BREAKING NEWS: ARIZONA CONGRESS WOMAN SHOT IN HEAD!

[Phatscotty]

Interesting way to explain a "right". It keeps us free and allows us to stop people infringing on our freedom and the safety of our families.

It sounds to me like you have a problem with the .001 percent who are fucked in the head or motivated by passion, greed, or the heat of the moment.

Yet, why do people who fear and oppose "big government" tend to blame everyone else but themselves for these things? Why do these "patriots" so quickly resort to threats and intimidation, and occasionally, violence, as a justification for their anti-government views? And how are these calls for insurrection less treasonous than the legitimate acts carried out by democratically elected executive and legislative body?

Just asking.

Why would I blame myself? Is this a real question?

Your are asserting your own words and opinions into things that I 100% disagree with. If you want to go over them, 1 by 1, nothing would make me happier.

on the other had, why do you yourself blame people who fear and oppose big gov't?

I do not believe any of that has anything to do with my statement your replied to. Just trying to murder libel the other side. I do not approve.

Murder libel? LOL
I do not care if you approve or not - I asked you three legitimate and directly relevant questions:
Why does the anti-big government/tea party/right reactionary "patriot" refuse to take responsibilities for their own actions?
Why do the above resort to threats, intimidation, and occasionally violence?
How is it not treasonous for these self-proclaimed patriots to call for insurrection against political institutions within our democratically-elected government?

can't answer number one without a specific example as to what you are talking about. what actions? the biggest sweep in the house since 1938 against FDR?
cant do number 2 without number 1...See how you jump from assumption to assumption, based on generalizations? I have no clue what actions you are talking about.
who is calling out for insurrection against political instituions? Joe stacks????

I am trying to follow you. please fill in the olympic size swimming pools with pertinent information.

[Orwell]

Interesting way to explain a "right". It keeps us free and allows us to stop people infringing on our freedom and the safety of our families.

It sounds to me like you have a problem with the .001 percent who are fucked in the head or motivated by passion, greed, or the heat of the moment.

Yet, why do people who fear and oppose "big government" tend to blame everyone else but themselves for these things? Why do these "patriots" so quickly resort to threats and intimidation, and occasionally, violence, as a justification for their anti-government views? And how are these calls for insurrection less treasonous than the legitimate acts carried out by democratically elected executive and legislative body?

Just asking.

Why would I blame myself? Is this a real question?

Your are asserting your own words and opinions into things that I 100% disagree with. If you want to go over them, 1 by 1, nothing would make me happier.

on the other had, why do you yourself blame people who fear and oppose big gov't?

I do not believe any of that has anything to do with my statement your replied to. Just trying to murder libel the other side. I do not approve.

Murder libel? LOL
I do not care if you approve or not - I asked you three legitimate and directly relevant questions:
Why does the anti-big government/tea party/right reactionary "patriot" refuse to take responsibilities for their own actions?
Why do the above resort to threats, intimidation, and occasionally violence?
How is it not treasonous for these self-proclaimed patriots to call for insurrection against political institutions within our democratically-elected government?

can't answer number one without a specific example as to what you are talking about. what actions? the biggest sweep in the house since 1938 against FDR?
cant do number 2 without number 1...See how you jump from assumption to assumption, based on generalizations? I have no clue what actions you are talking about.
who is calling out for insurrection against political instituions? Joe stacks????

I am trying to follow you. please fill in the olympic size swimming pools with pertinent information.

Wow. You think you are so damn clever.

1. All actions. For example: you want smaller government and will cut social services in a heart beat yet complain when mental health needs put our citizens at risk. Or that certain drugs are available to treat psychosis which may or may not be linked to mass shootings such as in Tuscon.

2. Generalizations? Really, because I am making a very specific charge - that the right often resorts to threats, intimidation and occasionally violence in their anti-government message.

3. You yourself have a thread in this forum about the "revolution" beginning in the new Congress that starts with an anti-government image of the "Don't Tread on Me" flag. I consider it treasonous to act as if health care legislation is justification for the right to make threats against our constitutional rights and the common good - yet, that doesn't seem to stop those who call the President of the United States a Marxist. And for what exactly?

I have no doubt you will deny the connections because doing so means you can continue to play it both ways.

[Phatscotty]

all actions....is a specific charge?

and by "all actions" you aren't generalizing one bit right

In closing, why don't you get some fucking facts you ignorant P.O.S.?

Do you know what the question was that he asked the congresswoman in 2007? Do you know the shooter is a Nihlist, and believed in literally NOTHING?????

Murder Libel. What you have tried to do here really is pathetic. Get some facts and come back to the conversation.

Is this your fault then? for promoting your stupid, untrue theory?

TUCSON, Ariz. — A Tucson mass shooting victim was taken into custody Saturday after yelling "you're dead" at a Tea Party spokesman during the taping of an ABC-TV town hall event hosted by Christianne Amanpour.

This guy doesn't have the facts either. He just got his information from "thu media" and people like Tobi

[Orwell]

all actions....is a specific charge?
and by "all actions" you aren't generalizing one bit right
In closing, why don't you get some fucking facts you ignorant P.O.S.?

How can you "close" if you never addressed any of the issues I raised? Generalizations? I answered you specifically.
Instead you insult me personally?
Wow, that is rich. Try again.

Do you know what the question was that he asked the congresswoman in 2007? Do you know the shooter is a Nihlist, and believed in literally NOTHING?????

Do you even know what Nihilism means?
Yes, I know the punk asked a leading question based on his twisted linguistic-political logic. No one could answer it correctly. Now,

Murder Libel. What you have tried to do here really is pathetic. Get some facts and come back to the conversation.

Point of order: you made the unsubstantiated charge of "Murder Libel" - I have simply presented you three questions you are avoiding to answer.

Is this your fault then? for promoting your stupid, untrue theory?

TUCSON, Ariz. — A Tucson mass shooting victim was taken into custody Saturday after yelling "you're dead" at a Tea Party spokesman during the taping of an ABC-TV town hall event hosted by Christianne Amanpour.

This guy doesn't have the facts either. He just got his information from "thu media" and people like Tobi

LOL. Funny. You are chasing your tail. Around and around you go.
But yes, tangentially, his facts are based on an emotional investment considering he was f*ckinig SHOTby the f**king punk in question.

But sure, blame a victim for being upset with someone spewing anti-government rhetoric in a heated and contentious political environment after a traumatic event. I am sure if one of yours had been arrested for threatening Democrat who voted for health care legislation, you'd be complaining about political correctness, the liberal media, and overreaching government - ah, but it's politically convenient to have a SHOOTING VICTIM make a threat against a Tea Party spokesperson. Very convenient.

[Phatscotty]

The dude is NOT, by any single mean, a Tea Bagger, and nowhere near a Conservative. Yet, I get questions at my work about the right-wing making this guy shoot? It's jut fucking stupid, and it's the reason I am not going to let you do it here.

[Orwell]

The dude is NOT, by any single mean, a Tea Bagger, and nowhere near a Conservative. Yet, I get questions at my work about the right-wing making this guy shoot? It's jut fucking stupid, and it's the reason I am not going to let you do it here.

I don't care if he drinks tea, coffee, or sucks ball sacks. He has adopted a number of conservative conspiracies and quite clearly acted on them.

I have no idea where you work and I don't care. All I know is that you are doing everything humanly possible to avoid the points I raised, and you resort to personal attacks to try to dismiss me. I have answered your questions and replied to your claims with reasonable and supported answers, based on facts and my personal view - so, unless I woke up in the Soviet Union this morning, I feel quite free in making my point here - regardless of your petty insults and partisan amnesia.

cheers.

[Phatscotty]

The dude is NOT, by any single mean, a Tea Bagger, and nowhere near a Conservative. Yet, I get questions at my work about the right-wing making this guy shoot? It's jut fucking stupid, and it's the reason I am not going to let you do it here.

I don't care if he drinks tea, coffee, or sucks ball sacks. He has adopted a number of conservative conspiracies and quite clearly acted on them.

I have no idea where you work and I don't care. All I know is that you are doing everything humanly possible to avoid the points I raised, and you resort to personal attacks to try to dismiss me. I have answered your questions and replied to your claims with reasonable and supported answers, based on facts and my personal view - so, unless I woke up in the Soviet Union this morning, I feel quite free in making my point here - regardless of your petty insults and partisan amnesia.

cheers.

you are so full of it.

Ta!

[Orwell]

The dude is NOT, by any single mean, a Tea Bagger, and nowhere near a Conservative. Yet, I get questions at my work about the right-wing making this guy shoot? It's jut fucking stupid, and it's the reason I am not going to let you do it here.

I don't care if he drinks tea, coffee, or sucks ball sacks. He has adopted a number of conservative conspiracies and quite clearly acted on them.

I have no idea where you work and I don't care. All I know is that you are doing everything humanly possible to avoid the points I raised, and you resort to personal attacks to try to dismiss me. I have answered your questions and replied to your claims with reasonable and supported answers, based on facts and my personal view - so, unless I woke up in the Soviet Union this morning, I feel quite free in making my point here - regardless of your petty insults and partisan amnesia.

cheers.

you are so full of it.

Ta!

Oh yes, I am so full of it that "Ta!" negates sound logic and articulated reason.

Good luck, poor soul.

[Night Strike]

1. All actions. For example: you want smaller government and will cut social services in a heart beat yet complain when mental health needs put our citizens at risk. Or that certain drugs are available to treat psychosis which may or may not be linked to mass shootings such as in Tuscon.

2. Generalizations? Really, because I am making a very specific charge - that the right often resorts to threats, intimidation and occasionally violence in their anti-government message.

3. You yourself have a thread in this forum about the "revolution" beginning in the new Congress that starts with an anti-government image of the "Don't Tread on Me" flag. I consider it treasonous to act as if health care legislation is justification for the right to make threats against our constitutional rights and the common good - yet, that doesn't seem to stop those who call the President of the United States a Marxist. And for what exactly?

1. There is no link whatsoever between your claims. Wanting a smaller government in no way infringes upon making sure dangerous people cannot go around killing people.

2. You have no proof of conservatives doing this. In fact, I bet you've never actually listened to a conservative speaker. Precisely because of the outlandish claims you and your liberal friends make on a whim, conservatives repeatedly make comments DENOUNCING any form of violence. Conservatives know that violent acts are EXACTLY what progressives want to happen so they can then complete their government take over because they have to step in during a crisis to make sure it's not wasted. Furthermore, there are many liberals who repeatedly call for conservatives to be silenced by any means necessary. Have you ever seen the vitriol the people at MSNBC have for anyone who is a conservative? They've repeatedly called for someone to go after the conservatives by any means necessary.

3. It's treasonous to oppose the health care law???

[Phatscotty]

The dude is NOT, by any single mean, a Tea Bagger, and nowhere near a Conservative. Yet, I get questions at my work about the right-wing making this guy shoot? It's jut fucking stupid, and it's the reason I am not going to let you do it here.

I don't care if he drinks tea, coffee, or sucks ball sacks. He has adopted a number of conservative conspiracies and quite clearly acted on them.

I have no idea where you work and I don't care. All I know is that you are doing everything humanly possible to avoid the points I raised, and you resort to personal attacks to try to dismiss me. I have answered your questions and replied to your claims with reasonable and supported answers, based on facts and my personal view - so, unless I woke up in the Soviet Union this morning, I feel quite free in making my point here - regardless of your petty insults and partisan amnesia.

cheers.

you are so full of it.

Ta!

Oh yes, I am so full of it that "Ta!" negates sound logic and articulated reason.

Good luck, poor soul.

Yup, his favorites internet movie "Zietgiest". Definitely right wing propaganda? You just don't make any sense.

[Aradhus]

I hated Avatar, does that imply I'm anti left wing propaganda( As that is how it was described by many right wingers)?

[Orwell]

The dude is NOT, by any single mean, a Tea Bagger, and nowhere near a Conservative. Yet, I get questions at my work about the right-wing making this guy shoot? It's jut fucking stupid, and it's the reason I am not going to let you do it here.

I don't care if he drinks tea, coffee, or sucks ball sacks. He has adopted a number of conservative conspiracies and quite clearly acted on them.

I have no idea where you work and I don't care. All I know is that you are doing everything humanly possible to avoid the points I raised, and you resort to personal attacks to try to dismiss me. I have answered your questions and replied to your claims with reasonable and supported answers, based on facts and my personal view - so, unless I woke up in the Soviet Union this morning, I feel quite free in making my point here - regardless of your petty insults and partisan amnesia.

cheers.

you are so full of it.

Ta!

Oh yes, I am so full of it that "Ta!" negates sound logic and articulated reason.

Good luck, poor soul.

Yup, his favorites internet movie "Zietgiest". Definitely right wing propaganda? You just don't make any sense.

And how is it exactly that your spurious conclusion makes my argument less sensible?
Oh right, it doesn't.

Thanks for playing. Try again some time.

[Phatscotty]

no you numbskull! put zietgiest and the communist manifesto together, now you have 2 pieces of information!!!!

It's like, you take the 3 most vague things that arent political (the gold standard etc) and it really is silly and just amazing, and dismiss every other major fact, such as the communist menifesto, mein kapf, and zeitgiest, along with being a nihlist. Heavy drug user, long hair, there is so much information here, you really do have to bend reality to focus on the gold standard and the new currency, and totally ignore he had a personal vandetta with this congresswoman going back 3 years

The new currency stuff, I can show on the left and the right without even thinking about it longer than a half a second. That just is not political, and your attempt to call the "right-wing" is, as I said before and will say again, is plain silly.

[Orwell]

no you numbskull! put zietgiest and the communist manifesto together, now you have 2 pieces of information!!!!

Sounds like Jared Loughner logic to me.... I guess it takes a certain type for this to make sense?

It's like, you take the 3 most vague things that arent political (the gold standard etc) and it really is silly and just amazing, and dismiss every other major fact, such as the communist menifesto, mein kapf, and zeitgiest, along with being a nihlist. Heavy drug user, long hair, there is so much information here, you really do have to bend reality to focus on the gold standard and the new currency, and totally ignore he had a personal vandetta with this congresswoman going back 3 years

I do not have to bend anything - he stated the gold standard himself and came to a number of illogical conclusions about grammar, reality, and time to rationalize his perverted view of the world.

The new currency stuff, I can show on the left and the right without even thinking about it longer than a half a second. That just is not political, and your attempt to call the "right-wing" is, as I said before and will say again, is plain silly.

Really? A half a second?
Then show it.

(the clock is ticking...)

[Aradhus]

If Jared started killing black people, would we call it racially motivated?
If certain voices in positins of power claimed that black people were dangerous and should mostly be killed, would we consider that irresponsible and should that person be held accountable?

Jareds intent was to assassinate a politician.

Prior to the assassination attempt, some politician from Arizona said something which may or may not be relevant, "The way that she has it depicted has the crosshairs of a gunsight over our district, when people do that they have got to understand there are consequences to that"

I forget the politicians name, Gabrielle ..something.

[Woodruff]

How can you "close" if you never addressed any of the issues I raised?

tobinov, meet Phatscotty. I'm surprised you hadn't met him before. There's not much else to him, really.

[Phatscotty]

no you numbskull! put zietgiest and the communist manifesto together, now you have 2 pieces of information!!!!

Sounds like Jared Loughner logic to me.... I guess it takes a certain type for this to make sense?

It's like, you take the 3 most vague things that arent political (the gold standard etc) and it really is silly and just amazing, and dismiss every other major fact, such as the communist menifesto, mein kapf, and zeitgiest, along with being a nihlist. Heavy drug user, long hair, there is so much information here, you really do have to bend reality to focus on the gold standard and the new currency, and totally ignore he had a personal vandetta with this congresswoman going back 3 years

I do not have to bend anything - he stated the gold standard himself and came to a number of illogical conclusions about grammar, reality, and time to rationalize his perverted view of the world.[/quote]

The new currency stuff, I can show on the left and the right without even thinking about it longer than a half a second. That just is not political, and your attempt to call the "right-wing" is, as I said before and will say again, is plain silly.

Really? A half a second?
Then show it.

(the clock is ticking...)[/quote]

zeitgiest.com, you NERF HERDER!

I'm not engaging in this anymore. There is no point. You are getting your rocks off by being as silly and ignorant as possible.

Get some facts!

[Orwell]

no you numbskull! put zietgiest and the communist manifesto together, now you have 2 pieces of information!!!!

Sounds like Jared Loughner logic to me.... I guess it takes a certain type for this to make sense?

It's like, you take the 3 most vague things that arent political (the gold standard etc) and it really is silly and just amazing, and dismiss every other major fact, such as the communist menifesto, mein kapf, and zeitgiest, along with being a nihlist. Heavy drug user, long hair, there is so much information here, you really do have to bend reality to focus on the gold standard and the new currency, and totally ignore he had a personal vandetta with this congresswoman going back 3 years

I do not have to bend anything - he stated the gold standard himself and came to a number of illogical conclusions about grammar, reality, and time to rationalize his perverted view of the world.

The new currency stuff, I can show on the left and the right without even thinking about it longer than a half a second. That just is not political, and your attempt to call the "right-wing" is, as I said before and will say again, is plain silly.

Really? A half a second?
Then show it.

(the clock is ticking...)

zeitgiest.com, you NERF HERDER!

Phatty, let me put it to you straight: you fail to make the Zeitgeist Movement relevant.

I'm not engaging in this anymore. There is no point. You are getting your rocks off by being as silly and ignorant as possible.
Get some facts!

I argue that you never engaged in the first place - and since you have made serious attempt to address the questions I raised and the points I have made, I can only assume you cannot. However, one thing is abundantly clear: that you are doing your best to distance your political views from his. Maybe you should go back to those three questions I asked you and ask yourself why.

[Night Strike]

I'm not engaging in this anymore. There is no point. You are getting your rocks off by being as silly and ignorant as possible.
Get some facts!

I argue that you never engaged in the first place - and since you have made serious attempt to address the questions I raised and the points I have made, I can only assume you cannot. However, one thing is abundantly clear: that you are doing your best to distance your political views from his. Maybe you should go back to those three questions I asked you and ask yourself why.

The only people who believe the deranged shooter had any views in line with conservatives are far left people pushing their own narrative of the world based on outright lies. No conservative has to distance themselves from his views because none of the views are even close to the same. To believe otherwise is a sham, and you know it (hence why you believe it).

[Phatscotty]

no you numbskull! put zietgiest and the communist manifesto together, now you have 2 pieces of information!!!!

Sounds like Jared Loughner logic to me.... I guess it takes a certain type for this to make sense?

It's like, you take the 3 most vague things that arent political (the gold standard etc) and it really is silly and just amazing, and dismiss every other major fact, such as the communist menifesto, mein kapf, and zeitgiest, along with being a nihlist. Heavy drug user, long hair, there is so much information here, you really do have to bend reality to focus on the gold standard and the new currency, and totally ignore he had a personal vandetta with this congresswoman going back 3 years

I do not have to bend anything - he stated the gold standard himself and came to a number of illogical conclusions about grammar, reality, and time to rationalize his perverted view of the world.

The new currency stuff, I can show on the left and the right without even thinking about it longer than a half a second. That just is not political, and your attempt to call the "right-wing" is, as I said before and will say again, is plain silly.

Really? A half a second?
Then show it.

(the clock is ticking...)

zeitgiest.com, you NERF HERDER!

Phatty, let me put it to you straight: you fail to make the Zeitgeist Movement relevant.

I'm not engaging in this anymore. There is no point. You are getting your rocks off by being as silly and ignorant as possible.
Get some facts!

I argue that you never engaged in the first place - and since you have made serious attempt to address the questions I raised and the points I have made, I can only assume you cannot. However, one thing is abundantly clear: that you are doing your best to distance your political views from his. Maybe you should go back to those three questions I asked you and ask yourself why.

zietgiest....is.....where....jared....lofgren.....got....the.....gold....standard......idea.....and.....the....new....currency....idea.....and,...the....gov't.....is....paranoidingly......huge....and...all....powerful...

There, Zeitgeist, the movie Jared loved, The movie his friends says he watched over, and over, and over, and over again, which is also the most significant liberal/athiest mind-fuck out there atm, covers all 3 of your little murder-libel talking points.

Get the facts, and good day, if you go and watch the video zietgiest (http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/) and probably snap one off in the process, then I will talk to you again on the subject. If you really believe all this crap you are saying, and continue to ignore the facts, then I just feel sorry for you, because your entire life is going to be one of a pawn.

[Orwell]

I'm not engaging in this anymore. There is no point. You are getting your rocks off by being as silly and ignorant as possible.
Get some facts!

I argue that you never engaged in the first place - and since you have made serious attempt to address the questions I raised and the points I have made, I can only assume you cannot. However, one thing is abundantly clear: that you are doing your best to distance your political views from his. Maybe you should go back to those three questions I asked you and ask yourself why.

The only people who believe the deranged shooter had any views in line with conservatives are far left people pushing their own narrative of the world based on outright lies. No conservative has to distance themselves from his views because none of the views are even close to the same. To believe otherwise is a sham, and you know it (hence why you believe it).

I am responding to Phatty's defensiveness.

Please, if it is a sham, you should be able to provide specific examples. Stating it as an undeniable fact based on your partisan knee-jerk response does not make it true.

And don't assume you know what I believe. I will tell you that myself.

[Night Strike]

I'm not engaging in this anymore. There is no point. You are getting your rocks off by being as silly and ignorant as possible.
Get some facts!

I argue that you never engaged in the first place - and since you have made serious attempt to address the questions I raised and the points I have made, I can only assume you cannot. However, one thing is abundantly clear: that you are doing your best to distance your political views from his. Maybe you should go back to those three questions I asked you and ask yourself why.

The only people who believe the deranged shooter had any views in line with conservatives are far left people pushing their own narrative of the world based on outright lies. No conservative has to distance themselves from his views because none of the views are even close to the same. To believe otherwise is a sham, and you know it (hence why you believe it).

I am responding to Phatty's defensiveness.

Please, if it is a sham, you should be able to provide specific examples. Stating it as an undeniable fact based on your partisan knee-jerk response does not make it true.

And don't assume you know what I believe. I will tell you that myself.

Typical liberal trick: make a claim about conservatives and then force those conservatives to prove those claims false rather than having the liberal prove those claims to be true. I guess liberals don't actually believe in innocent-until-proven-quilty.

And just because you still think that truth is a cop-out, maybe you should read all the reports from people who knew Jared and said that he did not watch the news or listen to talk radio, and that if his views had to be characterized, they would be summed up as being a liberal, not a conservative.

[Orwell]

no you numbskull! put zietgiest and the communist manifesto together, now you have 2 pieces of information!!!!

Sounds like Jared Loughner logic to me.... I guess it takes a certain type for this to make sense?

It's like, you take the 3 most vague things that arent political (the gold standard etc) and it really is silly and just amazing, and dismiss every other major fact, such as the communist menifesto, mein kapf, and zeitgiest, along with being a nihlist. Heavy drug user, long hair, there is so much information here, you really do have to bend reality to focus on the gold standard and the new currency, and totally ignore he had a personal vandetta with this congresswoman going back 3 years

I do not have to bend anything - he stated the gold standard himself and came to a number of illogical conclusions about grammar, reality, and time to rationalize his perverted view of the world.

The new currency stuff, I can show on the left and the right without even thinking about it longer than a half a second. That just is not political, and your attempt to call the "right-wing" is, as I said before and will say again, is plain silly.

Really? A half a second?
Then show it.

(the clock is ticking...)

zeitgiest.com, you NERF HERDER!

Phatty, let me put it to you straight: you fail to make the Zeitgeist Movement relevant.

I'm not engaging in this anymore. There is no point. You are getting your rocks off by being as silly and ignorant as possible.
Get some facts!

I argue that you never engaged in the first place - and since you have made serious attempt to address the questions I raised and the points I have made, I can only assume you cannot. However, one thing is abundantly clear: that you are doing your best to distance your political views from his. Maybe you should go back to those three questions I asked you and ask yourself why.

zietgiest....is.....where....jared....lofgren.....got....the.....gold....standard......idea.....and.....the....new....currency....idea.....and,...the....gov't.....is....paranoidingly......huge....and...all....powerful...

There, Zeitgeist, the movie Jared loved, The movie his friends says he watched over, and over, and over, and over again, which is also the most significant liberal/athiest mind-f*ck out there atm, covers all 3 of your little murder-libel talking points.

False assumption on your part: Zeitgeist isn't liberal.
Have you read your Ayn Rand lately? I'd say she and Ron Paul would agree with quite a bit of Zeitgeist.

And no, you haven't addressed my three questions at all. It's funny that you seem too think that by calling it "murder libel" you get off the hook. Sorry, it doesn't work that way.

Get the facts, and good day, if you go and watch the video zietgiest (http://www.zeitgeistmovie.com/) and probably snap one off in the process, then I will talk to you again on the subject. If you really believe all this crap you are saying, and continue to ignore the facts, then I just feel sorry for you, because your entire life is going to be one of a pawn.

I have seen the movie already. As I told you in the other thread, it's boring paranoid dribble and I do not consider it anymore valid than your inane logic or your patronizing and petulant approach to these discussions.

[Phatscotty]

well, then you know exactly where your own bullshit examples come from don't ya????



unless, you are denying that the gold standard, the new currency, and fear of the NWO are not major themes in Zietgiest?

[Orwell]

I'm not engaging in this anymore. There is no point. You are getting your rocks off by being as silly and ignorant as possible.
Get some facts!

I argue that you never engaged in the first place - and since you have made serious attempt to address the questions I raised and the points I have made, I can only assume you cannot. However, one thing is abundantly clear: that you are doing your best to distance your political views from his. Maybe you should go back to those three questions I asked you and ask yourself why.

The only people who believe the deranged shooter had any views in line with conservatives are far left people pushing their own narrative of the world based on outright lies. No conservative has to distance themselves from his views because none of the views are even close to the same. To believe otherwise is a sham, and you know it (hence why you believe it).

I am responding to Phatty's defensiveness.

Please, if it is a sham, you should be able to provide specific examples. Stating it as an undeniable fact based on your partisan knee-jerk response does not make it true.

And don't assume you know what I believe. I will tell you that myself.

Typical liberal trick: make a claim about conservatives and then force those conservatives to prove those claims false rather than having the liberal prove those claims to be true. I guess liberals don't actually believe in innocent-until-proven-quilty.

There is no trick. You made a statement by decree. The onus is on you to prove it up.

And just because you still think that truth is a cop-out, maybe you should read all the reports from people who knew Jared and said that he did not watch the news or listen to talk radio, and that if his views had to be characterized, they would be summed up as being a liberal, not a conservative.

I think the truth is a cop-out? That is a very convenient partisan narrative of your own you got there.

So, now that you have, in your own mind anyway, proven beyond a doubt that liberals are ideologically guilty by association based on hearsay and echo chamber rants, what do you propose? Executing us by firing squad? Reeducation camps? Indentured servitude? Or are you going to load us up in cattle cars and send us to Canada? Oh yes, that one please.
/roll