We just need to flip a coin to assign blame to the terrorists or the rappers.

His suite mate said he was in the common area watching Pro Wrestling a lot.

How long did it take for the gun control folks to weigh in? Minutes?

Among our media stars, few pundits command as much respect and admiration as Charles Krauthammer does.

Really? Is that true? I dismissed this guy as an idiotic crank 20 years ago and have always thought Fox and others kept him around because of his consitency. I didn't realize anyone had any respect or admiration for him. I need to get out more.

Really? Is that true? I dismissed this guy as an idiotic crank 20 years ago and have always thought Fox and others kept him around because of his consitency. I didn't realize anyone had any respect or admiration for him. I need to get out more.

He's a featured columnist in Time and The Washington Post. What other evidence would you like to see?

There have been several episodes of Hume kissing Krauthammer's butt because he will write something and fairly shortly thereafter the Bush administration will seem to be following the advice.

The FOX All-Stars----LMAO.

Krauthammer. That name so beautifully defines his political concepts.

Boils down to 2 things for wingnuts: Muslims and Bill Clinton.

I just think he needs some serious therapy.

"Do as I say, not as I do" seems to be the mantra of the punditry these days. Of course, the issue here is that people who support Bush's war don't see promoting that agenda of getting "ideological mileage out of the carnage" ... instead, they see3 it as a promotion of the right view, by default. That makes it far easier to give advice to others (who are all, by definition now, engaging in political point scoring). It would all be quite an ingenious little scheme if it weren't so terribly transparent. Thanks again for pointing out the hypocrisy ...

He thinks he is just making some important points that need to be said about the tragedy. It's not hypocrisy in his mind because he isn't "exploiting" it for personal aims, just as you aren't exploiting it just to hammer Charles Krauthammer once again. In fact, nobody believes they are exploiting the tragedy, and I see their point when it comes to pro/con gun control: after all, if they aren't allowed to talk about guns and gun violence in the aftermath of a shooting, that's kind of an unfair penalty on the important issue, like banning talk about Iraq's violence while the war is going on ("don't "exploit" the suffering of the troops for you own personal political purposes while they're still in danger").

The point is, unless CK realizes how specious his connection of the shooting is to "islamic terrorists," he won't see how linking the two is exploitation, and therefore won't see himself as being hypocritical. Of course, believing everyone you disagree with acts out of some strange knee-jerk personal politics while only you act of out pure principle is pretty stupid -- but it's a stupidity many of us often fall into.

An Administration filling slots with Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell graduates, and not only that, but tuning in to Fred Barnes, Brit Hume, and Charles Krauthammer for talking points and policy.

All these guys are chickenhawks. If Krauthammer got his handicap from service I'll stand corrected.

..."Ismail Ax." I suspect it has some more to do with Islamic terror and the inspiration than it does with the opening line of Moby Dick.

The shooter was an English major. He would have been familiar with the opening line of Moby Dick and all of its nuances. Mr. Krauthammer's reflexive contempt for the education and intellect of the younger generation has gotten in the way of his common sense.

The deep sorrow felt by the likes of Krauthammer that the shooter wasn't a Muslim, a convert, or connected with Islam or terrorism in any way is palpable.

Never mind, Charles will just blame on the 'Eye-Rabs' anyway - I guess he gets paid the same no matter what he writes.

He thinks he is just making some important points that need to be said about the tragedy.

Of course he thinks his points are important, otherwise he wouldn't make them. But the whole point of his column today (did you read it?) is that nobody should try to make points -- important or not, valid or not -- out of the VT shootings. And he says that's especially true for those who don't wait a decent interval between the shootings and the point-making.

He isn't arguing against the drawing of invalid political conclusions from the shootings. He's arguing against the drawing of political conclusions of any kind, valid or otherwise.

Charlse Krauthammer is no Don Imus.

I sent the following email to Krauthammer. I'll let you know if I get a response:

You're kidding me, right?

You go on Fox News on Wednesday and claim that the Virginia Tech shooter drew his inspiration from al Jazeera and Islamic suicide bombers and then you have the audacity to write a column today complaining that Barack Obama lacks decency because he is using the shootings for political gain?

I guess I should never be surprised by the reckless hypocrisy of the conservative filter through which you view everything, but even for you this is too much. I really have to know: is this a case of mere stupidity or am I giving you too much credit? What I mean is, if you're just that much of a moron, I can at least know that you don't mean harm. But if this is intentional, then you are truly a scum-sucking weasel of the highest order.

"How long did it take for the gun control folks to weigh in? Minutes?"

Actually, Shooter, your boy, Pantload Reynolds, was bringing the 2nd Amendment connection up before the last body was cold. Is that what you are referring to?

There was Debbie Schlussel:

Here's what we know about the murderer of at least 32 students and maimer of at least 28 more at Virginia Tech, today:

* The murderer has been identified by law enforcement and media reports as "a young Asian male."

* The Virginia Tech campus has a very large Muslim community, many of which are from Pakistan (per terrorism investigator Bill Warner).

* Pakis are considered "Asian."

* There were 2 attacks at least half a mile apart.

* There have been at least two bomb threats to this campus in the last two weeks.

How could there be only one shooter--who was able to go a half mile away to commit a second set of shootings? Were there two and was this a coordinated terrorist attack?

So who is the shooter? What is the shooter's nationality? What is the shooter's religion? Waiting to find out. And wondering why the police and media are referring to the shooter as "Asian" and not by specific nationality.

If I were Asian, I'd be legitimately upset with this broad generalization of the mass murderer's identity.

Why am I speculating that the "Asian" gunman is a Pakistani Muslim? Because law enforcement and the media strangely won't tell us more specifically who the gunman is. Why?

Even if it does not turn out that the shooter is Muslim, this is a demonstration to Muslim jihadists all over that it is extremely easy to shoot and kill multiple American college students.