Oh because MSNBC and ABC,CBS,NBCand NPR do not have a left bent. And The government defining what is fair by funding? It's called NPR a network that is bent left

I deleted the part on political assassinations.  The U.S government has done enough of them during the cold war, and other nutballs do get motivated for a lot political reasons.  The Unabomber, for example, specifically targeted individuals who who saw were a threat.  He has a politcal motivation to fight technology.

Anuyhow, I want to comment here that I had been thinking that maybe people were trying to score political points.  However, I do think there is a range of fear here.  Excess fear built up against the Tea Party.  Some in the Tea Party with too much fear of what is going on.  You get people scared.  The shooting response was about fear of the other side ruining the country.  In the case of the congresswoman did receive death threats and her office was attacked, but the state of fear does go back, to even 2008.  For example:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-october-27-2008/obama-and-palin-rallies-of-fear

And yes, it is true, when a party is out of power, they do engage more of being on the attack.  I will say it does appear though that the political cycle is nonstop now, where even a national tragedy can't get people to stop a minute and think.

It's unnessisary to own a gun in todays society?  Aren't you the one who just said people need to overthrow their corrupt governments?  Kinda hard without any access to guns when their militaries DO have guns.

Furthermore.  Not wearing a seatbelt doesn't make driving a car anymore dangerous for anyone but you.

Eh, doesn't seem to work that well in England.

The BBC has a pretty obvious Labour bend and big goverment bend, as can be shown by their extremly onesided coverage on the Tory austerity measures.  Likely because such measures cut their own funding.

It turns the News medias receving the funding into leaning towards whichever party is willing to give them more.

I'd rather have a blantant screaming liberal group like MSNBC then a casual leaning left but pretending to be balanced group like NPR.  Only one is really dishonest persay.

Still, not wearing a seatbelt you're statistically much more prone to serious injuries even in minor car accidents. In a country where healthcare is heavily socialized that means much higher financial costs for everybody, but even in the US it still means needlessly hogging time and personnel resources, e.g in an ER during the triage and first assistance phases, possibly causing damage or inconvenience to other harmed people.

No need to point out that it's a slippery slope ("then why shouldn't the government force you to eat better and live a more healthy lifestyle"), but the specific case sounds a little enough violation of personal freedom to me -what's the problem? wrinkled shirts?- that such a law enforcement makes sense if you don't live alone on an island.

As for the guns, are you really saying that the right to bear arms makes sense so that there can be a legal revolution? :)

I'm not sure about that. Partisans seem to stoop lower and lower, and some of do them live in a world entirely of their own. A CNN poll taken from Friday through Sunday (after Obama's speech where he denounced this kind of thing) showed that 56% of Democrats believe Palin's map contributed to the Tucson shooting. That's similar to the number of Republicans who weren't sure Obama is a citizen in a Research 2000 poll from a couple of years ago (with the caveat being that the Daily Kos sued Research 2000 last year for doing a shitacular job).

So, that's not good. But at the same time, people are abandoning the parties in droves and will probably only continue to do so as these kinds of recriminations fly back and forth. The optimist in me says that with huge problems to be faced, people are going to demand results. That will require politicians to begin to act like adults, and so hopefully this kind of insanity will be booted out of the public square and back to the fringes of society where it belongs.

@FreeTalkLive:

Law enforcement is not around in the US to protect people.  Maybe it does that where you live but it’s not the mission of law enforcement in the US.  Some towns in NH don’t even have cops.  The crime is so low that the expensive of having cops isn’t always a good idea around here.  Of course, most of the households in those towns have guns.

Wow, I never thought things could be so bad over there. I had a totally different view of the US. What exactly would you say is the role of law enforcement (even from the name you gather that it has to do with enforcing the law = making sure everyone respects the law, laws having the prupose of protecting people). Paying to have cops is a necessity. You shouldn't be so cheap. And defending yourself should only be a last resort, if the proper authorities are incapable of doing anuthing in that moment. It must be a jungle over there.

Those are gross violations of civil rights where I live.  The people where I live wouldn’t stand for a government doing something like that to them.

If an insane person gets access to a gun he becomes a danger for everyone in the community. It's in everyone's best interest that there's a psychiatric test before you can use a gun.

I’m sorry, but why do you think that if a car is stopped because a train is crossing the road that a 50 year old lady in the back seat shouldn’t be allowed to take off her seatbelt for 20 seconds so that she may put a jacket on?  That's against the law is in most of the US.  Some states allow adults to do that in the back seat but not the front passenger seat.  I'm sorry bu these seat belt laws just don't make sense.

That seatbelt thing may be a little excessive. It should be illegal to not be wearing one if the car is moving.

 I don’t recommend that people drive while drunk but the current law prevents people from even drinking one beer while driving.  That’s inconsistent because I drink water while driving and it’s just as distracting as drinking one beer is. 

Beer can make you become drunk. And drinking anything while driving is a bad ideea, BUT water is a necessity for us humans (without it you die), and it could be dangerous not drinking the water. It's an OK exception.

 I don’t know what any of this has to do with people killing each other.  NH has the lowest crime in the US and some of the safest roads.  Actually, I think MA has the safest roads in the US.  MA is just south of NH and has a seat belt law and all of that.  Yet fewer people wear seat belts in MA than just about anywhere in the US, and it still has the safest roads.

Wearing seatbelts doesn't make the roads safer, it makes drivers safer, in case they have accidents. That's their purpose. So there's no connection between a seatbelt law (or lack therefore) and the fact that X state's roads are safe (drinking beer while driving will probably make the roads become pretty dangerous though).

Well, I was talking about states like North Korea, where the government is an enemy of it's citizens. When the government becomes the enemy you obviously no longer have to respect it's laws. People like FreeTalkLive however have a pretty disturbing view of what is considered an "opressive" law.

Don't dial down the rhetoric, dial it up!

Will the national Democratic Party denounce this incitement to shoot white babies and cook them in chili? Even more importantly, will they denounce the reprehensible suggestion that carrots belong anywhere near chili?

(I don't even know where the fuck they were going with this one. Congratulations to Joe Manchin, who now only has the second weirdest campaign ad in this thread.)

It is this divisive partisanship, that is leading to an increase in outright fear, winner take all, and an inability to work together, that could lead to a distruction of America.  In risky time (I am tempted to post a thread asking if things are more risky now, and less safe, where a Ted Williams hits the jackpot for being found on YouTube), it looks like people are more likely to cling to sides, rather than realizing there is powers in increasing numbers.

I think one issue why you will be less likely to see politicians renouncing the fringe, is that the fringe is what they seem to reply on to power their ability to get elected.

By the way, if we end this thread, it should be on baby chili.  Baby chili FTW!  And if people don't agree, they can go stuff it!  That pot looks like it says Demo Rat.  By the way, what else do you expect from those wacky libs.  They believe in VEGGIE chili, which has carrots in it. 

[Reference to abortion here deleted]