Truculent truck owner

This will probably irritate readers of the Democrat persuasion, and I’ll get silly messages that I am being political or partisan, blah blah blah.  I respond in advance "piffle". 

I simply like this guy’s no-nonsense Missouri style!

With a biretta tip to Sancte Pater comes this from the Kansas City Star along with my emphases and comments:

Missouri man’s incendiary sign on U.S. 71 draws fire
The Kansas City Star

David Jungerman farms 6,800 acres of river bottom land in western Missouri.

He’s not the kind of guy who posts on Twitter or has a Facebook profile.

So when the 72-year-old Raytown man wanted to speak out politically, he used what he had handy: a 45-foot-long, semi-truck box trailer.

Are you a Producer or Parasite
Democrats – Party of the Parasites

He planted the trailer with its professionally painted message in his Bates County cornfield along heavily traveled U.S. 71 about an hour south of Kansas City. He wanted lots of people to see it.

They did. Including at least one with a good case of outrage, matches and a can of gas. [!]

On May 12, Jungerman’s trailer was torched. The Rich Hill volunteer fire department responded. A week later, it was set afire again. The firefighters put it out again.

[But wait!  There’s more!] Then flames erupted in an empty farm house that Jungerman owns.

“They don’t like free speech,” said Jungerman. He put out a $5,000 reward for information leading to an arrest[Not lying down at all.  He has something to say!]

The sign is harder to read now because some of the letters are charred; the trailer tires burnt to nothing.

“Things are getting a little out of hand out there,” said Chief Deputy Justin Moreland of the Bates County Sheriff’s Office.

Local Democrats don’t want to be linked to the arsons. [I should think not!  Though I will watch for flames in my inbox.] Jungerman has every right to speak his mind, said Kay Caskey, a Bates County Democrat and wife of longtime state Sen. Harold Caskey.

“Obviously our country is in disarray now because of economics, jobs and foreclosures,” she said. “We are hurting as a country. But there are too many people who want to tear it down instead of build it up. Yes, there is anger out there, and we are a long way from Washington. [This story brought him a little closer.]

“This man has a right to do what he did, but around here some people might wonder at what point do you cross the line?”

Jungerman said he didn’t mean to direct his sign at local Democrats. Many of those are old-fashioned Harry Truman Democrats, he said.

They’re more conservative than many Republicans,” he said. “I should have put an ad in the paper to explain that. No, I meant the national Democrat parasite base that is sucking this country dry. The ones that just take from the government and not give anything back.” [If only he could learn to speak his mind.]

Jungerman says he’s not even a die-hard Republican. He voted for Claire McCaskill [yeech] when she won a U.S. Senate seat in 2006.

He put the sign out to make a point, but also to stir up some fun.

“You should have heard the truckers talking on the CB radio,” [They are still around?] he said with a chuckle. “One would like the sign and another would tell him to pull over up ahead so he could whup him.”

Jungerman grew up on a farm, but got tired of the tail of a Jersey milk cow hitting him in the face so he told his father he was going to town to get a job. [ROFL!]

“I’ve worked 80 to 90 hours a week ever since,” he said.  [I love America.  Now he has lots of acreage and a 45 ft long truck.]

He’s a staunch believer in personal responsibility. In 1990, he and his daughter confronted four teens they caught fishing in a pond on their Raytown land. The boys called them names and threatened them, Jungerman said, and one spit on Jungerman’s daughter.

Jungerman pulled a snub-nosed .38-caliber and held them until police arrived[!]

The police, however, arrested him, took his Rolex watch and threw him in jail. The next day when he made bail, police did not return the watch. They said they didn’t remember him having one[!]

He pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor gun charge. [If he was on his own property with trespassers, why would he have been charged?  Perhaps someone knows.]

Five years later, against advice, he sued the city of Raytown for the value of the watch. He represented himself in a three-day trial that he won. But the judge overturned the verdict and the jury’s award of $9,175[Something tells me he has been a thorn in the side of the city.]

Jungerman appealed, won again and got his money. [LOL!]

Today, he owns a baby furniture company called Baby-Tenda Corp. at 123 S. Belmont in Kansas City’s Northeast area. He manages to get down to his farmland two or three times a week.

His problem now is that corn is looking good. Soon, it will obscure his trailer sign from highway traffic[I don’t know what they say in MO/KS but where I grew up it was "4th of July knee-high".]

Well, I would have pulled it out of there by now if they hadn’t burned the tires off.”  [LOL!]

To reach Donald Bradley, call 816-234-4182 or send e-mail to

At least the way this is reported, there is something in this guy’s spirit that I find appealing.

Sooooo.. any readers out there with their own photos of this?

Isn’t this the great Bp. Finn’s territory?

And if any dems are getting into a twist over this, check this out about Rep. Mark Kirk (R-IL).

Some sharing options...

About Fr. John Zuhlsdorf

Fr. Z is the guy who runs this blog. o{]:¬)
This entry was posted in Just Too Cool, SESSIUNCULA. Bookmark the permalink.

55 Responses to Truculent truck owner

  1. Patrick J. says:

    Discretion, being the better part of valor, seems to not be in play here.

    The continued and ever increasing polarization of the political landscape has not been a particularly good thing for the country. It destroys meaningful dialog and even simple common ground issues become a battle. If you are Republican, or identify with its policies moreso than the Democrat party, imagine if you saw the same message but tailored to demonize the Republicans. It would set your blood to boil.

  2. Leonius says:

    Free speech is still a right and arson is still a crime, and trying to punish someone for exercising their right to free speech is fascism.

  3. kab63 says:

    They don’t like his truck? Park one of their own on the opposite side of the street. Sheesh. Don’t they understand they’ve just proven this guy’s message? He produced his sign and instead of producing a sign of their own they parasited his.

  4. JohnH says:

    Father asks:

    If he was on his own property with trespassers, why would he have been charged? Perhaps someone knows.

    I wasn’t there, but the law regarding defense of property or self is written such that one must feel physically threatened by the trespasser in order to return the threat. How old were the boys? Could they have posed a legitimate threat? Were they in the process of leaving while making their remarks? All-in-all, he could have just decided a misdemeanor was easier than going to trial over a potential felony against a Missouri anti-gun democrat lawyer.

  5. Bos Mutissimus says:

    Patrick J. — are you serious? Where have you been in the last ten years?

    “Bush LIED! Thousands DIED!”
    “Not in MY NAME!”
    “Chimpy W. Hitler’s war led by Puppetmaster Darth Cheney!”
    “The Son-of-a-Bush STOLE the election!”
    …and on, and on….

    I suppose you’d have a point, if there were some meaningful dialog to begin with! The trailer message is positively benign by comparison!

    I tend to agree that most Missouri (or Midwestern) Democrats are generally more conservative than nationally prominent Democrats. I am neither a Republican or a Democrat, nor will I likely ever join any political party. I do know for certain that I will never be a Democrat as long as they continue to maintain abortion-on-demand as a non-negotiable plank of their party’s platform.


  6. Aaron says:

    Bos beat me to it, but the fact is that Democrats don’t need to put their anti-Republican messages on the side of trailers, because the media prints and broadcasts them incessantly for free. And of course, to do this, you have to own a trailer and a piece of ground to sit it on. I do know truckers and farmers who are Democrats, but none who are happy enough with the looters currently in charge to attack the opposition in 5-foot letters.

    Corn grows a lot faster than it used to. If it’s only knee-high by the 4th of July these days, something probably went wrong. Here in downstate Illinois, it’s usually head-high by then at least.

  7. AJP says:

    Any time you call a group of people animals (even if the metaphor makes sense) you really can’t expect folks to respond calmly and rationally. It just PO’s people – remember the dust-up here a few weeks ago about comparing womens’ ordination to ordaining horses?

    Nonetheless I admire this guy’s fighting spirit, and the repeated arson is just beyond the pale. It especially ridiculous when one recalls all the nasty venom the left spewed against Bush and still spews against Sarah Palin, red staters, working class folks, etc. Leftists can dish it out but they sure can’t take it, huh?

  8. Mario Bird says:

    @ Patrick:


    Come on. Meaningful dialogue? Is this Fr. Jenkins?

    My buddy saw one of those sweet tree-hugger cars last week plastered with all sorts of granola messages (free the whales, kill the oilrigs, vote donkey, etc.) — and THEY had a NO-BAMA sticker right smack in the middle. Even Emanuel is calling it quits.

    Part of the way that dialogue occurs is by pointing out the fault in another person’s position. I’d be all for some Dem taking it to a Republican for a policy decision that is ruining the country, and broad strokes are sometimes the only kind that garner attention.


    P.S., that “discretion is the better part of valor” quote should be used with…er, discretion. Wisdom it may be, but it is the wisdom of a great coward at a moment of hilarious ignominy.

  9. Patrick J. says:

    Bos Mutissimus

    I don’t live in a cave, but this is a veritable Billboard in size, not a bumper sticker, and I have not seen a “Bush lied…” billboard. So, it is a matter of upping the ante, by both sides, when we should be resolving to appeal to people’s higher minds, though some assume these are missing in the “enemy” camp.

  10. Patrick J. says:


    With all due respect, I am not your “Dude” so please be more respectful. You don’t know me. Wisdom is wisdom, btw, or it is not.

  11. ckdexterhaven says:

    If only more dads were willing to stand up for their daughters like that. You can bet his daughter won’t bring home a loser. I love this country, and I love the 2nd Amendment.

    I saw a billboard on I-95 in Virginia outside of DC saying something about the culture of corruption with Nancy Pelosi. Guess you can say I love the First Amendment too. How thankful I am for the God given wisdom of our Founding Fathers.

  12. TJerome says:

    If Pius XI were alive today, he would issue another Mit Brenneder Sorge and condemn the modern Democratic Party. They are the functional equivalents of Nazis. [A good example of not thinking before posting. This will not become a rabbit hole.]

  13. Patrick J. says:

    Wow, TJerome, just wow.

  14. chcrix says:

    The current chicanery in politics will continue until folks realize that Democrats and Republicans are both the ‘party of parasites’.

    To some degree, it is just a matter of which kind of parasites one panders to.

    Disagree? Ask yourself how much real difference does changing the party cause.

    Endless wars?
    Democrat:check Republican:check
    Fat cat bailouts?
    Democrat:check Republican:check
    Screaming incompetence in the face of disaster?
    Democrat:check Republican:check
    Abrogation of the constitution?
    Democrat:check Republican:check

  15. Jacob says:

    I am guessing no one else picked up the reference from the trailer?

    Ayn Rand had nothing but contempt for Christians, but she did some up with quite a few humdingers when it came to describing “producers” and “parasites”.

    “Who is John Galt,” indeed!

  16. chcrix says:

    Didn’t notice TJerome’s comment earlier:

    “the functional equivalents of Nazis” – but be fair: this is not just the Democrats.

    Joe Sobran put it well a few years back. He pointed out that ALL modern governments are effectively “National Socialist” in nature. But somehow, nobody seems to want to use the name.

  17. Patrick J. says:

    Four teenagers fishing. Now that sounds like something that demands a confrontation. I think Compton and Miami and Detroit would love to have that kind of teenage “problem.” (I don’t like the fact that they spit, but we’re getting one side of the story here, remember that, before handing out medals of valor, etc.)

  18. wanda says:

    I like this man. Where I come from, trespassing is still a crime and spitting on someone is still assault/battery. I don’t have a problem with him excersizing his 1st Amendment rights and his right to bear arms and protect his family and property.
    Bravo that he recouped the value of his watch.

  19. The Cobbler says:

    Nobody here is talking about Kirk running from the media. Surely that’s another modern editting STOS spoof just waiting to happen? (Or would the media just be on the receiving end of phasers set on stun?)

    Not much I can say about free speech vs. tact (both have their place) that hasn’t already been said.

    Although, while we’re quoting Shakespeare:
    “If the Enemie is an Asse and a Foole, and a prating Coxcombe; is it meet, thinke you, that wee should also, looke you, be an Asse and a Foole, and a prating Coxcombe, in your owne conscience now?”
    ~Captain Fluellen, Shakespeare’s “Henry V”

  20. “This man has a right to do what he did, but around here some people might wonder at what point do you cross the line?”

    When you set fire to another man’s property, ON his property, you big dummy! Geez!!! This guy is a real American, because he doesn’t back down.


  21. AnAmericanMother says:

    Any time you call a group of people animals (even if the metaphor makes sense) you really can’t expect folks to respond calmly and rationally.

    You mean like all those conservatives burning down people’s houses because Democrats (including representatives and senators) are claiming right now that Tea Party demonstrators are KKKers and Nazis and racists and domestic terrorists who should be rounded up and arrested?

    The only violence I have seen has been on the left, and it’s pervasive and fueled by extremely violent rhetoric that goes all the way to the top (‘boot on the neck’ – ‘get in their faces’ – ‘whose @$$ to kick’ etc.)

    This is a one-way street, and the Dems are driving DUI the wrong way.

  22. Bos Mutissimus says:

    Patrick J: what has size to do with the merit of any dialog?

    I took your initial point to be that Mr. Jungerman’s invalorous lack of discretion attenuates the possibility for more civil political discourse. There is already so precious little meaningful dialog that the question on the trailer hardly impedes its return. But this is not new; C. S. Lewis shrewdly observed some 70 years ago that genuine intellectual exchange was already on the wane – re-read the very first of The Screwtape Letters to see why. “[A]ppeal[ing] to people’s higher minds,” if that is supposed to mean engaging their reason, is a fruitless and naïve endeavor when Liberals, by definition*, deny the possibility of Truth. Fortunately for us, meaningful dialog has not entirely vanished from the earth — there’s always Fr. Z’s blog.

    Your suggestion of Republicans imagining the inverse is simply risible – that’s already been around for some time!

    * Thank you, Cardinal Newman.

  23. Peggy R says:

    I’ll talk Mark Kirk. Ugh! is all one needs to say. I voted for the pro-life Catholic in the primary. But we do have a pro-life Catholic running for Gov. Bill Brady.

  24. elmo says:

    Both parties are parasites; they’re just picking off of different sites on the body politic.

  25. Patrick J. says:

    Bos, you got my point, my main point, and my secondary point(s). Good for you. I don’t think I am being obtuse.

    Your premise about liberals is not particularly well rooted, “Liberals, by definition,” whatever that is supposed to mean. So define liberal. A liberal, according to you, by definition, is a denier of truth? First of all, the term itself has too many popular conotations. A liberal of which persuasion, which generation, which country. MMM,,just too nebulous. You cannot build a cogent argument on this sort of premise, even if your points have merit.

    Billboards, or something on that scale, are egregious when they basically are calling YOU (if you are a Dem, Rep. Green party) a name. Bumper stickers may provoke, but people, exercising at least some discretion, usually don’t usually go to this extent. “Bush lies” id different than Republicans are racists, or Dems are parasites. Just a different level of provocation.
    To say “size matters” is probably to invite a whole ‘nuther level of emotionally laden reactions, but in this case, the scale is pertinent to my point about discretion. I don’t like rap, but I really don’t like it if it is playing so loud shaking my walls. Something like that.

  26. Patrick J. says:

    Leftists and liberals are traditionally different, though more and more they are lumped together and this clouds some of these issues, sort of a blurring of lines. All republicans are not gun toting, xenophobic, far right-wing skin head kooks – nor are all democrats wild eyed Castro loving, welfare receiving, dismantlers of all that is right and good about America. I just say tone down the rhetoric, learn to make rational and cogent, non emotionally laden arguments backed by facts and history and bereft of ad hominems, clearly define terms, don’t subscribe to cheap stereotyped depictions, especially about people or groups you are not intimately acquainted with, and you have a chance to win people to your side. That is too much work for some, so they will instead lash out with invective laden diatribes that win only the already converted, i.e., preaching to the choir.

  27. Vincent says:


    The phrase in Indiana, where I grew up, was “knee high by July,” with July pronounced JOO-lie.

  28. Titus says:

    Jungerman pulled a snub-nosed .38-caliber and held them until police arrived. [!]

    . . . .

    He pleaded guilty to a misdemeanor gun charge.

    The law in most states is that you cannot threaten a trespasser with lethal force unless 1) the trespasser is a burglar in your home or 2) you reasonably believe yourself or another to be in imminent danger of serious bodily injury or death. Brandishing a firearm in that case doesn’t meet the test. (Some states, like Texas, have what are sometimes called “castle laws” that allow a landowner a lot more leeway in dealing with trespassers).

    As a Dickens character once aptly said, “the law is an ass.”

  29. Patrick J. says:

    Renner and Renner, Publicists:
    1212 Smoother St.
    St. Louis, MO

    Advice to Mr. Jungerman

    Dear Mr. Jungerman:

    As per your recent inquiry, our advice to you, as how to tailor your outdoor messaging so as to maintain its core meaning and substance while at the same time avoiding the sort of violent reactions that you have been recently experiencing would be as follows:

    Change copy to read: “Are you Producer or a Drain. The Republican Party is a party of Producers.” Or, instead of “Drain”, you might say, “Reducer.”

    Let, Us know what you think, Mr. Jungerman. If these don’t work well for you, we can try another approach.

    Best Regards
    M. Renner

  30. Latter-day Guy says:

    Apropos of the corn comment: my family in the SW Missouri area grows sweetcorn for local sale (farmer’s market, etc.) and we usually get the first batch off by 4th of July weekend. Some years are too rainy/cloudy, which slows things down a bit, but the first week of July is usually doable.

    In a strange coincidence, we use a little marquee to let passers by know if there is going to be corn in the coming week. (We actually get people driving in from out of state––they are very serious about their corn, I guess.) My two youngest brothers have manned the stand from the time they were quite little, which has been rather lucrative for them––lots of elderly ladies have made a habit of leaving a substantial tip for “the boys.” Anyhow, in 2004 after the corn season was over, my dad put up on the marquee the message:


    Nobody tried to burn the place down, but we did get some really angry phone calls. Odd, ’cause the whole thing was meant to be fairly lighthearted.

  31. Bos Mutissimus says:

    Patrick J: “At present, it [Liberalism] is nothing else than that deep, plausible scepticism, of which I spoke above, as being the development of human reason, as practically exercised by the natural man.” John Henry Cardinal Newman, _Apologia Pro Vita Sua._ New York: Longman’s, Green and Co. 1947, p. 237.

    *I* did not define the premise. If Ven. J. H. Newman doesn’t provide a sufficiently “well-rooted” definition, I would welcome a better one. After all, no man knows the use of words better than Dr. Newman; no man, therefore, has a better right to define what he does, or does not mean by them!

  32. Supertradmum says:

    There is a great, fancy billboard sign warning the Dems of the November election on Highway 71 outside of St. Joseph, going to Kansas City, Mo. Also, there are bumper stickers which indicate Missouri frustration of the current administration. Some of the language is less than polite. I love this man’s spirit.

    Father Z, in Iowa, we said, “Knee-high by the fourth of July” and that meant a good crop.

  33. Supertradmum says:

    PS If this farmland is near KC, then it is the great Bishop Finn’s diocese.

  34. Patrick J. says:


    Not disagreeing with your idea except that the definition of liberal has both social and political implications, and the political implications, especially, are somewhat liquid in that the political aims of “liberals” do shift with time. So, John Kennedy was a liberal, who would find most of his policies quite at home with today’s Republican Party, and I think that says more about the leftward movement of the Democratic Party than any major shift on the part of Republicans. It is just a term that needs to be pinned down a bit more before it becomes really useful in a persuasive argument.

  35. Patrick J. says:

    I think we could learn something, borrow a page out of the playbook of our more “fundamentalist” friends, who would say this or that person needs to be “saved,’ with a renewed mind, as “if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature, old things are passed away, and behold, all things are become brand new.” and “Do not be conformed to this world,but be transformed by the renewal of your mind, that by testing you may discern what is the will of God, what is good and acceptable and perfect.” KJV

    So, instead of erecting higher and higher walls and lobbing hand grenades, verbally or otherwise, we need to be about the business of evangelizing, and that starts by being a witness, which does not include being ugly, rude, impatient, snide, snarky, tit for tat, and this upping the ante of vitrolic political rhetoric aimed at people who may need that renewal, is ultimately self defeating, no matter how just one’s cause or how righteous one’s intent. Our job on this earth is to save our own soul, yes, but also win the lost. How does some of this comport with that aim? That is what I want to say. To confront teenagers who are, yes, trespassing on your, oh, 6800 acres, fishing for goodness sake, and end up with a potentially lethal outcome, is just, well, bizarro land. Something is wrong with this picture.

  36. isabella says:

    Patrick J,

    What would *you* have done differently? I’m not being snarky, I genuinely would like to know.

  37. tobiasmurphy says:

    I attended my freshman year of seminary at Conception Abbey (don’t hate me, I was following orders!), which is right around there. This is pretty typical of the politics in that area. Normally, I’d think the conservatism is a good thing, but I was once in a car full of white guys with one Mexican seminarian (here legally) when we got pulled over by a small-town sheriff who claimed falsely that we were speeding. He carded all of us and I showed him my seminary student ID. When he saw that, he let us go. I guess he figured he should expect to see a Mexican in a car full of Catholics!

  38. Stu says:

    I like old guys like this. Walt Kowalskis of the world unite!

  39. AnAmericanMother says:


    It probably wasn’t bec. of the Mexican seminarian, just that you had a car full of guys.

    Sheriff’s deputies tend to assume that a car full of guys is out for a night on the town and probably consuming mass quantities of alcohol and/or drugs. (Certainly it’s not always the case, but as Damon Runyon said, that’s the way to bet.) They’ll pull the car over just to have a look-see, and then they’ll ask questions or ask for your ID whilst checking for any odor of alcohol or burning MJ.

  40. irishgirl says:

    I echo Stu’s comment: I like guys like this, too!

    There’s got to be something in the water out there that produces such ‘real men’!

  41. chironomo says:

    I like old guys like this. Walt Kowalskis of the world unite!

    <>: Get off of my pond…

  42. JonM says:

    Couple observations.

    We shouldn’t destroy property and we shouldn’t steal; these are sins. Burning a trailer that doesn’t belong to us is not only disorderly, it it theft.

    With that in mind, we also should not provocate a situation. I believe calling people ‘parasites’ is a provocative statement, especially inflammatory in this economic landscape wherein over 30% of young white men and over 65% of young black men are unemployed or severely underemployed.

    It is also haughty for those in their 60s and 70s to describe how by ‘hard work alone’ and ‘personal responsibility’ acheived their wealth. It is rather presumpuous to strut with an air of accomplishment when, from Bretton Woods to the late 1990s, a perennial policy of inflation by the Federal Reserve central bank forced incomes up.

    Therefore, it wasn’t exactly a great feat to make great wealth in property and in basic savings; incomes kept increasing while interest rates were fixed at low levels.

    There are many problems with contemporary society in which people are directed to look to the federal government for solutions for any particular problem. Generations X (pre-cable TV) and Millenial (post cable TV) have many not very dedicated to diligence. Indeed, these are the first two generations alive in a post-Vatican II era and ultimately are the result of the parenting of the previous two generations. Circumstance does not make a sin no longer a sin, but can prove a mitigating factor.

    But, the callousness and utter lack of compassion from many in the Baby Boom and ‘Greatest’ Generations, evidenced by attempts to cut unemployment benefits while quipping ‘get a job’ to those in trouble, after the past two generations completely transfered industrial capacity to Asia, cause me to harbor a muted sense of concern over vandalism of a smug sign.

  43. chironomo says:

    There’s got to be something in the water out there that produces such ‘real men’!

    I grew up out there (Prairie Village KS…) and my father worked out in Raytown. There is a considerable distinction between the cultures of the KC Suburbs (Mission Hills, Overland Park, etc…) and the nearby agricultural communities. I recall going fishing as a child out in Douglas County… everyone seemed to be armed all the time…guns in trucks, guns behind the counters at the stores… it was very strange to see this as a suburban kid!

    Recall also that the historic hero of that part of the country is John Brown…. a huge mural of him adorns the State House entrance rotunda (at least it did when I was a child!). Angry, wild-eyed and brandishing a rifle in one hand and a flag in the other… that’s the spirit of Kansas.

  44. randomcatholic says:

    With all due respect to the gentleman (and I am inclined to agree with him) I think he needs to be a little more introspective.

    If he is a farmer in the United States he is the recipient of quite a lot of “parasite” like dollars.

    Consider: farm subsidies, the whole ethanol fiasco, and a host of other government hand-outs and protections for our nations farmers that make little or no sense.

    I would just caution farmers who say things like this to remember their principles when we get all sort of silly farm legislation that obfuscates market forces as effectively as any democratic intervention in the economy.

  45. Patrick J. says:


    What would I have done differently?

    Fair question, but in response to ? the fishing incident? Well, there is just a pattern here of this guy vs. the world, he has probably a narrative playing in his head and who knows what really happened as far as the “confrontation” with the four teenage boys fishing? That was the point I made earlier, we are getting his side only. What provoked these kids to even think about spitting on this guys daughter? That is the untold story here. His provocative message (billboard), and gee, he gets a reaction. You catch more flies with honey than vinegar ia my point – I just think that vinegar is his style. I don’t say his message is necessarily wrong, just too provocative. I outlined a rewrite of that message already, above. Then, I extend that idea to us Christians, how is our message packaged? What kind of results are we getting with our sometimes vinegar-ish approach. Being “right” is not a license to then be in your face ugly.

  46. JohnH says:

    Patrick J says,

    I don’t say his message is necessarily wrong, just too provocative. I outlined a rewrite of that message already, above.

    Patrick, I know you are not saying arson is an acceptable response to provocative free speech. Still, are you suggesting that free speech should be subjected to some kind of editorial review? Who are you to say that something is ‘too provocative’? Of course, that is your right to say that. And you shouldn’t have to fear reprisal for it. And that is the point. Should this man have expected his trailer and farm house to be set on fire because his message did not fit the arsonist’s mold of what is not offensive to him? This is a ridiculous proposal. He can say what he wants to say how he wants to say it on his own property. He should not be subjected to the fear of being terrorized because his message is unpopular to a particular group. For someone who posts as many comments as you do I would hope you could appreciate that.

  47. John 6:54 says:

    This is Bishop Finns area. I’m suprise today’s liberals know what a parisite is. I’m also suprise the KCStar would even print this unless they want this guy knocked off. I’d guess 80% of the KCStar readers are parisites.

  48. Patrick J. says:


    No, I am not saying that it should be subject to editorial review. In the area of assault, in an assault case, there is the mitigating factor allowed of “fighting words.” Not just any words but some provocative language the courts do recognize. I am not saying “parasite” reaches that bar, but you get the idea. Shouting “fire” in theaters, dropping “f” bombs on TV during prime time, etc. Reasonable limits on free speech, but also, from the speaker, especially those for whom we as Christians regard as laudable, we expect discretion, which is the first post. That should answer almost any “well what about..”‘ that anyone might bring up. I am not anti free speech, but with RIGHTS comes equivalent RESPONSIBILITY, or it is not a right we are talking about, but simply LICENSE. Just because one has the “right” to do something, doesn’t mean you do so in an unbridled fashion without exercising discretion. Capice?

  49. Patrick J. says:

    John 6:
    Did you mean “parasite?”

  50. greg the beachcomber says:

    Patrick: I’m guessing that the rewrite wouldn’t appeal to Mr. Jungerman because first, by his own admission he was out to “have a little fun,” which probably means poke his finger in a few eyes. He is indeed a vinegar type of guy, but when someone pokes their finger in your eye you don’t shoot them. It would be like rousting a few teenagers fishing in your pond with a .38. (Oops!) Second, as Jacob pointed out above, I suspect Mr. Jungerman has one of those copies of Atlas Shrugged that’s been flying off the shelves recently, and “parasite” sounds so much better than “drain.”

    You do catch more flies with honey than with vinegar, but sometimes you’re not trying catch flies. Sometimes you’re trying to clean the coffee maker, and vinegar works much better for that.

  51. Patrick J. says:


    I can imagine an “in the car” conversation:

    Gee Dad, see that sign? What does parasite mean? Dad, you said you voted Democrat sometimes… Dad, …Dad…

  52. JonM says:

    I think this is being bent into a political competition as well as a chance to suggest that posters, like Patrick, who oppose the sign also support arson.

    That arson is wrong, very wrong, is not a debatable issue. But it is not the only issue here.

    There are many actions that, given a certain context, are wrong or particularly wrong because the intent is to provoke someone to sin.

    It’s very tricky business determining this, but I think any even tempered person should expect there will be angry people as a direct result from a sign that, in very tough economic times, calls an entire group (and those receiving welfare) ‘parasites.’

    As another pointed out, farmers have received ample benefits; perhaps much is directed to agricorps, but even small corn growers reaped a very non-market benefit from federal supports.

    I really do think the platform of the Democratic Party is odious and mocks the Church. But I wouldn’t suggest that those who are not ‘producing’ are parasites and ought to join the Democratic Party.

    Per the definition of many Ayn Randians, a pornographer who pulls down a quarter mil is a ‘producer’ while a Catholic unemployed due to factory closures and his five kids are ‘parasites.’

    Regarding the gun drama, I don’t know what the laws are in his state, but in most places, you’ve got to have a good reason to pull a gun on someone (good as in ‘I thought I was gonna die.’)

    I think we too often get caught up in political rivalries and forget about first missions. Besides, neither party is very good or truly seeks to enact laws guided by Truth.

  53. Patrick J. says:

    Per the definition of many Ayn Randians, a pornographer who pulls down a quarter mil is a ‘producer’ while a Catholic unemployed due to factory closures and his five kids are ‘parasites.’

    That is a great way of expressing some folks’ value system. Touche.

    I don’t absolutely oppose the sign. I think discretion should apply here, ala: ‘would this be this too hot for today’s political climate?’ and so forth. I kinda like the message myself, but I do think the consequences were just not thunk through..

    If my daughter was spat upon and I had a gun, who knows? But I just see a pattern where this poor guy has just gotten probably fed up, and undoubtedly for good reason, but do we really want to go Charles Bronson? – i.e., quasi vigilante? Righteous indignation can lead us down some bad pathways, so we have to monitor ourselves and think about the unintended consequences.

  54. isabella says:

    @Patrick J.

    Thank you for your civil response to my question. I actually approve of his message, arson is a crime, but the incident at the fishing hole sounds a little weird. Watching somebody spit on your daughter on your own property is not just watching her be *insulted*, but *assaulted* with all the diseases around these days. I live in an open carry state and if somebody spat at me while I happened to be armed, I would be sorely tempted . . . I pray it would end there. And you did say you weren’t sure what you’d do if somebody spat at your daughter, as well.

    The only puzzling thing for me – why the handgun? Most farmers I know patrol their own property with a shotgun. And I don’t see why he was arrested. Civility is important, but we’re turning into a nation of sheep. I’d like to see a good middle ground.

    I think the best response would have just been another billboard on somebody else’s OWN property. Also, the boys should swim elsewhere, instead on in what is apparently a private swimming hole for the man’s daughters. My reading is that he was protecting his daughters – wouldn’t most men here do the same for their families?

  55. Patrick J. says:


    Just hard to say what went on, but the guy has 6800 acres! Huge piece of land, just huge. I am surprised he even detected the boys, and it says they were fishing, which is about as quiet and peaceful an activity there is, otherwise you scare the fish. I am not saying it is OK to trespass, but wow.