I believe it said that the culprit was making the call himself (likely from his own cell phone) and then giving the "code" to the cashier. Whether or not he was talking to anyone at all is not clear, he might have been calling some unanswered number and just talking into air to make the con look legit.

That isn't really surprising. Few politicians have been as good at getting attention from the media as her. While ron paul dominates youtube, sarah palin seems to dominate every form of broadcast. I wouldn't be surprised to see her (or Tina Fey's impersonation of her) on SNL again at least once this coming season.

Excepting that whole "innocent until proven guilty" bit, of course. But you don't like that statement so you can ignore it, right?

Impeachment is supposed to include an actual trial with actual presentations of actual fact, not a show trial heard by an angry mob.

The rest of the world - including those who have actually experienced (or at least read meaningful documents on) socialism and/or communism - acknowledges the validity of the two-dimensional political spectrum. Your insistence on a one-dimensional continuum of "good" and "evil" is as logical as claiming the world to be flat.

Which leaves the question then of why you bother reading (parts of) my comments and "replying" to them.

When you show complete disregard for the law in the name of politics you should not pretend that you are somehow capable of preventing such an outcome. If you go back and actually read the comments you'll see I never accused you of directly calling for assassination but rather pointed out that once you remove all protections of the law that are intended to protect everyone you should be aware of the likely outcome.

If someone called for illegally deporting the Koch Brothers, Rand Paul, or any other Tea Party heroes you would be leveling the same concern.

They would be if they were only assertions based on nothing. Being as they are observations based on words that you and I have actually written, no. You have shown repeatedly:

• That you literally don't know the first thing about Communism
  • and
• That you don't want to acquire that very basic knowledge even though it is freely available and not an even remotely difficult read

So in this case it is not insulting. Similarly if the Koch Brothers were to write a "Tea Party Manifesto" that described why they formed the Tea Party and what their aspirations were for it, I would read it before trying to tell people what it is about.

So then are you saying that between citizen A and citizen B, the opinion of A is more valuable because it has more money behind it? That has been a key mantra of the GOP (for several decades at least) and its tea party (since its inception).

There is no shortage of ego in the stance you are taking in regards to my posts. If you don't want to read what I write, then don't. With the arrogance you are showing currently towards them you don't seem to be enjoying them.

Even your punctuation is condescending.

Oh, maybe in the abstract. Dare you involve actual people, and everything goes pear-shaped. This is why the genius of the U.S. Constitution is to assert outright that people are evil, and set up checks and balances to minimize the effects. Which #OccupyResoluteDesk is systematically ignoring, while Congress and the Courts, as a whole, are abetting.
Your assertion of the orthogonality of socialism and fascism is akin to saying that your C++ source code is crash-free--of course it is: until you compile it, execute it, and blame the ensuing stack trace on conservatives.

It is certainly true that I have long since discarded the idea of taking you seriously. That happened sometime last year, I think, around the time you tried to accuse me of calling for assassination.

Your assertions that (a) you hold knowledge, (b) I lack such, and (c) I'm not even trying to learn, are really kind of insulting, don't you think?

Fart too white and nerdy.

Ran across a phrase via Instapundit that seems to capture the Left very 'clearly': nostalgie de la boue .
Putting it theologically, so much of the Left is an appeal to the flesh.

Well, we've seen how the net education and political involvement of a country can be reduced.
Is that a one-way chemical reaction, though?

I don't know--depends upon the cash flow for the channel.