More anti-government violence

A week or so ago, in the wake of the one-man attack on the IRS in Austin, we had a discussion here about the whether or not the increased anti-government rhetoric on the right might be encouraging such behavior. Several people indicated, if I remember correctly, that, given the current political climate, they wouldn’t be surprised if we saw more violence in the near future. And that’s exactly what happened a few days ago.

On Thursday, a California man by the name of John Patrick Bedell, was killed at the Pentagon after shooting two police officers. It seems as though, Bedell, who suffered from what is being described as severe “anti-government anger,” had crossed the country with two semiautomatic weapons, intent on making a stand in DC… Following is a clip from the Associated Press:

…Hints of a deep-seated mistrust of government emerged in Internet postings linked to Bedell. A blog connected to his LinkedIn profile contained a two-part treatise on big government, including its vulnerability to being controlled by a criminal organization.

“This organization, like so many murderous governments throughout history, would see the sacrifice of thousands of its citizens, in an event such as the September 11 attacks, as a small cost in order to perpetuate its barbaric control,” the blog post read…

Coincidentally, the Southern Poverty Law Center just issued a report on anti-government extremism… Here’s a clip from the report’s accompanying press release:

…The number of extremist groups in the United States exploded in 2009 as militias and other groups steeped in wild, antigovernment conspiracy theories exploited populist anger across the country and infiltrated the mainstream, according to a report issued today by the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC).

Antigovernment “Patriot” groups – militias and other extremist organizations that see the federal government as their enemy – came roaring back to life over the past year after more than a decade out of the limelight.

The SPLC documented a 244 percent increase in the number of active Patriot groups in 2009. Their numbers grew from 149 groups in 2008 to 512 groups in 2009, an astonishing addition of 363 new groups in a single year. Militias – the paramilitary arm of the Patriot movement – were a major part of the increase, growing from 42 militias in 2008 to 127 in 2009…

While I don’t believe there’s evidence of this most recent shooter having ties to any particular group, I don’t suspect the recent, paranoid anti-government ravings by the likes of Glenn Beck, who loves to talk about the secret military that Obama is building, the conspiracy theories of the tea bagging set, or the proliferation of signs about Obama’s gas chambers, helped.

Those interested in reading the Southern Poverty Law Center report, click here, or watch this video featuring the report’s author, Mark Potok.

This entry was posted in Observations, Other, Politics, Predictions and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. Post a comment or leave a trackback: Trackback URL.


  1. Brackinald Achery
    Posted March 7, 2010 at 10:01 pm | Permalink

    I’m reading that John Patrick Bedell was a registered Democrat.

  2. Brackinald Achery
    Posted March 7, 2010 at 10:09 pm | Permalink

    That would make three strikes on your part for making false accusations against right wingers for recent violent acts: the suicidal census worker who faked his “murder” at the hands of right-wingers, pro-communist Joe Stack, and registered Democrat John Patrick Bedell.

    Might as well say Obama-fanatic Amy Bishop’s recent shooting spree was a Glenn Beck Militia-spawned act of domestic right wing terrorism while you’re at it.

  3. Posted March 7, 2010 at 10:50 pm | Permalink

    If you read the post, I say that there’s no evidence that he belonged to any right wing group. All I said was that the current climate certainly isn’t helping matters any. With Glenn Beck talking about Obama’s secret black military force, Sara Palin talking about death panels that will decide who lives and who dies, and the Tea Partiers in general screaming about the imagined crimes of government, it’s no wonder to me that we’re seeing this kind of stuff. The fact that he identified himself as Democrat (I’ll take your word for it), doesn’t change anything that I said. And, sadly, I’m sure there will be other cases in the not too distant future for us to talk about.

  4. Posted March 7, 2010 at 10:55 pm | Permalink

    And, for those interested in reading my post about the census worker in Kentucky, which BA referenced, you can find it here.

  5. Brackinald Achery
    Posted March 7, 2010 at 11:12 pm | Permalink

    You’re very obviously, deliberately implying that right wing popularity is to blame for the recent violent actions of people who associate with the left, which is groundless circular reasoning (the right are all about nut-ball violence against government, therefore any act of nut-ball violence against government is because of the right, even if done by someone on the left).

    You admit that they aren’t affiliated with the right out of one side of your mouth, then strongly imply that the right is somehow to blame for their actions with the rest of your post, including the tags. Can’t have it both ways.

    I think Jon Stewart said it best: “I’m from New Jersey, I know how this works — I’m not saying your mother’s a whore, I’m just saying she has sex for money.”

    If you, progressive Mark Maynard, snap one day and run over a politically-active local personage whom you hate, I’m sure my multiple small-government gun-nut posts on your blog “didn’t help matters any.”

  6. EOS
    Posted March 7, 2010 at 11:32 pm | Permalink

    BA has been right about all three of your attempts to smear. It’s a dishonest tactic and you are not fooling anyone.

  7. Lacy
    Posted March 7, 2010 at 11:53 pm | Permalink

    Whoa boys!

    I think Brackinald is right. These actions can’t be simplified down to a political idealogy.

    I think Mark is right. These actions are inspired by anti-government rhetoric.

    Here’s what I mean. Campus shootings, office shootings, and now, anti-government shootings have all garnered immense media attention.

    The problem is lonely men (no women yet) who feel like failures and want to die but not without national attention to sooth their frail, battered egos. A bunch of losers who want someone to blame. Whatever the media flavor-of-the month is, is who they’ll target their failure-induced-rage against. Current media is making government the target. The “If only I could freely smoke weed or didn’t have to pay taxes I’d be the success mommy promised!” is a target of currently being floated about town. Weak minds and fragile egos will gravitate to the most convenient target.

    Did Glenn Beck cause this? Yes and No. He helped them define a target. But they would have found a target, in an Amish schoolhouse or office building, either way, they’d of tried to fill their graves.

    The problem is that from momma’s milk, too many men are told they are born special. When they find out they’re not, a handful have to find someone to blame (at least violently, most of others still find someone to blame) and want the world to feel their pain since they think the world has promised them some cup it didn’t deliver.

    Ladies, expect to be shat on so they take it a bit more in stride and simply stick their heads in self-cleaning ovens when things get to be too much.

    Get rid of the sense of entitlement, stop blaming folks, and stop the media attention and the fuck-ups go back to quietly jumping off bridges.

  8. dragon
    Posted March 7, 2010 at 11:57 pm | Permalink

    I suppose next you’ll start a huge smear campaign against the good folks at the KKK, just so you can hand over to Nancy Pelosi the heroes on the front line fighting for white justice. Asshole.

  9. Fred
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 9:34 am | Permalink

    Sorry, BA, but it’s time for a little truthing. The following comes from Think Progress:

    UPDATE: In a post, Bedell urged potential collaborators to contact him at an email address with the domain name — which belongs to the Ludwig Von Mises Institute, a libertarian think tank with ties to Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX). A Mises senior fellow led an official event at CPAC last month. Bedell’s connection — if any — to Mises is unclear, though he was also a “fan” of the organization on Facebook.

    Here’s the whole article:

  10. Peter Larson
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 9:40 am | Permalink

    I think it’s a stretch to assume that someone who’s imbalanced enough to crash a plane into an IRS building or go into the Pentagon shooting will have a rational and balanced set of personal politics. I don’t think we can claim that any of them are representative of the majority views of any single group.

    Saying that Fleabag movements cause these guys to do stupid shit is as bad as saying that Marilyn Manson caused Columbine.

  11. Fred
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 9:46 am | Permalink

    Yeah. It must just be a big coincidence.

  12. Robert
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 10:21 am | Permalink

    I have to agree with Brackinald Achery’s characterization of what you are doing, Mark…but only to an extent. You may be, to some degree, however, just imitating the blame game the right wingers seem to play so impulsively and unconsciously, and without much social restraint or consequence. I’m not sure how much of that is conscious or impulsive on your part, but I imagine you aren’t all that committed to the notion that all these violent outbreaks are nothing but the acts of insane individuals, likely only goaded on by the irrational hostilities and general glorification of violence accepted in our culture and media.

    I don’t come to this blog expecting to read concise and irrefutably accurate depictions of current events, so I am not terribly let down when I see what I think is some expression of your personal attitudes and prejudices seeping through. However, it doesn’t hurt to have guys like Brackinald jump all over you for it. At least, I don’t think it hurts you, or the conversation. It may do some small harm to Brackinald himself I suppose in the sense that it helps him perpetuate his own delusions of intellectual isolation. I’m not too worried about him though. He seems to have a healthy chunk of sanity to his personality. As much as he may try, I don’t think he’ll ever be able to escape it.

    I love Lacy’s comments. They seem unusually insightful for a comment on this shitty blog of yours. I guess that happens once in a while, even here.

    As far as all this goes, I may have to think a while before I can come up with anything very specific to say to all this, and even then I probably won’t bother.

    I’m still pissed at you for being suckered by that asshole on Reddit who is spreading obviously bullshit Detroit horror stories about his alleged guardsman buddy being kidnapped.

    And I’m continuously annoyed at you for not moderating any of the comments here, allowing every thread to degenerate into the inevitable idiocy we’ve all come to expect on this blog.

    I guess my point is, BA and the others have valid points in their critique of your comments of late regarding anti-government sentiment and lunacy. My other point is; who gives a shit? Of all the stupid shit you have said on this blog, apparently this comparatively slight misrepresentation you’ve expressed here is a whole heaping more important to some regulars than the really blatant and offensive shit you’ve been saying for years.

  13. Thai Girl Would
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 10:25 am | Permalink

    Who the fuck cares about the microdistinctions? History shows that rightwingers, democrats, republicans, libertarians, terrorists, are all capable of senseless acts of violence.

    And guess what, folks? The Obama Admin *in one year* has got more blood on its hands than all the rightwing + terrorist groups you can name. I’m talking about the blood of American soldiers. I’m also talking about the blood of impoverished Americans. And the blood of Iraqi soldiers, Afgh soldiers, Iraqi civilians, Afgh civilians, civilians in Louisiana, Los Angeles . . . and on and on.

  14. Curt Waugh
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 11:11 am | Permalink

    Robert, did you come here and make an idiotic comment just to prove that this blog is full of idiotic comments?

    Well played, sir.

  15. Robert
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 11:37 am | Permalink

    I was going to take it even further, Curt, and start threatening to drive my car through the front of the Dreamland Theater in an attemt to destory Mark’s puppet. But I figured that would be taking the joke too far and nobody was going to read my comment anyway.

  16. Robert
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 12:06 pm | Permalink

    I wasn’t going to pay the fee to check and see if John Patrick Bedell was actually registered as a Democrat. I’m sure you didn’t either, Brackinald. At this point it looks like everybody is trusting that Michelle Malkin didn’t just add that detail to the info she got from And we do know Malkin to have fabricated details in the past. I guess could check it out and confirm it. We’ll see if anybody bothers.

  17. kingpin
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 12:17 pm | Permalink

    It doesn’t matter what side of the fence they are on. There is only one fence. On one side is the government, and their rich and powerful allies….and on the other side is us.
    I don’t agree with their actions, but I can see why these things are happening. The people of this country have been getting a raw deal for a long time, and the fragile strands of the rope are becoming so frayed, that they are starting to snap.
    Don’t worry, though…in the end, we’ll still have plenty to hang the bastards with.

    and Robert…moderate this, asshole. For someone who finds this blog so insulting and innflammatory, I sure do see you on here quite often, flying off at the tongue, so shut the fuck up…or…don’t shut the fuck up. That’s the great part about leaving comments, unfiltered

  18. Robert
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 12:22 pm | Permalink

    kingpin, you have to admit, I’m not on here as much as I used to be. I’m trying to kick the habbit. You should be supportive.

  19. dragon
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 12:36 pm | Permalink

    Robert, you’re missing your true calling. Verbatim.

    I have to agree
    I’m not sure how
    I imagine you.

    I don’t come
    I see what I think
    it doesn’t hurt
    I don’t think it hurts
    It may do some small harm.

    I suppose
    I’m not too worried
    I don’t think
    I love Lacy’s.

    I guess
    I may have to
    I can come
    I probably won’t bother.

    I’m still pissed
    I’m continuously annoyed
    I guess my point is
    really blatant and offensive shit.

  20. Posted March 8, 2010 at 1:12 pm | Permalink

    Me too, Robert! We should start a group.

  21. Robert
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 1:14 pm | Permalink

    I don’t follow, dragon.

  22. dragon
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 1:23 pm | Permalink

    Then lead, motherfucker.

  23. Robert
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 1:33 pm | Permalink

    Dragon, were you suggesting I’m a poet?

  24. Robert
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 1:35 pm | Permalink

    …because those sorts of attacks are just uncalled for.

  25. dragon
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 2:20 pm | Permalink

    My other point is; who gives a shit?

    Sorry for taking you at your word.

  26. Robert
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 2:22 pm | Permalink

    So you ARE calling me a poet!

  27. Brackinald Achery
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 2:35 pm | Permalink

    I hear ya about the Michelle Malkin source, Robert; I’m also hesitant to trust her definitively, which is why I phrased it the way I did (“I’m reading he’s a registered Democrat” vs. “he’s a registered Democrat”). It may be true, or it may not be.

  28. Brackinald Achery
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 2:38 pm | Permalink

    It wouldn’t surprise me that someone who is against the drug war is a fan of the Mises institute, regardless of party affiliation.

  29. Fred
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 2:45 pm | Permalink

    Thank you, BA, for acknowledging my comment. I didn’t think that anyone was going to.

    Personally, I don’t know how much weight on put on whether or not someone registered as a Democrat or a Republican. They could have registered that way several years ago in order to vote in a primary. It doesn’t mean anything. I’d be more interested to know how much FOX News they watched.

  30. Stella 2
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 3:31 pm | Permalink

    These people are all fucking nuts. It’s no surprise that their ideologies cancel each other out. This isn’t 1940. This is schitzoworld.

  31. Brackinald Achery
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 4:46 pm | Permalink

    My pleasure, Fred, it was a good find on your part. Now you’ve got me hoping I’m totally proven wrong because of that (the Mises connection) and the unsure foundation of Michelle Malkin’s just saying it’s so (the registered Democrat thing). What a relief that would be for a change. Then I can just feel like one of the guys for a while.

    I’m with Stella 2; this guy was genuinely crazy. At least most of Joseph Stack’s letter made some sense, if we’re honest.

  32. Edward
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 5:22 pm | Permalink

    I don’t know that I’d exactly call Joe Stack’s philosophy cohesive, Brackinald. I think he said that he was a Communist at some point, but he also didn’t feel as though he should have to pay taxes. That, to me, sounds like a pretty big gap. When I read the stories on Stack, I saw a man who wanted everything, but didn’t want to pay for it. That to me says Tea Party.

  33. Curt Waugh
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 5:42 pm | Permalink

    “If you read the post, I say that there’s no evidence that he belonged to any right wing group. All I said was that the current climate certainly isn’t helping matters any.”

    “I’m also hesitant to trust her definitively, which is why I phrased it the way I did (”I’m reading he’s a registered Democrat” vs. “he’s a registered Democrat”). It may be true, or it may not be.”

    “I’m not outright saying that the two of you have really distinguished yourselves with your rhetorical styles, it’s just that you both sound like tools when you write like this. And I’m not saying you ARE tools, I’m just saying that your douchebaggery is on display. And I’m not saying that you ARE douchebags, I’m just sayin’…”

  34. Posted March 8, 2010 at 8:03 pm | Permalink

    Yeah, I guess I’m an asshole for suggesting that a toxic political environment might serve to encourage anti-government violence. I’ll just be quiet from now on. Maybe I’ll start posting about football. Would that be OK with you, Curt? Robert? Everyone else?

  35. Brackinald Achery
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 8:15 pm | Permalink

    I’ve been quite forthright, as anyone can read, so I am in no way attempting to deceive or slander anyone, so anyway…

    I wouldn’t say his philosophy is cohesive necessarily, Edward, but you could read his letter and pretty much pick up what he was putting down to a large extant. Even if you didn’t agree with it. You could follow along.

    This John Patrick Bedell guy on the other hand… his thought processes are a little tough to follow. He seems to want to avenge some military guy who was “suicided” to cover up a 9/11 truth conspiracy, and to make weed a free market currency (intriguing… perhaps it could work as Ypsi’s local currency), among other things I need to reread because I’m not sure I understand.

  36. Brackinald Achery
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 8:20 pm | Permalink

    Mark, what you’re doing is what the neocons did to dissenters during the Bush years. The only difference I can see is that they equated the left’s dissent with encouraging foreign terrorists, while the left is equating the right’s dissent with encouraging domestic terrorists (or lone nuts not part of a coherent ideology, as the case may be).

  37. Posted March 8, 2010 at 8:52 pm | Permalink

    I have to call bullshit on that, B.

    What the neocons did, when people criticized them, is they said these critics 1) wanted the terrorists to win, and 2) wanted to make us less safe. They also implied that their critics were effeminate, but I’ll leave that aside for now.

    What I did was say that the heightened climate of political paranoia in this country “could” be contributing toward this recent wave of violent anti-government attacks.

    I think there’s a huge difference between the two. Most notably, I didn’t suggest that those on the right were actively engaged in terrorism. I just made the observation that their retarded bullshit very well may have consequences in the real world. (When you keep yelling “fire” in a crowded theater, someone’s going to lose their shit.)

    And there’s another huge difference. When we were criticizing Bush, we were using facts, and, I might add, we were correct. In this instance, it’s just batshit insanity. When Glenn Beck tells Americans that Obama is raising a secret black army, that’s not the same as when we, on our side, point out that torture is taking place a Gitmo. There’s a world of difference, and, if you can’t see it, I’d say you’re probably beyond hope.

  38. Brackinald Achery
    Posted March 8, 2010 at 10:50 pm | Permalink


    War dissenter Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan went moonbat crazy and shot up a bunch of defenseless people at a government facility in Texas.

    Is this what we can expect when Democrats fill the airwaves with anti-government rhetoric in a time of war?

    I’m not saying Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan was a Democrat. Nor am I saying that those on the left are actively engaging in terrorism.

    All I’m saying is that the hightened rhetoric of progressive war dissenters in America “could” have contributed to Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan’s shooting spree at Fort Hood. Saying that Bush and Chaney are in a holy war against Muslims and that all they care about is building a pipeline through Afghanistan may have consequences in the real world. I’m not saying he was a member of any left wing group, I’m just saying if you yell “unjust war” enough times, somebody’s going to lose their shit.

    Coincidentally, left wing groups have a history of anti-government violence in the U.S.

    While I don’t believe Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan was a member of the left wing weather underground, I don’t think the left’s signs about 9/11 being an inside job, or the Scull and Bones Society being an illuminati conspiracy, helped.

    Tags: violence on the extreme left, progressive blogger rage, sedition, treasonous lefties encourage terrorists, unpatriotic atmosphere, Marxists foment domestic terrorism…

  39. dan gillotte
    Posted March 9, 2010 at 12:09 am | Permalink

    I liked it better when we could all talk openly about ball-shaving.

  40. dragon
    Posted March 9, 2010 at 12:33 am | Permalink

    Ah, BA, I think your barely literate, intellectually blind, morally bankrupt son Brackinald W. Achery is using your computer again.

  41. Peter Larson
    Posted March 9, 2010 at 5:38 am | Permalink

    “When we were criticizing Bush, we were using facts, and, I might add, we were correct. ”

    You have got to be kidding. The left spouted no limit of hairbrained bullshit about Bush and still do.

    I am with BA on this one in pointing out your selective memory.

  42. Steph's Dad
    Posted March 9, 2010 at 7:00 am | Permalink

    Brack, I wasn’t aware that we were struggling to figure out the motive behind Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan’s attack, as he was a devout Muslim who had expressed anger in the past over the U.S. presence in the middle east. I think that one, as far as terrorism goes, is pretty straight forward.

  43. Curt Waugh
    Posted March 9, 2010 at 10:26 am | Permalink

    Sorry Mark. I didn’t mean to diminish your entire thesis. I just found those two statements next to each other too juicy to resist comment.

    Little MEN (yes, they are almost always men) who feel powerless will eventually take to violence. Their politics are irrelevant. I believe that Mark is trying to make a larger statement about which ideological groups tend to promote it more than others (outside of football, that is).

    I think the general observation that violent rhetoric seems more prominent among the tea-baggers is hard to refute. Do both sides say stupid shit? Of course. Have both sides committed violence? Maybe. But it’s hard to argue with facts like the post-election run on ammunition. It sure as hell wasn’t Democrats running out and buying up guns because a brown man was elected president. They didn’t even have a run on guns after the worse-than-questionable 200 election. The violent calls just weren’t prominent. They are now.

  44. Donald Washburn
    Posted March 9, 2010 at 11:33 pm | Permalink

    Who is this “Chaney” Brackinald Achery speaks of? I feel like it could be the key to unlocking the whole secret cabal and unifying us all against the amorphous and undeclared powers of oppression.

  45. Brackinald Achery
    Posted March 9, 2010 at 11:43 pm | Permalink

    Curt, the run on guns and ammo was a reaction to the perception that the left is traditionally more into gun control than the right (and I’d argue that people on the left are generally not as into buying guns in the first place, except for Robert).

    People were afraid of losing their ability to purchase guns and/or ammo (rightly or wrongly), so they stocked up just in case. It’s not like millions of recent gun-buyers were planning on storming the capital with guns blazing, because of the first black president. That’s just silliness.

    Luckily, I bought all my stuff during the Bush years, so I beat the high-demand prices. That’s the benefit of not running with a herd.

    …and let’s not forget Amy Bishop here with the anti-men sexist talk.

  46. Brackinald Achery
    Posted March 9, 2010 at 11:45 pm | Permalink

    Yeah, sorry Don, I spelled it wrong. Score your points against me wherever you can, cause you won’t find a lot of legitimate chinks to choose from.

  47. Lacy
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 12:04 am | Permalink

    Brackie. If the anti-man stuff was referring to me then please mention my name. Why is it men respond to each other by name (Don, Robert, Mark, Bush) but are backhanded with the ladies? (This isn’t making me more datable, is it?)

    If by “sexist,” you mean acknowledging differences among the genders, then I am a big (metaphor, not really that big in actual size) sexist. Thank you for reminding readers that women do kill, but we usually kill people we know (children, boyfriends, coworkers … again, I’m not scoring dating points here, am I). Amy Bishop shot her brothers and selective coworkers. Very feminine. I thought what we were talking about here was men killing random people due to perceived personal wrongs. Any relevant examples?

    Assuming you’re available (you sound available), maybe Mark could help us set up a little speed dating evening? I’m thinking, me, you, Robert, the Wrestler, and pretty much every other reader of this blog.

    Think about it. Fire and Ice!

  48. Mr.SwettyBallz
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 12:06 am | Permalink

    BA wrote, “…and let’s not forget Amy Bishop here with the anti-men sexist talk.”
    Oooh, oooh. Yay!
    Does she smell like axle grease and pee?

  49. Brackinald Achery
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 12:07 am | Permalink

    I didn’t mention your name because I was afraid you would shoot me.

  50. Lacy
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 12:15 am | Permalink

    Weird. That’s exactly what my last several boyfriends said to me when we broke up.

  51. Lacy
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 12:20 am | Permalink

    Just to clarify, they said “That I smell like axle grease and pee” not that they were afraid I was going to shoot them. That’s just what I was thinking.

  52. dragon
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 12:21 am | Permalink

    I’m deeply offended that Lacy broad didn’t invite me. If I found out her name referred to her undergarments I might give her a chance. She does sound a little desperate though and is probably a bitch.

  53. Lacy
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 12:26 am | Permalink

    Sorry dragon, I actually thought you were a bitch, and while I’m creative in the bedroom, I’m no Megan Fox.

  54. Brackinald Achery
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 12:33 am | Permalink

    Lacy, here’s some free blog dating advice: you should start by not being so self-deprecating. Leave that to Mark. Brag yourself up more, like those hip-hop guys do.

    I read in Men Are From Mars & Women Are From Venus that chicks dig unsolicited advice or some damn thing.

  55. dragon
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 12:33 am | Permalink

    I heard she wrote the script for Transformers while on her symbian.

  56. HeadScratchin' in A2
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 8:47 am | Permalink

    If I were to actually come to Ypsi and sit in a bar, is this the kind of conversation that I’d be likely to hear? If so, I’m thinking about bringing my Sociology class. This is fascinating.

  57. Robert
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 10:03 am | Permalink

    Mark, I think Lacy’s idea of organizing speed dating events is a great idea. Maybe you could print up a report of all our past comments here and provide them to all the participants. Then, we could each use those five minutes to grill each other on the comments we found most offensive. It would be fun. I’m pretty sure that none of us would actually want to date each other, but we’d have a lot of fun going through the process and pretending we were considering it.

    The football idea was good too, Mark.

  58. John Lenin
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 10:06 am | Permalink


    If you came to Ypsi, you’d want to catch a ride, because your Hummer would get vandalized within an hour.

    But we’d be happy to drive to A2 and meet you and other libs w/ bibs, if Logan serves beer in the morning.

  59. Robert
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 10:56 am | Permalink

    I guess BA and I should just be happy that the incidents Mark is referring to in THIS thread actually happened. I’m trying to become a more “glass half full” kind of person.

  60. Curt Waugh
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 11:38 am | Permalink

    So you say, BA. I think you’re full of shit. I don’t thing for a minute the gun run was about restrictions on gun ownership. I think it was a gut reaction to fear. It’s a far more base reaction and, thus, a far more likely motivator.

    When I see hoofprints, I think “horses’, not “zebras”.

  61. Brackinald Achery
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 11:57 am | Permalink

    Yes, fear of gun control legislation, based on the left’s proven record of being pro-gun control. Your own proven hysterical hatred of gun ownership kinda puts you in the middle of the Serengeti, so you might want to give zebras a chance.

  62. Lacy
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 12:04 pm | Permalink

    Can the speed-dating NOT take place at a hotel conference center? Getting invited to “get better acquainted” by five guys in a row who slap their room key on the table is beyond creepy. Yes. I look that smoking hot in my yoga pants, even when the skin is acting up. (Is that better, BA?)

  63. Havvah La Leche
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 12:21 pm | Permalink

    For speed dating, can I recommend Old Country Buffet? It’s where I met my hubby. We first made eye contact at the seafood salad, exchanged smiles at the carved salmon, when we finally brushed elbows at the cobbler, he’d gotten up the nerve to break the ice and ask me my name.

    You could get a fresh plate between each “date.” There’s no better quick measurement of compatibility than food!

  64. dragon
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 12:32 pm | Permalink

    I guess BA and I should just be happy

    It was a dark and stormy night; the fog had enveloped the swamp. Little Robert was becoming increasing frightened until he suddenly cried out, “Bracky, Bracky, I’m Scared.”
    “You’re scared” Bracky replied, “I have to walk out of here alone.”

  65. Woody Lefurge
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 1:25 pm | Permalink

    I love the idea of combining a buffet of food with a buffet of potential mates, and “A fresh plate between dates” is way too good a slogan not to use. Reading where these threads lead is as fun as reading the original posts. Well, sometimes at least!

  66. Curt Waugh
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 1:32 pm | Permalink

    BA, I don’t know which is more ridiculous: your unfounded statements about why people buy guns, your unfounded statements about my opinions of gun ownership or the fact that I feel I need to respond to you. Must be idiot-day for me.

    By the way everybody: I have no problem with gun ownership. I cannot, however, understand how BA got a computer without a license.

  67. John Lenin
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 3:44 pm | Permalink

    Curt, Brack, Robert, et al:

    Would you shut the fuck up and start your own blog?

    Thanks, John

  68. Brackinald Achery
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 5:09 pm | Permalink

    Curt, I am a gun owner and a friend of gun owners who is and has been involved in 2nd ammendment politics since I was a kid. Unfounded my ass.

    I will happily found my statements regarding your attitide towards private citizens bearing arms by placing this link to our last big argument about it.

    Lacy, it was a huge improvement. Just so we’re clear though, I’m only helping you out out of the goodness of my heart, as I am happily taken. It was foolish of you to think that someone who is as argumentative, defensive, and noncompliant with other people’s retarded irrationality as I am could stay single forever.

  69. Mr.SwettyBallz
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 6:12 pm | Permalink

    Curt wrote, “I think it was a gut reaction to fear. It’s a far more base reaction and, thus, a far more likely motivator.”
    I think if you ask Mr. Sociology, aka Head Scratchin in A2, he’ll tell you that motivation is a difficult nut to crack but that there is a good, very, very good chance that good old ass chomping, nut sweating fear is the motivation for damn near everything human beings do.
    Especially political shit.
    Then, we scream about how “logical” it is to the other guys. Convenient. It makes the world go round.
    I am going off the grid for a few days and hope to come back with a big dead thing with antlers. Curt, weren’t you the vegan interested in that kind of food from the vegetarian book post?
    Actually, if I don’t come back with something big, bloody and dead, then I will have had a lot of fun playing poker, ass-grabbing and drinking lots of brownish alcohol in the woods with a bunch of men. Yes, ladies, that is what “sportsmen” really do.
    See you next week.
    Emotion is everything, guys. For goodness’ sake, go date each other at the buffet.

  70. Brackinald Achery
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 6:24 pm | Permalink

    John, I will happily never comment here again if Mark asked me to leave.

  71. Peter Larson
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 7:08 pm | Permalink

    I really don’t give a shit about guns. I think people who feel the need to own them for things outside killing things to eat are morons, but that’s just a personal opinion. They can have them, just don’t shoot me.

    That being said, I believe that much of the rush to buy ammo and guns was fueled by gun sellers to make a quick buck. In 08 (still months before Obama was inagurated), there was a huge sign outside a local gun shop stating “Obama will take your gun rights away in January! Stock up now!”

  72. Lacy
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 10:57 pm | Permalink

    Brackie, I just read through that link you posted to your old butch-fight with Curt. Do you realize that at one point you had like 10 comments in a row before anybody even responded? You come off as a little desperate and kind of unbalanced. It’s like you’re wanting/needing people to yell at you to make you feel validated?

    I read somewhere that men like unsolicited advice. But I promise I won’t psychoanalyze you anymore (if you let me wallow in my insecurity slanket).

  73. Brackinald Achery
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 10:59 pm | Permalink

    Peter, I agree.

    Lacy, you have every right to be all sour grapes and shit.

  74. Lacy
    Posted March 10, 2010 at 11:39 pm | Permalink

    Brackie, look at you validating my feelings! You have read books.

  75. Curt Waugh
    Posted March 11, 2010 at 7:47 am | Permalink

    Still looking for when I said anything about gun control. I clearly expressed a desire for an unarmed citizenry – I loves me some peace, but I never said word one about government laws against it. Little paranoid much?

    John Lenin, we’ve been here for years. Take your unsolicited newbie opinion and shuffle back to Digg or wherever you came from.

  76. Curt Waugh
    Posted March 11, 2010 at 7:51 am | Permalink

    On the other hand, I defer to Lacy. These sort of rhetorical games aren’t really my forte. Subtle, I am not.

  77. John Lenin
    Posted March 11, 2010 at 8:12 am | Permalink

    At the very least, consider restricting your comments to a minimum, as when you’ve got something urgent, and lucid, to bring to the table. Otherwise the conversations are bogged down in onanism.

  78. Kim
    Posted March 11, 2010 at 9:08 am | Permalink

    I disagree with BA, EOS, and DR quite often, but I like having them around. It’s frustrating on occasion, but I don’t want to spend my mornings in an echo chamber.

  79. Robert
    Posted March 11, 2010 at 9:32 am | Permalink

    John Lenin, you may not have noticed, but this entire blog is all about onanism. I am inclined to take your advice nevertheless.

    Dragon, I’m gonna quash you brother!

  80. Robert
    Posted March 14, 2010 at 10:15 am | Permalink

    AP Exclusive: Pentagon gun was from Tenn. police

  81. dragon
    Posted March 14, 2010 at 12:11 pm | Permalink

    Guns and fetuses
    So unique and beautiful
    Precious irony

  82. Posted March 14, 2010 at 12:25 pm | Permalink

    The free market is a wonderful thing, isn’t it?

  83. Brackinald Achery
    Posted March 14, 2010 at 12:28 pm | Permalink

    Hahaha, a government agency is the free market. Classic.

  84. Posted March 14, 2010 at 12:33 pm | Permalink

    Yeah, when they sell confiscated guns to dealers who put them back on the street.

    I feel like linking to Elton John’s “Circle of Life” song.

  85. Manny
    Posted April 16, 2010 at 9:27 am | Permalink

    Having lost the election, they’ve given us no option but violence.

  86. Wilk
    Posted November 7, 2010 at 1:19 pm | Permalink

    If you judge people you have no time to love them.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.


BUY LOCAL... or shop at Amazon through this link Banner Initiative coal mining kids