re: #50 Sharmuta

So, are you suggesting that there is no valid basis for suggesting that the modern American national government has overstepped its Constitutional boundries? And that therefore anyone who believes that the national government does a lot of things that have no Constitutional basis - those people are dangerous potential terrorists? To me that seems to be a silly leap of logic, as well as a overwrought conclusion. The fact that there are indeed fringe groups who are dangerous does not mean that there are no legitimate points of view that take a dim view of legislative and judicial overreach. That is my problem with this report - not that it exists, and not that it focuses on right-wing extremists. Rather, it is the slipshod, sloppy way it goes about discussing people, using an extremely broad and murky set of definitions of what consitutes one of these right wing extremists.