To: LindyBill who wrote (106624 ) 3/29/2005 8:53:59 PM From: KLP Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 793745 My bet is that many of the Democrats will wish that very thing after his move today to see Terri. Now the Dems are going to have a very difficult time saying this is a right-wing group that wanted Terri to live.... Edit: People like Krugman, for instance..siliconinvestor.com Random Shooting Former Enron adviser Paul Krugman is in rare form today. We're not sure we've ever read a column that is at once so incoherent and so inflammatory. The headline, "What's Going On?," captures the confusion. The column is basically a laundry list of Krugman gripes, prompted by the Terri Schiavo case: o Schiavo's parents have enlisted antiabortion extremist Randall Terry as their spokesman. Although Terry "hasn't killed anyone," another antiabortion extremist murdered an abortion doctor. o Gov. Jeb Bush considered taking Mrs. Schiavo into state custody, though he didn't actually do so. o Some pharmacists refuse on moral grounds to fill prescriptions for contraceptives. o Senate Republicans want to eliminate the filibuster for judicial nominees, so that judges would be confirmed by a simple majority vote. o House Majority Leader Tom DeLay says his politics are based on a "biblical worldview." Tellingly, he doesn't mention Valerie Plame. All this leads Krugman to the following conclusion: America isn't yet a place where liberal politicians, and even conservatives who aren't sufficiently hard-line, fear assassination. But unless moderates take a stand against the growing power of domestic extremists, it can happen here. Reread Krugman's list of complaints. Other than the murder of the abortion doctor--which happened in 1998, when Bill Clinton was in the White House--there's nothing that even remotely has to do with assassination. If Krugman and the New York Times want to combat extremism, a good way to start would be to refrain from loose talk about political violence.