64 Comments

• Searlit | Jan 15, 2011, 02:40 PM EST

  Ah, Maloney, maybe there's hope for you , yet. Makes me think of my dear grand aunt Etta.

• maloney | Jan 14, 2011, 07:06 PM EST

  When the rest of the world, including countries that haven't been our best of friends are telling us to stop sinking the ship, somebody better start looking at the captain. World powers have been where we are headed & they have put it in reverse. Even China & Russia think we have went crazy.

• hancock | Jan 14, 2011, 02:55 PM EST

  The rest of the world now has no respect for this empty suit.

• Searlit | Jan 14, 2011, 01:02 PM EST

  Maloney, he's helping the people who are hurting the most, first. First aid, means stop the wound from bleeding in order to save the patient. I never said anyone was lily white, to begin with, just that the rest of the world has lost a lot of faith in us, over what the previous administration did.

• maloney | Jan 14, 2011, 09:52 AM EST

  Searlit..believe it or not I agree with most of what you said. But I don't believe obama's spending was to help the economy or the people. I don't think we were so lilly white before Iraq or are hated much more than before since. The rest of it was ace's.

• Searlit | Jan 13, 2011, 06:59 PM EST

  Maloney, The world went along with the US because previous to GW Bush, the US was seen as Big Daddy, by many of our allies. Our government was trusted to not be too extreme. That all ended after the reasons given for the Iraq War turned out to be false. Somebody lied somewhere. I guess we will never know. Spending doesn't make one a bad President, if the spending helps our own economy and US citizens. I do believe we need to take care of our own people first, so that we are strong enough to help other nations. As far as the Afgan war, it can't be ended soon enough, for me!

• maloney | Jan 13, 2011, 12:19 PM EST

  Searlit,,you know the whole globe thought Iraq had WMD's including the Clintons & even France. If spending makes you a bad President then obama must be Satan. He has spent more money in 2 yrs. than Bush did in 8. It's also your boy Barry who has cranked up the Afgan war with no plan of victory.

• eiriamach | Jan 13, 2011, 10:56 AM EST

  "Pushing" is right, Searlit. Only, when Bush told of the weapons of mass destruction, he didn't call them "theory"; he called them "fact." Unfortunately, the existence of WMDs is not the kind of "fact" that ordinary Americans outside of the CIA can possibly check on. Bush2 was a master at bamboozling the public.

• Searlit | Jan 13, 2011, 09:33 AM EST

  Maloney, You don't count pushing two wars on our nation? Congress didn't believe we should go to war, so someone in the Bush Administration, came up with the theory of 'weapons of mass destruction'. All they did was try and control the whole country through fear tactics while they used executive powers to change Geneva Convention rules, and roll back our own countries civil rights. At the same time they spent a trillion dollars of "other people's money" (taxpayers) on it. I think war is H*ll!

• maloney | Jan 12, 2011, 11:11 PM EST

  Searlit, Pres. Bush flailed merrily along for 8 yrs. not pushing much on the population. The Dems. w/ obama have passed many things the majority of America didn't want. obama bypassed congress & pushed many more issues into being. When you try to fundamentally change America (obama's words) tolerance is a thing of the past. If you agree with obama it's hard to see the intolerance. I prefer socially oppressive. That will not work in America.

• Searlit | Jan 12, 2011, 10:45 PM EST

  Okay, maloney, I disagree with your first sentence. The rest of it I can't argue with, except for saying that the progressive 'socialists'(try socially conscious)tolerate nothing. That I don't understand.

• maloney | Jan 12, 2011, 09:29 PM EST

  If the hate mongers are taken out of govt. there will be no dems. left. Searlit, just stating the facts. It's been this way in America for a long time. You just didn't know it. Conservatives have been in power for the majority of the last 30 years or longer & no Armageddon yet. If you libs ever figure out a way to disarm America, true Armageddon will begin. It's the progressive socialists who tolerate nothing. Not the conservatives. The Sheriff's dept. in my county have said if they are ordered to disarm Americans they will go against the govt. & Obama, as will every person I know in the military & I know a lot of em. The gun owners I know have fought for America in the past or currently are serving our country. These are not people you need fear. There are millions who run their mouths but less than 1% fight for their country.

• olovely | Jan 12, 2011, 04:47 PM EST

  It's as good a time as any to admit that hateful speech can lead to hateful consequences. If good comes out of this awful weekend it will come in the form of weeding the hate-mongers out of American politics.

• Searlit | Jan 12, 2011, 02:48 PM EST

  I suppose it's left up to people like you Maloney,it's sounds like a recipe for Armageddon, though. Many of us don't want to join a race toward extinction of the planet.

• maloney | Jan 12, 2011, 01:12 PM EST

  Hollowbuttt..if no liberals own semi-auto firearms it sounds to me that your side has already lost & all you have left is to run your mouth & tell lies. We win, you lose. Gun sales in AZ. jumped by 60% after the shooting. Keep talking gun control. The more you try the more power you lose. 309,000,000 people. 270,000,000 guns.

• hancock | Jan 11, 2011, 11:37 PM EST

  I think yopu should take your own advice or stop embarrassing yourself.

• McNabb1966 | Jan 11, 2011, 05:59 PM EST

  @hollabackgurl...Nice litany of nonsense. Regurgitating the tired fake talking points of the Left does not add any value to the discussion. Your remarks are as devoid of originality as they are substance.

• hollabackgurl | Jan 11, 2011, 04:57 PM EST

  I think you should have attended a typical Tea Party rally, or will you need me to post a link to the documented sights and sounds of one?

• hancock | Jan 11, 2011, 03:01 PM EST

  I think you should take your own advice.

• hancock | Jan 11, 2011, 03:00 PM EST

  Gun toting clan rallies?

• hollabackgurl | Jan 11, 2011, 02:47 PM EST

  What I just did was state the facts without calling anyone a communist, a homo, a racist, a socialist, a libtard, a libturd, a democrap, or a fake president.

• hancock | Jan 11, 2011, 02:05 PM EST

  What do you call what you just did?

• hollabackgurl | Jan 11, 2011, 12:45 PM EST

  The hysterical rhetoric of the right, from Genn Beck's paranoia to Limbaugh's 24/7 freakouts, to the Tea Party's gun toting clan rallies have poisoned America's political discourse with threats, birther smears and actual calls for assassination.

• hancock | Jan 11, 2011, 12:18 PM EST

  Its OK to smear the Tea Party without evidence?

• Monsoonman | Jan 11, 2011, 12:12 PM EST

  The only thing you keep harping and keying on erlimach is that the splc sued the ku klux klan into financial oblivion. Yet you keep ignoring the herd of elephants in the living room regarding the cayman island offshored banking, bernie madoff, the witch hunt against the Tea Party AND the non prosecution against selected US terrorist organizations, that are in line with the doctrine the left espouses. Sorry but until you see through your ideology you are blind. Wake up and smell the elephant turds.

• eiriamach | Jan 11, 2011, 10:07 AM EST

  Monsoonman, throwing around charges like "subversive and dangerous organization" and NOT providing any evidence to support such charges is one definition of "smear campaign." My question to you is why you would want to smear an organization that has done as much over as many decades to bring justice to as many innocent people as the Southern Poverty Law Center has?

• Ajreaper | Jan 10, 2011, 10:44 PM EST

  There are NO liberals who own semi automatic guns because hollabackgurl does not know any- OK I buy that. What more evidence need there be?

• hancock | Jan 10, 2011, 08:59 PM EST

  Giffords herself owned guns. Next.

• hollabackgurl | Jan 10, 2011, 08:48 PM EST

  I don't know a single liberal who owns a semi-automatic gun. So I don't think that you could argue that Jared Loughner was anything other than a typical right wing paranoiac nut (just look at Glenn Beck, there's no shortage of them).

• Monsoonman | Jan 10, 2011, 08:09 PM EST

  hmmm, a quandry, who to believe: You do know a registered non profit group who takes money from the public and does not pay taxes, is required to let the public know it spends its money, it's the law. The non partisan Better Business Bureaus report on how the Southern Povertys Law center spends its money is correct, they fail the ethics bar, in spite of what you say. Also, if you'll pay attention, the splc only pays lip service to the left wing hate groups I listed, but has NEVER instigated any investigations or actions against them. They save their resources to now target the Tea party. You never answered what splc did with the Madoff money they received and why they would set up bank accts. on the grand caymans, if they are so above board.

• Searlit | Jan 10, 2011, 06:43 PM EST

  Great post! That's telling them the what for, eriamach!

• McNabb1966 | Jan 10, 2011, 06:04 PM EST

  According to the Washington Post, Loughner (a 9/11 Truther) is a registered INDEPENDENT and didn't vote in 2010. Any other "facts" you'd like to share with us olovely?

• McNabb1966 | Jan 10, 2011, 05:50 PM EST

  @olovely...One of us is certainly clutching at straws and I'm afraid it is you. Your info is as faulty as your basic premise. The Anti Defamation League has rejected the suggestion by DHS that Loughner was influenced by American Renaissance. You conveniently avoided all of the evidence about Loughner's true leanings and peculiarities coming from people his own age who knew him. None of their descriptions include anything remotely "right wing." I understand that you're desperate to find something - anything - to retroactively backup the false accusations you and the rest of the Left have spewed over the weekend but you're not doing yourself any favors by relying on false information. And you still have not said anything that would lead us to believe you understand the difference between campaign rhetoric and reality.

• Ajreaper | Jan 10, 2011, 01:45 PM EST

  So you propose eliminating freedom of speech? Do away with "talk" that might lead to an actual crime? Meth is illegal but it's dang sure readily available so if guns were not legal you really don't think criminals would be able to aquire them- like they do every controled substance known to man? There are trade offs to living in a free society you know that right?

• eiriamach | Jan 10, 2011, 01:24 PM EST

  Monsoonman, read the SPLC's mission statement; this organization began as a civil rights group that took up the task of monitoring hate GROUPS, not individuals like Louis Farrakhan or the two guys who called themselves black panthers and hassled people last year. The Black Panthers GROUP, however, is among those tracked by SPLC. A full report on this and other minority hate groups is available on the SPLC site. In brief, according to SPLC, "The New Black Panther Party is a virulently racist and anti-Semitic organization whose leaders have encouraged violence against whites, Jews and law enforcement officers." Again, where is the "subversion," and where is the "danger"?

• eiriamach | Jan 10, 2011, 01:07 PM EST

  Monsoonman, the only "report" available from the Better Business Bureau's Wise Giving Alliance about SPLC is a brief note that SPLC has declined to be evaluated by the BBB's standards, and considering the role by BBB in financing candidates like "Second-Amendment-Solution Sharron Angle" in the recent election, I surely would not want such an organization looking into my bank accounts either! What is the source of your claims about SPLC's use of its funds? According to SPLC itself, "During the last fiscal year, approximately 68% of our total expenses were spent on program services. At the end of the fiscal year, our endowment – a special, board-designated fund established to support our future work – stood at $189.7 million. We are proud of the stewardship of our resources."

• Monsoonman | Jan 10, 2011, 01:00 PM EST

  I have given you two concrete, factual answers to your queries, erimach, with back-up, I am not your errand boy. You remind me of the baby who keeps dropping his spoon on the floor and expecting the parents to pick it up repeatedly. Show me where the splc has probed and sued louis farrakhan and the black muslims for race hatred, calling for racial separation and the killing of jews? Even calling for the digging up of jews in the cemeteries and killing them again...not a peep from splc. How about the voter intimidation by the black panthers in philadelphia, no angry outcry or lawsuit against them. How about the jihadist organizations in the U.S.? Not a word from splc. Take the blinders off, smell the napalm, they are just another tool in the leftists toolbox....But oh they are front and center looking for anything to taint the grassroots Tea Party with, but they are failing because the Tea Party is just what it is, ordinary American citizens wanting to be heard.

• eiriamach | Jan 10, 2011, 12:49 PM EST

  Monsoonman, just which shred of your alleged "facts" about financing supports your claim that the organization that financially crippled the KKK is "dangerous and subversive"? What is the "danger" and what is SPLC trying to "subvert"?

• Monsoonman | Jan 10, 2011, 11:16 AM EST

  What, is your record stuck eirimach? The southern pooverty law center is a subversive, leftist group. Trying to paint the Tea Party as a hate group tied to racist organizations and doing this working closely with NPR to spread those lies. Yet not a mention of the black panthers voter intimidation in philly? why? Anyhow here is an audit result of their operations, they flunked:The tax-exempt SPLC flunked an audit by the Arlington-based Better Business Bureau's Wise Giving Alliance, which requires that "a reasonable percentage, at least 50 percent of total income from all sources, should be applied to programs and activities directly related to the purposes for which the organization exists." The SPLC spent only 11 percent of its total income on programs and activities directly related to the purposes for which the organization exists. The other 89 percent of the SPLC's total income was spent on fund-raising and administrative costs, including high salaries for its top officials.

• eiriamach | Jan 10, 2011, 09:40 AM EST

  I just caught on to the title of this blog entry when I was reminded of Sarah Palin's Tweet of March 23 last year, which she issued the same day as she posted her map of 20 Democrat members of Congress within cross hairs: "Don't retreat. Instead— reload!" (I'm a little slow to catch on sometimes. Better that, though, than too fast on the trigger, verbal or mechanical, and that's the point, right?) Monsoonman, I'm still waiting for you to draw some connection between SPLC financing and your allegation that SPLC is "subversive and dangerous." When I Googled your quotation, Google listed dozens of groups, including Council of Conservative Citizens, American Renaissance, Gun Rights Examiner, and other "white pride" groups whose web sites all had the same wording about SPLC, reading from the same script, as we say. But nowhere did I find any evidence for any charge of illegality or lapse of ethics. As for SPLC having million$ on account, that's what it takes to challenge hate-crime groups such as the KKK in court, under the rule of law. I hope SPLC continues strong financially.

• newcanaan | Jan 10, 2011, 07:13 AM EST

  this idiot sheriff shoild be fired, also the democrat writing this story.

• olovely | Jan 09, 2011, 11:32 PM EST

  I agree, by the way, that Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney were subjected to ridicule and scorn beyond reasonableness. But still, somehow, this looks and feels different. The level of violent ani-government rhetoric, from the birthers to the Glen Beck conspiracy theories, is new. And deeply dangerous.

• olovely | Jan 09, 2011, 11:12 PM EST

  Jared L. Loughner is a registered Republican, it has emerged. His anti-government ramblings took many of their cues from anti-government organization American Renaissance, which is connected to the white supremacist New Century Foundation. Loughner's target was a Jewish Democrat. The young man who saved her life was gay and Hispanic. (By the way, McNabb, Daily Kos - which I don't read - is a website not a GOP candidate for political office; you're clutching at straws).

• seamusmoore | Jan 09, 2011, 11:12 PM EST

  Another great piece of analysis by Cahir. Just guessing that he is not a supporter of pinkpistols.org, a group that encourages gays to own a gun(in states where the law permits their carry) for protection against gay bashing. Their logo (check out their website) of a silhouette firing a gun inside a pink triangle certainly doesn't fit into Cahir's mindset; for that matter, neither does the fact that Congresswoman Giffords was a strong advocate of the second amendment AND a gun owner herself. For the record, I have not seen any info confirming that Jared Loughner had been treated for mental illness, which would have barred him from owning a gun. All the evidence of his mental disorder is from post-shooting analysis of his my space and you tube pages and comments and, of course, his wanton act shooting of people at a shopping center. One thing troubles me, if his motivation was political and he targeted Gabrielle Giffords because of "the overheated climate", why did he randomly shoot all those other folks?

• Monsoonman | Jan 09, 2011, 10:19 PM EST

  The list of hypocritical liberal gun toters is long and odiferous, do as they say not as they do. The first one on the list is senator feinstein

• McNabb1966 | Jan 09, 2011, 09:52 PM EST

  @olovely...It's very convenient for you to suddenly be so literal in your interpretation of what is obvious political rhetoric. You are also ignoring the fact that the Left, such as Daily Kos, also used the bullseye and "targeting" imagery. It's called a political campaign. Wasn't it the Clinton administration that applied the term "war room" to it's campaign operation? You can be as obtuse as you want, it doesn't give your "point" any validity. If you actually believe what you've written then you are in deep denial.

• olovely | Jan 09, 2011, 09:47 PM EST

  There wasn't a single liberal political candidate who suggested, as Sharron Angle did, that people might look to "second amendment remedies" or that "the first thing we need to do is take Harry Reid out." Sarah Palin's political action committee used an image of a map with crosshairs over 20 districts. I don't know any liberal politician who suggested, as Newt Gingrich does, that the President is caving to Muslim extremism. I don't know a single liberal who went, like the Tea Party rabble did, to public meetings to scream at the elected officials, and to threaten them – making them expendable, making them cannon fodder. And I don't know a single liberal who owns a semi-automatic.

• McNabb1966 | Jan 09, 2011, 07:52 PM EST

  Wow! Cahir is even more incoherent than usual. And that's saying something... It's funny that the Left couldn't get enough of the "paranoiac anti-government rhetoric" when George Bush was in the White House and the GOP controlled Congress. And surely we can all agree that it was the "paranoiac anti-government rhetoric" of the Left that caused the near-fatal shooting of President Ronald Reagan in 1981. The only ones who need to "retreat and re-think" are the hypocrites of the Left.

• maloney | Jan 09, 2011, 06:59 PM EST

  Ft. Hood was as bad or worse than this terrible shooting but the media & especially our govt. didn't make near as big a fuss. The shooter was a liberal nutjob. I think I'll buy a couple more guns just in case. The liberals & muslims are killing soldiers, Judges & politicians. Also 9 yr. old girls.

• Monsoonman | Jan 09, 2011, 06:53 PM EST

  The $PLC now has an account in the notorious tax haven and money-laundering location of the Cayman Islands!” SPLC receive $2.9 million from “[t]he Picower Foundation, set up by Jeffry Picower, reliably reported to have been the biggest beneficiary of the Madoff scam.” Madoff left many destitute elderly in his wake. The SPLC should return its Picower money to the Madoff trustee for their benefit. ...Think that will happen?

• cillowen | Jan 09, 2011, 05:42 PM EST

  tell me that violence and sadism is not appreciated within this american culture that we're eager to push on people of all lands. Then you wonder what the problem is.

• eiriamach | Jan 09, 2011, 05:32 PM EST

  Irishmoonfrog, no one has told any group to shut up. I read no advocacy of censorship in the article above, but rather a reasoned connection between hate speech and hate crimes. Common sense tells us that the two are causally connected. You exaggerate wildly. Also, Irish violence is part of the history of America; for example, Irish immigrants were fully involved in the worst civic insurrection (1863) the USA has ever experienced. Answering your question "At what point does armed resistance to 'legitimate' government authority become justifiable," any American can quote Jefferson: "whenever any government becomes destructive of these rights [life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness], it is the right of the people [later he adds "their duty"] to throw off such forms of government and to provide new guards for their future security." When the federal government, which has the responsibility to protect our "unalienable" and God-given rights, fails to do so or damages those rights, then it loses its legitimacy and Jefferson calls for revolution to overthrow it. WHY do you think that the US is at that point now? WHY do you think that the federal government has deprived you of life, liberty, or the pursuit of happiness? You should be angry, but find a rational target for your anger.

• eiriamach | Jan 09, 2011, 05:14 PM EST

  Monsoonman, SPLC income derives from its success in court. In 1987, SPLC filed against United Klans of America for the 1981 lynching of African-American teenager Michael Donald. Dees won a break-through case worth seven million dollars on behalf of Donald's family; the case bankrupted the Klan, which had to sell its national headquarters and other assets to pay the judgment, which probably included fees for Dees/SPLC. Like Giffords, Dees' organization has been targeted many times but has survived to win other lawsuits that cripple hate groups. That's where the SPLC's money comes from. If I had $350,000 to spare, I'd happily pay $348,420 of it to undermine KKK activities in America.

• irishmoonfrog | Jan 09, 2011, 05:03 PM EST

  "Anti-government" rhetoric is NOT by definition "paranoiac". And telling angry people they should stop expressing their valid anger because it might have encouraged some nutjob to go on a rampage, is wishful thinking and insulting to those of us who feel enraged over government's increasing encroachment on our freedom and dignity. When the government takes our freedom and dignity, it is by threat of violence. It's just that that violence is performed by uniformed professionals known as law enforcement. At what point does armed resistance to "legitimate" government authority become justifiable? A huge plurality of Americans are at that point. Telling this group to shut up just invites more violence. On another note, this site has been drifting further and further from its focus of reaching out to Irish Americans, and towards an agenda of American liberal politics and gay rights. I find it distasteful, but tolerate it because I love Ireland and things Irish. Less of this, please, and more about Ireland!

• eiriamach | Jan 09, 2011, 04:40 PM EST

  Monsoonman, this is not the first time I've been unable to follow your thinking. Dees' income of $348,420 is a modest one for a top attorney, and litigation is not his only job. Almost single handedly, he dismantled the Ku Klux Klan with a successful lawsuit. What IS your point--that a man who makes more money than you make cannot do any good in this world? Monsoonman, you are not stupid, so please draw some sensible connection between the $348,420 and his organization being "subversive and dangerous."

• Monsoonman | Jan 09, 2011, 03:34 PM EST

  I love these "non profit" organizations...No wonder they don't make a profit, the top dogs get all of the money first! According to the SPLC's 990 Form for 2008, the SPLC's Chief Trial Counsel Morris Dees made a generous $348,420 that year. SPLC President and CEO Richard Cohen was right behind him at $344,490. General Counsel Joseph Levin made $189,166. Legal director Rhonda Brownstein brought in $179,806; CFO Teenie Hutchinson, $155,414. Potok pulled in $143,099. Former Chief Operating Officer Jeff Blancett made $159,301 -- that's right, the former COO. Who is funding this subversive and dangerous organization?

• eiriamach | Jan 09, 2011, 03:17 PM EST

  The question is, which extreme of the political spectrum incites hate speech, whether its leaders advocate hate crimes or not. From the Southern Poverty Law Center web site(splcenter [dot] org [slash]): "Currently, there are 932 known hate groups operating across the [USA], including neo- Nazis, Klansmen, white nationalists, neo- Confederates, racist skinheads, black separatists, border vigilantes and others." SPLC has tracked and documented and often been involved in suing such groups on civil rights violations. Its Director, Morris Dees, is a sought-after speaker. SPLC's "Terror from the Right" page outlines 75 domestic terrorist attacks from radical-right extremists since the 1995 bombing of Oklahoma City Federal Building by Timothy McVeigh and Alfred Murrah. Is Arizona the "Mecca" for this? Not really, just in the media focus. At the end of my first week working in Arizona, someone tacked a KKK newsletter beside my door. I saw many rifle racks on pick-up trucks and sidearms on ranchers in public places, but never felt personally threatened by anyone who knew that I lean politically left. I have heard far more bigotry and radical-right ideological ranting in Irish American groups "back East" than I ever heard out west. Violence can erupt from hate speech anywhere.

• Pittsburghkid | Jan 09, 2011, 02:47 PM EST

  My friend was being robbed, and order to kneel during the robbery. The robber left the garage where the robbery took place, and returned. He left in order to make sure their was on one outside to witness his planned killing. Upon returning to do his killing, upon returning my friend was waiting with his gun and kill the would be killer. the robber/killer died with his gun in his hand and a bullet threw the head. A hand gun save my friend, and a delivery driver that day. If the robber had killed my friend, then jerks like the writer of this artical would be trying to get him off.

• Monsoonman | Jan 09, 2011, 01:31 PM EST

  Markos Moulitsas of the Daily Kos, the largest left-wing community online, put Gabrielle Giffords on a target list with a bullseye. Just as Sarah Palin removed her post, Markos has removed his. Another Daily Kos writer, just the other day, penned a post saying Congresswoman Giffords was dead to him. But then there is the real culprit — the shooter himself. A friend of the shooter’s described the shooter as decidedly “left-wing” as recently as 2007. On YouTube, he flagged as a favorite video one of a person dressed as a terrorist burning the American flag. Only a lunatic or a leftist would do that. His favorite work was not a Glenn Beck book, but a staple of every left-wing bookshelf, the Communist Manifesto. Barack Obama himself told left-wing activists, “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.” THE SHOOTER WAS A GAY UNHAPPY FORMER CAMPAIGN WORKER, PERHAPS DISGRUNTLED FROM A RECENT DECISION TO NOT SUPPORT PELOZI IN CONGRESS. Oh no cahir!

• hollabackgurl | Jan 09, 2011, 12:56 PM EST

  A Department of Homeland Security memo claims investigators are looking into whether the shooter Loughner is associated with the right wing extremist, anti-government group American Renaissance. The group promotes views that are “anti-government, anti-immigration, anti -ZOG (Zionist Occupational Government), anti-Semitic,” the DHS memo says. Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, the target of Loughner’s firing frenzy, is “the first Jewish female elected to such a high position in the US government. She was also opposite this group’s ideology when it came to immigration debate,” according the DHS memo. The group’s website features what appear to be paid advertisements for tea party versions of the “don’t tread on me” flag.

• olovely | Jan 09, 2011, 12:45 PM EST

  Palin's career won't survive this. She is now claiming the crosshairs she put on her website are like ones you see on a map. I have never seen crosshairs on a map. What miserable spin and hypocrisy. Perhaps now we'll send her and her incivility back to Alaska where she belongs.

• jdi2269 | Jan 09, 2011, 11:50 AM EST

  PLEASE STOP YOUR GOOFY ARTICLE! SHERIFF DUPNIK IS A SUPER LIBERAL OBAMA BACKER AND SHOULD BE DOING HIS LAW ENFORCEMENT JOB INSTEAD OF SPOUTING HIS UNEDUCATED LIBERAL VIEWS!

• SCVMal | Jan 09, 2011, 11:16 AM EST

  right on Capt. Tom. What's lacking most in our society, though, is RESPECT - for anything or anyone!

• CaptainTom | Jan 09, 2011, 11:03 AM EST

  I think the sheriff hhit the nail squarely on the head.There is every connection between the tragedy that occured and the overall atmosphere of hate and distrust that unfortunatly exists in our society today. Civility is dead and badly needs to be ressurected.