Cinyc,
I've made my point several times now. You can keep redefining the issue to say, well, they said we should shoot representatives, but they didn't actually say "go here at this time," and a Democrat said blah blah here, so it's not the same. I don't care, I think telling people to go shoot representatives if they don't like how they vote is unacceptable, and wherever you move the goalposts to after that is irrelevant. Whatever changes you want to make to that has nothing to do with me. The cinycs and keystone phils of the world don't necessarily have to agree with this view. Note that I am not in a position to pass laws to mandate what I think should happen, I am just one voice in a large number saying this right now in the wake of the attempted assassination. I am saying what I think. You haven't yet presented an argument as to why it's a good thing for elected officials and candidates for high office to choose to "go there" and call for assassinations. That's my challenge to you because all I am asking is that they make the prudent choice not to go there.
Jefferson advocated a revolution every generation. He was also a slaveholder. He was wrong about some things and right about others, like all the other Founders. I'm guessing you don't care for his line about the wall of separation of church and state as a mandate for our current government, do you? I don't believe that Jefferson's words were divinely inspired and God gave us (if you believe in God) the reason to discuss issues as they play out today while drawing on the wisdom of the past. I think the public reaction to Giffords' assassination by all but a few political activists and internet jerkoffs (I put myself in that category sometimes, too) shows where the country stands on "watering the tree of liberty with blood."
^^^
Are you literate, listener?
