One of the Greatest American Traitors is a Mormon

This pitiful scum sucking pig needs to be hung by the neck.

His crying on demand technique sucks too!

  1. #1 by Moribund Republic on March 16, 2009 - 4:48 pm

    Dude, that is some great shit!! Very entertaining!!

  2. #2 by Becky on March 16, 2009 - 5:16 pm

    He sounds like an infomercial – like the guy who tries to convince you that you can make money in the real estate market without investing any money. What a phoney.

  3. #3 by Cliff Lyon on March 16, 2009 - 5:47 pm

    Glenn Beck is going Limbaugh 2.0 and will end up the political poster child for The LDS Church.

    They should ax him.

  4. #4 by marshall on March 16, 2009 - 6:08 pm

    And Utah is supporting this idiot. How do we shut down the stadium of fire?

  5. #5 by Moribund Republic on March 16, 2009 - 6:20 pm

    It is sooooo perfect America, this schlock will do you progressives in. Watch.

    …and he is an admitted entertainer, makes no pretenses, and a reformed broke down addict as well. Purrrfect! He will make the “little people” of the right detest progressives all the more.

    He is a creation of the Dialectic, and so sponsored by the media, like a Maddow is to you all, Glenn speaks to the masses of America…, and they listen.

  6. #6 by Cliff Lyon on March 16, 2009 - 6:41 pm

    You are wrong Moribund. He is has an audience of less than 200,000 per day. His core is much bigger actually, about 18 million.

    He is a punk and is hurting his interests for the benefit of Fox and at the expense of the Church.

  7. #7 by Thomas on March 16, 2009 - 7:13 pm

    Glenn’s a great patriot and a great member of the Church. Maybe someday you will make a difference like him. Until then, put a sock in it.

  8. #8 by Moribund Republic on March 16, 2009 - 7:14 pm

    He is product. Yum, says Hegel!

  9. #9 by Tim Carter on March 16, 2009 - 7:21 pm

    Yeah, that was some serious shit. Embarassing to say the least.

    Snivel, Snivel I’m just so proud….snivel…of my country. Snivel…And…snivel..I..snivel…fear for it.

    Yeah, that was some High School play dramatics. They will probably work. He called it – televangelist. Low grade emotion. I can only hope he gets caught with 5000 hits of Oxy or with a transvestite, or in the mens room with a friend, like those that came before him.

  10. #10 by Richard Warnick on March 16, 2009 - 7:30 pm

    I am not going to download a four and a half minute YouTube on dial-up. I will say Glenn Beck can bring the crazy with the best of them, he’s like Michelle Malkin with religiosity. I don’t know why Cliff wants this guy dead– he’s going to bring down Faux News Channel and maybe even the Republican Party.

    Limbaugh is a mere “entertainer” too, but no Republican officeholder can disavow him without committing political suicide. It used to be that the lunatic fringe made regular right-wingers look sane by comparison, now it works the other way. The whole GOP is inextricably linked with the wingnuts.

  11. #11 by Moribund Republic on March 16, 2009 - 8:44 pm

    Ha hahahhahahhahaa…ye fools!!!

  12. #12 by Larry Bergan on March 16, 2009 - 9:55 pm

    I haven’t seen anything that fake since KSL TV had a guy on who was in big trouble because he left one of his horses to die in a field without any food. He turned away from the camera and tried as hard as he could to get a tear before looking back at the camera and exclaimed how much he loved that horse.

    This was HooWaaay more pathetic then that! I mean, honestly, Rupert Murdock has to be trying to embarrass America with all of this shit!

  13. #13 by Larry Bergan on March 16, 2009 - 10:48 pm

    Look at another Fox atrocity

    Fox News has taken a clip from Biden, saying “The fundamentals of the economy are strong” to make it look like he is out of touch. Problem is, here is the entire quote:

    Ladies and gentlemen, I believe that’s why John McCain could say with a straight face, as recently as this morning — and this is a quote: “The fundamentals of the economy are strong.” That’s what John says. He says that “we’ve made great progress economically” in the Bush years.

    Why would anybody watch a channel that so blatantly disrespects them?

  14. #14 by D-Train on March 16, 2009 - 11:15 pm

    Wow: “This pitiful scum sucking pig needs to be hung by the neck.”

    Did I read that correctly? I just simply cannot believe that Cliff said that…. Cliff you are seriously losing it bro. That is just absurd to say something like that… My respect for you is gone.

  15. #15 by Larry Bergan on March 17, 2009 - 2:16 am

    Hey D-Train:

    What about this.

  16. #16 by Ken on March 17, 2009 - 4:59 am

    So Cliff is your definition of a “traitor” someone who believes in the Constitution and the principles it is founded upon? Someone who opposes Obama’s massive tax and spending plans? Sounds like you are trying to redefine the word patriot.

    I know quoting scripture to a liberal is like exposing a cross or garlic to a vampire but here it is:

    Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light, and light for darkness; that put bitter for sweet, and sweet for bitter! ~Isaiah 5:20

    Is there a more fitting scripture for our day?

  17. #17 by Richard Warnick on March 17, 2009 - 6:27 am

    I would hesitate to call any American a traitor, but I think Glenn Beck is undoubtedly an un-American ignoramus.

  18. #18 by cav, on March 17, 2009 - 6:47 am

    …and a scripture quoted by Ken wouldn’t be so tixic were it not intendended to equate conservative, right-wing notions with ‘light’, good’, and ‘sweet’.

    Sorry Ken, It’s possible that there’s a real case to be made for keeping religion and politics on different sides of the divide.

  19. #19 by Uncle Rico on March 17, 2009 - 6:49 am

    Really? NOW we’re going to talk about the evils of redefining terms like “patriot” and “traitor.” NOW we’re going to call into question massive spending plans by a federal government run amuck. After enduring eight year of the most incompetent, corrupt, dictatorial, secretive, untruthful, devisive and fiscally un-conservative administration in the history of this country whose disrespect for the Constitution was breath-taking in its scope, and whose disdain for co-equal branches of government was legion, NOW we’re going to concern ourselves with “good and evil” because a D occupies the White House? Really?

    “Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias prophesy of you…”

  20. #20 by cav, on March 17, 2009 - 6:54 am

    tixic = toxic. Grrr.

    Better get something Green on. And G’morning Unka.

  21. #21 by e brooks on March 17, 2009 - 7:03 am

    “… and if you really look hard at this freedom mosaic behind me, allow you eyes to go crossed. and you’ll see a 3D diorama of the moon landing!”

    the self parody of guys like Beck would be a total riot if there weren’t so many who took it seriously.
    the basic message: “Barack Obama and Harry Reid aren’t going to save America, but if you can organize a ‘viewing party’ to watch TV with me, then YOU can save America!”
    I feel like I’m watching Adam Arkin doing Paul Giamatti doing John Adams. no wonder Chuck Norris is among the faithful.

  22. #22 by Becky on March 17, 2009 - 7:05 am

    Put your hands on the television and you shall be healed! And send your checks to the address on your screen.

  23. #23 by Richard Warnick on March 17, 2009 - 7:55 am

    Since Ken decided to confer sainthood on Glenn Beck, let me point out that he’s also one of the most prolific liars on the air today. Has his own category on Media Matters.

    Isn’t there some kind of religious prohibition on lying?

  24. #24 by Shane Smith on March 17, 2009 - 8:02 am

    I am disturbed that some of you actually watched that. I couldn’t get past about a minute thirty. What a freaking asshat.

    “Those who broke the law must go to jail!”

    So….. Faux News is pushing to jail the entire shrib white house now?

    BTW, nice scripture Ken. I note with satisfaction that it applies to most republicans, all prop 8 supporters, and pretty much anyone who would watch faux news.

    When you read that quote to yourself Ken, follow it up with the one about motes and beams, and then go find the one about praying publicly on the street corner o as to make a show of your righteousness. Have fun buddy.

  25. #25 by Ken on March 17, 2009 - 9:48 am

    If you actually listened to Glenn Beck you would realize he was and is no cheerleader for George Bush. He was against the Patriot Act and the massive spending of the RINO controlled congress. Beck was constantly harping on Bush and still is. It seems to me if there is one conservative radio star that liberals should at least respect is Glenn Beck. His views are actually more Libertarian than Republican.

  26. #26 by Derek on March 17, 2009 - 10:01 am

    Beck, like most NeoCons, was an unabashed cheerleader for the spurious wars on terror and promoted myopic views on Islam. He’s as jingoist as they come, and conducts himself no better than Hannity, O’Reilly, or Limbaugh. He’s a disgrace to my faith.

  27. #27 by Ken on March 17, 2009 - 12:00 pm

    You are right in one thing Cliff. One of the biggest traitors in the country is a Mormon. The MINO Harry (This war is lost) Reid of Nevada.

  28. #28 by Richard Warnick on March 17, 2009 - 12:23 pm


    Are you claiming that the Senate Majority Leader actually guilty of treason, and that he cannot be a proper Mormon unless he tells lies about the invasion and occupation of Iraq? Evidence, please?

    I forgot to mention in response to your earlier comment that more and more right-wingers now suddenly seem concerned about the U.S. Constitution, after defending George W. Bush for eight long years. Bush famously regarded the Constitution as “just a goddamned piece of paper.”

  29. #29 by Larry Bergan on March 17, 2009 - 1:22 pm

    Any fool who thinks Glen Beck or musclehead Chuck Norris is going to risk harming one hair on their well-groomed heads by attacking ANYBODY with or without a gun is deluded, but the danger of a terrorist like Timothy McVeigh latching onto fake “movement” is very real.

    Watch out for Cheney’s dirty bomb as well!


    I didn’t think you’d reply to Glen Beck’s threat on Michael Moore’s life . Another ineffectual coward without a name. What else is new.

  30. #30 by Larry Bergan on March 17, 2009 - 1:30 pm

    Ken: The next Tim McVeigh.

  31. #31 by Ken on March 17, 2009 - 2:20 pm


    I think you should strike larry Bergan’s last comment.

  32. #32 by cav, on March 17, 2009 - 2:41 pm

    …the weather in Alberta, Canada? Why, it’s raining shoes!

  33. #33 by Larry Bergan on March 17, 2009 - 6:51 pm


    Makes me think of Gene Kelly!

  34. #34 by Cliff on March 18, 2009 - 9:31 am

    Why Ken,

    What really is the difference? McVeigh was a right-wing nut bag. And he thought he was normal.

  35. #35 by Ken on March 18, 2009 - 9:37 am

    Stalin was a left wing nut bag who thought he was normal and he killed millions. So I guess, using your logic, there is no difference between you and Stalin.

  36. #36 by Cliff on March 18, 2009 - 9:48 am

    Ken, Don’t you think its kind of stupid to equate Stalin’s politics with the majority of Americans?

    But you can compare his STYLE with the Neo-Cons.

  37. #37 by Ken on March 18, 2009 - 9:57 am

    Its just as stupid as you comparing conservatives with Timothy McVeigh. Also, please site your source where you claim the majority of Americans are left-wing.

  38. #38 by Shane Smith on March 18, 2009 - 10:58 am

    “”Believe in something! Even if it’s wrong, believe in it!”
    — Glenn Beck”

    Wow. This explains so much…..

  39. #39 by Moribund Republic on March 18, 2009 - 12:30 pm

    Glad you are finally catching on Shane.

  40. #40 by Richard Warnick on March 18, 2009 - 1:23 pm

    If you get your facts from Glenn Beck, I can see why you might think right-wing ideology is dominant in America. It’s a myth. There is a progressive majority.

  41. #41 by cav on March 18, 2009 - 2:42 pm

    When did it become wrong to NOT be a fascist?

  42. #42 by Dwight Sheldon Adams on March 19, 2009 - 10:12 pm

    Wow. I’ve never seen real crocodile tears before. Thanks, Mr. Beck. I decided to go to his site and, surprise surprise, I was able to transform a liberal bashing thread into a (as much as can be expected) legitimate debate. I walked away with a -30 peer rating. That’s what you get for taking away an ultra-con’s candy.

    Cliff–Yes. Ax him. And I don’t mean that with any degree of literary license. Beck is such a frickin’ hack. My brother says he likes him cuz, but only listens to his radio show because it’s not on Fox News. BUT HE SAYS THE SAME CRAP ON BOTH PROGRAMS! My wife’s grandma says she likes him because he’s Mormon, and my brother agrees. I always say you should be MORE cautious of those with which you share dogmatic or emotional political beliefs, not less.

    Moribund–What is this, 1984? Or V for Vendetta? You could make a lot of money writing a graphic novel. Title: “Beck in Power,” or “Don’t Change that Channel, We’ll be Right Beck,” or something. Creepy interpretation, and very insightful. Thanks.

    Thomas–Learn the difference between patriotism and nationalism and rejoin the conversation. Glenn’s statements can be deemed antisocial and opiate on many levels. He’s on a post-addictive conversion high, and giving the credence of even a microphone to such a tool is destructive of both what he professes and opposes.

    Larry–Fox is a bunch of media sluts. Information pornography. What gets me is how Rupert Murdoch (a.k.a. the Conservative Capitalist Tool) can get a court to declare that, under the first amendment, they can call themselves a news program while openly lying and that, because they are actually an entertainment program, these lies cannot be prosecuted as slander. Ridiculous.

    Ken–No, quoting scripture to a liberal is more like exposing your genitals to a conservative. Ponder that one.
    I believe that Beck believes in what he supports. I also thinks that he believes in the doctrine of #1–himself. God helps those who help themselves, right? Isaiah 5:20 is particularly poignant for our day–there are hypocrites of many stripes. Don’t make the mistake of thinking people who believe differently than you do are the only ones. Take a page from the Book of Uncle Rico.

    Richard–Un-American? We saw that phrase used dangerously in the last few years. Be careful in the way you employ it. I think Beck is more ideologically bankrupt than un-American.

    Becky–You hit this nail on the head. Beck’s method is unapologetically televangelical. <–(Is that a word?) His whole process, in his program and on his page, is “Oh ye of faith, congregate and shut the doors, and share uniform perspectives in blessed isolation.”

    Cav–Ouch. You reveal the bitter truth. A friend of mine professes that he is a supporter of either laissez-faire capitalism or strict scientific socialism. While this describes his inability to perceive a moderate level of management being possible, I had the pleasure of informing him that these extreme right and left-wing concepts share a common central point on the political wheel: fascism. The conservatives want government to enforce their perspective, which is unabashed protection of their right to express whatever they want with no alternatives being given sway. They call it “having a righteous society.” Their version of freedom, where the government “doesn’t get in the way,” is one in which the government opens the paths of opportunity to Christianity by pushing every other policy-backing organization and ideology out of the way. Religious fascism is a dangerous thing. It’s so easy to trick the faithful when you hold a Bible in front of your lying face.

    When fascism comes to America it will be wrapped in a flag and carrying a cross.
    -Sinclair Lewis

    Dwight Sheldon Adams

  43. #43 by cav on March 20, 2009 - 6:20 am

    DSA, glad you’re feeling better.

  44. #44 by Becky on March 20, 2009 - 7:30 am

    Ditto what Cav said, Dwight. Good to see you back.

  45. #45 by Cliff on March 20, 2009 - 7:34 am

    Right on Dwight and a belated congratulations on your recent marriage. They say the first year is the hardest.

  46. #46 by Kevin Owens on March 20, 2009 - 9:35 am

    A friend of mine professes that he is a supporter of either laissez-faire capitalism or strict scientific socialism. While this describes his inability to perceive a moderate level of management being possible, I had the pleasure of informing him that these extreme right and left-wing concepts share a common central point on the political wheel: fascism.

    Extreme laissez-faire capitalism only allows for government intervention in order to prevent people from economically harming one another. It is a very libertarian perspective, granting as much freedom to individual economic actors as possible. This philosophy has some merit, because it is strictly fair and just; however, it is also very inefficient.

    A moderately free market is more sensible. We can let the government be involved in some positive intervention, in order to make the economy run more evenly, but leave the rest of it up to the people. In this regard, I disagree with your friend; I believe a moderate level of management by the government is not only possible, but desirable.

    If I understand correctly, strict scientific socialism describes a system wherein invasive social intervention is limited only to actions which have a strong basis in scientific truth. Thus, social blunders like the Holocaust can be avoided. When a new social policy is implemented, it would be carefully observed and tested to determine whether it was successful and beneficial. Bad programs would then be dropped or revised, and good programs would continue. Are you opposed to a system like this?

    How did you conclude that these two ideas connect to form fascism? Where is the nationalism, the authoritarianism, the indoctrination? Where is the iron fist, crushing the individual? (If you want, you can associate the iron fist with Adam Smith’s invisible hand in your response. I think it would be a good metaphor.)

    The conservatives want government to enforce their perspective, which is unabashed protection of their right to express whatever they want with no alternatives being given sway. They call it “having a righteous society.” Their version of freedom, where the government “doesn’t get in the way,” is one in which the government opens the paths of opportunity to Christianity by pushing every other policy-backing organization and ideology out of the way.

    Not all conservatives want that. I, for one, don’t. If you don’t allow for disagreement and dissent, how can you know if your position is truly righteous? Group-think and enforced collectivism more often than not lead to bad decisions. Freedom of conscience, on the other hand, is a critical foundation of a good and free society.

    Conservativism, to me, is more about careful change. Instead of wildly flapping about, moving any way the wind blows, big changes need to be managed in such a way that they do minimal harm to the members of society. All the possible angles should be considered before the status quo is dismantled. Impulses should be studied out scientifically before they are acted on.

    A good government is both compassionate and stoic. It is sympathetic to the needs of its citizens, but is thoughtful and intelligent in its action. It is strict, but also merciful.

    Like the pioneers before us, our zeal must be harnessed into a stern, impassioned stress. We should act with fervor and dilligence in order to achieve a better society, but we must do it with pragmatism and wisdom. We must do it with open eyes and thoughtful minds.

  47. #47 by Larry Bergan on March 20, 2009 - 12:09 pm

    Yeah Dwight, that court action and decision was something. Believe it or not, Fox actually apologized for, (how do I put this), having Biden appear to be saying what he was criticizing McCain for saying. I not sure why they would do that considering all the trouble they went to assuring themselves the right to lie to their loyal viewers.

    Think Lewis Carrol.

  48. #48 by Jenni on March 20, 2009 - 12:23 pm

    It’s always funny to me to see the cons jumping the Bush ship — now that it’s proven how evil and corrupt his administration was. They wouldn’t listen to us before, because we’re liberals, and liberals must be wrong about everything. Now that it’s amazingly obvious, they’ve rebranded Bush as a liberal so that they can hate him.

  49. #49 by Dwight Sheldon Adams on March 20, 2009 - 1:09 pm

    Wow. It appears that I was sanctioned from the 9-12 Project after less than 10 posts and a cumulative -62 rating. And I didn’t even swear! Guess they just don’t like letting liberal viewpoints with any degree of articulacy have a voice.

    8. It is not un-American for me to disagree with authority or to share my personal opinion.

    That’s Principle 8. Guess it doesn’t mean much of anything.


    That’s Value 8. Guess it’s referring to “website moderation,” hence them not simply calling it “temperance.” Is it just me, or is it odd that Principle 8 is so coincidently thrashed by Value 8? Ouroboros. . .the sign of the eternally shut mouth.

    Oh, and thanks to all for the welcome back. (holding clasped hands up and waving to the cheering throng)

    Dwight Sheldon Adams

  50. #50 by Moribund Republic on March 20, 2009 - 1:40 pm

    Take your meds Shane, and rest. If it is on TV or radio, it is all entertainment. You believe it if it suits you.

  51. #51 by Derek on March 20, 2009 - 2:01 pm

    I had to chuckle when I saw the “disagree with authority thing on Beck’s list, seeing as he was quick to denounce any voice contrary to the administration line (at least back when I gave him a shot around 2004).

  52. #52 by Cliff Lyon on March 20, 2009 - 2:10 pm


    You got banned from this? Better go back and make sure. If so…

    Do you have the post that got you banned? Lets post about it.

    What a giant ASS Beck!!

  53. #53 by Kevin Owens on March 20, 2009 - 2:50 pm

    I have a post on this thread which is under moderation. I don’t know why; it didn’t even include any links.

  54. #54 by Larry Bergan on March 21, 2009 - 2:06 am

    The rattle represents the fact that we would never attack anyone without warning or reason, Glen? Did you really say that?

    Fuck dirt!

  55. #55 by Dwight Sheldon Adams on March 25, 2009 - 3:23 pm

    Kevin–I appreciate your request for equivocation. Sadly, in my last post, I provided for it badly.

    Unfortunately, you’re absolutely true statement that “Not all conservatives want that,” is fairly irrelevant in the context of the discussion. We’re speaking of a broad-based conservative movement which backs and is backed by such people as Glenn Beck, Rush Limbaugh, and Fox News in general. The movement towards ultraconservatism (barely distinguishable from neoconservatism) is dominating the conservative political scene right now, largely because conservatives have, for many years now, created a division between liberals and conservatives that is only reparable, in my opinion, through conservative reparation or culture war.

    Your perspective, while oftentimes reasonable, is lost on the wayside in the conservative political movement towards irrelevant issues and government prescription of cultural memes. Sort of an “opiate of the masses” kind of thing. The free market has come to Washington. Again.

    I must admit that I find it odd that you equate conservatism with “careful change.” Conservatives in America are more about managing the winds of world change by building fences around our borders (no, it’s not just you. That WAS an allusion) than by changing national public policy in a progressive fashion. While you may define your beliefs however you like, you might find it difficult working within the constraints of your nomenclature in popular reference. I fear that you are using the word “conservative” in much the same way that liberals frequently use the word “progressive.” If you require a change in self definition, don’t avoid it in order to maintain social cohesion. I don’t know if that is your motive, and as dropping a little advice in case it is.

    I agree with your comments about government compassion and stoicism. That’s a good perspective to have. I, personally, see government as a body of the people. When government benefits you, you can perceive that your caring for yourself through your union with the public body. When governmentt benefits someone else, you can perceive that you’re helping others through their union with you. Integrating these two perceptions (seeing yourself through both sets of circumstances at once) creates a holistic view of government as a body of the people, and yourself as one of the people.

    Scientific socialism involves directed government control of all aspects of economy. Stricter forms of this type of socialism perceive all aspects of society as aspects of economy, and therefore subject to control. Invasive social intervention is the defining feature of scientific socialism, and is hardly limited. The observation, testing, and destruction or revision of policy, are all positive elements of any government, and I wholeheartedly support them in any system.

    The two ideas connect to form fascism because fascism lies between them in the political spectrum when it is wrapped into a circle. I wish I had a reference for you, but there are so many different ways of organizing the political spectrum but I don’t wish to take the time to find it right now. The basic concept, however, is that, if you’re integrate the social controls in strict scientific socialism (and limited economic controls) with laissez-faire concepts of private ownership, meritocracy, and individual profit, you create fascism, plus or minus a few concepts. In fascism, the free individual chooses to associate himself with the system because he perceives that it’s in his best interest–and because there is a newfound sense of pride in being a part of a self praising and powerful nationality. This is not unlike capitalism, which many people in this country associate themselves with because of a perceived link between capitalism, American identity, and economic superiority. Capitalism, in the national scene, is a system of nationalist meritocracy negligence of the many conflicting factors of circumstance and contrived slavery. The invisible hand of the free market is a natural working force in any economic system. Smith mislabeled the iron fist of capitalism with its name. The iron fist to which I refer is the chaotic element of a so-called free market system which is so easily manipulable, depending on how much of the free market you own. The best things in life are free, especially when they cost money and there’s only so much to go around. These two hands are grappling with each other, arm wrestling, if you will. The iron fist of totalitarianism is simply the iron fist of capitalism grown into its greatest stature by the distribution of all control of society to one or a few hands.

    I have long argued that the natural outcome of capitalism is either socialism or fascism–the third option being temporary anarchy, which is not worth talking about. Sadly, in order to round the political spectrum to socialism, capitalism has to sprint through fascism. Let’s see if American capitalism can run fast enough to survive. We already have so many elements of fascism ingrained in us.

    Cliff–I was allowed to post my comments, but they underwent an unusually lengthy moderation process–at least a day, best I can tell, though I didn’t check back between an hour after I posted and a day after. Of course, that’s just long enough for the page to go far away into the dust-bin of the archive.

    This is the post:

    It might be wise for many of you to review your ideology and not only your legal loopholes. I thought that the concept that “All men are created equal” applied to “All men,” not “American citizens,” and that our rights (including the right to a trial) come from God, not man. If the conservatives were supporting giving a group a trial and the liberals opposed it, these are the exact arguments all of you Beckites would be using right now.

    The right to a trial exists for a reason. Putting people in prison indefinitely on suspicion, despite what all of you have intimated, does NOT make them guilty. Where is your integrity? Would you be satisfied with being imprisoned because you were accused of a crime? If an American was suspected of terrorism in the Middle-East and imprisoned indefinitely without a trial, you would be criticizing the oppressive Muslim regime that imprisoned him. Look in the mirror before you become the oppressors you claim to hate.

    The whole point of giving these people a trial (and of habeas corpus, which was around for centuries before Alberto Gonzalez axed it) is to prove WHETHER OR NOT they are what you claim they are. You seem to simply trust that anyone picked up in the chaos of a military raid is automatically tied with 9/11. Due process is a beautiful thing, and is both constitutionally and ideologically tied with this great nation.

    Read this:


    I tried posting it a couple of times. I don’t know why it took so long for them to post it, considering that conservative posts are frequently posted after only a minute or two.

    Dwight Sheldon Adams

  56. #56 by Moribund Republic on March 26, 2009 - 12:09 pm

    You are moderated because your posts are too long winded, and no one reads them Dwight. It has happened to me.

    You need to take a class on succinct. If I were grading you, I would just pick whatever you wrote, not read it (after the first few times) and then just scrawl a B- or a C+ depending on how I felt that day.

  57. #57 by Dwight Sheldon Adams on March 27, 2009 - 12:43 pm

    MR–Familiarize yourself with academic writing. Your lack of comprehension regarding scholarly word choice is perhaps the reason why your NOT “grading [me].” If being succinct means being insipid, you are spectacularly succinct.

    I am repetitive from time to time, that I can admit. But, unlike you, I like to create an actual ARGUMENT before I start babbling–and that requires a certain degree of explication.

    I also focus on a specific style of writing, one which, apparently, is not palatable to your simplistic tastes. FYI, I copy all of my posts to a separate file on my computer where I may then condense and perfect at a future date, after my arguments have worked themselves out in my head. Using your head. . .what a novel idea. I recommend it.

    You will also notice that I head my comments with a person’s name, to save everyone else from reading what is not directed to them, unless they so choose. You simply toss your ruminating stupidity to the winds of discourse, with little respect for anything but your own desire to be heard shouting above the crowd.

    Thanks for the effort,
    Dwight Sheldon Adams

  58. #58 by Becky on March 27, 2009 - 1:03 pm


    MR sometimes addresses his responses to me directly, even when he is responding to another person’s comment (see newer threads). And then he calls me stupid. It’s like being in 3rd grade again and getting my face pushed into the drinking fountain. The teacher tells me it’s because he secretly likes me, but I dunno.

  59. #59 by Richard Warnick on March 27, 2009 - 1:44 pm

    I read Dwight’s comment and decided to check out the Glenn Beck Mass Insanity Project (aka 9-12). Here’s a sample:

    Has anyone considered the idea of beginning the IMPEACHMENT process. President Obama has made several comments and is initiating policies that will directly effect our safety and security as Americans.
    1. He wants to (or maybe already has) shut down our missle shield, protecting us from enemy fire on our soil.
    2. He wants to disarm our pilots that have the right to protect the airplane they are in charge of.
    3. He wants to restrict our firearms while his own cabinet is telling us that we will be attacked in the next five years and he has given no solution on how to protect us.
    My name is Tony and I am an American that is afraid of my government!

    I replied to that with a list of Bush’s impeachable offenses, of course.

  60. #60 by Moribund Republic on March 27, 2009 - 2:11 pm

    This is a blog Dwight, get over yourself.

  61. #61 by Moribund Republic on March 27, 2009 - 2:14 pm

    So Cliffy is your teacher Becky? Stands that at your age that Cliff being your teacher, you then define yourself as someone that has to go to summer school or something.

    Which is exactly how it looks.

  62. #62 by Becky on March 27, 2009 - 2:20 pm


    That was completely incoherent, MR. But then so is most of what you write. Get some rest.

  63. #63 by Moribund Republic on March 27, 2009 - 3:11 pm

    You mentioned that your teacher said I liked you, and Cliff said that, so pay attention.

    You do amuse me for sure. Where we are today and given that your generation mostly made these fuck ups, it all makes sense now.

    No doubt you can’t understand Becky, that much is clear. That we cannot see id often incoherent.

    Sleep when you are dead.

  64. #64 by Moribund Republic on March 27, 2009 - 3:14 pm

    That which we cannot see is often incoherent. I’m on e-mail chat with dell, I need to entertain myself.

  65. #65 by Dwight Sheldon Adams on March 28, 2009 - 11:16 am

    MR–You sometimes make the most ridiculous comments, with no apparent context. It is no wonder that you so often defend your significantly more apparent stupidity with the unending argument that you “need to entertain” yourself. You choose a position that is always defensible, except for one thing: your maturity and style of communication are better suited for the Yahoo Pool room than a political discourse blog, and it’s much more entertaining than having your face shoved in the dirt over and over.

    Here’s a few of your more delightful idiocies:

    “This is a blog Dwight, get over yourself.”
    This from the one who shows contempt to everyone? The one who tries to use cumbersome ramblings with an air of mystery? Well, the best you can possibly say to back up this insult is “it takes one to know one.”

    “You need to take a class on succinct. If I were grading you, I would just pick whatever you wrote, not read it (after the first few times) and then just scrawl a B- or a C+ depending on how I felt that day.”
    Gosh, MR. I wonder why my professors always give me As. . .maybe cuz they’re qualified to grade writing and you’re not. And they have an attention span that outlives their first spasm of puerile fury.
    Oh, and it’s “succinctness,” not “succinct.” Learn your suffixes.

    “So Cliffy is your teacher Becky? Stands that at your age that Cliff being your teacher, you then define yourself as someone that has to go to summer school or something.”
    Yeah. Becky was right. Incoherent as alddejgy. ‘Cept you were TRYING to be readable. Then you pull this one:
    “That we cannot see id often incoherent.”
    Aside from the obvious incoherence of this statement, which incoherence must mean, according to you, that I can’t see it, this serves as the typical MR argument: “Any failings of mine can be passed off as everyone else’s incapability to understand my genius–or my failure was intentionally executed for my own entertainment.”

    If I tried to pull that argument, I would be laughed out of every intelligent body of people in the country. You’re kind of a jester, aren’t you, MR? Naw. More of a clown. Just remember that this is just as entertaining for me as it is for you. More, actually, because I hand you your rear every time. So are you ready to give up? Or is you gonna get MAD, now? 😀

    I love bullying the bullies.

    Dwight Sheldon Adams

  66. #66 by Moribund Republic on March 28, 2009 - 12:24 pm

    Dwight, this is absolutely to drive the responses. I get exactly what I expect out of everyone here. Learn to control your emotions is the task. Even if you have something to say, no one listens.

    A’s huh? Grade inflation all over again. I loved the curve. only 1 A per class in many I went to.

    Have you ever read response form others of your ilk that are no better here? There are times when there is no point in serious. This is entertainment. I am serious if I feel like it. Serious isn’t solving a thing if we have not noticed.

    It’s Saturday night Dwight, go out and get some or something tonight.

  67. #67 by Moribund Republic on March 28, 2009 - 12:51 pm

    Is it so hard to believe Dwight that many use sites like this to entertain themselves, you know, stir the pot? Ever think you may be being manipulated?

    You know, like what’s that on your shirt Dwight? Or since you are in school, like leaning a garbage can full of water on a dorm mate’s door that opens inward. You know, to a guy that thinks he is real smart. Until he opens his door.

    Largely my contempt is for the sycophants here. If your posts weren’t so long I may read them, and know who you are, and what you think.

    Life will be tough for you Dwight. Do have friends? Laugh much?

  68. #68 by Kevin Owens on March 30, 2009 - 1:40 pm


    Scientific socialism involves directed government control of all aspects of economy. Stricter forms of this type of socialism perceive all aspects of society as aspects of economy, and therefore subject to control. Invasive social intervention is the defining feature of scientific socialism, and is hardly limited.

    We have both provided a different definition for “strict scientific socialism”. Apparently, we both believe in what is described by my definition, and neither of us believe in what you describe.

    The best things in life are free, especially when they cost money and there’s only so much to go around.

    The imbalance of wealth in the world is definitely a queer thing. It seems as if everything is free to the rich; because they have so much money, they don’t need to work at all in order to survive and live comfortably. This is perverse, because work and production are the building blocks of a healthy economy, and capitalism rewards idleness over production.

    I love bullying the bullies.

    It’s like watching the watchers.

  69. #69 by Dwight Sheldon Adams on April 4, 2009 - 9:50 pm

    MR–A magician who jumps out from behind the curtain of his own accord is neither clever nor inspiring. You are here for attention–not entertainment. Otherwise you might not react so much to my pokes and jabs, and reveal yourself so willingly. To use your own example: You don’t say “What’s on your shirt, Dwight?” You say “What’s on your shirt, Dwight? See, haha, nothing, see, so I touched your nose. Wasn’t I clever? Haha. Hey, c’mon, man, I was just doing it for fun, ok!” That’s when I deck you. Unfortunately, in verbal fights, you can just keep saying “I touched your nose! I touched your nose!” no matter how many times I deck you, and I can keep on decking away. But it doesn’t change the fact that you’re just a fool playing a fool’s trick. Two things to remember: First–I am just as entertained as you are by our exchanges, but I don’t feel the need to defend my method nearly as often as you do. One of us (and I know which one) is better than the other at this game–which one of us is truly being entertained? Second–I can see through you. You spend too much time presenting your retarded opinions to not care about them, but you seem unable to craft or communicate ideas on anything more than an impaired level. You beg so much to be taken seriously, but it is your style that demands that you claim otherwise.

    Do you have friends? Laugh much? You spend an awful lot of time on here seeking “entertainment” if you do. And criticizing what you are too inattentive to understand. I’m glad you despise people who want to use information sharing to make a difference. I despise people who like to use time better spent on their non-existent goals to disrespect others who have goals. Get a life.

    I should feel sorry for you. I don’t.

    Dwight Sheldon Adams

    This is to test the edit feature.

    It works!

Comments are closed.

%d bloggers like this: