Image 01 Image 03 Commenter Calls for Lynching Of Koch Brothers Commenter Calls for Lynching Of Koch Brothers

The comments directed at the Koch brothers at left-wing blogs have been among the most vile I have seen anywhere on any topic.

But this one by frequent commenter Marc22309, who has published over 1800 “letters” (what calls comments) certainly is among the most vile:

It’s interesting how not a single other commenter at criticised the use of lynching language, and has left the comment standing. So much for’s enlightened liberal readership.

For the record, no, I don’t “blame” Think Progress and Lee Fang.

Related Posts:
Koch Derangement Syndrome Jumped The Shark Rather Quickly
Who Could Have Imagined Koch Prank Call Was Identity Theft?
Think Progress’s War Against The Koch Brothers

Follow me on Twitter, Facebook, and YouTube
Visit the Legal Insurrection Shop on CafePress!
Bookmark and Share


Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.


As posted by one of your commenters earlier this week, "Koch" is easier for the Lefties to spell than "Halliburton".

I love that comment. Pure Genius.

reminds a person of another time in history where people with the same attitude believed that lynching a person was the answer to their sociial problems.

Seems like marcAlexandriaVA, is as intelligent as a "Rock". Take that back, the "Rock" wins.

"a human" then "Brothers"??

The Leftosphere is full of vile hateful people. I can only imagine how miserable they make the lives of those they live and work with in the real world.

I noticed Zandar the Stupid has taken another swipe at you for the Koch identity theft post. In today's post, the arrogant twerp re-links to his original post a week ago where he says your fitness to be a law professor should be investiagated. I'd love to see you drag his smartass into court. Even if the case went nowhere, it would be worth it to make him sweat.

I'm sick of these arrogant, whiny, hateful misfits.

The rabid conditioned reflex that groups like Thunk Progress can elicit from their followers when they ring the bell to announce the new conservative bogeyman du jour would make Ivan Pavlov salivate.

Jeez, even the NYT gave signs today of backing off:

"Cancer Research Before Activism, Billionaire Conservative Donor Says"

It doesn't matter. Once those bozos on the leftosphere get into a good hate, truth does not matter. Nor does it matter how long and storied the lefty credentials, of degree of deviation from the latest line equals thoughtcrime to that crowd.

Look at Ann Althouse, a law prof who voted for Obama, now reviled because she dares to ask questions.

@MaggotAtBroadAndWall – if you stop reading him you will cut his readership in half. Really, I don't worry about low-level nutroots bloggers, and neither should you.

If you thumb through the Leftie Manual, I believe there is a section explaining that it is okay to say nasty things about white people, including successful Jews. These comments A-OK. They are only offensive when they are aimed at history's only victims, black folks. Eric Holder recently clarified this point.


Unlike our supposedly brilliant president who makes this same mistake again and again, Professor Jacobson understands one of Reagan's great axioms: "Always fight up, never fight down."

Oh please, do grow up. You're going to make a big fuss out of one comment on some political website? In the same week that some audience member asked a Republican "who is going to shoot Obama" and the Republican didn't even respond?

Gag me. Maybe our political discourse would be more civil of both sides didn't constantly focus on what fringe idiots say about things.

Hypocrisy, while present across the political spectrum, is epidemic on the Left these days. Where was Nicholas in those crazy first weeks after the Tucson shootings, when everyone on the Left was screaming for civility and an end to words that incited violence, and sifting through the Internets for any example from the fringe they could find?

And if the Republican had responded in the incident he mentioned, he'd have been pilloried regardless of its content. Silence was a much more articulate response, since it left the attention on the question, not the answer.