Wow. That's illegal.

Yeah, the right of a free people to keep and bear arms is inherently linked with WAR. Because that's what the debate about me protecting my right to defend myself and my family and shoot bambi is about: war!

They're not even related. This is the level of exchange put forth in the "resource-based economy" fantasy thread. It's like talking to someone on LSD.

Your flawless logic has convinced us that common sense and countless studies are wrong, Fokker. Thank you for your contribution.

The only good communist is a dead communist.

That clip was hysterical.

>>Since then he seems to be failing, he cannot unite a country behind a health bill that would bring away from its third world medical status.<<

Thread's ignorant spam. Nobody wants to read the ramblings of someone who chooses to be ignorant. Don't encourage the troll.

Go read scholarly studies of gun control's effects on crime rates. You'll find the same results from everyone all over. UK, Australia, Washington DC in USA, and on and on.

The stupid deserve death before procreation. It's for the good of the species. You pansies will water down humanity's future.

>>Tell me when did a gun in USA stopped a mass murder?<<

Hasan was stopped by being shot many times. The shame is that he wasn't shot sooner. The same is true of all mass murders. If someone had a gun and shot them after they pulled out a weapon and started shooting and before they had time to shoot a dozen+ people, that would be a good thing. There aren't mass murders where guns are more common, because would-be mass murderers get shot and stop murdering. Your question seems rather misguided.

There's no disputing the facts, only ignorant people without values who aren't above lying about them.

I only assume that "public" stations with government money ballooning their budget are artificially given the opportunity to deceive consumers into thinking their programming is something anyone watches. They're competition to private companies, making it more difficult to run a profitable business providing media to the public. Private businesses should be the only thing competing with private businesses and determining the quality of programming necessary to profit and exist. Funding a company regardless of the quality of its programming (which only consumers are capable of judging) is harmful to companies that produce content consumers actually want.

This thread is about government funding for for-profit companies, Freelancer. Funding for for-profit companies that are failing because they cannot produce a product that consumers want. This action directly short-circuits what makes capitalism work so well in providing the highest quality products at the lowest cost. It is desirable that companies which cannot produce a product consumers want at a price that they can profit from go out of business and cease to exist. Funding such failed enterprises with tax money is a waste of money.

News flash: We don't have a surplus, and I'll wager that non-US residents supporting wasting money on supporting these failed institutions don't have surpluses either. This is just ridiculous. We have no money but some are advocating spending money propping up failed business. No, I don't want anyone taking my money to produce more content that nobody wants. Try what you're advocating in your personal life first before you advocate pushing it on a national scale and wasting others' money: We won't have to respond to your posts, because you'll lose your internet in no time. Things aren't free. You're not doing anyone a favor by proposing actions which increase the cost of living for everyone, you're hurting everyone--especially the poor, who can't afford the increase in cost of living.

When the thread's topic, reliance on government, necessarily includes the idea of taking from people and limiting people's freedoms, there's no other word for it. I'm not going to be dishonest because someone finds the truth offensive.

If you can't call your position what it is, you know it's indefensible. If you want to defend tyranny, defend tyranny. Don't defend a government without limits and take offense at calling it a government without limits. That's just weird. To determine what success people are allowed to have is to make them slaves. Pretty language doesn't change this fact. Saying you hate slavery while claiming that anyone has the right to determine the success of others doesn't make you an opponent of slavery. Taking offense at words doesn't distance you from the meaning of those words. It's a silly game I have no desire to engage in. You can take up self-image and self-deception issues with a licensed psychological expert.

You're saying that advocating freedom from tyranny is offensive?

Yes, we should all be slaves to a benevolent state! Socialist tyranny is awesome. I wish I had the standard of living of China or Cuba!

Stop feeding the troll.

His basis:
>>he was instrumental in fixing the stock market<<

Which is complete nonsense. Obama hasn't "fixed" the stock market in any way, and he has very obvious detrimental effects on it.

>>and helping th eglobal economy recover by rallying the heads-of-state to back the bail-out plan<<

Everyone with half an education knows that this recovery, by all the numbers, is very slow and jobless. Recoveries are naturally much steeper and faster than this. Obama has slowed down this recovery tremendously. This is hardly opinion. Yeah, there are those who claim that census workers can save the economy, but they have no education nor idea what they're talking about. They think government jobs like census jobs are productive and create wealth and save economies... Everyone who can tie their own shoes knows they're wrong.

>> it was his sheer determination which got medicare passed<<

If he is referring to the health care package, he's incorrect on the facts (it was pressure and corrupt deals that got it passed), and it wasn't an accomplishment to get a garbage bill passed. He could probably get a bill outlawing left-handed smoke shifters passed too, but it wouldn't make him a great president. It's not an accomplishment. It's nothing positive for anyone.

>> signed a nuclear arms reduction treaty with Russia, and won a Nobel Peace Prize<<

And more things which aren't accomplishments.

Xeno has 0 support for his claim that Obama has done anything positive. Thread's spam.