'What’s the difference between that kind of talk and Eric Rudolph?'

[checks-n-balances]

Republican Vigilantism
by Laura Flanders with Steven Rosenfeld

(snip)

...A week ago Tom Delay was threatening political retribution against judges who disobeyed. Last Monday, Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas) suggested that violence against judges and their families was an understandable reaction to the decisions those judges make. In Washington, a new outfit calling itself the Judeo-Christian Council for Constitutional Restoration held a two-day meeting on what they called “the Judicial Threat to Faith.” Two House members attended, aides to two senators; representatives from the Family Research Council and Concerned Women for America; conservative activists Alan Keyes and Morton C. Blackwell; Frank Pavone, the Vatican envoy who represented Terri Schiavo's parents; Alabama's "Ten Commandments" judge, Roy Moore; Tom Delay sent a message by video.

(snip)

Will someone please tell me what’s the difference between that sort of talk and Eric Rudolph?

(snip)

Rudolph bombed the Atlanta Olympics to attack the federal government. Tom Delay wants to take out judges whose views he doesn’t like. Rudolph was willing to kill and maim because he doesn’t like women’s power and gays and human equality. Delay and Bush are willing to throw the Constitution out for what look like similar reasons.

They all say they act in the name of god. Rudolph’s bombings were accompanied by letters claiming they were the work of the Army of God. First Strike Bush has said he believes he is God’s agent too.

There’s something going on that’s more dangerous than saturation coverage. It’s Republican vigilantism. The vigilantes are back, and if Delay is anything to go by, they’re hell-bent on vengeance. The qualities that apparently made Eric Rudolph a folk hero to some --- his ability to strike and evade the law, to become judge, jury and executioner -- sound to me a whole lot like qualities the Judeo-Christian Council for Constitutional Restoration would go for.

(snip)

More
http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0411-26.htm

My question: Doesn't it make sense now for us to connect all those names mentioned in the article to Rudolph?

[realFedUp]

1. They're "christian" conservatives?

seems to be the factor absolving them of crime and sin.

[Brotherjohn]

2. I too thought that was a most salient point.

In fact, just referenced it in the thread below.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=103x119398

WHAT IS the difference???

Answer: NONE. They're in the same army (...of "God"?). One is the "Commander" and the other is the "Grunt".

The Commanders give the "orders": Rep. Cornyn saying on the House floor that "he understands" violence against judges; Bill O'Reilly going on about a doctor, whom he names, performing hundreds of late-term abortions for thousands of dollars each, and concluding (in his infinite and informed wisdom) that it's not probable that these all involved a risk to the mother.

The Grunts carry out the orders: Eric Rudolf bombing gay bars, abortion clinics and the Olympics; Paul Hill and others murdering doctors.

No difference whatsoever.

Yet some liberal hooligan throws a pie in the face of Bill Kristol and it's LIBERALS who are out of control.

There's a real disconnect in this country, and it goes something like this:
If a liberal so much as speaks loudly on a subject, he/she is a ranting lunatic and evidence that liberals need to "get a grip" or "get over it". Yet if a conservative murders someone or endorses endorses murder... well, they're not a conservative... they're just a wacko... or they didn't MEAN it that way... or... OH JUST SHUT UP, YOU FREEDOM-HATING, TERRORIST-CODDLER!!! :sarcasm: