Anti-Choice Extremism

Documented: Radical anti-choice comments from Conservative blogger dmarks (AKA Dennis Marks).

JULY 15, 2011 AT 5:43 AM

WD: "Republicans signing pledges is OK with me (except for yours) ... anti women's rights". ["Yours" is a reference to Willis Hart's pledge which is not to sign any more pledges". "Anti women's rights" is a reference to the GOP's opposition to a woman's right to choose].

Hm? How many decades since there has even been an anti-womens rights pledge? If there ever was one? [in response wd said "It hasn't been decades since the Republicans tried to restrict a woman's right to choose. That's going on RIGHT NOW"].

And we need to reduce spending, a lot. There's so much waste. We can start with the hundreds of billions which are going in "entitlements" to the wealthy and well off. Waste that WD says we need for propaganda purposes, not because those people need the government handouts.

JULY 16, 2011 AT 10:45 AM

WD said: "and his insistence that the man [former preznit gwb] who turned a surplus into more than 6 trillion in debt ISN'T responsible for the "debt problem"?"

The Clinton surplus is as real as unicorns. There were only defificts on his watch. Bush turned a deficit into a higher deficit. Obama did the same thing. Also, you are confusing debt and deficit. Clinton handed Bush a massive debt that he added $1.6 trillion to, himself. Bush then added $6 trillion to it.

[Dervish Sanders said] "Or perhaps he's just a moron. Because everyone who isn't a moron knows bush is responsible for the lion's share of the national debt".

Two lions. The amount of debt Bush is reaponsible for is about the same as the amount Obama is responsible for. Only Obama's done this in 3 years and it took Bush 8.

[Dervish Sanders said] "It hasn't been decades since the Republicans tried to restrict a woman's right to choose".

You mean "restrict abortion". That is what the issue is about. Abortion, yes or no. Not "choice". And actually this is a children's rights matter, not a women's rights matter. Most people oppose abortion, and more women than men oppose it.

JULY 16, 2011 AT 10:48 AM

WD: "Also, men should have no say regarding what any woman does with her body. It's a misogynistic position".

which has nothing to do with abortion, which is an issue over what is done with a child. It is as much about restriction what a woman does with her body as rape is about what a man does with his body: such weasel-words are attempts to mask the fact that the issue is abortion: yes or no?". Also, more victims of abortion are young females than they are young males... more so with sex selection becoming common. It's a misogynistic practice. [Interpretation: Abortion should be illegal just as rape is illegal].

AUGUST 26, 2011 AT 10:11 AM

It's is not control of a woman's body that is controversial. It is violence against the body of another person, the child. There was zero misogynistic content in Voltron's comment. [Re Voltron saying "What about equal rights? She didn't get pregnant by herself. What if the father WANTS the baby? What if he doesn't and she does? Why does he have to pay for the next 18 years?"].

AUGUST 26, 2011 AT 10:15 AM

[Dervish Sanders said] "...feel pretty strongly that it is their God given "right" to force a woman to carry a [child] they don't want to term".

The only force involved, WD, is the violence involved in killing the child. Without such acts of violence, the child (who is already a living human being) will continue to survive.

JUNE 23, 2012 AT 7:28 AM

There we have it. WD thinks that the people can't be trusted to decide whether or not to buy a Hyundai automobile, and this decision must be left to the rulers....but this is not true at all if someone "Chooses" to kill another human being. Only these decision are private matters. There we have it.

OCTOBER 20, 2012 AT 7:16 AM

Never heard of this guy [Joe Walsh] before. The deadbeat dad part sounds bad, but the abortion part much less so for me, since I think abortion is a bad idea. And I have an opposite view of RN as to which side in the abortion controversy tilts more toward fascism. But thanks, Will, now I have the songs "Space Age Whiz Kids" and "Life's Been Good" in my head.

JULY 29, 2015 AT 7:56 PM

Those at the top of PP rake in millions, and the outfit receives billions in corporate welfare from the government.

JULY 31, 2015 AT 12:31 PM

I read that this is all OK because the money that PP is making chopping up kids and selling the pieces is not enough for them to make a profit. A real weak defense. If we use this logic, we can excuse any other corporation for any sort of malfeasance if it is not making a profit (i.e. bungling business practices, poor management) at that time.

[Willis Hart said] "PP get their cash the old fashioned way; by earning it and through private donations".

Too bad the Hyde Amendment, put in place to stop the government from being involved in the business of harming the young, isn't interpreted to such direct subsidy to the abortion industry. But the funding could end up in danger. Remember ACORN, the election fraud scam, that got cut off finally.

JULY 31, 2015 AT 12:33 PM

Good point. The abortion industry thrives on people not knowing what they do. PP is very extreme, and greedy: they demand tax money to to be used to harm unborn children all the way up to newborns. It's run by sickos who get their jollies killing as many of the unborn as possible. Do they need to engage in their deadly sadism on the public dime?

Posts that link here [TADM #48] Vile Lie Concerning Russ Feingold From Dennis Marks, Then Cognitive Dissonance When He Is Confronted With the Truth, 7/18/2014. [TADM #79] Evidence Shows Dennis Marks Might Be The Kind Of Person Who'd Assassinate A Doctor Who Performs Abortions, 8/25/2015.

DSD #17

Only Black Lives Matter Ugly Racist Protesters Don't Say

Documented: Ridiculous accusations of racism against the Black Lives Matter movement from the racist blogger dmarks (AKA Dennis Marks).

According to Wikipedia "Black Lives Matter (BLM) is an international activist movement, originating in the African-American community, that campaigns against violence toward black people. BLM regularly organizes protests around the deaths of black people in killings by law enforcement officers, and broader issues of racial profiling, police brutality, and racial inequality in the United States criminal justice system".

Thu Aug 14, 2014 AT 09:53:00 PM EDT

Interesting and balanced between your two views. [Re Rational Nation USA commentary in which the blog proprietor says "As in most situations the natural tendency is to protect, or cover for you own". This being RN's conclusion as to why the executive director of the Fraternal Order of Police, Jim Pasco, criticized President Obama for "excessive force" remarks about law enforcement in Ferguson MO. Black Lives Matter "became nationally recognized for its street demonstrations following the 2014 deaths of two African Americans: Michael Brown, resulting in protests and unrest in Ferguson"].

Unfortunately, the racism presented by Rev. Sharpton and Jackson as they inject themselves into this (as usual) is hardly rational and balanced, and will take us surely far away from justice, better policy, and truth in this. Nor is Limbaugh helpful, of course. Obama, well, treats it like a possible distraction when he is trying to make a perfect putt.

DECEMBER 6, 2014 AT 4:20 AM

Also, the racist protesters are nuts when they lump the Brown incident together with Garner. The cop was the victim in the Brown case, as he fired in self defense as Brown was violently assaulting him [False]. There's nothing like this at all in the Garner case. I use the term "racist protesters" quite accurately. They complain about blacks killed by cops, but are totally silent about whites killed by cops. And they are totally silent about blacks killed by black criminals (a number that is huge compared to the incidents they complain about.

Also, regarding Garner, I hope there is a focus on the police unions. These truly awful organizations support police brutality, and the idea of rewarding bad cops with lengthy paid vacations. And they have come out on the wrong side of this one. The police unions have no legitimate function that serves the public interest at all.

December 13, 2014 at 11:35 PM

This shows that a good part of this protest movement is strongly and very explicitly racist. AOW is correct. These protesters have totally ignored any similar incidents where white, or others who are non-black, have died. All lives do matter. However, members of the KKK, and individuals of identical mindset who are not white and in the KKK, disagree.

Tue Dec 23, 2014 AT 07:44:00 PM EST

[Ema Nymton said] "Police are not under attack, institutionalized racism is".

Yet there is no evidence of racism by the officers involved in either of the two incidents the protesters cite. One Ema point disproven. The racist protest movement even is rife with slogans against the police in general. It is very "anti cop". Another point disproven.

Finally, this racist protest movement doesn't oppose "double standard". It's message is all double standards: these nasty bigots are silent when blacks kill whites. To them, the statement " black lives matter" is a celebration of supremacy... about the only lives that matter to them.

DECEMBER 26, 2014 AT 4:15 AM

Will: why bring race into it at all? It's a meme injected into these discussions by the very racist protesters. The ones that argue that only black lives matter. This meme has been at play despite the fact that race wasn't a factor at all in any of these incidents.

Wed Dec 24, 2014 AT 07:48:00 AM EST

The chickens are coming home to roost from the protesters' ugly racist slogan that only "black lives matter". Unfortunately, RN, this might well lead to police isolated from the community and much more militarized. And, Garner's crime was to fail to pay the money being stolen from him by New York's wealthy elite in a legal mugging. So the muggers made him pay. We need to seriously reconsider the intentional repurposing of the police from "protect and serve" to being like Mafia goodfellas collecting protection money.

MAY 23, 2015 AT 2:50 AM

On top of that, Sharpton is part of the explicitly racist "Black Lives Matter" movement. Since the lives of others do not matter. Over the past decade, twice as many whites as blacks have been killed by police. Supremacists like Sharpton and Jackson are pretty much silent about that. Of course, the best solution is for activists like them to let go of their bigotry and insist, like any decent human being, that "all lives matter", whether black or white.

[Note: While it is true that more White are killed than Blacks, the US is 63% white and 12% black. Statistically speaking a Black person is 300% more likely to be killed by a police officer than a White person. Source].

MAY 23, 2015 AT 12:02 PM

Not only that, but they [The NAACP] are by the defintion of the term racist since they do specifically demand special rewards for those of favored skin color and punishment for those their skin color tells them to dislike. They oppose equality, and always rose up to oppose efforts at equal rights in university admissions. In recent months, the NAACP has embraceed the supremacist slogan that only lives of those of one race matter.

And, on top of that, when they strongly associated with Farrakhan, they were antisemitic as well. And also in 2000, a major leader of the NAACP chimed in to bash Vice Presidential candidate Joe Lieberman not for his views, but simply because Joe was Jewish. [This accusation is false].

Posts that link here [TADM #80] On The Dennis Marks Racist Claim That The Black Lives Matters Movement's Slogan Is "Only Black Lives Matter", 8/30/2015.

DSD #16

Bigoted Bigot's Misogynist Misogyny

Documented: Bigoted and misogynist comments from dmarks (AKA Dennis Marks).

JUNE 22, 2012 AT 5:41 PM

WD said: "which one can deduce he has due to his implicit approval of the Republican war on women)".

Well, WD earlier was moaning about how campaigns can influence voters. And here clearly he himself has been fooled by the Democrats' mention of a Republican "war on women", which in reality only exists in the imagination of Democrats. I guess he knows of what he speaks. The rest of us tend to view campaign material with a more critical mind.

MAY 28, 2015 AT 1:43 PM

It's blatant sexism by the left: the demand that female employees deserve even more unearned handouts from employees than makes do.

Add this to so called "living wage" laws and minimum wage laws, and you get a vision of employers as welfare agencies, where the pay had less and less connection to the value of the work done.

MAY 29, 2015 AT 4:28 AM

Will, Sounds like a bunch more "oinkers" who want a lot of free stuff without having to earn it. [Re Willis Hart dismissing the real pay disparity by saying "If women were willing to work for 23% less than men, what possible incentive would any company have for EVER hiring a man? It makes no sense"].

MAY 31, 2015 AT 8:55 AM

"Male privilege" is itself a sexist concept made up by bigots. It's sort of similar to the concept of "white privilege", which was spun from the imagination of anti-black racists in order to cover for their hatred of people of the wrong skin color. "White privilege" has as much place in enlightened thought as the very similar idea that all blacks are criminals.

JUNE 27, 2015 AT 2:37 AM

It's a "patriarchy"!!! That's what pro-female sexist bigots (the word is "feminist") keep claiming... Yeah right....

Sat Sep 05, 2015 AT 07:22:00 AM EDT

As for political correctness, it is much more often what racists and bigots promote, with theories of white privilege, patriarchy, and "micro aggressions".

As for slave wages, it is also insulting to smear immigrants as slaves. I checked the states with the most immigrants vs wages in these states. There is actually a trend toward states with more immigrants having higher wages than those with fewer immigrants. The anti-immigration, nativism view is just not supported by demographics, even if it feels good to those who fear "the other".

This will be my last comment in this item, in keeping with the spirit of the blog host's rules and with the host's many many requests. I've made my points in opposition to immigrant bashing. I will of course consider commenting in new items about the subject, in terms of that new subject and not to please anyone by continuing a grudge match comments in several posts. This is, after all, "Rational Nation", not the personal axe - grinding whetstone of grudgy visitors.

SEPTEMBER 4, 2015 AT 8:43 PM

It really is bad news as her [Hillary Clinton] crimes pile up, and her obstruction of justice gets more and more arrogant (as if her sexist campaign wasn't arrogant enough). Even the left wing media isn't giving her a free pass anymore, and her dwindling supporters circle the wagons with their fingers in their ears. Just think Will, 13 months of more criminal activity, obstruction of justice, and pantsuits. Or hopefully a lot less if there is any justice.

Posts that link here [TADM #81] Dennis Marks Misogynist Racist Immigrant-Bashing Doublespeak, 9/7/2015.

DSD #15

Elizabeth Warren Is A Lying Asshole, A Fake & A Contemptible Wannabe Who Boosted Her Career With A Fraudulent Claim Of Being A Native American & Who Supports The Evil Occupy Wall Street Movement

Documented: Comments by dmarks (AKA Dennis Marks) in which he slanders Senator Elizabeth Warren. Including comments about how EW is lying, a fraud and a racist in regards to her claims of having Native American heritage (proven accurate via a DNA test as of 10/15/2018. WYM-85).

6/1/2012 at 9:28am. Contra O'Reilly.

WD said: "Wealthy idolization rhetoric". ["Wealthy idolization rhetoric" was the Dervish Sanders response to dmarks writing "Things go better with Koch"].

No, not at all. I am looking at the ideas, not the wealth.

Rusty: Yes, it turns out that Elizabeth Warren boosted her career on a fraudulent claim of being a Native American. I have been following this for a long time on blogs that discuss Native American issues. She also plagiarized a book. I've read a about her fraud and deceit from Natives. It's a real issue, and has nothing to do with Brown at all.

Rusty also said: "..I mean there are'nt many who willingly flush money down the toilet like the SEIU does."

The sad thing is that most of this money is stolen from workers. This is why the SEIU is in PANIC MODE at the idea that workers can choose whether or not to give money to it.

Finally, when asked about [Scott] Walker buying the election, WD said "Yes, I do have evidence of it.". Yet he failed to give any. Please try again. Give evidence of buying the election, instead of people speaking out and saying things you don't like.

6/1/2012 AT 4:39pm. Contra O'Reilly.

WD said; "It's in the interest of middle and lower class people to vote Democratic".

Actually, it is in the interest of roughly half of them to vote Republican. It is not that they don't "realize" they should vote for the Democrat Party. It is that they are voting in their own interest, and for you to say otherwise is to speak out of complete ignorance. They know their own lives, and you do not. I trust the people. You clearly don't.

[Dervish Sanders said] "Elizabeth Warren is a truth teller, which is why the plutocrats hate and fear her so".

She is finally admitting her lies. She's a fraud.

6/2/2012 at 8:02am. Contra O'Reilly.

WD: "Baloney".

Actually, I am looking at the ideas of the Koch brothers, not the wealth. You have no evidence to the contrary, and are just reacting out of emotion instead of logic.

WD: "Also, the Koch ideas are terrible".

That's your opinion, but it is hardly an intellectual argument.

WD said "as they benefit the wealthy and hurt the poor and middle class".

That is not an opinion, but an uninformed assertion which proves that you have no idea what you are talking about.

[Dervish Sanders said] "SEIU is standing up for it's members".

That would be a first. SEIU is known for bullying its members, most of whom don't even want to be in it. Also, get a grip on reality. The specific 'standing up for its members' we are discussing is the SEIU taking money from people against their will. This is crushing the membership, not defending it.

[Dervish Sanders said] "That's what they use the money you falsely claim they "steal".

Stealing is illegal taking, and it is illegal to use union dues for politics. But SEIU does this.

[Dervish Sanders said] "for... defending workers against fascist thugs like Walker.

You have no idea what fascism means. I do, and therefore I know it certainly does not apply to Walker refusing to give more unearned handouts to fat and happy government workers.

[Dervish Sanders said] "You need to try again dmarks. I presented the evidence" [of Scott Walker buying the governorship with Koch money].

No, you provided nothing at all about buying an election. But you did speak with scorn about people having the ability to speak out.

[Dervish Sanders said] "You're choosing to ignore it". [The evidence of Scott Walker buying the election].

We haven't come to that bridge yet. You've not made a case. There's nothing to ignore yet.

[Dervish Sanders said] "Unfortunately I can't stop you from lying".

You can: just point it out when it happens. I look forward to the day, perhaps 5 years from now. As for Warren, she did indeed plagiarize a book of pow-wow recipes. You are behaving as a partisan reactionary. I've been sticking pretty close to the Native media, and unlike you, they don't lie about someone because there is a (D) after their name.

[Dervish Sanders said] "It was actually Elizabeth Warren who was plagiarized". [National Review's Elizabeth Warren Plagiarism Claim Quickly Debunked. The Huffington Post 5/19/2012].

Talk about getting things backwards. What next? You will probably claim that the Cherokee victimized Warren. In fact, Warren's a fraud. A contemptible wannabe like Ward Churchill.

6/21/2012 at 6:18am. Newspaper Rock.

It's no surprise conservatives make political hay of this, just as it is no surprise that I hear things like the liberal who told me that in this, Warren is actually a victim of Natives. Not the other way around.

[dmarks refers to Dervish Sanders pointing out that the "plagiarism" claim against Elizabeth Warren is false. False due to the book she supposedly "plagiarized" being published AFTER her book was published. Dervish Sanders never said Warren was "a victim of natives" as the person who made the debunked plagiarism claim was Katrina Trinko, a National Review author who is not Native American and who also issued a correction and apology].

6/22/2012 at 8:59am. Newspaper Rock.

She's digging herself a deeper hole. If she hadn't lied about her heritage, and kept covering it up. making excuses, and lying about it more, she'd be in good shape. But instead she makes mistake after mistake after mistake.

6/22/2012 at 9:00am. Newspaper Rock.

Back to the original article: "while the Warren camp is charging that the Cherokees are doing Brown's bidding".

Yeah, to Warren, Natives have no minds of their own, and any who object are part of a conspiracy. To her, Indians don't exist except as something in the past that can be used for advantage in a fraudulent ancestry claim, or something that Sen. Scott Brown cooks up in a laboratory like homunculi.

6/22/2012 at 5:37pm. Contra O'Reilly.

WD said: "Also, most voters say the "controversy" regarding Elizabeth's Warren's ancestory won't affect their vote. Feel free to keep bashing her for this... just be aware that it's getting you nowhere".

I've been still sticking with the Natives on this issue. Warren is a fake, a fraud, a white person of privilege falsely claiming to be a Native American to get more privilege. And you said earlier that she is the victim of Indians.

WD said: "The evidence shows that whichever candidate spends the most usually wins. Why do you think this is? It's because people don't ignore the ads, they listen to them".

That's called the free and open exchange of ideas about the most important matters of the nation. IF you don't like it, move to China, where people don't have the rights that you again and again bash, complain about, and want outlawed. It's the difference between democracy, which I support, and fascism, which WD supports.

2/28/2013 AT 05:32:00 PM EST. RNUSA.

To counterbalance Warren, they'd need to put up a Native American who fraudulently claims to be caucasian in order to get free stuff. [In response to Willis Hart writing that Ted Cruz counterbalances Warren... in that they're both nutty/extreme].

7/7/2014 at 07:11:00 AM EDT. RNUSA.

Will: She [Elizabeth Warren] is pretty bad....I remember listening to a speech she did loaded with language to pit American vs American, appealing to base jealousy and greed. And don't forget her fraudulent claims of being a Native American.

7/7/2014 at 07:51:00 AM EDT. RNUSA.

Will: Hillary is scandal-ridden and emotionally unstable, and left her Secretary-of-State position in disgrace. There's more than 2 years of scandal and ridiculous statements (a multi-millionaire personally profiting from her government connections claiming to be "dead broke"???) left before Nov 2016. Damaged goods.

Warren's views are extreme, as in driving off moderates (as well as conservatives of course). She will capture the hearts of the "99% Movement" (which really represents only 20% or so of Americans, and as you can see, is rather self deluded).

It would take a pretty bad Republican candidate to lose to either of these. However, I have no doubt that the Republicans will rise to the task and provide such a candidate.

7/07/2014 at 08:27:00 AM EDT. Contra O'Reilly

RN: It's your blog.... but. We've all seen various flights of fancy and off-topic tangents... and many times you have allowed such, and have even caused them in comments in your posts.

In my view, I think Shaw's mention of Dr. Carson as a possible candidate in 2016, and his (lack of) experience is quite in topic with mentioning Warren and her (lack of) experience in 2016.

7/7/2014 at 7:26pm. WYD.

"Occupy Wall Street"... a truly evil movement. With its ramp camps, rallies against Jews, assaults on small busineses, and the general push for making the top government elites who mess up our lives even more powerful. And Warren supported them?

9/10/2014 at 8:39pm. Contra O'Reilly.

He's also a person, like Elizabeth Warren, who has fraudulently presented themself as a Native American for personal gain. It's a form of racism on their part.

[The "he" dmarks refers to is Ward Churchill].

10/8/2014 at 4:19pm. Contra O'Reilly.

[Willis Hart said] "...he could possibly get the nomination and then go down in flames in the general. No argument.' [BB-Idaho said] If ya Cruz, ya lose...".

The same could happen with scandal-ridden Hillary... prone to emotional outbursts. Or the fraudulent fake Native American Elizabeth [Warren] (who cynically lied about her race for special advantage), seen as too extreme by most. Some real "winners" on both sides.... he could possibly get the nomination and then go down in flames in the general. No argument.

9/17/2014 at 07:19:00 AM EDT. RNUSA.

Exactly Will.

[Response to a comment by Willis Hart in which he refers to Elizabeth Warren as an "idiot plutocrat"].

12/21/2014 at 12:41pm. Contra O'Reilly.

Also, glad you included Ward Churchill in the white list. Though he fraudulent claims to be Native american in order to get special treatment. This is in a way perhaps racist against real Natives, and certainly demeans then. Elizabeth Warren has done the exact same thing. I'd say she belongs on the white list too, for her divisive pseudo-populist rhetoric that seeks to pit citizens against each other and demands that that the only solution is more authoritarian State power.

[Willis Hart authored a post titled "My Own Personal Contribution to Race Relations", and in it he names "white assholes" and "black assholes"].

4/6/2015 at 8:34am. Libertas And Latte.

Jersey, here is an attempt to look at your statement about the second Bush administration being the most corrupt in history. It comes from the Left, actually: HuffPo.

"Here is America's international performance on the [World Economic Forum] factors relating to corruption....: The U.S. is down on 19 of these WEF factors, up on 2, and unchanged on 1, during the period while Obama has been in office. This overall finding, of declining U.S. performance, is entirely in line with the similar findings from the World Bank: Corruption in the United States is increasing significantly during Obama's Presidency".

Inept? That can be quantified further if you want. I would start with about how millions of jobs were shed, and how the national debt increased, by his choice, at a significantly worse rate than under Bush.

Anyway, rest assured that it would get even a lot worse under a President Hillary Clinton, with a history steeped in crime, obstruction, and secrecy. (And no, this is not a partisan statement. I will readily point out that Elizabeth Warren, a leading contender, more to the left than Hillary, does not have any sort of history of malfeasance).

4/7/2015 at 2:36pm. Libertas And Latte.

The rest has been disproven elsewhere. As am not a racist or bigot, i never excuse or support ethnic hatred due to the ethnic group a racist, antisemite, etc belongs to. That is concerning of the two men mentioned.

But I will only mention that of course it was a sort of racism for Warren to have knowingly and fraudulently presented herself as a Native American in order to get special advantage, when she wasn't one at all and she knew it. Her fraud has never played well in Indian Country...

http://legalinsurrection.com/2012/06/native-american-harvard-alumna-and-lifelong-dem-accuses-elizabeth-warren-of-ethnic-fraud/

4/12/2015 at 09:29:00 PM EDT. RNUSA.

BB: How about Warren? A fresh face to a country wear of clintonbushclintonbushclintonbushclintonblush... And whatever Warren's distance from the center, she's pretty clean (other than the receding fake Indian claim, which was really a long time ago). I think there's that one skeleton in her closet, and it's rather dusty. Hillary Clintons got a dancing army of them. Warren could have a good chance at nomination, especially if something similar to Hillary hiding the emails comes up in the heat of the early primaries.

[Hillary Clinton didn't "hide" any emails. SWTD #313].

Posts that link here [TAD #57] Dennis Marks Frying Up Old Bones In Canardo Oil Re Elizabeth Warren Native American Controversy, 9/12/2014. [TAD #82] What Is Dennis Marks' Agenda Re Bernie Sanders Positive Comments When He Previously Spoke Negatively About Sanders? 10/5/2015.

DSD #14

Bernie Sanders: Hero Of The Ruling Class, A Greedy Thief Who Is Good At Plundering

Documented: Comments by dmarks (AKA Dennis Marks) regarding 2016 potus hopeful Bernie Sanders.

JULY 4, 2011 AT 4:02 PM. Negative.

Will: Bernie Sanders voted as if bin Laden had slipped him a check. We need less of that, not more. [In response to Willis Hart writing "Oh, and, just for the record, PL 107-40... the joint resolution for use of force in Afghanistan 9/14/2001... passed 98-0 on the Senate... its sponsor was Tom Daschle, btw... and 420-1 in the House... I think that the one NO vote was cast by your hero, - your hero's a politician, I still can't get over that - Bernie Sanders LOL"].

[Note: PL 107-40 was a "joint resolution to authorize the use of United States Armed Forces against those responsible for the recent attacks launched against the United States. "Those responsible" was the language used because we had not yet decided that al Qaeda in Afghanistan was the responsible party. The resolution was NOT a "joint resolution for use of force in Afghanistan". Also, the no vote Willis refers to was made by Barbara Lee, not Bernie Sanders... See SWTD #244].

JULY 5, 2011 AT 2:42 AM. Negative.

Bernie Sanders is a hero of the ruling class, but not the ruled. He's a man for that segment of the population that gets a warm and fuzzy feeling when they hear "We're from the government, and we're here to help you". The folks who DON'T want to question authority. The folks who believe that absolute power does not corrupt absolutely.

JULY 5, 2011 AT 7:36 PM. Negative.

WD said "534 more Congresspersons just like Bernie Sanders = Heaven".

A lot more of us would be in Heaven now if there were more Sanders voting to let the terrorists have their way and to keep lauching more and more 9/11's with no consequences. That is exactly what Sanders was voting for. Thankfully every single other Congressman and Congresswoman gave a lot more thought to their vote than Sanders.

Rusty asked: "Who is Bernie Sanders?" He's a representative who consistely votes to take more and more power away from the people and concentrate it in the hands of those who rule us. As for Olbermann, he fell of a map and ended up on a failed cable TV network.

August 8, 2011 AT 10:30 AM. Negative.

Reality: The W tax cuts were mostly for the middle class. Not the rich. But anyway. As for Bernie Sanders, it's a shame he isn't home gardening instead of being in Washington. He's a hardline economic fascist, and can be counted on typically to vote in favor of the ruling elites and against the people. A 20-year younger would still be no more popular than Ron Paul: if you, like Paul, campaign in the interests of a tiny number of people, you will get the support of a tiny number of people.

As for Tom's main point toward the end: “If you jump-start this economy you won’t have to worry..."

I think with Obama what you see is what you get. I don't think it's likely he is going to make some big change, and he will probably just keep doing what he has been doing so far.

SEPTEMBER 4, 2011 AT 12:47 PM. Negative.

[Dervish Sanders said] "My dream presidential team would be Bernie Sanders/Dennis Kucinich".

That's also the dream team of all of the Republican candidates. Romney, Perry, etc would struggle against Obama, but Sanders/Kucinich would make these Republicans salivate over very sure prospects of an 80%+ landslide.

SEPTEMBER 4, 2011 AT 2:10 PM. Negative.

Also, Sarah Palin, Bachmann, and the most fringe Republicans vying for the party nomination don't have a chance against President Obama. But they would against your "Dream Ticket" one example of it. So go ahead, run your pair of joke candidates/spoilers. The GOP would thank you for it. And their own joke candidates would be much less of a joke against them.

SEPTEMBER 7, 2011 AT 8:55 AM. Negative.

WD asked: "dmarks, you are misunderstanding or misrepresenting what I said".

Neither. Any problems had to do with your own lack of clarity. You said: "My dream presidential team would be Bernie Sanders/Dennis Kucinich". "I ...they won a presidential election....I never said I thought they should run".

How else do you win a Presidential election but by running? I made no misunderstanding or misrepresentation. The assumption is always that to get to the Presidency, there's a dream "ticket" before the dream "team".

[Dervish Sanders said] "So you can shut the hell up about that now".

How mature of you.

[Dervish Sanders said] "Why would the American people be so much more willing to vote Republican crazy over Democratic crazy?"

No. They would easily choose the popular leader-of-the-pack non-crazies Republicans over the fringe crazies that you proposed as your dream ticker *cough* dream team. In a battle of crazies vs crazies (the hard fringes), it's anyone's guess as to which side would use. Both sides would have a fighting chance.

[Dervish Sanders said] "Europe, IMO, has proven that Democratic Socialism works".

Democracy works. Socialism (economic fascism) does make the trains run on time, but it is rather unjust. Mid 20th century Central Europe and Eastern Europe of most of the 20th century are typical results of socialism, not abberations. People who are too easily given to having the ruling elites make personal decisions for them (as in the case of single payer) have been proven historically much more likely to goose-step and work for Final Solution, 5-year plans, Great Leaps Forward, and other such atrocities. It all has to do with the mindset of "government always knows best", one which critical minds reject.

MAY 23, 2012 AT 10:22 AM. Negative.

Bernie Sanders, whose politics represent the interest of a tiny percent of Americans, would hardly get any votes if he ran for President. Sanders might have an initial burst of strength in the polls, but this would rapidly plummet down to the single digits of his base once people realize his first name isn't Harland and that voting for him wouldn't automatically mean free fried chicken.

MAY 24, 2012 AT 3:07 AM. Negative.

As someone who is wealthy and is one of those who rules, Sanders meets the definition of plutocrat. How could he be destroyed by himself? [Response to Dervish Sanders saying "I said Bernie Sanders would be an awesome president, not an awesome candidate. He'd be destroyed by the plutocrats and their fascist super PAC money"].

'Fascist' super pac? You [Dervish Sanders] use the word without regard to meaning. This example of free speech has nothing to do with strong centralized government... and if the super pacs end up speaking out against Sanders' efforts to concentrate and centralize power, they end up actually being anti-fascist.

JULY 15, 2012 AT 1:12 PM. Negative.

WD said: "Real world correction: Bernie Sanders supports economic policies that would benefit 99 percent of Americans. Whether or not they agree is another matter".

Whether or not they agree is the important thing here. These people know their own lives, not you. I trust them; and most of them do not agree with the "Occupy" movement and know that the economic policies they support are not in their interest.

RN said: "Other than that 'ole' Bernie should retire before he causes real damage to the 99%".

If he [Bernie Sanders] had his way, there would be great damage indeed.

JULY 16, 2012 AT 4:53 AM. Negative.

WD said: "The economic policies the Occupy movement supports ARE in their interest... in my opinion, of course, but unlike you I'm honest about it. I don't BS about "trusting the people"."

MOST of the 99% (the people, not the Occupy movement which represents a fraction of them) disagree. Their opinion trumps yours. As I am not arrogant, I side with them. You may think that trusting the people is BS, but I don't. To do as you do is extremely arrogant. You would make a terrible politician, with your extreme arrogance. You would be a lot like General Zod.

From his 2008 campaign web site: "When I first came to your planet and demanded your homes, property and very lives, I didn't know you were already doing so, willingly, with your own government. I can win no tribute from a bankrupted nation populated by feeble flag-waving plebians. In 2008 I shall restore your dignity and make you servants worthy of my rule. This new government shall become a tool of my oppression. Instead of hidden agendas and waffling policies, I offer you direct candor and brutal certainty. I only ask for your tribute, your lives, and your vote."

Yeah, this fits in completely with your arrogant attitude, and the condescension of the Occupy movement in claiming to represent 99% of the people.

[Dervish Sanders said] "Also, if Bernie Sanders had his way the wealthy might become a little less wealthy, but everyone else would become significantly more prosperous".

I doubt that very much, and if he [Bernie Sanders] ran for President, probably only about 3% would agree with him.

JULY 17, 2012 AT 3:42 AM. Negative.

Will said: "And if he, AN AVOWED SOCIALIST, has a lot in common with these other "progressives", then I want absolutely nothing to do with the lot of them".

That is wise of you. Sanders is an extremist who has looked at the ideology of Hitler, Mao, Pol Pot, and Stalin, and said "yes, I want this in the US". It is an ideology that is all about top down control and centralization and diminishment of freedom.

JULY 17, 2012 AT 10:57 AM. Negative.

European socialism, WD? That is what Hitler and Stalin were. Though Mao was not. Fascism is a left or right ideology. Yes European Socialism 'works' if you want to kill and oppress people at unprecedented rates. Fortunately, most people reject Sanders and his ideology, because it is not in their interest at all.

APRIL 22, 2013 AT 8:27 PM. Negative.

He [Kim Jong-un] is the face of socialism in its purist form. Now that Pol Pot is dead, anyway. But isn't North Korea more advanced according to the standards of the American hard left anyway? After all, it has single-payer healthcare, no corporate (private-sector) mass media, and no profiteering capitalists. Bernie Sanders paradise.

MARCH 1, 2013 AT 1:25 PM. Negative.

Bernie Sanders (I - Pyongyang) could be the third stooge. He's always jonesing for a super-state to rule us all. [In response to Willis Hart writing "I don't know who I want to slap more right now, Reid or Boehner. Maybe I could do like Moe of the 3 Stooges and clock 'em both in one swoop"].

MAY 6, 2013 AT 3:36 AM. Negative.

Did Chairman Mao take over your blg? Or his reincarnation Bernie Sanders?

MAY 6, 2013 AT 5:06 PM. Negative.

And speaking of Bernie Sanders, the greediest member of Congress, he has announced plans to steal the contents of the Social Security trust. No lockbox is safe from a greedy thief who is good at plundering.

Tue Dec 31, 2013 AT 08:17:00 AM EST. Negative.

Will: Those who use "fictional" to decribe free markets generally are using it as a meaningless pejorative. These people generally oppose economic matters truly controlled by "we the people" and instead want those who rule (the State, the rulers) to command and control the economy. The state claims that these trespasses on the people's affairs are "beneficial to society", and they do fool some of the gullible and uncritical. But let there be no doubt: this corruption, this crony capitalism, this keystone of fascism, benefits the oligarchs first and foremost.

About Warren. There is indeed a hunger for true left-of-center candidate. After all, we have elected one for 13 of the last 20 years. However, there is very little hunger for a hard left, Progressive candidate. While Progressives succeed due to regional popularity, or a sneaky politician's ability to preach Progressive rhetoric while engaging in corrupt pork barrel politics, nationally the Progressive cause is rather unpopular with the people.

According to a poll by Think Progress of all places, while a lot of people do support near-left liberalism (the politics of Clinton and Obama), progressivism is the ideology of a mere 16%.

Yeah, America hungers for progressive politics about as much as it hungers for brussels sprouts. Less so, in fact. Which means that we won't ever have a President with politics like that of Bernie Sanders, and Elizabeth Warren will have to move strongly to the center to gain any traction.

Tue Jan 28, 2014 AT 04:43:00 PM EST. Negative.

RN, I've got a freshly printed $3 trillion bill with Bernie Sanders face on it. Poverty is over, thanks to MMT (million monkeys theory, as in solving budget problems by giving a million monkeys money-printing presses). [Note: dmarks refers to an earlier comment by Dervish Sanders concerning the Modern Monetary Theory].

JUNE 25, 2014 AT 5:58 AM. Negative.

Will: The Vermont comment was due to Bernie Sanders being there, the person in Congress who most openly embraces extremist ideology.

Fri Dec 26, 2014 AT 03:10:00 PM EST. Negative.

His candicacy, which will win the hearts and minds of between 10 and 20% , will wreak havoc on the Dems' primary process, drain money from other candidates, and give more moderate, near-Left Dems a nice contrast to point to boost their own attempt to win the center.

Fri Dec 26, 2014 AT 11:16:00 PM EST. Mix of Positive & Negative.

Curious about Sanders' votes on such issues as the taxpayer handouts to the banksters (TARP) and the many billions handed to the auto industry in corporate welfare also. Looking.... Looks like he was against TARP? Good for him! I've not found the answer to what he did, or supported on the auto industry bailout, though. But I found an interview with Thom Hartmann in which he did appear to argue in favor of the massive taxpayer handouts to the auto corporations.

If Mr. Sanders did oppose all of these bailouts/handouts/corporate welfare, then he deserves credit, and it gives much him more of a leg to stand on. Because those who supported the bailouts, the transfer of money from our treasury to the fatcats, were directly creating those circumstances "to overwhelmingly favor the uber weathy and stratification". I also find myself in agreement with much of what Mr. Sanders said about the supposed "banks too big to fail". As long as his solution made for smaller, decentralized private banks, instead of Stalinizing banks by bringing them more under direct Federal control.

Tue Dec 30, 2014 AT 07:48:00 AM EST. Negative.

RN said: "the thought of a Sanders or Warren presidency gives me the shudders".

No worries. They represent a rather small percentage of the electorate, and certainly can't capture the conservatives, or even the middle. If they do moderate their views, and tilt toward speaking of the public interest rather than just that of the State's top elites, that would be a good thing.

Thu Apr 30, 2015 AT 10:16:00 PM EDT. Positive.

There's a line that divides real candidacy from the clowns who run vanity campaigns for an ego trip or cash (Sharpton, Keyes, etc). Bernie Sanders is on the right side of that line, I believe. It's a real candidacy, and like Les here, I believe it is good for the election overall.

Fri May 01, 2015 AT 07:25:00 AM EDT. Neutral.

We've been doing the liberal thing for half that time, Jersey, including the last 6 years.... But anyway, let Sanders get his message out. The result of his candidacy will be a yay or nay vote on democratic socialism.

[Note: There are 2 additional positive comments in the thread not presented here... 5/2/2015 AT 09:18:00 PM EDT & 5/4/2015 AT 08:00:00 AM EDT].

Fri May 15, 2015 AT 01:06:00 PM EDT. Positive.

Personally, I tend to agree with Rep. Bernie Sanders on Israel more than I do about West, who is now a failed politician. I simply don't equate recognition of a Palestinian state with endorsement of the extermination agenda of Hamas/etc.

Tue May 19, 2015 AT 05:18:00 PM EDT. Neutral.

Jerry, at this point I am willing to at least listen to Bernie on this, also. [re Jerry saying "Bernie is probably the only presidential candidate willing to say this". "This" being Bernie saying Citizens United needs to be overturned].

Mon May 25, 2015 AT 04:16:00 PM EDT. Neutral.

If Hillary won, the Presidential pendulum would swing from left to left... which is, not at all. If Bernie won, it would swing from left to deeper left. If Trump won, the pendulum would bounce around like Daffy Duck. (No, Jersey... i don't think it is likely to happen).

Tue Jun 09, 2015 AT 11:03:00 AM EDT. Positive.

The hounds are already treating Sanders seriously. Perhaps funded by, Hillary, famous for her "destroy anyone" campaigning. I read a report of Sanders writing something outrageous about women and sex, more than 40 years ago. That was what the headlines were. I found his actual writings... if anything, he was guilty only of writing silly musings long after he should have put the pen down. If that's all they can get on him...

Tue June 09, 2015 AT 01:20:00 PM EDT. Positive.

I didn't know about Walker's foreign policy agenda... but looking it up, I see it now. I'm a fairly recent convert to opposing the wars and entanglements of the neo-cons and also of the left (Obama, with his new wars and expansion of old ones and all-time record military spending).

As for Walker's agenda and unions, I think it should be easy to effectively bargain.... and also easy to choose not to participate in the bargaining. I would agree with you that's clear that Walker only wants one of these. I also think that unions would become more popular if they didn't routinely throw the dues into a slush fund used for very partisan campaign and lobbying purposes. That's not bargaining at all.

Back to Sanders and his reputation....and those of his opponents. When I read of the phony claim of sexist writings against Sanders, I immediately thought of the scorched-earth tactics of the Clinton campaign. (see my Tue Jun 09, 11:03:00 AM EDT comment).

When I read of the ridiculous and sexist condemnation of Hillary by Ralph Nader (the reality matched the claims of what Nader was doing), I didn't think even for a second that Rep. Sanders was behind this attack. He just doesn't have that reputation. He just seems like a straight shooter. And whatever I think of the majority of his agenda, that's good.

Tue Jun 16, 2015 AT 01:01:00 PM EDT. Neutral.

Flush the dynasties. How would you like, say, a Rand Paul vs Bernie Sanders matchup?

Thu Aug 20, 2015 AT 08:39:00 PM EDT.. Positive.

Ideology aside, Bernie Sanders is great campaigner, sincere, energetic, has a strong resume, and is fighting like the underdog. All in contrast to Hillary. I'm not counting out Dervish S' s hope at this point.. if Biden or someone else major doesn't jump in. ["hope" comment in response to Dervish Sanders saying "Me, I'm hoping Sanders wins the nomination and the presidency"].

AUGUST 22, 2015 AT 7:00 PM. Positive.

In his favor, Sanders is refreshing among candidates. Regardless of ideology (My principled opposition to him in all of the points you mention has been discussed elsewhere). Where else do you find a candidate who is direct, honest about his beliefs, and apparently without guile? You certainly won't find anything of the sort in the Hillary camp.

AUGUST 23, 2015 AT 3:01 AM. Negative.

Yeah. true. The surface thing goes along with "Regardless of ideology". He's riding a bubble, like the Occupy Movement did, of support that is still only going to be very small. [In response to Willis Hart calling Bernie Sanders a "surface thinker").

AUGUST 23, 2015 AT 8:35 AM. Negative.

So, Will. how many of Sanders' more extreme points will vanish if he does persist in a lnog term campaign and ends up moving to the moderate pragmatic center?

AUGUST 28, 2015 AT 10:03 AM. Negative.

Q. What do you call someone doing $9 an hour worth of work but the employer is coerced into giving them $15 an hour?

A. a thief. (Or "unemployed", because this coercion will strongly encourage the employer to abolish this position). [In response to a post on the Libertarian blog "Contra O'Reilly" concerning Bernie Sanders' support for a $15 an hour minimum wage].

Sat Sep 12, 2015 AT 05:59:00 AM EDT. Neutral.

I think Dervish Sanders is correct, or at least has a sound prediction. I looked at my first poll numbers after a couple of weeks, of seeing how (in my view) weak the Hillary campaign is, and how strong the #FreelTheBurn is going, at least in the media. And HRC is still way ahead of "Bern" in the polls. [Note: Dervish Sanders predicted that Biden would not run].

Wed Sep 16, 2015 AT 01:18:00 PM EDT. Positive.

I gotta say, that despite my disagreement (principled and informed) on several issues, I am liking his candidacy more and more.

Thu Sep 17, 2015 AT 06:30:00 AM EDT. Neutral.

If RN wants to turn this discussion into purely crunching of old bones (which at least WD knows he is doing), I am sure he will let us know. However, he has been quite clear on this subject...and it is not a "cop out", but instead respecting the explicit demands of the blog host..... this is "Rational Nation" after all, and not a place where every post must be seen as an excuse to continue off-topic grudge matches from other posts, other blogs, or imagination.

I could refute the lies and false assumptions in the above comment, but like the above comment itself, it would be off-topic in regards to the statement that RN wants to discuss. The blog host has made it clear he doesn't want 60 off topic comments hijacking his threads. Respecting this wish is not "bootlicking", but it is instead good manners. And not insisting that you have the right to go into someone's house and soil the living room rug. Back to the post subject. That's what we are here for, right?

[Comment made in response to Dervish Sanders saying "Hmm... I thought Bernie Sanders was the senator from Pyongyang and a thief who is good at plundering. Old bones, dmarks may say. I say cop out. Either he believes what he writes or he doesn't. If not, then why should anyone read anything he writes? Whatever he writes we should all assume he doesn't really mean it"].

Thu Sep 17, 2015 AT 05:15:00 PM EDT. Neutral.

Les, in light of Bernie Sanders' comment, which candidate would you most like to see Sanders debate? I already have one name in mind myself. [Note: the name is Randal Paul].

Fri Sep 18, 2015 AT 04:13:00 PM EDT. Positive.

Yeah, Jerry... Front runners really don't to like rock the boat. And in politics, if someone is a front runner, apparently it pays to go out in public very little or say very little, lest it jeopardize the lead. I've seen this in race after race. I'm pretty sure Hillary is still ahead, and she likes it that way. Bernie is surging ahead, and of course he wants to debate to keep his momentum. Bernie seems like he has better character than most of them. I hope that means that, once he is far ahead (if that happens) that he won't refuse to debate others also.

In regards to your question, Jerry. Worded that way it is fair enough. There are some paragraphs in his statement I strongly agree with. And some I don't agree with so much. All of them, though, would be good for a candidate debate discussion, I think. I have changed my mind about him in some ways, which, as you said "warrants a question". Especially when the question is worded in an intelligent fashion, and not in a "gotcha" mode that attempts to divert the subject of the post into ongoing battles between two commenters, regardless of the topic I am very impressed at how he is running his campaign and conducting himself, regardless of my views of him on the issues. And this aspect of him (a national campaign) is rather new.

(RN: the last paragraph is intended for Jerry, and not to bait Dervish Sanders. But if you disagree, feel free to refuse to refuse to post. delete the comment).

Sat Sep 19, 2015 AT 09:45:00 AM EDT. Positive.

I also thought Bernie showed bravery by going to Falwell's college like this.

Tue Mar 08, 2016 AT 07:32:00 PM EST. Positive?

So, there you have it. A primary today. I cast my ballot for Bernie. Yeah. there you go...

Posts that link here [SWTD #136] Severe Conservative Delusions: Democratic Socialism Dissembling Edition, 4/23/2013. [SWTD #145] Stooge For Plutocrats Slanders Defender of Social Security Senator Sanders, 5/7/2013. [TADM #82] What Is Dennis Marks' Agenda Re Bernie Sanders Positive Comments When He Previously Spoke Negatively About Sanders? 10/5/2015. [SWTD #316] Chris Christie As Preznit Would Be A "Greedy Thief Who Is Good At Plundering" Re The Social Security Trust Fund, 11/1/2015.

DSD #13

Perverted Phallophile's Homoerotic Homoerotica Featuring Noam Chomsky Nude

Documented: Comments by dmarks (AKA Dennis Marks) regarding his claims of having received "homoerotic" comments and emails.

DECEMBER 15, 2013 AT 8:51 AM

The above comment, in a response to an unpublished comment from WD in which he first raises the subject of nude Chomsky photos, elicited thousands of words of many comments which I briefly scanned and found the typical repeated name dropping of Will and "Lester", but now numerous prurient sexualized references to Noam Chomsky added to the mix. I would have never imagined that my birthday post for Chomsky would elicit numerous comments about his genitalia. One can only imagine what will happen on Trotsky's birthday...

DECEMBER 20, 2013 AT 5:02 PM

Merry Christmas, Dervish Sanders.

The quotations below from Dervish Sanders are a fair paraphrase. If anything, they improve the big steaming piles of word salad. The several long blog comments he sent to me today are far to lengthy to post here.

"...Will needs that Xanax.... I'm still NOT pi$sed at Coach Ditka ...to enrich the plutoXcrats, that is for certain. W#inergram....nobody else (or very few people) remember or care about. PlutoXcrat. ... picture of the Koch brothers with their er#ct w@ngs touching (tip to tip). Perhaps a pic of the an)us of a Koch (so he could envision where he could poke it if the Koch was receptive?...see pictures of my w@ng.... take it up the p00p=shoot ..."

Anyway, I know Dervish Sanders loves any mention or attention given to his angry homoerotic rants. So here is my Christmas present to him. I have read your comments, Dervish Sanders, and am reacting to them. Enjoy the resulting holiday bliss. And I shudder to think... while visions of sugar-plums dance in childrens' heads this time of year... this is a glimpse at what is always dancing in Dervish Sanders' cranium.

January 11, 2014 at 4:50 AM

Ducky: A little fixated on homoerotic issues, aren't you? Especially movies that don't really involve it at all. [Re: comment from Duckys here in which he says "A prequel to Gibson's homoerotic sadomasochism in The Passion"].

Sam: Hell hath no fury like the bloated swine being threatened with being pushed away from the trough. [Re Sam Huntington saying "Sadly, Scotland today is a socialist state"].

JANUARY 24, 2014 AT 10:12 AM

Yeah, his December was spent writing thousands of words of gay sex fantasies peopled by himself, his imaginary friend Dennis, Noam Chomsky, you, someone named "Lester", Santa Claus, and even Rusty. It all sits there, quotable, in my spam filter. I really stopped reading it around Christmas day. Perhaps as a result, he has stopped sending me any.

Or perhaps he realized the irony treating a blog he called "boring" as if it was the most exciting thing in the world by attempting to post so many homoerotic love/hate letters to it. Also, he might realize that he won't get any friends as long as he acts like a total idiot all the time.

JANUARY 28, 2014 AT 7:49 AM

I doubt Shaw reads these, so there isn't much more I will say on this subject. I can understand some understanding between Shaw and WD... WD defended Shaw concerning the hitler baby troll. However, Shaw must think it is fine that WD sends hundreds of sexually-harassing messages to other bloggers... as long as WD doesn't send them to Shaw. On this matter, Shaw's character is found lacking.

Sat Feb 01, 2014 AT 07:14:00 PM EST

The so called 99 percent movement mostly advocated more power for the less than 1% at the very top... for concentration and centralization of authority. This is one reason the movement fell apart. There were instancess where they went against type, as when they advocated for more membership in credit unions. A truly laudable goal of decentralization, the opposite in fact of their fascistic/control goals in other matters such as healthcare.

I have no idea about Mr. Sander's lotions. It's probably something perverted again, and I don't want to think about it. [See TADM #76].

FEBRUARY 2, 2014 AT 9:26 AM

He did it again today. Sent something, I read the first 3 words to determine it was some sort of cut-and-paste spam. Flushed. If anything, there might be an improvement. I don't think he talked about his penis in it, nor did he use his pet name for me, nor did he talk lustily about Noam Chomsky's naked body. And yes, he has done all that in the past.

If he keeps it in his pants... er, keeps up the improvement, it might be a positive sign.... Nonetheless, the "clock" by which he will be allowed to post comments on my blog has been reset again, for 30 days from today.

MAY 24, 2014 AT 6:56 AM

Not to mention annoyingly homoerotic. [Re: Willis Hart post "wd's New Netflix Series". See also OST #13].

AUGUST 1, 2014 AT 8:43 AM

RN: Even his sock puppets have sock puppets.... lol. Recently, he said, I think at "Rational Nation", that he only treats people like people treat him. I'm willing to bet Keith Olbermann's yacht, though, that Will hasn't bombed WD's blog with hundreds of spam comments like WD has done to Will here.

And when did I send WD dozens of homoerotic penis comments, to cause him to do such to me? Or when did Les create multiple fake/satire WD blogs as WD has done for Les? His delusions know no bounds.... Will, do you think you can convince Sybil Sanders to only use his Barlowe personality? [See TLB #51].

March 23, 2015 at 8:29 AM

I usually ignore comments from this homoerotic spamming stalker. But for once, this comment by him is roughly true. [Re: "The violent thugs are coming for you dmarks. And Obama wants to take your gun so you can't defend yourself". See also SWTD #277].

JULY 1, 2015 AT 2:28 PM

Not to mention... spending several hours a day writing blog comments and posts that no one will ever see. I was on the receiving end of one particular person's excessive homoerotic literary attempts. ... Not that there is anything wrong with that... I'm sure there is a place for lengthy descriptions of Noam Chomsky's naked rear end, even if I don't appreciate it myself. Who knows ....maybe poorly written sex stuff is the way to millions and success. Look at Fifty Shades for an example.

July 29, 2015 at 5:49 AM

Dervish Sanders is both, while you are not, Jersey. [Re: Jersey McJones comment in which he says "I'd rather be a hoplophobe than a phallophile". See also TADM #76].

Posts that link here [SWTD #124] Saying Goodbye Because I'm Going to Be Kicked Off Blogger, 2/25/2013. [TAD #76] Is The Phallophilic Dennis Marks Sticking His Firearm In His Naughty Place? 7/30/2015.

DSD #12

Rusty Shackelford Slanders Ed Schultz & Dervish Sanders

Documented: Comments by Rusty Shackelford (AKA Rusty Schumckelford) in which accusations against Ed Schultz of domestic violence by his ex-wife Maureen Zimmerman (divorced 1993) are discussed.

MAY 26, 2011 AT 10:46 PM

WD,you should really go post at one of the liberal echo chambers. Its amazing how thinned skin you are when someone says something negative about Obie or one of your MSNBC heros.The fact is Ed Shultz is a low life.You do know he admitted to and was issued a restraining order for beating his first wife.That WD is'nt an opinion...its a fact.

Will was correct labeling you a partisan hack... its absolutly what you are.

MAY 27, 2011 AT 10:54 AM

F.Y.I. WD.

Mary K. Zimmerman vs. Edward A. Shultz 1/26/99. Application for Domestic Violence Protection Order.

Yea,old Fat Ed's a real peach. [Note: Ed Schult's ex-wife's first name is Maureen, not Mary. Also, the temporary restraining order was issued in 1995 not 1999].

MAY 27, 2011 AT 11:55 AM

Or WD,you can go to Fargo ND court records and look at case #09-93-C-00131. Fat Ed's wife was 5'4",115lbs when he beat her up. One of your hero's WD...speaks well of you.

JANUARY 24, 2012 AT 6:34 PM

Seeing that Schultz did beat up his ex-wife I'm sure he'd take a stab at [Anderson] Cooper.

JUNE 22, 2012 AT 4:07 PM

WD seems to condone the oddest of things,some boardering on creepy. Last year he saw nothing wrong with Anthony Weiner sending lewd photo's to young,possibly under aged girl. He tries his best to whitewash Scott Ritter's proclivity for underage teen girls. He knows that Ed Schultz was indeed charged with domestic battery by his former wife,but tries to sweep the facts under the rug.

If WD were to find out Jerry Sandusky was a liberal dem he would seek a way to forgive his actions. Based on WD's adamant acceptence of deviant behavior one would only deduce he himself may actively engage in somewhat like behavior.

JUNE 22, 2012 AT 5:18 PM

I beg to differ WD... your constant defense of deviant liberals is most telling. Either you're blind to their behavior due to their politics or you find that behavior most acceptable... your defense of these deviants and their proclivities negate your little (4) point confessional. You're a bit creepy WD... Rusty would'nt be surprised to know WD is on some towns register.

JUNE 22, 2012 AT 7:18 PM

WD,you poor soul... your acceptance of absolute diviant behavior by people who's political view's line up with yours is indeed creepy... now, not personally knowing you I could'nt actually label you as creepy... but you do seem a bit greasy. Not someone I would want working for me or within close proximity ot teenaged girls.

JUNE 22, 2012 AT 7:46 PM

I'd guess its difficult for your ilk to "accept it." But,WD your words are very telling... diviant behavior by some is something you can over look....its interesting you have no problem calling people racist,homophobes or misogynists,yet when your repeated words shine a spotlight of possible acceptance of diviant behavior on you its something you feel you can just brush off... does'nt work that way WD... as I said,your words are very telling and just by your words its evident you are greasy.

JUNE 23, 2012 AT 9:21 AM

WD,you call me and dmarks liars. Please prove to us that Ed Shultz's exwife did'nt accuse him of domestic violence.Prove that she did'nt have a restraining order issued against him because of his liquor filled rages.

I'm here saying Ed Shultz was charged with domestic violence by his ex-wife....I'm here saying his ex-wife went to court and had a restraining order issued against him because she feared his alcohol fueled rages.

Prove me wrong you greasy POS or STFU.

JUNE 23, 2012 AT 6:04 PM

WD,one more time... please answer the following two questions either yes or no.

1) Did Ed Schultz's ex-wife accuse him of domestic violence?

2) Did Ed Schultz's ex-wife seek a restraining order against him due to her fear of his alcohol filled rages?

Now WD,Rusty is going to make a wild guess and say you wont answer those two simple questions and you will demand proof of Schultz's actions....and your response will attempt to deflect the truth about Sgt.Schultz.If you do just that,you'll prove just how greasy you really are....just as we all suspected.

JUNE 23, 2012 AT 6:33 PM

On 11/02/1995 in Cass County North Dakota...

Maureen K. Zimmerman filed a tempory protection order for domestic violence against Ed Schultz.

There you go greasy one...spin that...or use your acceptance of diviante behavior to justify it. I'm beginning to think you are on the creepy side WD.

JUNE 24, 2012 AT 10:49 AM

It seems Maureen Zimmerman (Sgt.Schultz's ex-wife)has a pretty good read on what domestic violence really is... in fact,fat Ed showed her up close and personal just what spousal abuse is.

Yet WD,now known as "that greasy bastard,"supports wife beating.Maybe WD is a muslim who abides by a strict interpretation of the koran....that could explain his acceptance of all sorts of diviant behavior.Creepy guy,that WD....oops,I mean Greasy Bastard.

JUNE 25, 2012 AT 11:39 AM

Fact: Ed Schultz is a wife beater.

Fact: WD supports Ed Shultz.

Fact: WD therefore supports Ed Schultz's actions.

Fact: By proxy WD supports wife beating.

Fact: WD is a greasy bastard.

Posts that link here [SWTD #307] Is There Evidence Supporting The Allegation That Ed Schultz Is A Wife Beater? 8/18/2015.

DSD #11