David Hogg's attempt to end Laura Ingraham's career sets dangerous precedent

[Faun]

Uncensored is telling a whopper of a lie. Easy to confirm lie.

Someone is sure trying to lie, Comrade.

{
Ah, the “gun show loophole”. Your liberal friends have probably mentioned it when trying to convince you that there must be “common sense gun safety legislation” (or some similar liberal terminology).

The erroneous premise is that criminals buy guns to use in crimes at gun shows because gun show purchases don’t require the same background checks as purchases made at firearms retail establishments. This, of course, has been debunked many times but that doesn’t stop liberals from using it as an argument because reality doesn’t matter when a good false narrative will do. Unless guns are purchased from a private individual a background check is required by law. If you, or anyone else, purchases a gun from a licensed dealer at a gun show there will be a background check performed to determine if you can legally purchase a firearm. However, when purchasing from an individual rather than a business, that doesn’t apply because such private transactions aren’t regulated by the government.

“Ah HA!!”, you might say, “THAT”s where all those illegally trafficked guns are bought and sold!” Uh… no. Research shows that only a tiny percentage – less than one percent – of firearms offenders have acquired guns through gun show purchases. So, the old “gun show loophole” is a myth. It’s an often repeated myth, but a myth nonetheless.

Where do criminals get their guns, then? Research shows that criminals steal guns or buy them from other criminals who either steal them or break laws to acquire them, such as making “straw purchases” from legal dealers. One such instance happened in Ohio recently when a man made a straw purchase of two dozen handguns from four different dealers, claiming that he needed them for his job teaching a concealed carry class, and then passed them along to criminals who couldn’t pass background checks. [more]}

The Myth of the “Gun Show Loophole” – The Mark & Mack Show

You've had your ass kicked on this bullshit several dozen times.

No, liar. You gloss over the narrative in your post that admits firearms are purchased at gun shows from private dealers without background checks.
You are delusional abour kicking anyones ass.

Again, you anti-civil rights clows trot out the same tired bullshit over and over. You get the shit kicked out of you, then whimper away.

You just fucking said anyone can buy a firearm at a gun show and not be subjected to a background screening by an unlicensed dealer. That’s what you call, kicking our ass. Exactly how senile are you, gramps?

DERP

Same lies from the same retards...

{
The “Gun Show Loophole” demagoguery demonizes these individual collectors and portrays them as the source of all of our troubles. What the gun control lobby wants to confuse the public into supporting is the enactment of laws that require background checks on private sales, transfers or loans of firearms.

Certainly, some individuals do come to gun shows to barter, trade, sell or buy firearms – but they are not dealers any more than those who meet at a gun range and choose to trade. If they were dealers, the ATF would force them to register as federal firearms licensees under existing law. And yes, ATF agents come to every gun show, and even flea markets and other such venues, looking for violations of these laws.

So what is the real purpose of the push to close the “gun show loophole”? Since there is no loophole, the purpose is to convince the public to agree to a law that subject ALL private sales, transfers, or loans of firearms to the background check requirement.

If such a law were in place, you could not loan a firearm to a friend for a weekend hunt, trade guns at the range or give your son a deer rifle without going to a federal firearm licensed dealer to conduct a background check. This extension of government into the private lives of gun owners is meant to cause inconvenience and thereby discourage the ownership of firearms. It will especially discourage the gifting and loaning of firearms so often used to encourage someone to join the shooting community.

What this will not do is slow down the acquisition of firearms by criminals. It is already illegal for even a private individual to transfer a firearm to a felon or other prohibited person.

Many people are unaware that studies show virtually all criminals obtain their firearms through black market transactions on the street. Just as gang members deal in drugs and other contraband, they trade and sell firearms, many of which have been stolen in the first place. These dealers in contraband care nothing about laws and will never conduct background checks. Thus these laws only burden the law abiding citizens with the proposed incursions on their Second Amendment rights.

Mass shootings and the Charleston tragedy are no exception. In a public statement the FBI Director admitted that it was a bureaucratic error that permitted the Charleston shooter to obtain a firearm. Improving the existing system under current law may have helped – but no new intrusions on State and Federal Constitutional rights are necessary. As for other mass shootings occurring across our country, the perpetrators commonly pass background checks when they buy firearms through licensed dealers, and we find many more instances where theft, rather than a private sale, is the source of firearms.}


The Gun Show Loophole Myth

Stop lying, ya loopy old fart. You already admitted there’s a loophole, even if you refuse to believe what you post...

However, when purchasing from an individual rather than a business, that doesn’t apply because such private transactions aren’t regulated by the government.​

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

There is no singular definition of fascism, other than it has used the machinations of divide and conquer over a population to gain power, is authoritarian in nature, and its leaders narrowly defines patriotism by attacking those who are different in creed, color or ethnicity. In this case, students who have questioned gun policies.

False, you ignorant Maoist.

Fascism is a system devised by Benito Mussolini, head of the Italian Bolshevik party to "fix" the flaws of Marxism. The primary "flaw" being of course that Vladimir Lenin, rather than he was the ruler of the movement.

Mussolini detailed his system in "Il Fascisti" which you can read here Benito Mussolini (Author of The Doctrine of Fascism)

Perhaps the most poignant quote being "why should the state need to own the means of production when the state owns the owners?"


Mussolini devised a system where all things, including the people, belong to the state. Sounds an awful lot like what you Stalinist democrats promote.

So Wiemar Germany under Hitler, Spain under Franco; Japan under ToJo, or in Chile, Austria, Croatia, Finland, France under Petain, Greece, Norway, Hungry, Portugal, Romania and Yugoslavia are were not fascist countries?

A study of these forms of fascism have an number of commonalities, but also vary from that of Mussolini in Italy and the Nazi Movement in Germany.

For those interested in history, a study of how these nations devolved into fascist nations can be enlightening, for those who don't have the time or energy or willingness, all they need to do is to watch and listen to Trump, and his fellow travelers.

Some were, some weren't.

Tojo?

What astounding ignorance, Comrade.

Pinochet?

What you Maoists do is use "fascist" as a substitute for "heretic."

As I said, you have zero grasp of the meaning. All enemies of the party are "fascists."

Words have meanings, Comrade. That Marxist academia attempted to recast fascism, a socialist economic system with autocratic dictatorship as "right wing" is simply an example of the big lie in action.

BUT that has failed now. Only leftists still buy into that utterly stupid lie.

If you want to know what Fascism is, read fucking Mussolini. If you want to be an ignorant prick, by all means continue to spew Maoist bullshit.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

progressive fascism of shutting down opponents is anything but new

Do you ever think before you post? This thread alone is an example of someone from the Alt. Right, aka, the neo fascist movement attacking a 17 year old.

To review:

• Progressives used the Federal government to spy on a political opponent. That is undisputed. They continue to lie about it and are trying to cover it up
• Fascists are using school kids to take away 2 Constitution right: the right to bear arms to defend against a Fascist government and now the right of Laura's speech.
• The phrase "alt Right" never exited at USMB prior to the 8/15/16 order given by Hillary Clinton to call anyone that who dared to disagree with her.
• Wry will feebly show that someone somewhere once used that phrase, but it did not exist at USMB prior to Hillary feeding the order into the Progressive Hivemind.
• Finally, if a Tide Pod eating 17 year old advocates for taking away a Constitutional right, he should expect to be attacked

 

[Pop23]

Laura ruined her own damn career. Laura and the rest of the right have been attacking these victims since day one.

They lack the tact and sense when talking about these kids. You criticize their stance but you also have to be a little sensitive to the fact they've gone through a traumatic experience and they are still very young.

Laura making fun of David because he got rejected from university is just plain tasteless and nasty.

So advertisers and the people have right to not want to be associated with such human vermin.

Yea, we have to ban everyone that doesn't parrot liberal ideology. There can only be one view expressed!

I try to stop doing business with companies that pull support for political reasons.

They are just acknowledging it is not worth the headache

They aren’t bothered by losing customers?

So be it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Tweets are "verbal," Li'l Kim?

Who knew?

I knew. Now even a desperate, senile loser like you knows.

verbal

of, relating to, or consisting of words​

Education time is over. Now about my question. Why don’t you try to answer it instead of trolling?

How the fuck did David Hogg set out to end Laura Ingraham’s career? By making her verbally attack him?

: spoken rather than written

• a verbal contract

Fucking retard.

I just gave you a definition of the word, “verbal,” and you still didn’t learn? That’s on you.

But being the kind hearted Liberal I am, I’ll give you another clue.... like many words, the word, “verbal,” has more than one definition. Meaning both yours and mine are valid.

Now then, are ya going to keep trolling or are you going to answer a question that’s relevant to the thread?

How the fuck did David Hogg set out to end Laura Ingraham’s career? By making her verbally attack him?

And I took the link YOU posted, retard.

Verbal, spoken.

What fool you are.

Moron, that was just one of the several definitions my link offered. That doesn’t negate the one I used.

Now there’s two questions you’re refusing to answer...

1) How the fuck did David Hogg set out to end Laura Ingraham’s career? By making her verbally attack him?

2) Exactly how senile are ya, gramps?

What a fucking retard.

{
ver′bal•ly, adv.
usage.: verbal has had the meaning “spoken” since the late 16th century and is thus synonymous with oral: I wrote amemorandum to confirm the verbal agreement. This use is sometimes criticized for being etymologically incorrect orambiguous, though the context usu. makes the meaning clear: No documents are necessary; a verbal order willsuffice. oral can always be used if the context demands: My lawyer insists on a written contract because oralagreements are too difficult to enforce.}

From your own link - dickwad

 

[bodecea]

So shrill...so frightened...of HS students..

These uneducated "students" will b voting in a couple years. Yes, uneducated voters are something to be feared -- except by the far left. They need them to advance their tyrannical agenda.

Many of them are voting in November....and I stack their education against moronic trumpanzees any day of the week.

 

[Faun]

I knew. Now even a desperate, senile loser like you knows.

verbal

of, relating to, or consisting of words​

Education time is over. Now about my question. Why don’t you try to answer it instead of trolling?

How the fuck did David Hogg set out to end Laura Ingraham’s career? By making her verbally attack him?

: spoken rather than written

• a verbal contract

Fucking retard.

I just gave you a definition of the word, “verbal,” and you still didn’t learn? That’s on you.

But being the kind hearted Liberal I am, I’ll give you another clue.... like many words, the word, “verbal,” has more than one definition. Meaning both yours and mine are valid.

Now then, are ya going to keep trolling or are you going to answer a question that’s relevant to the thread?

How the fuck did David Hogg set out to end Laura Ingraham’s career? By making her verbally attack him?

And I took the link YOU posted, retard.

Verbal, spoken.

What fool you are.

Moron, that was just one of the several definitions my link offered. That doesn’t negate the one I used.

Now there’s two questions you’re refusing to answer...

1) How the fuck did David Hogg set out to end Laura Ingraham’s career? By making her verbally attack him?

2) Exactly how senile are ya, gramps?

What a fucking retard.

{
ver′bal•ly, adv.
usage.: verbal has had the meaning “spoken” since the late 16th century and is thus synonymous with oral: I wrote amemorandum to confirm the verbal agreement. This use is sometimes criticized for being etymologically incorrect orambiguous, though the context usu. makes the meaning clear: No documents are necessary; a verbal order willsuffice. oral can always be used if the context demands: My lawyer insists on a written contract because oralagreements are too difficult to enforce.}

From your own link - dickwad

Moron, from the link you just provided. The very first definition...

1. Of, relating to, or associated with words

 

[bodecea]

^ trumpanzees frightened of a HS student.

 

[Faun]

So shrill...so frightened...of HS students..

These uneducated "students" will b voting in a couple years. Yes, uneducated voters are something to be feared -- except by the far left. They need them to advance their tyrannical agenda.

Many of them are voting in November....and I stack their education against moronic trumpanzees any day of the week.

Wait until voters see the FY2018 federal deficit.

 

[bodecea]

Laura ruined her own damn career. Laura and the rest of the right have been attacking these victims since day one.

They lack the tact and sense when talking about these kids. You criticize their stance but you also have to be a little sensitive to the fact they've gone through a traumatic experience and they are still very young.

Laura making fun of David because he got rejected from university is just plain tasteless and nasty.

So advertisers and the people have right to not want to be associated with such human vermin.

Yea, we have to ban everyone that doesn't parrot liberal ideology. There can only be one view expressed!

I try to stop doing business with companies that pull support for political reasons.

how's that working out....for the companies? Are they devastated?

 

[bodecea]

View attachment 185603

For Laura Ingraham, there was no choice but to apologize to Parkland school shooting activist David Hogg for her foolish tweet regarding the 17-year-old being rejected by several colleges.



David Hogg's attempt to end Laura Ingraham's career sets dangerous precedent


Well we do keep saying the Trump haters are idiots and no matter how much you try to warn them , inform them they laugh, they call it all a conspiracy , or their Obama / Clinton favorite training to use " It's fake" .. to this day they can't realize why those two made it a point to make that mention during Trump's run as they tried to sink Trump with lie after lie after lie.

But in the end you can't fix stupid and you all are eating yourselves alive lmfao. And so is this idiot who thinks he is going to start a revolution.

How the fuck did David Hogg set out to end Laura Ingraham’s career? By making her verbally attack him?

Tweets are "verbal," Li'l Kim?

Who knew?

I knew. Now even a desperate, senile loser like you knows.

verbal

of, relating to, or consisting of words​

Education time is over. Now about my question. Why don’t you try to answer it instead of trolling?

How the fuck did David Hogg set out to end Laura Ingraham’s career? By making her verbally attack him?

Don't you know? The RW trumpanzees are ALWAYS the victims. ALWAYS.

 

[SobieskiSavedEurope]

[

There is no singular definition of fascism, other than it has used the machinations of divide and conquer over a population to gain power, is authoritarian in nature, and its leaders narrowly defines patriotism by attacking those who are different in creed, color or ethnicity. In this case, students who have questioned gun policies.

Mussolini devised a system where all things, including the people, belong to the state. Sounds an awful lot like what you Stalinist democrats promote.

Well, I'd say that's the most appealing aspect of Fascism, being that it would manage the Corporations, and their value as within the state interest, so they wouldn't continue hiring illegal immigrants in mass, or outsourcing jobs in mass, to cut the American workers throats in the name of "Cheap Labor".

 

[Pop23]

Laura ruined her own damn career. Laura and the rest of the right have been attacking these victims since day one.

They lack the tact and sense when talking about these kids. You criticize their stance but you also have to be a little sensitive to the fact they've gone through a traumatic experience and they are still very young.

Laura making fun of David because he got rejected from university is just plain tasteless and nasty.

So advertisers and the people have right to not want to be associated with such human vermin.

Yea, we have to ban everyone that doesn't parrot liberal ideology. There can only be one view expressed!

I try to stop doing business with companies that pull support for political reasons.

how's that working out....for the companies? Are they devastated?

Laura ruined her own damn career. Laura and the rest of the right have been attacking these victims since day one.

They lack the tact and sense when talking about these kids. You criticize their stance but you also have to be a little sensitive to the fact they've gone through a traumatic experience and they are still very young.

Laura making fun of David because he got rejected from university is just plain tasteless and nasty.

So advertisers and the people have right to not want to be associated with such human vermin.

Yea, we have to ban everyone that doesn't parrot liberal ideology. There can only be one view expressed!

I try to stop doing business with companies that pull support for political reasons.

how's that working out....for the companies? Are they devastated?

Time will tell.

 

[bodecea]

For the record, the self identified conservatives, Alt. Right/neo fascist set, are both hypocrites and bigots who are intolerant of any idea or speech which conflicts with their narrow and regressive beliefs.

If a Rosa Parks today refused to give up her seat today to a white man, the same )*&%$#%'s who are attacking this young man would attack her.

Laura Ingram is an example of the continued efforts to divide our nation, and this is the most egregious from of sedition; it's fellow travelers above ought to think before they post hate we see in pages above.

Says the hate filled racist democrat.

There is NO hypocrisy like demopocrisy...

Your constant posts of this ^^^ mental masturbation genre continue unrequited, and deservedly so.

So Comrade, where is the hate?

{
Leftists don’t merely disagree with you. They don’t merely feel you are misguided. They don’t think you are merely wrong. They hate you. They want you enslaved and obedient, if not dead. Once you get that, everything that is happening now will make sense. And you will understand what you need to be ready to do.

You are normal, and therefore a heretic. You refuse to bow to their idols, to subscribe to their twisted catechisms, to praise their false gods. This is unforgivable. You must burn.

Crazy talk? Just ask them. Go ahead. Go on social media. Find a leftist – it’s easy. Just say something positive about America or Jesus and they’ll come swarming like locusts. Engage them and very quickly they will drop their masks and tell you what they really think. I know. I keep a rapidly expanding file of Twitter leftist death wish screenshots.

They will tell you that Christians are idiots and vets are scum.

That normals are subhumans whose role is to labor as serfs to subsidize the progressive elite and its clients.

That you should die to make way for the New Progressive Man/Woman/Other.

Understand that when they call Donald Trump “illegitimate,” what they are really saying is that our desire to govern ourselves is illegitimate. Their beef isn’t with him – it’s with us, the normal people who dared rise up and demand their right to participate in the rule of this country and this culture.

They hate you, because by defying them you have prevented them from living up to the dictates of their false religion. Our rebelliousness has denied them the state of grace they seek, exercising their divine right to dictate every aspect of our puny lives. Their sick faith gives meaning to these secular weirdos, giving them something that fills their empty lives with a messianic fervor to go out and conquer and convert the heathens.

And the heathens are us.}

Kurt Schlichter - The Left Hates You. Act Accordingly.


You racist fucks are overflowing with hatred.

The more you post, the more your sanity comes into question. Get help before you do something stupid.

The kind of mental health issues that should be checked out......before any gun purchase.

 

[jon_berzerk]

View attachment 185603

For Laura Ingraham, there was no choice but to apologize to Parkland school shooting activist David Hogg for her foolish tweet regarding the 17-year-old being rejected by several colleges.



David Hogg's attempt to end Laura Ingraham's career sets dangerous precedent


Well we do keep saying the Trump haters are idiots and no matter how much you try to warn them , inform them they laugh, they call it all a conspiracy , or their Obama / Clinton favorite training to use " It's fake" .. to this day they can't realize why those two made it a point to make that mention during Trump's run as they tried to sink Trump with lie after lie after lie.

But in the end you can't fix stupid and you all are eating yourselves alive lmfao. And so is this idiot who thinks he is going to start a revolution.

the kid looks mentally ill without question

Nah, he just looks like he is in the throws of puberty. He's part of the "Tide Pod Challenge" generation.

Why are people listening to him and still ignoring you?

they are not

other then to point out how indoctrinated the "youth" have become

 

[Uncensored2008]

The more you post, the more your sanity comes into question. Get help before you do something stupid.

Why of course, enemies of the party are "insane" and must be locked in forced labor camps. You Stalinists have LONG history for this.

As for "doing something," that would be the domain of you racist Marxists.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Someone is sure trying to lie, Comrade.

{
Ah, the “gun show loophole”. Your liberal friends have probably mentioned it when trying to convince you that there must be “common sense gun safety legislation” (or some similar liberal terminology).

The erroneous premise is that criminals buy guns to use in crimes at gun shows because gun show purchases don’t require the same background checks as purchases made at firearms retail establishments. This, of course, has been debunked many times but that doesn’t stop liberals from using it as an argument because reality doesn’t matter when a good false narrative will do. Unless guns are purchased from a private individual a background check is required by law. If you, or anyone else, purchases a gun from a licensed dealer at a gun show there will be a background check performed to determine if you can legally purchase a firearm. However, when purchasing from an individual rather than a business, that doesn’t apply because such private transactions aren’t regulated by the government.

“Ah HA!!”, you might say, “THAT”s where all those illegally trafficked guns are bought and sold!” Uh… no. Research shows that only a tiny percentage – less than one percent – of firearms offenders have acquired guns through gun show purchases. So, the old “gun show loophole” is a myth. It’s an often repeated myth, but a myth nonetheless.

Where do criminals get their guns, then? Research shows that criminals steal guns or buy them from other criminals who either steal them or break laws to acquire them, such as making “straw purchases” from legal dealers. One such instance happened in Ohio recently when a man made a straw purchase of two dozen handguns from four different dealers, claiming that he needed them for his job teaching a concealed carry class, and then passed them along to criminals who couldn’t pass background checks. [more]}

The Myth of the “Gun Show Loophole” – The Mark & Mack Show

You've had your ass kicked on this bullshit several dozen times.

No, liar. You gloss over the narrative in your post that admits firearms are purchased at gun shows from private dealers without background checks.
You are delusional abour kicking anyones ass.

Again, you anti-civil rights clows trot out the same tired bullshit over and over. You get the shit kicked out of you, then whimper away.

You just fucking said anyone can buy a firearm at a gun show and not be subjected to a background screening by an unlicensed dealer. That’s what you call, kicking our ass. Exactly how senile are you, gramps?

DERP

Same lies from the same retards...

{
The “Gun Show Loophole” demagoguery demonizes these individual collectors and portrays them as the source of all of our troubles. What the gun control lobby wants to confuse the public into supporting is the enactment of laws that require background checks on private sales, transfers or loans of firearms.

Certainly, some individuals do come to gun shows to barter, trade, sell or buy firearms – but they are not dealers any more than those who meet at a gun range and choose to trade. If they were dealers, the ATF would force them to register as federal firearms licensees under existing law. And yes, ATF agents come to every gun show, and even flea markets and other such venues, looking for violations of these laws.

So what is the real purpose of the push to close the “gun show loophole”? Since there is no loophole, the purpose is to convince the public to agree to a law that subject ALL private sales, transfers, or loans of firearms to the background check requirement.

If such a law were in place, you could not loan a firearm to a friend for a weekend hunt, trade guns at the range or give your son a deer rifle without going to a federal firearm licensed dealer to conduct a background check. This extension of government into the private lives of gun owners is meant to cause inconvenience and thereby discourage the ownership of firearms. It will especially discourage the gifting and loaning of firearms so often used to encourage someone to join the shooting community.

What this will not do is slow down the acquisition of firearms by criminals. It is already illegal for even a private individual to transfer a firearm to a felon or other prohibited person.

Many people are unaware that studies show virtually all criminals obtain their firearms through black market transactions on the street. Just as gang members deal in drugs and other contraband, they trade and sell firearms, many of which have been stolen in the first place. These dealers in contraband care nothing about laws and will never conduct background checks. Thus these laws only burden the law abiding citizens with the proposed incursions on their Second Amendment rights.

Mass shootings and the Charleston tragedy are no exception. In a public statement the FBI Director admitted that it was a bureaucratic error that permitted the Charleston shooter to obtain a firearm. Improving the existing system under current law may have helped – but no new intrusions on State and Federal Constitutional rights are necessary. As for other mass shootings occurring across our country, the perpetrators commonly pass background checks when they buy firearms through licensed dealers, and we find many more instances where theft, rather than a private sale, is the source of firearms.}


The Gun Show Loophole Myth

Stop lying, ya loopy old fart. You already admitted there’s a loophole, even if you refuse to believe what you post...

However, when purchasing from an individual rather than a business, that doesn’t apply because such private transactions aren’t regulated by the government.​

Retards and their straw man fallacies.

You're an idiot Li'l Kim.

I know reading is a bit much for you, so watch the videos I posted, you drooling retard.

 

[Uncensored2008]

: spoken rather than written

• a verbal contract

Fucking retard.

I just gave you a definition of the word, “verbal,” and you still didn’t learn? That’s on you.

But being the kind hearted Liberal I am, I’ll give you another clue.... like many words, the word, “verbal,” has more than one definition. Meaning both yours and mine are valid.

Now then, are ya going to keep trolling or are you going to answer a question that’s relevant to the thread?

How the fuck did David Hogg set out to end Laura Ingraham’s career? By making her verbally attack him?

And I took the link YOU posted, retard.

Verbal, spoken.

What fool you are.

Moron, that was just one of the several definitions my link offered. That doesn’t negate the one I used.

Now there’s two questions you’re refusing to answer...

1) How the fuck did David Hogg set out to end Laura Ingraham’s career? By making her verbally attack him?

2) Exactly how senile are ya, gramps?

What a fucking retard.

{
ver′bal•ly, adv.
usage.: verbal has had the meaning “spoken” since the late 16th century and is thus synonymous with oral: I wrote amemorandum to confirm the verbal agreement. This use is sometimes criticized for being etymologically incorrect orambiguous, though the context usu. makes the meaning clear: No documents are necessary; a verbal order willsuffice. oral can always be used if the context demands: My lawyer insists on a written contract because oralagreements are too difficult to enforce.}

From your own link - dickwad

Moron, from the link you just provided. The very first definition...

1. Of, relating to, or associated with words

Yes you stupid fuck, but you failed to continue reading.

You truly are a retard.

You probably really are stupid enough to not grasp you have had your ass handed to you..

 

[bodecea]

Keep on attacking the survivors of a school shooting...the material for election campaigns alone is awesome.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[

There is no singular definition of fascism, other than it has used the machinations of divide and conquer over a population to gain power, is authoritarian in nature, and its leaders narrowly defines patriotism by attacking those who are different in creed, color or ethnicity. In this case, students who have questioned gun policies.

Mussolini devised a system where all things, including the people, belong to the state. Sounds an awful lot like what you Stalinist democrats promote.

Well, I'd say that's the most appealing aspect of Fascism, being that it would manage the Corporations, and their value as within the state interest, so they wouldn't continue hiring illegal immigrants in mass, or outsourcing jobs in mass, to cut the American workers throats in the name of "Cheap Labor".

There is nothing appealing about fascism or any other form of socialism. It is simply a scheme whereby the powerful rule over the weak.