Wednesday, November 29, 2006

Moron Mail

It's almost like this guy just filled in a mad lib with the same old lefty tropes:

In response to Jeffrey Boie's Nov. 26 letter, I would like to know who the "far left liberal religious group" is ("A waste of the court's time")? Is there such a thing?

Yes. Yes there is such a thing. It was the Edina Community Lutheran Church and the Unity Church-Unitarian in St. Paul (Wow! A Unitarian church - imagine that!). If you had read the article referred to in the letter you cited, you would have known this. However, I get a feeling that you're the type of person who likes to remain willfully ignorant so as not to have to endure the cognitive meltdowns and psychotic episodes that come from having your predjudice-rich self-serving world view shattered.

The neo-cons

Latest of the ever-shifting definitions of "neo-con": anybody who doesn't "think" the same way this tool does...

fought for the right to carry firearms anytime; anywhere. Gov. Pawlenty's signed law says you can do that, unless posted otherwise. (Notice the violent crime rise since then? Oh wait - that's Amy Klobuchar's fault.)

Whoa! This Mensa's pulling out the old post hoc ergo propter hoc card. I can do that too:

After I read this letter, I pooped. Therefore reading letters from nimrods who don't know what the hell they're talking about is a cure for constipation!

In any event, The Glorious Hiawatha Light Rail Choo Choo of Doom has killed more people than guns fired by permit holders (I believe the current score is 3 or 4 to 1. Check the KAR archives - it's in there somewhere.)

And yes - it's all Amy Klobuchar's fault. At least there's more evidence for that conclusion than for the proposition that all the non-permit holders shooting each other and innocent bystanders in North Minneapolis are evidence that conceal and carry is responsible for the rise in violent crime.

You dumbass.

A church does not want to or feel the need to post a No Guns sign. This should be common sense. However, rights-exercising neo-cons and their lawyers have forced the need for a court's exemption under Pawlenty's law. How can you compare this to posting life-safety signs or a temporary posting of a building permit?

So by definition, anyone who carries a weapon and has a permit is a "neo-con"? Or it's just the neo-con segment of the larger conceal-carry demographic that "forced" the "court's exemption"? I'm confused. Am I missing something?

No. No I'm not. You just suck at this.

Does anyone not find this statement and argument absurd?

Yes. I do find your argument absurd. Or did the "this" in that sentence refer to something else?

It's not "liberals" causing this court action; it's a right-winger law...

...That can be found in like 40 other states...

Is a "family and church-centered" neo-con actually mocking churches for this?

Congratulations! you just used the term "neo-con" in three-quarters of the paragraphs of your letter without having the faintest idea of what it means (other than "people I hate"). Way to finish strong!

BONER A. McPOLACK Burnsville

I think I'm going to start calling people like this "Paleo-retards."

No comments: