Fiskers, Lock And Load
By Mitch Berg
He couldn’t beat the buh-LAW-ggers…
…so he joined them.
The subhead says he’s “unbound and unbowed”.
This oughtta be good for a yuk or two.
By Mitch Berg
He couldn’t beat the buh-LAW-ggers…
…so he joined them.
The subhead says he’s “unbound and unbowed”.
This oughtta be good for a yuk or two.
This entry was posted by by Mitch Berg on Tuesday, October 13th, 2009 at 9:24 pm and is filed under Blogs. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
You must be logged in to post a comment.

Shot in the Dark is a
WordPress joint.
Entries (RSS)
and Comments (RSS).
October 13th, 2009 at 9:38 pm
I appreciate the comment less format. It’s an improvement upon the censoring that the Sorosphere has come to rely upon.
I may have to revive FISKWA!!
October 13th, 2009 at 10:02 pm
This is a satire, right? Please tell me that it wasn’t written by a ‘newsman’:
“According to some scholars, the passage is popular among restoration Christians who are part of the “Kingdom Now” and “Dominion Theology” movements who see it as a call to make the nation knuckle under to God’s will and accept the Lord’s dominion over all.”
According to some scholars?
Pawlenty a fire-breathing fundamentalist? Is Coleman so clueless that he doesn’t realize that Reagan was not a particularly religious man? That his religious background was as ecumenical as ELCA?
Instead of doing a deep reading of the scripture Pawlenty read, let’s look at the actual quotes from the article:
From this Coleman thinks that it is obvious that Pawlenty is a religious maniac. What a crappy excuse for a journalist.
October 13th, 2009 at 10:51 pm
I look forward to your obsessive caterwauling over another lefty blog that nobody’s ever heard of.
October 13th, 2009 at 11:00 pm
No one has ever heard of Coleman? You’re denser than usual tonight, Tim in StP. Coleman is a columnist in the largest circulation newspaper in a second-tier American city. You “obsessively caterwaul’ over Mitch’s blog, and he doesn’t have nearly the reach that Coleman does.
At least we know that Coleman has reached ‘crazy old uncle’ status with you lefties.
October 14th, 2009 at 6:57 am
your obsessive caterwauling
Says the guy who’s been leaving regular comments on my obscure little blog for five years.
October 14th, 2009 at 7:23 am
Full disclosure: I offered him some comments about style and form several weeks ago, some of which he may even end up using. I think he picked a good, workable style for somebody who does a lot of stuff on the net, in various places, something I’m kind of familiar with.
Regardless of what one thinks about his opinions and politics — I’m a fan of his loathing of corruption and police misbehavior, and not much else; wish he’d cover that stuff a lot more, as I don’t have much of an appetite for the endless “Michelle Bachmann: Threat or Menace?” pieces that the left churns out — I think him turning his hand to blogging is a good thing.
The lack of comments, as Swiftee points out? You know, better than I, how time-consuming monitoring that can be. That said, a good commentariat is part of what a lot of folks (me included) like about good blogs, like yours; maybe, having gotten his toes wet, he’ll jump in.
October 14th, 2009 at 8:01 am
I hope Non-Monkey is tweeting, too. He should really tweet at least 60-70 times a day, so we’ll never be without his latest thoughts. A nation turns its lonely eye to Non-Monkey.
October 14th, 2009 at 8:28 am
I believe that Nick has a Twitter account… we were going back and forth for a while a number of months ago. I don’t know how active he is anymore.
October 14th, 2009 at 8:30 am
BTW–his photoshop skills, like his command of reality, have been found wanting.
October 14th, 2009 at 8:34 am
One of Nick’s tweets:
“@Tom_Freeman Agreed: But I’m not training cadres to go shout at people. Nor do I belong to or support any party. I AM the middle in MN”
Yep. He’s in the middle. Right along with Lyndon LaRouche.
October 14th, 2009 at 8:53 am
So his tweets are as sensible as his columns, then, Leo? Reassuring.
October 14th, 2009 at 10:30 am
It shows where we are as a country where some will take seriously Coleman’s assumption that those who quote Scripture are by definition dangerous nutcases….hey, hasn’t Dear Leader done that, too?
(at least misquoted, no?)
And nobody tell Coleman about Lincoln’s “House Divided” speech….he’ll become a neo-confederate in no time! :^)