I agree that this new law actually makes sense as I've often wondered why you can see a group of "more than likely" illegal immigrants at any lawn supply store or Home Depot without immigration at least making an effort to check on their status, and it isn't like police don't already ask EVERYONE for their state issued identification as it is, but I have a challenge to some of the other people commenting on this piece: can you go even one day without turning everything you say into the same "you guys are leftist / liberal media" crap?

Your point, I'm assuming, is to voice your opinion and possibly influence others who might not be fully informed on the matter at hand. A hint at accomplishing your goal might be to try and say something factual, relevant, and credibly sourced without babbling on about "leftists" and Nancy Pelosi like a drunken Sarah Palin at a moose hunting expo. Kind of turns people off immediately and makes you sound like you are nervously holding a shotgun and wearing a tin foil hat. ;-)

Tommyboy67,
I would agree to a point that I was a bit childishly sarcastic, but you did start the tone of things with "liber-tard morons" and in suggesting that anyone who disagreed with you should " take a flying leap into the body of water."

Second, whether I agree with your views or not, my comment referred very little to the actual Tea Party movement itself, but rather to much of the misinformation being put out there that leads to the extremist actions of the few. When people base their often times passionate political point of view on misinformation and / or on ONE side of the story - the line between 'concerned citizen' and 'a nutjob on a mission' can easily become a dangerously slippery slope. Both sides are guilty of it, but I'm not sure I've seen all that many democrats on a rampage, or even holding stupid signs, so you be the judge on who is worse.

You say we "liberal democrats" are missing facts and logic, and, for lack of better words - that's total crap. I actually agree with some of what Republicans and Tea Partiers(?) do, but disagree with the way Republicans generally go about things when they aren't in power. Or Period. They make it a policy to spread misinformation, half truths, and often times downright lies in order to discredit the other side. And there are plenty of leaked internal memos out there that support that statement. Again, the same kind of tactics that lead to justifying the actions of extremists.

As far as facts, the Tea Party movement began two days before Barack Obama was sworn into office, supposedly as a way to harness the public anger over the financial bailouts, and was intially fueled by the excessive promotions of blatantly one-sided Republican mouthpieces like Fox News and Rush Limbaugh. With a genesis like that, I wouldn't stake much claim on everything the movement stands for being entirely "factual."

My personal belief is that the initial protesting against government bailouts of the financial firms was a lot like running to shut the barn door when the horse was already gone. Bush signed TARP into law, yet it was primarily Democrats who were targeted by protests against it. Weird. And how widely promoted within Tea Party circles was it that the government loss from the bailouts is actually less than 20% of what was anticipated? That taxpayers actually made windfall profits from most financial bailouts? That the Obama administration has made great reductions to wasteful earmarks?

I fully agree with reducing government waste and for more public oversight into the way taxpayers dollars are spent, but hardly think just protesting anything democrats do is the way to go about it.

Dear tommyboy67,

Thanks for clearing up what we don't know about your point of view that resulted from your in depth early encounter with Obama. If I only I had stood next to George W. Bush at a baseball game in 1984 -- when he was managing the baseball team, maybe I would have had better insight into his political doctrine 17 years later. That's completely relevant into "who and what he says he is." I'd even go so far as to say you are a bonafide expert on how Obama's mind works! ;-)

I'm from Oklahoma City and was directly touched by the bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah building. I can still see the shell of that building standing there while grieving family members desperately waited for any news on living survivors being pulled from the rubble. The point I believe the author of this article is trying to make is that much of the rhetoric and often times blatant misinformation regarding our President's policies that we unfortunately hear coming out of the Republican / Tea Party perspective (socialist this, comrade that) can easily wrecklessly fuel the next Timoty Mcveigh as they try and "save their country" through domestic terrorism and violence. How many death threats and instances of vandalism were directed towards Democrats after the recent health care vote? How many abortion clinics are bombed and doctors murdered by disillusioned people who felt "justified" in their actions?

I personally wish there was a way for the FCC to enforce rules over media outlets regarding fair reporting and at least having some shred of requirement for them to prove a credible source to the information they promote and / or provide retractions to false statements. There is an entire line of websites who do nothing but fact check Fox News (google for one, there's a lot), and they have plenty of material for daily updates. It's bad enough that Fox News channel masks itself as something other than an opinion station, but the misleading "factual" rhetoric they often fuel should be illegal as it leads to the exact fringe extremist movements this article is discussing.

"Ill informed" is definitely a way to describe a lot of these people. My favorite are the ones who still run around saying that "Obama's taxes are making them go broke." Interestingly, we are still under Bush's tax plan until 2011. Or the ones who complain about Obama's immigration stance. Last time I checked, he hasn't changed anything from Bush's as of yet, and it is likely that McCain would have been more a moderate on it if he were in office. The list goes on and on. It's like, i'm fine with people voicing their opinions....but at least know what the hell you are complaining about, haha.