Interesting story and Im glad Salon addressed it so quickly.

I wish they would do that for the latest terrorist hotel attack in Pakistan.

There must be a political reason for not doing so - I wonder what it is.

of the republican party & NRA out of commission. Too bad he injured people along the way though.

Why the overreporting of this? I understand 2 people were shot (incl. the wingnut) but is it worth this much fanfare? It must really be a slow news day.

Exactly, my "comrade." Just ask yourself: who controls the media?

Idiot.

Well... there goes (non) Joe the (non) plumber's fame, as well as Bible Spice.

Does this mean we can stop asking who the leader of the Republican party is now?

You know, Kronenburgerwhateverelse, it's characters like you and the other critter here that give a moral sanction to creeps like this.

A good man died today because people like you flapped your mouths. Your freedom should have stopped before his heart did.

Happy?

Shame he managed to gravely hurt somebody on his way out of society.

kzzbj1: "I wish they would do that for the latest terrorist hotel attack in Pakistan. There must be a political reason for not doing so - I wonder what it is."

Related to Von Brunn, are ya?

Huh? I thought he was shot by some gun-toting, Fed and Jew hating, nut case asshole.

Those of you mocking this tragedy and questioning Salon's reporting should be ashamed of yourselves. Your mothers would not be proud of you.

Have you checked other online sources? They are all leading with this story. Both my city's news web sites are featuring this situation prominently.

While the Pakistan bombing is indeed tragic, this is receiving special attention because it happened in our country. I would fully expect any US media to pay more attention to a fricking shoot-down in our fricking nation's capital!!!!

Seriously, do you people have no souls, no empathy, no shame?

Maybe he was on a special diet to enhance his virility at the age of 89? Anyway there's some really good news for the freedom-loving world; 17 Chinese Uighurs detained in Guantanamo are to be released to live and love on an archipelago in the middle of the Pacific Ocean with a population of around 20 thousand people. The Lonely Planet states that Paulau is a place where diving is extremely popular but has nothing to say about water-boarding. I reckon those 17 Chinese Muslims now being despatched to a tiny piece of Oceanis must be thanking their lucky stars for the generosity of the new Administration in Washington.

and your interest on going on TV to debate rightwing nutjobs, I'm wondering how you can reconcile the two seemingly opposing goals when you go on MSNBC to debate Holocaust-denier and noted anti-Semite Patrick Buchanan.

Buchanan has a long, well-documented history, written in his own columns and books, for praising Hitler, and, perversely, denying the Holocaust while blaming Britain and the U.S. for the Holocaust at the same time. Link @ sig for the most recent article on the Huffington Post about MSNBC's silence when someone asked the network how they can continue to employ Buchanan with such a documented track record, including a now-removed Holocaust denial forum on his Web site.

If you don't think either the writer or that Web site is credible, simply Google "Pat Buchanan Holocaust denial" and you'll find 100,000 hits to choose from, most containing Buchanan's own words.

If anti-Semitism isn't enough for you, he's also written fondly of the old days, when blacks knew their place:

On race relations in the late 1940s and early 1950s: "There were no politics to polarize us then, to magnify every slight. The 'negroes' of Washington had their public schools, restaurants, bars, movie houses, playgrounds and churches; and we had ours." (Right from the Beginning, Buchanan's 1988 autobiography, p. 131)

"If we had to take a million immigrants in, say Zulus, next year, or Englishmen, and put them up in Virginia, what group would be easier to assimilate and would cause less problems for the people of Virginia?" ("This Week With David Brinkley," 1/8/91)

And this piece, written 3/21/08, in response to then-candidate Obama's speech on race, headlined, "A Brief for Whitey." (Note how he refers to Sen. Obama as "Barack," and Rev. Al Sharpton as "Rev. Al.")

http://buchanan.org/blog/pjb-a-brief-for-whitey-969

These are not isolated comments. There are so many more.

Seriously, Joan, how can you possibly be on the same TV show with Buchanan? I know I'm a nobody, but it is my hope that you would turn down the next invitation you get, with a public blog stating exactly why you will not appear on TV with such a man. I see no other way that MSNBC will be called on its extremely hypocritical retention of a thoroughly vile figure. As the article on the Huffington Post points out, if Fox or CNN paid Buchanan, MSNBC would be screaming bloody murder. And maybe Salon would be too.

A certifiably crazy person attacks a U.S. building and kills or harms American citizens, using a justification that we hear all too often and ignore. That is by any sane account a reasonable story for an American publication to lead with. How did the bombing of a hotel in a country 10 thousand miles away get conflated with this one. Salon also has a story on Rev. Wright - does that mean they are unfairly ignoring Billy Graham - seriously, why the hell are people comparing apples and broccolli.

but sometimes the truth makes no sense.

Aren't there some rules about who can get a gun and who can't? How did this guy get a gun within the rules, or if not, then what happened? How did he get a gun?

Probably at an unregulated gun show where those laws about background checks don't apply. Given the mess that the country and the world are in, gun control isn't one of my top ten issues but, seriously, how can right wingnuts defend the ease with which someone with this guy's history can obtain a firearm? Oh yeah, I forgot. Logic, reality, consistency, and truth play no part in the right's ideology/pathology.