re: #434 Charles

A poll that says most Americans don’t believe that violent political rhetoric influences violent behavior tells you absolutely nothing about whether violent political rhetoric actually does influence violent behavior.

That’s not what the poll said. It said that most Americans don’t believe that in this instance, this particular, seriously mentally ill fellow got his cue from RW rhetoric.

On top of that, when a plurality of those who stand to win political advantage by pinning the tail on the other side’s donkey reject that reading of events, maybe it’s because it’s just not a logical conclusion.

Violent political rhetoric is perfectly capable of inciting sane people of violent temper and narrow understanding to violence. Witness Al Sharpton’s barely oblique call for an arson attack on a building he said was owned by Jews. That had consequences. And historically, many assassinations have been carried out by conspirators working to a political plan.

This is a different situation. While it remains possible that some connection may emerge, the evidence so far does not support the conclusion that Loughner was prompted to his act by political rhetoric.

Anybody who answers an algebra question on an exam with a screed on mind control is probably unable to understand political rhetoric.