We’ve Got a Screamer

Jon Arnold is running for legislature
Anti-intelligence candidate Jon Arnold has filed for office on the Republican ticket.  He says he wants voters to send him “kicking and screaming” to Helena.

 I will go kicking and screaming into Helena, pushing our leaders to try to take back our powers that have been restrained from us by the federal government.

I think Arnold is confused about what “going kicking and screaming” means.  But that’s no surprise, considering that he’ll tell you straight up: “intellectuals” are the problem:

We have a despotic, unconstitutional fourth branch of government, comprised of a small army of two million bureaucrats….Many of these people are considered to be “intellectuals.”  The problem with intellectuals is that they are not smart enough to know the things that they don’t know.  This was the brilliance of our founders.

Well, it is “the brilliance” of Jon Arnold anyway.

Jon Arnold is running for legislatureIt used to be that being smart and getting an education was viewed as important in America. But now, it’s the dumb that we put on a pedestal.   And to what do we owe this gift of dumb? Right-wing fundamentalism, both religious and political. We have a Presidential candidate who is worried that Satan is attacking America.  Rick Santorum says, in public, that college is all part of Obama’s evil plan to corrupt the nation’s youth.

Arnold further demonstrates his aversion to smart when he asks voters to:

Imagine if ten years from now there is a “sin tax” (such as those for alcohol and tobacco) for the purchase of a cheeseburger…The only protection against such injustices is to not grant the government this power to begin with.

What Arnold doesn’t know is that there is already a gaggle of Montana politicians clamoring for policies that would require a massive food police bureaucracy–at an enormous expense.  However, they are all members of his own party.  Here is a list of legislators (all Republicans) that signed an op-ed in favor of the idiotic boondoggle. The “evidence” for the claims made in the op-ed comes from TEA Party Republican Tom Burnett’s own blog and “research” paper.

Representatives: Tom Burnett, Janna Taylor,  Salomon, Wayne Stahl, Jonathan McNiven, Pat  Ingraham, Tom McGillvray, Ken Peterson, Jeff Wellborn,  Cary Smith, Jerry O’Neil, Bob Wagner, James Knox,  Dan Skattum, Wendy  Warburton, David Howard, Jerry Bennett, Jesse O’Hara, Christy Clark, Kris Hansen, Champ Edmunds, Krayton Kerns, Ron Ehli, Mark  Blasdel, Doug Kary, Austin  Knudsen, Kelly Flynn, Walt McNutt, John Esp, Pat Connell, Matt Rosendale, Cleve Loney, Mike Cuffe

Senators: Debby Barrett, Ed Walker, Ryan Zinke, Bob Lake

Arnold is a Republican candidate Montana Senate District 43, which includes Anaconda and surrounding communities.


171 Comments on "We’ve Got a Screamer"

  1. never trust a man who doesn’t brush his teeth…

  2. Floride is a United Nations conspiracy. The TEA Party is well aware of this matter and is undoubtedly drafting legislation.


  3. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 3, 2012 9:28 AM at 9:28 AM |

    “Abraham Lincoln did not free the slaves, they were born free. He simply told the states that they would no longer be allowed to deny them the freedom they were born with.”

    Jon Arnold

    Political Party: The IQ is just Too Damn High Party!

    Read his announcement statement in its entirety. I dare you. It’s truly an amazing piece of work. He’s definitely proud that he’s not an intellectual! And it shows. Where is Craig to EMBRACE this newest member of his party? EMBRACE them, Craig, for they truly know not what they do.

  4. i’d rather watch ‘jersey shore’ than read this guys drivel.

    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 3, 2012 9:47 AM at 9:47 AM |

      No, seriously, do read it, trusty. It’s incredible for its glimpse into the moronic, fascist mind of a dipshit!

      And lest we forget, the very first thing a fascist regime does upon takeover is to rid the society of ALL intellectuals! Happens every time. Teachers, doctors, lawyers, artists, etc., ANYone capable of thinking for themselves must go! Hell, Pol Pot did it one better. He simply executed anyone that wore glasses on the speculation that they might be smart! True story.

      And in fact, there may be some merit to his claim. Some anthrologists speculate that in the pre-history days as we were evolving, the big strong dudes with good eyesight were the hunters. The wimpy dudes with poor eyesight made pisspoor hunters, but they WERE very good with stuff up close! So, they kinda stayed behind and did the fine motor skills stuff like make the exceptionally finely crafted bows and arrow! Hence, their brains may have developed a little differently. It DON’T require a whole lotta smarts to attack a mastodon! But it DOES require a little intelligence to paint, draw and invent new technologies!

      Mr. Arnold DEFINITELY belongs in the class of dudes who would willingly jump on a mastodon! No brain, no pain! He would do it simply because it’s the right thing to do, and the wimps back in camp wouldn’t do it! They’re too smart! In our modern society though, I’m not sure that we need the mastodon jumpers to lead us. But hey, if I ever see a mastodon, Mr. Fartmold will be the first dude I call!

      Hope this helps.

  5. a true believer in the truest sense…reading that was annoying. jon arnold jackson doesn’t know when to shut-up

  6. Sorry to hear that you are stuck with this feller but glad you boys got him there and he ain’t stinking up Dakota and that is no joke. I sure wouldn’t consider him to be anything other than trouble for your state as an elected official. Good luck, but keep him over there, humor him and give him a couple of dog catcher votes.

  7. Yeah, I get it. They’re the dumb ones, and don’t know it.

  8. Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 3, 2012 8:36 PM at 8:36 PM |

    Yea the MTGOP in our state still have that title Nationally…. “Bat Shit Crazy.” but other states are vying for that title.

    The Dakotas have been Growing up, and still have Moderate GOP in enough numbers among their ranks to keep the Tea Party in their friggin closet to some extent(unlike MTGOP which embraces the Nuts that fell from out of state trees, or were pushed out)!

    Its our other neighbor Wyoming that Wants Their Own Currency, a Draft, and a Freaking Aircraft Carrier In case of Doomsday! I feel for my Democrat friends there as well!

    • So you too have never understood how good-cop bad-cop is played. Democratic leadership knows they can get away with all kinds of shit because you are soooooo sceeered of the Pubbies. Good God are you an easy mark!

      Reminds me – I have a bridge for sale back in Brooklyn. Any takers?

      • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 4, 2012 11:36 AM at 11:36 AM |

        Mark I Understand Police and Military better then you could ever understand it, because I grow up on it! And Good-bad cop is not the analogy that fits here…. not even close! It is a matter of Informed decisions by some who care about being a public servant, and those people who do not have the time or inclinations to be informed to do the right thing!

        Gone are the days of the moderate republican, the Tea Party has taken the GOP party so far to the right, we Dems look like Liberals just by standing in the same spot we always have, left of center… I do not plan on changing that spot for my side anytime soon, the GOP needs to come back towards the center, were the American Public has always stood!

        • Way too funny – your second paragraph demonstrates how good-cop bad-cop is working on you, as we speak.

          I rest my case.

          • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 4, 2012 5:35 PM at 5:35 PM |

            It is not my problem! That is your opinion…. of me, which doesn’t count for much…. just like you Good Cop-Bad Cop Definition!

          • No, I disagree, there is objective reality that exists outside of anyone’s opinions. Whether or not you are aware of that reality, or are even self-aware, is another subject entirely. I think your comment above demonstrated that you lack self awareness. I certainly understand by this time hat your grasp of reality is foggy at best.

            • Like “foggy” is a clinical diagnosis: pick on someone in your own scrum, Toke; your own pathologies tend to present when you get caught cornering someone on the playground.

              • Again, there is objective reality. I don’t get angry at things said to me here because I know how you view me, how the information I present seems off the wall to you. It’s all counterintuitive, and so you react with first shock, and then anger. In the end, you simply dismiss it as nonsense. .

                The ideas I present are beyond your ability to grasp. You are far gone down the rabbit hole of party politics, and hence are no longer vigilant citizens.

                Koow thyself … It is your first task. Have you ever self-reflected? Time is at hand, fools.

                • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 5, 2012 7:06 AM at 7:06 AM |

                  THE END IS NIGH!, says Buttinski’s sign as he stumbles around the streets of Colorado mumbling to himself! Mark, do you gather much of a crowd down there on the street corners? Jus wondering!

                  • See now? Your ability to grasp content is being challenged. I am saying that now, when challenged, would be a good time to self-reflect.

                    And Larry, please, you are not very good at the art of insult. The stupid names bounce off people, and merely cause them to look at you cross-eyed. To be effective, a good insult has to have an element of truth and some word craft, as when Shaw invited Churchill to his play and said “Bring a friend, if you have one.” You would have said something like “Winky Churchbells is a dumabass!” Do you see, do you even begin to grasp, how lame you are, how badly in need of that look in the mirror you are? I suspect your alcohol use is a symptom of something much deeper amiss in your makeup.

              • You are in Arizona, Mark, this interested party is in New Mexico; after you help make Montana blue: we can share a bottle of Pinot Noir.

                Until then, we are enemies.

                • I look forward to having exchangesmwithnyou. I love having enemies! Why else be alive?

                  • Love
                    The quest for meaning

                    All these things are worthwhile, and all you can focus on is your impotantance to your ‘enemies’. You are irrelevant, Mark. You obviously think so yourself.

                    • You are so much a lens of your own ego through others that you don’t begin to know me. I am no one special. I had luck, and luck allowed me to break free. You’re not so lucky. What can I say?

                    • About the only thing I can agree with is that you are no one special (unless you are refering to the special bus you certainly must ride…).

                    • Nice. What next – midget jokes? Betting on dog fights?

                • “Exchanges with you.” Now that typo was caused by beer, Sierra Nevada Torpedo, as we sit here watching the Arizona sunset.

                  • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 5, 2012 9:59 PM at 9:59 PM |

                    Just keep remembering your no-one special Mark! Cause that’s the way the 1% looks at all of us.

                    Rehberg who thinks no one is special from getting the medical treatment they deserve, after working all their adult life in a coal mine only to contract black lungs disease. Don’t worry about that guy, let him find his own medical treatment as Rehberg guts the laws that protect the only thing left precious he can give his family everyday… a roof over their head, food in their belly… cleans clothes on their backs and himself! The company can replace him. they wont lose a day of work from another worker stepping in!

                    Don’t worry about the no one special kid, that dreams of finding the perfect health stimulant for winter wheat crops, to make them resilient to drought and fungus. he cant pay for his college tuition without the help of a government grant, but he has always been an A student, while he helped his father work the ranch. Rehberg, and the GOP Lackies don’t want him to stop working, they want him to try harder then the 14 hours he already puts in school and home, otherwise he is just a welfare case.

                    What about the no one special woman, who has Amniotic Fluid Embolism, because she didn’t have prenatal care when the republicans closed down the clinic in her little town. the baby will probably die before she does.

                    I do care about the no-one specials in Montana Mark! Something your kind, you breed of special slime don’t care about, because that’s not were the money is… but it is what the establishment clause, and part of the original Bill of rights was written for… those very people.

                    But, the law, everyone forgets on your republican side is even more telling

                    Amendment 9: The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.

                    Your one less person in Montana, not living in this state, I don’t have to care about thank goodness! You better hope there is someone who cares about you in that some place else… not so special!

                    • I lived in Montana for 59 years. I am majority owner of a Montana manufacturing business. My roots are there. My “special breed of slime” is not Republican nor right wing. I am of the left, the true left, which you do not recognize because it is almost extinct in the US, replaced by your right wing Democrats masquerading as such, and by fools like you who are not versed in politics or issues and only care about elections.

                      Your concerns about health care and coal miners, fall on deaf ears then, as the greatest damage done to our health care system was done by Max Baucus, who given an opportunity to institute badly needed reform, instead turned it against us and used that opportunity to repay his benefactors, the health insurance industry. Because of that, we’ve had no reform, and are soon to be required to pay ransom to overlords of AHIP for crappy coverage. Our private health insurance system is a disgrace, and Max is a major benefactor of the people who run it.

                      Don’t you dare complain to me about health care coverage! Your party screwed the pooch, f***** us over, gave us the business.

                      And here you are, all ready to vote for them some more because, Norma, you just don’t know anything! Just because we are offered candidates does not mean that we have real choices.

                    • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 7, 2012 11:45 PM at 11:45 PM |

                      U.S. Constitution: Article IV

                      Section 3. Admission of New States to Union; Property of United States

                      Clause 1. Admission of New States to Union


            • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 4, 2012 8:42 PM at 8:42 PM |

              Mark your arguing with your self you know? Continue with your assault, but remember it takes two to argue so I suggest you consider this conversation in front of a mirror… I generally do not argue with the insane unless a doctor is present! It is for your own good!

              • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 4, 2012 9:36 PM at 9:36 PM |

                “Mark you’re arguing with your self you know”

                Well of COURSE he is, Norma. And there’s a perfectly logical scientific explanation for that. It’s termed the Buttinksi Effect. You see, when one has one’s head up one’s ass, there’s a bit of an echo! Hence, Buttinki is actually confused into arguing with himself!

                The good thing is that he’s never lonely and always has someone dumber to converse with!

              • I have, Norma, on one or two occasions read your words and found actual content there, and so do not think you are beyond hope or reason. But usually you are just throwing screed on the screen, repeating the lines you are given to memorize as a Democrat. Are you capable of any more than that?

                • So once again, Mark gets to decide for us whether our words show hope or reason… What a patronizing ass.

                • Like all of us. I get to think and judge the words of others on their merits, and not due to the group to which the people who write them adhere.

                  Try it sometime.

                  • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 5, 2012 2:10 PM at 2:10 PM |

                    Yea know what, Mark? Moorcat is right! You are a a patronizing ass. We dont think like you ( thank Goodness), We dont base our conversation on what you say, or even how you think. Sorry bud your not considered even close to stellar advice here…. because you are a tool of the RW!

                  • Many people, mostly Democrats find me annoying, I realize. Much of it is that I am not nice to you. I find it hard to be nice to you because you have assumed the position that belongs to real fighters, people of honor, and squeezed them out. Your party is squeamish, bought, cowardly and mostly stupid as I see it. I think your party leadership is intelligent. They are ready and willing to work with the right wing, as they are part of it.

                    But they hate lefties. We are too smart. We have it figured out. That’s why,when Gore screwed up in 2000, running a weak campaign and losing for a whole host of reasons, Democrats chose to blame Nader. It’s because he’s a lefty, and Democrats fookin hate lefties.

                    there is no left in the US. there are two right wing parties, and like an eagle with one wing, they fly in a circle. Election after election, and no change. Or hope.

                    • No, Mark. Most people find you annoying because you are. You are an idiot with delusions of grandaur and you just can’t keep yourself telling all of us how we are wrong and you are right. If everyone finds you annoying, what is likely the correct answer – You are annoying or we are all too stupid to understand the vast and powerful knowledge you wish to impart to us? The answer is obvious.

                    • Wow, Tokarski is actually Conan the Leftarian. Who woulda thunk it?

                      There is next to nothing objective about your previous comment, Conan. Not an ounce of it is independently verifiable outside of your ‘dimension’ of thought. Democrats didn’t blame Nader because he was a lefty. They blamed Nader voters for being tools of the right-wing. Gore’s “weak” campaign won him a significant majority of the popular vote. Many Democrats are lefties, or to phrase it better outside of your dimension of thinking, many lefties are Democrats. Birds with one wing can’t fly at all, in circles of otherwise. So to borrow the authoritarian phrasing you seem fond of, Don’t You Dare complain to me that you see anything objectively. You don’t. To you, it’s all about the importance of you.

                    • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 6, 2012 8:07 PM at 8:07 PM |

                      Most people find you annoying Mark, cuz you are not a Democrat! You just keep coming here, to this blog, and telling people you vote for the left to confuse the issues.Then on other days you say you haven’t voted for years!

                      Which Mark are you tonight?

                      Cause it looks to me, like your trying to do an academy award winning performance as a fallen man, a dude who lost his way to the voting booth!

                      People remember what you say here Mark, you act like you live in a vacuum!

                    • There you go speaking for everyone again. God that’s annoying, and you both do it, Rod and Kenny. Does it give you added security to know that you are part of a group? That’s what it sounds like. Insecurity.

                      Some time in my late 30’s I had an awakening, and it was simply this: there is nothing to be afraid of. There was no god or devil, commies or terrorists or demons. I was free of fear, and from that day forward my amygdala receded to the background.NAND I was able to think clearly. That’s all that is going on here – you are all afraid of shit – terrorists or Republicans or Tea Party members. The amygdala overrides the cerebral cortex, and eventually destroys the intellect.

                      There is a lot of stupidity here. You two are very stupid, but you were not born that way. It’s a result of too much fear, too little dispassionate reasoning. The same with the Tea Party – you mirror them.

                      In the end, there is no solution – only death and new people will fix us, and that takes time. You are beyond readh. Live well and prosper.

                    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 6, 2012 8:32 PM at 8:32 PM |

                      Moron? Gotta be!

                    • Larry, you stupidity is not even of the aggressive variety that Goethe said was so dangerous (Budge). Yours is common stupidity. You are very stupid,but hardly unique, and completely lacking in self-awareness.

                    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 6, 2012 9:35 PM at 9:35 PM |

                      FINALLY! A dufus as pure as Buttinski! Gotta be one of marky’s kin!


            • Mark’s ‘Objective’ reality.

              (And yes, I actually did make it through all fifteen minutes of that.)

              • I have GOT to get me one of those shiney suits!! On another note, I’m having trouble following Mark’s rationale(?); he gets to judge others but we don’t get to judge him? He’s enlightened, we’re not? He thinks, we don’t? He’s all knowing and wise and we’re just slugs? We spew verbal vomit and party line rhetoric but he’s an original thinker? Mark must have the all-time shineyest of suits.

                • Oh, I’m certain of it. Without a doubt, the more circular the reasoning, the shinier the suit.

                  • That’s really clever. Ergo not original, but clever.

                    • Sorry, Mark, but it was original. I’ve shown clearly before how circular your reasoning is. Why do you think I chose the video I posted as your “objective” view? You actually think you set the conditions of reality; and based on nothing more than that, you claim the power of ‘objective’ view over everyone else. That’s exactly how I came to the very empirical, and reasonably objective, insight that you are delusional. It’s apparent that you don’t even know what the word “objective” means anymore.

                • WHo said that you don’t get to judge me? We are always judging one another. You I don’t know so well, Dallas, pbut I’ve been around Rod and Kenny (real name) and Kralj and Norma enough now to have a good sense of them. Egos interfere with everything, and the Kailey brothers have self-defense egos, walls of bullshit around them due to insecurity. Larry’s a drunk, but even if not would not set the world on fire with his intellect. Norna rarely offers meat on the bone. Read her comments and look for substance – it happens but only rarely.

                  Me? As I have said many times – I got lucky. I became self-employed, was able to make a living without spending all my time working, and read and read and read – not because I knew stuff, but because I was confused and did not understand anything.

                  It’s a path, you never get to the end. Just today I read that Libya is splitting up … Who was it said the was ultimately going to be the end of imperialist attack – separation of the oil-rich region, civil war … Oh yeah – Chomsky.

                  You learn to rely on people who are right more often than wrong. I am not smart enough to see these things, but smart enough to avoid people who don’t see these things, and also to know that party politics is pointless.

                  And I like to write and argue with people because it is fun. I like people with sharp wits who can bring it. Rod’s comment about circular reasoning and shiny suits, though not original, was witty. That’s rare.

                  • YAWN…

                  • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 7, 2012 2:18 PM at 2:18 PM |

                    Oh Mark their really isn’t help for you…. cuz your not listening bud! We don’t hate you! We just grow tires of your insults to our intelligence.

                    • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 7, 2012 2:21 PM at 2:21 PM |

                      Oh Mark there really isn’t help for you… cuz your not listening bud! We don’t hate you! We just grow tired of your insults to our intelligence.

                      Yeah I hit the reply button without really checking again, that’s human error on my part!

                    • Do I care if you “hate” me? Man, it’s like pissing in the ocean. It doesn’t affect the waves a bit. You are beyond reach.

                      I live on green grass over here Norma. I don’t have to worry about what anyone else thinks, as if that word had substance. I am free, I see what I see. This country is virtually beyond repair, and the biggest problem is that the people who could and should make repairs, Democrats, are busy cheering for the wrong team. Some say you are merely stupid. I want to understand why you are stupid, but I do agree, you are stupid. Norma, read my lips: Bag of rocks, band width draining stupid. Oxygen sucking stupid. Beyond reach.

              • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 6, 2012 8:56 PM at 8:56 PM |

                Wow Rob, See Mark’s comments above? Mark had an epiphany! Ah? Except he calls it an awakening? … And we are in these strange-montage-brainfarts, and awakening’s of his?

                • is Mark finally figuring out that none of us have any respect for his thoughts?

                  • This just reenforces his persecution complex. He thrives on his annoyance to others because – in his small warped mind – it shows that he is right and we all are stupid robots comforming in march step to the boggiemen that hide under his bed and causes him to wear depends at night. He rails against others (specifically larry) for using deragatory names but then calls Wulfgar “Rod” and me “Kenny” as if that has some special meaning (beyond proving his incredible childishness). Mark is a lost cause, doomed to wallow in his own special kind of misery, and not worth the effort to engage. The only saving grace to this waste of human flesh is that he doesn’t vote and therefore cannot truely have any effect on the rest of us.

  9. Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 4, 2012 3:45 AM at 3:45 AM |

    1,500 kept out of Benton Co. GOP caucus

    Read more here: http://www.thenewstribune.com/2012/03/04/2052032/1500-kept-out-of-benton-co-gop.html#storylink=cpy

    Ray Swenson, a Richland lawyer, criticized local GOP officials for poor organization and said the results today should be invalidated.

    “I think it’s illegal,” Swenson shouted to a gathered crowd, many of whom were filming him with cellphone cameras. “The Republican party leadership is taking away our freedom.”

    Swenson told the Herald he may file a lawsuit seeking to invalidate the caucus results.

    “I think it’s unconstitutional,” he said. “Our right to vote is the most fundamental right in the Constitution. … This is exactly equal to walking into a polling place and being told, ‘We’ve run out of ballots. We didn’t expect this many people. Go home.’ ”

    Yeah the GOP are already starting to deny even their own the right to vote!

  10. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 4, 2012 9:02 AM at 9:02 AM |

    MORE COMPASSIONATE TEATARDISM! Mother Mary comes to me, speaking words of wisdom, let it be, let it be!

    This woman don’t even LOOK normal! Sumthin’ REAL wrong with the Teatards! But HEY, she don’t want to feed the animals! But ya know, as a freakin’ TAXPAYER, I would MUCH rather feed PEOPLE than feed the Big Kockh brothers! Time to END corporate food stamps! Feed people not Kockhs!

    Wonder how much of that hated gubmint money ol’ Jonny Fartmold has sucked up? Plenty I’d bet! Enjoy! And remember, feed people not Kockhs! And dicks, cheney, etc.! But when you think about it, ALL Teatards are dicks and kockhs!


  11. Cebull=Limbaugh: the GOP routinely writes Limbaugh’s script to draw attention from the outrageous antics of its party in order to make their entire platform look saner.

    Unless and until we Democrats deconstruct the handbook written by their philosopher/kink, Newt Gingrich, we will always be playing defense.

    • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 4, 2012 11:44 AM at 11:44 AM |

      The man didn’t even really apologize to Mrs Fluke, he is still basically calling her a prostitute! Rush Limbaugh is what the GOP stands for now! They are taking their cues from a guy I knew growing up in California as a nutty radio announcer in Sacramento years ago. He was a clown and misinformed piece of crap then! He is just a fat older version of the same slime now!

  12. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 4, 2012 1:33 PM at 1:33 PM |

    CRAIG’S PEOPLE ARE NUCKIN’ FUTZ! And gettin’ futzier as we speak! Craig, EMBRACE your inner Saintscrotum! EMBRACE the fact that in SPITE of the fact that fully NINETY-NINE PERCENT of women in this country USE birth control, Ric Saintscrotum had delcared it a SIN!

    And I believe’im! God TOL’ lil’ ricky that all them shameless hussies was a’sinnin’, SO thas good enuff for me! I only regret that we can’t burn and dunk anymores! Things was SO much simpler back in the good ol’ days when women and blah people knew their place! Them was the good ol’ days fer SURE! Things were orderely! And Nice! And tidy! Hard to beat order! It’s next to LAWliness! Law and order and catholoholic wackos makes for a good society. No, not good. A GREAT society! Only better than the one Johnson tried!

    Saints like Saintscrotum are ALWAYS villified in their own time. He’s kinda like Joan of Arc, only he’s Ric of Farce! The Holy Roman Scrotum might just burn him at the STAKE some day, just like Joan! Ya never know!


  13. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 5, 2012 7:08 AM at 7:08 AM |

    A man after the Kockh brothers own heart! And a good Pubbie dude! Prolly one of judge CeeBULLshit’s early mentors!

    Interesting read.


    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 5, 2012 9:17 AM at 9:17 AM |

      Here’s the Mormon Pope defending aNOTHER fine organization, the Kockh brothers’ John Birch Society! It’s really pretty incredible to watch the resurgence of the wackos. Hell, makes me want’a vote for a Moron like Mittens right now! There’s sumthin’ to be said about the immutable order of fascism! One never need think! I like that. And so does Jon Fartmold!


  14. First off, let me thank you for sending so much traffic to my website. Moreover, two years ago you never saw fit to mention my campaign but seeing that I ran the second closest race for the MT State Senate, in a district that has long been a lock for the democratic party, I guess you figured it was finally time to check in.
    Considering that I ran such a close race and happen to be a “dumb non-intellectual” I can only infer that you must be worried that the voters in SD 43 are becoming the same, seeing as so many of them saw fit to vote for me. Therefore, I would like to offer you the chance to enlighten all of us. Crawl out from behind your keyboard, give me a place and time in SD43 when you would like to meet, and we will let the people decide which one of us is more intellectual. However, should you decide to come, I would suggest that you leave your tautological opinions behind and refrain from committing ecological fallacies (and no, this has nothing to do with the environment, but your smarter than me so you already knew that).

    • Unless I read your own words wrong, Mr Arnold, you don’t seem to think that being intellectual is all that good a thing. Why, pray tell, would you want to “prove” you are more intellectual than anyone posting here (including Cowgirl)? That would seem to be counter productive.

      Further, I have no intention of coming to SD43 to debate you. It would be moot as I am not running for an office and you are not campaigning to run the office for my Senatorial District. I have my own wingnut to worry about.

      Sadly, if you are the best that SD43 can do, I really pity the people of that district. I grant you that your district isn’t all that big or populated by all that many people, but surely someone in your district is a viable conservative candidate without being a wingnut. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised given that Debby Barrett has continued to win her elections in our District.

    • Jon, you really shouldn’t be talking smack about your ‘intellectual cred’ when you don’t seem to have a clue what a “tautology” is.

  15. Well, since you pray me, let me discern. If you would have read my entire statement, rather than mischaracterizing bits and pieces, you would understand that I am arguing that the benchmark of political intellectualism, is not in thinking that you know how to solve everyone’s problems, but understanding and accepting that you can’t. Therefore, those that consider themselves to be intellectuals cannot be so unless they first accept this premise.

    As for debating me being moot, why than do bother to write this blog? Are you not advocating for your own ideas? If your goal is to simply report news than why do you add your own biased opinions?

    As for me being a “wing nut”, why the insistence on personal attack? If I am wrong, why do you not simply offer a line of logic that defeats my arguments? Perhaps you would prefer to debate me in your district?

    • jon arnold sounds just like skees…

      • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 7, 2012 2:47 PM at 2:47 PM |

        I’ll debate you Joe! I am running in Moorcat’s district against someone who has become just like you… a revisionist of American and Montana history!

        Your just another person who wants to muddy the waters of religion and Politics in America, when president Jefferson who bought Montana as part of the “Louisiana Purchase” for the United States said:

        “I consider the government of the United States as interdicted by the Constitution from intermeddling with religious institutions, their doctrines, discipline,or exercises.”

        Lastly, I am sick of you interpretations of Obama’s call to education. Who in middle class America doesn’t want their children to do better then them? When did education become so evil… when our forefathers themselves, felt education was in the interest of the nation as a whole to be educated?

        Yes I would look forward to explaining to your district how they have been tricked by Republican Revisionists like you, I would look forward to explaining to them the real facts of America and Montana…. not the conjured fear of the GOP!

        • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 7, 2012 2:50 PM at 2:50 PM |

          Ill even give you a fair Chance Joe! You set up the questions… and give me at least 24 hours notice of them…. hows that!

        • Are you running against Wellborn or Barrett?

          • HD 72, against Wellborn

            • I will take a lot, Norma, to unseat Wellborn. He is well liked in the community and he isn’t quite the wingnut that Barrett is. His wife is a well respected real estate agent in Dillon and he is fairly well establised in the community. You will have to bring your “A” game to defeat him.

              • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 7, 2012 5:30 PM at 5:30 PM |

                I have an “A” Game! Welborn is a nice Guy! But he has voted yes with the GOP in Our legislature on :

                Legalize Hunting with silencers on guns!
                Lift the prohibition on carrying concealed weapons in bars, churches and banks!
                Eliminate law that requires landlords to install carbon monoxide detectors!
                Constitutional referendum to specify no right to abortion or its public funding!
                Allowing concealed carry without a permit in Montana
                Federal law enforcement officers should communicate with sheriff first
                Ensure county oversight in movement of publicly-owned wild buffalo or bison
                Revise definition of eligible renewable resources
                Eliminate ability for FWP to use hunting access fees to acquire fee title lands
                Revise energy efficiency and code adoption requirements in building codes
                Revise voter registration
                Revise mining laws regarding cyanide health and vat leach open-pit mining
                Define scope/ boundaries of human sexuality/reproduct ed in K-12 public schools
                Provide medical liability protection for hard-to-recruit subspecialists
                Revise consumer protection laws and settlement proceeds
                Require cost-benefit analysis of mandated health insurance coverage of service
                Provide state eminent domain authority for federal lands
                Repeal medical marijuana law
                Revise interim zoning laws
                Revise subdivision and platting act

                “Real” Nice guys in Montana don’t pollute the water air land, take away health care for woman, carry Guns in bars and churches, or give rights to certain people and corporations first, Mr. Moorcat! No matter what you like about him personally just like I do………. he isnt right for Montana! Or for anglers that want to fish on Montana rivers!

                HB 309 his very own bill would have privileged only certain people to fish on Montana rivers and creeks! I will run against him , and if people want real representation for our area they will vote for me!

            • Also be aware (as I am sure you are) that this community is primarily conservative – sometimes bordering on wingnut territory. There is a lot of “old school” rancher/farmer money and the “good ole boy” network here is alive and kicking. There is a strong minority of more progressive thought here too, but they have pretty much failed to make many inroads in the state political arena (though there have been some inroads at a local level). The key to this area has been and will continue to be jobs and the slow economy here.

              To give you some indication, while conservative, I am considered to be an “outsider” to the local conservative group think because I am not a social conservative. You face an uphill battle but it is possible if you are willing to work hard enough for it.

    • I use the term Wingnut in it’s accepted context in political discourse. It is not an “insult”, rather a statement of position. I do not “pray” to you and to make such an allegation simply shows your complete lack of understanding for the (American) English Language.

      The rest of your overworded “explanation” is just… silly. The problems that face either Montanan’s or Americans are not that difficult to rectify on an intellectual or logical basis. In fact, political animals like you thrive on making them more complicated than they really are. It is that over complication that you use to insert yourself into the political arena and justify your “wingnut” agenda.

      Attacking education is about as silly as the rest of your rant. As I am sure you well know (unless you really are as ignorant as Cowgirl makes you out to be), an education is – statistically – condusive for higher wages and a better quality of life. All of my children either have, are or are working toward attaining some kind of higher education and applaud them for doing so.

      Apparently reading comprehension is one of those “political intellectual” things you so disagree with. I am not Cowgirl nor have I ever maintained to be. In point of fact, I run my own blog elsewhere. I simply commented on your inane rant here.

      I have no interest in debating you. You are a non-starter for me and therefore of no value. I cannot vote for you and debating you here would be pointless. Nor would I want to provide you with a platform so you could spout your pointless musing in my District. I would much prefer you remain in your own little section of Montana and not bother the good people here.

    • Jon Arnold uses words (incorrectly) with a dizzying effect. I imagine a debate with him would go something like this

  16. If I am of “no value” to you why have you bothered to engage in this cyber discourse?

    Should you find the courage to rid yourself of your cowardice consider my proposition an open invitation.

    • Oh Jonny, why the insistence on personal attack?

    • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 7, 2012 4:18 PM at 4:18 PM |

      Jeez Joe I already gave my answer!

    • Maybe your reading comprehension is indicative of the lower intellegence that Cowgirl has accused you of.

      I engaged you here, because this is the one arena I have seen you in. You chose to make a statement here and I did (and do) disagree with it. I have a character flaw that makes it difficult for me to just walk away from what I see as blatent stupidity. I admit to this character flaw and have no real hangup about it.

      As far as your characterization of my “cowardice”, let me restate my position. You are meaningless to me. I cannot vote for you and you cannot represent me. You have no value to me whatsoever. Had you not responded to Cowgirl’s post, I would have happily remained ignorant to your existance, let alone engaged you in any kind of discussion.

      Sadly, you felt compelled to make some kind of statement here that was blatently idiodic that I felt the need to respond. That ends my interest in you. You have just another useless voice spouting inane rhetoric to serve whatever useless purpose you have for running for the office of Senator from SD 42. To me, you – as in individual – are meaningless and therefore I have no interest or desire to meet you, debate you, or even acknowledge you. Sorry if that sounds blunt or harsh but it is a reality you will just have to accept.

  17. No offense taken, I enjoy debate and encourage it. By the way, I’m running for district 43, not 42. As for me attacking education, what I wrote was, “…schools in this country get about 95% of their funding from local taxes. Just 5% comes from the federal government, yet 70% of regulations in the school system come from the federal department of education. Are we as montanans in such need of minimal government funding of our schools that we are willing to allow bureaucrats in DC to decide whats best for our students?” Therefore, I am not attacking education. I am simply arguing that Montanans are better suited to determine what Montana’s school children should be learning. If you feel that Montanans are too stupid to do so, I would welcome you to state your case. In addition I would encourage you to expound upon my idiocy in making this claim.

    As for the comment on Thomas Jefferson, I would say touche. I would also point out that Mr. Jefferson saw fit to invoke our “creator” four different times in his Declaration of Independence. However, the Declaration is not a law, and neither are his statements following the Louisiana Purchase. Moreover, there is no law requiring a “separation of church and state”. Such words are only found in a supreme court decision (see Everson V. Board of Education; 1947). The 5-4 Everson decision was written by one Hugo Black, former Associate Justice of The United States Supreme Court. Mr. Black was of such impeccable morale character that he saw fit to be an anti-catholic bigot, and went so far as to join the KKK in 1921. If the principles of such outstanding leaders are to be those on which the mores of our laws are to be rooted, I fear we are all doomed.

    Concordantly, my offer still stands.

    • If you truly welcome debate, then I offer this very plain observation: You are a fraud, Jon Arnold. Funding of schools is easy to verify, and it isn’t what you say it is. It’s somewhat more complex than that, given Montana’s funding of education through extraction practice. You can’t verify your percentage of regulation at all, nor would you bother to try. You spout these pseudo-facts and expect others to prove you wrong, without ever showing yourself to be correct. When challenged to even the minimal degree, you fall into fallacy as it is your most comforting blanket. You made the claims; support them. You won’t. I know this because you are a fraud, Jon Arnold. That’s not insult, it’s empirical observation.

      And no, Montanans are not better suited to determine what Montana school children should be learning. We are a growing nation of learned individuals, not a state of coerced relevant knowledge based on political viewpoint. Your view favors the teaching of jihad to Muslim young ones based on local. That is what you just argued. Do you care to clarify or are you still married to your idea of Sharia Law?

    • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 7, 2012 5:58 PM at 5:58 PM |

      Dear Mr Joe,

      First of all On education, I have to totally disagree with you just throwing numbers out there hoping they will stick about education monies and how they are placed in this state!

      Total school general fund budgets for 2009-10 were about $946 million. The state funded about $603 million (63.7%). The rest was funded by the federal Government. Out of the state funds alone Property taxes accounted for only 29%! The state issued an additional 64%, and non levied funds added an additional 7%! Secondly their is a reason the government sets a minimum standard for education… it is so all american children have the same standards of achieving success and safety of education! Giving everyone an equal chance to achieve a good job! The Federal laws are set at a minimum, it is up to Montana to make it a better educational system. So what is the problem with it?

      Lastly, Jefferson was not a christian he was a deist! Jefferson believed in equal access to all religions. the word God does not evoke a certain religion! God is the English name given to a singular being in theistic and deistic religions (and other belief systems), but the operational wording here is he is not just a christian god, and as Jefferson has said countless times,

      ” From the dissensions among Sects themselves arise, necessarily, a right of choosing and necessity of deliberating to which we will conform. But if we choose for ourselves, we must allow others to choose also. This establishes religious liberty.”

      The GOP seems to want others, to conform to their view of christian religion alone. We are not a christian nation sir! We are a nation of religious tolerance for all religions! So I will disagree most whole hardily with the GOP reasoning of religion.

    • So, Mr. Arnold, you disagree with Thomas Jefferson? He was the first to use the term “wall of separation between church and state”. Do you not believe there should be a separation between the two?

  18. http://www2.ed.gov/about/overview/fed/10facts/index.html

    “In the 2004-05 school year, 83 cents out of every dollar spent on education is estimated to come from the state and local levels (45.6 percent from state funds and 37.1 percent from local governments). The federal government’s share is 8.3 percent. The remaining 8.9 percent is from private sources, primarily for private schools.”

    …”Federal education program “requirements” are not unfunded mandates because the conditions in federal law apply only when a state (or other grantee) voluntarily chooses to accept federal funds. Any state that does not want to abide by a federal program’s requirements can simply choose not to accept the federal funds associated with that program. ”

    In other words, here’s our federal monies…now do what your told. I am simply arguing that we ween ourselves from the federal tit.

    As for teaching children Sharia Law, I know of no such bill being submitted for consideration within the MT State Legislature and would not support such.

    Would you like to offer any other empirical evidence to my being a fraud?

    And once again…my offer still stands.

    • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 7, 2012 6:00 PM at 6:00 PM |


      Read the latest facts sir you are wrong again!

    • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 7, 2012 6:21 PM at 6:21 PM |

      Lastly, Muslims have been a part of this country since it first became a nation Joe! In the two hundred plus years they have never come to congress in any state and proposed Sharia Law! Where do you guys come up with this untrue stuff, scaring Americans and making a minority of 18 million in our country untrustable according to your party?

    • As I told you, Fraud, funding is well verifiable. Prove your claim that:

      70% of regulations in the school system come from the federal department of education.

      You claimed it. You should be able to support it, right? No. Of course you can’t. That would be the empirical evidence that you are a fraud.

      And you are truly as stupid as this post posited. I never claimed that you want to teach children Sharia Law. What is obvious is that you desire the conditions under which Sharia Law could be taught to our children. As the intellectual you claim to be, one would think you would see that as obvious. If a racist community ‘purchases education for it’s kinder’ (your claim, Mr. Fraud) then shouldn’t they be allowed to teach the Turner Diaries as a gospel? Those are the conditions under which Sharia law is taught, and those are the conditions you have quite obviously favored.

      Since you seem to think that you know big wordages, here’s a couple for you: Reductio ad Absurdum. It is an argument that shows the very ridiculous implications posited by another. You do support the implementation of Sharia Law, Jon Arnold. You’re simply not smart enough to see how. Are you sure you want to debate others given your clueless understanding of debate itself?

    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 7, 2012 6:51 PM at 6:51 PM |

      Opinions are like assholes, dude. Everybody’s GOT one! And that’s all you got, jonny. Rob has is exactly right. You’re a phony, dude. What makes YOU an expert on education? And really, what even QUALIFIES you to have an opinion on how education is run? Done much teaching have you? Got a lot of book larnin’, do ya? Well then, LIST what you got, dude!

      But I can tell by the way you spout and write that you probably didn’t even finish high school! GED maybe! But that’s a big maybe!

      You see, jonny, education talks and bullshit walks! You have ZERO qualifications to be attacking education! None! Nada! Zippo! Walk away, dude. Just walk away before you embarrass yourself further. For you see the folks posting here are quite learned. You’re not. And it shows. You’re simply a rightwing fundiwackmentalist kook and education hater. You HATE smart people because they make you look so dumb!

      Admit it, jonny. That’s what you’re all about. Now, jonjon, let’s see just WHO the coward is here dude! Post your bonafides, dude! Starting with your degrees and work experience that elevates your assholiness to the level of legitimate opinion! So far, all we’re seeing is your asshole, dude!

      Like the old song says, jonny, ya got to pay your dues if ya want’a sing the blues! In other words, ya gotta have some creds if ya want’a be something other than a dumbass! Man UP, jonny! List your creds!

      Here, I’ll help!



      Teaching experience__________

      ANY experience!_____________

  19. BA political science may 2004

    MA political science dec 2005 International relations and comparative politics

    2006-2009 research assistant for project vote smart. Granite co. Mt

    Again I welcome debate and political discourse. If you want to know something, just ask. But being learned people, have some restraint, and please quit diminishing the conversation into pubescent personal attacks.

    As for my 70% claim, see Levin, Ameritopia, (2012).

    • Again, do you believe there should be a separation between church and state?

    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 7, 2012 8:10 PM at 8:10 PM |

      Jonny, I find that very, very hard to beleive, dude! Just WHERE did you recieve those degrees from? A bible college somewhere? I would ask for my money back if I were you, dude, because judging from your original rant, you did NOT get your money’s worth!

      Now, where were those degrees from? And did they REALLY not even teach you how to write a paragraph?

      • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 7, 2012 8:11 PM at 8:11 PM |

        On-line maybe????? Oral Robers U? Liberty University? I DON’T believe a Montana university awarded you a degree! Where, dude? Where? Put it out there. By computer???

        • Both are from Oklahoma state university.

          • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 7, 2012 8:26 PM at 8:26 PM |

            BINGO! Where you from?

            • When I was a kid I lived all over the south. My stepdad had a job that took us fom tx, to la, nm, ok, and ks.

              Just like you I didn’t get to pick where I was born nor where I grew up but I’m sure in spite of this you will find some flaw with me.

              • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 7, 2012 8:43 PM at 8:43 PM |

                Yippers! You right about THAT, phony baloney! You see, I kinda take offense at some southern dickweed movin’ up here and CLAIMING all the forests etc. as his own! Well, guess what. YOU DON’T OWN SHIT, DUDE! We all do, and we kinda like it that’a way! It’s called FEDERAL land and NATIONAL forests, NOT jonnyland and jonny forests! Hell, the ONLY thing named after you in Montana is the friggin’ OUTHOUSE, Jon!

                You done been outted. Nice chattin’ with you.

    • Just so that we’re clear (about how much I’m laughing at you right now) You, Jon, actually wrote that support for your claim of “regulations in the school system” comes from a book written by a wingnut radio show host? That’s the best you have? No studies? No primary source at all? Not even a quote from Leader Limbaugh?

      You’re one of those guys who graduated by copying your “research” from Wikipedia, aren’t you, Jon? If you actually wish to be taken at all seriously as an academic intellectual, then let me offer a bit of advice: 1) Next time find a primary source for your claims. 2) Link to any source for your claims such that they can be independently verified and (3 At the very least, you should quote relevant passages for context and explanation of terms. Government regulations of education could be as innocuous as mandating that all students be taught math to the level of basic algebra. If that’s what you have a problem with, then you’d best state it clearly, hadn’t you?

  20. I believe in the first amendment.

  21. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof…

    The puritans that founded this country sought to free themselves from the tenants of the treaty of Westphalia. Signed in1648 after the 30 years war. The war fought between Protestants and Catholics. The treaty contained a provision that stipulated, “the religion of the king shall be the religion of the people”.

    Our founders sought to prevent our people from being forced to practice any religion while respecting their right to practice whatever religion they wanted, however they wanted.

    They feared that if they gave the gov the power to force people to practice a religion, some would refuse, and rightly so, but more importantly, if the gov had the power to force religion on people, it would also have the power to take it away….thus their attempt at absolute neutrality.

    I think we are to remain religion neutral. The government can’t force anyone to observe any religious activity nor prevent anyone from exercising their religious beliefs whether publicly or privately.

    • Mr. Arnold,

      Nice googling but thanks for your reply just the same. And I’m glad to hear of your religious neutrality and I agree, it’s not the gov’ts place to impose a religion on anyone. That includes someones right to not even practice a religion, to not even believe in a “higher power” and to speak and react publically about their belief, or lack thereof. But I also have a different point of view regarding the importance of the 1st amendment.

      In my view the 1st amendment is equally necessary to prevent the government from being taken over by a religion, any religion. It’s not so much to protect individuals religious freedom from gov’t but to protect gov’t from religion.

    • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 7, 2012 10:42 PM at 10:42 PM |

      The Puritans wanted everyone to worship in the Puritan way. In order to ensure that Puritanism dominated the colonies, nonconformists were fined, banished, whipped, and even imprisoned for not conforming to the way of the Puritans.

      The Puritans, were a strict fundamentalist Protestant sect who immigrated to the New World for religious freedom beginning in 1609. They believed that education was necessary in order to read the Bible to receive salvation.

      This was in line with the beliefs of the Protestant Reformers. Their schools made no distinction between religious and secular life and were also used to inspire children to endure the hardships of a life in the New World through religious devotion. They were hardliners of the church Joe, they believed in the protestant way of the King!

      This is why the sons of Plantation owners and rich merchants were sent to Oxford England, or France to study Joe. They knew that their was more to education then just the church. In fact almost all of our fore-fathers went to schools abroad!

      Let me show you the effect these Christian Hardliners had on James Madison, one of our most important forefathers:

      “Poverty and Luxury prevail among all sorts: Pride ignorance and Knavery among the Priesthood and Vice and Wickedness among the Laity. This is bad enough. But it is not the worst I have to tell you. That diabolical Hell conceived principle of persecution rages among some and to their eternal infamy the Clergy can furnish their Quota of Imps for such business. This vexes me the most of any thing whatever. There are at this time in the adjacent County not less than 5 or 6 well meaning men in close Gaol for publishing their religious Sentiments which in the main are very orthodox. I have neither patience to hear talk or think of any thing relative to this matter, for I have squabbled and scolded abused and ridiculed so long about it, to so little purpose that I am without common patience. So I leave you to pity me and pray for Liberty of Conscience to revive among us.”

      Jefferson Thomas wanted freedom of religion but, it was James Madison who fought for it tooth and nail!

  22. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 7, 2012 8:23 PM at 8:23 PM |

    “I think Montanans are more than capable of deciding how to manage our forests, schools, farms, rivers, lakes, livestock, roads, health insurance, colleges, retirement, taxes”

    Jonny A.

    Um, jonny, YOU got a forest, dude? Really? And a river? And livestock? Roads? Retirment? Colleges? Taxes??

    This statement alone is bizarre! What are you suggesting there, polisci major? That we appropriate for ourselves federal land, etc? Stupid, stupid stuff! How do the feds bother our retirement? And do we REALLY want to reject fed dollars for roads? Should we stop paying federal taxes?

    You make NO sense, dude. Yes, you got all the kook talking points with NO details! Not good enough.

    • Tell me sir, where does the constitution grant the federal government the authority to manage montana’s forests, schools, farms, rivers, lakes, state taxes, etc.?

      As for our retirement the federal government takes taxes for social security and gives it back after allowing it to devalue through inflation, rather than allowing you to invest it in something that can grow. In addition it enters into an unwritten contract, promising it’s return, with no guarantee that the money will still be there, nor any guarantee that it will not change the terms under which you can receive it. Such as the increase in recent years of receiving full benefit at 66 to now 70.

      • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 7, 2012 8:40 PM at 8:40 PM |

        Um, jonny, do you even KNOW Montana history, dude?! Apparently not! Do you even KNOW how much land in this state is FEDERAL land, dude? Apparently not! Sorry, jonjon, but you DON’T get to take what doesn’t BELONG to you, dude! EsPECIALLY an outter stater like yourself? You’ve been outted. You see, show me in the Constitution where it says that states can STEAL federal land, land that belongs to ALL Americans? It ain’t in there, dude!

        • Where does the constitution create federal lands? If the Feds own lands and simply grants some to states, why do we have states?

          • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 7, 2012 8:58 PM at 8:58 PM |

            Why are there clouds? If there are clouds, why are they there? Does not the wind move them around?


          • Are you seriously proposing the idea that every action of the government of the United States has to be specifically laid in the Constitution? Please tell me you aren’t that stupid.

            The Creation of National Parks and National Forests was accomplisheded decades ago – by Congress, as allowed by the Constitution – and now you seem to challenging Congress’s authority to do so. Am I missing something here or are you really going down this road?

            • No I’m not proposing that, I don’t need to. The 10th amendment already did.

              • Tom Arnold, So your position must be that ALL land owned by the federal government must be ceded to States?

                So what is the purpose of the the “Property Clause”, why does it clearly state the Congress has authority over federal land if the fed govt cannot own land?

                If the founders agreed at all with your harebrained theories why didnt they just say “the federal government may not own land”?

                You know all of these nutball arguments have failed in the federal court system?

                Meet me at the Hofbrau at midnight tonight for a debate. The subject will be your belief that federal civil rights laws are unconstitutional and you support for the right of States to enact Jim Crow laws.

      • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 7, 2012 11:30 PM at 11:30 PM |

        First of all Joe for every dollar the feds take in for Montana alone they give us back $1.77. Thats right no devalued dollars here in Montana!!! http://talkingpointsmemo.com/images/give-take-small-final.png

        so the Government are already giving back all we send them plus!

        Regarding admittance to the union as a state, Montana which was already bought and owned by the United states as part of the Louisiana Purchase, was always federal land First! So was Utah, so how you guys think you can change the “Equal Footing doctrine” for this state, or Utah is actually pretty damn slim when the supreme court has already been on the governments side at least 3 times before!

        The last case was Nevada against the US in 1990, and the supreme court sided with the Government! What chance do you think Montana has, since Montana tried to give itself back to the US Gov. during the depression in the 1940’s, when it did go horribly broke! and the government bailed us out? Almost every able bodied man in Montana that need a job to support his family worked for the conservation corp building roads, telephone lines, bridges! The farmers and ranchers here were given subsidies to save their farms, cattle companies and sheep operations. This state owes the USA a thanks not a slap in the face.


        All this Ballyhoo over states rights is the real Guise of KOCH Industries and other big oil & gas companies, That are writing these preposterous bills for republicans to carry to their state houses…. that will poison the areas our fresh water comes from, devastate our wild herds for hunting and management… so they can make more money while our grandkids suffer from poisoned air and water into the future. Really? Do you know what you are proposing here? The Death of our state as a natural wonder that made a billion dollars in tourism alone last year? Are you that willing to kill one of our best industries we have now… for an industry that only holds 7% of Montana’s economy? I think not!

      • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 7, 2012 11:46 PM at 11:46 PM |

        U.S. Constitution: Article IV
        Section 3. Admission of New States to Union; Property of United States

        Clause 1. Admission of New States to Union


  23. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 7, 2012 8:36 PM at 8:36 PM |

    More arnoldisms.

    “Do you want to be a society of free men, or do you want to continue our present march towards socialistic uniformity?”

    Huh??? Jonny, you Beckerhead? You been a’listenin’ to glen beck, haven’t you? But since you’re runnin’ for senae, expound on this a bit. Just what the hell is that dreaded socialistic uniformity that you speak of other than complete bullshit?

    Code words, jonny. That’s all you got. Teatard code words.

    Not enough.

  24. Again, personal attacks. Answer my question and I will answer yours. Tell me where the constitution grants the federal government the authority to regulate any of the afore mentioned things.

    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 7, 2012 8:48 PM at 8:48 PM |

      Jonny, NOW you’re an expert on the management of OUR forests?? Wow. Just wow! A real renascence man! Too funny. What you got is code words, jonny. That’s all.

      But HEY, speak to it, jonny! Speak to the management of forests! What do you know, dude?

      • You still haven’t offered any defense of your argument. My claims rest on the tenth amendment of the constitution. Offer something substantive and I will respond.

        • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 7, 2012 9:03 PM at 9:03 PM |

          Um, jonny, I DID offer something substantial! You see, you claim to be Dr. I.M. Kookie, or in other words, an expert on all KINDS of stuff. So, NOW you claim that that STATES can better manage federal resources such as national forests. SO mr. expert, EXPOUND, DUDE, EXPOUND!

          You see, jonny, it’s obvious that you don’t know SHIT about what you’re attemtping to talk about. Just ONE, jonny, list just ONE thing that the states can do better with a forest!

          Sorry, jonny, you lose again!

        • No, Mr. Arnold. You did not offer anything to back up your question. You never mentioned the 10th amendment here so I can only assume you are alluding to something on your website. You simply asked the commentors here to justify something to you without any background or foundation being laid by yourself. You are obviously “setting a trap” to get us to argue your agenda. This is classic misdirection. I now at least believe that you have some formal schooling in Political Science. I feel it is a shame that you apparently only managed to remember the really sleazy parts, though.

        • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 7, 2012 11:35 PM at 11:35 PM |

          “Equal footing doctrine” Joe! This particular state was owned by the people of the USA first as part of the Louisiana Purchase. Couldn’t be a state unless you agreed to that doctrine first!

  25. Tell me where the constitution provides for federal forests. Either we are a nation of laws or a nation of men.

    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 7, 2012 9:09 PM at 9:09 PM |

      Platitude much??

    • So, your argument is that the national forests are unconstitutional? I believe you need to take that up with the Supreme Court, and I doubt you’ll have much luck, considering that federal land ownership pre-dates the constitution, and the Supreme Court has never struck it down.

      Because the constitution has never disallowed federal ownership of land – otherwise there would be no military bases, no federal buildings, no White House. Now, what you are trying to argue is that the Federal Government is allowed to own and manage small plots of land, but not larger ones? That is a legally absurd argument – where would you draw the line? Because essentially your argument is that the federal government can’t constitutionally own land.

      • States don’t need the supreme court to overrule itself, read article five.

        Article 1 section 8

        To exercise exclusive legislation in all cases whatsoever, over such district (not exceeding ten miles square) as may, by cession of particular states, and the acceptance of congress, become the seat of the gov of the united states, and to exercise like authority over all places purchased by the consent of the legislature of the state in which the same shall be, for the erection of forts, magazines, arsenals, dockyards, and other needful buildings

        So, we see constitutional authority for dc, military bases, and courts….where does it mention forests?

        I would encourage you all to read the constitution…than try to break my arguments. This will save us a lot of time.

        • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 8, 2012 11:23 AM at 11:23 AM |

          Goofy much?

        • What it boils down to is that the Supreme Court of the United States does not agree with you. So what you want is for States to basically ignore the Court and start a civil war because you believe your own interpretation of the Constitution carries more weight. You definitely went to some of General Robert E. Skees’ lectures at Burger King.

          • No again, we have checks and balances in our government, states can amend the constitution without the consent of the supreme court or the congress. Read article five.

            I can’t debate a document that no one seems to have read. Read it, trust me, you’ll feel better.

            • Two amendments to Montana’s constitution are headed for the toilet now.

            • Tom Arnold, you just said that the Constitution already supports your view so why would it need to be amended? You aren’t making much sense here. Are you going to meet me tonight at the Hofbrau in Anaconda for a debate?

            • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 8, 2012 11:43 AM at 11:43 AM |

              Just you say so, Jon???? Your wrong again!

            • I’m glad that you and the rest of TeaParty Nation have finally gotten around to reading and accepting those most progressive of American documents, the US Constitution, the Bill of Rights and the other 17 amendments.

        • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 8, 2012 11:38 AM at 11:38 AM |

          Jon your talking out your Kazoo here Now! I know law a little better then you think I do, and your Original question was answered by me about the government owning Property!

          The people in Montana will not cotton to following someone who just wants to illegally secede the union. Your little plan will not work here. You cannot become a state without Article 4, and Montana wasn’t a state first it was a sovereign territory of the USA Government first! This means the hurtles your Tea Party challenges in the legal world, cannot be overcome on Article ten alone, or article 1!

          The only way a state becomes a state is article 4, and that is what the court will judge you on!

  26. As for platitudes I believe the pejorative term you were looking for in reference to outhouses is spelled John…not Jon.

  27. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 7, 2012 10:35 PM at 10:35 PM |

    HOLY RIC SAINTSCROTUM! See what homeskuulin’ with do to a person? Cuter than heck but dumber than dogshit!


  28. This guy does sound like he attended the hotel conference room lectures of General Robert E. Skees. Skees makes the same arguments about ‘states rights’ and then attempts to fall back on wordy pseudo intellectualism when his arguments fall apart and then eventually cuts and runs.

    This one question gets them to leave every time: “Do you think the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was unconstitutional”? (which banned discrimination in private accomodations).

    They most certainly believe it is unconstitutional but will not say so in a public forum. Unless its a bagger meeting where they don’t think any of the ‘uninitiated’ are in attendance.

    • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 8, 2012 11:27 AM at 11:27 AM |

      Well Jon or Joe… is Ignoring me, and really doesn’t want to debate me…. and lets face it Jack, He does spout the same Tea party rhetoric as Skees, and has a complete misunderstanding of Montana history or Economy! Your Right!

      Jon or Joe, has been dodging my answers as to where it is written in the constitution we can own property as a nation as well. Because, that would just break up his little State Tea Party Ideas!

      They don’t get to use 10 like Alabama did and lost, or Nevada did and lost… here. It was government Land first! they will really be SOL in their 10th defense solely, without using it in Tandem with Article 4 of the constitution! And the supreme court is really into following STARE DECISIS. The policy of courts to abide by or adhere to principles established by decisions in earlier cases, is nowhere stronger then our highest court!

  29. Jon,

    By the way, Article 4, Section 3, clause 2 “The Congress shall have Power to dispose of and make all needful Rules and Regulations respecting the Territory or other Property belonging to the United States; and nothing in this Constitution shall be so construed as to Prejudice any Claims of the United States, or of any particular State.”

  30. Let the record show that Jon Arnold has gone back on his offer to debate and is unwilling to meet at the Haufbrau in Anaconda to debate his support for the right of Southern States to enact Jim Crow laws.

    • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 8, 2012 3:22 PM at 3:22 PM |

      Hey Colstrip, I offered to debate your GOP Candidate Jon Arnold, the minute he made the challenge to us Democrats on “Cowgirls Blog!”

      Let the Record show: That I was willing to debate him, in Colstrip and even allow him to frame the debate, with his choice of questions.

      Mr Jon Arnold has gone back on his offer to debate this Democratic candidate of House District 72, and thereby not allowed you to hear the truth about what Montana needs!

      Please think about giving a Democrat, in your House district a try, to represent you in 2012! I believe you would be better served!

  31. I had actually hoped that this post would garner 200 comments. But, since Jon Arnold appears to have fled being exposed as the fraud he is, I guess we’ll have to settle for something less. Too bad, really.

    • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 8, 2012 6:54 PM at 6:54 PM |

      He came here, with a lot less intelligence pzazz, then Mark or Craig offer in crazy! Got stomped on his tea party bonafides, and limped away. He’s probably very happy, he was lucky enough to wander back into the silence of non-conscientiousness in one piece? But I wonder, does a guy like that really believe in the non-logical arguments he was spouting, or was he just too lazy, to say the right things to his possible future constituents?

Comments are closed.