Congratulations to Don Grundmann and Riley J. Hood on their Recent Nuptials

donandrileyWe at Independent Political Report wish to congratulate Constitution Party activists Don Grundmann and Riley J. Hood on their recent wedding. The Happy couple wed April 1st at the First Presbyterian Church in Fresno, CA in front of a crowd of well-wishers. Following the ceremony, Grundmann made a stirring & emotional speech at the reception.

“I know I’ve said a lot of bad things about gay people,” said Grundmann, “but I was just covering. This is who I really am. I’m proud of me, and I’m sorry for anyone I’ve ever hurt. I just know Riley and I will be really happy together. We’re buying a condo in San Fran, and we’re thinking about adopting! I love you, boo bear!”

Cody Quirk, Grundmann’s best man, was so moved by the love between the two that he teared up during the toast. Said Quirk: “I just knew Closet Don and Captain Bro Perm would tie the knot eventually. It’s beautiful.”

142 thoughts on “Congratulations to Don Grundmann and Riley J. Hood on their Recent Nuptials

  1. Martin Passoli

    Each of them has got it half baked. Put them together and that’s as fully baked as anyone can get.

  2. William Saturn

    Very few people outside of IPR know who these men are. Someone researching one of these men could come upon this article and believe it is true. There is no indication given that this is satire.

  3. Thomas L. Knapp

    William,

    Riley is the state chair of a political party. Grundmann used to claim to be one as well. Political party officials who issue statements on behalf of their organizations are public figures. It’s not IPR’s fault that they chose to be public figures or that they’re not very EFFECTIVE at being public figures.

    Given that any defamation claim would be an interstate matter with diversity of jurisdiction, that would by definition make it federal. Last time I noticed, the threshold for a US District Court to even accept a complaint was a plausible claim of at least $80k in damages per plaintiff. There’s not a fucking chance that their reputations, let alone any damage to their reputations, would be valued at $80k by any sane person. I can think of a few people who might pay them the cost of a Greyhound ticket to go the hell away, but that’s about it.

  4. William Saturn

    Diversity cases do not necessarily have to be heard in federal court. But that’s not the issue. Public officials/figures are still afforded some protection. I believe there needs to be a showing of actual malice. Regardless of whether that is the case here, this is still potentially libel.

  5. Martin Passoli

    I’ll ignore these people trying to play us for April fools and pretending this is satire. Congratulations to the happy couple!

  6. Joshua

    HAHAHAHA!!!! Thank you for this Jed! This is the best thing I’ve seen in a while! Made my day.

  7. Mark Axinn

    An element of defamation is actual damages.

    No damages, no defamation.

    Next case please.

  8. Cody Quirk

    How sad that only a blogger with Nazi buddies objects to this.

    Then again, I would love to see Grundmann come on here and throw one of his loony temper tantrums over this, lol.

  9. paulie

    WS,

    Axinn is an attorney by trade and has been for many years. I get the impression that he is successful in that field. I don’t know what you do, but if it isn’t law, chances are better that he is right than that you are. That multiple people here disagree with you (ie all think any lawsuit about this would get laughed out of court) and no one agrees also indicates to me that you are wrong.

    If you still think it’s a real issue, ask Redlich. He is an attorney also, as well as the one most directly on the line if there is a real issue, so he’d be the best person to determine if he thinks it is a real problem for him or not.

  10. Matt Cholko

    Every time Hood or Grundmann open their mouths they harm their reputations. They’ve both done more than enough of that to render their reputations totally worthless.

  11. William Saturn

    Despite what has been said, public figures do have recourse for libel. Hustler Magazine, Inc. v. Falwell is the applicable Supreme Court case on this subject. It decided that Jerry Falwell could not recover from Hustler Magazine for a satirical interview it published (in which it stated Falwell’s “first time” was with his mother) because Falwell could not prove Hustler Magazine published with actual malice. According to the case, a successful tort here by a public figure requires (1) damage to reputation, (2) false statement of fact, and (3) actual malice. The extent of damage to the reputation of Grundmann and Hood above cannot be known at this time, despite what Mark Axinn writes above. It is unquestionable that this article is a false statement of fact. But whether there is actual malice here is not known. I would not be so quick to reject that this is potentially libelous. I stand by the statement.

  12. Thomas L. Knapp

    “The extent of damage to the reputation of Grundmann and Hood above cannot be known at this time”

    Yes, it can. Their reputations are already so poor that it’s effectively impossible to damage them further. The only people who like them are people who will like them BETTER for “being attacked by those people.”

    So far as I know, IPR hasn’t sent them a bill for the improvement of their reputations among that crowd.

  13. langa

    I’m not a lawyer, but I did take a couple of postgraduate classes in Constitutional Law, and I concur with the actual lawyer (Mark) that the chances of Grundmann/Hood successfully suing IPR over this article are approximately zero.

  14. paulie

    It’s interesting that the discussion about the ephemera of being sued is in IPR comments, but not on our email list for writers. If I saw an article that I actually had a serious worry about Warren being sued over, I’d bring it up on the email list, since Warren is a lot more likely to see that than IPR comments or probably even the article itself and because it gives other IPR writers a chance to see the conversation and join it, just like the public comments. It’s possible that William wrote Warren privately, but I’m guessing not, because I would have expected to see Warren pop up on the email list or in comments here if he had. Thus, my best guess is that William actually is not really worried about any danger of a lawsuit against Warren, or even against Jed (who as I understand it has very little if anything in the way of assets). Rather, it seems to me that this is just a way for William to express his displeasure with the rather pointed but well-aimed satire hitting its mark. Well, too bad! The happy couple made their bed, so now let them lay in it, and the rest of us can point and laugh.

  15. Stewart Flood

    I think he is just upset about not getting to be the best man in the story.

  16. Jill Pyeatt

    I’ve noticed that William is quite consistent in his beliefs again censorship. He wants everything posted to be public–unless it’s an attack against homophobes. Those are the only comments he thinks are inappropriate.

    This is just an observation on my part, but right now I can’t think of anything else he’s objected to.

  17. William Saturn

    I never said I was opposed to one having the right to post this kind of material. I never said I agreed with the Court. Plus, I never said “this is libel!” I only said it is potentially libel because it is a false statement (of quite a personal nature) made without any indication it is satirical. Like I’ve said before, I have some sympathy for Don Grundmann because of the mob mentality against him. I have no problem sticking up for him or anyone else marginalized because of their beliefs.

  18. Don J. Grundmann, D.C.

    William – I appreciate your consideration and thoughtfulness regarding the libelousness of the comments against Riley and myself. I will not be suing partly because to do so I would be spending 24/7 of my time countering those who will be attacking me nonstop with endless outrageous lies, smears, and accusations. There will never be any end to them for various reasons inclusive of actions which I will be taking shortly and which I can inform you of if you so wish.

    The greatest thing which such comments so well illustrate is the virtual total cultural collapse which our nation is undergoing, even if it is still at its most infant stages; a little toe in the water beginning of the transatlantic swim equivalent to follow.

    Most specifically I note that Riley and I are representing the mainstream values upon which our nation was built. Defense of children for myself but also a recognition by both of us that the nation was not founded on a belief, acceptance, or promotion of the soul poison of sodomy. Such attacks against us would have been considered preposterous and absolutely the actions of an insane, and indeed evil, lunatic/person if they had been attempted in previous times.
    ;
    Fast forward to our time and a Socially Engineered, Pavlovian trained populace has been warped and mutated into the belief, acceptance, and promotion of sodomy EVEN, AND ESPECIALLY, TO THE CHILDREN OF THE NATION.

    What could possibly account for such a monstrous development? There are many factors but 3 I can quickly note are – A) the collapse of the paradigm of man; i.e.; men degenerating into males who comprise among their ranks both sodomites and their supporters – something a real and actual man would, and could, never do or support ( Prime Examples – the mob mentality you refer to here at IPR where males such as Quirk and other males and females squeak out their support – ” tolerating evil,” ” changing society,” and other such euphemisms – of the Sodomite War against Humanity ); B) the collapse of the Christian Church in its opposition to the Homosexual/Sodomy Movement; reference here the recent surrender of the Mormon Church where in return for preservation of their ” image ” they will support pro-pervert laws in Utah; i.e.; they no longer challenge sin but will grovel to the sinners in return for their approval,; and C) the collapse of conscience; which would stop any and all of my attackers if they had any left in the slightest degree.

    Hence Riley and I stand in defense of that which made our dying nation great; both its Christian foundations and the basic moral foundations of protection of and support for the normal family unit and children. This is what brings the attacks against us.

    I am like Charlton Heston in ” The Omega Man.” While I carry on in defense of the basic foundations and the last remnants of humanity the mutants howl and screech ( Come down!!! Come down!!! ) against my exposure of their corruption, sickness, and outright evil.

    The article is hence part of the overall manifestation of the collapse and death of our nation.

  19. langa

    I’m a big supporter of free speech and a big opponent of capital punishment, but if I weren’t, I would certainly push for the death penalty for Nicholas Cage and everyone else involved with that terrible remake of The Wicker Man.

  20. Thomas L. Knapp

    langa,

    Well, the movie in general is just kind of “meh” … flat. But a few things — the bees, the bear-suit punch-out, etc. — make it a masterpiece of terribleness which will live in all our hearts forever.

  21. langa

    TK, I know what you mean, and normally, I’m a fan of “so bad they’re good” movies. But, in this case, I liked the original so much, that when I think of the remake, I just get a tremendous urge to do bodily harm to all those responsible for inflicting it upon us.

  22. Thomas L. Knapp

    langa,

    It’s been so long since I saw the original that I can’t really compare the two. I remember finding the original interesting but a little drawn out and tiresome, but that may have been because I was young (it was made in the early 70s, and I’m guessing I saw it circa 1980, when I would have been in my early teens and more interested in blood and gore than story).

  23. langa

    Actually, I think the original does a very good job of presenting a rather libertarian perspective on the idea of freedom of religion. I have always felt that, from a strictly libertarian standpoint, there is no such thing as freedom of religion, at least not per se, as the NAP really makes no distinction between religious actions and non-religious actions. Aggression does not become legitimate simply because it is part of a religion, and vice versa. Religion is simply a non-factor.

    The original version of The Wicker Man seems to take basically the same view. For most of the film, Sergeant Howie is portrayed as meddlesome, intolerant and authoritarian, primarily because he insists on belittling and mocking the (non-aggressive) pagan religious customs of the islanders. However, near the end of the movie, Howie is transformed from sanctimonious villain to sympathetic victim, as the islanders use their religious beliefs as a justification for murder. Ultimately, I think the film strikes a fine balance between endorsing religious tolerance, while simultaneously condemning the use of religion to justify evil actions.

  24. paulie

    Can’t find a clip but the first movie scene that comes to mind in regards to Fabulous Don is the guy who solicits Dirk Diggler to show him his cock in a pickup truck and then beats him up.

  25. Cody Quirk

    “I will not be suing partly because to do so I would be spending 24/7 of my time countering those who will be attacking me nonstop with endless outrageous lies, smears, and accusations.”

    Or basically because you either have the legal, nor even the financial standing to do so.

    “The greatest thing which such comments so well illustrate is the virtual total cultural collapse which our nation is undergoing, even if it is still at its most infant stages; a little toe in the water beginning of the transatlantic swim equivalent to follow.”

    Even if in a moral and social sense, our nation is going down the tubes, yet the vile dogmatic tactics of people like you, Riley Hood, and others, actually help speed up that process instead of slow it down by your approach and rhetoric that seem to push many to what you deem as the “dark side”.
    In fact the vile protests of the Westboro Baptist Church are cited by many as being one of the major factors in helping those of the LGBT persuasion become more accepted by mainstream society, then by any action on the “Homosexual/Sodomy Movement’s” part.

    And people like you keep helping the “Homosexual/Sodomy Movement” look even more innocent and persecuted through your behavior.

    “Most specifically I note that Riley and I are representing the mainstream values upon which our nation was built. Defense of children for myself”

    No you’re not. I can cite many quotes by the founding fathers that are in opposition to sectarianism and in opposition to government invading one’s liberty to privacy and personal freedom.
    The founders especially condemned the same kind of religious fanaticism that you and Riley live by.

    Oh, and you don’t have children, nor are you married, and neither do you live by yourself, so you are a poor figure to ‘defend our nation’s children’.

    “the collapse of the Christian Church in its opposition to the Homosexual/Sodomy Movement; reference here the recent surrender of the Mormon Church where in return for preservation of their ” image ” they will support pro-pervert laws in Utah; i.e.; they no longer challenge sin but will grovel to the sinners in return for their approval,;”

    You know that Fluckiger and Janine Hansen are not only Mormon, but remain members of the church despite the LDS Church “surrendering to the Homosexual/Sodomy Movement”. Perhaps you should get in their faces and chide them for this.
    In fact you should even bring up the LDS Church’s “surrender” at the next national committee meeting of the CP and present a resolution that would not only point this out and condemn it, but also call on all LDS members of the CP to abandon their church and “start behaving like Biblical Christians”.

    The think the CP would be further helped by such an action on your part, and I encourage you to contact Riley Hood and team up with him on this help make the CP conform more with Biblical Christianity 😉

    I dare you.

    “Hence Riley and I stand in defense of that which made our dying nation great; both its Christian foundations and the basic moral foundations of protection of and support for the normal family unit and children. This is what brings the attacks against us”

    Or maybe it’s because you harass people online with opposing views to the point of stalking and intimidation, along with smearing people of other faiths (like Muslims and Mormons), and especially insult others with arrogant pharisee drivel.

    Both of you are reaping what you have sown.

    “I am like Charlton Heston in ” The Omega Man.” While I carry on in defense of the basic foundations and the last remnants of humanity the mutants howl and screech ( Come down!!! Come down!!! ) against my exposure of their corruption, sickness, and outright evil.”

    Let’s say you’re right. The problem then is that you continue thinking that you can change things around and reverse the trend when in fact the reality is futile for you; your base of support is shrinking rapidly and society in general is heading in the opposite direction at a rate that you cannot stop or dent, but help increase through your rhetoric and online bleating.

    In other words, not only have you lost this fight, but there really is no point for you to continue, since for one, the idea of recriminalizing same sex acts & relations is laughably taboo to today’s western world and will be even more taboo in the future.

    The war is over for you & Riley, period.

  26. Riley J. Hood

    You faggots have nothing better to do. I have been married for 16 years, to a woman whose name is Janice. I will start to searching for a lawyer to sue you people for defamation of character. Mr. Zeigler is the self avowed queer.–RJH

  27. paulie

    You go ahead and do that Riley, and we’ll report on your progress suing us for an April Fools day joke. I’ll let Warren know.

  28. Cody Quirk

    LMAO, ever heard of the First Amendment, Mr. Hood? It’s something that’s going to make any lawsuit by you look frivolous & silly in a court of law.

    IPR has featured your articles in a fair manner, as they have with the leaders & activists of all other minor parties here, and because you happen to advocate and call for things with are considered highly unpopular, inflammatory, unconstitutional, and even illegal- then you should’ve been prepared for the blowback & ridicule that comes in response to your rhetoric and especially your very public editorials in the first place- especially since you are also a leader of a state political party.

    If you can’t take what you dish out, then don’t dish it out in the first place, IMO.

  29. Shave the Whales!

    Bruce Majors,

    Which one left you and which one’s that bitch? 😛

  30. wredlich

    While I agree with Mark Axinn that actual damages have to be proven in most defamation cases, it’s not required in all such cases. If, for example, you make a false factual assertion that someone is a registered sex offender or has some other criminal status, that is “per se defamation” and proof of actual damages is not required.

    There are at least some cases that say a false assertion that someone is gay does not qualify for per se defamation, and then you’d have to prove actual damages, which is very difficult.

    The real problem with any lawsuit is that this is satire, and thus protected. There’s also the problem of proving malice, which would be particularly difficult as to me since I had never heard of Riley Hood before. I recognize the name Grundmann but I don’t remember why.

    Warren

  31. paulie

    Yes, but actually I think we really should only cover them on April 1, sort of like Milnes, unless they do something actually newsworthy (I don’t mean run another article or another write-in campaign for office).

  32. Mark Axinn

    Warren is correct that “per se” defamation, like any “per se” tort, would not require proof of actual damages. But that’s certainly not present in this case. The piece was clearly satire, published on April 1 on a site that occasionally carries serious news about the individuals involved and had multiple satires appear that day.

    Then there’s the incredibly remote possibility that Mr. Riley or Mr. Grundman is a public figure (unlikely since IPR, as great a site as it may be, does not quite rise to the same level as CNN or the Wall Street Journal). In that case, the 1st Amendment kicks in, and the ability to sustain a claim like Jerry Falwell raised against Larry Flynt is pretty remote (esp. after the Supreme Court ruling in that case).

    So in the end, IPR has nothing to worry about and keep on churning out great articles and April Fools satires.

  33. Martin Passoli

    “I have been married for 16 years, to a woman whose name is Janice. ”

    Please give her my condolences.

  34. William Saturn

    Mark Axinn says it is “clearly satire.” I don’t believe it is so clear. Personally, I think we should add a disclaimer to all the April Fools articles that make false statements of fact. I could easily foresee someone with little knowledge about fringe politics or perhaps someone from another culture coming upon a fake article and either believing it as true or believing IPR is factually inaccurate.

  35. paulie

    It’s clear to everyone except you. Even if I didn’t know who Grundmann and Hood are I would guess it was an April Fool’s joke from context. And Riley is what, worried that someone in Indonesia or Cameroon may think he is gay? Give me a break.

  36. Jed Ziggler Post author

    If Riley sues me, he won’t get much. I have no house, no car, and very little in my bank account. So yeah good luck with that.

    If he sues Warren Redlich, he will lose. This is a satirical piece meant in good fun (if a bit biting), not defamation.

  37. paulie

    The ironic thing is that the thread was long buried before Riley revived it. Now it’s getting lots of new views because it is staying in recent comments, and all he will get out of this is followup April Fools articles every April 1st from now on.

  38. Joshua

    Wait, wait, wait. I just want to know if we can take a minute to point out that the Chairman of the Constitution Party of Wisconsin (who parades himself around as a “good Godly man”) took to a public forum, specifically one geared to covering third party politics, to call it’s writers “faggots.” Can we talk about that for a moment?

  39. paulie

    I’m sure he is aware that it is a reference to being burned at the stake, and probably wishes to bring that back.

  40. Jake Porter

    Paulie,

    “I’ve got an idea. Suppose you agree that he can’t actually have babies, not having a womb, which is nobody’s fault, not even the Government, but that he can have the right to have babies.”

  41. Mark Axinn

    I thought fag was slang for a cigarette and a faggot is a small piece of burning wood.

    But then, I like a gay and carefree attitude towards many things and may not be up on the latest terminology.

  42. Jed Ziggler Post author

    “I thought fag was slang for a cigarette and a faggot is a small piece of burning wood.”

    According to South Park it’s a slur against Harley riders.

  43. paulie

    I thought fag was slang for a cigarette and a faggot is a small piece of burning wood.

    Yes. So why these burning objects? Because gay people, when outed, were burned alive at the stake during the Catholic millenium long reign of terror in Europe.

  44. paulie

    The proper term is sodomite.

    There’s nothing proper about this term.

    Even if you read the old testament literally, it is not at all clear what the sin of Sodom was: rape, pedophilia, general promiscuity, violation of the rules of courtesy to guests, and other possibilities exist.

    “Sodomy” can also mean heterosexual anal sex, and even oral sex, which would make most straight people “sodomites” as well.

  45. Don J. Grundmann, D.C.

    It is so astounding, sad, funny, and pathetic to see how the lackeys and lovers of Sodom, Inc. desperately contort the English language to attempt to confuse people regarding what they really do and, especially, their ultimate aims/goals.

    ” Violation of the rules of courtesy to guests???????” What a total load of BS but yet straight from the Social Engineering/Pavlovian playbook of the Plantation Masters; the true controllers of the Homosexual/Sodomy War Machine.

    Paulie – Sodom, Inc. will not go into kindergarten/first grade classes to tell children not to mistreat guests; an absolutely beyond ludicrous attempt to sanitize their evil. They will be there to teach the children that sodomy – putting their penis and/or any other thing into an anus – is normal, ” natural,” and something they should either try themselves or, especially, have done to them. They will be there to do to the children what the whole Movement is designed to do and intends to do – mentally, emotionally, and spiritually molest the children before they physically molest them. They will be there to fulfill their objective – to totally, and permanently, shatter the children so that they will be the forever slaves of both the Plantation Masters and their own Master, the Enemy of God.

    Bottom Line – There is no such thing as ” gay.” That is a marketing/Social Engineering/public relations term for homosexual. And a homosexual is, by definition, a sodomite. End of story.

    You are a good lackey for, and extremely loyal to, Sodom, Inc. and its CEO, The Enemy of God, but your volunteer job description involves non-stop lying to sanitize the reality of the evil which you support and promote. Your smoke cloud above was just part of your continuing efforts to sanitize and disguise the turd which is the Homosexual/Sodomy Movement as a whole.

  46. Don J. Grundmann, D.C.

    paulie – Your reply is yet another classic. Bottom Line : I can address all of your self-proclaimed ” truths ” and you would do exactly as you have done now – ignore any challenges to your Sodom, Inc. playbook recital and then say that I addressed nothing.

    Of course in your playbook a million ” possibilities ” can exist except for one – that sodomy itself, and ( especially ) the evil of the people who practiced and supported it, was the ” crime against nature ” for which Sodom was destroyed by The Creator whom you despise.

  47. paulie

    You can continue to ignore the points rather than address them. I guess that is the only thing you can do given your unsupported conjecture about what the sin of Sodom was. But even supposing that we do define Sodomy exclusively as anal sex, many (quite probably most) straight people have anal sex, and quite a few gay people don’t. Lesbians certainly don’t, unless it’s with a strap on or unless they are not exclusively lesbians. .And if you include oral sex, I would guess that is easily well over 90% of straight people. And your latest reply assumes that the term Sodomy as it has come to be used in the English language had to have been the sin of Sodom, but you have still done nothing to show any evidence for this conjecture.

  48. Andy Craig

    Getting called a “sodomite Libertarian” by one of the CPoW kooks has to be one of the most amusing highlights of my experiences as a Libertarian candidate in Wisconsin. Some folks tried to get offended on my behalf, but I just told them to laugh it off.

    I was asked about them in a couple of interviews, since I had a CPoW opponent last year. I don’t think they liked me pointing out that they have a “King James Version-only” policy. Which I read on their own website. I also called them theocrats and their ballot label misleading, because both of things are pretty obviously true.

  49. paulie

    Don, I’ve had anal sex with women, so am I a sodomite? What about my lesbian friends, or for that matter gay men who only have oral sex and/or other types of sexual contact but no anal..are they sodomites or not? Also, what is the exact chapter and verse(s) that proves to you exactly what you believe the sin of Sodom was?

  50. NewFederalist

    “…that sodomy itself, and ( especially ) the evil of the people who practiced and supported it, was the ” crime against nature ” for which Sodom was destroyed by The Creator…”

    Thanks for clearing that up. All this time I thought it was for stock market manipulation.

  51. William Saturn

    Chapter 19, verses 5 & 8 talk about the male residents of Sodom wanting “to know” the angels that came to investigate the city on God’s behalf. Lot offers these residents his daughters who had not “known” men, but the male residents refuse. They want “to know” the angels. At the time of King James, “to know” meant sexual intercourse.

  52. paulie

    The angels are not necessarily male, but even if they were, the act that the men in question want to perform would have been rape, and also violation of a host’s responsibility to his guests. It’s also not clear that this was necessarily the only, or even most important, sin for which Sodom was destroyed from the story. So, again, there’s no proof that what we call “sodomy,” itself a word with different definitions in different places, is actually the sin for which Sodom was supposedly destroyed.

  53. paulie

    Thanks for clearing that up. All this time I thought it was for stock market manipulation.

    Maybe it was. The story really doesn’t say.

  54. William Saturn

    “The angels are not necessarily male”

    The angels are referred to as “men.” However, at the time, the word “men” could refer to members of either sex. Still, “Sodomy” refers to acts between opposite or same sex people.

  55. Don J. Grundmann, D.C.

    Actually it was indeed ” hospitality ” as paulie states.

    You see, Lot ran a restaurant and placed the forks and knives on the wrong side of the plates. The local Gordon Ramsey of the time saw this and said/screamed/shouted ” How the %^&*($#@ can you run a restaurant when you can’t even put the forks on the right damn side??!!” And so was born the legion of Sodom which God destroyed because of its bad ” hospitality.” Right, paulie?

    And who can dispute my historical ” possibility?”

  56. paulie

    The angels were guests under Lot’s protection. Offering them up to be raped, besides being rape and interspecies sex, would have also been a violation of Lot’s responsibility to protect his guests. What is so hard to understand?

    Instead of making stupid jokes about forks and spoons, you would be better off answering whether straight people who have anal sex are sodomites or not, whether you include oral sex in your definition of sodomy (and would that include straight oral sex), and whether gay people who don’t have anal sex are sodomites or not under your definition.

  57. Mark Axinn

    Only Mrs. Lot knows for sure, as she looked back.

    As far as the daughters were concerned, they were no winners as they demonstrated in the cave with Daddy.

  58. Don J. Grundmann, D.C.

    A) Lot’s responsibility to who?

    B) paulie, paulie – You mean my ” possibility ” is different from all of your ” possibilities?” Can’t I make up any fantasy just like Sodom, Inc. does and it will get automatic credibility as does any smoke screen put out to ” muddy the waters ” and normalize sodomy so that it can be taught to children as normal, natural, and something that they should try? That’s the whole idea behind your arguments and then you dis me when I give you a little help. Now I know how Rodney Dangerfield felt.

  59. paulie

    You mean my ” possibility ” is different from all of your ” possibilities?” Can’t I make up any fantasy just like Sodom, Inc. does and it will get automatic credibility as does any smoke screen put out to ” muddy the waters ” and normalize sodomy so that it can be taught to children as normal, natural, and something that they should try? That’s the whole idea behind your arguments and then you dis me when I give you a little help. Now I know how Rodney Dangerfield felt.

    No idea of what any of that meant other than that you are still dodging the questions, but then that’s what I expected.

    “Now I know how Rodney Dangerfield felt.”

    I will resist the temptation.

    I will resist the temptation.

    I will resist the temptation.

    LOL

  60. Cody Quirk

    Ironic especially that Don has no children of his own, nor has he ever been married, and let alone still lives with his mother- which makes him a very, VERY poor authority in “speaking for the children” or ‘defending the heterosexual orientation’; since it appears that his background might leave his own sexual orientation open to question, indeed.

    After all, he lied here about still being the California CP Chairman when he in fact was replaced as State Chairman beforehand- so he has shown himself to be an individual that doesn’t always give an honest, or even a ‘straight’ answer.

  61. Jill Pyeatt

    I am amused that this thread has now been active for a few days, but before Riley resurrected it, it had gone off the front page like all the other April Fool’s Day articles.

    Thanks, Riley.

  62. Don J. Grundmann, D.C.

    Quirk – You don’t ever want to meet me in person as I will slap the snot out you. I have gotten very sick of your shallow stupidity. You claim to be a Mormon and yet you are totally in the camp of the Homosexual/Sodomy Movement. What a cowardly disgrace. Your pathetic weakness and cowardice in just sickening.

    Yes, I know that you will now rave on about being ” threatened,” ” stalked,” and all of the other crap which you fart out to give yourself a self-importance.

    Yes, I have no children but I would not betray any child much less my own as you will. What a sickening disgrace you are.

    The nation is going down the tubes and you support the attackers. What a God dammed ass you are.

    You haven’t done jack-shit to do the tiniest thing against the enemies of the nation and instead attack, betray, and backstab everyone who is working their butts off to defend the country.

    You will richly deserve every horrific thing that happens to you through your miserable existence.

    When I refer to people, sub-humans, who support Sodom, Inc. and all of its goals I will be referring to you and all of the other freaks like you.

  63. paulie

    In the comment directly above, Don is showing his interpretation of loving his fellow man like himself. Unfortunately, it appears he must not like himself very much.

    Meanwhile, the real reason Riley Hood revived this thread is almost certainly because he secretly relishes the attention. He must know that a lawsuit would have no chance, and that even if it did a public comment wouldn’t be the way to get the post removed, so that had to have just been a thinly veiled excuse to revive the thread and get more attention and comments for himself and to have more people see his name in print more often. Well played, sir!

  64. Thomas L. Knapp

    Oh, get off it, Grundmann — like you’ve ever lifted a finger to “defend the country.” Calling people names on the Internet isn’t “defening the country,” it’s just calling people names on the Internet.

    Fortunately, you probably don’t have to worry about getting your ass kicked by Cody Quirk. As you’ve no doubt discovered by now, human beings who aren’t your mother tend to go out of their way to avoid you.

  65. paulie

    In their comments in this thread, Don and Riley show the passion that makes their love so heated. A toast to the happy couple! 😛

  66. Mark Axinn

    I think it’s time to move on now.

    A funny April Fool’s spoof has run its course and then some….

  67. paulie

    You’re probably right. Riley just couldn’t leave well enough alone though and had an unquenchable thirst to see his name up in lights… and Don can’t stop expressing his longing for physical contact with Cody.

  68. Cody Quirk

    Well Don is going to be in for a disappointment, because I’m straight, practical, & happily married to a awesome woman that thinks Grundmann’s posts are some of the funniest BS rantings she’s ever seen in the world of political blogging.
    Heck, she also gave me the idea of using parts of Hood’s articles as lyrics for potential death metal songs, which would sound both funny & super sick, if you think about it.

    Also note that if there was no truth in my previous post, then Grundmann wouldn’t have responded in such a pissed-off manner with ad hominem rhetoric that didn’t even address most of my allegations.

    I’m also thinking that he has a serious Napoleon complex as well, since this guy is only 5 foot, due to his scoliosis, and thinks he could slap someone over 6 foot easily, along with thinking he plays some very important role of a ‘savior’ in a culture war that both he & Riley obviously understand little about, especially the obvious fact that they lost long ago and keep beating the dead horse.

    In fact their rhetoric only helps the ‘opposing side’ look good and maks social conservatives & traditionalists look like WBC-style simpleton fundies with zero public appeal.

    And if the CP mainly has people like them to represent & defend the party online, then that party doesn’t have a future, or even a near-future in the political arena.

  69. Shave the Whales!

    “Heck, she also gave me the idea of using parts of Hood’s articles as lyrics for potential death metal songs, which would sound both funny & super sick, if you think about it.”

    I hope it gets played at Don and Riley’s wedding. Every couple has to have a song, after all!

  70. Cody Quirk

    “I hope it gets played at Don and Riley’s wedding. Every couple has to have a song, after all!”

    I dunno- I think The Weather Girls ‘It’s Raining Men’ is likely to be their official wedding song.

  71. Pingback: Riley Hood Threatens to Sue IPR | The Saturnalian

  72. Jill Pyeatt

    LOL–now William Saturn is going to join in the fun by giving the April Fool’s article a longer life!

  73. Don J. Grundmann, D.C.

    Well Quirk I do advise my friends to be ” clinical;” i.e.; objective and not subjective and emotional regarding death, destruction, and tragedy around them. But I was not ” clinical ” in my response to your latest idiotic comments as I was thinking of a little boy that I knew years ago. He was a wonderful little boy but he was killed by the same forces that you, and so many of your fellow freaks at IPR, support. There was a lot of death and destruction involved; tragedies which will last for generations and produce endless pain for countless people along the way. But such is meaningless to a rodent like you.

    I was thinking of all of the tragedies which will occur if your Master succeeds. And I thought of all of the death and destruction which has already occurred; as with my little friend. And I was not ” objective.”

    When I refer to your ” Master ” I am referencing that you, as have many others, have made your choice between The Creator and His Opponent via your support of the Homosexual/Sodomy Movement.

    If you had been next door I would have walked over and knocked the crap out of you. But The Creator will bring you your just rewards in His time.

  74. Krzysztof Marcin Lesiak

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1wYNFfgrXTI

    Sarwark for LNC Chairman
    Auguste Bartkuke Lesiak for LNC Vice Chairwoman
    Krzysztof Marcin Lesiak for LNC At Large Committee Member Number Six
    Darryl W. Perry/Gary Johnson for president vicepresident 2016
    Eminem is endorsing…………….for president
    Rand Paul is going to Win
    Ron Paul REVOLution Represent
    Nicholas Sarwark are you Polish
    Nicholas Sarwark are you Lithuanian?
    Do you Represent the North Side?

  75. KrzysztofABLE Marcin Lesiak

    You now the day destorys the nigth
    night the day
    tried to run tried break on through the other side
    Along allong the watchtower Henxridx and Morrison who are they? I’ve never heard of the Original Gangstas? I’ve never heard of Tupac Shakur either? Legend has it he died on November (September13th) 1996? I heard That Tupac died because the government killed him and Barrack Huessein Obama is also and OG. What do you guys think?
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cJQwnAhXnBk

  76. KrzysztofABLE Marcin Lesiak

    MJD is a stoner and he works at BMO Harris Mount PRospect opportunity location. Please #FreeMYNiggaMateusz. He doesn’t deserve to be in prison. He’s one of my 137 boys out there. Are you my boy? He’s not boy..he’s just a stoner he works at a bank in Mount Prospect, Illinois. Have you guys ever heard of a town called Mount Prospect, Illinois? I sure as h3ll have never heard of DePaul University #HillaryClinton#BillaryClinton#AmericanFreePress

  77. KrzysztofABLE Marcin Lesiak

    #FreemyniggaMateusz
    #FreemyniggaSpikeandHaley
    #Freemyoriginalgangstasgaingof137BlueDanubeRepresent
    #FreeMyniggaMateusz
    #FereNonagressionprinciple
    #ZFreemyniggamateusz
    #Freemyboy
    #ElchaponationReynolDSanchez
    #FreemyboymateuszjanDziegel
    #NOW
    #IAINTPLAYINGAROUND

  78. paulie

    Chris, you can hold any beliefs you want, but please don’t post repetitive gibberish. I’m not taking any unilateral action and you have contributed a lot to this site in the past, but WTF? Seriously. At least in your racist phase, or coming out of the closet as a racist or whatever it was, your thoughts seemed coherent, albeit ridiculous. This on the other hand…makes about as much sense as a homeless schizophrenic walking around the streets downtown yelling random things at passers by and traffic. I hope you get some help, dude, I really do. I mean that sincerely.

  79. Cody Quirk

    No, I seriously think someone hacked him- even his facebook account has been taken down as an ‘unverified account’.

  80. paulie

    No one hacked him. It’s just a further stumbing down the road of crazy of the stuff he has been posting and emailing me. He is degenerating mentally. It’s sad, but it is him. FB may have received complaints from random “friends” of his that did not realize what was happening.

  81. Markham Robinson

    Someone who was taken in by the “Nuptials”post breathlessly reported the startling news to me. When I finally checked it out it became quickly apparent it was a joke, a joke in poor taste.

    Ever since I’ve been trying to get in touch with my gullible informant to prevent them from making a fool of him/her-self.

    Don there is so much justified criticism that might be made of you I hate to see time wasted on a jape like this.

  82. Humongous Fungus

    LOL. I don’t think it’s in poor taste but otherwise agreed, and still laughing that someone took it seriously…that alone should tell you something. Thanks for reviving the thread yet again, too!

  83. Matt Cholko

    The fact that anyone gives a damn about a joke blog post, made on April 1st, should tell us all something…..that more than a few people are living very empty, boring lives.

  84. Pingback: Update from Dr. Don Grundmann | The Saturnalian

  85. Don J. Grundmann, D.C.

    You see Quirk, I had not commented here for quite some time because of revolting bastards like you.

    As I commented to William, the little boy I referred to was killed by those like yourself who are in support of everything that I have been fighting against. And what is your comment? The same sick bastard comment which you previously provided.

    You see Quirk, you could have changed your existence around and became human again. You have had many opportunities but now, months and even several years after your original stupid comments, you continue demonstrating just what a total asshole, and an extremely stupid one, that you are.

    Yes, as I said before, it would be a public service, and a memorial payback for my fallen friend, to knock the crap out of you; simply for your own stupidity much less for being a supporter of his killers. But would it change your stupidity? Would it bring you to the slightest realization of what an absolute idiot you are? I say no way. You can’t have the stupid beat out of you as it is as infinite as space. You will always, as demonstrated by your comment, be a total fool and idiot.

    Yes Quirk, the little boy I loved as if he was my own son was killed by the very forces which you and so many of your fellow God forsaken rats support. His was a death that none of you could or would ever give the slightest damn about. And there were many who died as a result of his death but yet again you and your fellow rats are too sick to give the slightest damn or have the slightest peep of conscience regarding your actions which, in your own way, helped to not only pave the way to his death but ( especially ) set the stage for the countless others who will follow.

    I am so glad that The Creator has created Hell, a place where you will richly deserve to go to and this by your own actions. You and your fellow rats/freaks can spend eternity with your fellow demons. Mark Robinson, Mark Seidenberg, Ed Noonan, and all of your other fellow friends will be right there with you – the cream of the rat crop. It brings me great happiness to know that The Creator will bring a rat like you to justice.

    Of course you will also find His Justice on this side of the temporal curtain. Remember when it occurs, both here and in the afterlife, that you are simply getting exactly what you deserve.

    May He damn you now and always.

    P.S. – As I said previously : If you ever by the slimmest chance you see me – walk the other way. Do not ever introduce yourself to me under any circumstances. I will consider your ignoring this comment to be a direct challenge and will immediately get, in memory of my friend and so many others who died with him, payback, if only in a small amount, for the great evil which was both done to him and which you and your friends support.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *