[faterikcartman]

del

[faterikcartman]

del

[faterikcartman]

del

[faterikcartman]

del

[faterikcartman]

del

[faterikcartman]

It is always those who call themselves liberals that are the first to embrace fascism. And yes, I’m saying the OP is calling for fascism and oppression.

The shooter was known as a liberal. Weren’t his fave books by communists and socialists? Have you heard that the shooter actually worked on the congressperson’s campaign in ’07? Have you read that this congressperson voted against Nancy Pelosi? Have you read that a poster on a liberal blog said she was dead to them as a result? Do you remember that Obama himself said if political opponents bring a knife, [we] will bring a gun?

Have you read that, bottom line, the shooter was a homicidal nut-job?

You neo-fascists are like Nazis without the love of country. You think you also lack the desire to kill Jews — but I question that as most of you seem to fall over yourselves to embrace Islamists who want to do just that.

You’re counter-revolutionaries. You reject the Constitution. And you reject the concept that oppressed people can justly physically resist.

And unable to counter intellectual arguments you look to simply shut the mouths of the opposition.

I can’t help but think this mindset is the result of some sort of mental illness, stupidity, or you’re all in on the dirty little secret that it is just a ploy to silence those you disagree with.

No one but crazies sees political opponents “in the cross-hairs” as a direct threat. Stopping public discourse is not going to do anything to keep the crazies in check.

That’s the thinking — or lack of it — you get when you teach multi-culti nonsense in schools instead of history. People start thinking there were no wars before guns and no violent crime before television.

I, for one, am tired of sitting idly by whilst a new cadre of commissars call for restrictions on free speech, restrictions on gun ownership so that the people cannot resist an oppressive state, and restrictions on most anything they don’t like in the name of the global-warming hoax.

You so-called liberals have such muddled brains that on the one hand you argue for limitless abortions because you have the right to do what you will with your own bodies. You argue that marijuana should be legal for the same reason — your body, your choice. But more and more communities that are hot-beds for liberalism are banning trans-fats to save people from themselves.

As the guy from Fallbrook pointed out — literally burning Bush in effigy was celebrated by the left.

The left (true fascist haters of individual freedom) goes off the deep end and everyone thinks it’s fine. The so-called right (true classical liberals) uses a political metaphor and they’re accused of calling for murder and people clamour for controls on talk radio and firearms. Conveniently, no one mentions that the liberal mainstream media is left unmolested and the arms of state control remain fully armed.

Now I see how Hitler was able to turn a nation against a minority group and murder six million people on a pretext.

You people need to slap yourselves (now you nutters will accuse me inciting violence — well yes, I’m trying to incite you to violence against yourselves, I won’t deny it), take a cold bracing shower, look yourselves in the mirror, and think about where your dreams lead.

You sorts always look at things through the prism of the current political climate — but fail to foresee what it would be like if future, much less benign, “leaders” were in power with the controls you establish now. Wake up. Freedom has a price and too many people are cheap bastards.

[faterikcartman]

It is always those who call themselves liberals that are the first to embrace fascism. And yes, I’m saying the OP is calling for fascism and oppression.

The shooter was known as a liberal. Weren’t his fave books by communists and socialists? Have you heard that the shooter actually worked on the congressperson’s campaign in ’07? Have you read that this congressperson voted against Nancy Pelosi? Have you read that a poster on a liberal blog said she was dead to them as a result? Do you remember that Obama himself said if political opponents bring a knife, [we] will bring a gun?

Have you read that, bottom line, the shooter was a homicidal nut-job?

You neo-fascists are like Nazis without the love of country. You think you also lack the desire to kill Jews — but I question that as most of you seem to fall over yourselves to embrace Islamists who want to do just that.

You’re counter-revolutionaries. You reject the Constitution. And you reject the concept that oppressed people can justly physically resist.

And unable to counter intellectual arguments you look to simply shut the mouths of the opposition.

I can’t help but think this mindset is the result of some sort of mental illness, stupidity, or you’re all in on the dirty little secret that it is just a ploy to silence those you disagree with.

No one but crazies sees political opponents “in the cross-hairs” as a direct threat. Stopping public discourse is not going to do anything to keep the crazies in check.

That’s the thinking — or lack of it — you get when you teach multi-culti nonsense in schools instead of history. People start thinking there were no wars before guns and no violent crime before television.

I, for one, am tired of sitting idly by whilst a new cadre of commissars call for restrictions on free speech, restrictions on gun ownership so that the people cannot resist an oppressive state, and restrictions on most anything they don’t like in the name of the global-warming hoax.

You so-called liberals have such muddled brains that on the one hand you argue for limitless abortions because you have the right to do what you will with your own bodies. You argue that marijuana should be legal for the same reason — your body, your choice. But more and more communities that are hot-beds for liberalism are banning trans-fats to save people from themselves.

As the guy from Fallbrook pointed out — literally burning Bush in effigy was celebrated by the left.

The left (true fascist haters of individual freedom) goes off the deep end and everyone thinks it’s fine. The so-called right (true classical liberals) uses a political metaphor and they’re accused of calling for murder and people clamour for controls on talk radio and firearms. Conveniently, no one mentions that the liberal mainstream media is left unmolested and the arms of state control remain fully armed.

Now I see how Hitler was able to turn a nation against a minority group and murder six million people on a pretext.

You people need to slap yourselves (now you nutters will accuse me inciting violence — well yes, I’m trying to incite you to violence against yourselves, I won’t deny it), take a cold bracing shower, look yourselves in the mirror, and think about where your dreams lead.

You sorts always look at things through the prism of the current political climate — but fail to foresee what it would be like if future, much less benign, “leaders” were in power with the controls you establish now. Wake up. Freedom has a price and too many people are cheap bastards.

[faterikcartman]

It is always those who call themselves liberals that are the first to embrace fascism. And yes, I’m saying the OP is calling for fascism and oppression.

The shooter was known as a liberal. Weren’t his fave books by communists and socialists? Have you heard that the shooter actually worked on the congressperson’s campaign in ’07? Have you read that this congressperson voted against Nancy Pelosi? Have you read that a poster on a liberal blog said she was dead to them as a result? Do you remember that Obama himself said if political opponents bring a knife, [we] will bring a gun?

Have you read that, bottom line, the shooter was a homicidal nut-job?

You neo-fascists are like Nazis without the love of country. You think you also lack the desire to kill Jews — but I question that as most of you seem to fall over yourselves to embrace Islamists who want to do just that.

You’re counter-revolutionaries. You reject the Constitution. And you reject the concept that oppressed people can justly physically resist.

And unable to counter intellectual arguments you look to simply shut the mouths of the opposition.

I can’t help but think this mindset is the result of some sort of mental illness, stupidity, or you’re all in on the dirty little secret that it is just a ploy to silence those you disagree with.

No one but crazies sees political opponents “in the cross-hairs” as a direct threat. Stopping public discourse is not going to do anything to keep the crazies in check.

That’s the thinking — or lack of it — you get when you teach multi-culti nonsense in schools instead of history. People start thinking there were no wars before guns and no violent crime before television.

I, for one, am tired of sitting idly by whilst a new cadre of commissars call for restrictions on free speech, restrictions on gun ownership so that the people cannot resist an oppressive state, and restrictions on most anything they don’t like in the name of the global-warming hoax.

You so-called liberals have such muddled brains that on the one hand you argue for limitless abortions because you have the right to do what you will with your own bodies. You argue that marijuana should be legal for the same reason — your body, your choice. But more and more communities that are hot-beds for liberalism are banning trans-fats to save people from themselves.

As the guy from Fallbrook pointed out — literally burning Bush in effigy was celebrated by the left.

The left (true fascist haters of individual freedom) goes off the deep end and everyone thinks it’s fine. The so-called right (true classical liberals) uses a political metaphor and they’re accused of calling for murder and people clamour for controls on talk radio and firearms. Conveniently, no one mentions that the liberal mainstream media is left unmolested and the arms of state control remain fully armed.

Now I see how Hitler was able to turn a nation against a minority group and murder six million people on a pretext.

You people need to slap yourselves (now you nutters will accuse me inciting violence — well yes, I’m trying to incite you to violence against yourselves, I won’t deny it), take a cold bracing shower, look yourselves in the mirror, and think about where your dreams lead.

You sorts always look at things through the prism of the current political climate — but fail to foresee what it would be like if future, much less benign, “leaders” were in power with the controls you establish now. Wake up. Freedom has a price and too many people are cheap bastards.

[faterikcartman]

It is always those who call themselves liberals that are the first to embrace fascism. And yes, I’m saying the OP is calling for fascism and oppression.

The shooter was known as a liberal. Weren’t his fave books by communists and socialists? Have you heard that the shooter actually worked on the congressperson’s campaign in ’07? Have you read that this congressperson voted against Nancy Pelosi? Have you read that a poster on a liberal blog said she was dead to them as a result? Do you remember that Obama himself said if political opponents bring a knife, [we] will bring a gun?

Have you read that, bottom line, the shooter was a homicidal nut-job?

You neo-fascists are like Nazis without the love of country. You think you also lack the desire to kill Jews — but I question that as most of you seem to fall over yourselves to embrace Islamists who want to do just that.

You’re counter-revolutionaries. You reject the Constitution. And you reject the concept that oppressed people can justly physically resist.

And unable to counter intellectual arguments you look to simply shut the mouths of the opposition.

I can’t help but think this mindset is the result of some sort of mental illness, stupidity, or you’re all in on the dirty little secret that it is just a ploy to silence those you disagree with.

No one but crazies sees political opponents “in the cross-hairs” as a direct threat. Stopping public discourse is not going to do anything to keep the crazies in check.

That’s the thinking — or lack of it — you get when you teach multi-culti nonsense in schools instead of history. People start thinking there were no wars before guns and no violent crime before television.

I, for one, am tired of sitting idly by whilst a new cadre of commissars call for restrictions on free speech, restrictions on gun ownership so that the people cannot resist an oppressive state, and restrictions on most anything they don’t like in the name of the global-warming hoax.

You so-called liberals have such muddled brains that on the one hand you argue for limitless abortions because you have the right to do what you will with your own bodies. You argue that marijuana should be legal for the same reason — your body, your choice. But more and more communities that are hot-beds for liberalism are banning trans-fats to save people from themselves.

As the guy from Fallbrook pointed out — literally burning Bush in effigy was celebrated by the left.

The left (true fascist haters of individual freedom) goes off the deep end and everyone thinks it’s fine. The so-called right (true classical liberals) uses a political metaphor and they’re accused of calling for murder and people clamour for controls on talk radio and firearms. Conveniently, no one mentions that the liberal mainstream media is left unmolested and the arms of state control remain fully armed.

Now I see how Hitler was able to turn a nation against a minority group and murder six million people on a pretext.

You people need to slap yourselves (now you nutters will accuse me inciting violence — well yes, I’m trying to incite you to violence against yourselves, I won’t deny it), take a cold bracing shower, look yourselves in the mirror, and think about where your dreams lead.

You sorts always look at things through the prism of the current political climate — but fail to foresee what it would be like if future, much less benign, “leaders” were in power with the controls you establish now. Wake up. Freedom has a price and too many people are cheap bastards.

[faterikcartman]

It is always those who call themselves liberals that are the first to embrace fascism. And yes, I’m saying the OP is calling for fascism and oppression.

The shooter was known as a liberal. Weren’t his fave books by communists and socialists? Have you heard that the shooter actually worked on the congressperson’s campaign in ’07? Have you read that this congressperson voted against Nancy Pelosi? Have you read that a poster on a liberal blog said she was dead to them as a result? Do you remember that Obama himself said if political opponents bring a knife, [we] will bring a gun?

Have you read that, bottom line, the shooter was a homicidal nut-job?

You neo-fascists are like Nazis without the love of country. You think you also lack the desire to kill Jews — but I question that as most of you seem to fall over yourselves to embrace Islamists who want to do just that.

You’re counter-revolutionaries. You reject the Constitution. And you reject the concept that oppressed people can justly physically resist.

And unable to counter intellectual arguments you look to simply shut the mouths of the opposition.

I can’t help but think this mindset is the result of some sort of mental illness, stupidity, or you’re all in on the dirty little secret that it is just a ploy to silence those you disagree with.

No one but crazies sees political opponents “in the cross-hairs” as a direct threat. Stopping public discourse is not going to do anything to keep the crazies in check.

That’s the thinking — or lack of it — you get when you teach multi-culti nonsense in schools instead of history. People start thinking there were no wars before guns and no violent crime before television.

I, for one, am tired of sitting idly by whilst a new cadre of commissars call for restrictions on free speech, restrictions on gun ownership so that the people cannot resist an oppressive state, and restrictions on most anything they don’t like in the name of the global-warming hoax.

You so-called liberals have such muddled brains that on the one hand you argue for limitless abortions because you have the right to do what you will with your own bodies. You argue that marijuana should be legal for the same reason — your body, your choice. But more and more communities that are hot-beds for liberalism are banning trans-fats to save people from themselves.

As the guy from Fallbrook pointed out — literally burning Bush in effigy was celebrated by the left.

The left (true fascist haters of individual freedom) goes off the deep end and everyone thinks it’s fine. The so-called right (true classical liberals) uses a political metaphor and they’re accused of calling for murder and people clamour for controls on talk radio and firearms. Conveniently, no one mentions that the liberal mainstream media is left unmolested and the arms of state control remain fully armed.

Now I see how Hitler was able to turn a nation against a minority group and murder six million people on a pretext.

You people need to slap yourselves (now you nutters will accuse me inciting violence — well yes, I’m trying to incite you to violence against yourselves, I won’t deny it), take a cold bracing shower, look yourselves in the mirror, and think about where your dreams lead.

You sorts always look at things through the prism of the current political climate — but fail to foresee what it would be like if future, much less benign, “leaders” were in power with the controls you establish now. Wake up. Freedom has a price and too many people are cheap bastards.

[faterikcartman]

The whole system works because people produce things and services that others want.

It is very difficult to carry around 1,000 bushels of corn so we use money to represent our labour in order to trade conveniently.

When the supply of goods and services stays the same, but the money supply is increased, once that money goes into circulation the value of each unit of currency falls as traders compete for the same limited supply of goods and services.

Despite an abundance perceived by a few, unlike currency gold cannot be created out of whole cloth or alchemy. Nor does it decay or corrode. Deflating its value by increasing its supply is usually a gradual process rather than one that can be accomplished overnight. And gold is not issued by a government that may default on it. And it is compact and portable.

Ultimately, of course, gold too is just another commodity and its value over time reflects the vagaries of demand based on complex and varied factors.

Still, when presented with a choice of Zimbabwean dollars vs. gold, which would you pick? Gold, of course. Even if Zimbabwe prints more and more money and it becomes virtually worthless, one take take their gold anywhere in the world and it will have value, unlike a currency issued by a particular government.

I’m sure the OP is not alone in looking at the USA and wondering at what point is the dollar significantly weakened or the debt so unmanageable that default or hyper-inflation looms. When the amount of gold reserves are examined one might understandably worry that our system is truly propped up by a belief in growth, rather than hard assets.

Hence, this past year many nations have bought large amounts of gold for their reserves along with exploring other currencies to hold.

Exciting times to be sure!

[faterikcartman]

The whole system works because people produce things and services that others want.

It is very difficult to carry around 1,000 bushels of corn so we use money to represent our labour in order to trade conveniently.

When the supply of goods and services stays the same, but the money supply is increased, once that money goes into circulation the value of each unit of currency falls as traders compete for the same limited supply of goods and services.

Despite an abundance perceived by a few, unlike currency gold cannot be created out of whole cloth or alchemy. Nor does it decay or corrode. Deflating its value by increasing its supply is usually a gradual process rather than one that can be accomplished overnight. And gold is not issued by a government that may default on it. And it is compact and portable.

Ultimately, of course, gold too is just another commodity and its value over time reflects the vagaries of demand based on complex and varied factors.

Still, when presented with a choice of Zimbabwean dollars vs. gold, which would you pick? Gold, of course. Even if Zimbabwe prints more and more money and it becomes virtually worthless, one take take their gold anywhere in the world and it will have value, unlike a currency issued by a particular government.

I’m sure the OP is not alone in looking at the USA and wondering at what point is the dollar significantly weakened or the debt so unmanageable that default or hyper-inflation looms. When the amount of gold reserves are examined one might understandably worry that our system is truly propped up by a belief in growth, rather than hard assets.

Hence, this past year many nations have bought large amounts of gold for their reserves along with exploring other currencies to hold.

Exciting times to be sure!

[faterikcartman]

The whole system works because people produce things and services that others want.

It is very difficult to carry around 1,000 bushels of corn so we use money to represent our labour in order to trade conveniently.

When the supply of goods and services stays the same, but the money supply is increased, once that money goes into circulation the value of each unit of currency falls as traders compete for the same limited supply of goods and services.

Despite an abundance perceived by a few, unlike currency gold cannot be created out of whole cloth or alchemy. Nor does it decay or corrode. Deflating its value by increasing its supply is usually a gradual process rather than one that can be accomplished overnight. And gold is not issued by a government that may default on it. And it is compact and portable.

Ultimately, of course, gold too is just another commodity and its value over time reflects the vagaries of demand based on complex and varied factors.

Still, when presented with a choice of Zimbabwean dollars vs. gold, which would you pick? Gold, of course. Even if Zimbabwe prints more and more money and it becomes virtually worthless, one take take their gold anywhere in the world and it will have value, unlike a currency issued by a particular government.

I’m sure the OP is not alone in looking at the USA and wondering at what point is the dollar significantly weakened or the debt so unmanageable that default or hyper-inflation looms. When the amount of gold reserves are examined one might understandably worry that our system is truly propped up by a belief in growth, rather than hard assets.

Hence, this past year many nations have bought large amounts of gold for their reserves along with exploring other currencies to hold.

Exciting times to be sure!

[faterikcartman]

The whole system works because people produce things and services that others want.

It is very difficult to carry around 1,000 bushels of corn so we use money to represent our labour in order to trade conveniently.

When the supply of goods and services stays the same, but the money supply is increased, once that money goes into circulation the value of each unit of currency falls as traders compete for the same limited supply of goods and services.

Despite an abundance perceived by a few, unlike currency gold cannot be created out of whole cloth or alchemy. Nor does it decay or corrode. Deflating its value by increasing its supply is usually a gradual process rather than one that can be accomplished overnight. And gold is not issued by a government that may default on it. And it is compact and portable.

Ultimately, of course, gold too is just another commodity and its value over time reflects the vagaries of demand based on complex and varied factors.

Still, when presented with a choice of Zimbabwean dollars vs. gold, which would you pick? Gold, of course. Even if Zimbabwe prints more and more money and it becomes virtually worthless, one take take their gold anywhere in the world and it will have value, unlike a currency issued by a particular government.

I’m sure the OP is not alone in looking at the USA and wondering at what point is the dollar significantly weakened or the debt so unmanageable that default or hyper-inflation looms. When the amount of gold reserves are examined one might understandably worry that our system is truly propped up by a belief in growth, rather than hard assets.

Hence, this past year many nations have bought large amounts of gold for their reserves along with exploring other currencies to hold.

Exciting times to be sure!

[faterikcartman]

The whole system works because people produce things and services that others want.

It is very difficult to carry around 1,000 bushels of corn so we use money to represent our labour in order to trade conveniently.

When the supply of goods and services stays the same, but the money supply is increased, once that money goes into circulation the value of each unit of currency falls as traders compete for the same limited supply of goods and services.

Despite an abundance perceived by a few, unlike currency gold cannot be created out of whole cloth or alchemy. Nor does it decay or corrode. Deflating its value by increasing its supply is usually a gradual process rather than one that can be accomplished overnight. And gold is not issued by a government that may default on it. And it is compact and portable.

Ultimately, of course, gold too is just another commodity and its value over time reflects the vagaries of demand based on complex and varied factors.

Still, when presented with a choice of Zimbabwean dollars vs. gold, which would you pick? Gold, of course. Even if Zimbabwe prints more and more money and it becomes virtually worthless, one take take their gold anywhere in the world and it will have value, unlike a currency issued by a particular government.

I’m sure the OP is not alone in looking at the USA and wondering at what point is the dollar significantly weakened or the debt so unmanageable that default or hyper-inflation looms. When the amount of gold reserves are examined one might understandably worry that our system is truly propped up by a belief in growth, rather than hard assets.

Hence, this past year many nations have bought large amounts of gold for their reserves along with exploring other currencies to hold.

Exciting times to be sure!

[Author]

Posts