Okay, I thought they were all talking about the same article. Either way, it's still not long after the fact. 7 years isn't that long in politics. And even if it were, comments made long ago are still fair game IMHO. Some things are obviously silly to bring up but time shouldn't be a factor. Running the government is (should be) a fairly serious business.

Kids grow up, sometimes even into responsible adults.

Now, someone mentioned that particular comment possibly being satire of a comment made by Norquist, himself. Can anyone provide some elucidation on that point (bonus points for links to the original comment)?

So apparently satire is verboten when you go into politics. I guess that's because the average pundit is a lot like a primordial slug and can't process more than a sentence at a time.

And for you, Ted: http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/qu...orq182534.html

Sure, but it's fair to let the voters decide for themselves whether a comment is important or not. No additional information on a candidate should be off-limits.

At the same time, the fact that they have to attack a candidate with an out of context quote that's almost a decade old is rather telling about how confident they are in the strength of their candidate and their policies.

Either way it was a inherently stupid attack on the candidate considering gamer demographics in the US.

That said though I do have to wonder if Colleen Lachowicz's plan to hunt down and murder a fellow human being passes the Democrat Civility Test (tm)? :P

Read the Norquest quote and then the quote linked by Wolf. It's satire. Regrow your senses of humour.

No, of course not (if she was a Republican). We get yelled at for "targeting" an election since it's indicative of violence.

I suggest you take your own advice!