the ammo from shelves of gun shops around the country by fear-mongering popular demand. Ever since, and with a constituency that is lock-and-load ready, an endless list of action items has shifted the screams of radicalizers to shrill overdrive.

How many more times will Fox's Beck or Limbaugh fan the fanatical flames that burn inside of rightwing extremists to another violent climax, before sane America demands a stop be put to the incitement of domestic terror?

It's too late for some innocent victims whose killers responded to the voices of media and talking-head cheerleaders. But, if they stop even now, it may prove too late for others who will fall to the echoes of voices still resounding inside the heads of the independently rabid. 

Make no mistake, it is terrorism according to the Executive Order signed by President Bush in September of 2001 that was explicit in its definition:

Executive Order 13224

(d) the term "terrorism" means an activity that

-- (i) involves a violent act or an act dangerous to human life, property, or infrastructure; and

-- (ii) appears to be intended

---- (A) to intimidate or coerce a civilian population;

---- (B) to influence the policy of a government by intimidation or coercion; or

---- (C) to affect the conduct of a government by mass destruction, assassination, kidnapping, or hostage-taking.

It's not just for millenial religious warfare anymore: Terrorism for profit was born right here in the USA.

The election campaign that began with intentional slurs of Barack HUSSEIN
Obama as a terrorist has escalated terror up the scale of extremist hate-mongering to generalize a novel form of public relations tool for corporate allies.  They transformed healthcare reform townhalls into verbal smackdowns and teabag tussels.  Rhetoric of that sort of threat is mainstreamed in the 'teabag movement', now enough that some arrive fully and heavily-armed to appearances by President Obama.

How mainstream has the threat of violence for political ends become? 

The rhetoric is so pervasive and persistent in the normative social environment of Americans that a child recently believed it is OK to poll FaceBook users on whether President Obama should be killed "if he cuts my health care"!  And more than seven hundred responded?!

What voices are heard by children when they're playing alone?  The loudest are parents and media talking heads..

So, when will it become too late to stop this kind of insanity?

When Glenn Beck's inside sources tell him that the police and military are with us? When he thinks it's OK to publicly tell that to his audience?  When a NewsMax columnist (for 10 years!) opines the intricacies of a military coup d'etat?

Nightmares no longer go away in the daylight and extremist freak shows are Fox News staples. I think we're nearly there and now's the time to Stop Domestic Terror before more TIller-killers are moved
to act, before more murders are committed at the Holocaust Museum, before more
Federal census workers are brutally hanged.

Because Words Have Meaning -

The simple elegance of that wisdom comes from Frank Schaeffer who was a co-creator of the Religious Right movement with his father and C. Everett Koop. It's from the video "Frank Schaeffer - Fundamentalist Foot Soldiers," below, made as part of the campaign he's joined in with and several other organizations. Together, they have written a letter to Attorney General Eric Holder outlining our concerns and requesting that he act quickly to address this wave of domestic terrorism. A copy of the letter is here.

Schaeffer anticipated it and has been trying to warn us of the current wave of domestic terror which was born, in part, from the movement that he helped to found and of which he has become a vocal and very well-outspoken critic.


It was during the 1980s that Schaeffer abandoned the movement he more recently described in "Crazy for God" after finding that the base upon which it was built would do very un-Christian things like firebomb abortion clinics and advocate the murder of clinic doctors. His own father, Francis Schaeffer, wrote "The Christian Manifesto" from which some extremists take the license of belief that all legitimate means are exhausted and it's now time for the second American Civil War, and revolution.

At you can watch more of the VR interview with him, examine the evidence submitted to AG Holder, sign up to join the campaign, watch Rachel Maddow's discussion with Schaeffer, and understand the full slate of objectives they hope to achieve. 

Here, I've presented my sense of what's involved in this wave of domestic terrorism that has overtaken us since the election, and the campaign they've begun is a start at addressing the issues. 

Bottomline: the entrenchment of thinking that it's OK to use violence in changing US policy is purely and simply terrorism and, somehow, that thinking has become 'normal'.  It will require a substantial effort by sane Americans to help restore a normal that is more consistent with the America I once understood.  Go sign up:

We are taking a stand against this dangerous trend towards the incitement of lawlessness and violence. We strongly believe in the First Amendment right of free expression and discourse, even when that expression is abhorrent and not in line with our own beliefs. However, the First Amendment does not protect debate where one side includes the threat or act of violence.







No votes yet


...once upon a time. Not anymore!

If the right to threaten or to physically harm people was protected by the First Amendment, extremists like Beck, Limbaugh, Coulter, Malkin, Perry, etc., ad nauseum, then I might allow the freakish charge of "CENSORSHIP" as a valid one. IF the call was for censorhip.

Instead, the high holy advocates of self-responsibility deserve more ridicule for mocking themselves and their supposedly highest principles in defending the advocacy of political violence.

They were the loudest to rail against bin Laden's calls for holy terror against Americans. And the radicals cheered louder when President Bush defined the actions of bin Laden as terrorism.

Now, they practice it.

The extremists are from a fantasynightmare version of America, or at worst, the fringe of this one. There, threats and acts of violence are free speech matters protected under the First Amendment.

Never been, never will, as far as I understand the English language and its use in the Bill of Rights. There's no right to advocating political violence in the Bill of Rights.

I agree with the creators of, and that is why I quoted the key statement to close the article:

However, the First Amendment does not protect debate where one side includes the threat or act of violence.

"I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our moneyed corporations which dare already to challenge our government in a trial of strength, and bid defiance to the laws of our country." - Thomas Jefferson

the crazy people will test the limits of legally protected speech every chance they get. Straddle the line between hate and violence and see just how far they can go before someone puts them in jail.