Reply #21: Then look here. [View All]

[Hong Kong Cavalier]

I found this with a two minute search on Google. I'm sure I could find a dozen more hit pieces like this if I really wanted to.

http://www.nationalreview.com/derbyshire/derbyshire021501.shtml

You'll love this part.

Chelsea is a Clinton. She bears the taint; and though not prosecutable in law, in custom and nature the taint cannot be ignored. All the great despotisms of the past — I'm not arguing for despotism as a principle, but they sure knew how to deal with potential trouble — recognized that the families of objectionable citizens were a continuing threat. In Stalin's penal code it was a crime to be the wife or child of an "enemy of the people". The Nazis used the same principle, which they called Sippenhaft, "clan liability". In Imperial China, enemies of the state were punished "to the ninth degree": that is, everyone in the offender's own generation would be killed, and everyone related via four generations up, to the great-great-grandparents, and four generations down, to the great-great-grandchildren, would also be killed. (This sounds complicated, but in practice what usually happened was that a battalion of soldiers was sent to the offender's home town, where they killed everyone they could find, on the principle neca eos omnes, deus suos agnoscet — "let God sort 'em out".)

Is that clear enough for you?

This isn't some random anonymous poster on an internet message board. This is an opinion writer for the National Review using rhetoric that states Chelsea Clinton should be killed for being "an enemy of the state".
Even if he didn't "mean" it, it's still a thousand times more vile than almost anything that's been posted here on DU.