Enough proof in those posts to continue to prove racism is still rampant in the USofA.

No, mj, I did not send these to O’Reilly because he probably won’t read anything I send. But be my guest. Let me know if you get any response.

X

mj – I’m still waiting for that moment too. Bill-O promised he would be equally hard on any right-wing sites that engaged in such hateful rhetoric that he found on “far-left” sites. Well, he and his crack staff don’t have too far to look to find some, his monkey-boy Watters oversees this site. Somehow, I don’t think O’Loofah will be turning over a new leaf and addressing this in 2016, another year, same ol’ Bill-O.

Is someone from NewsHounds forwarding these to Bill O’Reilly?

He’s always making the claim that only left-wing websites engage in violent rhetoric, while insisting that right-wing ones never do, but he would strongly condemn them if they ever did.

I think it’s time “America’s Daddy” got the opportunity to wag his fat finger at, and scold The FoKKKsNotion.com, don’t you?

.

Robert, let me start by stating that I wouldn’t normally respond to you since you chose to link to a site that’s even less reputable than FoxNoise. (It’s worth telling that, when I searched the key terms of your WND links, “narry mercury twitter trump,” pretty much the whole first page of links go to other right-wing conspiracy sites but the story doesn’t seem to have pervaded any LEGITIMATE sites.)

That written, allow me to remind you that the SCOTUS case involved an ordinary man’s use of violent lyrics in relation to his ex-wife (the Court noted that the man included “disclaimers”—not unlike certain crime dramas that pull the old “we took this story from the headlines but we’ve changed things to prevent our asses from being sued for defamation among other things” routine). Now, the man was fired from his job (as an amusement park security guard!) because his boss thought the posts were potentially threatening to his fellow employees and possibly customers (employers are actually exempt from many aspects of the First Amendment). (I’ll also throw in the fact that several years ago, an anti-abortion website posted the names and home addresses of abortion providers. A pro-choice group tried to get the site banned for promoting violence but the courts ruled for the website under First Amendment rules. The thing was, though, there was only one reason the site existed—to terrorize abortion providers. Now, compare that to the outrage from FoxNoise and other right-wing sites when that New York newspaper printed the names and addresses of people who owned lots of guns. Right-wingers claimed that was an invasion of privacy—but they’d stood squarely on the side of the anti-abortion group’s “right to inform the public.”)

BUT. Here’s the real difference: There ARE laws against making threats against the President of the United States. They applied under Reagan; they applied under GHW Bush; they applied under Clinton; they applied under W; they apply under Obama. The most telling difference is that the number of FoxNation comments making such threats has exploded since Obama took office with the FBI having to play a very cautious game because the right-wing nutjobs will scream that they’re being “persecuted” for their “political opinions” (even though, those same right-wing nutjobs wouldn’t hesitate to call for the arrest and full prosecution of any “left-wingers” who’d made such threats against W).

The other thing is that THIS site has responsible monitors who will pull a comment that they believe crosses the line of acceptable commenting (I’ve had a few of my own comments deleted—even though I’ve been clear in the very hypothetical nature of any actions discussed; but this isn’t my “home” so I don’t get to make the rules). FoxNation doesn’t monitor their commenters—or even warn them that certain language won’t be tolerated. FoxNation needs to post specific rules that ban users who routinely post violent comments against the President. And, as much as I can tell from the very brief bits I found on the above-mentioned web search, the “death threats” came from ONE man. Compare that to the screen shot of the FoxNation piece. That’s NOT one man—that’s a lot of people. (Okay—there’s a possibility that it is one person using multiple screen names but that’s actually MORE disturbing than the alternative that there are a lot of different people making these deplorable comments.)

And, one last thing: Congrats on trying the equivalency card. Too bad you failed, epically.

Before the Oklahoma City bombing, Rush was on the airwaves singing the praises of the militia movement. After the bombing, Rush was backpedaling just as fast as his fat legs could move.
My prediction is that if one of these lunatics twisted visions come to materialize, Faux will backpedal like crazy.

Stupid is as stupid does!
Or something like that!
And, Bemused, not only are they all devout christians, they are also the staunchest of patriots!

Where is the comparison to Tweets and Facebook comments? If murder threats means a website should be condemned why does it only apply to Fox?
“The nation’s highest court ruled a death threat on a Facebook wall might not legally be considered one.”

<a href=“”http://www.wnd.com/files/2015/12/Narry-Mercury-Twitter-Trump.jpg">http://www.wnd.com/files/2015/12/Narry-Mercury-Twitter-Trump.jpg">See Example</a>

Orton was scheduled to appear in court yesterday. Does anyone know what happened?

Any bets if a plot like this comes to fruition, America burns and afterwards a lot rightwing neo-fascist rats will be found in the smoldering rubble .

And I’d wager that each and every one of those putative murderers holds him/herself to be a true Christian. Mind-boggling.