A nation of Jared Loughners [Reader Post]


Sometimes the shortest period measurable by man is the amount of time between a tragedy occuring and left wing blaming the right. One thing is for certain- no thinking can possibly take place in such short a period of time.

Early on no one knew a single fact about Loughner, let alone his name. But that did not stop the left for a second. Sherriff Clarence Dumbshit Dupnik had the answer immediately.

“Let me say one thing, because people tend to pooh-pooh this business about all the vitriol that we hear inflaming the American public by people who make a living off of doing that,” the sheriff said during a press conference. “That may be free speech, but it’s not without consequences.”

During an interview earlier in the day that aired on MSNBC via local NBC affiliate KPNX, Dupnik declared that “it’s time that this country take a little introspective look at the crap that comes out on radio and TV.”

Yup, Dumbshit Dupnik knew it all. He blamed Rush Limbaugh

“The kind of rhetoric that flows from people like Rush Limbaugh, in my judgment, he’s irresponsible; uses partial information, sometimes wrong information. Attacks people, angers them against government, angers them against elected officials and that kind of behavior, in my opinion, is without consequence and I think he’s irresponsible,” Sheriff Dupnik told ABC News.

besides blaming Sharron Angle and, of course, Sarah Palin

“Not in any way shape or form. When you have people like Sharon Angle, in Las Vegas, running against Harry Reid, making outrageous statements such as ‘We may need to resort to taking the second amendment into certain cases.’ And for people like Sarah Palin to say ‘We have people like Gabby Giffords in our cross-hairs.’ I think those statements are totally irresponsible and they’re not without consequences. And we are seeing them here.”

Dumbshit Dupnik knew many things, including things that didn’t happen. As Ryan Witt notes,

It is important to note that Palin never verbally stated that Gabrielle Giffords was in her “cross-hairs.”

When asked what ought to happen to Limbaugh, Angle and Palin, Dumbshit Dupnik was reported to have said off the record

“Just hang ’em”

The above sentence employs the Dupnik rule for accuracy in media.

kill bush

The esteemed journalist Keith Olbermann, unencumbered by facts, also knew why the shooting occurred:

In a special comment later in the program, Olbermann linked the incident to Giffords being identified last year as one of former Alaska GOP Gov. Sarah Palin’s 20 “targets” for the November election, identified by a website showing crosshairs around 20 Democratic districts.

“This morning in Arizona, this age in which this country would accept “targeting” of political opponents and putting bullseyes over their faces and of the dangerous blurring between political rallies and gun shows, ended,” the liberal host said.

jdhayworth crosshairs

Not wanting the moment to pass without proving his ignorance, Rep. Raul Grijalva (D-AZ) threw in his two cents:

“The climate has gotten so toxic in our political discourse, setting up for this kind of reaction for too long. It’s unfortunate to say that. I hate to say that,” Grijalva said. “Anybody who contributed to feeding this monster had better step back and realize they’re threatening our form of government.”

The legacy networks couldn’t wait to pass judgment:

“Giffords was one of 20 Democrats whose districts were lit up in cross hairs on a Sarah Palin campaign Web site last spring,” CBS’s Nancy Cordes declared in referring to a political map, adding that “Giffords and many others complained that someone unstable might act on that imagery.” Hours later on CNN, Jessica Yellin noted “we don’t know the motive” before she proceeded to raise how “on Twitter and Facebook, there is a lot of talk, in particular, about Sarah Palin.” On Sunday’s Today, leading into a clip about Palin, NBC’s Kelly O’Donnell asserted: “Giffords, a conservative Democrat, was concerned about heated campaign rhetoric from the Tea Party.”


ABC connected Palin to the Wild West, as David Wright reported on This Week:

Congresswoman Gabby Giffords liked to joke that her district includes Tombstone and the OK Corral. Until yesterday morning, most people here would have said that rogue gunslingers were part of the distant past. On election night in November, 18 of the politicians in the crosshairs of Sarah Palin’s political action committee lost, but not Gabby Giffords.


Robert Paul Reyes gives schizophrenia a bad name in his warped blog:

Loughner hasn`t said a single word to law enforcement officials, but we can conclude form his rants posted online that his violence stems from mental disease and not political ideology.

However Loughner`s insanity doesn`t absolve Palin from her complicity in the carnage that took place in Tucson, Arizona. Loughner grabbed on to the free-floating violent rhetoric that is saturating Fox News and talk radio, and it gave him justification to unleash death and mayhem.

Sarah Palin your hands are dripping with blood!

Got that? Loughner’s motives are not from political ideology but they come from a political figure!

And while we’re dripping with blood…

Michael Daly hyperventilates and pees himself at the New York Daily News

Rep. Gabrielle Giffords’ blood is on Sarah Palin’s hands after putting cross hair over district

But anyone with any sense at all knows that violent language can incite actual violence, that metaphor can incite murder. At the very least, Palin added to a climate of violence.

Politico set a standard of stupidity and bias which will go unmatched for generations. Some titles:

Tea party’s message: Don’t blame usBy KENNETH P. VOGEL | 1/10/11 5:25 PM
The movement tries to distance itself.

Why does the Tea Party need to “try” to distance itself from something for which there is absolutely no evidence of involvement?

Tucson shooting marks turning point for Sarah Palin

So far, the former Alaska governor has said little, posting only a brief message on her Facebook page Saturday offering condolences to those affected by the shootings. But the rush on the left to affix some of the blame on her for the assassination attempt on Rep. Gabrielle Giffords has suddenly turned the tragedy into a defining moment in Palin’s meteoric political career.

Whether she defends, explains or even responds at all to the intense criticism of her brand of confrontational politics could well determine her trajectory on the national scene — and it’s likely to reveal the scope of her ambitions as well.

Now do you think there was a single word about what Obama should say? Noooooooooo. It was all about what Sarah Palin was supposed to say. And that was assuming that Palin was involved in the conspiracy.

Now a sampling of the lynchmob who inhabit Politico:


Richcpl: ” She’s a shallow, nasty, poisonous person who will never have misgivings about, let alone accept personal responsibility for, anything she says or does that others legitimately view as questionable or inappropriate.”

yomomma: “THE US SECRET SERVICE BLAMES PALIN TOO!!! The Secreat Service informed the first couple, of a massive spike in “Death Threats” that they were receiving and that they coincided, with Palin rallies, where she enflamed the crowds, until they were screaming KILL HIM!!!! KILL HIM!!!!!”

bush in crosshairs

animaliberator: “Sarah Palin has blood on her hands. And this time it is more than caribou blood.”

loretta: “She does not understand how KARMA works. You do or say something nasty to someone else for no good reason, and it comes back to you, but with much more weight. I’m thinking it is time that she “MAN UP” and take the consequences.”


Pam in Texas: “This tradgedy is laid at your doorstep along with the cowards in Republican leadership who refused to stand up to you”

hallaquilla: “The ranting right-wingers will all scurry away from the issue, but the same hate-speak that has made scum like Palin, Limbaugh, Beck, O’Reilly and other self-serving twits rich and famous brings out the worst in people not the best. The angry, right-wing teabaggers are not patriotic (few ever served their country in any way) and are not altuistic–helping others in caring professions.”

Baracknophobia: “Over on the radio, Limbaugh told his audience that President Obama is more harmful to America than our terrorist enemies. Is it any wonder then that these right-wing lunatic freaks feel a sense of duty, of obligation, to ‘right the wrongs’ that these instigators in the media hammer into their psychotic heads day after day?”

jakiamik: ” like her flock, palin’s focus on hate and vile rhetoric SHOULD be reviewed in relation to this latest assault on decency from the right. insinuating violence is encouraging violence. palin, beck, hannity, ailes, murdoch – most all of the fox talking heads – should be held accountable. and if they had a shred of conscience, they would also feel quite complicit.”

It’s execrable and pretty depressing. It’s a lynch mob, fueled by the left and the legacy media. Readers will note that the authors here were careful of their words before being able to garner some facts. Not so elsewhere.

Jared Wright is described by friends as a “leftist” and a “liberal.” An interview in Mother Jones reveals a possible motive for the slayings from someone claiming to be a good friend of Loughner.

Tierney, who’s also 22, recalls Loughner complaining about a Giffords event he attended during that period. He’s unsure whether it was the same one mentioned in the charges—Loughner “might have gone to some other rallies,” he says—but Tierney notes it was a significant moment for Loughner: “He told me that she opened up the floor for questions and he asked a question. The question was, ‘What is government if words have no meaning?'”

Giffords’ answer, whatever it was, didn’t satisfy Loughner. “He said, ‘Can you believe it, they wouldn’t answer my question,’ and I told him, ‘Dude, no one’s going to answer that,'” Tierney recalls. “Ever since that, he thought she was fake, he had something against her.”

Tierney describes a descent into madness:

After Loughner apparently gave up drugs and booze, “his theories got worse,” Tierney says. “After he quit, he was just off the wall.” And Loughner started to drift away from his group of friends about a year ago. By early 2010, dreaming had become Loughner’s “waking life, his reality,” Tierney says. “He sort of drifted off, didn’t really care about hanging out with friends. He’d be sleeping a lot.” Loughner’s alternate reality was attractive, Tierney says. “He figured out he could fly.” Loughner, according to Tierney, told his friends, “I’m so into it because I can create things and fly. I’m everything I’m not in this world.”

And Sarah Palin is not mentioned once. Not once.

All of the posts here, at Verum Serum and at Politico that showing that Democrat campaign committees had targeted Republicans no differently than in Palin’s map, Kos’ specifically making Giffords a target, exposing the litany of Obama’s angry words, and revealing images from the left of Sarah Palin hanging in effigy and exhorting the murder of George Bush- they made no impact.

We have become a nation of Jared Loughners. Facts don’t matter and are not allowed to intrude into the congitive process. Loughner was mentally ill. There is absolutely no evidence that Sarah Palin had any influence on him at all, but Loughner made clear he felt wronged by Giffords. None of it mattered. The truth did not matter at all. This was a terrible tragedy on its own but the left compounded it with the baseless, mindless attacks on an American citizen.

This horrible event had NOTHING to do with Sarah Palin. It had NOTHING to do with rhetoric in this country, but the left wants NOTHING to do with the truth. They only wanted the hate, as did Loughner.

A speaker on the Radio Rumble this morning on Fox News pointed out that both Kennedy’s were killed, Reagan was shot and Ford had an attempt on his life while the Fairness Doctrine was in place.

Loughner was insane. As for the rest of the left- what’s your excuse?

Barack Obama said “I don’t want to quell anger! I think people are right to be angry!”

Barack Obama said “bring a gun.”

Barack Obama said “Punish your enemies”

Loughner was angry, he brought a gun and he punished those who he perceived as his enemies.

See how easy it is to play this game?

0 0 votes
Article Rating
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

DR J My only assertion was in#14 “Your hatred of the left and Obama knows no bounds”
Obama has said alot of things in various contexts.So have people like Beck,Limbaugh,Olberman,and Palin.My belief is the words of these people DID NOT influence this crazed shooter.

@Wm T Sherman: And can we lay off the childish variations on Sheriff Limpdik’s name?

Great one, Wm. T. A moment of creative brevity.

@rich wheeler #36:

Dr John #19 says “It’s pretty clear Obama inspired this incident based on his violent language alone” REALLY I’d be interested in who agrees with this statement.

I took it as sarcasm. In Dr. John’s post:

Barack Obama said “I don’t want to quell anger! I think people are right to be angry!”

Barack Obama said “bring a gun.”

Barack Obama said “Punish your enemies”

Loughner was angry, he brought a gun and he punished those who he perceived as his enemies.

See how easy it is to play this game?

@B-Rob #30:

For all we know, he may have been content with just seething against this woman until she heard Sharron Engel’s “Second Amendment remedies” comment,

Speculate much? It kills you that you can’t tie “right-wing hate” to the shootings, doesn’t it? You’re yearning, hoping, spinning for it.

Here’s Angle clarifying her much derided statement, months before the shooting:

You missed Medved’s point: That political assassinations in this country have, historically, not occurred in times of harsh political rhetoric (rhetoric that’s been around in decades past, and not unique to this one).

or until Giffords won,

If he was political (and to the right), wouldn’t you think he’d obsess over a more liberal congressman than this one?

Word Sarcasm.I forgot what a jokester Dr John is. My bad.

@Wm T Sherman: Hey there, William T. I sent this link over to Doug Ross and guess what?

QOTD: “The problem is not the cultural triggers. The problem is the mental illness. Like nearly every other culture on Earth, our culture expresses plentiful imagery and words concerning metaphors of weaponry, hunting, conflict, and war, and 99% of this does not come from politics. It comes from everyone’s daily life.


@rich wheeler:

My point is that Obama is at least as culpable as anyone else in his hateful rhetoric and can be taken out of context just as easily as can anything Palin has said. In fact, what Obama and his wife have said are arguable worse than anything Palin has said. That’s right- Michelle Obama, who said

I want people armed and dangerous

We either use context or we do not. We either take them all out of context or we do not. You and your left can decide. I’ll play along.

I also do not believe for one second anyone’s rhetoric had anything to do with anything here.

Sarah Palin Facebook:

President Reagan said, “We must reject the idea that every time a law’s broken, society is guilty rather than the lawbreaker. It is time to restore the American precept that each individual is accountable for his actions.” Acts of monstrous criminality stand on their own. They begin and end with the criminals who commit them, not collectively with all the citizens of a state, not with those who listen to talk radio, not with maps of swing districts used by both sides of the aisle, not with law-abiding citizens who respectfully exercise their First Amendment rights at campaign rallies, not with those who proudly voted in the last election.

Dr J As we can all read Michelle was talking about arming people with information.We agree that the language of Palin,Obama et. al. in all likelihood had no influence on the shooter.
Let’s pause to mourn those so senselessly lost and pray for the full recovery of the wounded.
Word I agree with Mrs Palin.

” Blessed are the peacemakers—-” BUT IT’S GOOD TO KNOW THE USMC IS READY WHEN NEEDED

@rich wheeler #60: Thanks, rich. It makes me value your input more during times when we may disagree and not see eye to eye on the issues.

And, that is why, one of your people went on the rampage. Yes, one of YOUR people. Loughner’s insanity is your insanity, his mad logic is simply your mad logic cubed.

Loughner is a man of the Left. He acted out from the Left. He just broke through the final taboo, that’s all.

In other words, you, Olbermann, Alinsky, Marx (your assassin’s fave author, and, ultimately, your root guru) Matthews, Barney
Frank, ride in the same stampede, and Loughner is your brother.
It’s not that you are sane, Loughner is crazy, and all the rest of us are sane. No. You are crazy and Loughner is simply more crazy, but crazy in the same way as you are.

Tell me: Where is your William Buckley? Where? The Leftoid RadLibs don’t have a William Buckley, or a Calvin Coolidge, or a Margaret Thatcher, or a Walter Williams, because the interstices of your syllogisms don’t compute. Thus, when it is pointed out to you, by, say, a Buckley, or Sarah Palin, you Leftoids go berserker, start fulminating like Yosemite Sam, or Cass Sunstein, or Elmer “DemKrat” Fudd at Bugs Bunny. Yes, that’s right, I said it.


Er, no. Nothing you cons write could make me scared because, intellectually speaking, you folks aren’t too swift. So, no, cat did not have my tongue. Rather, when I post, it goes into moderation for some unknown period of time. And I was a bit busy on Wednesday and did not log on here. But here I am.


That wasn’t Michelle Obama who said that she wanted people “armed and dangerous.” It was Michele Bachmann! But I am glad that you admit that was a nutty and inflamatory thing to say.


Such silliness on your part. I really don’t know if the FBI will conclude that nutty right wing rhetoric led this guy to shoot Giffords or not. And, frankly, I have no personal stake in whether it did or didn’t.

But you know what I am concerned about? The guns at political rallies; the cons using machine guns are political rallies, like Giffords’ teabagger opponent; the cross-hairs put on districts; the inflamatory language against Obama and liberals; the Arizona pastor who wished that Michelle Obama be made a widow; and the wacky conspiracy theories on the right, like Glenn Beck’s nonsense. That is what I worry about.

Why? Because gun nut cons are more likely to act out because they believe they are losing in their efforts to “take back America.” That is why you have what I call “apocalyptic” imagery and rhetoric, as if America will be destroyed by Obama which, thus, justifies anything done to keep him from destroying America. Ditto “the liberals.”

And admit it — as soon as you found out Giffords had been shot, you TOO thought it was a wingnut who did it, didn’t you?

@Wm T Sherman:

You apparently believe the problem is “the mental illness” not the “cultural triggers.” Interesting. Unfortunately, as the psychiatrist pointed out, mental illness with particular cultural triggers can create a reaction, where the same illness without those triggers would not occur. Think, for example, about post-traumatic stress disorder. Once a person has it, absent similar stressors you have one reaction; with those stressors you have another. Likewise, mental illness with treatment and without treatment

Mentally ill people can fixate on things they find in culture. We had a guy here who was fixated on the police, convinced that they were out to get him. So one evening, police are called to a domestic violence call. The guy was not even involved, but reacted, fatally, when the police showed up. Yes, the guy was mentally ill. But that evening, but for the police showing up at a neighbor’s house to handle their problem, no one dies.

Like I said — you never know what can make people go off. Like the nut in Pittsburgh who killed four cops because he thought Obama had sent them to take his guns. And I am not saying IN THIS CASE that Loughner was set off by the apocalyptic language and imagery. But someone else might be. Which is the precise kind of “consequences” that Gabby Giffords was warning about when Palin produced her stupid poster.

I only hope that we have seen the end of the harshest, more violent and apocalyptic language. And I won’t even get into the insanity of people thinking it is a good idea to bring guns to a political rally . . . hopefully people have that out of their system.


I used to work at a small art museun, on Sundays I was the only employee in the building. One Sunday a man showed up and wanted to purchace a piece that was part of the permant collection. I told him it wasn’t for sale and before I could explain why he became hostile and ran upstairs, it was clear to me he was a nut case, I was frightened and went out the back door and waited until he left the building. Perhaps the permanant collection should be removed, we wouldn’t want to antagonize the crazy people that want to by art that’s not for sale.

Another incident I experienced was when I drove my daughter to an appointment, it was in a building across the street from our huge police/court building. As we were approaching the building I noticed a man lifting up a newspaper vending machine that was chained to other vending machines, he was lifting and banging it on the sidewalk, made quite a commotion. His eyes met mine, he stopped his crazy banging and ran at me with an oil spout, who knows where he got that, in his hand and grazed me with it just because I happened to look his way at the wrong time. The block was full of people, but he picked me. Perhaps we should never cast our eyes upon anyone that appears to be doing something out of the ordinary.

Who knows what is going to trigger someone with severe mental illness, maybe wearing a red hat or driving a blue car, maybe we should stay in our homes with our doors locked who knows when we may say the wrong thing, wear the wrong thing, look at someone at the wrong time.

So brob, was it my fault that painting wasn’t for sale? Was it my fault that I glanced at that man that was slam banging the vending machine? I don’t know what these ill people did after they left my sight, maybe they went home and hurt someone mentally or physically, was that my fault?

How much do we need to curb our freedoms for fear that we might just might upset someone with a mental illness?

BTW, your response to Wordsmith leads me to believe that I would stand a better chance with that crazy vending machine banger. and…..I heard there was a crazy guy out in Ohio that’s mad as hell about some leftwing lawyer that spouts on and on about GOPer cons. Best curb your tongue brob…..boo!

@B-Rob: You said:

Er, no. Nothing you cons write could make me scared because, intellectually speaking, you folks aren’t too swift. So, no, cat did not have my tongue. Rather, when I post, it goes into moderation for some unknown period of time. And I was a bit busy on Wednesday and did not log on here. But here I am.

Good, glad to hear you aren’t too scared to have an honest intellectual debate about the questions I repeatedly asked you on another, but similar thread. Link

I will repost my questions for your benefit:

You consistently avoid answering my questions because you are afraid to. Or maybe you just don’t have the balls to step up and really, intelligently debate this issue. It is much easier for you to lie, dissemble, insult, call names and paint with a broad brush.

I posit that you are only capable of being intellectually dishonest and to whit, I submit that you repeatedly refuse to answer my questions.

Let me refresh your memory:

First I posted the definition of liberal, and show how you do not even live up to that label –

You claim you are a liberal. What is the definition of a liberal?

   /ˈlɪbərəl, ˈlɪbrəl/
1. favorable to progress or reform, as in political or religious affairs.
2. (often initial capital letter) noting or pertaining to a political party advocating measures of progressive political reform.
3. of, pertaining to, based on, or advocating liberalism.
4. favorable to or in accord with concepts of maximum individual freedom possible, esp. as guaranteed by law and secured by governmental protection of civil liberties.
5. favoring or permitting freedom of action, esp. with respect to matters of personal belief or expression: a liberal policy toward dissident artists and writers.
6. of or pertaining to representational forms of government rather than aristocracies and monarchies.
7. free from prejudice or bigotry; tolerant: a liberal attitude toward foreigners.
8. open-minded or tolerant, esp. free of or not bound by traditional or conventional ideas, values, etc. – Source

Seems you just aren’t living up to your own ideals, there B-Rob.

Now then, as far as folks from the Tea Party movement claiming to want to teabag someone. Proof please.

Then in another post, I asked –

@Braindead Rob: You said:

So spare me the links to lefties doing X, Y, and Z. It still does not excuse what was going on to a much greater degree on the right.

So if your side does it, then it is okay? You are comfortable with the plethora of examples of lefties using hateful rhetoric and, as you claim, inciting violence?

And lastly, I am asking this –

What is your proof that Loughner was motivated by ANYTHING said or done by anyone on the right?

So there you have it brob, since I don’t scare you and since you are soooo much more intellectual than us “GOPer cons,” have at it;; answer the above four questions.

This just in – B-Rob still runs scared… LOL

The cancer of Radical Liberalism, Alinsky-style, can best be eradicated by American citizens who awake and disavowal their former delusion. The most convincing, and, necessary, testimonies against Nazi-ism was by former German Nazis, who, awakening from within its ranks by being witness to Nazi evils, escaped, and joined with us. Repeatedly, the most convincing callers to Rush, Hannity, et al., are former members of some RadLib cell, group, cult, or union. Jim Jones was a Communist, and, like Loughner, read Marx, indeed, instructing his followers to suicide in the name of Communism! Death cult Libs: Jones, Loughner. Those who escape from Islamic Totalitarian realms, like Brigit Gabriel, and who possess the soul and temerity and talent, to fight the demons unleashed upon humanitas by Mohammed, Wahhab, Bin Laden, who join with us to fight Islamic Totalitarians, as well as, the Alinskians, and tyrants, like Putin, Chavez, Ortega, Castro, and other monsters, like Bill Maher, second cousin to Jared Loughner, possessed of a similar demonic insanity, thus, compelled to revile the very algorithms of the American body politic.

@B-Rob #30:

Obama is Black and Dem. The Secret Service started logging a 300% increase in death threats against Obama compared to Bush . . . 300%!

New post for you to play in, B-Rob.

@B-Rob #69:

Such silliness on your part.

Please use your words to heal; not words to wound. :p

I really don’t know if the FBI will conclude that nutty right wing rhetoric led this guy to shoot Giffords or not. And, frankly, I have no personal stake in whether it did or didn’t.

Sure you do. Like the liberal pundits and politicians who immediately jumped on the “let no crisis go to (political) waste”-bandwagon before any facts were in, you put your stakes down on the hope that Loughner would be your political fantasy right-winger.

But you know what I am concerned about? The guns at political rallies; the cons using machine guns are political rallies, like Giffords’ teabagger opponent; the cross-hairs put on districts; the inflamatory language against Obama and liberals; the Arizona pastor who wished that Michelle Obama be made a widow; and the wacky conspiracy theories on the right, like Glenn Beck’s nonsense. That is what I worry about.

Out of partisanship (where were you on this when it came to Bush?) or as an American citizen? Where’s your consistency?

Cross-hairs on districts and guns at rallies has repeatedly been explained to you. Yet you choose to politicize the Tuscon tragedy. Unfortunately for your side, you’re all just shooting yourselves in the foot on this one. Americans aren’t buying the bull**** that either guns or heated political rhetoric are to blame. History doesn’t support you, either. As the facts have come in, most of the smart Dems have back-pedaled from their earlier claims. Guess you’re too much stuck on stupid to do the same.

And admit it — as soon as you found out Giffords had been shot, you TOO thought it was a wingnut who did it, didn’t you?

Actually, no.

@B-Rob: You said:

But you tend to forget the REAL difference between now and then — Obama is Black and Dem. The Secret Service started logging a 300% increase in death threats against Obama compared to Bush . . . 300%!


From the United States Secret Service Director, Mark Sullivan –

Bit of a bombshell at this morning’s Homeland Security Committee hearing:

U.S. Secret Service Director Mark Sullivan dismissed published reports that the level of death threats against President Obama are four times greater than typical threat levels against recent presidents — claiming the current volume of threats is comparable to that under George W. Bush and Bill Clinton.

“It’s not [a] 400 percent [increase],” Sullivan said during a heated exchange with Delegate Eleanor Holmes Norton (D-D.C.), who suggested the service needed additional agents to protect the first African-American president.

“I’m not sure where that number comes from,” he said, adding that the number of threats against Obama “are the same level as it has been [against] the last two presidents.”Source

Typical Rob – spouting off without checking your facts. I guess the head of the Secret Service who states that the number of death threats is no more or less than the previous two admins just kinda blows holes in your racist theroy, huh Billy Bob? LOL

If one of the moderators could please embed this video?

Really, you make it too easy buddy. And BTW, you STILL are avoiding my questions about Loughner. Here is the link – Questions B-Rob is too scared to answer honestly.