Quote: "Probably thinks that the guy who shot up the Holocaust Museum was a hero."

Please. You have absolutely no basis for that sort of crap. None.

Excerpted from your last letter:

With language no longer useful, we have entered non-language communication with the symbol. ... What's the end game glock? What, you hadn't thought about all this yet before you came over here spewing your bullshit??? The hate is growing Glock...how is this going to end???

[snip]

I tire of writing now, but I will never tire when it comes to getting in the grill of everyone you depraved fucktards...either here on a message board, at a public town hall, and most certainly if its just me and you alone in alley...

you best watch yourself.

Yes, the hate is growing. It appears to be yours. The irony is thick. Calm yourself.

@CarlRogers and @gekko

"Hey Roman, must've hit a nerve, bet you don't like it when people call you a racist." - CarlRogers

No one that knows me calls me a racist. You however, regardless of physical stature, seem to be a very small person, or at least someone who lacks critical faculties, and apparently can't resist making baseless charges for no reason other than someone has pointed out something that you find to be unacceptable. You'd make a fine authoritarian.

"Roman seems to know a lot about Randy Weaver. Randy is Roman's hero..." - gekko

I know about Weaver because I read (and own) a copy of Gerry Spence's book -- see http://bit.ly/4GoJs6 for the listing at Amazon -- in which Spence gives us the narrative of how he came to be involved with the case and how our government essentially murdered a boy and woman who was mother and wife for no good reason.

Weaver my hero? No. Weaver's politics and racsim are both abhorrent to me (as I believe I have already stated.) But Weaver's politics and religion are also utterly irrelevant to what happened at Ruby Ridge.

Gekko, you too are a very small person or otherwise lacking in critical faculties.

Ya know, I view it all as a form of speech. The sign and the firearm (which is really what has so many putative liberal here in a state of apoplexy) were merely symbols being used for speech that some don't much like.

As a liberal, I'm about freedom. That includes the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms which, the case of New Hampshire, extends to open carry in public.

Other than the sign and the firearm, I can't see any evidence that Kostric did anything disruptive or threatening. Apparently the US Secret Service and local law enforcement also did not see anything disruptive or threatening.

Know what I do find threatening? Authoritarianism which seeks to enforce any groups particular bugaboos. Whether that authoritarian comes from the right or the left makes no difference to this liberal.

No one is required to like or agree with Kostric's sentiments concerning government, the police, the DEA and its agents or health care reform. But he has a right to say what he feels. Others have a right not to listen.

Get over the firearm. I suggest that the way to go about that is to back aware from scare mongering, find a friend with a .22 and go out and plink some tin cans or something akin to that so that the fear of the unfamiliar goes away.

Kostric broke no laws. How are you going to stop people who are breaking no laws from doing things you don't like...but which are legal? No authoritarianism, regardless of source.

Kostric? He has no power but that which you give to him. And the hysteria here is giving him plenty. How about getting on to some real issues?

I also notice that not one of these commenters trumpeting the bravery of Kostric has yet to address the hyposcrisy of the Bush years when protesters were kept blocks away in hastily thrown up "pens" or arrested and escorted out for wearing an anti-Bush T-shirt or bumper sticker. I would love for them to post the links to where we might read their letters of protest at the time when a repub administration was truly suppressing the right of the people to express their dissatisfaction to the government. Not much to say on that point, eh boys?

Walsh's post wasn't about Bush so it's not really relevant. In fact, it's entirely irrelevant. Why on earth would someone drag that into this discussion? You and some of the other "liberals" here seem to be morphing into mirror images of the Republicans. Scary that. Thankfully, and the one thing I really give Obama props on, is that Obama is not shutting out dissenting voices...though it sure seems like some here want him to.

As far as a history of taking Bush to task, you're a Salon subscriber. Access to Table Talk goes with that. Go search for posts by "The Ox" (or just ask any number of forum regulars) dealing with Bush and the suppression of protests/free speech and hand-picked town halls. "The Ox" is me. Check this link for a thread I started: http://tabletalk.salon.com/webx?14@@.773a012a/0 (or click my sig.)

Regardless of any of the above, you don't have a point unless the point you are trying to make is that "Bush suppressed speech, so Democrats should too!"

Is that your position?