I appreciate that, really. I don't fault Norways Progress Party for Breiviks actions, and since he's a former member of it they can't deny all association with him or shared political views. But of course, they haven't, and there's the rub, isn't it?

When Foxs commentators and Bolton via Fox injected themselves into this horror to angrily deny the undeniable fact that Breivik shares and was motivated by much of their ideology, it immediately raised the question of whom those people are trying to convince, and far more importantly, WHY. Fox and Co. lumped themselves with Breivik, no one did it for them, despite Fox claims to the contrary. Foxs angry and manifestly false claims to share none of Breiviks politics associated the network with him; anyone adopting Foxs ludicrously indignant claims associates themselves with the network just as inevitably. Not my fault, not my responsibility; anyone who (frequently) denies affection for or agreement with Fox is free to cease the latter any time, with my blessing. I have no problem with someone saying, "I'm far right, but not a violent far right extremist like Breivik". I have BIG problems with people who can't or won't say that instead saying, "I'm far right, but not a violent extremist like Breivik--so he's not far right and how dare you libel me that way?!" It implies that extremism is innocuously acceptable and saying otherwise wrong. That's a false proposition but, as we've just been appallingly shown, also a very dangerous one. If Goldwater Republicans don't like where far right extremism leads, the simple solution is not going there.