Ever wonder how Freepers would talk about Harry Potter? (SPOILERS!)

After reading a few DU threads on the latest Harry Potter, where DUers discuss the endings logically, referring to details earlier in the book or in the series to support their arguments, I'm left wondering how Freeper sorts would argue about the book. (I'm ignoring all the eejits who say Harry Potter is the devil's book and all that silliness.)

Maybe they'd say things like this?

"Snape has to be a terra'ist, cause he's got long, stringy hair."

"I think Harry will probably defeat Voldemort when the rapture comes and takes him away just before Voldemort destroys the world."

"Voldemort's probably the good guy, and Dumbledore was the liberal who hated America and deserved to die, because he was all worried about Voldemort's past and stuff."

"Hagrid is evil because he's only half-Anglo-Saxon."

"Fleur is working for the bad guys because she's French."

"The Weasleys are too poor, and therefore must be lied to about the true goals of their government. Hopefully, unless this whole book is some liberal Commie plot, Voldemort will steal the next election and become the next minister and fix all the problems his liberal predecessors have created. It's a good thing to kill a lot of people to protect all those people. The Weasleys should go to Azkaban for defending the weak liberal Dumb-le-bore against good people like Voldemort. Then Voldemort will blow up France."

"How dare they call Voldemort the Heir of Slytherin! They owe him an apology!"

"JK Rowlings sure is sexy, but she needs to quite writing and take care of her baby!"

it looks like their remarks and comments echo our own for the most part. Those who actually are READING the books are gleaning far more from their own involvement in them than those who are condemning them without true knowledge of them. Thant's good!! It's a step forward.

"I can't believe it's legal to have books, BOOKS (shrieks this word) whar children can larn black magic and sorcery."