Merrian Webster defines terrorism as “the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion” and on a technical level, threatening and then committing violence upon someone to scare them becomes terrorism as soon as it becomes systematic.

Threatening and assaulting reporters who come to your rallies may not be systematic, but combined with threats at other rallies, and with the scary hate-and-threat filled e-mail and voice mail places like ACORN are getting, I’d say we’re coming up to that off-ramp. What’s missing is a lot more violence, and I hope it stays that way.

All that said, I’ll concede a certain amount of hyperbole on my part (which I did my best to limit by saying “lesser form of terrorism”), but maintain my central point. There is a said, scary irony in a group of people insinuating a presidential candidate is a terrorist when they’re simultaneously threatening reporters who disagree with them.

Thanks a lot for the feedback. It’s appreciated. I’m considering a post about my, and other people’s, use of the word “terrorism” because of it.