The Bishop and the Butterfly: Murder, Politics, and the End of the Jazz Age
    William K. Wolfrum's picture

    Conservatives risk being jailed, tortured

    There is a remote, although gaining, possibility America’s military will intervene as a last resort to resolve the “Conservative Problem.” Don’t dismiss it as unrealistic.

    America isn’t the Third World. If a military coup does occur here it will be civilized. That it has never happened doesn’t mean it wont. Describing what may be afoot is not to advocate it. So, view the following through military eyes:

  • Officers swear to “defend the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic.” Unlike enlisted personnel, they do not swear to “obey the orders of the president of the United States.”
  • Top military officers can see that the United States has been sold out by Conservatives who have given away American institutions and enterprises in pursuit of more money for their corporate benefactors.
  • They can see that Americans are increasingly alarmed that this nation, with Conservatives still allowed to walk around freely and espouse their treasonous ideologies, may not even be recognizable as America by the 2012 election.
  • They can see that the U.S. economy - ravaged by deficits, taxes, unemployment, and impending inflation all created by Conservative ideologies - has become a “petty cash” reserve for Conservatives and the corporations that give them enough money.
  • They can see these Conservatives waging undeclared war against the American people. They saw Conservatives mock 9/11 victims and Hurricane Katrina victims. They can see the vitriol Conservatives have against the American people each day in the fight to reform health care. They See Conservatives are loyal only to their corporate benefactors, and not the United States.
  • They can see the endless treasonous comments from Conservatives, and realize that Conservatives have no interest in “We the People.” They can see that Conservatives only cater to the rich, regardless of nationality. They can see Conservative leaders kissing up to nations like China, while people in their own nation are dependent on the charity of others for a semblance of health care.
  • In the end, America’s military will see that they have no choice but to round up Conservatives, jail them, and torture them. Because while the American military does not condone torture, Conservatives do. And yes, many Conservatives will accidentally be tortured to death. But they long ago agreed that this was fair.

    Please don’t get me wrong - I’m not advocating that the U.S. military jails and tortures greedy Conservatives and their self-serving corporate benefactors, smashing them until their minds and wills are broken so that the United States can finally catch up to the rest of the civilized world. No, I’m not advocating that at all.

    I’m just sayin’.



    You must have a different meaing to the word "conservative" than I do, or perhaps that's why you're capitalizing it. The people you're identifying as Conservatives stopped being conservative a long time ago (if they ever were). I can respect conservatives. Heck, in many ways I consider myself conservative. (For one thing, I believe in conserving our natural resources!)

    That aside and/or giving you credit for using "Conservative" instead of "conservative", there's this bit:

    In the end, America’s military will see that they have no choice but to round up Conservatives, jail them, and torture them.

    Wouldn't that make the torturers themselves "Conservative" (in the sense you're using this word to mean)? If so, who will round up, jail, and/or torture them?

    Checking the links in my pieces is sometimes vital for getting the satire.

    Speaking of links, Newsmax has apparently removed the article. The article url,, goes to the Newsmax home page, and John Perry's page,, does not list the article.

    Yeah, but "Violent overthrow of American Government" is attached to them forever.

    As is "Un-American Seditionists."

    True. It has forever tarnished Newsmax's shining reputation as an objective news outlet.

    Here's an article about the retraction:


    As of this writing, Newsmax has posted no explanation or apology on its website -- arguably par for the course for Newsmax when it gets caught screwing up. But Media Matters has received the following statement from a Newsmax spokesperson:

    In a blog posting to Newsmax John Perry wrote about a coup scenario involving the U.S. military. He clearly stated that he was not advocating such a scenario but simply describing one.

    After several reader complaints, Newsmax wanted to insure that this article was not misinterpreted. It was removed after a short period after being posted.

    Newsmax strongly believes in the principles of Constitutional government and would never advocate or insinuate any suggestion of an activity that would undermine our democracy or democratic institutions.

    Mr. Perry served as a political appointee in the Carter administration in HUD and FEMA. He has no official relationship with Newsmax other than as an unpaid blogger.

    Interesting that Newsmax makes a point of highlighting that Perry worked in the Carter administration, as if it somehow proves he's not really a right-wing nut. And its dismissal of Perry as nothing more than an "unpaid blogger" is a tad disingenous since Perry has been writing for Newsmax since 1999 and Perry's Newsmax bio touts how he "contributes a regular column to"

    I have no problem statiung that Newsmax is on par with Infowars and Malkin when it comes to integrity of honesty in any way. But with so much craziness on the right, more and more their messages get into the news cycle.

    Occasionally, readers submit comments to us via the handy "Contact Us" link on the left. It's not always clear which article they mean to respond to, and they often don't seem to realize that there are a few of us. I feel obliged to publish the most recent feedback that we've received (twice). Mr. Wolfson, your article seems like the most likely target, but it's hard to know for sure. Anyway, without further ado, I give you reader VP:

    Sir, as a Republican, and a supportter of my party, you sir have called me a mederer.  Sir, you have no class and why any one could possibly vote for such a low class, rabble rousing , name calling individual....  a person that needs to get out  with the people and say these things in  a full public and unfetted  forum...

    You, Sir, need to grow up.


    That Mr. Wolfson sure is controversial.

    Wolfy, I'd be scared if I were you. Calling someone a mederer is  grounds for getting your ass kicked.

    I refuse to soften my stance. I will always call out thouse that commit Merd.

    1. It's spelled meder, not merd. Get a clue, moran.
    2. You can say that here (or is that hear?), because our forum is fetted. Try saying it in an unfetted forum, however. (Is that a forum where they don't throw fêtes? If this forum throws fêtes, how come I'm never invited?)
    3. I'm such a spelling bigot.

    aka a spigot

    Way to jump on bad spellings. You are a true hero. In the grandest sense of the word.


    William K. Wolfson

    I do what I can.

    However, as for jumping on bad Spellings, she's really not my type:

    Tori Spelling

    Wow. That is definitely a personal foul. You need to spend some time in the Dag penalty box, reflecting on how to make better use of celebrity puns.

    Flagrant and gratuitious. For shame.

    Latest Comments