He has done precisely what was predicted. He now blames the Democrats for the shootings in Arizona and says that the accused shooter, Jared Lee Loughner, has the support of the Democratic Party.
Bill O'Reilly blew a gasket when it was pointed out that his violent rhetoric could be a motivation for a madman targeting Democrats. Two statements by O'Reilly apply perfectly to himself, though he is blind to that and his statements are aimed at those critical of him.
O'Reilly says, "The merchants of hate who are peddling this stuff should be accountable." You're right, Bill, you should be accountable. And, we're doing it.
O'Reilly refers to the people criticizing him with, "That was the exploitation of the murders for political means." We can turn around that same phrase to describe O'Reilly: The exploitation of political means for the murders.
All of the right-wing pundits and commentators are saying, as predicted, that the right-wing guns and violence imagery aimed at Democrats did not in any way affect Loughner's motivation. They say there is not evidence of that.
Actually, there is evidence that at least Sarah Palin and Glenn Beck have tacitly admitted their responsibility for inciting violence. Almost immediately following the shootings, Palin removed from her website the map with the gun sight crosshairs targeting Giffords. And Beck removed the picture of him stalking around with a pistol in his hand.
The fact that they removed these images right after a shooting in which they are clearly inciting violence by gunfire is just coincidence, I guess.
The proper question to the right-wing commentators saying there's no evidence Loughner was influenced by right-wing guns and violence images and rhetoric is: Where is the evidence that he wasn't?
We'll be waiting for them to answer that question for a long, long time.