Well, You Know DUMBFUCK…

This is the sort of risk real reporters take.

You know what I mean when I say “real reporters,” don’t you?  

Basically, anybody who calls himself or herself a journalist who puts a little shoe leather into it.  Journalism isn’t a job that can really be done dressed like this:

Also real journalists don’t often express an affinity for urinating on children the way you do.☔️


Good Morning, Demented, Depends™ Dependent, DEFAULTED DEFENDANT DUMBFUCK!

Screen capped, for when the fear pee deletions begin…

But really? Sticking noses in where they don’t belong?  SRSLY?

“Now, I will report aggressively on John Hoge’s lawsuit against Kimberlin and his co-defendants, especially that DUMBFUCK Schmalfeldt. But I will not be unbiased. I have news that I am sitting on until early next week. It is not good news for Kimberlin, his child bride or Schmalfeldt. (I’ll tell you this much. I won’t say if it’s DEFAULT, improper motions to dismiss by DUMBFUCK out-of-state defendants, or both. Someone will toss somebody under a bus to save themselves at the expense of others. This is not speculation.)

And I can’t fucking WAIT until I can write about it without risking the outcome.

And for every dollar Hoge takes from Kimberlin, for every ashtray clock and Scooypuff (It’s red. Vroom! VROOM!!) and Keurig and Telefunken U-47 Hoge takes from Schmalfedt, I will smile. I will laugh. God forgive me, I want the see this glorious train wreck. And according to the news I have, I will be able to watch it for a long time to come.

Remember where you read it.

Suffer, he will. It won’t fully compensate for what he’s done to others for the last decade. But it will be a small measure of satisfaction to have lived long enough to see Karma bite him on his pockmarked, pimply ass.”

I wonder what he could POSSIBLY MEAN BY THAT?

*This post is Rule 5 Zombie Wife Approved!


How To Select A Fake Name That Sounds Real

Choose one of the following (List A):

  • Brother
  • Sister
  • Mother
  • Father
  • Uncle
  • Aunt
  • Favorite Teacher
  • Best Friend

Choose one of the following (List B):

  • Best Friend
  • First Girlfriend/Boyfriend
  • Husband/Wife
  • Doctor
  • UPS Delivery Driver

Choose one of the following (List C):

  • Your Doctor
  • Your Dentist
  • The Nearest Street Name
  • Your Favorite President
  • Person you first” went all the way” with
  • Person you last “went all the way” with
  • Person you hate most in the world
  • Some random famous person

Use the three choices to fill in following sentence:

My fake name is the first name of (List A choice)’s (List B choice).  My fake last name is the last name of (List C choice).

So if I choose “Uncle” from list A, “Wife” from list B and “Favorite President” from list C, then my fake name would be my Uncle’s wife’s first name followed by my favorite President’s last name:

Kathy Marshall.

Don’t blame me if my favorite president was Harrison Ford in Air Force One.

Another example:  let’s say that someone chose “brother” from list A, “best friend” from List B, and “Person you first went all the way with” from list C.

They might wind up with “Bill Schmalfeldt” for a fake name…as unrealistic as that sounds.

There are four hard-and-fast rules to choosing a fake name:

  1. Never use your own first name
  2. Never use your own last name
  3. Never use a maiden name that existed more than two generations up your family tree.
  4. [REDACTED – this is my secret rule for making a fake name foolproof.  You want it? Hit the tip jar! – PK]

Breaking those rules is the mark of a TRUE DUMBFUCK.


I Had To Stop At Ten

Today seems like a day to write about politics.  I don’t do that much because it’s so polarizing and prone to passionate rhetoric as a result.  In the past, it has cost me friendships.

One of my peculiar curses is a talent for seeing connections and patterns. I see and understand how current events link backwards to social causes many decades old.  Today, I started a list of things which, in my opinion, are contributing causes to many of today’s social and political ills.  I’m posting them here in the hopes of starting some discussion like that which I have been observing all over the web today, though not necessarily drilling down into the same topics in the same level of minutiae.

I hope you will both critique and discuss my list, but I hope just a bit more that you will add to it.  I don’t think it’s nearly complete; I could probably run it to 50 points without too much effort.   Maybe you’ll help with that.

Without further ado, and in no particular order:

  1. The union stranglehold on public education.
  2. The end of corporal punishment
  3. The 50+ year social experiment where self-esteem trumps actual accomplishment.
  4. The absence of term limits on elected offices outside the judiciary.
  5. How politics has infested the process of federal judicial appointments, tracing back particularly to Ted Kennedy and Robert Bork.
  6. The 24 hour news cycle
  7. The death of common sense and its replacement with political expediency
  8. The incestuous relationship between the Democratic Party and their Praetorian Guard the Mainstream Media
  9. The notion that there is no longer such a thing as absolute truth
  10. The idea that all social change is progress

Bonus problem, because jokes must be made:  All things Kardashian


No, No, Yes.

Aaron didn’t threaten anyone.

He doesn’t face the loss of anything.

You’ve always been an idiot. @schlongspud is wise; today is just the day you made it screamingly obvious to everyone on earth.

View post on imgur.com


Now That It’s Too Late…

Might as well educate the monkey.

See, Maryland has a bunch of these rules that they use to govern and control how civil lawsuits are conducted.  One of them is Rule 2-322. It shows how preliminary motions should be filed, and what defenses are proper. Section (a) says:

(a) Mandatory. The following defenses shall be made by motion to dismiss filed before the answer, if an answer is required: (1) lack of jurisdiction over the person, (2) improper venue, (3) insufficiency of process, and (4) insufficiency of service of process. If not so made and the answer is filed, these defenses are waived.

What that means in DUMBFUCKSPEAK is…if you file a motion to dismiss, there are 4 defenses which can only be used in that motion to dismiss: lack of personal jurisdiction, improper venue, insufficiency of process, and insufficiency of service of process. If your motion to dismiss does not include those defenses, and you file an answer, then you cannot use those defenses. Ever.

Our good pal DUMBFUCK filed a motion to dismiss.  His defense was “lack of personal jurisdiction.”

That motion was denied.

Now there is also section (b) which reads:

Permissive. The following defenses may be made by motion to dismiss filed before the answer, if an answer is required: (1) lack of jurisdiction over the subject matter, (2) failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, (3) failure to join a party under Rule 2-211, (4) discharge in bankruptcy, and (5) governmental immunity. If not so made, these defenses and objections may be made in the answer, or in any other appropriate manner after answer is filed.

This means there are 5 defenses that are permitted at one of three junctures:

  1. a motion to dismiss prior to an answer,
  2. in the answer itself, or
  3. in any other appropriate manner AFTER an answer is filed.

Those defenses are lack of subject matter jurisdiction, failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, failure to join a party under Rule 2-211, discharge in bankruptcy, or governmental immunity.

They don’t have to be included in a motion to dismiss, but if they are not, the only other options are IN an answer or AFTER an answer. So if you DON’T put them in a motion to dismiss…you MUST file an ANSWER to be able to use these defenses.

This is going to cause a most popcorn-worthy problem later.

The next three sections are not germane to this particular discussion for reasons that non-DUMBFUCKS will find painfully obvious.  I won’t go into detail, but here are sections (c), (d) and (e):

(c) Disposition. A motion under sections (a) and (b) of this Rule shall be determined before trial, except that a court may defer the determination of the defense of failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted until the trial. In disposing of the motion, the court may dismiss the action or grant such lesser or different relief as may be appropriate. If the court orders dismissal, an amended complaint may be filed only if the court expressly grants leave to amend. The amended complaint shall be filed within 30 days after entry of the order or within such other time as the court may fix. If leave to amend is granted and the plaintiff fails to file an amended complaint within the time prescribed, the court, on motion, may enter an order dismissing the action. If, on a motion to dismiss for failure of the pleading to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, matters outside the pleading are presented to and not excluded by the court, the motion shall be treated as one for summary judgment and disposed of as provided in Rule 2-501, and all parties shall be given reasonable opportunity to present all material made pertinent to such a motion by Rule 2-501.

(d) Motion for More Definite Statement. If a pleading to which an answer is permitted is so vague or ambiguous that a party cannot reasonably frame an answer, the party may move for a more definite statement before answering. The motion shall point out the defects complained of and the details desired. If the motion is granted and the order of the court is not obeyed within 15 days after entry of the order or within such other time as the court may fix, the court may strike the pleading to which the motion was directed or make such order as it deems just.

(e) Motion to Strike. On motion made by a party before responding to a pleading or, if no responsive pleading is required by these rules, on motion made by a party within 15 days after the service of the pleading or on the court’s own initiative at any time, the court may order any insufficient defense or any improper, immaterial, impertinent, or scandalous matter stricken from any pleading or may order any pleading that is late or otherwise not in compliance with these rules stricken in its entirety.

Finally, there is section (f):

Consolidation of Defenses in Motion. A party who makes a motion under this Rule may join with it any other motions then available to the party. No defense or objection raised pursuant to this Rule is waived by being joined with one or more other such defenses or objections in a motion under this Rule. If a party makes a motion under this Rule but omits any defense or objection then available to the party that this Rule permits to be raised by motion, the party shall not thereafter make a motion based on the defenses or objections so omitted except as provided in Rule 2-324.

Now here, we need to go back to DUMBFUCKESE. A party making a motion to dismiss under this rule (using any of the defenses in sections (a) or (b)) is permitted to join it with any other motions available at the time.

DUMBFUCK has not done that.

If a party files a motion under this rule, but LEAVES OUT ANY DEFENSE OR OBJECTION THAT IS AVAILABLE UNDER THIS RULE, the party SHALL NOT MAKE A MOTION BASED ON ANY DEFENSE OR OBJECTION that the party COULD HAVE MADE IN THE PRIOR MOTION, except as provided by rule 2-324.

In shorter words, for extra speshul snowflake DUMBFUCKS, this means you get one motion to dismiss.




Oh, but wait! What about rule 2-324? There’s an exception there!  So let’s have a look-see.

(a) Defenses Not Waived. A defense of failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted, a defense of failure to join a party under Rule 2-211, an objection of failure to state a legal defense to a claim, and a defense of governmental immunity may be made in any pleading or by motion for summary judgment under Rule 2-501 or at the trial on the merits.

(b) Subject Matter Jurisdiction. Whenever it appears that the court lacks jurisdiction of the subject matter, the court shall dismiss the action.

Basically a list of defenses and objections that are not waived and can be made in certain circumstances.  They are common with the defenses which may be used WITH an answer or AFTER an answer is filed. Note that Rule 2-501 governs motions for summary judgment, so at this point it does not apply.

Sadly, none of these defenses are available to our good pal DUMBFUCK in a motion to dismiss.



One motion to dismiss: DENIED.

Second motion to dismiss:  IMPROPER.  NOT ALLOWED.  A NULLITY.

Third motion to dismiss:  IMPROPER.  NOT ALLOWED.  A NULLITY.


Judge’s order denying the motion: filed June 9th.


15 days pass to file an answer (see Rule 2-321 below). Then 3 days more as a courtesy (to allow for service of the judge’s order by mail).


June 27th. The deadline for filing a responsive answer.



Wait, what?  Default?


Because there is one more rule to examine, and that’s rule 2-321 – Time For Filing an Answer:

(c) Automatic Extension. When a motion is filed pursuant to Rule 2-322 or when a matter is remanded from an appellate court or a federal court, the time for filing an answer is extended without special order to 15 days after entry of the court’s order on the motion or remand or, if the court grants a motion for a more definite statement, to 15 days after the service of the more definite statement.

If a 2-322 motion is filed, and the court makes an order on the motion, the time to file an answer is extended by 15 days after the judge’s order is entered.



All is proceeding as any idiot who can read English could have foreseen.


Because FOCUS!!!!