BLOG: Rufus, You Have Lost Your Mind

Bryan Dubois
Oct 26, 2010

It's not fair that online readers don't get to shake their heads at this week's Rufus Sanders column, so here it is in its entirety:

And since it's not fair that Rufus spouts his left wing religious beliefs without response:

This political season is as toxic as it gets.

Of course it's "toxic."  But had the tables been reversed and the Dem's had the momentum, this toxicity would've been described as "positive energy."

It is only a mid-term election but you would think this was a presidential year.   

Because in Rufus's world, the electorate isn't supposed to be interested in politics during mid-term elections.

But maybe it really is in that it’s the successful policies of President Obama that is being challenged by right-winged angry conservatives, lost independents   , confused libertarians, “crumpet cracker-eating tea drinkers,” and other impatient, ill-informed, and unreasonable Americans.   

Because if you oppose Obama's policies you must be either scared or ignorant.  In Rufus's mind, there's no such thing as opposition based on principle.  Also, the obvious:  Successful policies of President Obama?  [snort!]

While it is expected by many the Republicans will win back the House and maybe even take the Senate, I predict the Democrats will surprise even themselves and carry the day.

Rufus, you've lost your mind.

Despite slumping poll numbers and the hateful rhetoric I still have faith the American voter will see through the emptiness of the “do nothing” Republicans and the fragmented “no we can’t” tea party and do the right thing.   

Wait Rufus, you just called all of those people "angry," "lost," "confused," "crumpet cracker-eating tea drinkers" "Impatient," "ill-informed" and "unreasonable Americans" but now you profess to have faith in them?   There's a new political tactic for you:  Rufus will call you names unless you vote for Democrats.

I just don’t see how any thinking person would want to go back to the failed administration policies of 2001-’08.

Actually I think people are opposed to a $13 trillion dollar debt and government run health care - neither of which plagued the country 2001 to 2008.  (Progressives always mislead their audience about the motivations of those who oppose Obama.)

To do so would be insanity and   pure political suicide.

Wrong again Rufus.  "Political suicide" would better describe the practice of  ramming through unpopular legislation without considering the wishes of the American people.  Or are you still trying to figure out the cause of the tea party?

You remember those were the policies that led us into two wars which has cost us over $3 trillion and were the cause of the largest economic collapse this country has seen since the Great Depression,  not to mention the longest war in our history.   


Again, Rufus misleads the audience by not acknowledging the housing crisis which had nothing to do with the war. 

I just don’t believe that the American people will actually put into office the likes of Christine O’Donnell, who has had to explain to us that she is not a witch, while admitting that she did dabble in witchcraft and black magic — all while trying to explain her extreme conservatism.

Believe whatever you want, but if you choose to ignore why supporters are attracted to O'Donnell, you commit political suicide - just like your party has been in the process of doing over the last 2 years.  Voters don't care about the youthful mistakes of O'Donnell - they care about how she will represent them.

It is not only troubling but verges on political lunacy.   

Not really.  (I'm starting to wonder if Rufus understands any phrase that contains the word "political."  If a tactic works during an election cycle, it's obviously not 'political lunacy,' is it?  Political lunacy would be ramming through legislation and then expecting people to praise you for it.

Then there is Sharon Angle in Nevada, who has declared America is   being taken over by Sharia law, while she continues to come off as a questionable backroom political dealer who has said just about any thing to get elected.   

Rufus, you're mixing Angle up with her opponent Harry Reid.  Speaking of which, have you seen Angle's ad that makes fun of Reid describing himself as someone who's on a "fixed income."  [snort!]  To me, Reid better defines a person who will say anything - no matter how outlandish - to stay in office.

Then there is the multi-millionaire Republican Linda McMahon in Connecticut, who is attempting to pay for her Senate run; while not even knowing   what the minimum wage is. Talk about being out of touch!    In New York the conservatives have one of the most embarrassing candidates in years in the big-mouth; intemperate Carl Paladino who wants to be governor, but who is inappropriate...

Yeah, Paladino is just entirely "inappropriate."  His entire being is inappropriate.  Not something he said, or something he did - Rufus believes his entire existence is 'inappropriate."

politically incorrect, insensitive and apparently a flaming homophobe in one of the most culturally diverse areas of the country.

Because in Rufus's world, one must be 'politically' correct.  (Again, does he understand the idea of 'political correctness'?  Does Rufus think that political correctness is something that one should strive for?  And apparently it's okay to be a flaming homosexual - just not a 'flaming homophobe!"  [snort!]

In Ohio there is Rich Iott who wants to represent the 9th district in the House, but who has been photographed wearing an SS uniform.   

...Yeah, because Rich Iott's entire campaign should be discredited because he was a WWII reenactor who was photographed playing a bad guy.

And just to think if these loonies take over we will be stuck with the sleazy, slicklooking, chain-smoking, ultimate insider lobby-peddling   John Boehner as the speaker of the house.

If somebody had trashed Obama like this, Rufus would've went into vapor lock indignation mode - yet it's okay for him to trash Boehner.  (By the way, Rufus, you do know that Obama smokes, right?)

The rest of Rufus's column consists of unsupported claims that Obama is our savior and that the world has been a better place since he was elected.

Or something like that.

The column gets too tiring to read.

Something tells me that Rufus is going to support Obama to the grave.  And we'll have the privilege of reading every Obama-based (or race-based) column of his until then.

 Just remember:  We are the ones we've been waiting for!!



Rufus does more to hurt Obama than any Republican pundit ever could with his rediculousness but he doesn't care because he loves the attention.  Neither side needs these crazies.

brutus smith

 Wow, who knew right wingnuts lived in Norwalk?

brutus smith

 sam a, being that Keyes is right of a right wingnut, that says a lot about you. No more claiming of being Independent. 

Massengill Wins...

Rufus must write a great column that he gets so many comments on a comment on his column.  If "hits" are the criteria to determine the success of an editorial........ Rufus is a star!


Rufus is a star, he's pretty far out there near Uranus.

The New World Czar

 "Fanatical wingnuts"...Christine O'Donnell, Sharron Angle, Linda McMahon, Carl Paladino, Rich Iott, and John this to...Alan Grayson, Nancy Pelosi, Barney Frank, Barbara Boxer, Charles Rangel, and Dennis Kucinich?

Rufus, thanks again for boosting the Republican electorate by another 2%. BTW, it is "Sharron" and not "Sharon".


On November 2, 2010, there will be a nationwide tea party, and all are welcome to attend.


Yeah, dooshie, he's a star; full of hot gas!

Wow; I've never seen so much drivel in one column before.  First, Obama did not end the war in Iraq; he simply declared an end to combat operations.  This he could do because the country had begun to stabilize, and THIS happened because of the surge (which then-Sen. Obama opposed).  Talk about taking credit where it isn't due.

Yes, going into Iraq was a mistake; yes, it hurt our economy, but it didn't cause the "greatest economic collapse since the Great Depression."  I lived thru the greatest economic upheaval since the 1930s; it happened in the SEVENTIES, on Jimmuh Carter's watch.

Gawwwd, I could spend hours on this, but I don't have time.  Will come back later.  In the meantime, Roofie old fellow, in response to all of your "I just don't believes,"  here's a little something to think about.  It's why you SHOULD believe that the end of one party, left-wing rule is coming:




In a March 1999 interview with Wolf Blitzer, Gore said, "During my service in the United States Congress, I took the initiative in creating the Internet." well as:  "If it wasn't for Al Gore, you might not be reading this web page right now."


Massengill Wins...

Are the wingnuts too stupid to undertand that Gore never said he invented the Internet.  What he said is that he was involved in the iniatives behind funding and developing the Internet but to the reading comprehension deficient..... this concept is hard for them to understand.  Here is a link.

The Internet is a superhighway of information but the wingnuts are on the short bus in the slow lane!


i guess winston that the definition has me confused, please help by picking one:

create Definition cre·ate [ kree áyt ] To hear the pronunciation, install Silverlight   VERB  1.  transitive verb make something: to bring something into existence 2.  transitive verb give rise to something: to result in something or make something happen 3.  transitive and intransitive verb produce inventions or art: to use imagination to invent things or produce works of art 4.  transitive verb appoint somebody: to give somebody a new title, role, or office 5.  transitive verb performing arts perform role for first time: to be the first person to perform a particular role in a theatrical production   so if i said that i am going to take your car, and it comes up missing, i really didn't take it?   i didn't say it or make it up, gore said it.  kind of like timothy mcveigh saying he didn't blow up the building in oklahoma but the bomb did.
Massengill Wins...

Providing the funding and promoting the funding iniatives in Congress was his role.  Sort of like Bush standing on a carrier claiming he just brought Iraq freedom.  Did he do that personally (if it was true)?  It is called a role and in this case your misunderstanding of the facts makes you a useful stooge!


Moderators have removed this comment because it contained personal attacks. Discussion Guidelines

Massengill Wins...

Moderators have removed this comment because it contained personal attacks. Discussion Guidelines


Moderators have removed this comment because it contained obscenity. Discussion Guidelines

There's a new political tactic for you:  Rufus will call you names unless you vote for Democrats.   Name calling or labeling seems to be the lone tactic for the democrats on this blog also!       It’s just proof they have losing the debate!


I've never claimed to be an Independent, so you saying I can't claim to be one in the future isn't exaclty a hardship. Since you seem to enjoy labels so much, I'll tell you I'm probably closest to being  Jeffersonian Liberal. These days, that's probably best exemplified by kind of a cross between the Libertarian and the Constitution Parties.

I'm not sure why you bother, though. It seems you much prefer to call anybody who disagrees with your leftist views a "right wingnut." Frankly, I don't think the "right wingnuts" would be willing to claim me, but as anti-freedom as some of their viewpoints are, I'd take them any day over so-called "progressives" who would see us controlled by one government entity or another from cradle to grave!


There is nothing better than watching the local nuts going crazy as Rufus spits the truth.

Very well written piece Mr.sanders!!


Rufus says "But maybe it really is in that it’s the successful policies of President Obama that is being challenged by right-winged angry conservatives, lost independents   , confused libertarians, “crumpet cracker-eating tea drinkers,” and other impatient, ill-informed, and unreasonable Americans."


Lost independents? Independents are some of the most informed voters. Independents vote for the best possible candidates no matter what party they belong to. Why didn't Rufus mention all of the corrupt politicians from both parties, most of who are democrats? Why no mention of left wingers like socialists and communists? What has Obama really accomplished? I just seen on television again that he is on the campaign trail for other democrats. Why doesn't Obama stay home to work on this nation's problems instead of campaigning for others? The only ill-informed and unreasonable Americans that I see are straight party voting democrats and republicans. Plus those who take left wing and right wing propaganda as gospel. I guess Rufus believes that anybody who is not a left winger is angry, lost, confused, impatient, ill-informed, unreasonable and "crumpet cracker-eating tea drinkers" whatever that means. Why use the word cracker with crumpet? I guess that it is okay to drink kool-aid?

6079 Smith W

@ Mr. Dubois:

I enjoyed the Obie cigarette smoking pics. Kinda gives him a 'touch of class' don't you think? LOL.  

There have been rumors that our "95% cured" President likes to light up a few before getting on Marine One.

"95% cured"? He's so full of @#$%.




Bryan Dubois

Looks like those photos are faked.  (the one on the left for sure, probably the one on the right too)  Apparently somebody critical of Obama's smoking wanted to provide a visual through photoshopping.  Nobody has been able to get a real picture of Obama lighting up, but as of February of this year, Obama has not yet kicked the habit.

As for the faked photos:  I'm surprised nobody called me on the mistake.  I guess I'll have to call myself.


6079 Smith W
@ Mr. Dubois:   Whether the photos are faked or not makes little difference in the overall validity of the argument. He’s admitted it.   One of the major points is that Michelle apparently stated that she would only support his candidacy if he quit. A family of liars?   Also, one has to really question the sanity and the mental state of anyone who smokes with the vast amount of information that we have on the dangers of cigarette smoking.   When someone sneaks smokes, it tends to speak to a greater pathology.  

Now where’s that certified birth certificate and can we see it in order to clear up any possibility of doubt?


Bryan Dubois

I understand what you're saying, Smitty, but the photos are still faked. 

I agree that hiding the fact that you smoke speaks to the greater pathology.

6079 Smith W

@ Mr. Dubois:   IMO, there’s not much difference between those “faked” photos and a “docu-drama” where the producers assume and then re-enact events as they believe that they might have or could have occurred.   We could also think of them merely as satire.   In our wonderful digital age, I’ve had to learn to be somewhat dubious of most photographic and audio “evidence.”  Since I’m a skeptic by nature, that’s not that difficult.    


6079 Smith W

Also during his medical exam, his doctors recommended a "moderation of alcohol intake". 

What exactly does that mean?

Are there any photoshopped pics out there illustrating his binge drinking? LOL


brutus smith


Alan Keyes Ordered to Pay President Obama's Court Costs   Tue Oct 26, 2010 at 11:11:22 AM PDT

A state appellate court in Sacramento tossed out a lawsuit claiming President Barack Obama is not eligible to occupy the White House because he is not a natural-born citizen of the United States. The court ordered the plaintiffs to pay all court costs of the defendants.

The lawsuit was filed shortly after the 2008 general election. The leading plaintiff (of three) was Alan Keyes, a former member of President Ronald Reagan's administration from Maryland, and the 2008 American Independent Party candidate for president.

Keyes is a member of the so-called "birthers" movement. In his complaint, he claimed there is persuasive evidence Obama was born in what is now Kenya, which was then (1961) the British East African Protectorate of Zanzibar. He further claimed that President Obama would have automatically been a British citizen, based on his father's citizenship, and ineligible for office.


brutus smith

 I thought the teatards were non-violent? Much like the Nazi brownshirts. Private police force?


The truly annoying thing about Bryan Dubious is that there is no liberal blogger affiliated with the Sandusky Register to counteract his Beck/Rush/Palin regurgitations.


Why has Westerhold judged this voice the only one allowed to carry the Register's "BLOG" stamp in order to write opinions?


Mr. Westerhold care to respond?


Bryan Dubois


Let me help you out here, bro:  Matt Westerhold is unlikely to respond to questions directed at him in a commenting thread.  I can't speak for the guy, but your way is likely not going to get you where you want to go...

If you really want a blog on the Register, (which seems to be a recurring theme for you over the last several weeks) what you need to do is introduce yourself to the Register by starting a blog somewhere on the internet.  There are dozens of place for you to write.  Wordpress, blogger to name a couple.    I can tell you from experience that they're looking for interesting, relevent content, fairness, accuracy, reason, entertainment, and frequency.  After you've demonstrated some of your writing, you might be offered the chance to blog on the Register.  This is how it works.  I've written three different blogs for the Register, and two before I began working with them.

If you want some more free advice, give me a ring at 419-621-0169.  (It's in the book - no secret.)

You'll likely get nowhere hiding out anonymously, asking smug questions and acting indignant that nobody from their staff recognizes your genius writing abilities from your occassional story commenting.  (Many of which are obsessive personal attacks on me - which I don't mind as I've said before - it just shows what you spend your time thinking and writing about)

Just trying to be real with you.

By the way:

Sanders writes in the print edition of the Sandusky Register.  This single blog post was a response to his print column.  My blog is the response.  (Not the other way around.)

Dude i Roc

@ Pundit: I think Mr. Sanders in PRINT creates balance. SR does the merry dance of "tit for tat" VERY well.


Pundit: Rufus is a writer who get's a lot of print room and free reign. Dubois is a blogger who gets a microscopic amount of web space.

Rufus is a partisan democrat who fit's right in with the MSNBC/Brutus Smith far left liberals.

Dubois is somewhat of a libertarian type who does not spout complete rhetoric.

Westerhold is a liberal. He also has his own Blog, as do many others on the Register. If you want more blogs then feel free to write the SR people and request them.

Stating the paper tilts right is silly. They are squarely on the Dem side, although they do try to be objective and do fairly allow many different voices.