Why is it so many people think if gays beg for support, they will get that support? CfG has no reason to care about helping gays. They can just use us as campaign fodder.

How many pro-gay or moderate Republicans have been backed by CfG? Can you name any?

(1) President Bush is nowhere near believing that God commands him to kill us all if we don’t Submit(tm of Islam).

(2) President Bush is nowhere near believing that God commands him to wipe entire countries from the Earth.

(3) In context, the quote Gryph provided simply means that President Bush didn’t care (in 2004) if he would win the election. Bush was saying that in a sense, his re-election didn’t matter because we are all in God’s hands anyway and going by a larger plan.

Now, even that much in point (3), I do NOT necessarily agree with. But I do possess the rather minimal amount of sanity and goodwill needed to see it’s different from Ahmadinejad.

Gryph starts in a place of hating Bush and desperately wanting to try to score certain “points”; then searches for flimsy evidence and entirely puerile (Gryph, that means “childish”) analogies / equivalences to give himself an illusion that he has scored those points. The grownups know he hasn’t.

I also found it interesting that Gryph concentrated his efforts on substantiating a Bush-hating claim, rather than his “I know credible cases of U.S. torture” claims.

The latter would have been the thing to spend time on. A much more important question… and as well, Gryph’s stated reason for hijacking this thread away from Dan’s topic (refer to comments #19, #21, #36).

I see. I think unmasking the lester-keogh sockpuppets, the raj/Ian sockpuppets and now the PatrickTroll ought to be enough for one decade… but I doubt it.

You have to start getting serious, Patrick. You’ll always be outclassed but at least you can be taken seriously then. Maybe.

================

“The reason I “hate” Bush is simple. Its because both he and the President of Iran share something in common. They both think that God wants them to be President.” –Patrick

For the record, the Prez of Iran prays to Allah, not the Western God of your Forefathers or the Founding Fathers. If you weren’t a hyperbolic religious bigot, you’d know better. But then, facts have never been a determinant of your reality.

Get serious, Patrick.

You have no valid reason whatsoever to believe that Bush believes himself Divinely appointed, in the way that Ahmadinejad does. Yet you seek to arbitrarily claim he does, or to make him equivalent to Ahmadinejad. In other words: Your comment merely seeks to insult and inflame – i.e., to troll.

I could simply point out the obvious meaning, in context, of Bush’s remarks, and demostrate how that differs from Ahmadinejad’s evil intentions. But it we both know it won’t do any good. Why? Because, as I correctly grasped, your purpose is to insult and inflame via puerile, invalid equivalences – i.e., to troll.

Next, you make a gratuitous insult at President Bush. You have no valid reason whatsoever to believe that he believes himself Divinely appointed,…

Bush:

“I believe that God wants me to be president. But if that doesn’t happen, that’s O.K. I’m loved at home, and that’s more important. I have seen the presidency up close and personal. I know it’s a sacrifice, and I don’t need it for personal validation.”

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F0DE0D91F3BF934A25753C1A9629C8B63

http://www.religionnewsblog.com/7036-.html

Actually since he thinks being President is a “sacrifice”, then I suppose he believes God wants him to be a martyr as well.

Compare that attitude to that of Lincoln and his comment when he was asked about who’s side he thought God was on during the Civil War.”I only hope that we are on God’s side.”

Fortunately, the United States has, in fact, followed the Geneva Convention in its treatment of detainees all this time. (Even though significant questions should, and did, arise as to the extent to which GC applies to parties who themselves have not signed it nor honored it.)

2) Bullshit. Link one GP comment where you provided a military (.mil) report on an actual case of the U.S. practicing torture. Ever.

3) Bullshit. You re-write history. From 9-11 on, the Bush Administration has turned to the Justice Department and lawyered the hell out of its anti-terrorist programs. They did everything by the best understanding of the law available at the time, and consulted with key Congressional leaders from both parties. More recently, when the Supreme Court issued a new pronouncement that the military tribunals did need an authorizing law from Congress, the Bush Administration leapt instantly to work with Congress to get that law. My comment to you cited “Justice Department” and “Congress” correctly.

“And there is for all practical purposes, no division between the Justice Dept and the White House.”

The Justice Department, and all students of the American system of government, would be shocked to learn that.

The Justice Department is an independent career bureaucracy, like others, with a relative handful of political appointments at the top.

4) Yes it is a question. For months, Gryph, you have been trolling here with your sick views on the “torture” non-issue. You have done nothing but spread obfuscation that (if spread generally, e.g. by Andrianna, Daily Kos, etc.) undermines the ability of our CIA and service men and women to do their jobs. That’s not an insult; merely a conclusion based on months of observation and experience. If you find it insulting, take stock of your life and change your wrong behavior, Gryph. I was merely curious about what psychological process would enable you to leap from there to considering yourself a constructive, helpful patriot. So I asked you, drumroll, a question.

As I said, I did not expect a valid response – and I did not get one.

Now let’s look at your closing argument.

First, you make a gratuitous insult at this blog and everyone on it. Far from evidence being irrelevant, I have been begging you for some credibly sourced evidence – and never gotten any, this time as always. I know that GPW and others have as well.

Next, you make a gratuitous insult at President Bush. You have no valid reason whatsoever to believe that he believes himself Divinely appointed, in the way Ahmadinejad does. Yet you seek to arbitrarily claim he does, or to make him equivalent to Ahmadinejad. In other words: Your comment merely seeks to insult and inflame – i.e., to troll.

Game, set, match… Gryph.

#36 – Finally: Gryph, if you are really determined (in troll-like fashion, let’s say) to take this thread of Dan’s off track into your “torture” agenda….Then:

Needless to say, I won’t be expecting a valid reply.

1. The Geneva convention treaty, which we signed, is specific enough. And yes, I think water-boarding is torture. And if your not sure it is torture, then don’t do it.

2. I have many times. However, when I pointed to actual US military reports describing such events, I was accused of aiding and abetting terrorism. (Also as an aside, whenever I link to multiple sources and documents when posting, it gets trapped by the spam filter.)

3. You are re-writing history. Bush did not ask Congress to define “torture”. He instead put the programs into place on his own authority first, and in some cases without the knowledge of Congress. Same goes for the military tribunals. And Guantanamo.

And there is for all practical purposes, no division between the Justice Dept and the White House. They are the same thing. He did not “ask” the Justice Dept. anything. He told them to come up with justification for his program in hindsight. And they did. Those that objected, were pushed out or lied to. That is why the majority of the legal opposition to the Presidents policies have been coming from military JAGS. The Justice Dept. under Bush on most issues is just a political tool to be wielded, not upholders of “justice”.

4. This isn’t a question. You are instead making a statement; Its just yet another insult you are attempting to disguise as a question. Rhetorical thuggery that is typical from the apparatchiks around here such as yourself.

As an addendum to #2, I realized many months ago that evidence was completely irrelevant to the discussion at hand. Simply because there is no evidence that you would ever possibly be willing to accept that is contrary to your little “we do not torture” script.

Lastly. The reason I “hate” Bush is simple. Its because both he and the President of Iran share something in common. They both think that God wants them to be President.

LOL. Like I said: Get serious Gramps. The time for tolerating more silliness from the GayLeftBorg is over.

1) Why don’t you or Andrianna start off by providing (or: EVER provide) a rational definition of what y’all would mean by the word “torture”?

2) Why do you not ever provide credibly-sourced cases where your concept or definition of “torture” was violated?

3) Why do you hate Bush so much, for asking first (a) the Justice Department, and then (b) Congress, to provide rational definitions of what is and is not torture, then have our CIA and service men/women follow the latter? And,

4) Why would you call yourselves American patriots, when, in fact, on this subject you seek only to obfuscate, or to prevent rational discussion that would help our our CIA and service men and women do their jobs of protecting us?

Needless to say, I won’t be expecting a valid reply.

…Andrianna said to the mirror.

LOL

I was wrong to actually call him (the person) a troll, thus sinking to his level.

I was accurate in identifying his COMMENTS in this thread as trolls for the attention I’m giving him here… but that’s a separate question.

He made a comment in another thread this week that wasn’t just trollhood, insults on others, etc. I complimented him on it.

The fact that his troll/insult comments generally outnumber his real comments, week to week, is neither my problem nor any of my business; and neither is it my place to tell you other readers (via name-calling) what you should think of him. So, I apologize for the over-reach.

The apparatchiks of the pro-torture blogosphere can vent,…

Nope, Calarato didn’t use impotent or impeached for then you’d know it was a Clinton basher. And the focus was Patrick –not Clinton.

Its nice to see you two admit (whether intentionally or not) that your primary interest here is in insulting other people.

#30 – thanks Matt

Nope, Calarato didn’t use impotent or impeached for then you’d know it was a Clinton basher. And the focus was Patrick –not Clinton.

Nice try keogh-of-the-lower-case-clan. No bashing of Slick Willy… just a fair representation of Patrick’s MO.

More of that deep seated bigotry coming to the forefront, Patrick; you need help out of the HateBushBox.

If you followed even the headlines –skip any responsibility to actually READ the articles– in newspapers you’d know that the GOP leadership in Congress is deeply, fundamentally divided on the issue of top secret evidence shared DIRECTLY with the accused terrorist.

The prohibition of sharing the info does NOT apply to the chief magistrate; it doesn’t apply to the terrorist’s attorney… it only applies to the terrorist directly because, if they are indeed a terrorist, they would have little restraint in sharing the secret info with others to insure the source of the info is eliminated… if you didn’t know that critical and keenly central fact it’s because you don’t even read the headlines these days and just operate off BushHatred –as many have pointed out here.

Republicans are not partisan toads marching in lockstep on this issue, Patrick. You’d know that –and what the critical issues are in this matter– if you would read to comprehend rather than “read to indict” per your BushHatred indoctrination classes.

Come off the Democrat Plantation, Paddie boy. The world is more diverse and far more complicated than your base BushHatred animus will allow.