He is crazy, he will never hit the chair.
Instead we get to pay for him to spend the rest of his life in a home for the insane.
He is crazy, he will never hit the chair.I know it's asking too much, but if he is found guilty of the shooting by a jury, can we please then execute him a year later? None of this 'wait 3 decades while we pay for your life expenses' BS.
Hinckley shot Reagan in order to impress Jodie Foster, what kind of political statement was that??just shooting a politician is political statment.
We're turning on each other right now and the evidence is here before us. It's evident at every winger blog, the NYT, the major networks - everywhere.
A politician gets shot and immediately blame must be assessed on a group, a party, whomever is convenient. No need to wait for information, no need to wait for facts.
At this point it cannot be disputed that this guy has mental health issues. It matters not. There are other reasons he committed this heinous crime in the minds of too many and it's going to get screamed to the rafters until the cows come home.
Yes, we eventually will turn against each other on a much more intense level.
The end result of this shooting, because it has become our nature to overreact to nearly everything, is that the taxpayers will be footing the bill for SS protection for every member of Congress. It will be 24/7, traveling with them at all times. It will be expanded to include the key members of their staff and so on and so forth over time. The fact that this was one isolated incident committed by a severely mentally ill individual will matter not in the slightest.
CIA/NSA Innovation
In the mid-1950s, the CIA launched Project Genetrix: They flew high altitude balloonswith 350lb cameras as their payloadsacross the Soviet Union. They simply popped the balloons up into the jet stream and hoped the balloons would come out at the other end of the Soviet Union.
But as the CIA was tracking these balloons with radar, it was also picking up an unexpected Soviet radar signal. Eventually the CIA figured out that they were getting this signal because a piece of metal in the balloon was accidentally cut to the frequency of a Soviet height-finding radar and that signal was being picked up in our receiving radar.
This lucky accident spawned Project melody. Every time the Soviets launched an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), the CIA sent up radar receivers in Iran. And we used the Soviets' own missile telemetry beacon to steer those radars. So every Soviet radar within a thousand miles bounced off the Soviet ICBM, and the CIA tracked their reflections. This bit of espionage provided intercepts of all Soviet missile tracking radars including all their anti-ballistic missile radars. These receivers were built and designed at Stanford.
In the late 1950s, the Soviets had upgraded their early warning radar to the Tall King. The CIA and Strategic Air Command wanted to know where these radars were and how many there were
first.
You lost me at "you people". Putz.Is it so strange ? I mean, you people are fueling your own paranoid idea's. With people who spew hatred amongst others. Strengthening the paranoid delusions. And if the government wants to do something about it because people ask of this, suddenly the government is evil and all sort of conspiracy theories rise. The grey aliens or bloodsucking reptiles amaze me the most. How is it possible i ask my self that people actually believe a plot cooked up to hide the true reason of that balloon at Roswell ? More then 400 spy balloons to spy over the USSR where deployed and it is highly likely that the Roswell weather balloon had something to do with the research of designing the spy balloons.
http://www.computerhistory.org/core/secretvalley/
The idea of alien reptiles just come from a 1980 series called V.
Only because of the lack wanting to use to use the brain.
I know you do not realize it, but that is the same goal of any intelligent person who believes in democracy to have as little rules as possible. But this is only possible when people respect and care for each other. Look at the news about what happens around the world.
Another point is we elect people to be in the government because we our selfs have work to do. We have to keep the country going. Food on the table. Markets must stay alive. New inventions must be created and technological progress must continue to happen to prevent downfall.
It is people who break rules that laws are needed for. Do you have a problem with your short term memory ? Silly laws are needed because of people who are unable to think in shades of grey.
And another point :
And those same people who claim that the government should not
interfere with their lives are the same people who will blame the government when these people themselves do not think and as a result from that a disaster or other problem happens.
It is because of the anti social behavior of a small part of the people that the government wants to interfere with the lives of people. That to accomplish that on average everybody is happy.
And in the other scenario where the government actually is intrusive, it is usually people with a certain attitude similar as you and your buddies present. And that is why i call you a dictator and a communist. I have the right to do so because in your eyes i am an collectivist. The only difference is that i say we vote on it, and you say, well it is pretty obvious what you say between the lines...
Let me just put it bluntly. You do not want democracy, you do not want to comprise. And if people do not do what you want to do... What happens then ? You proudly show your guns and give the message : "If you not do what i want, i will use this !"
And see what happens, people with psychological problems take that message seriously. This thread is filled with hate remarks and conservatists who have a jihad against people who just want a little more peace. Conservatists that have a jihad against the government. You are no more different then some fundamental terrorist group who has the following message : "If you not do what i want, i will use this !" . Your way of thinking is proto-terrorism. It is fueling paranoid people. And that is another thing what you not see.
I think Palin posting that map was very unfortunate and stupid of her but I doubt this kid was influenced by her. Hell, he had told an aquantance that he thought Gifford wasn't very intelligent, imagine the disdain he'd have for Palin with her dumb as a box of rocks folksy bullshit she spews? I wouldn't doubt if given the choice he'd have tried to shoot Palin over Gifford if just for the notoriety seeing what an insanw bastard he is
And if you think his shooting of Gifford, the Federal judge and the other poor innocent victims is a tragedy imagine how bad it would be for America if someone were to shoot and possibly kill Palin? That'd make her a martry for the Wingers and the last thing America needs is for someone like Palin to be made a martyr. I think there should be an armed guard around her and her family 24 hrs a day just to make sure something like that doesn't happen.
You lost me at "you people". Putz.
EXACTLY.
He is completely off the deep end. Look at the videos he made on mind control. He was a sick individual that probably needed help. Palin didn't cause that. The teapa...rty didn't cause that. Gun Control didn't cause that. Republicans didn't cause that. Democrats didn't cause that. It was a mentally ill individual.
The government doesn't put food on the table, keep markets alive, or foster new inventions. It also doesn't make the trains run on time, contrary to what you likely believe, Benito.
Silly laws are notoriously ineffective at curbing many behaviors. I remember prohibition being particularly ineffective. So too is the war on drugs.
You have that backwards. Intrusive government is sobriety checkpoints (assumed guilt without probable cause), bans on the sale of toys with fast food meals, the FCC's "decency rules", mandatory health insurance, and many more examples of government sticking its nose where it doesn't belong. All of these, coincidentally, are advocated by the Left in general and Democrats in particular.
The vast majority of people do respect and care for each other, and that's not just because of laws. But you cannot enforce respect and care for your peers via government decree. The only lasting actions are those we recognize for ourselves as being in our best interests, both short and long-term.. and not just the interest of avoiding incarceration or other government imposed penalties.
The government doesn't put food on the table, keep markets alive, or foster new inventions. It also doesn't make the trains run on time, contrary to what you likely believe, Benito.
Silly laws are notoriously ineffective at curbing many behaviors. I remember prohibition being particularly ineffective. So too is the war on drugs.
On the flip side, abortion... in spite of being generally legal... has been on the decline for decades. It's a significant demonstration of a free society curbing undesirable behavior on its own.. without government saying "don't do it".
I neither adhere to nor condone what you suggest. I do not blame others for the consequences of my actions (or inactions), nor do I think anyone else should do so.
Action to prevent or correct the actions of few at the expense of the rights and liberties of the many is unjust and the quintessential example of an abusive and tyrannical government.
That is your point of view on it. In reality again these are all separate problems and cannot be so easily seen as one and the same problem. Again, you think to much black and white. You think you see a similarity (oh noes the government) and as such it is all the same.You have that backwards. Intrusive government is sobriety checkpoints (assumed guilt without probable cause), bans on the sale of toys with fast food meals, the FCC's "decency rules", mandatory health insurance, and many more examples of government sticking its nose where it doesn't belong. All of these, coincidentally, are advocated by the Left in general and Democrats in particular.
If people don't want what I want, that's it. There's nothing more to be done or to be said. Their refusal is their right... but it is also my right to keep my beliefs in spite of their disagreement.
Hyperbole is strong in you. You also appear to know nothing about brevity. Every post of yours is a wall of text filled with irrelevancies and sentences that are too long. You should be more concise.
I think you are quite right on this. I believe gov. shouldn't be involved in free market activities because it's the market's job to figure things out and innovate through competition. However, I do believe it's gov. job to ensure only legitimate company survive, otherwise some company can cheat investors/customers by cutting corners, falsify earning reports etc. or like Madof ponzy scheme. All of that will drive legitimate company out of businesses, and isn't good for competition or innovation. So government do have a role to play here.
I think people should have the right to determine what they want to do with their own health and body. I think it's better to impose such laws as advisories not as a law. But even Dem isn't the only one using laws to dictate what people can/cannot do with themselves. Rep wants to pass anti-abortion laws that control if someone can or cannot perform abortion on themselves. I don't think gov. has a say in that either. It's individual freedom.
You can find the same shit on some Tea Party websites. You can see the same screed about control through the left controlled "lamestream media". You can find distrust of the government, cries for unconstitutionality of many laws, and the cries for gold base currencies on many Tea Party supporters websites or rallies.
Look at somebody like Nemesis_1, he seems to run around screaming about the same type of stuff day after day.
If you want to go ahead and label a huge part of the Tea Party as insane for those reasons, great, thanks, it just proves our point.
So what if one group talked about laws being unconstitutional and gold backed currencies, do you want to silence that speech or what? Whats your point?
You can find lots of shit on lots of websites from lots of groups on the internet, you're focusing on one group because you disagree with them. The only evidence you have is that he used some words like gold and unconstitutional. You're selectively choosing evidence to fit your political view.
Did I ever say that I wanted to silence the speech?
My point is that Beck, Bachmann, Angle, O'Donnel, Palin, have all frothed the Teabaggers up. For what purpose? Obviously not because they actually believe in it.
If people where more able to control themselves, there would be no need for laws. Because they think before they act. Laws are needed for people who act first and think later. You read like an Ayn Rand follower and those people are to say at least a bit misguided and only believe in utopia.
Once again proof that you cannot read. Because i clearly stated that the people do the work and the government is a representation of the wishes of the people. The government is only there for the people. To protect the group against the individual.
You are confusing entirely different matters with each other. You war on drugs is a problem that is comprised of many different sub problems. It is not 1 problem but several problems. But i do worry that you are also a kind of individual who is a proponent of legalizing all forms of drugs...
Well, are you proud of yourself. That is something we all do as responsible people. But i doubt you are true to your words.
I think you have been hanging to much with the mind controller. You sound like a well trained communist. You exactly produce what you are taught.
That is your point of view on it. In reality again these are all separate problems and cannot be so easily seen as one and the same problem. Again, you think to much black and white. You think you see a similarity (oh noes the government) and as such it is all the same.
Go back to your cages then and live in the woods. Because with your logic, nothing would have ever changed for the better in this world.
Well, if you are unable to follow it and do not properly read, i cannot help it.
You can always address a single subject and i can explain it or i cannot explain it.
The end issue remains the same.
I think you are quite right on this. I believe gov. shouldn't be involved in free market activities because it's the market's job to figure things out and innovate through competition. However, I do believe it's gov. job to ensure only legitimate company survive, otherwise some company can cheat investors/customers by cutting corners, falsify earning reports etc. or like Madof ponzy scheme. All of that will drive legitimate company out of businesses, and isn't good for competition or innovation. So government do have a role to play here.
I think people should have the right to determine what they want to do with their own health and body. I think it's better to impose such laws as advisories not as a law. But even Dem isn't the only one using laws to dictate what people can/cannot do with themselves. Rep wants to pass anti-abortion laws that control if someone can or cannot perform abortion on themselves. I don't think gov. has a say in that either. It's individual freedom.
You can find the same shit on some Tea Party websites. You can see the same screed about control through the left controlled "lamestream media".
You can find distrust of the government
cries for unconstitutionality of many laws
and the cries for gold base currencies on many Tea Party supporters websites or rallies.
If you want to go ahead and label a huge part of the Tea Party as insane for those reasons, great, thanks, it just proves our point.
What irks me is the hypocrisy. What definition of freedom is he portraying when he takes a gun and attempts to assassinate people with whom he disagrees? That's not any kind of freedom, that's just plain tyranny.
Easily dismissed because the judges are activists legislating from the bench.psst, some laws are unconstitutional. That is kinda why we have that 3rd branch of government which includes a body you might have heard of before, the Supreme Court.
Did I ever say that I wanted to silence the speech?
My point is that Beck, Bachmann, Angle, O'Donnel, Palin, have all frothed the Teabaggers up. For what purpose? Obviously not because they actually believe in it.
Easily dismissed because the judges are activists legislating from the bench.
No, you never did, thats why I was asking you.
Its perfectly fine to get people riled up to go out and vote and go to rallies etc, but not so far as using physical force or "2nd amendment remedies" or that kind of shit, that I disagree with wholeheartedly.