You know, some legal precedent for the kind of lawsuit you are proposing against Bill O'Reilly.

Come on, I dare ya! Put up or shut up! I'm calling out all of you stupid shitheads who are calling for the criminal prosecution of Bill O'Reilly, or a civil suit against him for wrongful death.

I assure you, Fox News will hit that lawsuit out of the park like a hanging curveball.

Most of you have absolutely no idea what you are talking about. This is one subject on which I simply want to taunt all of you. I'll still be here, when, years from now, the play-out of this story proves me right and all of you wrong. I just wish I didn't have to wait that long. Isn't there some way we can get some money on the outcome? Nobody seems to have the balls to stand up for their silly opinions on this thread. I'm here to say that I'll throw down with any of you.

To the person who is looking forward to Keith Olbermann tonight; I expect that that maniac will supply you with all of the read meat you are craving. Olbermann is your Rush Limbaugh. He just isn't as rich or as popular, that's all.

There's plenty of legal precedent supporting the use of deadly force to protect the life of a third party. So you either believe that what this doctor did is not murder, or you believe that it is murder and therefore that the killer was justified in killing him.

I don't see how O'Reilly can deny complicity in this man's death.

Whatever one thinks of the recently departed Tiller – and I DO realize how divisive an issue abortion is – he was acting within the boundaries of the law. Period. If he were truly a “baby killer” a thousand times over as defined by the law – and not by the Honourable Judge O’Reilly – then surely he would have been in prison by now. Period. Regardless of what O’Reilly and his zombie-cohorts may claim, there was nothing actionable in what Dr. Tiller did. As for the supposed “facts” by which O’Reilly bases his case against Tiller’s practices, I discount them outright because A) he does not have the requisite skill (or work ethic) for proper investigative journalism; B) his understanding of the law is abysmal (he recently had to be schooled on the difference between ad hominem attacks and actual libel – he still claims, not surprisingly, to be a victim of the latter); C) he is an inveterate liar.

As for the question of blame, it is quite simple. Words can kill. Whether someone incites religious, ethnic or political hatred, the consequences can be devastating. It is too shallow, then, to say there is no relationship between O’Reilly’s nightly vitriol and the attitudes that seep into the larger public as result of it. O’Reilly, in fact, is never happier than when he tells his audience how much influence he actually has. Through this abuse of his position he has thus threatened and launched campaigns against people, institutions and, on occasion, countries (remember France and Spain?). Therefore, he simply cannot hide behind the mantel of objective journalism when he is, in fact, wielding real political power.

Despite this, I do not think he should ever be silenced. He should be called out, in the most direct way, and challenged on the reckless manner he abuses the enormous bully pulpit that has been given. At the very least, he should be singled out – as he is so often fond of doing himself – as the bigoted and hateful turd that he is.

And now that you have made O'Reilly responsible for this man's death, when someone from the far left, a soldato for women's right to kill a baby right before it's to be born, you have made yourself and Salon responsible for O'Reilly's possible murder if it occurs. Of course,you didn't say he should be killed but you did focus the public's eye on him. You might even say it was terrible and should not have happened and that it does not represent the view of typical liberals. And you'd be right and responsible.

Wouldn't that be Dick Cheney? Who cares if O'Reilly can be legally held responsible for Tiller's death? The man is a hateful, ignorant fool who makes me want to vomit. People only watch him to have their prejudices and hatred confirmed and made 'respectable' because a talking head on television parrots it back at them. O'Reilly has defended plenty of killers. He does it all the time. His attacks on Tiller were just political opportunism and had no moral basis whatsoever. Bill O'Reilly is essentially a morals-free zone, he's the voice of right wing hate and belongs in the same category as Rumsfeld and Cheney: all of them fascist bullies with no respect for the law.

You certainly understand what it means to have no idea what you're talking about. In all the time I've read your letters on Salon, you've never once had even the faintest clue.

Were someone to take you up on your nonsensical bet and lose, you'd demand payment. Were you to lose you'd find all kinds of excuses and rationalizations and never pay up. That's what your kind does. You're a coward and a liar, plain and simple. You approve of terrorism and laud murderers. Even if I thought you'd actually pay up, I want nothing to do with you.

I watched clips of what O'Reilly said on his show about Dr. Tiller. My ultimate question is why would anyone, except those who worship O'Reilly, ever agree to go on his show? They are uniformly treated miserably. I'd think that most people would think, "National TV or not, life is just too short to be treated that way."

No one here is supporting O'Reilly's (or Limbaugh's) death, but just so we know all our options -- is that on the table?

Where are ALL the anti-abortion activists once the unwanted children are born? Sadly, many of them want nothing to do with the children who are older than a fetus. And sadly, depending on how they vote, will fight tooth-and-nail against the use of birth control, gov't funding for social services, and REALISTIC sex ed. in the classrooms.

Oh, but wait a minute, God forbid if THEY ever find themselves or a loved one in such a situation. Suddenly, they view things differently...