Blog on the Run: Reloaded

Wednesday, August 31, 2011 6:27 pm

Robert Klippstein of Greensboro, you, sir, are a goddamned idiot (and I’m not real happy with my former employer, either)

I don’t know Robert Klippstein of Greensboro. But today, in a letter to the editor of the News & Record supporting the requirement of a photo ID for voters, he writes, “Voting is a privilege, not a right.”

Leaving aside for a moment any discussion of the constitutional, legal or practical merits of requiring photo ID to vote, oh, screw it, Jesus H. Christ, why is this man not locked up in a room somewhere where he can drool on himself without the rest of us having to be bothered?

Voting isn’t a right? What about “taxation without representation”? What about the civil-rights marchers, some of whom were beaten by police for pursuing — say it with me, kids — the right to vote? What about — oh, screw it. Just. Screw. It.

Oh, and News & Record? As I’ve already told editorial-page editor Allen Johnson privately, I of all people realize that running a Letters to the Editor column means presiding over a wretched hive of scum and villainy (and not in a FUN way, like, say, running and giving writers wide latitude. But at some point, if you’re going to run a public forum, you have to institute some level of quality control. You wouldn’t let a letter-writer claim, with respect to an important public issue, that 2 + 2 = 22 or that gravity is “only a theory” as if that meant you could step off the roof of the Lincoln Financial building with impunity. So why would you let someone assert as a fact something this stupid and dangerous? Allen, to his credit, copped a plea, but as Roch Smith has documented, this has not been an isolated problem.


  1. Give ’em hell Lex! Thank you for standing up against these morons and speaking your peace. I try to do that all the time and people think I’m insane! LOL

    Comment by Shea Hunter — Wednesday, August 31, 2011 6:37 pm @ 6:37 pm

  2. I’ve given up on expecting the N&R to refuse letters that make claims of fact counter to, well, facts.

    They’ve got it backasswards in clamping down on online comments on letters, both for their tone and with their what must be one-of-a-kind policy of allowing comments only during weekday business hours, while allowing, hell, even featuring, outright fabrications in print. I’m no expert, but I would think one of the remaining values of a newspaper editor would be to filter for accuracy.

    Comment by Roch101 — Wednesday, August 31, 2011 8:47 pm @ 8:47 pm

  3. For you and your ilk; here is a statement from disputing your opinion and upholding mine; “The right to vote is the foundation of any democracy. Yet most Americans do not realize that we do not have a constitutionally protected right to vote. While there are amendments to the U.S. Constitution that prohibit discrimination based on race (15th), sex (19th) and age (26th), no affirmative right to vote exists.”

    If voting is a right, how can it be taken away from convicted felons? Why do we have to register to do it? Chew on that, you ignorant piece of dog squeeze!

    Comment by Robert Klippstein — Sunday, April 8, 2012 1:51 pm @ 1:51 pm

  4. Legally, it’s a right, Robert. That’s why there nigh on 200 years of case law about it, and why convicted felons who have served their sentences are legally described, in the states in which this is legal, as having their rights (primarily, but not limited to, voting) RESTORED. And the Framers understood quite well that the people had rights not explicitly defined in the Constitution, or else there never would have been a debate about whether to add the Bill of Rights.

    I wish stupid were painful.

    Comment by Lex — Sunday, April 8, 2012 4:26 pm @ 4:26 pm

  5. “Dog Squeeze”! OWNED! There is no coming back from that Lex A.K.A Dog Squeeze. OUT

    Comment by William — Monday, April 23, 2012 12:25 pm @ 12:25 pm

    • Who the hell uses the word “nigh”?

      Comment by William — Monday, April 23, 2012 12:29 pm @ 12:29 pm

  6. “If voting is a right … why do we have to register to do it?”

    If bearing arms is a right, why do we have carry permits?

    If free speech is a right, why do we have libel laws and the Espionage Act?

    Teh_Stoopid. It buuuuuurrrrrns.

    Comment by Lex — Monday, April 23, 2012 4:19 pm @ 4:19 pm

  7. You can’t even argue successfully, Lex! Your comments merely prove my point, that these so-called “rights” are not absolute! They’ve been watered down by activist judges in decisions that you refer to as “case law”.Too bad that your stupidity hurts. Maybe your bed wetting, thumb sucking Liberal friends will come to your aid!

    Comment by Robert Klippstein — Tuesday, April 24, 2012 9:30 am @ 9:30 am

  8. Robert, I am in awe of your mastery of American jurisprudence. In fact, I can imagine that John Roberts and Antonin Scalia can feel their testicles trying to hide up beneath their kidneys as they read your analysis and realize that they are impostors.

    First you said voting was a privilege, not a right. Now you’re granting that it is a right but, as are other rights, subject to some restrictions. It can’t be both, so you need to choose. Go ahead. I’ll wait.

    Comment by Lex — Tuesday, April 24, 2012 10:08 am @ 10:08 am

    • Thumb sucking!hahahahahahahahahahahahaha

      Comment by William — Tuesday, April 24, 2012 10:56 am @ 10:56 am

      • Yeah, that’s some majestic rhetoric right there.

        Comment by Lex — Tuesday, April 24, 2012 11:07 am @ 11:07 am

  9. Lex, you can’t read, any more than you can write. First of all, nowhere did I grant that voting was a right. I used the term “so called rights”. Secondly, Roberts and Scalia are not activist Liberals. Ginsberg, Sotomayor, and Kagan do fit that description. I believe they would throw out the Second Amendment, (which I believe IS a right), in a heartbeat. I’d like to continue this battle of wits, but I dislike picking on someone who’s unarmed!

    Comment by Robert Klippstein — Tuesday, April 24, 2012 3:14 pm @ 3:14 pm

  10. Robert, first, the legal profession says you’re full of shit. Second, if you’re talking about “these” so-called rights, I presume it’s because you’re referring to the rights in my comment immediately previous. If that’s not what you were talking about, your writing is damned unclear.

    But, long story short, arguing that voting is not a right is like arguing that the sky is pink with purple polka dots. Five conservative SCOTUS votes might give that belief the force of law, but it doesn’t change the facts.

    And we’re done here.

    Comment by Lex — Tuesday, April 24, 2012 3:57 pm @ 3:57 pm

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Create a free website or blog at

%d bloggers like this: