Deleted Comments: We Have No Idea What These People Are Talking About, But Boy Are They Angry

Maud Pie has just about had it with your schist

This was one of those weeks when, in addition to the usual pile of predictable and forgettable rants about snowflakes and Donald Trump won the election, did you know Donald Trump won and he is your president now so shut up, we also got some downright weird comments, too. For instance, there was "Anna," who rushed right out to reply quite angrily to a nearly year-old comment on a story about Erick Erickson from June of 2016. Someone had written a decidedly unkind comment about Mr. Erickson, calling him a "cur," to which "Anna" replied with this Grade-A rant:

You are a typical libtard. You love kissing anti-Semitic Swedish ass but hate Polish people. Yep, keep holding that "Descendant of Immigrants" bullshit profile photo up. I am sure you are pro-immigrant, except for Eastern Europeans because you put them under the same "Jew-Hater" umbrella yet deny extreme anti-Semitism that occurs in your utopia of Sweden or among Muslim Immigrants. You sir are s selective racist. You hate Slavs but just love those Aryan assholes who are known as the Swedes and hate your guts for being a Jew. You love the other Aryan assholes known as the Afghan and Iranian as well.

It appears "Anna" followed that person from some other website where he was kissing Swedish ass, but here's the thing: That user did indeed say, almost a year ago, on an entirely different website, that several Eastern European countries have a history of anti-Semitism, which isn't exactly news. But why wait until April 2017 to yell at him about it here? Guess she really wanted to make sure the kisser of anti-Semitic Swedish asses saw it. We hope she gets some help with those anger issues, but we're glad she stopped by to dump a couple centuries' worth of ethnic resentments into our comments section.

Our piece on the nice "alt-right" couple whose idea of Date Night involved pepper-spraying and shooting some liberal snowflakes protesting a Milo Yiannopoulos appearance in Seattle sure did tick off a couple of trolls who don't like antifascist demonstrators, though again, the particulars of the grudges they brought to our comments section had virtually nothing to do with what we wrote about. For starters, there was "Cal Kurtz," who we suspect hasn't actually readHeart of Darkness but likes shouting "exterminate the brutes!" all the same. "Cal" also seemed really angry we wrote about what we wrote about without writing about what he thought was more important:

What about a antifa cunt? Did the hack writer forget about her aspirations to come back with 100 nazi scalps? Or maybe it's ok for the left to intimidate and hurt others they disagree with? I guarantee if more rights came armed and ready it would have been quashed quickly. Or maybe mention the scumbag mayors connection to a antifa, which led to the police being told to stand down until things really really got out of hand what about that? In typical leftist style the true facts are conveniently left out. Totally fake news totally biased journalism total crap I have no idea how this hack even got a job writing for this website. Oh wait I guess since someone like maddow has a show anyone can get a gig in journalism as long as they're willing to lie and spin the truth to the left for a mere pittance

Shame on us! We wrote about a couple of people who were charged last week for assaults they're accused of committing in Seattle in January, when OBVIOUSLY for balance, we were obliged to mention some antifascist lady who got punched by a white-supremacist jerk in Berkeley a couple weeks ago. And why no mention of the scumbag mayor? We don't know! Was that the scumbag mayor of Seattle or the scumbag mayor of Berkeley? In any case, it truly is a shame we didn't include the true facts of what happened in Berkeley two weeks ago in our story about an incident in January in Washington. Worse, we didn't even MENTION the shoddy investigation of the Haymarket affair! 

Also, I suppose I should mention I don't get paid a "pittance" -- my employer is a progressive who thinks a job should actually pay enough to live on. Further, between the both of us, Rachel Maddow and I have two more Ph.D.s than you, bud.

"Cal" hung around to troll a while, impressing us with his weighty intellect:

• Lol, I see the whole "I have no factual leg to stand on, therefore YOU'RE RACIST" retort is still taught to vacuous brained libiots. ;) you're welcome. Try harder next time, I'm offended by your lazy debating approach . Lol

• Again, you have no logical comeback, so you project your emotional immaturity. Run along and play your x box little one. Lol

• Hmmm, against free speech when the facts don't favor you...haha, predictable puppets parroting slogans. Try again stinky. : )

• Dear? Nice try at the whole condescending approach, but once again, try facts professor. ;)

• Ahhh, I see the you have tried to start using" cuck". I suggest you look up the definition, but it might disappoint you. : (

Lol, he is very smart ;) and full of far better debating facts, like the well-known fact that libiots are incapable of providing facts like all the facts in his statements above. LOL! We have to confess we were mildly amused by "Cal's" flounce:

Thank you to all my fans, you are so pathetically predictable. Dancing to my tune like puppets. I love you all!!! But c'mon stop pm'ing me telling me that you agree, but are to cowardly to publicly admit it. Also, kudos on attempting to use the words like cuck, and snowflake, but yall might need a little more practice. Get on it people. Lmao

Ha-ha, most people here secretly agree with him, as they all told him in "private messages," which in the case of our commenting system Disqus we have not got. Frankly, we'd rather have piling swivels.

We also heard from "Rivvi Kordia," who seems to think we should have been writing about Berkeley as well. We have almost no idea what this guy is talking about, but it's very important, even if it sounds a heck of a lot like a second-grader explaining the plot of a movie you haven't seen:

They are all upset because Based Stick Man took the streets back. It seems funny to me the cops constantly had the right to there backs and always kept the "antifa"/BAMN nerds in front of them where they could keep an eye on them. One of the "antifa" trash hit a guy in the head with a steel bike lock. They were using bear spray. But the Proud Boys led by Based Stick and Based Spartan beat them down and sent them running. Antifa "won" the first round because the right had no one there to stop their terrorist attack on the university but rounds two and three were won by Stick and the Proud Boys. Evidenced by the fact that they didn't bother to show up for round four. There are posts on reddit where "antifa" members quit the group accusing other members of being cowards running over them trying to escape the beating they took. I guess the alt-left is no match when they face up with real men. Antifa and BAMN are lowlife scum that got what was coming. Any time they dare to show their hidden faces again we will be there to rip off their masks and beat them back into hiding.

Then Captain Marvel zapped him right between the eyes, and all the children sing "Hey, Bungalow Bill!" We actually used the Google machine to look up "Based Stick Man" and learned he is a great hero for hitting lefty agitators on the head with a stick, and then we rapidly got bored. Also what the fuck does any of this have to do with the charging of two rightwing idiots in Washington? Oh, of course, we know: The REAL violent thugs are on the left, which the "alt-right" morons will prove by carrying guns and busting some heads. We like to stay inside and read. Maybe not these comments, though.

"Rivvi" also flounced, with the parting thought that the left is dedicated to "ending free speech" in America, adding, "I heard that anyone that posts on here with opposing views gets deleted and banned. Lets see."

Oh, that sounded like a challenge! Happily, the First Amendment is alive and well: As the publisher of this site, we are quite happy to make our own free choices about who we want tromping around our parlor, and so, "Rivvi," you'll be delighted to know that sometimes we ban people and leave their posts up for further mockery. Congratulations!

Our piece on the sovereign citizen looneybirds who are suing everyone from Donald Trump to the Sheikh of Araby for 350 Billion Dollars drew this helpful clarification from "weyman," who explained we have no idea what we're talking about, because LOGIC:

There is no such thing as a soveregin citizen , a soveregin is not under control of another , a citizen is a member of a governed society'

Ya can't be free aand governed at the same time ....Here is what the government scared of ...

We have never heard of this sovere gin, and are not inclined to try it anyway, as we far prefer scotch or bourbon. Plus, the sovere gin keeps asking all sorts of pointless questions and then screaming "I DO NOT CONSENT" when you try to drink it. "weyman" continued:

First thing we need to agree on is that there are 3 legal definitions of the “United States”

1) a sovereign nation in the league of sovereign nations

2) the land mass known as the “United States” of America

3) the “United States” Inc.

Hmmm. No. We don't actually need to agree on that at all, particularly when it's followed by an explanation as deranged as the following:

Now let’s see what happened

The date is February 21, 1871 and the Forty-First Congress is in session.

I refer you to the "Acts of the Forty-First Congress," Section 34, Session III, chapters 61 and 62. On this date in the history of our nation, Congress passed an Act titled: "An Act To Provide A Government for the District of Columbia."

This is also known as the "Act of 1871." What does this mean? Well, it means that Congress, under no constitutional authority to do so, created a separate form of government for the District of Columbia, which is a ten mile square parcel of land.

I refer you to the UNITED STATES CODE (note the capitalization, indicating the corporation, not the Republic) Title 28, 3002, 15 (A) (B) (C) and 14 for the definition of state.

(14) “State” means any of the several States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Commonwealth of the Northern Marianas, or any territory or possession of the United States.

(15) “United States” means—

(A) a Federal corporation;

(B) an agency, department, commission, board, or other entity of the United States; or

(C) an instrumentality of the United States.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, INC.

: Non-profit Delaware Corporation

: Incorporation Date 4/19/89

: File No. 2193946

Oh, dear. We're afraid "weyman" lost us at the magical thinking about the significance of capital letters, and it was all downhill from there. We are mildly curious how, if the illegal corporate government of the "United States of America, Inc." was established along with the District of Columbia in 1871, the corporation's registry date in Delaware is in 1989. Maybe they just relocated for tax purposes. In any case, "weyman" went on and on for several paragraphs more, which we'll spare you here, because WE DO NOT CONSENT to entering into a publishing relationship with morans, the end.

Finally, last week's Dear ShitFerBrains, about "alt-right" furries and the strange phenomenon of white nationalist Bronies, brought us this grumping from Braheem Hazeem III, one of the folks we'd featured in the piece, who was still mad that we'd completely lied about the "Furry Raiders" in Colorado, and also how the term "alt-right" was coined by mean old leftist Social Justice Warriors, who are not manly at all, or something:

Oh hey look! I was quoted by a sjw snowflake, I'm still waiting for this evidence that the Colorado raiders are Nazis or have shown any of the hate and lies you snowflakes like to promote.oh you have a picture of the guy with his arm up, I wonder what it would have looked like if you actually got some perspective on the situation. Don't you have a riot to attend? Please go get a real job or go join CNN cause you both put forth about the same amount of investigation and truth. Hey since SJWs have made up this alt right word (aka I don't agree with you so I'm going to make up hateful terms). I'm just gonna start calling SJWs and libs alt-left. But hey what should I expect, this generation just likes to just believe things that align with their ideas without doing any actual research or want to pull out bits and pieces to justify their ideas. Oh I also love how you say "alleged threats" that just proves you did absolutely no research before writing this.

Gotta love the self-awareness of a guy who objects to labeling while calling people "sjw snowflakes" (we're not offended, just amused). Also enjoy the griping about accuracy and doing one's homework from someone who isn't aware that neo-Nazi Richard Spencer popularized "alt-right" as a rebranding of stale old far-right ideology. (Spencer might dispute, just before being suckerpunched, that he's a Nazi. Fine. He's Nazi-adjacent.) In any case, we do fear for BH III's safety -- that many strawmen in one post might topple over and hurt him.

Lastly: Since we mentioned "alt-bronies" last week -- that would be people who think "My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic" is actually all about a message of white nationalism, because some people are really stupid -- our Twitter account has been visited by a bunch of Nazi Bronies, apparently just to let us know they're happy to get any attention, even mockery. One -- "BroniesForTrump" -- even tweeted to our attention a Boston Globe comic that made fun of neo-Nazi Bronies , which strikes us as downright odd. What's the point? Did the Nazi Bronies mistake it for an endorsement? Or does being mocked in public give them some sort of Zoidbergian proof that they matter? Congratulations, Nazi freaks! People think you're weird! Guess that means we'll all agree with you any minute now.