Jeff Danziger for December 24, 2012

Well, what do you know? I GOT my Christmas wish! Save room in there for Glenn Beck.

Oh Jeff, it it were only that easy. Unfortunately, nuts beget nuts.

Also in the van: Anyone who speaks out against the Obama party line. Next stop, Gulag!Towards the end of the Bush Administration the “conservative” meme was that anyone who criticized a sitting President in a time of war was committing treason and causing harm to the troops. The ever mean spirited Ann Coulter went to so far as to suggest “liberals” should be executed as traitors.Funny how all that ended the second Obama was sworn into office.

Why are we not outraged at the easy access to Alcoholic Beverages?1) There are still a few people who still seek to ban all alcohol. One lives here in town.2)You’re once again using a false equivalency to make your very weak case.

Tigger, please give it a rest, maybe even have an egg nog. You’re completely overlooking that the last time your plan was tried, it led to the biggest outbreak of gang violence, gun violence, and homicide for profit, in U.S. history. Well, not counting Iraq, Afghanistan, and maybe La PIerre’s Christmas tidings.

I hope Michele Bachmann is already waiting at the Looney Bin to welcome her new fellow inmates.

Perhaps you didn’t see my further comments on “prior restraint” on Lester’s Dec 22 cartoon. I still don’t get your argument, so I’d be interested in your further remarks on the topic.

Nyah-nyah!! Democrats get drunk and drive, too!

Nanny-nanny-boo-boo!!!

Well then, Howie—-who’s gonna shine Larry Craig’s shoes?

Put on the siren and go get Michelle Bachmann.

Straw man. Nobody was imprisoned. Nobody was executed.No, my comment is not a straw man argument. It called out your comment as BS.You claim the Obama administration will seek to silence dissent. As I stated, the so called conservatives were seeking to silence and/or downplay anti-Bush dissidence with the argument that said dissidence was treasonous and anti-American. As soon as Obama took office, those same so called conservatives started to engage in the very activity they were decrying as treasonous.

Just get in the ambulance and talk to your peers.

You also have to remember that crazy Ann Coulter suggested…I remember many of the extremist things Ann publicly states in a bid to get attention. That’s why I referred to her as the ever mean spirited Ann Coulter. The woman has no heart and no shame. She is the epitome of so called conservatives.

Psst, you’re beating a dead horse. We already know that tighter laws on drunk driving have lowered the number of fatalities. Why is it so outlandish to think tightening gun laws would have the same effect?

They left out Ted Nugent.

Dopey cartoon. Very one-sided. They left out the biggest idiots and trouble makers: Grover Norquist and Donald Trump. Of course I’m surprised the conservative element hasn’t added Chris Mathews, Larry O’Donnell and my favorite ranter, Keith Olbermann. There is what Fox would call “fair and balanced.” Being a Libertarian is fun, you can point out the absurdity on both sides. Of course you also take heat from both partisan elements as well.

Silly silly Tigger. Alcohol when used incorrectly kills. Guns and cigarettes when used as intended kill.

Just another fine example set by a republican. What do they call it???… Oh yeah, hypocrisy.-And, a mormon to boot. Was he smoking too?

Great cartoon today.One funny story is that gun enthusiasts are wanting to deport Piers Morgan.The sad story is 4 firefighters shot.

I see BRAIN Williams is roboposting again

Will pedophiles join the NRA and become part of the school protection force?

Tigger, I think they tried that at one time. It led to lots of gun deaths.

EVERYONE, PLEASE HAVE A GREAT CHRISTMAS!

That’s been tried; it was called “Prohibition”. It failed.

Yes…..There is. We just prefer not to post, on Christmas Eve, about the nut-jobs such as antiquetracman. Oops….

I see you haven’t learned the lesson the rest of us did from our History class on Prohibition. What you’re saying is exactly what was said before that law was passed.

Danziger, the new Casandra, predicting what is in store for those who disagree with the new lordship, Obama.

Hahaha!

if only

Even though the folks in the ambulance are not my favorites, I’m reminded that the old Soviet Union’s trick was to declare their detractors insane and pack ’em away.

You haven’t replied to my comments on prior restraint, so I suppose I can assume that you have withdrawn that argument. Anything else you’d like to retract?

Yeah, let’s grab anyone who disagrees with The Great Barack Obama. If they’re not happy in ObamaLand, they are obviously crazy, and belong in a mental institution.

You still provide no explanation of how Fourcrows’ position on gun control counts as prior restraint.That was the point at issue. Defend your position if you wish, but if you don’t I can only conclude that you can’t.

I’m more than willing to listen to your argument, but you have to state it, and so far you have failed to do so. Insults are not argument. (1) Fourcrows told a story. (2) You said “This is called prior restraint”. (3) I was puzzled, because prior restraint, as I understand it, has to do with stopping the publishing of material in advance because it may cause harm, and there was nothing in Fourcrows’ post about publishing anything. I asked you for an explanation, and your reply was “Read the whole post.” I did, and I still didn’t see anything that amounted to an argument about anything, and certainly not about prior restraint. I wondered if you might think that gun control was a form of prior restraint, though according to my understanding of prior restraint it doesn’t. So I posted something about prior restraint to make my point clear, and you replied in a somewhat snarky tone and again gave no argument. I asked again for an argument and again you give a snarky reply. Really, you’ve had lots of time to come up with some kind of argument to support your position. Do you believe that Fourcrows was advocating prior restraint? Under what definition of prior restraint do you think so? Do you think that gun control constitutes prior restraint? On what grounds? Is there some other action that you think Fourcrows was advocating that constitutes prior restraint? Is so, what action is it, where does he advocate it, and on what grounds does it count as prior restraint? These are not hard questions. Either you can answer them or you can’t.

You brought up the term prior restraint, I didn’t. When I politely asked you to explain your position, you dodged. And dodged again. And you are still dodging. How can I comment on your comment on Sotomayor when you refuse to explain the terms you yourself have introduced into the discussion?