What would Hannity say if he were shown this tape? The nonsense he intentionally fuels is the exact nonsense contained in that unhinged letter Shep read. To have a three digit IQ and a semblance of a clue and work at Faux News has to be tough, but if Shep had a bit more of a sack, he'd call out Hannity and Beck and El Rushbo for creating the exact kind of hate-filled, impassioned paranoia that has left two innocent people dead in the past week.

Where does it stop? How many lunatics are getting their most fanatically absurd beliefs confirmed on a daily basis by a "major" news source and the unofficial leader of the Republican Party? When do these irresponsible, delusional, money-grubbing shysters who are creating and exploiting a nation of terrified dunces get charged in connection with inciting violence? You can't yell "fire" in a crowded theater, and you can't influence people to kill people. Yes, these were lone-wolf, probably mentally-ill perpetrators. But it was nothing if not foreseeable. The DHS report confirms it was foreseeable, and it would be hard for these blowhards to argue they were unfamiliar with the kind of hatred seething on the internet.

They are criminals, and they should be brought to justice as such.

this does not seem like a move of a future presidential contender. if she wanted to bolster her national credibility, the move is to build her thin resume, not cut it off.

my guess is that one of two things happened: some big scandal is about to break, or she's so exhausted from being under the microscope that she's finally cracked.

if the rumors about the house-for-play story is true, that ain't good. especially when ted stevens got the federal shoe up his ass for accepting some weird wooden statues.

but let's face it - she's a dim bulb who also happens to be incredibly narcissistic. i think all the negative press actually hurts her, and she gets slammed every time she opens her mouth because every time she opens her mouth, something more ludicrously asinine comes out. she could just be fried.

either way, i hope she's done because our country needs a strong two-party system with thinking people at the helm of both ships. she represents the weakest opponent possible for the left--the scared ignoramus sector. it's hard to get better when you're playing against a pee-wee team. the adults need to take over the GOP, wherever they may be.

"Making clueless people feel better about themselves one non sequitur at a time"

One of the salient features of morons is that they are very insecure and hate to admit they were wrong. I think part of the reason so many people hold on so tight to this absurd belief is a fear of having to eat crow. The internet adds an interesting dimension because it enables them to find each other and create a critical mass of mutually-deluded morons, all making each other feel better about themselves. It's a powerful force--avoiding shame. Media networks have learned how to exploit it, and wind up fanning the flames for their own gain. When media has a stake in controversy (through increased ratings and ad dollars) and the ability to create it, a serious conflict is created that nobody seems to be talking about. Only a nation of morons could allow this to happen right underneath its own nose.

if the protesters were showing up and actually making sense - or even coming close to making a lucid, defensible point - nobody would have any problem. however, one of the cornerstones of a democracy is an informed electorate, and ours (particularly the frothing-at-the-mouth wingnuts who show up to these rallies to "have their voices heard" (read: be disruptive assholes)) is among the least-informed, most ignorant of any developed country. the things being said by these people and the GOP puppeteers who are leading them are so laughably absurd and ludicrously uninformed, that one begins to wondering what they're actually protesting, because they obviously have no idea what they're talking about.

these people are so dumb that they have no idea the level to which they're embarrassing themselves. that's the difficulty - you try to explain why their point is so off-point, and they don't get it. if it doesn't fit on a bumper sticker, it's too complicated for them. how do you win an argument with an 8 year old who just says "lalalala ... i'm not listening ... lalalalala"?

What powerful institution influences people to "believe" things not only in the absence of evidence, but in the face of direct conflicting scientific evidence? What institution teaches its followers that the more implausible something seems, the more it should be accepted as fact based on nothing more than "faith"? What institution instills in the minds of millions of people that not only is it OK to believe things that are utterly nonsensical and unsupported by any observable evidence, it's the only path to salvation?

We wonder why as a country we're so incapable of intellectually separating good evidence from bad, what's relevant from irrelevant, and correlation from causation; and why we're so susceptible to these kinds of outlandish conspiracy theories. We should look no further than the most outlandish conspiracy theory of them all - that a supreme being created the earth 6,000 years ago, later impregnated a virgin, who then gave birth to the supreme being's son, who later died and was resurrected, and that if you do not believe this with all of your heart, you will spend eternity in flaming misery.

That line really nails it. Whenever people talk about how Obama has messed up the message with health care, I can't help but think that what's really being said is that he failed to anticipate how inane and absurdly stupid the opposition would be, and should have tailored his message to appeal more directly to the typical easily-manipulated Faux News-consuming idiot.