TEA Party Legislator: Birth Control is “Death Nail in Coffin of our Republic”

TEA Partiers huddle at a GOP event, perhaps to discuss how glad they are that few women are present. Pictured are Eric Olsen, Krayton Kerns (center) and Dennis Rehberg

The folks at the Western Ag Reporter understand that what goes on inside the mind of TEA Party Republican Rep. Krayton Kerns is important.   So important,  in fact, that his words merited front page real estate in the last edition of the paper.  This way, we can all get a peek at how a mind of this caliber thinks.  (Hint, it barely does.)

More than anything,  Krayton Kerns is angry.

He’s angry that Sandra Fluke dared to say that birth control was $1000 per year, a great expense for many.

Krayton’s idea of illustrating how angry we should be about Fluke’s statement is to wax nostalgic about his own life experiences. He tells us of a dog he knew in vet school that earned that amount each month in stud fees.

Krayton Kerns is angry because he believes that birth control is the “death nail in the coffin of our Republic.”  And, he’s angry because he believes that it was Mitt Romney who made birth control the focus of the 2012 elections.  Now, because of this, Krayton Kerns says the conservatives are “screwed.”

A PDF of the entire piece can be read here. WARNING: Reading his column means losing four minutes of your life you can never get back.


217 Comments on "TEA Party Legislator: Birth Control is “Death Nail in Coffin of our Republic”"

  1. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 22, 2012 9:20 PM at 9:20 PM |

    I read it in Tricia’s Trader a couple of days ago. It’s probably in every goofy small town ag publication in the state. And my first thought was DAMN! Someone actually wrote something dumber than the thing that Skinflute wrote in the Beacon. And my second thought was these stupid bastards will NOT let up their assualt on the poor woman. Incredilbe. Truly freakin’ incredible. And my third thought was that Krazy Krayton is even dumber than I had imagined. How in the hell did that dumbass get through vet shool?

    These are some sick pervs. I’m thinkin’ that they actually enjoy attacking women.

    • Dear Larry,
      I cannot tell you how much I appreciate what you wrote yesterday about Krayton. I’ve been involved in environmental activism and women’s movement issues for a long time, and it is incredibly heartening, strengthening and comforting to know that there truly are men out there who “Get it” and are supportive and intelligent about these issues (I though all these great guys were living only in my family!) Thank you for speaking out, voicing your views. Our species really is in dire need of evolution and you just helped, big-time!
      Esther Essinger

      • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 23, 2012 1:09 PM at 1:09 PM |

        Why thank you, Esther. It’s what I do. You’ve maybe heard of birthers? Well, I’m what’s called a truther! I just put the TRVTH out there and let the chips fall where they may.

        But I really must say that I’m amazed at the hatred being exhibited by the nazis toward women. THAT should offend any man worth his salt! I cannot allow these morons like Cretin Kearns to degrade our country with their attacks on women. Sumthin’ REAL wrong with these dudes.

  2. A person who is obsessed with his own angry rants about things he does not have the mental capacity to understand is the central characteristic of a TEA bagger.

  3. “Hey, Denny: we all got that email from Judge Cebull. Did you get it, too?”

    The GOP is a toilet.

  4. Krayton Kearns aside, I am always amazed at how blatantly our cowgirl deliberately attempts to mislead. You say in the headline and in the post that Kearns stated that birth control was the death nail in the coffin of our republic.

    Come on. Here’s what he says: “The implementation of Obamacare will be the death nail in the coffin of our republic.”

    Why would you bother putting words in his mouth when the deception is there for all to see? And don’t argue that you only put the relevant part of his statement in quote marks. There is absolutely no way to argue that he said what you said he said. He may be silly, but you lied.

    • Shame on you, Ed.

      While you are technically correct, you failed to provide context. The writer of the original article waxed poetic about how the two issues where the same prior to making that statement. Had the writer failed to do that, I would support your analysis.

      There is so much fail in the article, I am having a hard time deciding where to begin.

      1) The author (Kearns) – like Skinner before him – attempts to misrepresent Sandra Flukes argument (AKA Rush Limberger). He states that Sandra was asking that birth control be funded by the public. That is complete and utter BS. All Miss Fluke asked was the birth control be covered by the insurance she was paying for.

      2) The misrepresentation that Romney made the campaign about contraceptives was rediculous. The Republican Campaign has been about Social Conservative ideals long before Romney made the statement he did and the conversation about contraceptives has been pushed by Santorum far more than Romney. I have no idea why this author singled out Romney but it was idiotic to do so. The Social Conservatives (of which you sound like you are defending) made the argument about contraceptives instead of what it should be about – the economy and jobs.

      3) The fail of trying to compare Sandra Fluke to the author’s male protitute dog is so fail I have no words to describe it. How can you – supposedly an educated, intellegent person – defend someone that sees women in such low regard that they would do such a thing? I find it disgusting in the extreme, and any value this idiot would have had is utterly destroyed by his utter lack of regard for women.

      4) Let’s parse this sentance shall we? –

      “The implementation of Obamacare will be the death nail in the coffin of our republic. If government assumes financial responsibility for contraception, does logic not dictate it will also have the right to say who receives it and what type?”

      Once again the author makes the contraceptive debate and the ACA debate (I won’t stoop to the intellectually idiotic level of calling teh ACA “Obamacare” since it should actually be called either “Baucuscare” or “Congresscare”). Just exactly what does the author mean by “Death nail”? Will America stop being America? Will the skys open up and rail firey pickles on us all? What scarey boogieman is the author attempting to point to? It is complete nonsense. Next, he trys to say that Obamacare will spew forth contraceptives to everyone and the taxpayer will fund it. What? Really? Maybe you or the author have failed to actually read the damn thing, but the ACA is about heath INSURANCE. You do understand what Health Insurance is, right? You pay a kingly wage everymonth and then if you have to go to the doctor (which you pray to all that is holy that you don’t…), you pay more money up front and the HOPE that the insurance – which you have been paying for – actually agrees to cover some small portion of the visit. The taxpayers aren’t paying shit for that health care. The insured is. Why is that concept so hard for you or the author to understand?

      And let’s not forget the Palin argument… “DEATH PANELS… DEATH PANELS”. Frankly, I used to have more respect for you, Ed. I never once considered you in the same light as the wicked witch from the north. The fact that would defend someone making a Palin argument floors me.

      There is more fail to be had by Kearn’s little rant but my fingers are getting tired pointing it out. Ed, you should know better. You tried to take a pot shot at Cowgirl (which, by the way, you were wrong about) and in the end you ended up defending someone that certain doesn’t deserve defending.

      • I’m starting to like you, Mr. Kailey.

        • While I appreciate your comment, Larry, Rob pointed out a while back that I simply cannot tolerate ignorance or stupidity. I actually respect Ed and I have been reading him for years. The fact that he defended the author of the reprehensible article floored me. I don’t always agree with Ed, but I rarely see him jump off the deep end. I can only assume that he didn’t actually read the article in question.

          The Social Conservative tact that the current Republican Party has taken is a complete loser. This wingnuttery will cost them huge in November. Had the party stuck with the old school ideals I was taught in my youth – fiscal responcibility, rational growth, small government – they could be positioned for HUGE gains this year, including the Oval Office. Instead, they have embraced this neolithic platform of hatred for women, religious based legislation and an attempt to take us back to the dark ages.

          I am just suprised that Ed drank the Koolaid.

      • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 23, 2012 11:59 AM at 11:59 AM |

        Moorcat, thank you. Very well-written, amigo.

        • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 23, 2012 1:30 PM at 1:30 PM |

          Totally agree Moorcat! I am incensed at this irrational train of thought, the GOP have towards women right now! How dare they liken us to Dogs, or property!

      • Somehow more people getting a little better coverage is going to kill the Republican Party


    • Hard to imagine the “republic,” which died in 1947 anyway in my opinion, can be further eroded by “Obamacare”, which is really corporate medicine as given us by Romney in Massachusetts. That the president and leading Republican canddiate are in agreement on this issue is hardly news to me.

      Kearns has done exactly what the Democrats have done here at Cowgirl – he is impugning extremism on the other party, just as Cowgirl does with him. It’s an interesting phenomenon, a product of self-delusion and I suppose a natural outflow of a political system where we are allowed only two parties with the same base of finance. If all you have is D and R, then differences have to be invented and the other one must be demonized, otherwise, there’s no fun, and no validation in electoral victory.

      It is, oddly, exactly the same phenomenon as personal validation through spectator sports.

      • Control the bench, Dems.

      • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 23, 2012 1:33 PM at 1:33 PM |

        All Democrats have to remember about you, is that you are not a Democrat Mark, just a Propaganda tool of the Right. And a pretty lousy, dull, tool at that!!!!!!

        • Interesting – if you don’t have repubby and Dem as your lens, you have no basis, no lens, and so knowing I am not Democrat presume I am Republican , as you have no other frame of reference. That’s not stupid so much as narrow. Stupid cannot be fixed ala Kralzy, but narrow view points can.

          Have you got it in you punk? Do ya?care to venture out. My gut says no, my brains says never discount possibility.

          • Oh we know what your lens is, Mark. It is ego and stupidity. How does it feel to be utterly ignored?

          • Depends on by whom the ignoring is being done. I wish it were you.

            Yes Kenny, I know that the ideas I express seem so ‘out there’ that people cannot embrace them. When propaganda is done really well, as American propaganda is, it is all-encompassing. It is not just your political existence, but the whole of your existence, that is submerged. It has destroyed your intellects, turning you into the zombies that we see here. You are really unable to embrace the ideas I bring to you, so strange does they seem to you.

            So you are basically unreachable, and people ask me why I bother. It’s because I’ve been observing American politics for so that I’ve come to understand that the system is beyond repair and only death of the old and birth of a new order can change things. That takes sea change events.

            But in the meantime with Democrats as you exist, I’m merely taunting you with a stick through the bars of the cage, creating discomfort. Even as you are deeply indoctrinated, you know on some level that I bring truth to you, and the discomfort (cognitive dissonance) makes you angry.

            It’s a zoo experiment. I’m bored.

            • You are so shallow! Cultural references are lost on you. “Punk” is Harry Calahan. Jesus!

              Traveling is usually good for a person. It broadens the perspective. But in my dealings with you I’ve only encountered a very narrow outlook, so narrow in fact that in realizing that I am not a Democrat, you can only view me as a Republican. There are no other possibilities in your narrow frame of reference.

              So it does no good to tell me how smart or well-traveled you are. I form my impressions of you based on your written words, and you are what appears on my screen, narrow and shallow.

              • I see Mark was drinking again… He has vomited all over this thread. It is sad that the old fart can’t hold control his drinking and has to subject the rest of us to his verbal vomit.

                • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 24, 2012 12:02 PM at 12:02 PM |

                  I think the dude’s insane! He’s gone over the edge! Or it could just be part of his I’m-so-much-smarter-than-you’all schtick.

          • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 24, 2012 8:18 AM at 8:18 AM |

            Forget it Mark, I have literally been around the world a couple times. You are just worthless and getting to look suspiciously smaller everyday, and not worth the effort anymore. Boring in fact.

            And tell me are you threatening a woman by calling me a punk… or are you really that stupid???

            • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 24, 2012 8:24 AM at 8:24 AM |

              You don’t have to answer that question, because it is Obvious your pretty dumb! For a split second I thought you had the conciseness to answer… I was wrong! My Bad it’s Saturday.

            • See above.

              • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 24, 2012 8:57 AM at 8:57 AM |

                You’re simply using up space here, Buttinski. Try self-imposed exile for awhile. We get it. You don’t like us. So, move on, dude. Move on.

                I like free speech as much as the next guy, but you’re just tedious. Abolutely NOTHING original to say. If you can’t exile yourself, please try brevity of insult. We’ve heard all this before. Now you’re just re-tilling fallow ground! Nuthin’ grows where you’ve already sh*t, dude! You’re simply the joke of the internet!

                • Interesting that you think you have some sort of proprietary privilege here. Who the f*** are you to tell me anything?

                  • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 24, 2012 9:22 AM at 9:22 AM |

                    It’s not just me, Buttinski. Now, I ask you to list all your fans here that support you. I’ll wait.

                    As has been mentioned numerous times, you’re just boring and using up space. The rest of the regular contributors actually have something to say. Do I include myself in that list? No. I just write stream of conscience. I’m simply an observer. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t.

                    But writers like Norma, Moorcat, Rob, Kurtz, Monty, etc., are learned folks who write very well. You’re simply bouncing your comments off their work. And that gets old real quick!

                    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 24, 2012 9:47 AM at 9:47 AM |

                      Here’s a suggestion, Buttinski. Try using your less-than-formidable skills on the actual BAD guys for a change! I realize that you do have a handicap. Having one’s HEAD up one’s own ass does makes it difficult. But do try.

                    • That is so Kaileyish of you, presuming to speak for the group. And frankly, as long as it’s a blog what welcomes public comment, you ought to be ashamed of trying to rid it of commenters you personally don’t like.

                      Karlzy, GFY.

                    • BTW, have I ever mentioned before that Democrat are the problem?

                    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 24, 2012 10:19 AM at 10:19 AM |

                      Sigh. Buttinski, all I’m asking is that for the SAKE of the blog, KEEP your insults brief? Is that so hard? Look, if you need the entire thread to insult someone, you probably need some help with your insulting skills, dude! Brevity, brevity is the soul of a good insult!

                    • Who the f*** are you to speak for “the sake of the blog”? How annoying!

                      They made a huge mistake the day they put up that post praising your for your use of juvenile nicknames. I knew you’d be even more insufferable thereafter.

                      And you know nothing of insults. Nothing. Don’t ever offer advice on the art of insult. Ever.

                    • Mark, interested party added Piece of Mind to the blogroll a couple of weeks ago. Any new traffic (you shithead)?

                    • I have not checked traffic in months. I used to care but then realized that most of it is unrelated to what I am currently writing about, and for that there are only a few who actually take the trouble. It is what it is.

                  • Backwoods Monty | March 24, 2012 4:52 PM at 4:52 PM |

                    ~ Geez~ Man! Buttarski, your too dumb to take a friendly hint. Boring! If our freedom of speech is telling you to go elsewhere? I am with other Commentor’s, on this Blog!

                    You bring noting to this blog as content! That isn’t herd mentality that explains this to you, it is all our conclusions based, on independent, observations and inferences of jerks like you.

                    In my inference alone, in the last thirty years of Observing jerks, You fit the Mold Mark, Your the same as other assholes in life, in which the outcome is always the same…. you suck at everything!

                    You you suck at wit and wisdom, you suck at content, you suck in observations,you suck at being a team player (even for your ConTool side), you suck at telling the truth…. you just suck!

                    • You don’t know then, about polrization? That’s all this is – a place where you can go and not be faced with your internal contradictions. It is the un-self-awareness zone. I am free to post here until the people who write the posts tell me to go. If I create angst, if I make you uncomfortable, it is you, and not me, that has the internal rage.

                      I could very easily hang out in places where everyone agrees with me, and self-validate with my kin and feel morally superior to the rest of the world, as you like to do. That is weakness, your moral cowardice. Be a man, you miserable coward! State your beliefs and defend them! Don’t fall back into the group and yell at me. Give me content. You are one miserable sniveling mound of jello!

                      Anyway, you came aboard here to put me in my place, so you said. You were going to haunt me. Look at you now, steeped in anger and frustration. What happened, Monty? Why did you cave?

  5. Hey Krayton,
    Just need some clarification: Are you advocating that women using birth control should be able to charge “for their services” ala John? Or are you saying only the owner of the woman should make the money? Or be allowed to say who she has sex with? Or maybe you’re simply equating the sexuality of women to the sexuality of a dog? Please clarify.

  6. I didn’t drink the Kool-Aid and I wasn’t defending Kearns. It simply amazed me that Cowgirl would take an article so easy to shred and then chose to highlight something Kearns did not actually say. Context? Bullshit. You’ve got his words — which I read — and they were not what Cowgirl said they were.

    • But Ed, that is what the author said, as I have pointed out already. It is EXACTLY what the author of the article said. First he equates Fluke to a canine prostitute, then he equates the contraceptive argument to the ACA. Cowgirl simply cut out the middle steps.

      • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 23, 2012 11:57 AM at 11:57 AM |

        Methinks that ol’ Eddy is mad ’cause he hasn’t yet recieved HIS guest column on the most widely read blog in the state. But for the record, Ed is a great writer who has written some great stuff. I have the highest regard for Ed. I too was taken aback by his seeming defense of this asshole Cretin Kearns!

    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 23, 2012 11:50 AM at 11:50 AM |

      Well theN, Eddy, SHRED AWAY, dude! Go all Ninja turtles on us and SHRED the damn thing! Become Shredder! Krayton is an asshole. That’s pretty obvious. But where he REALLY screws up is trying to be a FOLKSY asshole! He ain’t. He’s just an asshole who equates women to dogs.

      “Aw shucks. I’m jus a dumbass country vet. I don’t unnerstand all this fancy schmancy birth control stuff and why the lady folk need it. Shucks, can’t they be jus like my ol’ houndog Humper? He din’t need no birth control. In fact, he got PAID to get laid! So’s, was wrong with these here uppity women? Maybe these here women should do like my ol’ houndog Hump. If’n they want some birth control, let’em EARN it like ol’ Hump did! And Hump din’t seem to mind earin’ it! Hardy har har! Get it? Hump EARNED it. Get it? Hardy har har.”

      “Yippers, I’m jus an ol’ country dumbass vet, and you can take it from me. Ol’ Humper wasn’t uppity, and he din’t need no birthin’ control either! And if’n Hump acted up, why ol’ mister hand turned into mister fist, and I gave him what for! Never had no problems after that. Works for women folk to. Sometimes ya just gotta show’em their place.”

      “And some folks say that when I write, ol’ mister head turns into mister dick! I’m not entirely sure what that mean, but I’m a’thinkin’ that them kinda folks are callin’ me a DICKHEAD!”

      Yes, ol’ Krayton’s folksy alright. A folksy DICKHEAD!

    • Well, Ed, that’s just another example of the sort of deflectionist tactics that Ms. Fluke was tasked with enabling. The entire reason for the Fluke fluke was to divert attention away from the who is entitled to what, paid for by whom issue, into a circus about a “war on women.”
      The issue of entitlements, of the entitlement mentality, of the ideologization of same into an entitlementalist political movement, is critical and central to the 2012 election. As a “straight” journalist, I would expect you to deal with that in your day job.

      I’m not going to waste any more time on this, in this cesspool, but the bitter fact remains that Kearns is correct when he says if a “majority of voters think the 2012 elections are about contraception, we are screwed.”

      • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 23, 2012 12:00 PM at 12:00 PM |

        Skinflute, can I share something with you? No one on this site GIVES two shits what you think! For you don’t think.

      • Once again, Skinner, you want to make this about entitlement. Didn’t you get stomped hard enough the last time you made this argument? The only “entitlement” being requested is that the people paying for a product be given a product worth paying for. I am truly sorry you are either too stupid to get that or are too set in your narrow ways to be able to see it, but the fact remains. You are barking up the wrong tree.

        About the only thing you wrote that I agree with is your last line.

        • It IS about entitlements, Murk.

          • Explain to us how Health Insurance is an entitlement, Skinner? You seem to be married to this idea and I am honestly curious how you see a service we pay for as being an entitlement. I know that Entitlements seem to be your windmills of late and the idea that a business relationship between a company (insurance) and it’s clients (the public that pays for that service) is an entitlement is facinating (yes, I am being sarcastic).

            Further, I thought you were done with this discussion…

      • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 23, 2012 1:37 PM at 1:37 PM |

        So what your saying is Krayton is right, and women are like Dogs? Yeah that’s exactly what your saying! This conversation of yours has nothing to do with entitlements, neither is Kraytons! It is a attack on women’s right Period!

        • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 24, 2012 7:25 AM at 7:25 AM |

          Women are like dogs. Yes, that is EXACTLY what Cretin Kearns is saying. For you see, Cretin is an idiot. He strives to find the worst insult that his tiny pea brain can come up with to insult all women. He INTENDED to insult women! He’s not hiding anything. He’s actually PROUD of the fact that he’s a misogynistic imbecile. He thinks that that makes him look manly.

          Well, it doesn’t. It actually makes him look like what he is, a moron. He’s kinda like that idiot in the last Lege that kept refering to women as cows. In Pubbie world, one’s manly stature is based upon how debased one can be! It’s their value. It’s their world view. It’s their FAMILY value! Women who don’t accept their natural “superiority” schtick are little more than animals!

          Cretin reminds ME of all the wannabee cowboys that probably attended the same vet school he did. These were the skinny little dudes that didn’t exactly fit the John Wayne image or rugged individualistic males. SO, they would enhance their stature with their wardrobes! They would wear high heeled cowboy boots, a nice fat down vest, and the tallest cowboy hat they could find! Viola! Instant John Wayne! I call it cowboy falsies! It’s kinda like BOOB enhancement! Or a padded bra for losers like Cretin! A cowboy manzeir if you will!

          You see, Cretin has enlarged his persona with insults to women! Oh sure, to a few inbreds he looks like the Duke. But to most everyone else, he looks like the Duchess!, parading around in his falsies! What Cretin lacks in stature, he’s attempted to make UP for with insults to women! He’s enhanced his boobiness! Now he actually LOOKS like the big boob he is! Sorry, Cretin, but real men don’t attack women.

          Sad, so sad.

    • In fairness, it should be pointed out that Cowgirl’s title appears to say that the statement was a direct quote. In that, I can agree with you, Ed. That does not change the meat of the argument – that this neolithic idiot is continuing the Rush Limberger/Skinner meme that women want contraceptives for free or that contraceptives are somehow detrimental to the United States of America. It is the same utter Bullshit that the Republican party seems hell bent on running on this year and it is complete fail. While I do not have Larry’s turn of phrase, his point is valid – it would have better served both your credibility and the Republican point of view had you “shredded” the article like I did, rather than appear to defend this neandrathal.

  7. Its amazing to me but true………….. How much the GOP Counterparts and Radical Islamic Nutcases believe in the same dogmas today!
    We are becoming a divided nation because, this seems to be what the GOP really wants! It’s amazing how the right-wing neocon fundamentalists and the right-wing islamic fundamentalists agree about everything except which religion they would like to force on the rest of us. I am so glad and proud I am Democrat, What about you!

    Got this inspiration from http://zaiusnation.blogspot.com/ and the closer we get to the election, the truer and more defined the GOP are becoming like the fear-mongers they say they fear!

    I am also proud to say the Majority of American Muslims pretty much follow the Liberal Issues of today…. so how sick have the GOP gotten??????????

    ISSUE………………………LIBERALS…………….Sharia Law………………………….Right Wing Christian Republicans

    Prayer in School…………..opposes………………..favors………………………………..favors
    Sep. Church-State………….favors…………………opposes………………………………opposes
    Censorship………………. opposes……………….favors………………………………..favors
    Pre-emptive Attack………..opposes………………..favors………………………………….favors
    Scripture Interp………..not literal……………..literal………………………………..literal
    Women’s Rights…………..favors………………….opposes………………………………..opposes
    United Nations…………..supports…………………opposes………………………………opposes
    Gay Rights………………favors…………………..opposes……………………………….opposes
    Sex Education…………..favors…………………..opposes……………………………….opposes
    Death Penalty……………opposes………………….favors………………………………..favors
    Execute Mentally Ill……..opposes………………….favors………………………………..favors
    Execute Children…………opposes………………….favors………………………………..favors
    Detain w/o Trial…………opposes………………….favors………………………………..favors

  8. I can’t keep arguing about a fabricated “quote,” so I’ll drop that and just address one point from Mr. Skinner.

    I’ve seen a lot of this new line of attack that treats Ms. Fluke’s appearance as a brilliant Democratic ploy, a grand attempt to change the nature of the debate, etc., etc. Wrong. It was intended as a very minor sideshow to the GOP circus over in the “official” hearing. It only became a big issue, and a major distraction, when Limbaugh made one of the dumbest statements of his very dumb career. I suppose it’s possible that the Progressive Machine is so wise and all-seeing that it put Fluke up to her role knowing that Limbaugh would say what he did … but somehow, no, I don’t think so.

    • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 23, 2012 1:45 PM at 1:45 PM |

      Miss Flukes testimony was rejected by Issa, meaning she wasn’t allowed, at all, to speak on behalf of women period. This is why she was given the opportunity to speak at another congressional committee, that gave a damn about 50% of the american voters who are women. we have a right to a say that involves our kind!

      Mr Skinner and Krayton are idiots, if they think half the American electorate will stand for this, treating woman as if they are dogs!

    • I have never characterized the mock hearing as a “brilliant Democratic ploy”, though I have freely admitted that it was a political move in keeping with the “political circus” run by the Republicans. What it did do, though was showcase the utter lack of women asked to testify about what is – essencially – a women’s health issue. This was a hugely bad move on the part of Republicans that was – as you said – showcased by Limberger and later by Skinner.

      I think it is a strech to try to blame foresight on the “progressive machine” but your use of the term shows you have missed the point as well. Women’s health is not a “Republican” problem or a “Progessive” issue. It is a fact that transcends party, religious belief, race, and political position. It is quite literally something that is important to more than half the voters in the US. As such, taking a position that is both counter to women’s health and counter to the current law of the land (that women have a constitutional right to choose what happens to their health and wellbeing), can only be labeled stupid and misguided. The fact that Limberger and Skinner want to make it about “entitlement” simply shows that they understand it even less than the “Republican Machine”.

      As you well know, Ed, I am not – by any means – a member of the “Progressive Machine”. I voted for Nixon (a vote I do not regret), I voted for Reagan both times (I don’t regret the first one but I do regret the second one) and I voted for Bush senior. I believe that people should be responcible for their own actions. What I also believe in is that a service that we pay for, that enjoys the kind of federal and state protections that they do should provide that service in keeping with the law of the land. Women have a choice whether to become pregnant or not – a choice that is guarenteed by law – and the companies that we pay for insurance from should recognise that guarenteed right.

      • If only you could ’empath’ my respect for that comment as well as you ‘telepath’ my thoughts on the topic. (And if only you could ‘neuropath’ my spell-checker …)

        Women have a choice whether to become pregnant or not – a choice that is guarenteed by law – and the companies that we pay for insurance from should recognise that guarenteed right.

        Yeah. That. What you said. Kudos, seriously.

  9. Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 23, 2012 1:26 PM at 1:26 PM |

    So this Disgruntled man, Krayton, Used an English Bulldog as an example to women’s rights to medical care, and women everywhere??? What the hell is wrong with the GOP Leaders of today???

    Really, think about this women! Krayton just called us property! Dogs are owned as property. And when they are not owned, they are called feral? Have a majority of women everywhere escaped from a domestic or captive status? Are we living more or less as a wild animals? Cause this is what this Republican nutcase is saying about women, that we need to be re-trained?

    This is pretty disgusting!

  10. There is a movie that came out a few years ago “No Country for Old Men”, there is a line in it as the sheriff played by Tommy Lee Jones was killing the bad guy, “Do you realize how crazy you are.” So I ask this question does Krayton Kerns and his ilk, do they realize how crazy they are? Or are they so dam crazy that they think they are normal?

  11. Ingemar Johannson | March 23, 2012 2:11 PM at 2:11 PM |

    “He’s angry that Sandra Fluke dared to say that birth control was $1000 per year, a great expense for many.”

    Ed’s right, CG is misquoting facts.

    The real amount was $3000 not $1000. Of course when asked about Target and their $9.00/month Pill she plays stupid.


    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 23, 2012 2:19 PM at 2:19 PM |

      Right you ARE, Ingrid! The woman’s a SLUT, and a DOG, and a DOGGY SLUT for attempting to testify! Sheesh. Cretin is correct in pointing this out! Can we just see her videos now????

      • Ingemar Johannson | March 23, 2012 2:23 PM at 2:23 PM |

        I’m sure all those boyfriends thinks she’s kinda nice.

        • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 23, 2012 8:42 PM at 8:42 PM |

          Uh oh! Who called the MORALITY Pohleece? Sheesh, Ingrid, you’re even a bigger dipshit than I suspected! Now, care to back UP that statement with facts? Just HOW many “boyfriends” has she had? And just WHY is that ANY of YOUR busyness, dude? You assHolier than thou dudes in the unreligeeous right are some sicko pervs! Gotta know everthin’ about a young woman’s sex life! You and Birthet Bob have a lot in common. You’re both PERVS!

          FREEEEEEEDUMB! (except when it comes to young women. we want to see videos of them having sex! HEY, we deserve that much, right?!)

    • I checked with Friends, re the 9.00 birth control, you still have to have the 200-400 dollar a year Doctors Exam to get a presciption, and she can’t take the $9.00 pill, the one her Doctor says she needs is $45.00 a month

      • Also, she’s a very pissed off Republican women because their insurance policy would pay all costs if her Husband needed Viagra but she has to pay for birth control out of pocket

        • Ingemar Johansson | March 23, 2012 5:57 PM at 5:57 PM |

          Husbands with pissy wives don’t need Viagra.

          • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 23, 2012 6:06 PM at 6:06 PM |

            Keep digging, Ingrid! HEY, when you’re already IN up to your ass, why stop, right? Go full frontal misogyny! Right? What do you have to lose?

            • Ingemar Johansson | March 25, 2012 10:41 AM at 10:41 AM |

              Absolutely nothing Scary.

              How ’bout this one?

              SF is as easy as Remedial Math.

              • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 25, 2012 10:47 AM at 10:47 AM |

                SF? Ya lost me on that one, Ingrid. What is SF? I consider myself a rather worldy dude, but I never heard of SF? Is that kinda like STFU?? Now THAT I understand!

                • Ingemar Johansson | March 25, 2012 10:58 AM at 10:58 AM |

                  A person.

                  Last name rhymes with puke.

                  • SF is Sandra Fluke Larry! The Woman “Ingy da Fingy” Ryhmes with Puke. Don’t quit your day job of sucking off the Goverment tit Ingy, while you point at Sandra for all the ills of your misguided life. Wouldn’t want you to die of some Hypocritical disease like senility at your advanced age!!!!

                    People like Ingy are the very reason, women still get raped in this world! The majority of males in the GOP, those over 50 still think like cavemen. I respect the women in my world. I really consider them the better half.

                    If the testimony that was given of Sandra’s concerns…. was from a man, they would call him brave to speak on behalf of woman so candidly. How sad in this day and age, that women still need middleman to speak to their concerns. Isn’t it safer and the information more complete when it comes from the source.

                  • Ingy, is – for the most part – commenting here to get a rise from people. He doesn’t really believe that Sandra Fluke is a slut and I highly doubt that he supports either Skinner’s or Limberger’s take on the matter. Ingy just loves to tie “liberal” tails in a knot. I am actually not sure where he stands on the contraceptive debate because he has spent more time tweaking noses than he has actually discussing it. I would be kind of curious, though. For all his bluster and tweaking, there exists an actual mind behind the words and occationally, he actually does express a cognascent thought.

                    • He’s made where he stands pretty clear over time. He stands for Republican victory over all things. He is, in fact, the purist of republican conservatives I have encountered on the Intertubes, because he is smart and works directly for what he wants – liberal bashing. It’s actually kind of neat, because there is no pretense of higher purpose. He just wants the ‘bad guys’ to look bad.

                    • Backwoods Monty | March 25, 2012 2:48 PM at 2:48 PM |

                      Tweaking Noses, Spanking butts, giving wedgies, it’s all the same thing….. Ingy,s a bully against woman’s rights…. He doesn’t know when to give in to an intrinsic conversation about women that is thoughtful with equality…. he is basically an Idiot, walking!

                      Women deserve a spot at the table of any decision. They have always been the backbone of America for the last two hundred years. What Ingy is doing is no different then Limbaugh the druggie wants…. A old white mans America! History proves it never was that in the beginning with any minority, and it cant be that way now… unless we continue to allow it by being silent!

                      The road to hell is paved with political correctness folks. It is time to take, sexism, revisionism, and bigotry concepts to task and discuss them… until we all know how bad these stereotypes and misguided thought processes are for our country!

                      Norma, always like to throw out Jefferson Quotes but here is one of mine about woman:

                      WOMEN, Natural equality of: It is civilization alone which replaces women in the enjoyment of their natural equality. That first teaches us to subdue the selfish passions, and to respect those rights in others
                      which we value in ourselves. 1782

                    • And I can completely agree, Rob. I did not say that what Ingy says is valid, just that it is driven by a rational mind. I sometimes like what Ingy has to say – even when I violently disagree – because he is smart enough to couch it in terms that make us all look. He is certainly driven to make Democrats look bad and Republicans look good. He is determined to push for a Republican victory even when he disagrees with the idea in question. There is a purity of purpose that is somewhat refreshing. Sad as it may sound, I actually like Ingy and would not mind at all meeting him in person. Same goes with Craig, Steve, or (I am going to get shot for this…) Budge.

                    • I’d like to meet him to. We’d probably just end up talking football, but hey. Craig I would also like to meet. I imagine us fishing and talking philosophy more than anything else. Eschenbacher I would very much like to meet. He’s someone I think tries too hard to support brands of conservatism that he has no passion for. If you ever get the opportunity to meet Gregg Smith, jump at it. The guy is cool beans. I would also love to spend a few short times in the presence of the montanafesto folk.

                      Now, Dave Budge is an interesting case. I was hoping against hope that I would get to meet him when I went to Great Falls. Were I to meet him now, I think it would a special thing, right up until his over-the-top defensiveness and my sarcasm collided. It would probably result in a fist fight, ala “The Quiet Man”.

                      On the flip side, I have met jhwygirl. She’s impressive and committed to doing the intelligent and right thing. But she also claims that I threatened her. So much for that. Lizard would be an interesting meet up, even though he has intimated that he would be violent against my ‘obvious’ distortions of what he’s clearly written. I think that a ‘poet’ thing. Problembear, Pete Talbot and all the posters at ID I still hope to meet one day. PBear and I have an unspecified date on Georgetown lake. I’ve no interest, whatsoever, in meeting Matthew Kohler or JC.

                    • Oh, I love it when you self-reflect. You’re a fookin’ legend in your own mind.

                      God what ego!

                    • Backwoods Monty | March 25, 2012 6:07 PM at 6:07 PM |

                      Shorter Buttarski: Why didn’t you pick me??????????

          • Backwoods Monty | March 23, 2012 6:10 PM at 6:10 PM |

            I wonder why wives would be pissy anyway…. Must be because of dipshit Husbands? I will defer always to the woman’s opinion….

            Whats say you ladies?

          • her husband does not need it, the point is more insurance policies cover it then birth control

      • Ingemar Johansson | March 23, 2012 5:56 PM at 5:56 PM |

        It’s about birth control. Doctors exams are covered.

    • The cost of birth control is regional and is also subject to what type and brand of birth control we are talking about. Further, as Norma, Rob and many others have already pointed out, Birth control for women requires not only an initial exam that can (and does) cost hundreds of dollars, it also requires multiple “checkup” exams.

      The issues isn’t about what the actual cost was for Flukes. The issue was about whether insurance would cover it. Even you, in your irrational fog, should be smart enough to see it. You are arguing semantics instead of the issue. Try again.

  12. I read the article written by Krayton Kearns and the title of the article written by mtcowgirl is very misleading. He did not say “birth control “is death nail in coffin of our republic”” as the title infers. He wrote “The implementation of Obamacare will be the death nell in the coffin of our republic.” Please try to be more accurate mtcowgirl.

    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 23, 2012 2:17 PM at 2:17 PM |

      HEY, you got THAT right, Merna! It ain’t CRETIN kearns that looks like a complete asshole here! It’s COWGIRL for pointing OUT what a complete asshole Cretin is! Thanks for noticing! I was nearly misled into thinking that Cretin was the complete asshole! My bad.

    • Merna, as I have already pointed out ad nausium to Ed Kemmick is that, while the title being in quotes is misleading, the article itself made the connect with contraceptives and the ACA (I refuse to call it Obamacare because that title is truly incorrect and misleading). You invalidate your argument when you refer to the ACA as Obamacare, just as Kearns did.

  13. Anyone claiming inaccuracy is willfully ignoring that The article argues that the ACA is so bad because it includes coverage of birth control.

  14. Ed, you’re right it would have been just a sideshow had Rush not stepped on his tool. But he presented an absolutely golden opportunity for the left to implement their favorite political strategy, one not requiring any particular wisdom or perceptiveness.
    I remember a long time ago I went to a “human rights” event I thought was going to be about neo-Nazis. So there’s Celinda Lake, telling very eager ears that the way to win a political debate was not on the merits, but by stacking negative associations upon your opponent. It’s a simple strategy, a favorite of progressives, as the threads here seem to prove again and again.

    • Backwoods Monty | March 23, 2012 3:10 PM at 3:10 PM |

      Shorter Dave Skinner: Your right ED woman are Sluts, and should be treated differently then Men who need Viagra to keep screwing women!

    • Drawing the fire for Judge Cebull’s impeachable offense is very noble albeit clumsy, Mr. Skinner: hardly surprising that your party is circling the drain.

    • Dave, as you know that tactic is the “LBJ Rule.” Accuse someone of being a pig fornicator and get them to deny it over and over and over…..

      If a batter swings at a pitch in the dirt and misses, it’s still a strike. If the batter makes contact after bouncing it doesn’t count. No win situation by direct confrontation. I give Ed great credit for just coming out and calling Cowgirl on the carpet without defending Kearns or his remarks.

      It’s really quite telling when it takes such distortions to motivate the party faithful into voting.

      • Backwoods Monty | March 23, 2012 3:54 PM at 3:54 PM |

        Oh thats right Craiggy Ole Boy…. It’s Really was a 50 year old lie of the republicans about LJB? You are interested in diggin up Bad Propaganda then and using it again… How Unoriginal are you Republican BS artists?

        Craiggy Speak:

        That evil LJB started Medicare, The civil rights act… he put us in this mess….by caring about People F**k him! That A hole signed voting rights Act into law. He scared us Republicans everywhere! What a Bully!!!!

        You get the “Dumb GOP Tool of the day” Award Craig… for no Orginality ever! BWAH ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

        • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 23, 2012 5:34 PM at 5:34 PM |

          You see, Monty, it IS all about sex with dogs! The Pubbies screwed the pooch when their big, fat, inbred leader, Flush Blimpo, used the most vile, hateful, obscene language imaginable seen in this country in a long, long time. And now, all the little talking male cysts on the fat man’s ass are rushing to his defense! And the best defense according to the little cysts like Skintflute, Mooron, Ingrid, and Cretin Kearns is to attack!

          Yes, it really is sad to see. Not ONE of the little cysts on Limpo’s ass has even condemned in no uncertain terms the whoreific attack on a completely innocent woman! In fact, they NOW claim it was some sort of evil liebrul plot!

          Yes, they truly are the scumbags that they appear to be. And these little cysts on Limpaugh’s ample ass are the MALES mouthpieces who are gonna speak for the women of America! Makes one wanna rush right out and vote Pubbie, right?


    • Skinner, once again, you drink deeply of the fail sauce.

      First, the entire contraceptive argument is a complete sideshow. The issue will end up being one of law – that women have the right to choose what happens to their body (a fact already established in law) and that those that provide health insurance must honor that. What you, Santorum, Limberger and the rest of these idiots have done is bring that issue out of the background and firmly set it in the foreground. Do you honestly not realise how stupid that was? Limberger could not have done a better job for the Democrats had he tried. With many of Santorums remarks, the new law working it’s way through the Arizona Legislature, the heated rhetoric it wasn’t a stretch to add this incident to the already overwhelming concept that the Republican Party HATES women.

      Since then, you and others have been trying to do damage control, but as Republicans, you cling to the outdated Reagan eleveth commandment – though shalt not speak badly of another Republican. Since condemning Limberger is not an option, you choose to attack the messenger. Worse, you end up attacking all women in the process. You have taken a very simple, legal matter and blown it up into an attack on all women in America. Just how stupid are you?

      To showcase your stupidity, you even admit to attending a “human rights” event in hopes of seeing neo-nazis… What passes for rational thought in your head?

  15. Backwoods Monty | March 23, 2012 6:00 PM at 6:00 PM |

    Well what did you expect Larry, when the GOP are pretty close to making assembly lines of tea-baggers, for the future. Apparently, the ingredients are pretty simple and easily obtainable.


    Thank goodness, You and I are both Honorary members of S.H.I.T. Society to Highlight Ingrate Teatards! If it wasn’t for our constant Investigations, consultations, and observations to the Democratic process, those baggers would be turning our society upsides down, backwards and inside out! Keep at it friend, I know I will!

  16. My mother died right after the election, I think Rush and Fox scared her to death. Now this women

  17. LMAO – not one of you can even spell the name correctly. Do a little investigation before you post. Personally, I don’t care about anyone’s “social” life. I just don’t want to pay for it.

    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 23, 2012 9:20 PM at 9:20 PM |

      Huh? What name are you TALKING about, pauly? And by the way, cupcake, just WHO pays for YOUR health insurance, dufus? You see, pauly, I’m thinkin’ that you’re prolly a big, fat, clogged artery walking HEART attack waitin’ to HAPPEN type dude! So, why should I have to pay for YOUR poor health care decisions? I don’t want’a pay for your FAT PIG lifestyle!

      You see, pauly, we all have to pay for things we don’t want’a. That’s life, dufus.

      Now, cupcake, please provide some actual info regarding your health insurance so we can laff at you! Just kidding. So that we can decide if you’re really as full of shit as you SEEM to be.

  18. The best part of this whole thing is that the GOP knows that Birth Control is a losing issue for them…yet they can’t stop themselves from fighting it. And that the TEA Party claims they are the ones fighting to keep the focus on economic issues rather than social ones. Especially that the MONTANA TEA Party would claim this after fighting for the gold standard and a ban on divorce.

  19. Insurance companies have a fiduciary responsibility to their shareholders to reduce claims among those who are willing by providing no-cost contraception to their policy holders.
    Without it, the costs of those claims (which can be enormous in cases of a troubled pregnancy or a baby with a lifetime malady) are shifted to everyone else — all for a pregnancy that no one wanted to happen in the first place.
    We all then pay higher premiums because of costs that no one (except the Obama-is-the-devil crowd) wanted to incur.
    People may practice their faith, but don’t take money out of my paycheck to do it.

    • Backwoods Monty | March 24, 2012 5:03 PM at 5:03 PM |

      Not if they just lie their asses off, and companies do Lie!

      Matt Tiabbi Has a ton of great blog articles at “Rolling stone,” that explains just how much Lying Banks and insurance organizations have done. It has almost become a Penis measuring contest with these Wall St companies to see how big their lies can get! The last article in the Magazine itself his a huge expose` of Bank of America and how many insurance Companies it is sinking with them.

      As an Aside if you have your money, tied with anything regarding Bank Of America, get it out NOW! You are very close to losing everthing no lie!

  20. Mark,

    For years, the people that read and comment on Montana Blogs have been subjected to your inane prattle and it is becoming oh so cumbersome. In keeping with the list my brother provided in a previous thread, I have come up with my own classification of your comments –

    1) Ego driven Narcissism – This is the most common comment you use. You claim some life altering “enlightenment” that the rest of us do not have the mental skill to comprehend or the wisdom to achieve ourselves. This is classic narcissism and indicates a level of ego that is quite probably dangerous. You are the center of your world and you are trying to convince us that you should be the center of our world.

    2) The Objectification of everyone else – again this is ego driven but the pathology is much scarier. You claim some special gift that the rest of us do not have and therefore we are somehow beneath you. You objective the rest of us. This is indicative of a sociopathic personality disorder. By denying that the rest of us are incapable of conversing at your “level” you disregard us as thinking human beings and by doing so, you create the delusion that we are expendable. This is a dangerous path to take and, in fact, is the reason I despise you the most.

    3) The Hystronic Victim – When pushed, you retreat to the level of victim “The world is out to get me or silence me”. This conspiratorial delusion is indicative of a hystronic personality disorder.

    The combination of these traits indicates a very damaged personality and a complete lack of the ability to deal with reality. I am very glad you live in Colorado as you are one sad and scary individual. Your constant self agrandizing diatribes coupled with your constant objectification of everyone else is truly concerning. Even your constant attempts to rename people like Rob and I is indicative of your delusions. You can’t even the see the childish nature of it.

    I really hope you get help, Mark, because in my opinion, you really need it. Yes, I would love to see you booted from these pages (and from every other blog you infest) but more importantly, I think it desperately important that you get professional aid in dealing with your delusional behavior.

    • While I find Skinner and his ilk sad, damaged individuals, but I do not see them as actively dangerous. They – in thier own twisted way – actually contribute something to the discussion, if for no other reason than that people can respond to their twisted and ill conceaved assersions. People like Craig and Ed, I actually have a lot of respect for even if I do disagree with them on occation. Larry is actually a pretty intellegent guy and his posts, while colorful, usually have some core ideal hidden in the satire.

      Unlike all these individuals, your comments are completely and utterly useless. They only serve to reenforce your self delusions and rarely, if ever, contain anything that further’s the discussion. We are routinely subjected to your delusional and worthless ramblings for no reason other than you feel the need to justify your supremacy over the rest of mankind. Please take your damaged and desperate whinings somewhere else and allow us to rationally discuss the issues we face.

      • Backwoods Monty | March 24, 2012 5:25 PM at 5:25 PM |

        I know it is hard and sad, to have the courage to say, to a guy like Mark…. He needs help, but you absolutely right Moorcat!

        The guys a pariah!

    • Interesting. Narcissism is a tough one, as being in my head I’d be the last to know so that accusation has some weight, I suppose. I am not the best judge.

      But the rest of it is you … I am your Rorschach ink blot, and in describing me you have exposed yourself.

      Interesting. Not you, but your description of you.

      • Whatever, Mark. You are certainly not my “Rorschach”. I have way too much training in the feild to be deflected by you. I am done with you, though. From now on, you are on ignore mode. I will let others deal with your insanity and inane babbling.

        • Backwoods Monty | March 25, 2012 5:05 AM at 5:05 AM |

          Agreed, we all have been bored long enough, with the sniveling dribble and whining, from this GOP Prostitute… time to move on!

      • Interesting. I have not sniveled, dribbled, or whined. I have merely held up a mirror, and you do not like what you see. I am not a Republican, but you cannot pigeonhole me, since I am not what you are – fellow travelers of the right wing. You don’t know yourselves, and yet are sure you know me.

        You are not liberals, as you are advancing the right wing agenda. You have stepped into the shoes of progressives, and want us out of your party, and I for one am happy to oblige. But I do create angst and anxiety in you, and that is what cognitive dissonance is all about. That is the anger you feel – discomfort, as you have conflicting inner beliefs. That’s what being a Democrat does to a person, and is why you group here and don’t venture out. Here you have the solace of fellow travelers. When I come here, you get angry, and want me to go. You have said it, Norma has said it, Kralzy has said it .;.. just go away! I’m ignoring you! La la la la la la not listening not listening la la la la la…

        Kenny, god only knows you Kailey’s are trained in everything, you in engineering, and now psychology? What did you do in the military? Mentor the whole force? Good grief that walls of ego you two boys have built around yourselves. What deep insecurity! What is it about what I just wrote that set you off? Eh? You’re an open book!

        • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 25, 2012 9:44 AM at 9:44 AM |

          You are a world class sniveler and whiner, Buttinski! You come here to seek absolution for being a deranged moron. Sorry, dufus, but THAT is something that you won’t find here!

          You see, Buttinski, you are simply the lefty version of a Teatard, and you’re too dumb to know it! You are a Naderite all the way! And what did you accomplish by voting for Nader? Well, you installed bush and his dick cheney!

          And now, you CONTINUE to whine and snivel about there being NO difference between the parties! Well, dude, YOU have to live with what has happened! YOU will have to face your god some day and explain just WHY you contributed to the destruction of an innocent country! Why YOU enbabled the deaths of a hundred thousand innocent people! Why YOU aided and abetted the most horrific crime in modern history! Why YOU are responsible for the deaths of innocents who were burned ALIVE with white phosporous, probably the most horrible way to die of all!

          Yes, YOU, Buttinski, did ALL these things by your endless support of Nader, and your endless whining that the two parties were exactly alike! There YOUR sins upon YOUR soul, moron, not ours! We knew. We understoood. We have critical thinking skills that YOU don’t!

          So now, little dipshit, go elsewhere to look for absolution for your sins. You won’t find it here. Might I suggest that you spend the REST of your pathetic existence attempting to atone for your barbarity! You better adopt about a hundred Iraqi orphans and work your fingers to the bone to attempt to provide them with the life that YOU took from them, dipshit! You’ve got a helluva lot of atoning to do! When you get to hell, then maybe you can explain to the folks in Falluja just WHY you voted for Nader, and therefore caused them to be incinerated alive!

          You are simply a dipshit, Buttinski. Again, go somewhere else to look for absolution. You’ll get none from me. You did the crime, dude. Now you can do the time! Only GOD and the victims of your stupidity can forgive you now. But I can’t even feel pity for an asshole like you. You deserve none, for there is NO evidence of repentance! You simply double down on the crazy. Yes, Buttinski, there are cosmic consequences for being a horrific dumbass. You’ll have to face them alone. You did it, Buttinski. Now live with it!

          Now go, asshole, and try to make amends for being you!

          • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 25, 2012 9:52 AM at 9:52 AM |

            Bush = Gore, right?! (insane evil laughter)


            You did it, Buttinski. Live with it! I hear that hell is nice this time of eternity!

          • You may be clinically insane. Your writing, even just its appearance, certainly indicates some derangement.

            Regarding Bush v Gore, here are the actual polling results: Percentage of constituencies voted for Bush: 9% of blacks; 46% of those under 30; 49% of the college educated; 37% of the poor; 39% of working mothers; 11% of Democrats; 34% of union members; 13% of self-described liberals; 25% of gays and lesbians; 15% of Clinton voters in 1996; 25% of those supporting abortion …

            The election was Gore’s to lose, and he managed to pull it off. If he had merely held on to the Clinton voters, he would have won. Now your Democrats elect to focus on the Nader vote, and ignore everything else. Why? Could it be because we are what you claim to be – the progressive wing of the party? Is that why you hate us? We are what you are not? We have no qualms or fears about our beleifs, while you are in denial?

            I might also mention something apparent in 2000 … I even had a letter published in the Billings Gazette to this effect prior to the election: There were no significant disagreements during the campaign between Bush and Gore. Gore, by his own will, decided to campaign as a right-leaning centrist. Even if Nader had caused his defeat, which he did not, he could have eliminated his Nader problem by taking leadership on even one progressive issue. He did not.

            So much for that. Regarding killing of innocent people, Clinton managed to starve a half million Iraqi kids, no help from Bush at all. Your Obama is doing his share of killing now. It’s absurdity to talk like that, as presidents are not in charge of foreign policy, and are merely the mirror for the public, but your ability to ignore what is going on now, what went on the the 90’s under Clinton, speaks of a large void, a huge blackness of denial, inside your booze-addled skull.

            • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 25, 2012 10:21 AM at 10:21 AM |

              Bush = Gore, RIGHT, Buttinski?


              It’s you who’s insane, cupcake. Now go look for absolution elsewhere! We’ve heard your shit before. without end! Really, I’m not kidding. No one wants to even BE around you. You’re walking evil incarnate! Again, go atone for what you done! If that’s possible.

            • Control the federal bench, Dems.

              • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 25, 2012 10:52 AM at 10:52 AM |

                Gee, I forgot. It was actually BUSH and his dick, cheney, who ghost authored Earth in the Balance! Buttisnki, you are a FOOL’S fool, and a tool. Live with it. You’re worth no one’s time on this site. Again, no absolution for YOU, dipshit, until you repent! And I DON’T see that happenin’ any time soon! You have more in common with the Teatards than folks on this site. Buttinski = Teatards. Now THERE’S a comparison that works!

                • I’ll try to deal with you as if you are rational, as others might read this. Elected leaders are generally third-rate people, as to get elected they have to bargain with power. Once they have made that deal, they present themselves to us as people of character who are acting of their own instinct and accord, even as they have sold their souls. People who do that have a high level of cynicism, and little, if any, regard for you as a voter. They only need to say the right words to push your button to win your vote, and then they go about their business as if there had never been a campaign.

                  Earth in the Balance was written by a man who was only VP at the time, and out of the loop – he and Clinton were not even on speaking terms. (He might have won in 2000 if he were not such a butt head. He refused to use Clinton.) People behave differently out of power than when in power. Clinton himself, though a desk murderer while in power, appears to have a good instinct or two out of power.

                  People who sell trier souls while in power, and then act as men of character while out of power are at the very best, second rate people. At the very best, and in my opinion, neither Gore nor Clinton is worth a second look. So even though he didn’t take office in 2000, I doubt we’ve missed anything important in not having Al Gore as president.

            • It’s been interesting to see how you’ve re-written your personal history over the last 7 years, Tokarski. When first you and I ever discussed Gore v. Bush, there were 3 things we agreed on almost completely. Gore could and should have run a more progressive campaign, but that the election was stolen in Florida, rubber-stamped by an activist Supreme Court. Our bone of contention was my assertion that it never would have come down to ‘hanging chads’ without Florida’s Nader voters, and they had no damned right to be so smug about their superiority given what they really helped bring about. You’ve done nothing but attempt to deflect from what is simple fact since that time, even going so far as to claim that Gore would have done the same with Iraq as pResident Cheney and his pet monkey, all to absolve yourself and others from having helped bring these disasters about.

              This year, you again do your level best to help foster even more Republicant subjugation, domination and defeat of the people’s interest. And you attempt to mask your hatred of us all behind the idea that ‘Democrats are the problem’ and we’re all too stupid to know it. You’ve doubled-down on smug to the point of being an obvious clown.

              The obvious facts that you seem to gleefully miss, Tokarski. If the Democrats are a rightwing party, and the Republicants have gone off the lunatic deep-end of the right, then how are they the same, save that they aren’t doing what *you* want them to do? The answer is simple. The parties aren’t the same; you’re just so self-absorbed that you don’t care for truth. Like a child having a tantrum, you just want everyone else to suffer until you get what you want. Working to enable the lunatic right is not ‘progressive’, it’s self serving. Like many self-serving progressives (a remarkable number of them former right wingers themselves) you hide behind the idea of ‘holding elected officials accountable’, and fail to mention that what you’re holding them accountable for is their failure to work for you. You admitted at the time that you didn’t follow Tester’s campaign very closely but whine and snivel about how he has betrayed what you think he campaigned on. Small wonder that you seek so desperately to blame others for your acting like a complete Republican tool. You should be reviled, ignored and mocked here. You’ve made it very plain that you don’t give a shit about anyone but yourself.

              Given Bush v. Gore, Larry Kurtz is absolutely right. It’s worth voting for Democrats to hold the federal bench.

              • Ingemar Johansson | March 25, 2012 11:38 AM at 11:38 AM |

                I was just commenting to a buddy that Ginsberg in recent pictures looks to be death warmed over.

                To late to replace now, if she croaks in the next term you guys lose big.

                • There’s something about ‘counting chickens …’

                • My entire problem with this whole discussion (about Supreme Court judges) is that the Supreme Court is suppose to be about the law, not politics. The idea of a liberal or conservative judge is counter to the very idea behind the Supreme Court. Regardless of which side of the political spectrum you come from, everyone should be concerned about the fact that we no longer see the highest court of the land in a political sense.

                  The political aspect of the court has caused more bad decisions than good and we should all be screaming bloody murder about that. We are a land of law and that law has to be objective or we stop being free.

                  • It isn’t just the SCOTUS under discussion here. ALL federal judges are supposed to be about the law and not party.

                    When Clinton was President, he nominated two SCOTUS Justices, with advice from the Republican party. They were confirmed. Fine. But as of right now, less than 55% of Obama’s federal justice nominees have been confirmed, due to Republican obstruction. That is the worst percentage ever.

                    It’s nice to state your “entire problem”, Moorcat. That doesn’t make the problem go away.

                    • And you are (once again) absolutely right. I was one of the people signing the petition that went to congress to enact a law to prevent that situation from ever happening again. Sadly, I am sure that petition (signed by over a million people) probably ended up in the round file somewhere. We, as an electorate, have to act proactively to return reason to the people we elect to office. If the candidates are not willing to show reason – regardless of party – then we should work diligently to either elect those that do or get people with reason to run. It isn’t just Democrats that show some reason right now, either, nor do all Democrats show reason. It was a HUGE loss to see Snow announce that she was no longer interested in being re-elected. On the flip side, I would like to see Baucus do the right thing and step away.

                      Obstructionism is a losing prospect for the Republicans and they are beginning to get the clue. There will always be obstructionism in Congress just as there will always be partisanship. The American voting public will (and has) made it known that they are tired of the obstructionism and this is where you and I disagree on whether the House will go back to the Democrats. We agreed to see what happens but I hope and believe that you are wrong on that.

                    • I’d love to think that I’m wrong too. But I’d bet that I’m not. The House remains with Boner, or worse yet, Cantor.

                      So what does one do with too few justices, or worse, Cebull?

                    • And for the record, the saddest part of all is that federal judges only need be confirmed by the Senate but are subject to cloture rule. McConnell wields his army of 40 like no other ever seen.

              • Brings us right back to Montana where a federal judge has besmirched the credibility of dozens of cases tried before him and his impeachment would come before a GOP Congress passing identical emails among themselves.

              • No, Rod – the point was that the election was Gore’s to win or lose, and he lost. Was Florida stolen? Yes, probably, but it should never have been that close? Last I looked, we get to vote for whoever we please, no matter. FY.

                What would Gore have done different for Bush? No way of knowing. Based on his right-leaning campaign, his avoidance of anything resembling progressive politics, it’s hard to see much difference. And remember, Obama campaigned as somewhat progressive and is governing from the far right. So who sows what Gore would have done, as he did not even bother campaigning from the progressive side.

                If the Democrats are a rightwing party, and the Republicants have gone off the lunatic deep-end of the right…

                K new you did not read the Counterpunch article last week! I knew it. You commented as if you had at ID, but you didn’t and I knew it! At lease Swede had the decency to admit he gave it only a brief glance. What you have done above is promote lesser-evil politics, and here is what the article said regarding your mindset:

                1. The world of politics is coextensive with the range of possibilities permitted by the Democrat-Republican Party system. (To think otherwise is unrealistic, utopian, naïve and, worst of all, unpragmatic. The idea is to win, and right now the only possible winner is a Democrat or a Republican. To vote otherwise is to “throw away your vote.”)

                2. Therefore, when voting the choice is always and only between a Republican or a Democrat. TINA.

                3. There are no finite limits to the possibilities of greater badness. (However bad a policy might be, it could always be worse. ‘Worst possible policy’ is like ‘greatest possible number’. No such thing.)

                4. However bad the Democratic candidate may be, the Republican will be worse. (well confirmed empirical generalization)

                5. The lesser evil is always a better choice than the greater evil. (self-evident tautology)

                6. Therefore, when voting the best choice is always the Democrat. (follows from 2-5, and note that when the only choice is between a greater and a lesser evil, the lesser evil is not only the better choice, it is the best choice)

                7. However bad the Democrat is -and there are no limits to how bad he can be [cf. 3 above]- it’s always best to vote for him. (follows from 4-6)

                8. It doesn’t matter how bad the Democrat is, I’ll vote for him. (follows trivially from 7)

                9. Actually, I need know nothing more than that a candidate is a Democrat to justify voting for him. Being sufficiently informed about a candidate’s politics just is… knowing whether he’s a Democrat! (follows from 7 and 8)

                Thanks for illustrating his words.

                • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 25, 2012 12:24 PM at 12:24 PM |

                  Get thee behind us, Dumbshit! When you repent, dipshit, and when you atone, come back and let us know! But that’s gonna BE a while! You’re a fool’s fool, Buttinski. The bad guys just LUVS dipshits like you! Very easy to manipulate!

                • No, Rod – the point was that the election was Gore’s to win or lose, and he lost. Was Florida stolen? Yes, probably, but it should never have been that close? Last I looked, we get to vote for whoever we please, no matter.

                  No Mark, that was not the point. You contradict yourself, Mark, mostly because you’re attempting to rewrite history to favor your own self-image. If it was Gore’s to win or lose, then how can he be responsible if it’s stolen? And yes, you can vote for whomever you please. Expect laughter and revulsion when you act all smug in accomplishing the exact opposite of what you claim you did.


                  After claiming it your sole area of expertise, your mastery of the insult just astounds me. And I’ve told you many times, I don’t do requests.

                  You commented as if you had at ID,

                  You’re making things up, again, Tokarski. I made no such comment.

                  What you have done above is promote lesser-evil politics,

                  No. What I did above was point out that you are a simpering little whiner having a tantrum because the world doesn’t agree with you. You’re just too stupid to actually understand why that is the point.

                  • You went off the rail there, and did not address anything in Nasser’s article, again indicating that you did not read it. You’re the 4.0 philosophy student, and syllogisms are classroom stuff. He did one on you. Dissect it, master. Dissect it.

                    There is not much substance in your comment here, bit I’ll lay it out for you again and hope for better absolution: The election was Gore’s to lose, and he pulled it off. It was close, it was stolen in Florida, but should not have been close and that should not have been the deciding factor. He ran as a right-leaning centrist, and you guys are all bitchy because progressives did not vote for him enough to put him over. You’re especially pissed off at us Nader voters, who had NO reason to vote for him, for not voting for him without a good reason.

                    Lesser evil, you see. Greater evil is unlimited, therefore, lesser evil is also unlimited. Think about it, dimwit.

                    • Mark, you’re missing the point again. This discussion hasn’t been about an article you probably misunderstood as you flub an understanding of so many others. So, I repeat:

                      The point is “that you are a simpering little whiner having a tantrum because the world doesn’t agree with you. You’re just too stupid to actually understand why that is the point.”

              • It is this simple, Rod, and explained to me by Nasser in the article I asked you to read:

                There is no limit to how bad your Republican Party can be, so that your apparent presumption that Democrats are less bad has no importance because if there is no limit to Republican badness, there is also no limit to Democratic less-badness. Simple logic!

                Lesser-evil politics is a game that draws you into supporting the right wing and all its objectives. You’ve been sucked in by Democrats, and are now a de facto right winger.

                The only way that Democrats can have any value is if they stake out principled positions on issues and fight for them. Since you do not do that, your party has no value.

                • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 26, 2012 4:49 PM at 4:49 PM |

                  Nuthin’ new here. Lack of originality is probably the most DEFINITE sign of an idiot. That’d be you, Buttinski.

                • Backwoods Monty | March 26, 2012 4:50 PM at 4:50 PM |

                  Bwah Ha hahahahahahahaha What a Langer!

                • That’s funny, Mark. You assume that you get to define a “principled position”, and no one else does. At the risk of validating Godwin’s law, you would make an admirable fascist.

                  • But I make no such assumption. I simply know when it is not being done. It is apparent to me that it is not being done because whenever I complain about the behavior of Democrats, I am told that no matter how bad they are, they are better than Republicans. That is the mantra.

                    If Democrats do not beleive in public health care, an end to our multiple wars, closing of Guantanamo, restoration of habeas corpus, closing of secret prisons, support for labor unions, use of the UN to settle international disputes, protection of the environment, reduction in military spending, protection of Medicare and Social Security, raising of taxes on wealth … saying so is a principle stand! We will fight you based on principle, and not on your lack of spine.

                    • To quote a tired joke: “What do you mean “We”, White man …”

                    • Backwoods Monty | March 26, 2012 5:41 PM at 5:41 PM |

                      Yah who’s the “WE”????? Are those the voices in your head man????

                    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 26, 2012 6:16 PM at 6:16 PM |

                      Echo up his ass! He’s used to it. Head’s up!

                    • Progressives, the people you say should be voting for your candidates. You even occasionally refer to yourself by that name.

                      This is not rocket science. If you have abandoned these issues, simply say so. Your reasons might well be good and we’ll have a principled debate. But do not say that you are with us and then fail to fight. That is cowardice and the primary reason we find you detestable.

                      Do not say that these issues do not matter and that you are only about lesser evil. As we know, evil has no limits, so being lesser is of no value. You must take a principlesd stand. Now would be a good time.

                      The issues I listed are worthy. You can be on one side or the other and make a case. To be on neither is cowardice.

                    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 26, 2012 9:08 PM at 9:08 PM |

                      HEY, now cowardice is really something that you can LECTURE us on, Mr. Bush = Gore! For you see, if you WEREN’T a human shield in Iraq, than you are a coward! You started the fight, then ran!

                      I know it hurts to be you, little fella. But I can’t help that. That’s a cosmic debate for another day. Is it nuture or nature? Are you a cowardly little wart by nature or nuture? I choose NATURE!

                      You’re too funny, Buttinski.

                    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 26, 2012 9:34 PM at 9:34 PM |

                      BTW, just WHAT is it that you do besides whine and snivel, Mr. Bush = Gore? What have you invested? Is your real service in life simply to provide free of charge whine and snivel? HEY, that’s kinda like bein’ a humanitarian, right? Helping the poor who can’t afford to pay for whine and snivel! BHWHAHAHAHAHAAA! You’re a funny little dude, Buttinski.

                    • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 27, 2012 12:05 AM at 12:05 AM |

                      Here Mark goes again saying he is a Progressive. Like Monty says you lie, you lie, you lie.

                    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 27, 2012 6:19 AM at 6:19 AM |

                      Poor widdle Buttinksi! His Metamucil-filled tirades full of invective are simply designed to make up for a lifetime of being a little nerdy loser who MISSED the entire radicalism of the sixties and the great events fo the day! Sad, so sad, that all he has left is invective! He’s kinda like the left’s own Pastor Bulbdim. You see, Bulbdim MISSED Nam, but now he’s aiming for a new Alamo. Buttinski MISSED the entire sixties, but now he’s the Che Guevara of nerdy CPA dudes! He probably prances around the house in his little beret when no one’s looking!

                      Really kinda sad and pathetic to see these losers approaching the end of their lives attempting to make up for a lifetime of nothingness!

                      “The child is the father of the man”! Buttinski is EXACTLY what he’s supposed to be. The unbearable lightness of being a lightweight!

                    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 27, 2012 6:25 AM at 6:25 AM |

                      For Buttinski. For you see, poor widdle Buttinksi NEVER makes allusions to literature, for the dude is quite unread! He’s read Chomsky and Counter Punch, and now he thinks he’s Howard Zinn! But never literature or history. You see, when one is a nerdy CPA, one has a very incomplete education!

                      “MY HEART LEAPS UP WHEN I BEHOLD”
                      My heart leaps up when I behold
                      A rainbow in the sky:
                      So was it when my life began;
                      So is it now I am a man;
                      So be it when I shall grow old,
                      Or let me die!
                      The Child is father of the Man;
                      I could wish my days to be
                      Bound each to each by natural piety.

          • Backwoods Monty | March 25, 2012 1:48 PM at 1:48 PM |


            Notice: He never answered the question we both asked him about all his Fans? Notice: No one ever came to his defense either!

            Shorter Buttarski: Who cares! I have plenty of imaginary friends…. in my mind!

            • What question did you ask? Why do I need “fans?” You’re exposing yourself here, you know. You are more interested in group validation than a search for truth. So you look at me and say “he doesn’t have fans,” meaning I am not group-validated, like you are. So I must be wrong. ANd people must come here to support me, as one person cannot be right – only groups can. And we know that you follow groups.

              And we all know that when everyone agrees on stuff, that no one is thinking. Right, Monty? Right?

        • You know, Mark, I would have been happy to have just let you rant and rave like the idiot you are but no, you had to have your last word and once again try to prove I am not a real human being (once again proving your sociopathy). Let’s look at your reply –

          ” I have not sniveled, dribbled, or whined. I have merely held up a mirror, and you do not like what you see.”

          I did not accuse you of sniveling, dribbling or whining. I accused you of exhibiting behaviors that are consistant with serious personality disorders. This type of behavior is consistant with a Hystronic Personality disorder.

          “But I do create angst and anxiety in you, and that is what cognitive dissonance is all about.”

          You go on to revel in the “fact” that you create disorder amongst your perseaved enemies and attempt to once again assert your dominance to them. Classic Narcissistic behavior.

          “You are not liberals, as you are advancing the right wing agenda.”

          With this line, you not only attempt to negate everything everyone here says, you assert your assumed authority to define everyone here by your own rules. This is both Narcissistic and Sociopathic. You assert that you have the “divine” authority to rule and judge and you objectify everyone you are speaking to. Scary.

          “You have said it, Norma has said it, Kralzy has said it .;.. just go away! I’m ignoring you! La la la la la la not listening not listening la la la la la…”

          This is a very telling line. In it you retreat into your Hystronic victim mode. Everyone is out to get me… pity me. Worse, you insert your sociopathic personality at the end – “you are not real therefore I don’t have to listen to you”. This may surprise you, but when the majority of people in a society don’t like you and ask you to leave, there is usually a reason for it. This community has asked you to leave because you are disruptive and offer nothing to the community. You are too damaged to realise that.

          “Kenny, god only knows you Kailey’s are trained in everything, you in engineering, and now psychology? What did you do in the military? ”

          Now we come to the reason I did respond – your personal attack on me. You know damn well what I did the Military and if you don’t, you are showing your delusional behavior again. I operated Nuclear Reactors on submarines. I was actually pretty good at it.

          What is telling is that it is too hard for you to grasp that a 51 year old person might have done more than one thing in his life. Yes, I did operate nuclear reactors. I also went through the police academy, served 19 months as a police officer, went through law school, trained for and recieved a certificate to council adults with ADHD, worked as both armed and unarmed security for Pinkerton, worked as a field robotics tech where I got to travel the world working on manufacturing robots, worked as an engineer at Intel, competed in long range rifle shooting, competed in Martial arts, competed in Archery, made knives and swords for a living… the list goes on. Mark, some people in this world like to experience new things. Along the way they pick up training and skills to aid them doing this. If you were not so damaged, you would understand that.

          I never claimed to be an expert in diagnosis. I only claimed training. I can back that training with the class work and certificates I recieved from it. You simply discount my ability or skill because you have objectified me like you objectify everyone. This is a symptom of your displayed pathology. You continue to display that pathology every time you post.

          I will ignore you from now on if you will rise out of your sick and twisted pathology enough to return me the courtesy. You are welcome to spar all you want with others (but I would prefer you simply grow the hell up and leave like you have been asked to do) but leave me out of it. If you continue to display your sick and twisted diatribes against me, I will continue to point out just how sick and twisted you really are.

          • Thought you were going to ignore me.

          • He has a mirror all right. He looked in it and asked “Who is the fairest of them all”. Now he’s having a tantrum because no one trusts him enough to eat the poisoned apple.

            • Backwoods Monty | March 25, 2012 1:51 PM at 1:51 PM |

              Shorter Buttarski: I am asking you all to look in your mirrors, because I don’t have one anymore. It broke on encountering my reflection!

            • Interesting that I bring reasoned matter to you that only asks that you look at yourself, and you call it a “tantrum.” That can only mean that it creates some psychic distress, and is effective. Why else would you want me to go away? Why do you even care what I think, other than because I know how to reach inside you and bring out your internal contradictions. God knows you’d never face them or self-reflect, but at least I know you are not a robot, and do have cognitive dissonance and internal disorder.

              Good god Kaily – you’re partially human!

              • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 26, 2012 7:45 AM at 7:45 AM |

                Shorter translation of Markspeak: Without me Rob, You wouldn’t be as smart!

                Bwah Ha Ha Ha Ha What an egotistical pile of wasted brain cells you are Mark!

              • No, Mark. All you bring to the table is circular reasoning I’ve already exposed a hundred times, and the demand that others take your contradictions seriously. Let me blunt: No. I will not take your arguments seriously. No. I will not accept your view of who I am, or anyone else for that matter. No. I will not give you the cookies you scream for. And no. I do not care what you think.

                I have cared for what you feel. Familial losses are painful, and my sympathy was genuine. Similarly, I care for those who will be most hurt by your efforts leading to wingnut control. But your thinking, your ‘reason’? No. It’s twisted and delusional. I don’t care about that at all.

                • This is a political debate. Nothing more. If I have a contradiction, I expect it to be spelled out clearly. I surely do, as I am human. Don’t simply sit there and say such a thing exists without specifics. And don’t claim the grandiose high ground, that you’ve done everything and I’ve simply to seen it. Not so. You’re way too much smoke and no bullet that I can discern.

                  In other words, be something rather than telling me you are something. I’ve got a brain. If you have gravitas, I’ll pick up on it.

                  So far, I’ve seen lots of smoke but no fire

                  • No Mark, it hasn’t been a political debate at all, but rather a personal one. You made it that by claiming mental superiority when you obviously have none. That is why folk around here want you to go the fuck away, because you don’t understand the first thing about what you’re doing.

                    If I have a contradiction, I expect it to be spelled out clearly

                    Get used to disappointment, then, because you don’t understand clarity at all. Two hypothesis: 1) The Presidential election was Gore’s to win or lose. Gore is responsible for the outcome. 2) The election was stolen. Gore is not responsible for the outcome. Both simply cannot be true, and no amount of ‘nuance’ makes it so. If A then ~B. If B then ~A. Yet you continue to maintain that both B and A are true. That is the textbook definition of a contradiction, Mark. Are you sincerely stupid enough to think that’s unclear? Only to you, cupcake. You will continue to hide behind whatever misdirection concerning the specifics you deem fit. But you cannot hide from the fact that you contradict yourself. And that’s the point. It’s not about Democrats and Republicans, or the election of 2000. That is one of your many contradictions. The very point is that you claim authority over reason when you are quite obviously unreasonable. That’s why people want you to go away.

                    Is that clear enough for you? No one cares what you “see”. We already know that you are not to be trusted.

                    (To everyone else: I’m only continuing this slaughter because it amuses me when Internet blog threads reach 200 comments. I hope you will indulge and forgive me.)

        • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 25, 2012 1:15 PM at 1:15 PM |

          I still say it, Mark your not wanted here, by other commentors.

          I notice you like Monty’s writing regarding you so much, you have coped it for your insane conversation. Just goes to prove you cant possibly think for your self. Just a plagiarizer and tool nothing more!

          I think Cowgirl should write an article just about you…. just so we can point to it as a link regarding your stupidity and move on.

          This way each and every time, we need to prove a point about you, we just point to the link, and save ourselves the time to write anymore about you! We could save countless left minded people from your garbage that way!

          • Backwoods Monty | March 25, 2012 1:42 PM at 1:42 PM |

            Shorter Buttarski(Tokarski): I am an Idiot, I don’t know enough to leave, yep I am an idiot!

            Disclamer: I am not talking to Mark the dimwit anymore, but that doesn’t mean I cant talk about the Gobshite that he has become!

            • Monty, please. If this is some refrain you’re hoping catches on, stop. You said you were hoping to haunt me, and instead you’ve devolved, if that is possible, into Democrat-speak Kralzyness. You’re as loony as him. I thought you were Kaily once, now I think you’re Kralzy. Keep going, I’ll think you’re the woman behind the curtain herself, the “Cowgirl.”

              • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 26, 2012 7:53 AM at 7:53 AM |


                First Monty was a Kailey brother…… now he is the cowgirl? Your Paranoia is showing.

                  • Backwoods Monty | March 26, 2012 3:43 PM at 3:43 PM |

                    Translation to Buttarski: Learn to read my dribble correctly, I cant be sane if no one understands what, I, as an insane person just wrote!

                  • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 26, 2012 3:48 PM at 3:48 PM |

                    Bush = Gore…..

                    BWHAHAHAHAHAA! Get outta here, loser.

                    Dems = Pubbies……

                    Go away, hoser.

                    Your kind has done enough damage. It’s YOU, cupcake, who’s looking for someone, ANYone to validate YOUR sorry ass!

                    Idiot. We ALL read the same things you do, dipshit. You’re nuthin’ special. Hell, you’re a jonny come lately to the progressive movement ANYway! You’re like the dude who finally gets laid and thinks he discovered sex! You’re pathetic, loser.

                  • Remember boys that smart people tend to have a sense of self. I have a good understanding of politics that I have developed over many years, and have also developed a good sense of party membership in the US, and all that goes with it. Self-awareness is pretty much limited to smart people, I’m afraid. I am not the only smart person here by a long shot, but you boys are not smart, and that is sadly apparent.

                    Since you are not smart people, you don’t have the ability or self-awareness to know that you are not smart. You are stupid, do not know it, will never know it.

                    If one looks objectively at the two comments you left above, it is easy to see that they were written by stupid people. They lack any meaningful content and contain needless pejoratives. In total, they come off as ignorant and crude.

                    But you don’t see that. Right?

                    • Backwoods Monty | March 26, 2012 4:47 PM at 4:47 PM |

                      Shorter Buttarski: I am just talking about me again. Ain’t I wonderful? Of course everyone else here, is an Idiot, so they wouldn’t know……

                    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 26, 2012 4:47 PM at 4:47 PM |

                      BWHAHAHAHAHAA! Say sumthin’ smart, Buttinski. Here, I’ll do it for you. Bush = Gore! Nuff said. Now, you’re just masturbating in public! I think Cowgirl should give you a time out. I have NEVER suggested that anyone be banned, but you need it. Nay, DEMAND it! If there were no other site, that would be different. But have your OWN, which no one reads. Guess it’s just too smart!

                    • Backwoods Monty | March 27, 2012 9:10 PM at 9:10 PM |

                      Ha ha ha, is Buttarski still blaming me on you Rob???? What a jerk!

                      Look, Mark,

                      I am not Rob, Cowgirl, or Moorcat! I do have a relative who does comment on this blog. And we share the same work, and router. That person’s Anonymity will remain.

                      When you got really crappy with some of the commentors here, I had to drop in…. its in my nature to atop the offending actions of others like you! I am no Boy Scout, But I believe everyone has a chance to argue on the merits….. and no…… you were’t arguing merits, you were truly distorting facts and lying. Big difference!

                    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 27, 2012 9:17 PM at 9:17 PM |

                      The a**hole had NO right to attack Norma. I luv her writing, and Buttinski went after her in a big way. I too would have probably left the dink alone if he hadn’t gone after the others. He’s very easy to ignore.

                      But I WANT to hear Norma’s expertise. Hell, I learn something every time she posts. She does in no way deserve abuse from the worm.

                    • Backwoods Monty | March 27, 2012 9:33 PM at 9:33 PM |

                      Yeah! I didn’t like him going after the women on this blog… one of the biggest reasons I joined! Sick of sickos like him.

                      If I didn’t know better I would have thought Norma’s republican opposition, paid Buttarski to go after her. But I also remember she went after Will Deschamps, and Derik Skees in a big way on twitter, this last Legislative session. she is pretty damn good in 140 characters or less in taking down Tea Party as*holes.

                      I am sure she has ruffled some feathers on the GOP line… and good for her!

                      I like the heck out of Lynn also! Smart and to the point!

                    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 27, 2012 9:39 PM at 9:39 PM |

                      How true. I forgot to mention Lynn too. Very effective contributor/writer and great source for articles. She e-mails most of the reading I do. All I have to do is open my e-mail for all the important news of the day. It’s great!

                    • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 27, 2012 10:02 PM at 10:02 PM |

                      Thanks Larry, I am still here! Just been busy trying to get this new website for my campaign to work as planned. All and all, Mark wasn’t really bothering me, but Rob was right! I should save my debates with people in Montana about Important issues in this state, not argue with some dimwit from Colorado.

                      Personally there is a lot of good Montanans out there in cyber-land trying to make valid points about what goes on in our state, from both sides of the Isle…….. then there is the wannabes like Mark, who see things through the lens of a funhouse mirror. You can’t argue intelligently with someone, who has that screwed an agenda in life.

                      I would rather leave it to Monty and you, Rob and Moorcat. You got Mark Handled!

                  • Mark, you can’t even see the innate contradiction in your claim, can you? You think you can define someone else’s “self-awareness”. To you, one is not “self aware” unless they agree with you about what that other knows about themselves, about their very identity. You want control about how others view themselves completely. Sorry, kitten, but that’s not “self-awareness”. It’s capitulation to your domination, your authority. You don’t have that power, and you’re too stupid to realize that you can never take it.

                    Until you understand that, you have no understanding of politics, or the people around you.

                    • I disagree in total, though you are obviously correct that if I am stupid, I am incapable of knowing it. But I believe that I have a cogent set of principles that I use to define my positions on political issues, the good sense not to form opinions about things I have no knowledge about, and in addition to that, a good understanding of the propaganda game, or methods of thought control used in democratic societies. I did not come about these understandings on my own, but do haev enough sense to know when the apparent truth of something needs to be heeded.

                      I would by choice have no interactions at all with the two I addressed in those comments – they come to me with childish insults. So I put them in their place in a way that to me has some innate beauty about it, since they do not ahve a clue what I am talking about.

                      I think I have an understanding of politics that is superior to your own in that I understand the use of advertising better than you. I also understand that money is the driving force behind all legislation, and that voting does not influence it (generally). In American campaigns there is no connection between what is being advertised about candidates and their behavior in office. Most of campaigning is based on polling results where they have identified voting blocs that need to be reached to have a victory on election day. Once they achieve that victory, they ignore you in total and work to satisfy their financial backers.

                      If you do not understand that much of politics, you do not understand much of politics.

                    • Backwoods Monty | March 26, 2012 5:08 PM at 5:08 PM |

                      Buttarski Translation: More dribble and Psychobabble. Babble babble Babble, I am still right! People don’t have their heads in the clouds, or up in the inner workings between their cheeks like me. I know whats happening and No one else does! Babble babble Babble Babble babble Babble!

                    • Of course you disagree. You are attempting to define people in terms of their “self-awareness”, that of which you have no insight at all. You are defending your ‘knowledge’ in the obvious light of your ignorance. Yes, of course you disagree.

                      Here’s a hint, Tokarski, so that you might find a touch of “self-awareness”. You never, ever, write about morality. You skirt it, talking of principles that show a circular reasoning well debunked by myself and others. But you never hold to a moral ideal at all. When Dave Budge attempted to discuss his idea of Libertarian morality with you, you dismissed him completely, because ‘his ideas have never been tried’. You couldn’t even understand the level he was discussing on. But you still had to hold that you were righteous, without defending a moral principle, save that ‘Tokarski uber alles’.

                      You’ve put no one in their place, Mark. People come at you with an ideal sprung from a moral center. You have no interest in understanding that, or even acknowledging it. (Trust me, you have no idea how much I’m laughing at you just writing that truth.) People believe things, maybe even the wrong things. You haven’t a clue about any of that. You remain truly stupid about where other people come from at all. That’s the way you like it. To you, there is your ‘truth’, no moral code required, and those who think otherwise, the immoral. In short, whatever view of morality you have applies to everyone else, but never to you.

                      My brother’s assessment was spot on and perfectly clear. You suffer from a very deep and abiding Narcissistic Personality disorder. That’s why you thought you would get away with the ‘Monty’ charade, and why it’s so desperately important for you to convince others that it was me that impugned your virtue that you never EVER discuss. You have no morality, save that you be seen as correct. Those who attack you here must be shown as “stupid” because they focus like a laser on the reality of the fact. You are not a moral person. Not even at all.

                      In the future, Mark, don’t talk to me about “politics”. You aren’t qualified. Talk to me about morality. You aren’t qualified there, either, but at least you might learn a thing or two, and so might the rest of us.

                    • Uh, er, Rod, that’s pretty transparent, written for others, the Monty stuff, as you well know I saved your admission to me that you indeed pulled the Monty trap. So right away I know I’m dealing with an actor here. Further, simple logic, which you four-pointed in, says that no one other than you could be Monty, since it was not me, and no other had access to both your website and my IP address. Duh. You and I both know that. OK? If you want to pose for others, fine. But leave me out of that little charade.

                      Regarding Democrats and pointless behavior, I spelled it out logically and irrefutably for you: If there is no limit to evil, being the “lesser evil” choice is of no value. By definition lesser evil, when there are no upper limits on evil, is also unlimited evil.

                      I listed issues on which we could have principled debate, and have often done so for one simple reason: If you support us on those issues, then we need to support you. If you oppose us on those issues, even from a principled stand, we nonetheless need to oppose you.

                      But the worst possible outcome is for Democrats to say that they support those who have principled stands on those issues, but then fail to do anything to advance those issues. That is moral cowardice. And that is what Democrats do. That’s why I say on occasion that Democrats are “the” problem. I can oppose Republicans on principle, as they clearly state their beliefs, though often they are not very smart people. With Democrats it’s more difficult, as you have to be smoked out and debrided before you will even admit that you are failing to fight for us.

                      I don’t recall the discussion with Budge. I know that he claims high-ground morality for himself, and that he may even believe that he is advancing it via his libertarian philosophy. But it is a tactical mistake to have that conversation with him (just as I avoid you when you try to buttonhole me with “Answer the question!”), as it completely avoids the important discussion about the practical outcome of libertarianism, which is that no rules are put in place to protect weak people from powerful people, aka feudalism. That is an immoral outcome, so why have a high-minded discussion with him on that topic? Got it? What is the point of discussing morality on the head of a pin? Down on the ground is where it matters. Far from blowing by me, I simply go around all of his jibber-jabber and go straight to outcomes. Otherwise, its a hall of mirrors. He’s a piece do work, by the way. I love the way you polish each others’ knobs. It’s a bit of a narcissistic show, creepy.

                      Your lecture on morality, given my suspicion that you are a sociopath, is rather humerous. We had this discussion just two nights ago, four of us around a fireplace in the back yard, trying to discern the meaning of evil. It doesn’t exist outside of human society. There is no “evil” in nature, nor in the cosmos. If an asteroids hits the planet and destroys our civilization tomorrow, no “evil” results. Katrina was not an evil force. But aggressive war is evil,while defensive war is moral. The US under Bush, and now Obama, is an evil enterprise engaged in aggressive war. Bush and Obama are war criminals, in my view, or as Arendt referred to it, “desk murderers.”

                      But evil is a human concept, as is morality. We define it for ourselves, and we abide by laws we enact, codes we enforce on ourselves even though there is no legal fallout from, say, adultery or drunkenness. Most people have moral precepts and suffer guilt and remorse when they behave in a way that violates those concepts. I do. That is not true of sociopaths.

                      On the higher level, in government, normal moral principles are set aside, though this is never admitted in public. There is murder, theft, torture, destruction of property on a grand scale, all justified as a means to moral ends, though privately they do not talk in that manner. That was the whole point of The Prince, to spell it out. The book was not meant for us down below. That great game goes on at a very high level, and is highly immoral from our standpoint down here below, that is, those of us who hold high moral principles in the face of power. I hold such principles, you do not.

                      Politics: You don’t get it. You simply don’t get it. You are sucked into their playing field and are so egotistical that you believe that you are self-determined in your voting and other pointless activities.

                      I’ll have to test myself on narcissism. Of three of us, you, Kenny and me, one freely admits failings, two do not. Narcissism is a facet of a sociopath. I suspect there is projection going on from you two creepy characters, but I would like to take a test, if I can find one on the Intertube.

                    • Mark,

                      I said I was going to ignore you as long as you left me out of your rants. That was apparently too hard for you to do.

                      You prattle on about sociopathy without the least understanding of the term. In almost every post, you objectify the target of your post. This is a classic sign of sociopathy and you would know that if you had even the glimmer of a clue.

                      Further, Narcissism is NOT a facet of Sociopathy. It is an entirely different personality disorder (though I will grant you that the two are often found together). It has a different set of indicators and a different pathology. Again, you would know that if you had even a small clue what the hell you were talking about.

                      I have freely admitted many of my faults so I can only assume that you are refering to yourself and Rob in your little meme. Since I know that Rob has also admitted to fault and error, I can only conclude that you are once again delusional. Not a surprise given your continued insistance to parade your delusions to the world on the pages of this blog.

                      Rob “gets” politics a hell of a lot better than you do and it is obvious by the many arguments he has had specifically with you. It is incredably sad that you don’t realise this but it is in keeping with both your Narcissism and your Sociopathy.

                      It would serve you better to get help for your issues rather than verbally confirming them to all here who have to read your inane prattle on a constant basis.

                    • you well know I saved your admission to me that you indeed pulled the Monty trap.

                      Mark Torkarski, Patron Saint of ill-understood sarcasm. Please Mark, I’m asking politely. Post your proof of my nefarious nature here. I’m inviting you to do so. If it would swab your pained ego enough, I’ll even beg. Come on, Tokarski. Expose me to those you lord over …

                      Hehehe …

                    • Tokarski:

                      I listed issues on which we could have principled debate,

                      Tokarski’s list:

                      beleive in public health care, an end to our multiple wars, closing of Guantanamo, restoration of habeas corpus, closing of secret prisons, support for labor unions, use of the UN to settle international disputes, protection of the environment, reduction in military spending, protection of Medicare and Social Security, raising of taxes on wealth … saying so is a principle stand!

                      Jon Tester has supported every single one of those ‘principled stands’. But Mark Tokarski, having not followed Tester’s campaign (or apparently his voting record) tantrums that Tester is a giant sell-out BECAUSE HE’S A DEMOCRAT! And Mark thinks he’s “principled”. How self-aware he appears to be …

                    • To further counter point your damages personality –

                      You post a laundry list of issues that you will discuss on someone else’s blog – obviously with the intent to have people discuss those issues. The fact that this blog is owned, operated and maintained by someone else is ignored by you. The fact that your laundry list has nothing to do with the original post by the blog owner means nothing to you. All that matters to you is that A) you demand a platform to discuss your issues, and B) any other discussion is beneath you.

                      Narcissism – “I am the center of the Universe and if the discussion does not focus on me, it is void of content”. This is classic Narcissism. Anyone reading a textbook on the disorder would immediately identify you as a Narcissist.

                      Sociopathy – “I do not care that this is someone else’s blog, that they pay and maintain it. We should only be discussing my issues becuase anything less is beneath me and will be disregarded”. Again, Classic Sociopathy.

                      As far as the “Monty” thing, you are at a serious disadvantage. Too many people here were around when it occured and too many of them know enough about the specifics (and about computers and the internet) to believe your re-write of history. The facts of the matter are beyond dispute. Someone was posting from your computer calling themselves Monty. That leaves only two possibilities – either you are Monty, or someone else was using your computer with your MAC address to post as Monty. Given Occum’s Razer, the most likely answer is that you were posting as Monty.

                      This leads to the further conclusion that either A) you are so delusional that you can’t accept that you were caught or B) you recognise that you were caught and you are attempting to lie to us that the situation was different. Both possibilities point to a serious deficency of character and if it is delusion that is the correct answer, it also points to a dangerous personality disorder.

                      Attempting to re-write history is a dangerous game at the best of times. To do it on the internet where conversations could theoretically be stored indefinitely is just stupid, Mark. I am surprised you do not know that.

                    • He knows it. Tokarski is just stupid enough to think that the rest of us won’t notice. When proven wrong, he contends that it must be all our fault.

                      He he. Hehehehe. HAHAHA!

                    • Backwoods Monty | March 27, 2012 9:20 PM at 9:20 PM |

                      Too bad Huh?

  21. Montana ranks Faux Snooze as most used online news source along with Texas and Louisiana. Who’da thunk it?


    • Backwoods Monty | March 24, 2012 5:16 PM at 5:16 PM |

      That Kinda sucks, but I am guessing that has a lot to do with radio stations, our little Po-dunk station here, and one in Butte does play Fox Radio…. not Limbaugh though, thank God! Since, I do a lot of runs around town, I find CNN Plays on more TV screens, and If I am able to change a FOX station, at any eating place or Bar… even hospital I change it. I consider it a service of my Community …. to keep them away from harmful, Lying , Bullshit like Fox!

      Actually, I find our Montana PBS radio stations better then the the commercial ones!

  22. er, Mississippi.

  23. Women in Indian Country have little access to effective contraception. Assaults continue to be pervasive: Colorlines.

  24. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 26, 2012 4:49 AM at 4:49 AM |
  25. Cebull/Limbaugh/GOP misogyny driving women to Democratic candidates: Rich.

    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 26, 2012 10:16 PM at 10:16 PM |

      UH oh! Methinks that the ol’ consverative cow flopper done STEPPED in his OWN flop THIS time! Couldn’t happen to a more deserving fellow. Can’t wait for his next Droppings of a Conservative Cow Flopper column!

      • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 27, 2012 12:07 AM at 12:07 AM |

        Oh kerns can kiss his seat goodbye!

        • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 27, 2012 5:16 AM at 5:16 AM |

          I wouldn’t bet on it, Norma. The Teatards and Fundis LUV a moron like Cretin. I’m thinkin’ that this will enhance his stature with most of his voters. Sad but true.

  26. Cole Olsen is running against Krayton Kerns for this Laurel state legislative seat. Seems like a great guy. His campaign kick-off is this week, it looks like. http://www.facebook.com/events/365588763475240/

    • Norma Duffy AKA ILIKEWOODS | March 27, 2012 10:10 PM at 10:10 PM |

      Great find!

      • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 27, 2012 10:15 PM at 10:15 PM |

        That’s pretty much what we do here. He left off my particular favorite tactic though. Just insult them! Hey, they’re morons and racists anyway. And really, if they hear it enough, maybe they’ll finally change and get educated. They aren’t used to being told the TRVTH. I’m old and of the Ambrose Bierce mold. Everyone should hear the TRVTH at least once before they die. I prefer to dish it out in spades!

      • Thought you’d like that

  27. Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 28, 2012 5:55 PM at 5:55 PM |

    “Two hundred comments on one thread and 90% about this? Conflict I like but this stuffs a waste of time.”

    Jack, that is why I would like to see Buttinski banned. He purposely tries to destroy the site. He adds nothing. He simply attacks other posters. It does get very tedious. If the moron actually SAID something, I would not object at all. But the site is too valuable to allow him to sabotage it. The give and take between righties and lefties is quite good, but Buttinski chooses not to participate in that. He’s one not jonny, and that gets real old real quick. That and the fact that he’s really not very bright or learned or well-traveled. That’s why he’s so easy to mock. He’s the kid who can’t get his way so he’s gonna destroy the entire game!

    Sad, so sad.

    • Larry Kralj, Environmental Rangers | March 28, 2012 6:01 PM at 6:01 PM |

      Ooops. Should read “one note jonny”. Bush = Gore, and Dems = Pubbies. Hence, we’re all bad. You see, SOMEtimes an ephiphany that occurs when one has one’s head is up one’s ass should be a wee bit distrusted! But not to Buttinski!

  28. I think a more accurate quote would be that (John) Rirch Control is Death Nail in Coffin of our Republic. Apparently there are some out there that would have you believe that they have never worn a rubber.

  29. Before Marky-Mark points out that I am an idiot, I see that I typed in “Rirch” instead of “Birch”. BTW: I am an idiot.

  30. Domestic terrorism likely in Wisconsin PP blast: source.

Comments are closed.