You know how 9/11 made everyone more frightened of terrorism despite the fact that the actual risk from dying of terrorism didn't rise all that much and remained pretty much negligible compared to lots of other more common and probable risks? That happens because it was an outrageous event, and the outrageous draws undue and often disproportionate attention to itself, especially when someone can use it to fuel their biases, and baby, if there's a political angle, you better bet that the outrageous will be blown entirely out of proportion and used for confirmation bias like nothing you've ever seen.

So I'll put it forward again, that you're going to need something more solid than citing a handful of the outrageous (including one from salon, one from mediaite, and one from motherjones) and start providing solid, meaningful, analytical, perspective before it will be worth its salt.