Both have received poisonous (literally) mail. Via Villainous Company and JustOneMinute, this press release from the Department of Justice about Barbara Joan March, the 60-year-old woman who sent poisoned baked goods to 14 officials, including all nine Supreme Court justices, the chiefs of staff of the Army, Navy, and Air Force; and the director and deputy director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation. March pled guilty and is serving a 15 year prison term for mailing injurous articles.
The story came to light when Sandra O'Connor discussed the case during a bar association conference.
Naturally, the moonbatosphere went crazy comparing what March did with a in-bad-taste joke by Ann Coulter:
"We need somebody to put rat poisoning in Justice Stevens' creme brulee. That's just a joke, for you in the media."
There were even a few, like Orcinus who tried to pin this on conservative rhetoric:
Have you noticed how conservatives -- you know, the folks big on "personal responsibility" -- squeal like little mandrakes whenever someone calls attention to their culpability in engaging in irresponsible rhetoric that specifically encourages violent and criminal behavior? Especially when the chickens come home to roost?
Yes, indeed. This has become part and parcel of the liberal talking points memo. When a crazy guy sends Keith Olbermann anthrax-laced letters, liberals immediately grabbed with both hands the fact that the sender also posted on freerepublic.com and said "Ann Coulter is a goddess." I tried to explain over at Liberal Avenger that the reason the guy sent anthrax was that he's a nut, not that he posts on freerepublic, but no one there wanted to hear that (not that that is any surprise).
Unfortunately for the liberal nuts, Ms. March isn't a poster at freerepublic, at least, that we know of. So, I guess the moonbats will have to stop lecturing conservatives about the responsibilities of free speech for at least the next 10 seconds.
No, it turns out that Ms. March was just out for revenge against a variety of persons. According to the sentencing memorandum,
Third, the defendant's conduct does not appear to have been motivated by any personal, political or professional animosity toward the intended recipients of the letters. Rather, interviews with the purported senders of the letters, as well as factors cited in the presentence investigation report, suggest that the defendant's conduct likely was motivated by a misplaced anger toward the purported senders of the letters, former friends and colleagues who in the defendant's mind somehow had abandoned or wronged her. See Presentence Investigation Report at ¶88. The fact that the defendant chose to mail the letters to high-level public officials in a misguided attempt to cause more harm to the purported senders has increased her sentence by approximately five years.
I don't expect Orcinus or any of the moonbats to correct the impression they left about this case, anymore than I expect them to stop assuming that anyone who comments on rightwing blogs is violent and dangerous. But it would be a nice surprise.
|