...again.

Pathological literalism is one way to dance and obfuscate. At this point in time, in the last few years, there haven't been a lot of violent incidents perpetrated by conservatives. So far, but far too many rightwingers are playing a foolish game of provocation and brinksmanship. How long before there's a "misunderstanding" surrounding a winger carrying a gun to a public political meeting? Doesn't matter who starts it, really, the combination of deliberate provocation and numbers will produce a bloody incident. (And you're arguing for the large numbers of tea partiers, increasing the odds.)

More excessive literalism regarding media consolidation. Hugenberg at his peak didn't own a majority of the media in Germany, he simply owned enough of it to be a powerful voice supporting Hitler. He achieved critical mass, and only his falling-out with the party prevented him from being handed ownership of all the rest after the Nazis were in control.

It's also excessively literal to insist that the situations are different if the ownership patterns differ slightly. Today corporations dominate media ownership, and Rupert is really an odd duck in owning NewsCorp directly as an LLC rather than a stock corporation. For us, today, the problem of media consolidation is about more than individual media barons like Rupert Murdoch, it's ownership almost exclusively by large corporations with large corporate agendas that conveniently match up with conservative agendas. (So of course you don't see a problem there...)

And the Roberts Supreme Court went and gave corporations the same right to political speech as any human. We're in deep shit with that kind of power and control over our media in so relatively few and unaccountable hands.