It's O.K.! "Shoot The President!" "Shoot The Nig!", ( Obama ) It's Civil War !

NANNEYR, As the level of education has steadily risen worldwide, we have evolved more humanely and civil. However, the baser part of human nature is stronger in some than others, and will always be a threat to civility for the foreseeable future. The occasional unhinged gunman is nothing compared to the extremely well organized and insidious sociopathic group of those intent on conquering, subjugating, and exploiting the rest of the world with all of it's inhabitants. The death and damage which they perpetrate are on monumentally massive scales.

but their ruling specifically cites [ standing law does not prohibit "predictions or exhortations" to violence." ] ?EXHORTATIONS? Or, do they actutally make a distinction between direct and indirect exhortation?

thanks Sandy. obviously I have no prior familiarity with the issue, lol

I truly don't know how to construe your reply, but, the kids r a riot while making a salient point!

your error is in thinking i make sense lol.jk or so i hope.

i was sarcasticly responding to the threat the way the republicans always do just after they encite thier followers to violence.

Heeey I posted that earlier! *shakes a fist* I'm glad that I'm not the only one that loves The Whitest Kids U Know.

normaly i would care more about doing that.but as a fellow wkuk fan you know ya gotta pick your spots.waiting and waiting for the appropriate time to drop some trevor.redundancy be damned.

JFK wan't the only one targeted by power mongers and commercial interests Anthony. It's been classic modus operandi since "Jesus" and before. It occurs in every country where the people don't take a unified stand and implement safeguards to it. We may as well take our stand here, where we have numbers and private arms on our side. You want to join the anti corporate government Jihad?

Plenty of other countries to live in sport if you hate this one. Don't let the door hit you.

What i don't get is that if one subscribes to the theory of evolution we are all Africans.
And if you believe in creationism we are all Jews.
So someone please explain to me how rednecks justify their extreme bigotry.

I like to contemplate the Native American Medicine Wheel.
The red coyote to the south
The white owl to the north
The yellow eagle to the east
The black bear to the west
Black, white, red and yellow coming together at the center of the four directions.
How did they know that thousands of years ago?

It's always race isn't it. No wonder there is so much racism in this country. You are doing your part to perpetuate it.

Your rant does not make me uncomfortable in the least. I do not feel threatened, worried or anything, well, I did chuckle a little. In order to have an immediate threat there must be an ability to carry it out. So you see why I am not worried. I'm going to re-up my wine glass. Don't let your hatred keep you awake tonight. I will sleep well.

I think Kelo v. New London was much worse.

Right! So, when we shout out here: "Will someone PLEASE shoot all republicans?!" and someone actually does it, we are not culpable if we didn't plan or assist them, right?

Obama lover? Would you have said the same thing during the Bush Administration? The Clinton Administration and so forth? You can't shout "fire" in a crowded when there isn't one. I think threatening the life of the President should earn that same sentiment.

You can have your disagreements with the President, but there is a line between disagreements and psychotic ramblings. If you threaten to kill your spouse during a bitter child custody case and your spouse just so happen to get killed after, who do you think the police are going to go after first?

Threats of violence and murder are serious and should be taken as such especially in the case of the President of the United States. If harm would come to him or his family do you know what the immediate reaction would be? People would assume that it was some racist, pig-headed asshole that would harm them because of their race.

Slander, libel, regulating incitement, and defamation are restricted forms of speech that aren't protected (as much). Sedition is considered a restriction but it isn't really enforced as much. What the Westburo Baptist Church are doing is considered deplorable and disgusting. But in their case, people have a choice to ignore them. Ignoring the threat of the President's life, not so much.

nice rant...but my point is, as remanns stated below, the way the law is written he is not breaking it. And the Obama lover comment came from the way he wrote the article like he's offended that someone would say something like that about Obama, and goes on to say we should kill all these Republicans. It just makes him come off as uncredible and biased. And by the way I'm not fond of Republicans myself...

It's not clear who in the post you are referring to as "idiots." For starters, the Rightwinger defendant's comment at issue is a good example of the sort of protoNazi sentiment in Germany in the later '20s and early '30s. It's where we are, so we can expect this sort of thing. He recognizes that there is a civil war afoot - you've seen references here to the Cold Civil War we are "fighting" right now in the USA. These things are clearer in retrospect, but lots of folks, "left" and "right," recognize it. Unfortunately, the large majority of folks are too dim or too effectively propagandized to have a clue. But the defendant is correct, in no small part because he's a part of the cause of the war. To call him an idiot is like thinking a cat is an idiot because it can't cook and serve you dinner. The defendant is simply not evolved. And now, he's just a tool.

And the 2 judges that found for the defendant? It'd be helpful to see what their backgrounds are. The defendant might have prevailed because of a technicality that will be addressed, and the judges were technically correct even if the finding was repugnant. You'd have to read the actual opinions.

Or, the two judges may be Straussian Neocons, relics of the felonious Bush program to expunge the judiciary of intelligence and substitute Regent University grads. In that case they are not unevolved, they have evolved along a pathway parallel to most folks, ironically including the meatball defendant. Recall that such folks do not believe in good or evil, per se. They are the folks that start wars and promote torture, etc. In other words, Republicans. Among whom we must now group such wolves in sheeps' clothing as Joe Leibermann and Barack Obama. But those judges could not be considered idiots. They're likely intelligent, eductated, and successful.

And the person who authored the post? The messenger? Hardly can call someone an idiot if they're just bearing the message. Whatever it means. What it is at least is data. A blaze on the trail of descent. The disintegration of the practice of the philisophy of America at the hands of the usual suspects: the greedy, the violent, the ignorant, the evil. Today's Republicans. Pointing us towards yet more profitable violence, war, hatred, and fear - violence, war, hatred, and fear their type cause so as to profit by.

I think he would be better off with a sniper rifle and a grassy knol :)

I was just kidding but hey if you can't see that I'm sorry. I'm not happy with the job Mr. obama is doing but I really don't want to see him dead.

Well said.

Yes in many cases they have done just that.

Very scary indeed, if the debt ceiling is not raised the Republican Congressman and the Tea Party may be in a very dangerous spot.

Should his name be before or after Rush Limbaugh's?

Let's do em both @ the same time......

A cursory look at the ninth circuit reveals it is considered the only "liberal" activist court only because 59% of the judges sitting have been appointed by democrats. This court is the largest (serving the largest population) and there have been attempts over the last decade to split it in half. It oversees the western states for the most part. It is still illegal to yell fire in a crowded theatre. Calls for violence against anyone in public are actually free speech. IE: kill the umpire. But if I call his house and threaten him, try to hire someone to kill him, gather a mob to kill him. Have pictures all over my walls with plans after all these threats...that is illegal. Intent to kill is worse than blowing my mouth off. But we have a Representative of Arizona who will live with brain injury all her life and her career is over, her life is over...because a mentally ill man got it into his head...("second amendment right" anyone?) do this heinous act. Getting someone to kill by proxy...through a stranger....? could walter's statements have been tantamount to not just yelling fire in a theatre but telling someone to start a fire? There has to be a higher moral code and 60 days was a fair sentence for what he did. I suppose feds with guns at his door shook up his worldview.In the minimum this man is a pariah, at the maximum mentally ill. Children are taught to work it out but adults get away with bullying everyday. I think the appeal should never have been heard on any grounds. This court is inconsistent in its rulings, it should be split but the battle over the make-up of this court is seriously political. Violence whether verbal or physical should be punishable. I threaten my neighbor he calls the cops, they can sue me because I am a threat and restrain me. But the President is fair game? EGAD

I bet the view from the Smithsonian Metro stop will be the best around 6:00am. The cross bow hunting should be great @ that time of the morning........

no, that is illegal, but you can shout it in a public place all day.

Horse$#!T

....You're not doing it right

Indeed -- even speech with which we disagree. If we neglect to defend free speech, even speech that offends us greatly, it will only come back to hurt we the people when it's our turn to speak.

change from black police officer to a black rent-a- cop it would keep the suing down

so, if i say to my would be "lover", "Gee, I wish my spouse were not alive", but participated in no further plans or discussion, I would not be culpable if my lover murdered my spouse?

that was a private statement, and you didn't ask your crazy ass lover to kill your spouse, you only expressed a wish. now if you know you have a crazy ass lover and say such things and they do the deed? depending on where you are, you could go to jail at least for doing nothing to stop him/her

news media ,news media,news media witch hunt if it sells air time ( in Florida) and papers

yes you would , but only once the act was done and he testified against you as a conspiritor. unfortunately the motive is so great there the jury would probly believe your partner even if he was lie and you had never said any such thing...but ultimately we dont prosicute mind crimes ..yet

I was about to point out that threats were not made. I know that there are laws against inciting violence which would be accurate. If the prosecutor chose the wrong law, that is a shame, but we are America, and laws occasionally are applied wrong. I also would say that his bullshit was as bad or worse than a simple threat.

Go to a theatre and yell "Fire!" and watch how fast you wind up in front of a judge and are fined or imprisoned.

You have that right, and that's why corporate should be at the top of any list. Read the question I posed to hombre above Saladin, please.

It's the right ruling but it in no way makes it safe to make such comments openly. I'm afraid many people will find themselves behind bars by actually thinking they're free to say what they please... We've seen before that one ruling does not apply to all, and a lot of times a 'precedent' is set to merely coax more people and feed them into the meat grinder. It seriously depends on the judges, and they are not blind. If people were to assemble and talk about violence and 'predictions' indirectly, if discovered, I'm more than sure the government would move in as they already have in the past. Hell, they go after people who trade in an independent currency... So long as you really are a threat to them, you will be removed... It's just completely up to them to decide whether or not you're a threat. That's just about the only thing that's clear here.

Actually, you can legally shout "fire" in a crowded theatre even if there is no fire. The whole notion of this being unprotected by the first amendment was established in Schenk v. United States but was later overturned in the 60's in Brandenburd v. Ohio. In that case, the SC ruled that the gov't can't punish a person for inflammatory speech unless said speech incites or is meant to incite imminent lawless action(i.e. a riot).

That being said, the Appeals Court in this case seem to have decided that no reasonable person would have taken Mr. Bagdasarian seriously and therefore he never posed a real threat. However, I know of other cases where people have been convicted and sent to prison for making very similar comments. It's ashame how inconsistent justice can be sometimes.

=D

one would think so! but i'm more inclined to see the civil war occurring along the lines of the left versus the right, because the racial slur was secondary to the implied contempt for the realist left. that many blacks might join the left's effort who might otherwise be non political, would be a boon however.

common--I totally understand what you are saying, but as for the "shoot the nig", I wasn't even addressing that slur. Just the inference that you are able to kill or harm the president in my opinion raises the racial aspect of the story. I believe that just that ruling by the court has a racial overtone to it. I would bet the family farm that if the same remarks would have been made to any of our former presidents actions would have been taken. This gentleman would have probably had received an injunction, placed on the FBI's watch list, followed, hacked, or whatever else law enforcement saw fit to do. IJS: when it comes to Obama, it seems like common sense practices and procedures go out the window.

how about the Arizona shootings that left so many dead and who put the cross hairs on them and Jesus won't hold her accountable because: " It is a part of a greater scheme in God plans get rid of liberals "

exactly, since when is it ok to assume and insight violence without consequence? Ever since Obama has been in office, the right wing has heinously attacked his health and his heritage. I have never heard any of this with any other president.

Children are taught this everyday. but adults are exercising free speech? yea gods and little gold fish

i am with you, his sixty day time out by the lower court was appropriate, if he were a teen in school and threatened the principal at a rally, he would be suspended, but this dough boy appealed, so how sorry could he have been?

Voted up! Good comment

Now that's something worth voting for!!!

There should no bag limits on Republicans traitors to America.