world

FBI investigating threats to Democrats after health care vote

67 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2010 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

67 Comments
Login to comment

I will never understand how spending billions of our tax dollars to "help" Iraq is considered by some to be patriotic, but spending that money on providing health care to Americans is "socialistic". I used to think it was just ignorance and gullibility on the part of those who buy such defeatable lies, but with these same people issuing death threats to fellow Americans, I have to call these right-wing loons simply evil.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Threats of violence and intimidation are nothing new from republican supporters.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You have to wonder what a "perceived threat" really is...seems like it leaves a lot of room for interpretation...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What a sad reflection of America.

Even if you disagree with decisions, you have to respect the process of government.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I will never understand how spending billions of our tax dollars to "help" Iraq is considered by some to be patriotic, but spending that money on providing health care to Americans is "socialistic".

Never understand? Really? I occasionally wonder how bright people are who can't understand why people don't like socialism. What it comes down to is, that most people don't believe government should be in charge of health care. Its not a right, its not something we should be forced to have from birth. And if we want or need help, its the responsibility of our family, friends, and neighbors to help out. Its certainly not the job of, or responsibility of 'big brother' to force us to do what it wants. In this case, buy insurance. Does that help? Since you have such a hard time understanding such a simple thing, I tried to keep it simple.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Getting back to the subject of the article. Apparently death threats and venom being spewed at those who passed one of the most unpopular pieces of legislation in history is difficult to understand. I myself don't condone it, but then I don't condone threats or hatred against people like Limbaugh and others on the right. Apparently though, it ok and understandable for someone like Limbaugh and Coulter to get death threats, but not someone who totally screws over all Americans. Like so many other loony things, this is just one more thing proving the hypocrisy of loons.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I will never understand how spending billions of our tax dollars to "help" Iraq is considered by some to be patriotic, but spending that money on providing health care to Americans is "socialistic".

Because fighting wars voted upon by Congress is the natural role of America's federal government. Telling citizens how to live their lives is not. America's founding was based on the idea that people should be free to determine their own destiny and that citizens must be protected from government (think British parliament pre-1776). Human nature has not changed and the propensity for government to intrude upon individual liberty has not either. Besides, Socialism is never sustainable and always fails. Have you seen the state that Social Security is in these days? It has been reduced to nothing but a ponzi scheme that cannot possibly live up to the promises that were made to the citizens paying into it. No doubt Bernie Madoff is impressed by big brother Obama's achievement with health care - a program whose eventual failure is easily discerned.

It is wrong for people to be making threats against members of America's 'Social' Democrat party just as it was wrong for those threats made against former President Bush and members of his administration over the war while they were in office. No one should be encourging violence against politicians. However, I definitely understand the frustration with respect to what the government has just done. If you came to the realization that your country's founding principles were being undermined and that it is heading towards a financial disaster, you too would be angry at those responsible (though not so upset as to threaten anyone physically I am sure).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

medievaltimes says:

Even if you disagree with decisions, you have to respect the process of government.

No, not really.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Its not a right, its not something we should be forced to have from birth. And if we want or need help, its the responsibility of our family, friends, and neighbors to help out.

This is what I dont get...Usually Americans are very charitable. When disaster strikes Americans offer a helping hand or open their wallets. But yet when it comes to health care...for some reason it is different.

America is the richest, most powerful and greatest country on Earth...or so Im told. If that is true, surely it can provide a basic standard of health care for its dear citizens.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

No, not really.

Well, if thats the case, you shouldnt blame the Dems or the bill (I dont know if you have). You should blame the system of government then.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It's really more of a sad refection of you that you would generalize a nation of 300 million people by the acts of a few nut jobs.

Not saying 300 million people would do the same. But at the same time, it shouldnt suprise anyone that this would happen in American either.

The way the conservatives are handling this whole bill is a disgrace (I know Im generalizing). They are really being sore losers and acting like kids. They can and should do better than this. It would be nice to see some better leadership/ideas from the conservatives.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And if we want or need help, its the responsibility of our family, friends, and neighbors to help out.

Wow, I am glad I'm not molenir's neighbor, they would be surprised to learn they are responsible for his health care. Sounds like he is talking about some kind of "socialist" community insurance plan there.

But agree with one thing. It is not government's job to force people to buy health insurance from private health insurance providers. Government's job is to either step in and provide health insurance,or not provide it. It is infrastructure and as "socialist" as building roads, airports, or a military. This idea of individual responsibility, "I can take care of myself and don't need no government running my life" goes back to when the DNA stepped off the boat. I know, I grew up listening to it pretty much everyday. That's all fine, but when you apply it where it doesn't apply, you get a mess like US health care.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

America is the richest, most powerful and greatest country on Earth...or so Im told. If that is true, surely it can provide a basic standard of health care for its dear citizens.

You misunderstand the fundamental philosophical differences here. Its got nothing to do with helping people out, but rather the role of government in our lives. Conservatives believe that people should help each other out. Liberals believe government should help people out. Thats the primary difference.

As for a few nutjobs wanting to see those who supported the most unpopular piece of legislation in history injured. Well, there are nuts everywhere. And the nuts don't reflect on the movement. Anymore then that liberal whackjob who murdered her university co-workers over tenure, reflects on liberals. Just because she was a liberal, and a murderous whacko, does not mean most liberals are likewise murderous whack jobs.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Both you guys on the right and the left are guilty of violence against each other. You need to be aware of that. But as usual, the finger pointing begins.

I really believe if there was a modified version of what Dennis Kucinich wanted, such as at state level, I think this may have gone over a lot better for most. But if you read those lines in the bill, molenir does have a point.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

You misunderstand the fundamental philosophical differences here. Its got nothing to do with helping people out, but rather the role of government in our lives. Conservatives believe that people should help each other out. Liberals believe government should help people out. Thats the primary difference.

Maybe this is getting into semantics, but the government helping people out and individuals helping people out could be one in the same (taxes). I dont know...I guess when you are talking about roads, libraries, schools, airports, military, health care etc...there has to be some level of government involvement (even if I dont use/am against supporting these things).

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I guess when you are talking about roads, libraries, schools, airports, military, health care etc...there has to be some level of government involvement (even if I dont use/am against supporting these things)."

Good point, but let's look at the state of education as the fed has put more and more of its hands into it and taking the power away from the local.. has it gotten any better? Roads and airports actually bring in commerce, at least for the most part. And notice that the gov does not tell you which car or plane to use. And the fed does not set the price.

And for the military, haven't we been arguing ffor years the cost of having a large military? haven't there been protests for years calling for it to be down sized?

I think what's being missed is that once the gov does get involved, as in your points, look at how much bigger the gov has to get just to "be in charge of it". Now, we are going to have a huge government oversight on the health care industry and I am sure you can agree that when someone is appointed to a gov position they will build buildings, staff it, manage it... what is not in the bill is the government costs to create said bureaucracy.

Moderator: All readers back on topic please. This particular discussion is about the death threats.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Ralph Nader was right about the whole US system of democracy of being taken over by special interests. States rights seem to be a euphemism for local special interests. I can't think of a single thing that state governments, state courts, state militias or state constitutions contribute to the betterment of US citizens. There have been proposals by think tanks in the past to cut down local government to a more manageable figure, perhaps 9 or 10 large regions (New England, Mid-Atlantic, Southeast, Central, Mountain, Southwest, etc.) under federal supervision. Maybe it's time to dust them off and get away from the primitive 18th century mentality that has no more place in this day and age.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

People are nuts, nothing new. People only tend to notice it when its happening to someone they agree with. I'm sure that if the death threats were directed against Bush (again) than the position of many posters would be reversed.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Interesting how Americans (at least those posting here) have such a black or white view on these things!

As for all the remarks and quotes from your constitution, it is interesting to note that when it was written it referred only to "white men" but you changed that and a few other things over the years talking about this being unpopular is a bit of a joke, here are a few other thing that were unpopular at the time they were passed; " the right to vote for blacks and women and equal rights" should they also not have been passed, accepted or respected because they were unpopular?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I mentioned immediately after the health care bill was signed that there would be some civil disobedience of some sort. I never believed it would be directed against the democrats so soon. This will only bring more supporters for Obama. Those who are for the health cared package will start coming out showing their support more than they have.

How soon will someone be injured or killed? < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I've always felt that if you are a politician you will always have to deal with at least two sides and you should expect some type friction. I don't know why you feel everyone has to play nice. When have we ever played nice?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

wow, listening to the news it seems that the people who opposed the bill are no classified as terrorists...... didn't we just go through something like this name calling on what is and what is not a terrorist, like don't blame the whole group that one guy was a nutcase. Oh, but be an opponant to the bill and not even be a repub or tea bagger, I am now classified as a terrorist... Wow, how things change so fast.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hoyer said there were incidents such as people yelling that Democratic lawmakers should be put on firing lines

If free speech is beyond Hoyer's understanding, Hoyer should move to a country that doesn't allow it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I mentioned immediately after the health care bill was signed that there would be some civil disobedience of some sort. I never believed it would be directed against the democrats so soon."

I told you before, you can't win a debate by shutting people up. The more you do that, the more hyped people are going to get. What you and the dems are doing is pushing people into a corner and you are putting people like me in harms way. I mean, look at the name calling you have been doing and not even trying to have a rational debate about it and c'mon, the way the dems pushed this behind closed doors, they basically made the right wing hosts job easier.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just some food for thought. Many leftie posters here cheered the Iraqi that threw the shoe at President Bush and called him a hero, heck defended his act to no end.

I condemn violence from both the left and the right. The people behind these acts only worsen our already extremely polarized political and there is no place for anybody 'cheering' this on. And you haven't seen anybody on the right do that nor will you.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Where's the Macintosh chick with the sledgehammer when you need her?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So if I've caught the gist of this, the extreme right support helping unfortunate and impoverished Iraqi's, but not unfortunate and impoverished Americans?

Heh, that's not mentioning all the hysterical screeching they did in support of starting the damned war. A heckuva lot more than they did about Obama's healthcare bill - and that's really saying something after the pages and pages of ranting now set aside in many a users posting history!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I don't pretend to understand the workings of Americans' minds. But, this issue seems to be one of the most divisive I've ever witnessed. To an outsider it would seem that America, not content with being at war worldwide, is now at war with itself. And we all know the fate of a house divided...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

at least 10 members of Congress have reported some sort of threats

Heh, that's how Pelosi got the votes for ObamaCare.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Like I said before, "the party of no" is becoming too classy for republicans.

I think "team temper tantrum" represents them far better and is a more accurate portrayal of their current party.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Heh. I wonder how many of the threats can be traced to any of Cindy McCain's houses.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

"Hoyer said there were incidents such as people yelling that Democratic lawmakers should be put on firing lines"

"If free speech is beyond Hoyer's understanding, Hoyer should move to a country that doesn't allow it."

Good point ramen. Like if I wanted to use my rights to free speech to tell everyone you are a pedophile. What's the harm, right? It's just free speech. Or maybe if we post about how you killed your wife with constant negativity. That's just more free speech. No harm done here. If you don't like it, maybe you can pay a Marine to take you to North Korea, right?

I'm glad we have this understanding about free speech between you and I.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

RomeoRamenII wrote: If free speech is beyond Hoyer's understanding, Hoyer should move to a country that doesn't allow it.

Since Hoyer never said anything about jailing people for yelling, it seems that you are the one not understanding Hoyer's freedom to complain about other people testing the limits of decency and yes, even free speech. Speech that incites violence is illegal in the U.S.A. and the limits of that restriction are being tested if not breached here. Not sure where you live, but a move might be in order for you, not Hoyer, if you have a problem with the restrictions on such speech or on the right of a person to complain.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Apples and oranges Sailwind. I support violence on people who support violence. Its sort of like I don't mind a police officer shooting someone who shot someone. However you feel about Congressional Democrats and this issue, the violence did not start with them, did it?

This is not about suspending rights and its not an attack on liberty. Its not war and its not about unjust death. Its about money. As usual, we see what Republicans really care about. Money.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Its about money. As usual, we see what Republicans really care about. Money.

Agreed, the Republicans and most Americans are asking themselves how in the hell can we actually afford and pay for this?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Its about money. As usual, we see what Republicans really care about. Money.

Agreed...

Yep, as in no concern whatsoever for their fellow countrymen.

Finally, I can agree with Sailwind on something again.

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

As usual, we see what Republicans really care about. Money.

True dat. Since democrats have a history of not paying taxes, they are more than willing to spend other peoples' money.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Free speech doesn't include bricks. Free speech doesn't include destruction of personal property.

Does free speech exclude death threats as legal free speech?

Republican posters here on this site will be hopping up and down as soon as a democratic congressman dies. Maybe even wounded. But by doing him in he can't vote democratic. < :-)

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Free speech doesn't include bricks. Free speech doesn't include destruction of personal property.

Agreed

Does free speech exclude death threats as legal free speech?

Yes, definitely not acceptable speech. Nor to answer the question, is telling or publishing lies about someone else acceptable. However, and this is the big deal, politicians fall into a special category. As a public figure, one by choice, you can be lied about. For example, look at what Bush went through for 8 years. The reason for this, is justified by political opposition. I don't say its right, but if you're expressing your political viewpoint, then short of death threats, you can say just about anything you want about public figures.

Republican posters here on this site will be hopping up and down as soon as a democratic congressman dies. Maybe even wounded. But by doing him in he can't vote democratic. < :-)

While there are extremists on both sides who would like to see the opposition die, and who would celebrate such things, I think most people are good, rational people. I'll leave it at that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), who negotiated the breakthrough on abortion language in the health care bill, has received numerous death threats and faxes with violent images at his office.

Great that pro-life forces in the republicans party and also pro-death threat. Only a republican can make sense of that.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What did those jokers expect when they so mockingly ignored the wishes of 75 percent of the public and see themselves as being better than the very people they are suppose to be representing. They are only getting reactions to what they have done. This is trouble they brought upon themselves.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

When you mention DeLay RR2 was it actually his office or a shooting at someone else's that he instigated. That guy's mouth is known for the type of coded threats that start stuff like this article.

But yes, we all talking about the same kind of thuggery. The difference is that you support it, and most dems and most repubs do not. Your "picked on" comments show that you think its just a joke, and thereby, you support it. Please, no one confuse this guy for a representative of Republicans. He represents the far right only, a dying breed.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What did those jokers expect when they so provably lied about "75 percent" of Americans not wanting health care reform (http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2010/03/24/early-polls-give-obama-a-boost-in-health-care-debate/?cxntfid=blogs_jay_bookman_blog) and have done nothing productive for the very people they are supposed to be representing? They are only getting reactions to what they've failed to do. This is trouble they brought upon themselves.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is what I dont get...Usually Americans are very charitable. When disaster strikes Americans offer a helping hand or open their wallets. But yet when it comes to health care...for some reason it is different.

That's the difference; charity is something given, not taken. If I give to help the earthquake victims of Haiti, that's my decision to be charitable with the money I've earned. If the government takes it out of my pocket to give to someone, that's not charity - it's robbery.

It is infrastructure and as "socialist" as building roads, airports, or a military.

Again apples and oranges. Building roads and sustaining the military with my tax dollars provides a service directly to me, i.e. I use the roads and the military supposedly protects my way of life. I currently pay about a hundred buck per pay period for my insurance. It works. Now I still get to pay for my insurance, but I get to pay for other people's as well. Not a choice but a government inflicted taking of my funds whether I like it or not. That is socialism. There is a stark difference between the two that many of you don't seem to get - not sure why.

The liberal assumption - and a poor one - is that the only money being really taken are from the rich 'fat-cats'. Well no, that's not true. A large sector of the population is middle class and this sector will pay. The assumption that if you live above the poverty line you can afford to give is NOT true in this day and age. A good number of liberals these days are younger people. When you're young, the idealistic nature of giving to 'help your fellow man' seems much more romantic and is easier when you're only responsible for yourself. When you're supporting a family, you tend to notice more where your hard earned cash is going, and you seem to notice that the 'have-nots' are are not always your idealist ideal of the poor souls who have really tried hard but just can't make it. There are a whole, whole lot of folks of the 'government dole' who are just as capable of making a living as the rest of us. But why bother when Uncle Same hands you a check?

Quick case in point; I live in a medium sized city and take public transportation to work. There's a guy who gets on the bus every day who is both mentally handicapped, and has something wrong with his legs. He gets on that bus and goes to a 9-5 every day. He likely gets some type of disability, but with his condition could get full disability, but chooses to work a 9-5 (albeit at a job specifically designed for people with handicaps). Conversely there is a family that gets on the bus a few times a week; I've heard them talking that they're going to pick up their assistance checks. She's about 24, he's in his twenties with no physical deformities or conditions that would preclude work. Neither do, and they have three kids. So might you see why people get angry enough to hurl rocks through windows (which I do not in any way condone) when more money is being removed so such people can have health care? Cruel and heartless? Depends upon your perspective I suppose.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Great that pro-life forces in the republicans party and also pro-death threat.

The other great irony is how many of the conservatives believe they are following more truly in the footsteps of the founding fathers. They complete forget how the founding father himself, George Washington, dealt with the teabaggers of his day who threatened federal officials via what history calls the two rebellions known as Shays and Whiskey.

The vast majority of activist conservatives know little about they history they claim to be following.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Join the Republican Party; the party of hate!

Don't forget to pick up your copy of The Turner Diaries as you exit the political meetings.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

tigermoth -

Not a choice but a government inflicted taking of my funds whether I like it or not. That is socialism. There is a stark difference between the two that many of you don't seem to get - not sure why.

That is NOT socialism; it's taxation, and it occurs in every democratic nation on Earth.

If the government takes it out of my pocket to give to someone, that's not charity - it's robbery.

Do you consider contributing to Social Security "robbery" as well?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

What did those jokers expect when they so provably lied about "75 percent" of Americans not wanting health care reform (http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2010/03/24/early-polls-give-obama-a-boost-in-health-care-debate/?cxntfid=blogsjaybookman_blog)

A nonsense link, dude. Yours is one taken after the Vote Now, Read It Later bill was signed. But thanks for the laugh just the same.

Now, how about providing a link within, say, three months prior to the vote where a majority of Americans favored ObamaCare?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

RomeoRamenII -

Americans are the ones laughing now. Just refer to my "nonsense" link for the proof.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This sounds like a cock-and-bull story, floated to disarm criticism of the politicians who passed the latest gigantic entitlement bill (paid with money that they have to extract from the tax-paying population).

Now these poor darlings can play the victim, how convenient.

Expect more of this...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Great that pro-life forces in the republicans party and also pro-death threat. Only a republican can make sense of that.

What you didn't know, is that the people issuing those threats, were pro-abortion democrats. Stupak didn't sell out til Sunday. Guess when those recordings were made... Apart from that though, who really cares? It comes with the territory. If you don't want to be hated, don't become a public figure. Honestly, its the Libs who are always doing the hate anyway. Limbaugh, Coulter, and Drudge have all been assaulted, many other conservatives have been attacked, at their own homes. This after Dems deliberately made their addresses public. Whining about how venom filled the rhetoric is, and how much hatred and vitriol is being directed at them, my reaction is... Ooh, poor babies. Go ahead and retire, let someone who can stand the heat, take your job.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

let someone who can stand the heat, take your job.

Like President Obama.

http://www.japantoday.com/category/world/view/obama-dares-republicans-to-try-to-repeal-his-new-health-care-law#comments

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That's the difference; charity is something given, not taken. If I give to help the earthquake victims of Haiti, that's my decision to be charitable with the money I've earned. If the government takes it out of my pocket to give to someone, that's not charity - it's robbery.

Charity is great for a niche organization or a one time disaster event. But we are talking about 300 million people, a service that is daily and is a huge part of the national economy. If it were solely up to charity, some people would get more than others...kind of like how the health care system was.

Moderator: Back on topic please. Comments should focus on the death threats.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Do you consider contributing to Social Security "robbery" as well?" I do. Especially since I most likely won't be getting it in about 30 years. its just money thrown away. How about letting us make our own retirement funds and tax those IRA's less?

Moderator: All readers please stay on topic. This particular discussion is about the death threats. Please discuss the health care bill itself on the relevant thread.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Far as I know, while pretty much everyone gets death threats, from conservatives like Limbaugh, to loons like the President, there haven't been any claims of death threats, rather just a menacing tone, and a lot of rage over the Dems passage of this extremely unpopular bill.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

And Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.), who negotiated the breakthrough on abortion language in the health care bill, has received numerous death threats and faxes with violent images at his office.

Ironically, Stupak was receiving threats from the pro-ObamaCare side before he realized it is impossible to be pro-Life in the Democrat party. Pelosi told him to toss aside his principles and he fell in line, lock-step with his leaders.

Let's all not forget, the only bi-partisanship that took place in Congress regarding ObamaCare was the opposition to it. Both Republicans and a significant number of Democrats voted against it. The partisanship came from the Left.

As for the Democrats pointing the finger at Republicans for encouraging violence against supporters of the bill, I think they have been jumping to conclusions. There have also been threats and property damage against conservatives. I always find it amusing when one political side - whether it be the Left or Right - try to state that the other side is more violent, immoral, or whatever. Human nature is the same regardless of political affiliation - there are whackos on both sides of the political divide.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Molenir, you say that Limbaugh, Coulter and Drudge have been assaulted at their homes because Democrats made their addresses public. Are you making this up? Post some proof. But thank you so much for showing us the type of people you support; Mr. Operation Chaos and Ms. Carpet-bomb 'em Coulter. I think those two would be all for throwing bricks into windows, wanting to spend more on war machines than medicine.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

News reports today say that Eric Cantor had shots fired at his campaign hq. You knew liberals would resort to violence.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

SenatorAcorn said: News reports today say that Eric Cantor had shots fired at his campaign hq. You knew liberals would resort to violence.

And why would you blame liberals for an attack on a Jewish and very pro-Israel politician at this time? Why not blame the KKK, or even be quick to call it a false flag operation? Even far-left people might be to blame possibly even a Democrat. But you first point to liberals? I think that maybe you don't even know what a liberal is!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

HeyLars -

I think that maybe you don't even know what a liberal is!

In America, Liberals and Democrats are collectively know as Patriots.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

know=known

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Do anyone have evidence that the people who are doing this are republicans?

“It’s more disturbing to me that Republican leadership has not condemned these attacks and instead appears to be fanning the flames with coded rhetoric,” said Slaughter, a key supporter of the bill.

and

While not directly criticizing Republicans, Hoyer said that “any show of appreciation for such actions encourages such action.”

This is politics between Democrats and Republicans throwing mud at each other.

When employees sees that they are going to have to pay a hefty price for insurance next year well thank the people who voted for it. The employers are going to pass the buck to their employees and customers.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

In America, Liberals and Democrats are collectively know as Patriots.

I like the cut of your jib, USAFdude. Thank you for your service.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Let me guess the only person the FBI has arrested is the guy who shot at the Republican's office right?

I doubt they will actually arrest any of the so called people making threats against the Democrats because quite frankly I dont believe the democrats, I think they are liars and trying to detract from the fact that like 68 percent of Americans dont agree with them passing that bill.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Many conservatives have been assaulted or threatened near their homes after having their addresses made public by activists like Acorn or Moveon.org

and anyone who disagrees just is delusional about the violent nature of liberal activists. It was SEIU thugs that beat up a black man in a wheel chair calling him racial slurs for being a tea party person. Its always liberal activists that go crazy just watch any WTO protest.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

-"Democratic Congress members are getting lessons from the FBI on how to handle threats"

-"Congress have reported some sort of threats"

-"House Majority Leader Steny Hoyer, D-Md, who denounced the threats"

The vast majority of this story uses the words "threats and vandalism"- so why this;

Moderator: Back on topic please. Comments should focus on the death threats."

Misleading the public a bit aren't we ? Just "focus on the DEATH threats" and you'll stay in good graces. Aaaamazing !

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I think most politicians get odd, weird, and threatening calls probably on a monthly basis and this is just being jined up and used for political purposes.

Now the Democrats are probably getting phone calls from people that are pissed because in the months leading up to the health care votes some of them actually disabled their phones and deleted all their incoming emails because they did not want to hear from the vast majority of their constituents that did not agree with the bill.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites