We published the story earlier this week of some violence-seeking gun control fanatics who were advocating violence against peaceable Americans – merely because they exercised their Constitutional rights.

Here’s what she wrote:

 “So what line has to be crossed in the good old U.S. of A. before we start mowing them down to make our point?”  She continues:  “Do we have the ATF and BLM agents roll up in armored tanks? Do we use drone strikes?”

Seems the push back from regular folks caused Susie Madrak, the managing editor at Crooks and Liars some consternation.  Our guess is some of their advertisers picked up the phone and explained things in that language called dollars to the head honchos there, because little Susie was trying to recast her story in the comments section – amongst 1400 other people making comments.

    Susie Madrak says:
June 25, 2014 at 10:21 (Edit)

Hey, thanks for completely missing the point, since I’m a lifelong pacifist. What I was actually saying that there aren’t a lot of options to deal with people who defy the legal government — short of those that seem to inevitably lead to all-out violence, as we saw in Ruby Ridge and Waco. If you think I was advocating violence, you’re wrong.

Words have meaning, Susie.

Susie claims to be a pacifist.

Check out the graphic on top of her personal blog page:

She considers herself a machinegun-toting, grenade-throwing guerrilla, huh?

Is there a little projection going on here?

By the way, here’s what she really looks like:

What was it Rush said about “The feminist movement was created to allow ugly women access to the mainstream of society”?

7 thoughts on “HIGH SPIN ZONE: Susie Madrak, gun hating zealot, tries to spin her violent screed”
  1. I’m trying to figure out why the trigger is in front of the magazi… oh right, ignorance.

  2. another frustrated oppressed middle age lady that qualifies for a raging hormone change of life, life has been passing her by, so now with the WWW. she can garner attention too her misery an be in the lime light!

    1. She might be a “woman”, but I doubt very seriously that she is any kind of “lady”, FYI. I would feel sorry for this homely dimwit but for the fact she spends her time trying to subvert the Constitution and my basic Rights.

  3. Why do I suspect, by her drawing, that she’s been evicted and was really pissed about it?

    I also suspect she probably wasn’t the homecoming or prom queens when she was in high school. Dates have been hard to come by I suspect, even with internet dating. It’s no wonder she’s an angry, radical leftist.

    It’s probably better that people like her don’t have guns.

    Unfortunately, they suffer projection psychologically. They want to attribute their own impulsive, violent tendencies to the rest of us. Because they believe the rest of us can’t control ourselves either, it’s just another reason they irrationally argue for victim disarmament.

    Sorry honey. I’ve never been evicted. Even if I were, I wouldn’t want to shoot up the place and throw grenades.

    Some people are ugly only on the outside.

    Others – Suzie included – are just altogether ugly.


Comments are closed.