Not to mention that when you hear "Goths" you think Bauhaus and Robert Smith, that is, musicians, whereas you associate "Nazis" with Auschwitz and the Blitz, that is, mass murder. So if you think about a teenage murderer who is both a "Goth" and a neo-Nazi, it seems like you'd focus more on the Nazi aspect than the "Goth" aspect, unless you had a particular axe to grind...
But TV preachers, values-spouting talking heads, and their like can make lots and lots more money whining about Marilyn Manson and KMFDM, "Quake" and "Matrix" than they can attacking Nazis. Or racists in general, for that matter. The focus of all their blather is making money, selling advertisements and gathering votes, not at all trying to actually understand what was the cause of this mess. I'll bet if you find the guys spouting off against "Goths," etc., get them good and drunk and confidentially ask them "What's the real cause?" they'd answer, "Those two were plain nuts, beyond that it's incomprehensible."
For an extreme example, that idiot Falwell's going around saying, with no rational evidence whatsoever, that Klebold and Harris were gay, and that's why they did it! Because his imbecile followers really get worked up emotionally about homosexuality, particularly in the sense that it somehow negatively affects straight society, so they get their checkbooks out.
Suppose Falwell were to take on neo-Nazis, he won't get so good (lucrative) a response, because there are so few out-and-out Nazis on the street that his viewers don't feel like Naziism is likely to affect them personally. While most nervous fundamentalists never see anybody wearing a swastika, every day they see their own kids playing shoot-em-up video games and listening/watching unfamiliar pop music (being performed by weird looking characters who, gasp, shudder, might be gay!). So if Falwell bloviates against pop music and video games, his listeners feel it is sufficiently relevant to their lives that they should contribute some money.
On the other hand, Falwell's problem with blaming racism would not be that there are too few racists in society to interest his listeners, but instead that racists of varying virulence probably make up a sizable fraction of his audience. (Here I'm not using the word "racist" in the universal sense that Carrol Cox uses it, meaning someone whose perceptions are affected by the ubiquitous racism permeating U.S. society, but instead in the sense where you might say, for example, "David Duke is a racist, whereas Ralph Nader is not.") Same problem with blaming the U.S. gun mania. Like pro wrestling fans, Falwell listeners love hearing him pound on this bunch and that, but only on groups to which none of them belong. I'd bet Falwell's never in his career delivered a radio or TV sermon on Matthew 7:1-5.
If Falwell were ever to point an accusing finger at the pews, in the style of Jonathan Edwards, and mount a concerted public attack against racism in general, I'll bet he'd instantly lose permanently about a third of his audience.
Yours WDK - WKiernan at concentric.net