Now Michelle Malkin knows what it's like to be blamed at large for something there's no evidence that you're involved in save a tenuous potential ideological connection.

The stinging realization of this irony should last all of a few seconds, until a TV celebrity endorses a falafel mix and Hollywood's enabling of the terrorist menace once again becomes the most important issue the MSM isn't covering. We may never know why the Arkansas Democratic Party chairman was killed (although I'm wiling to bet we will), but the idea of any prominent conservative blogger taking offense at blame being assigned to them for a culture of violence against liberals when they've all careers out of the same types of accusations for the past several years is simply laughable.

This, perhaps, is my favorite part:

I am also guilty of last month’s shooting at a Knoxville church, for which a nutroots blogger similarly says I need to be held “accountable.”

For what? For blogging, writing columns, and authoring books with which they disagree.

Such stalwart, principled champions of free speech they are.

To quote a great man (or at least the actor playing a shitty version of him in an awful movie), freedom of speech...which you abuse. (Christ, I feel dirty even saying that.) The problem isn't that you say things with which liberals disagree. The problem is that you say things which quite openly advocate grossly racist and dehumanizing attitudes, that you're obsessed with declaring the most innocent of statements and actions traitorous and threatening, and that you're generally crazy stalkerish asshole. And whenever you're held responsible for the insane, dangerous things that you say, you hide behind freedom of speech as if it entails freedom from responsibility for what you say.

None of us want to silence Michelle Malkin or any of her fellow nutjobs, if only out of respect for their Constitutional rights. But none of us would mind if they shut the hell up and thought about what the words "objectively pro terror" actually meant.