Fox news = false news

So, you're saying that Soros is making contributions???? to news organizations?So is this to the publishers or the editors or the reporters or who?And is this income reported to the IRS or is it under the table?And does he give them their news story instructions once a day or is it more like on each different news event?Does he write the stories for them or just tell them what to say?Aren't you worried he's going to send hit men after you for blowing the whistle?

---

Tactimatically speaking, the molecubes are out of alignment. -- S.ValleyWhat if Eleanor Roosevelt had wings? -- Monty PythonYou can't build a Time Machine without Weird Optics -- S. Valley

Is it true that George Soros is forcing Fox to cancel Glenn Beck?

---

Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

That must be it!! Soros caught Rupert Murdoch in bed with a dead girl! Or a live boy!

Yep. Probably the girl that Glen Beck has yet to deny that he raped and murdered in 1990.

---

"What can be asserted without proof, can be dismissed without proof."-Hitch.

quote:

---

That must be it!! Soros caught Rupert Murdoch in bed with a dead girl! Or a live boy!

---

Only in Loose-iana.

---

Dost thou think, because thou art virtuous, there shall be no more cakes and ale?
-Shakespeare

​

Real things always push back.
-William James

To continue with that analogy, I'm bitching about people who don't know anything about chemistry but want to ban jars of white powder.

Analogy fail. Not all white powders are dangerous. All firearms are designed with the intent to be lethal. Don't give me any bullshit about "it's designed to put holes in paper," we both know you can do that sort of target practice with a fucking air rifle that can't put a hole in a human skull. Firearms are designed for the exclusive purpose of killing; some are designed for killing animals other than humans, but every single one can be used to commit murder. That's a pretty fucking big difference for the white powder analogy.

I can't agree to that. Irrelevant. Any white powder could be used to commit murder too.

Which firearm is not designed to be able to produce lethal force? It's so relevant it's the entire point. Banning all white powder when only a subset of white powder can be used as a weapon is not comparable to banning all guns because, while only a subset of guns are used as weapons, all of them can be used as lethal weapons.Gun owners like to retort that "my guns aren't used to kill, they're used to shoot paper targets," but that's a bullshit argument because everyone with more than 3 neurons understands that if you really just want to put holes in paper you don't need an actual human-lethal firearm, all you need is a pellet gun or the like. Guns are designed to be lethal. Handguns are designed specifically to be used on people (while owners of some rifles at least can argue that their firearms are intended to be lethal to other animals). [/qs]What, by forcing sufficient flour down someone's throat that they choke? Stop being an idiot, CS. You know the facts as well as I do. Any idiot with a loaded gun can point it at a person, squeeze a trigger, and commit murder. Every firearm is in fact designed to do just that - kill. The ones that are designed for hunting can be used to hunt human beings as easily as deer.White powders are, by and large, not lethal, even by accident. If a kid gets into the flour, or the sugar, or the baking soda, the worst that happens is a nasty mess to clean up. If a kid gets into the gun safe and finds any loaded firearm of any type limited only by the child's ability to lift and carry the weapon, the worst that happens is somebody gets fucking shot, an occurrence that happens frequently enough that you cannot even pretend to be ignorant of it.

That seems like a different question... Would you also say that all cars are designed with the intent to be lethal? They are designed to be able to produce lethal force. All white powders can be used as lethal weapons, or all cars, or hammers, or all kinds of stuff. "Can be used as a lethal weapon" is not an argument for banning something. You really don't get it at all, do you? You cannot imagine why someone would prefer to shoot bullets over pellets, nor can you think of a legitimate reason for it.It is kinda neat that you can read peoples' minds though. That you can know that people who design and use guns solely for target practice are just a bunch of liars. You're one of the poeple who posts like they know almost nothing about guns! That would work, wouldn't it? Nuh-uh - You're an idiot! So its not that it *can* be used to do it, its that it makes it so easy? False. Cars can be used to run down people. Oh, and they're specifically designed to break the speed limits, right? Shouldn't you also be arguing for banning some cars too? Okay, so the rational response is to argue against people leaving loaded guns in a child's reach, not banning them outright. Well, unless your an idiot who doesn't know anything about guns. But that's my point.

It always amazes me that there is a certain group that as soon as there is any discussion about guns they trot out the gun ban canard.Has anyone besides you said anything about banning guns? Seems quite dishonest to suddenly through this into the debate.We need to have a corollary to Godwins law. Something about the first to bring banning guns into an unrelated topic. Maybe we should call it the CS law since you seem to be quite prone to doing it.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

You got any evidence for that assertion? What amazes me is the level of supidity that you must have to be unable to follow the discussion back through the context to see why it was brought up in the first place... especially when the software keeps track of which messages are replies to what.Regardless, none of this has anything to do with Fox News.

Here is a story about an air rifle that can kill you dead, I have a 22 cal beeman that will get it done also People kill people, you can take my gun or ban them, I can make one if I want it bad enough, or go buy one on black market.All banning guns would do is expand a black market for them, and guarantee only law and criminals would have them, it reminds me of pot being illegal, if it wasn't then there would be no need to have drug cartels controlling it and profiting from it, while making criminals out of a user.

---

"I hate to advocate the use of drugs, alcohol, violence, or insanity to anyone, but they always worked for me." - Hunter S. ThompsonAd astra per asperaNihil curo de ista tua stulta superstitione.

My point exactly. And you are the one that skewed the topic to gun bans.

---

Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts

Louis and Clark brought a lethal air rifle with them on that expidition... You can just google about it for links.