On 3/25/2013 10:10 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 20:01:28 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 12:42:19 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 21:37:41 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

Unfortunately...American politics isnt quite that easy. The Democratic
National Committee controls the Democrats..and the Marxists that
control the DNC and their myrid Useful Idiots are very hard to deal
with. Which is why the Great Cull or the Second American Revolution is
in the wings. When those people are simply murdered outright...it
will help level the playing field considerably.

I sure hope homeland security and the other law enforcement agencies
read these newsgroups -- there is a lot of grounds for charges of
treason on these groups every single day.

Oh, HORSE****, clare! You're getting as bad as Huntress. Nobody is
threatening anyone, gov't or otherwise, or arrests would already have
been made and bodies sequestered. Give it a rest.

[Larry sez, acknowledging his veiled threat -- and knowing that a
veiled threat is a real threat, behind a veil...]

Oh, bull****. Larry made no threat, veiled or not.

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 07:27:23 -0700, George Plimpton
wrote:

On 3/25/2013 10:10 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 20:01:28 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 12:42:19 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 21:37:41 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

Unfortunately...American politics isnt quite that easy. The Democratic
National Committee controls the Democrats..and the Marxists that
control the DNC and their myrid Useful Idiots are very hard to deal
with. Which is why the Great Cull or the Second American Revolution is
in the wings. When those people are simply murdered outright...it
will help level the playing field considerably.

I sure hope homeland security and the other law enforcement agencies
read these newsgroups -- there is a lot of grounds for charges of
treason on these groups every single day.

Oh, HORSE****, clare! You're getting as bad as Huntress. Nobody is
threatening anyone, gov't or otherwise, or arrests would already have
been made and bodies sequestered. Give it a rest.

[Larry sez, acknowledging his veiled threat -- and knowing that a
veiled threat is a real threat, behind a veil...]

Oh, bull****. Larry made no threat, veiled or not.

Sure he did. It's the part you clipped out.

He was very careful not to identify an individual, which is what keeps
his butt out of trouble. But that was a threat.

--
Ed Huntress

On 3/26/2013 8:08 AM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 07:27:23 -0700, George Plimpton
wrote:

On 3/25/2013 10:10 PM, Ed Huntress wrote:
On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 20:01:28 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 12:42:19 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 21:37:41 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

Unfortunately...American politics isnt quite that easy. The Democratic
National Committee controls the Democrats..and the Marxists that
control the DNC and their myrid Useful Idiots are very hard to deal
with. Which is why the Great Cull or the Second American Revolution is
in the wings. When those people are simply murdered outright...it
will help level the playing field considerably.

I sure hope homeland security and the other law enforcement agencies
read these newsgroups -- there is a lot of grounds for charges of
treason on these groups every single day.

Oh, HORSE****, clare! You're getting as bad as Huntress. Nobody is
threatening anyone, gov't or otherwise, or arrests would already have
been made and bodies sequestered. Give it a rest.

[Larry sez, acknowledging his veiled threat -- and knowing that a
veiled threat is a real threat, behind a veil...]

Oh, bull****. Larry made no threat, veiled or not.

Sure he did. It's the part you clipped out.

This? "We're out here, Mr. & Mrs. Politician, and we're getting awfully
antsy with your actions of late. Please stay in line and heed our
wishes, Mr. Public Servant, or we'll have to steer you with a firmer hand."

Bull****. No threat.


He was very careful not to identify an individual, which is what keeps
his butt out of trouble. But that was a threat.

Bull****.

You sort of remind me here of the hysterical co-ed in the Carpet-Muncher
Studies class who shrieks that she was "literally raped" because some
male disputes her self-depiction as perpetual victim. She wasn't even
*figuratively* raped.

The Founders were gentlemen - who carried sidearms - and were more than
ready to use them in defense of their honor.

They didn't argue about simple **** like some people do these days.
They certainly didn't call people hideous names like people do today!

One would simply call his second to make arrangements for an early
morning exchange of - wit? Steel? Pistols for two and coffee for one?

But these days any peasant can insult anyone and get away with it.

Dennis wrote:

Jim Carrey fans:

"http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/25/hee-haw-jim-carrey-mocks-gun-lovers-charlton-heston-in-spoof.html


Refresh my memory. Is he a 'has been', or a 'never was'?


--

Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.

Sometimes Friday is just the fifth Monday of the week.

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 14:40:46 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Dennis wrote:

Jim Carrey fans:

"http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/25/hee-haw-jim-carrey-mocks-gun-lovers-charlton-heston-in-spoof.html


Refresh my memory. Is he a 'has been', or a 'never was'?

C: Both of the above.

He's probably the highest paid (gross) comedian of all time...so far.
http://www.celebritynetworth.com/ric...rey-net-worth/


He married the Tom Skerrit's gorgeous deputy (Lauren Holly) in that
lez-daughter-of-the-cop series, Picket Fences. Daughter went on to
witchy hotness in Charmed.

He was pretty good in The Mask, but I couldn't watch the rest of his
crap, such as Dumb and Dumber.

--
If we can ever make red tape nutritional, we can feed the world.
--Robert Schaeberle

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 00:57:39 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 20:49:43 -0400, wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 16:21:13 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 12:25:48 -0700, whoyakidding's ghost
wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 13:41:36 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 09:39:17 -0700, whoyakidding's ghost
wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 11:38:25 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 08:22:01 -0700, whoyakidding's ghost
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 13:36:01 -0400, Ed Huntress
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 10:22:09 -0700, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 12:42:52 -0400, wrote:

On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 01:23:46 -0500, "RogerN"
wrote:

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
news:nv1tk89fhm8cc5j9048ncoqlnb06374vn ...

On Sat, 23 Mar 2013 22:14:43 -0400, wrote:

snip
So you have an expensive hobby.. I can see it if you are a target
shooter - but it's not target shooters that are causing the run on
ammo. It's nut-cases figuring they need enough ammo to run a private
or civil war for 4 years again.

Oh....like the US government, who bought 1.6 Billion rounds of ammo?
Enough to fight a war in Iraq for the next 26 yrs.

Gunner

Interesting:
http://www.mrconservative.com/2013/0...-of-civilians/

Law enforcement training to kill civilians, DHS buying 1.6 Billion rounds,
DHS buying ~3,000 armored assault vehicles for use in the USA. Why would
anyone be suspicious?

RogerN

With nut-cases hording guns and ammo the government mabee has reason
to be conserned??

It's -not- nutcases, clare, it's us normal people...

(Irony meter just pinned and bent the needle...)

It's all about perspective. Jim Carrey does a nice job laying it out.
http://www.funnyordie.com/videos/043...ith-jim-carrey

Ohmigod, that's good. What's just as funny is the comments. He really
plucked some gun nutz' strings. Strings are what they have where
normal people have a sense of humor.

The gun nutz absolutely hate it when you tell them that you know what
they're thinking and it ain't pretty. I love that they're running up
the cost of their paranoia while claiming that they're merely sensible
people. Considering the appalling stats about consumer debt, it would
be useful to poll feverish ammo buyers and ask them what they gave up
in order to fund their purchase. You know it's going to be things like
making more than the minimum payment on their credit card, health
insurance, kids' dental work, etc. Then ask them if they consider
themselves responsible, as if the results would be any less than 100%
yes. It's ****ing amazing, but I guess we should be getting used to
that. I couldn't believe it when a majority thought that Iraq was at
the root of 9-11, or had WMD, and that invading them made sense.
Couldn't the idiots learn something from their mistaken notions? Of
course not, because here we are again with yet another example of
national stupidity being played out by largely the same group of
mental midgets. No matter how many times they're proven helpless at
logic, they continue to believe they're intelligent and sensible.

I think you're attaching too much importance to logic and sense. It's
a cultural divide, one we've always had but which has grown hardened
and shrill in recent decades.

Bill Keller just wrote an editorial about it, "States Gone Wild":

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/25/op...pagewanted=all

Of course there's lots going on. I think if I had to pin it down to
one root cause it would be the trend towards every man for himself.
But in order for someone to think that their personal right to "feel"
safe should take precedence over society's right to promote genuine
safety, the thinker has to be illogical. You can see it whenever the
gun nutz are faced with _any_ restrictions, no matter how reasonable.
They say there's "no such thing" (idiotic). They cry "second
amendment" (wrong and stupid) and "gun grabber" (paranoia). As Clare
explained, US restrictions will never be as tough as they are in
Canada already. And yet that hasn't resulted in wholesale "grabbing."
This is very simple stuff that even the dim witted ought to be able to
understand. But they prefer to put whatever whim is in their head (and
or off a crazy blog) over common sense and responsibility. Ironically,
they frequently claim to be patriots at the same time they're
advocating revolution. Which brings me back to the lack of reason.
They're afraid of losing their ability to fight a possible war with
their duly elected government, so they call for starting the war
instead. In the worst cases, we actually have people claiming they'd
rather have revolution than restrict felons' right to own firearms, or
have reduced magazine size or universal background checks. Those sorts
of positions aren't just illogical, they're insane no matter the
culture.

One of the reasons I find it interesting to engage in arguments here
is just a matter of exploring their whole mndset. You know that I grew
up in rural towns (in Md. and Pa., not in NJ) where there were two
seasons: hunting season and trout season. It was a rod or a gun, all
the time.

So I think I should be able to identify with their attitude. I
recognize what it is, but I don't identify with it. It was just taking
shape when I was last hunting and involved in serious target shooting.
This is something different. It's a cultural separation; each side
thinks it's part of a different country, almost.

The civil war has never really ended in the USA -= there has just been
a long uneasy truce.

Which civil war are you chatting about? The one between the
colonials and the Brits? Or the one in 1861? If thats the one you
are referring to..cites?
The war between the states. The one that took the lives of more
Americans than all other hostilities the nation has been involved in,
including the war of independence, Spanish American, Indian Wars,
World wars, Koria, Nam, to the current conflicts.
You have slaughtered more of your own than ANY combination of external
enemies. By the latest numbers, 750,000 - more than 10% of the
nation's population at the time slaughtered in 4 short years. That is
more than dispicable - and you and your kind would have it happen
again. Bloody barbarians. Even thinking about repeating that SHOULD be
considered treason, even if your laws don't currently treat it as
such.!!!


Cites? I don't need cites. You don't either. Just look at your
country.

snip

But that's what it is, IMO. It's the old rural/urban divide, which has
become more complex. Guns are a central issue. Tribal myth-making is
at the heart of it, with Liberalism/socialism as talismans and tribal identifiers, and
you can kiss the Constitution goodbye.

It's more than urban/rural

Fixed that for you.

Gunner

Larry Jaques wrote:

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 14:40:46 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


Dennis wrote:

Jim Carrey fans:

"http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/25/hee-haw-jim-carrey-mocks-gun-lovers-charlton-heston-in-spoof.html


Refresh my memory. Is he a 'has been', or a 'never was'?

C: Both of the above.

He's probably the highest paid (gross) comedian of all time...so far.
http://www.celebritynetworth.com/ric...rey-net-worth/

He married the Tom Skerrit's gorgeous deputy (Lauren Holly) in that
lez-daughter-of-the-cop series, Picket Fences. Daughter went on to
witchy hotness in Charmed.

He was pretty good in The Mask, but I couldn't watch the rest of his
crap, such as Dumb and Dumber.


Wasn't that a documentary on politics? ;-)

--

Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.

Sometimes Friday is just the fifth Monday of the week.

"Michael A. Terrell" on Tue, 26 Mar 2013
14:40:46 -0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

Dennis wrote:

Jim Carrey fans:

"http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/25/hee-haw-jim-carrey-mocks-gun-lovers-charlton-heston-in-spoof.html


Refresh my memory. Is he a 'has been', or a 'never was'?

"Has been' As an actor, he played funny parts. But now he's
trying to be serious - and he's still a clown.
--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 22:57:46 -0400, wrote:

The civil war has never really ended in the USA -= there has just been
a long uneasy truce.

Which civil war are you chatting about? The one between the
colonials and the Brits? Or the one in 1861? If thats the one you
are referring to..cites?


The war between the states. The one that took the lives of more
Americans than all other hostilities the nation has been involved in,
including the war of independence, Spanish American, Indian Wars,
World wars, Koria, Nam, to the current conflicts.
You have slaughtered more of your own than ANY combination of external
enemies. By the latest numbers, 750,000 - more than 10% of the
nation's population at the time slaughtered in 4 short years. That is
more than dispicable - and you and your kind would have it happen
again. Bloody barbarians. Even thinking about repeating that SHOULD be
considered treason, even if your laws don't currently treat it as
such.!!!

So you prefer there to be slaves. Because it will "save lives".

Interesting rational there old Comrade.

Your friends in the USSR and Red China murdered some 190,000,000 men,
women and children in 65 yrs. And yet you prefer the same political
ideology that murdered all those people. Thats rather an interesting
admission from you.

Clare prefers there be slaves, because no one but the slaves will be
harmed.

Fascinating..fascinating indeed.


Gunner

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 23:09:12 -0400, wrote:


My goverment? No. The people who are currently running it? No, they
are socialists as well. Though fascism is just a form of socialism.
Tell me you didnt know that..right?


If you go far enough left, you end up extreme right.

Actually not true. To the Left is totalitarianism, to the far right
is anarchy.

Your delight in socialism is simply a cul de sac at the far left end
of the road.

One side of that cul de sac is socialism/communism..the other side is
fascism. Just the odd and even numbers to tell them apart.


Posted: Sunday, March 11, 2012 1:00 am

By KL Jensen
A recent letter to the editor repeatedly tried to associate Fascism
with the Tea Party movement. Clearly, the author fails to understand
the concept of Fascism. Fascism was coined by the Italian dictator
Benito Mussolini in the 1920's.

Mussolini grew up as a committed follower of Marxist
Socialism/Communism. From its theoretical inception by Karl Marx and
Friedrich Engels, Communism has always been an international movement
with the goal of spreading Socialism and eventually Communism globally
.... thus the penchant for many trade unions to include the word
€˜International' in their name: IBEW, SEIU, IUOE, etc.

Mussolini came to realize that actually implementing International
Communism was a daunting and likely impossible task. The local "home"
environment within national boundaries consisting of a common language
and culture would be easier to organize under Socialism.

Ultimately Mussolini rejected Marx's global concept of

Socialism/Communism and devised the idea of National Socialism, a
compulsory "cooperation" between the Italian State government and
major businesses, industries, agriculture, and banks within the state
in order to streamline efficiency "for the good of the people". The
"people" themselves are unable to manage the affairs of the State ...
they must be led by an all-powerful dictator.

Big businessmen throughout Europe and America loved it [at first] --
it implied they could participate directly in collusion with
government to access markets for their specific goods, at the expense
of small businesses. €˜Crony Capitalism' was now formally part of €˜Big
Government'.

A key distinction between Fascism and Marxist Socialism/Communism is
that Fascism allows people to own private property, where Marxism
dictates the State owns all property. Fascism was deemed more
efficient, for the State doesn't have to create a bureaucracy to
maintain the properties. The state dictates how the private property
is used [including industry and farms] -- sort of like our
contemporary EPA and zoning boards. In reality, private ownership is
an illusion.

Adolph Hitler loved Mussolini's Fascism, and incorporated it into his
German brand of National Socialism, which devolved into Nazism. Hitler
eventually co-opted Mussolini himself.

At first the Communists tolerated National Socialism and Fascism,
seeing it as a stepping-stone to Communism. The German Communists made
up a slogan embracing the idea -- "First Brown, then Red", referring
to the brown shirts the German National Socialists wore.

With Hitler's co-opting of the Fascist movement, and his determination
to keep Germany a racially pure state, the German and Russian
Communists realized Germany and Italy would never "progress" to the
International Communist model. Thus the National Socialists,
Democratic Socialists, Nazis, and Fascists of Germany and Italy became
the bitter enemies of the Communists.

Germany and Italy were roadblocks to the implementation of Global
Communism. This battle between communism and fascism has always been
about two distinct leftist Socialist movements -- one favoring an
International socialism, the other a national socialism. Neither
movement has anything in common with the American concepts of
individualism and independence.

To equate fascism with American conservatism or the current Tea Party
movement is a gross error in thinking, reflecting ignorance of the
true history of the fascist movement.

Fascism has far more in common with today's progressive socialist
movement, and progressives are increasingly becoming known as Liberal
fascists.

Consider the many collusions between the Federal government under
Democrats and big business [GE, Solyndra, GM, Chrysler, etc.] along
with federal government control of banking, housing, healthcare ...
add in the nanny-state regulators and overseers of OSHA/EH&S, EPA,
etc., in manufacturing and production, and it becomes abundantly clear
our current American government is significantly fascist in structure.

However, ascribe the blame where it lies, at the feet of the American
progressive socialist movement. Many RINO Republicans contributed to
this as well, but the dominant socialist movement lies in the
Democratic Party.

The deluded Marxist Communists still keep hoping that they're going to
come out on top in the long run.

Fascism requires a constant enemy. For Hitler it was the Jewish
people. For the modern fascist, the enemy is

individualism and its small government, free-enterprise capitalism,
regardless of race and ethnicity.

Fiscal conservatives, libertarian conservatives, libertarians, and the
Tea Party are not fascists by any meaning of the word.

*
Is Fascism left or right?

It's a left-wing ideology, as it is always accompanied by economic
socialism.

The idea that fascists could be conservatives is from the liberals
realizing (to their horror) that folks have done what they wanted to
do, got caught, and sullied their pristine name of [fill-in-blank]. In
other words, it's the conservatives who want to tell people what to
do, right? No. The conservatives are capitalists, who want the market
only regulated so that people are not hurt (i.e., FDA). The liberal
wants everything regulated. The socialist wants the government to own
some key industries. The fascist knows that the government need only
have control of key industries (by loaning them money or dictating who
their CEO's can be). Both of those tactics are things the liberal only
will attempt. Ironically, while the liberal is accusing the
conservative of being a fascist, the liberal is also accusing the
conservative of having not stopped whatever industry from doing
something they say was wrong. Which is it?

*

The Nazi party, a left-wing liberal movement
fiscal, left, left-wing, liberal, liberals, Nazi, nazi left-wing, nazi
leftist, nazi liberal, nazi liberals, nazi party, Nazis

The liberal atheist media has tried to portray the Nazis as a radical
right-wing movement but any historian or politician whos studied the
Nazi party would find the exact opposite to be true.

You will always here liberals and liberal atheists claim the Nazis
were €œfar right wing€� but its time for me to completely debunk that
myth.

The Nazis are labeled as €œfar right€� simply for being fascist. By that
definition, any party whether they are fiscally left or right would be
labeled as €œfar right€� if they are fascist.

But far-right as in libertarian, pro-capitalist, pro-Austrian
economist or small-government the Nazis were not.

€�We are socialists, we are enemies of todays capitalistic
economic system for the exploitation of the economically weak, with
its unfair salaries, with its unseemly evaluation of a human being
according to wealth and property instead of responsibility and
performance, and we are determined to destroy this system under all
conditions€�

- Adolf Hitler, Hitlers speech on May 1, 1927. Cited in: Toland,
John (1992). Adolf Hitler. Anchor Books. pp. 224€“225. ISBN 0385037244.

Some liberals have claimed that Hitler retracted this statement, this
claim of course turned out to be just another lie. Hitler never
retracted this statement ever. Instead a historian claims that Hitler
had regrets about using the word €œsocialism€� simply because Hitler
said €œ€�Socialism! That is an unfortunate word altogether€�. But
claiming that socialism is an unfortunate word is a far cry from
retracting his statement. Contrary to what liberals claim, Hitler
continued to strongly oppose capitalism and never retracted this
statement.

There is absolutely nothing conservative, pro-capitalist, or
right-wing about the Nazis. Most conservatives are only anti-illegal
immigration, not against all immigration like the Nazis were, and in
the past conservatives like Ronald Reagan gave amnesty. Im sure that
most conservatives strongly oppose illegal immigration.

The Nazis or National Socialists were very fiscally left-wing on
nearly all issues, although you can find some isolated incidences
where the Nazis supported privatization of some industry, private
property or something along those lines, the Nazis still were overall
anti-capitalist (as well as anti-communist) and strongly opposed to
capitalism.

The Nazis were also socially liberal on many issues as well.

So what are my reasons for labeling the Nazis are being a far-left
wing liberal movement?

Nationalization of corporations and industries

€œ13. We demand the nationalisation of all (previous)
associated industries (trusts)€�
- The 25-point Program of the NSDAP

So which party supports nationalization of corporations and
industries? Is that more left-wing or right-wing?
Profit-sharing

€œ14. We demand a division of profits of all heavy industries€�
- The 25-point Program of the NSDAP

Profit-sharing is definitely a left-wing liberal idea.
Expansion of pension

€œ15. We demand an expansion on a large scale of old age
welfare€œ
- The 25-point Program of the NSDAP

Expansion of old age welfare? Couldnt be a small-government
conservative if you supported it.
Keynesian economic policies
Basically all of the Nazis economic policies were Keynesian as
opposed to Austrian. This means the Nazis supported (and in fact did)
things like running large deficits and using government programs to
reduce unemployment. There is absolutely nothing pro-Austrian
economist about the Nazis at all.
Anti-free-market capitalist
The Nazis had government-controlled capitalism, which is a form of
socialism and essentially the exact opposite of free-market capitalism
(where the government has little to no control). The Nazi government
had control over corporations. The Nazis also had
government-controlled wages and prices as well. All these policies
are the exact opposite of far right-wing free-market Austrian
economists policies.
Pro-animal rights
Its impossible to deny that the Nazis were pro-animal rights.

An absolute and permanent ban on vivisection is not only a
necessary law to protect animals and to show sympathy with their pain,
but it is also a law for humanity itself

- Hermann Göring, leading member of the Nazi party

The Nazis were the very first country in history to ban
vivisection. The Nazis also made restrictions on hunting and banned
commercial animal trapping. Many people who violated animal rights
laws were sent to concentration camps.

So is being pro-animal rights more left or right?
Pro-Government control

€œ25. For the execution of all of this we demand the formation
of a strong central power in the Reich. Unlimited authority of the
central parliament over the whole Reich and its organizations in
general€�
- The 25-point Program of the NSDAP

The Nazis wanted the government to have unlimited power over all.
This is once again a typical leftist viewpoint of wanting government
power over personal freedom. Leftists and liberals constantly promote
the idea of more government involvement, more government control, and
bigger government claiming that it is a good thing for the government
to have power over individuals and corporations.

When liberals argue that Hitler was some how right-wing their weak
arguments usually involve:
- Pointing out quotes where Hitler spoke out against Marxism (ignoring
the quotes where Hitler spoke out against capitalism and that most
liberal Democrats are not Marxists)
- Intentionally ignoring the 25-point Program of the NDSAP
- Pointing out that Hitler was patriotic or believed in a strong
national defense (while ignoring that many other ideologies on the
left also believe in patriotism and building a strong national
defense)

The simple fact is overall Hitler and the Nazis fit in closely to the
left-wing liberal Democratic party. Their anti-communist and
anti-capitalist views mesh very well with the modern liberal Democrat
party, and theres no way to deny this.

Even White Nationalists on the most popular White Nationalist forum
have admitted that the Nazis were left-wing €“
http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t617746/. The very same user who made
this post is also admittedly an atheist saying €œIm an Atheist and an
adherent to the Darwinian-Galtonian school of evolutionary thought€�.

So how can anyone deny that Hitler and the Nazis were much more
left-wing than right-wing on nearly every issue, and much closer to
left-wing overall than right-wing?

On 3/27/2013 12:06 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 22:57:46 -0400, wrote:

The civil war has never really ended in the USA -= there has just been
a long uneasy truce.

Which civil war are you chatting about? The one between the
colonials and the Brits? Or the one in 1861? If thats the one you
are referring to..cites?


The war between the states. The one that took the lives of more
Americans than all other hostilities the nation has been involved in,
including the war of independence, Spanish American, Indian Wars,
World wars, Koria, Nam, to the current conflicts.
You have slaughtered more of your own than ANY combination of external
enemies. By the latest numbers, 750,000 - more than 10% of the
nation's population at the time slaughtered in 4 short years. That is
more than dispicable - and you and your kind would have it happen
again. Bloody barbarians. Even thinking about repeating that SHOULD be
considered treason, even if your laws don't currently treat it as
such.!!!

So you prefer there to be slaves.

The American Civil War was not about ending slavery.

On 3/27/2013 12:18 AM, Gunner Asch wrote:
On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 23:09:12 -0400, wrote:


My goverment? No. The people who are currently running it? No, they
are socialists as well. Though fascism is just a form of socialism.
Tell me you didnt know that..right?


If you go far enough left, you end up extreme right.

Actually not true.

Actually it's true. You're a Nazi, gummer.

pyotr filipivich wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" on Tue, 26 Mar 2013
14:40:46 -0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

Dennis wrote:

Jim Carrey fans:

"http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/25/hee-haw-jim-carrey-mocks-gun-lovers-charlton-heston-in-spoof.html


Refresh my memory. Is he a 'has been', or a 'never was'?

"Has been' As an actor, he played funny parts. But now he's
trying to be serious - and he's still a clown.


Like a sorry rocker who thinks he can do country?


--

Politicians should only get paid if the budget is balanced, and there is
enough left over to pay them.

Sometimes Friday is just the fifth Monday of the week.

"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 23:09:12 -0400, wrote:

My goverment? No. The people who are currently running it? No, they
are socialists as well. Though fascism is just a form of socialism.
Tell me you didnt know that..right?

If you go far enough left, you end up extreme right.

Actually not true. To the Left is totalitarianism, to the far right
is anarchy.


They do overlap at the extremes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 09:11:09 -0400, "Michael A. Terrell"
wrote:


pyotr filipivich wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" on Tue, 26 Mar 2013
14:40:46 -0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

Dennis wrote:

Jim Carrey fans:

"http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/25/hee-haw-jim-carrey-mocks-gun-lovers-charlton-heston-in-spoof.html


Refresh my memory. Is he a 'has been', or a 'never was'?

"Has been' As an actor, he played funny parts. But now he's
trying to be serious - and he's still a clown.


Like a sorry rocker who thinks he can do country?

Sometimes it works like a charm. To wit:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VyK1bZZ7E-s

--
If we can ever make red tape nutritional, we can feed the world.
--Robert Schaeberle

"Jim Wilkins" wrote in message
...
"Gunner Asch" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 23:09:12 -0400, wrote:

My goverment? No. The people who are currently running it? No,
they
are socialists as well. Though fascism is just a form of
socialism.
Tell me you didnt know that..right?

If you go far enough left, you end up extreme right.

Actually not true. To the Left is totalitarianism, to the far
right
is anarchy.


They do overlap at the extremes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anarcho-syndicalism

It's a libertarian socialism which trusts neither capitalists nor
bureaucrats.

To oversimplify, the Right praises others' personal achievements, the
Left resents them. And that's reflected in the sorry lot Dems have to
build an Administration from.

On Wed, 27 Mar 2013 00:06:06 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:

On Tue, 26 Mar 2013 22:57:46 -0400, wrote:

The civil war has never really ended in the USA -= there has just been
a long uneasy truce.

Which civil war are you chatting about? The one between the
colonials and the Brits? Or the one in 1861? If thats the one you
are referring to..cites?


The war between the states. The one that took the lives of more
Americans than all other hostilities the nation has been involved in,
including the war of independence, Spanish American, Indian Wars,
World wars, Koria, Nam, to the current conflicts.
You have slaughtered more of your own than ANY combination of external
enemies. By the latest numbers, 750,000 - more than 10% of the
nation's population at the time slaughtered in 4 short years. That is
more than dispicable - and you and your kind would have it happen
again. Bloody barbarians. Even thinking about repeating that SHOULD be
considered treason, even if your laws don't currently treat it as
such.!!!

So you prefer there to be slaves. Because it will "save lives".

Interesting rational there old Comrade.

Your friends in the USSR and Red China murdered some 190,000,000 men,
women and children in 65 yrs. And yet you prefer the same political
ideology that murdered all those people. Thats rather an interesting
admission from you.

Clare prefers there be slaves, because no one but the slaves will be
harmed.

Fascinating..fascinating indeed.


No, but the war between the states was about a little more than JUST
slavery. Tarriffs, states rights, and minority rights were all part of
the cause of the war - Slavery was a contributor.

Gunner

On Mar 26, 2:01*am, jon_banquer wrote:
On Mar 25, 11:35*pm, Too_Many_Tools wrote:





On Mar 25, 10:01*pm, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 12:42:19 -0400, wrote:
On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 21:37:41 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:
Unfortunately...American politics isnt quite that easy. The Democratic
National Committee controls the Democrats..and the Marxists that
control the DNC and their myrid Useful Idiots are very hard to deal
with. Which is why the Great Cull or the Second American Revolution is
in the wings. *When those people are simply murdered outright...it
will help level the playing field considerably.

I sure hope homeland security and the other law enforcement agencies
read these newsgroups -- there is a lot of grounds for charges of
treason on these groups every single day.

Oh, HORSE****, clare! *You're getting as bad as Huntress. Nobody is
threatening anyone, gov't or otherwise, or arrests would already have
been made and bodies sequestered. *Give it a rest.

We sense things coming down the pike and are getting ready to hole-up
SECURELY while it goes on around us. *It's prepping, not treason.

We got saddled with the "charter of rights and freedoms" by our old
friend " Peter Waterhole" a few decades ago, which has made things a
little harder as now every Tom Dick and Harry has his "rights"
guaranteed, without having his "responsibilities" also laid out by
law.

That sounds too much like our own (speaking-weasel-led) gov't at work..

--
If we can ever make red tape nutritional, we can feed the world.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * --Robert Schaeberle

If you don't understand how easily it is for the Feds to monitor any
group..especially Usenet where the gun loons love to hang out..you
really are an idiot.

People like Gummer have a large digital file..and the locals are
likely advised to monitor him on a regular basis.

FWIW...guns shows are heavily monitored by the Feds.

TMT

There is no doubt Larry Jackass is a complete idiot. Probably a
ticking time bomb as well.

Read this:

http://tinyurl.com/clmdqyo- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yep...a gun loon who would not pass a pysch test.

TMT

On 3/27/2013 9:36 PM, Too_Many_Tools wrote:
On Mar 26, 2:01 am, jon_banquer wrote:
On Mar 25, 11:35 pm, Too_Many_Tools wrote:





On Mar 25, 10:01 pm, Larry Jaques
wrote:

On Mon, 25 Mar 2013 12:42:19 -0400, wrote:
On Sun, 24 Mar 2013 21:37:41 -0700, Gunner Asch
wrote:
Unfortunately...American politics isnt quite that easy. The Democratic
National Committee controls the Democrats..and the Marxists that
control the DNC and their myrid Useful Idiots are very hard to deal
with. Which is why the Great Cull or the Second American Revolution is
in the wings. When those people are simply murdered outright...it
will help level the playing field considerably.

I sure hope homeland security and the other law enforcement agencies
read these newsgroups -- there is a lot of grounds for charges of
treason on these groups every single day.

Oh, HORSE****, clare! You're getting as bad as Huntress. Nobody is
threatening anyone, gov't or otherwise, or arrests would already have
been made and bodies sequestered. Give it a rest.

We sense things coming down the pike and are getting ready to hole-up
SECURELY while it goes on around us. It's prepping, not treason.

We got saddled with the "charter of rights and freedoms" by our old
friend " Peter Waterhole" a few decades ago, which has made things a
little harder as now every Tom Dick and Harry has his "rights"
guaranteed, without having his "responsibilities" also laid out by
law.

That sounds too much like our own (speaking-weasel-led) gov't at work.

--
If we can ever make red tape nutritional, we can feed the world.
--Robert Schaeberle

If you don't understand how easily it is for the Feds to monitor any
group..especially Usenet where the gun loons love to hang out..you
really are an idiot.

People like Gummer have a large digital file..and the locals are
likely advised to monitor him on a regular basis.

FWIW...guns shows are heavily monitored by the Feds.

TMT

There is no doubt Larry Jackass is a complete idiot. Probably a
ticking time bomb as well.

Read this:

http://tinyurl.com/clmdqyo- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yep...a

Just admit that you don't know ****ity-doo about GPS.

"Michael A. Terrell" on Wed, 27 Mar 2013
09:11:09 -0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

pyotr filipivich wrote:

"Michael A. Terrell" on Tue, 26 Mar 2013
14:40:46 -0400 typed in rec.crafts.metalworking the following:

Dennis wrote:

Jim Carrey fans:

"http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/03/25/hee-haw-jim-carrey-mocks-gun-lovers-charlton-heston-in-spoof.html


Refresh my memory. Is he a 'has been', or a 'never was'?

"Has been' As an actor, he played funny parts. But now he's
trying to be serious - and he's still a clown.


Like a sorry rocker who thinks he can do country?

Sordid like that.
--
pyotr filipivich
"With Age comes Wisdom. Although more often, Age travels alone."