The Right acted admirably almost across the board here, including people I wouldn't have expected it from.

But I think the question here is valid: Conservatives are prone to the "cultural decline" stuff and blaming actions/events on said decline. I suspect (though I don't know for sure) conservatives have traditionally been more likely to blame D&D, video games, porn, etc for bad things that happen.

I can imagine a scenario where the shooter had attributes such that the situation would have been reversed. Certainly where people like Rush are concerned.

If that's true, hopefully our prolonged exposure to this poison from the Left has helped inoculate us from going down the same path when the temptation arises, which it will.

I am heavily influenced by Plinkett and find his deconstruction of the films fascinating and informative (and I will steal from them).

But I'm deeply disappointed that the always distracting and annoying serial killer outtakes -- presumably put there out of some insecurity that the actual film criticism wouldn't be sexy enough to pull in the viewers, or out of creative insecurity -- reaches such a disgusting point in the review of the last film that I find I can't recommend it to others. Perhaps Red Letter Media will do the favor of editing out the particularly disgusting scene that makes me feel this way (and I'm not a prude or sensitive person).

It's doubly disappointing because the last third of his final review is a brilliant and revealing analysis of what happened to Lucas, which, as we know, is a topic for the ages...

He was a mostly terrible screenwriter for the first two films also, yet managed to overcome that enough. The thing is, back then people could and would still fight him to do something better. When I get to a followup post I'll document some specifics.

I'd also say he went downhill after the first two; the third is a pretty bad film and just got a pass because people hadn't figured the situation out yet.

I'm pretty sure lives have actually been lost due to the prequel love scenes. I know I was close to being put on life support.

I was sure he'd take a pot shot while using some cleverness to pretend he wasn't. But he didn't.

He did the right thing. The Presidential thing.

Good for him.

Ack, missed this and it looks like no audiobook, which would make it easy!

Ah well, picked up the Kindle version, will see how far I can get by Friday...

I'm willing to stop talking on Ricochet about the vast recent history of violent leftist rhetoric -- as it's preaching to the choir -- but I know too many people ignorant of recent history and influenced by the last seemingly-reasonable liberal blog they read not to document and continue to try and influence those around me about the facts in this matter.

I will not stand by and be tarred as a murderous racist by those who engage in the worst forms of slander on a daily basis. I won't let them own the history because they are willing to yell louder and longer.

Some have to counter the hate and the false history.

But it's also understandable to want a refuge, and there's no good reason for Ricochet not to be a refuge.

While the "crass" part stands, I realized I would make a liar out of myself if I didn't add a caveat: If a killer is clearly acting out a political mission that is part of a larger group effort, then clearly that's fodder for political discussion and the killer's background plays into that.

Though in no case is it reasonable to make assertions until the "fog of tragedy" has cleared (I think I just made up a new phrase) and discussions can be had on the basis of actual facts.

NYT Bestseller at least gives some context. If a book just says "bestseller" it could mean anything.

Specifying what entity is doing the tracking indicates the general approach used to come up with the claim, even though that approach is pretty flawed.

I fully agree with the disease characterization, and the tragedy of losing a human being with potential to the ravages of a diseased brain they cannot control.

When people refer to the shooter as a "nut" I don't believe it's meant as an insult; I think the intent is to clearly place his actions in the context of someone who had no true control over his actions. In our culture most of us don't know of a more accurate yet concise way to say that.

In using that term they are seeking a way to express something different than, say, the more disturbing type of person who pulls off the Columbine massacre; individuals who may have problems but clearly are not in the throes of the kind of "aliens talking to me through the pipes" situation this shooter seemed to be in.

One is a disease; the other is some glimpse of evil.

Your story and those of the other families impacted by this are the only ones that matter right now.

These signs, combined with Robert Gibbs' clueless statement about "Imagine just a few years ago had someone walked around with images of Hitler" are pretty much what inspired me to create my site to archive quotes, just so I could have this page.

For lots and lots of these images, check out zombie's hall of shame and his pictures of an SF anti-war rally. Also Ringo's page of awful protest pictures.

Conservatives and the Tea Party have never said anything 1/100th as incendiary or violent as the Left did throughout Bush's term, yet somehow we are leading the world into a hell of incivility. 

She is using the same sorts of terminology as the DLC, the DCCC, Markos Moulitsas, and many many others. I just cannot understand why, when Markos used exactly the same terminology for exactly the same politician, somehow Palin is the one who must be called out.

After enduring so many years of the most violent hate-filled speech from the Left, including from a US Congressman referring to Bush as Hitler, I just can't comprehend how a politician using standard political rhetoric is somehow the focus of a tragic event that had absolutely nothing to do with anything she did or said.

Nothing Palin has ever said even comes close to the standard rhetoric of the Left under Bush, and nothing she said is connected to this act. This need to focus on her is bizarre.

Kenneth, what of Palin's rhetoric is not common among the Left, and specifically among those criticizing her?

Use of 'targeting' is absolutely standard in all politics; maps with targets on them are common across the board. Those such as Markos criticizing Palin have used the same language, even referencing the same politicians (including the one who was shot). Violent references to Bush/Cheney, and comparisons of Bush to Hitler were daily occurrences.

Is it really acceptable to call on Palin to have to use an entirely different vocabulary than everyone else in politics?

Or are you actually asking that everyone in politics change their rhetoric?

If we get a centrist Obama who manages to get re-elected, that's better than some possibilities, such as eight years of Huckabee (which is more or less eight more years of Obama).

In search of a half-remembered quote, I recently re-listened to quite a number of the early Ricochet podcasts, and fell in love all over again. It's easy to forget just how much quality is packed into one audio file.

It's a conspiracy! Bring back the lost 18 1/2 minutes!

It was sorta complicated, and the mayor had a point that it would probably enmesh the City in lawsuits...

Elsbernd's Proposition G -- attacking Muni unions -- passed big-time (Muni unions in SF are about as popular as teacher's unions everywhere else right now), so I think that's a very positive sign on the overall question of public sentiment...