I'll let you go back and read how and why the Supreme Court case is even in our conversation…because now you are arguing the point they are going to argue before the supreme court like I wrote the Chicago law and am fighting for it. You don't even remember under what context you brought it up to begin with.

And I'll say this again because you are too stupid it seems to absorb it. When someone commits murder THEY ARE RESPONSIBLE…OK? If someone on TV has been stoking the fire and encouraging it….the murder is still responsible for his murder…OK? We were past that many posts ago. No matter what I say, you turn the argument into “who's responsible”. No one is arguing against personal responsibility, it's just you don't want to consider any other factors…you don't want to admit that people like Beck and Limbaugh have any effect on anyone. Fine.

The world may be black and white but that's because your old and apparently a little senile. Have fun wallowing in your fear of the future…and telling everyone they're commies. I'm about out of patience with you.

Why don’t you explain it to me? I don’t understand the economy of cars? I understand that we are paying to keep a company afloat that is producing cars that nobody wants, unless “government” i.e. the taxpayers are going to subsidize part of it. What did I just tell you moron, there was a false demand created by a government subsidy an now all the excess cars are just sitting on lots with nobody wanting to buy them. GM is broke, they are only running on the money of the taxpayer, we are subsidizing their manufacturing and the inflated wages and benefits of union employees. Furthermore, the unconstitutionality of the gun law registration requirements is something Obama and the democrats support, they have for years. How are you chipping away at my assertions when the Supreme Court is taking up the case? Obama repeatedly stated that he approved of the D.C. gun ban when it was in force; AG Eric Holder signed an amicus brief in the Heller case that supported the dc handgun band and has publicly asserted that he doesn’t think the 2nd amendment protects your right to own a handgun
“You like running back to the idea of individual responsibility. Everything has to be black and white with you doesn't it….you just can't let things stray into the complexity of reality.”
Of course I believe in personal responsibility, that is what the civil society is based on. How can any idiot argue against personal responsibility? You don’t know the first thing about reality, most things are black and white pal, this nuanced, complexity of reality argument is just a stalking horse for lazy thinking dolts like you who want more government intervention in the lives of productive citizens who can take care of themselves. You really resent that don’t you?

Government is the only entity capable of creating stimulus in a weak economy. Economy is about dynamics, and injections of money (even if it's borrowed) keep the economy moving so we don't go off the deep end and can adjust things so we have a future.

Since a majority of pollution (from cars) is caused by a small minority of older vehicles (ones that are working you see…not on your front lawn on bricks) so it had a two fold purpose…remove the older cars while the creating a boost is sales to reduce inventory. Your problem is you haven't given these things much thought and you rely on FPM (and I can guess who else) to instruct how you think/feel about things.

“That's okay, we're all stakeholders in GM now, but not really, you see the first piece of property Obama seized was two car companies along with a bank.”

Riiiiight…except the government didn't “takeover” the companies. I don't think you really understand the economy of cars and the extensive web of contractors and vendors that support our bloated and abnormal industry. You can disagree that we should have saved the car companies…but you aren't doing that…you're trying to mischaracterize the program(s) for the purpose of false outrage or something.

Look at you dumbass…they have managed to teach you that government regulation caused the economic crisis…holy smokes…welcome to bizarro world…where no one can learn their lessons because they just choose to believe something else.

You brought up the McDonald case as Obama seizing guns or at least something scary coming in the future. You can't follow these thoughts from one post to the next can you. It's all a weird blur. I can chip away at your stupid assertions and you will just plow forward.

“oh you're still trying to blame Fox news for the Murder of Dr. Tiller, which means you still believe the whacked out notion that people are just helpless fools unable to make choices for themselves and that behavior is the consequence of environmental factors outside their control.”

I wasn't trying to blame them…as we established it would be difficult to prove in any legal sense..remember…that was in the last post. But Tiller was an example towards the other point about how hate and fear in the “media” suchs as Fox, FPM, Newsmax and others. You like running back to the idea of individual responsibility. Everything has to be black and white with you doesn't it….you just can't let things stray into the complexity of reality.

No it doesn't. Good thing that wasn't the point I was making. The murder of this man is an example of Oreily, Beck and others not directly telling people to kill murder someone, but giving a small block of crazies all the ideas they need. If you believe in what they say…it is inevitable.

“What about John Malvo, Muslim extremist or the guy that killed the guard at the Holocaust museum, an avowed socialist, as was Lee Harvey Oswald. Don't forget the Unibomber was a rabid Al Gore fan. Can you prove “rhetoric” causes behavior?”

No, I don't think even when it's obvious it could be “proven” in a legal sense…but lets take Tiller for instance. His murderer wouldn't have known of his existence, much less have been told that Tiller was a monster who would murder any baby for $5000 and asking questions like “when will we put to stop to this?” There is ample video I'm sure if you google it.

No health care legislation has been passed. Your taxes have not gone up. No property has been seized. No guns have been taken away. So everything you listed as possibly driving someone over the edge (besides Beck telling them the sky is falling and communists are polluting our precious bodily fluids)…all your examples are bullshit.

All you have are vague fears about the future. If you don't understand what Cash for Clunkers was designed to do…I can't help you. Do you even understand the concept of stimulus. I swear most of you forgot that we almost went off a cliff a year ago.

“Oh, the Supreme Court will soon be taking up a case regarding whether or not the 2nd amendment will also apply to the states. As if it isn't already specifically listed in the Constitution as a right pertaining to all citizens, but since some leftist legislature is rightly scared of an armed citizenry it somehow now needs to be ruled on.”

Sigh. This is a challenge FOR the 2nd Amendment against a 27 year old law taxing handguns in the city of Chicago. For crying out loud…you don't even know what your own examples mean. You're too busy blaming your irrational fears on “lefty”.

“Climate of Fear”, can you idiots post one comment with out those tired, old Hackneyed lefty talking points.”

Um…ok…um…let's see…how about “Environment of Dread”…or “Atmosphere of Paranoia”…or maybe “Bizarro World of Violent Irrationality” it's not a talking point dumbass…it was a description.

“Bush only had 26 czars”…”Obama's got a lot more. That's not the point”

You're right…the point was you were saying they were unconstituitional or some such nonsense…I said it was an ordinary part of modern government….and all the recent Presidents had them. I await your non-sequitor response.

Furthermore, there are more taxes coming, The Joint committee on taxation just found out that under the Obamacare bill drug companies, medical device manufacturers and insurers would pay $121 billion over 10 years as a result of taxes in the Senate Finance Committee version. They won't pass those costs onto the consumer though will they, no. That's just for starters, we're going to have to feed the unions at GM some more since demand has dropped for autos after the cash for clunkers rip off. Who subsidized that by the way? Those are just a few examples, but it goes on. Oh, the Supreme Court will soon be taking up a case regarding whether or not the 2nd amendment will also apply to the states. As if it isn't already specifically listed in the Constitution as a right pertaining to all citizens, but since some leftist legislature is rightly scared of an armed citizenry it somehow now needs to be ruled on. “Climate of Fear”, can you idiots post one comment with out those tired, old Hackneyed lefty talking points. Bush only had 26 czars, to get the Number 47 you have to count the number of people who held the same position. Nice try. Obama's got a lot more. That's not the point, which one of these departments are specifically listed in the Constitution i.e. Green jobs czar or some other such ridiculous nonsense.

You get a little more ugly everyday…

Um…the point is not to pre-blame someone, it's to warn that you should stop lying to people and trying to scare them or one of them might make the CHOICE to do something stupid.

“So righty who flips out and commits acts of violence, which hasn't happened yet, will be blamed on FPM and Fox news.”

Well…look what happened to that abortion doctor..Tiller I think was his name. You don't think you can rightly draw a correlation there? Believing in individual responsibility has nothing to do with it. Of course the murderer or bomber is responsible…but if you don't understand why the extreme rhetoric isn't a good thing then I can't help you. If you think I am pre-blaming then you are pre-excusing or being purposefully naive.

“Neither one of these entities has the power of tax and regulate our business out of existence, nor seize our property or our firearms, or appoint czars to unconstitutional positions without being confirmed by the Senate.”

What? What new taxes? What property has been seized? What firearms have been confiscated…the gun laws are completely loose. In Arizona, they passed a law that let's people walk around like cowboys if they want. “Czars” is just a nickname for agency heads. Bush had 47 of them….there is nothing strange or unusual about these positions.

“Don't you think these factors would collude to force any decent American over the edge? Probably not in your world I guess.”

Well these lies or exaggerations are a part of it. Climate of fear…

If you have some insight regarding an organized, or unorganized threat to the President of the United State, you need to be talking to the USA, not blabbering. Of course that would require you to show that some law is being violated. Fact is, the president, any president, ought to take office with guy following him around hollering “DEAD MAN WALKING” over and over again. Fact is, if someone “really” wants to kill the president, and doesn't care about getting caught, the president is dead., The only issue then becomes do we spend the taxpayer money on a pine box, or do we do a “bandito funeral” with a shelter half and hole? The president, any president, as a man, is nothing special. That doesn't make killin him okay. It is murder like any other, we will get another one. I recall the day after JFK was killed, we were off from school. A guy named Bubba and I went deer hunting and I got a nice little Tejas deer, not my first, but it was good. Someone on the street in town, said “you know, the president was killed yesterday.” Bubba said, “yeah, I know, and I know we didn't kill em'”

Socialists, apparently, can only do good and nice things. Anything bad done by any socialist automatically kicks them out of the socialist club. So you can never use any bad socialist behavior to discredit socialists. Only good and perfect beautiful socialist behavior. The definition of socialists excludes all bad behavior and only includes utopian behavior. I understand now. What I understand is that it's a loaded definition, and a propagandandistic one, designed only to help socialists advance their cause. What I don't understand is why you buy into it and are promulgating it. Are you a socialist?

Obama is probably in more danger from Muslims who have realized that he is an Apostate. Obama was raised to be Muslim, but turned away and joined a Christian church as an adult. He probably did that for political expediency– my personal belief is that, in religion, the man is an agnostic at most– but many of the Muslim leaders in the ME are on record as offering opinions that Obama is a “stealth” Muslim, fooling the infidels. And, no, that isn't a personal opinion, Kadaffi is on record saying exactly that, which is where the rumors that Obama was Muslim originated.

However, the fact is that in Islam, Apostacy carries a death sentence. When the fanatics begin to discover that he is NOT a “stealth Muslim” and is in fact an Apostate, he is in deep shit.

THEY are more of a danger to him than any conservative I know!

or Von Mises in his Human Action (p. 171) said:

There are two patterns for the realization of socialism. The first pattern (we may call it the Lenin or Russian pattern) . . .
. the second pattern (we may call it the Hindenburg or German Pattern) nominally and seemingly preserves private ownership of the means of production and keeps the appearance of ordinary markets, prices, wages, and interest rates. There are, however, no longer entrepreneurs, but only shop managers … bound to obey
unconditionally the orders issued by government. This is precisely how Hitler governed when he achieved dictatorial power. Right wing? You mentioned earlier about the teaching of Marx and Engels, who said this: “True, it is a fixed idea with the French that the Rhine is their
property, but to this arrogant demand the only reply worthy of the German nation is Arndt's: “Give back Alsace and Lorraine”.
For I am of the opinion, perhaps in contrast to many whose standpoint I share in other respects, that the reconquest of the German-speaking left bank of the Rhine is a matter of national honour, and that the Germanisation of a disloyal Holland and of Belgium is a political necessity for us. Shall we let the German
nationality be completely suppressed in these countries, while the Slavs are rising ever more powerfully in the East?”
Hitler, or Engels? Who does it sound like? How about this next one, this has to be Hitler, right?
“This is our calling, that we shall become the templars of this Grail, gird the sword round our loins for its sake and stake our
lives joyfully in the last, holy war which will be followed by the thousand-year reign of freedom.” Nope, both from Engels,

sounds like crazy “right-wing nationalism” doesn't it? You're the one in over your head boy.

You are ascribing traditional, constitutional, American values to historical
definitions of right and left wing. That's not a very scholarly way of
going about it, and may (partly) explain your confusion. If you are basing
your view of left and right on the idea of strong state power, than you
consider the French monarchy as “left-wing” because it controlled the land
and industry. Given that the term “right” and “left” derive from the Estates
General, this concept is beyond absurd. Better a windbag than a douchebag.

Even Goldberg does not try to deny what historians have held for the last 70
years — that fascism and Nazism have right-wing roots. He just lamely tries
to link them to contemporary “liberals.” For example, Goldberg says: To
sort of start the story, the reason why we see fascism as a thing of the
right is because fascism was originally a form of right-wing
socialism….Originally being a fascist meant you were a right-wing
socialist, and the problem is that we've incorporated these European
understandings of things and then just dropped the socialist.”

More evidence of you being in over your head on this argument is that you
don't realize that the difference b/t national and international socialism,
when anti-communism (communism/Trotskyism = international socialism) was a
key pillar in the Nazi and fascist platforms. Hitler explains:
–”In the years 1913 and 1914 I expressed my opinion for the first time in
various circles, some of which are now members of the National Socialist
Movement, that the problem of how the future of the German nation can be
secured is the problem of how Marxism can be exterminated.”
–”In this way the struggle against the present State was placed on a higher
plane than that of petty revenge and small conspiracies. It was elevated to
the level of a spiritual struggle on behalf of a WELTANSCHAUUNG, for the
destruction of Marxism in all its shapes and forms.”
–”In view of the complete subordination of the present State to Marxism,
the National Socialist Movement feels all the more bound not only to prepare
the way for the triumph of its idea by appealing to the reason and
understanding of the public but also to take upon itself the responsibility
of organizing its own defence against the terror of the International, which
is intoxicated with its own victory.”
–”Hence it is that at the present time the Jew is the great agitator for
the complete destruction of Germany. Whenever we read of attacks against
Germany taking place in any part of the world the Jew is always the
instigator. In peace-time, as well as during the War, the Jewish-Marxist
stock-exchange Press systematically stirred up hatred against Germany, until
one State after another abandoned its neutrality and placed itself at the
service of the world coalition, even against the real interests of its own
people.”

Communists and leftist political dissidents were exterminated before the
mass-murder of Jews even began.

But I will leave you to your echo-chamber thinking — everything horrible,
evil and vile over the course of human history is from the “left” and every
thing good, proper and decent is from the “right.” It's easier that way.

The psycho Left is still trying to blame the JFK assasination on the Right despite all evidence to the contrary. It's stuck like a bone in their throat and all based on a neurotic mindset that reflexively projects all evil – real or imagined – onto the Right.