St Thomas o' Beckett, Archbishop of Canterbury had been reluctant to take the job ... "On being offered the post, Beckett wrote to Henry that "our friendship will turn to hate". ... (years later) ... Henry(II) was furious when he found out what Beckett had done (invoked the Pope's authority over his). He is said to have shouted out "will no-one rid me of this troublesome priest ?" Four knights heard what Henry had said and took it to mean that the king wanted Beckett dead."

<link>)

My mother, who ran a small all day private school, stopped home schooling me when I was eight years old. By then she had already imparted to me some sense of the importance of "just words," and the dangers of intemperate speech. By then, never having yet set foot in America, I also already knew who John Wilkes Booth was.

It was only much later that I came to understand the two distinct notions that motivate the unique crime of political assassination. The criminal mind want's to have some hold, material or psychological, over the person for whom they have done a favor, maybe unasked but no one would believe that. The demented, either want the same, or to force their delusional megalomania upon the awareness of the whole world, which has ignored them ever since they gave up the infantile delusion of being the center of the universe.

These are the kinds of people who constitute a nightmare for everyone in public life, from Olympic figure skaters to mom and pop store operators who receive offers to put the competition down the block out of business. We don't need the Columbine or Virginia Tech massacre to remind us of the thousands if not hundreds of thousands of tortured souls out there who have long since lost all sense of right or wrong in their confused minds.

Ideas are funny things and of course some acts can be committed even in the course of denying or apologizing for them. Isaiah Washington's public denial of calling his co-star a faggot did more to get him fired than the purported original act. Every trial lawyer knows the strategy. "I'm sorry that slipped out, your honor, and I ask the jury to ignore my last remark." The Clintons have played that card over and over again.

The dread thought is that the damage may be already done. Indeed the power of suggestion wielded by leaders in high places is such that it can even originate notions in the minds of the impressionable that they would never have entertained otherwise. If there is one talent a presidential candidate needs to have, it is the ability to appreciate the power of suggestion and a leader's ability to inspire and invoke the best, and the worst, that lies or lurks in the hearts of man. (Having a daddy or spouse as a former president seems to have somehow by-passed that qualification.)

Should Senator Obama be forced out of the race, there is only one condition that would absolutely prohibit me from voting for Senator Clinton in the upcoming election, even had I the intention of voting for her in the first place. That condition would be if Senator Obama had been assassinated. Surely the Senator should have known that!

they are called non-thinkers.

Plenty of good ol' boys are arguing the pros and cons of an Obama assassination while I type this and have been doing so from the moment he announced his nomination run, and only idiots think that this has not been happening in every state in this nation, not just in the deep south. That's the nature of humanity.

But, you clueless lunatic, there is a huge step between talking about it with your beer drinking buddies and actually, coldly, logically planning out the act and then committing yourself to its accomplishment. This is one reason why political assassinations in this nation so rarely occur. It's pretty much a suicide mission, and in today's forensic science era it's also pretty much a certainty that the act or the attempt can also be traced back to the other participates of the planning stages, if any.

If Obama is shot at or hit or actually assassinated it won't have anything to do with what Hillary did or did not say during her run for the candidacy.

You DO know that all she was doing, by the way, was pointing out that other famous candidates also remained in the race into June, and that she hoped to gain political cachet by associating her name with theirs, a typical and time honored political ploy. ONLY knee jerk Obamacrat hysterics could associate her assertion that she's in the race until she is forced out or herself killed with some insane plea for someone to kill Obama for her.

Pssssst, stupid, you do not gain political office by advocating the assassination of your opponent. Even if you and the press and your fellow Obamacrats are too stupid to know that, Hillary at least knows it, and that is the BIG REASON, stupid, that she was NOT advocating the political assassination of Obama.

Stupid, knee-jerk, hysterical Obamacrat.

Listen you abusive idiot. Any presidential candidate who subtly or otherwise adds fuel to the fire already raging in some madman's brain is being colossally irresponsible. She didn't advocate the assassination, she simply introduced it to the media, knowing that they would do the rest.

After my wife died of cancer I could not bring myself to even chat with any of her friends who had harmlessly flirted with me over the years during our marriage. My problem with voting for Hillary after a tragedy like that, was that she flirted with the idea, not that she advocated it. She must know that in all fairness all of the previous candidates would have to be reintroduced to the electorate in such a case. In such a case I would have to balk at fulfilling the intent of even a lone madman dead or alive by voting for her.

You do know that Time or News Week is running RFK's cover on their front page even as I type this. Are they ALSO advocating Obama's assassination?

If Obama briefly mentions RFK or MLK, Jr. during this race is he also suggesting his own assassination or perhaps suggesting that some gunman take out Hillary or McCain?

Okay, okay we DO get it. As a typical Obamacrat posting on these Fray boards you have revealed your inability to reason your way out of a wet paper bag. We are, however, supposed to listen to you and to your fellow Obamacrat hysterics as to why Obama would make a fine president?

Riiiiiiggggggghhhhhtttttt!

Go see a psychiatrist, stat!

You are a jerk.

You're off again on your vitriolic name-calling of all Obama supporters.

What happened to that "heartfelt" apology you made to StevieN??

Oh yeah - not so heartfelt, eh?

You don't answer people (myself and entj4sure) who have asked you legitimate questions - to discuss and explain certain things you have said and claimed here.

No, instead you attack people who make their own personal points - and not for any other reason except that you can let loose your pre-set bile that labels all Obama supporters as reactionary, idiots who are morons and worse.

You are a jerk.

There is an ominous and obvious touch of hysteria in your postings. Are you trying to deflect the argument from your own imaginings. I think you are actually exposing your own irrationality. Yes, you may be exposing more of your own psychology than you think. This would explain your first post, pointing out that it wouldn't be Hillary's remarks that would initiate dangerous thinking in the deranged. You know!

Yes, you are right, the powder keg is always there, always. Nothing that any columnist can write, nothing that other commentators bring up can provide the spark like a chance remark from the one who would benefit from it directly. That's all the confirmation that an irrational mind would need to set him or her off on a dangerous course of action. That's all I had in mind.

Now, just compare the tone of your writing to the measured tone in mine. Everyone reading these exchanges are. I'm beginning to think that you may be one of those crazies who may be influenced by dangerous remarks. Calm down, sir/madam, think about it. You may be right about Hillary's intent, but Henry II was not trying to get his best friend murdered. He was simply venting his rage. He tried to show his contritition by suitable acts of penance.

He didn't have to do that, he was an absolute monarch. That was not my point, I was simply indicating that Hillary's own frustration and fatigue may have made her come up with the one statement that will turn the remaining super-delegates against her. If I had been her most ardent supporter I would still continue to support her even after this, UNLESS, that single idea she briefly flirted with did in fact transpire, and that sir/madam is how the super-delegates must be thinking right now.

So, yes, I'm beginning to think that you may be one of those crazies who may be influenced by dangerous remarks. Calm down, sir/madam, think about it. An act of violence against your idol's opponent can only rebound against the one the perpetrator is trying to help. Now that I have got an inkling of what I am dealing with here, I shall not indulge you any further.

Part of the problem is that her main argument had no merits, she was talking about primaires, mainly Cal. being held in mid June. That is no longer the case, primaries will be over in the first week of June. Also there were alot of other examples she could have used to make her point. Sadly this has left her comments up to alot of speculation and knowing what a smart women she is and past comments that she has made have people questioning them even more.

I don't know if she was saying she should stay in because something bad could happen or not, I would hope not and I would hate to see her leave the race with that hanging over head. But for people old enough to remember JFK, MLK, or RFK I am sure it made many people angry. I myself remember when Reagan was shot and how horrible it was to think someone would do that.

Gatewood, I have seen other posts you have made as well. You come across as a little person who likes to type things just to stir up trouble and view the outrage you inspire. That is really sad, if you really wanted to debate issues this is a great place. I have had many exchanges with people who have different views then me and it is nice to "argue" our differences with real thought behind the opinions. On other forums I visit we would call you a "forum troll". So I will not respond to you again because you add no value to the discussions. So my advice to everyone else is DON"T FEED THE TROLL