Arazona Shooter Jared Loughner was a Leftwing Democrat

[P4P Opinion]

You haven't heard of a lot of things so that doesn't surprise me.



Fill in the blank.

National _________ Party.

Should I go slower?

I suggest you study a little history, or at least study it better, because this post is one of the more idiotic posts I've read on this forum, all the more because of your articulacy.

[Bastian Loc]

I suggest you study a little history, or at least study it better, because this post is one of the more idiotic posts I've read on this forum, all the more because of your articulacy.

let me guess. you're English and you love Socialism so any comparison to Hitler offends your delicate illusions about living in a welfare state?

[Jim Jeffries]

let me guess. you're English and you love Socialism so any comparison to Hitler offends your delicate illusions about living in a welfare state?

Next he'll be claiming that Mussolini wasn't a socialist before he became a fascist.

Anyhow TS is an idiot. Loughner was a psychopath that was all over the place. The only reason his politics is even an issue is because the Left wasted no time using this to attack the Right, without a single shred of evidence indicating his motivation. I'll be pissed if this guy avoids the chair.

[Bastian Loc]

Next he'll be claiming that Mussolini wasn't a socialist before he became a fascist.

Anyhow TS is an idiot. Loughner was a psychopath that was all over the place. The only reason his politics is even an issue is because the Left wasted no time using this to attack the Right, without a single shred of evidence indicating his motivation. I'll be pissed if this guy avoids the chair.

Exactly, they're such political opportunists its disgusting. Next up bills to destroy the first and second amendments.

[Nuurzhaelan]

You asked me a question and I answered it, now you're going off on random unintelligible tangents about diversity?

Seek help.

It's not random or unintelligible, it's just that I need to spell it out for you. Shall I go slower?

It (diversity and my comments on it) is relevant because you claimed that hitler and his government were socialist. It was an exclusive club. Everyone else (Jews, Catholics...anyone he did not approve) was to be expunged. Germany and its leadership were fascist, ultra right wing zealots who sought to stomp out any influence that would (in their views) contaminate the purity of the Reich. The name 'National Workers' Party' was inaccurate because it neither represented nor benefited the whole nation, only the Germans.

Hitler was a socialist and loved big government control.

You lose.

Remember that brain fart? There was nothing socialist or communal about them. Government controlled economy does not automatically make for a communist government because so MUCH of the public were not included in its scope. hitler's government was so decidedly supremacist that it could not have been socialist. He labeled anyone who did not agree with his vision a traitor. So, even some of the Germans were not represented. Everyone was of one mind, or pretended to be. It was not about the people and their welfare, it was about German supremacy.

They are democrats in name and in practice. The same ones that paid lip service to being anti war only to continue to vote for war and war funding.

The ones that behave just like "republicans"?

Which war are you on about? Iraq? Dig the crust out of your ass, your brain needs oxygen. By and large, Democrats did not want the war. They paid for it because by the time it was revealed that the whole world had been duped, it would have been far more disastrous to leave. The baathists had been run out of power and the military had been disbanded. The only thing holding the country, and the entire middle east together at that point was the US...the same country which created the vacuum of power. If the US had left, the Shia probably would have joined and emboldened Iran and the Kurds would have likely fled into Turkey's borders. No one wanted any of that save the Iranians.

They also paid for it because our soldiers needed support. Public support was not strong in Vietnam and many thousands died as a result. Democrats recognized that solidarity would save more lives than protesting would.

Again, another random tangent. I'm not your therapist man. Stick to the topic or stop replying to me. I've never seen such convoluted pseudo shit in my life.




What are you saying?

I was reading the word merit as either a claim to innate value (noun) or as something deserved (verb). You seemed to be conveniently arguing that the premise posted by Sin, that hitler valued merit versus equality, should be accepted because people should receive only what they earn and deserve. I argued against that by stating that sometimes one cannot get what one deserves because life is not fair.

Then I argued that hitler was not concerned with what the Jews or others who disagreed with him had deserved; he was only concerned with the innate value of the German over the Jew. You ignored the real thrust of the issue and I was pointing it out.

I didn't make the claim, he did. Please try to stick to the topic. But off the top of my head I'd have to say that their only industry was umm....... war?

Right. So, competition as opposed to cooperation. Where is the merit (noun...innate value or worth) in a nation whose only product is war?

Yes you are.

Sop****ric twit.

He was a totalitarian. Go debate your "ism's" with someone of your basic level of understanding.

It's basically the same ****ing thing, ******.

[BrotherDudeJack]

lol, people still arguing about sides.


Both parties suck.

Both parties have ran this place to where we are today.

Its sickening trying to use this event to prop up one side and down the other. Red, blue, left, right,

does it really matter when we all suffer the consequences of their actions and those who you root for don't really give a **** about you?

Best post so far.

[P4P Opinion]

let me guess. you're English and you love Socialism so any comparison to Hitler offends your delicate illusions about living in a welfare state?

Of course, not a critical thinker either, makes sense. Can't stick to the topic in hand, or won't. Whether I like socialism or not is entirely irrelevant to whether 'National Socialism' equates to socialism. To repeat my point, you need to study history or study it better, because you clearly have not understood it.

[squealpiggy]

I'll reiterate - the fact that he lauds both Mein Kampf and the Communist Manifesto suggests to me that he's a malcontent pseudo-intellectual who likes the idea of holding controversial opinions. I daresay he thinks he's very clever and has it all worked out and is better than the "sheeple" who "just follow what the government tells them" because they are "mind control zombies" who "drink flouridated water".

Know anyone like that?

[Mud]

I'll reiterate - the fact that he lauds both Mein Kampf and the Communist Manifesto suggests to me that he's a malcontent pseudo-intellectual who likes the idea of holding controversial opinions. I daresay he thinks he's very clever and has it all worked out and is better than the "sheeple" who "just follow what the government tells them" because they are "mind control zombies" who "drink flouridated water".

Know anyone like that?

U forgot..."and is a ****". "peeleft:

[JEROBOAM]

I'm hearing that he was a Free Mason too.