Yesterday, led by the RNC, right-wing blogs in Virginia tried to push along the rumor that Mark Warner didn’t want to be seen with gubernatorial candidate Tim Kaine (never mind that Kaine is now surging on Jerry Kilgore). Fast forward all the way to today and Tim Kaine and Mark Warner are touring together on a whirlwind tour of southwestern Virginia.
The Cons lie. It’s what they do.
But Instapundit said that right wing bloggers are the greatest defenders of truth the world has ever known! An Army of Davids! Did Glenn lie?!?!
I swear to God, they are worse than children. How anyone can support that corrupt bunch of liars is just beyond me.
If they had any sense of shame (I know, asking a lot isn’t it?) they’d never be able to open their mouths again.
Say anything?
Up in New York, Jeanine Pirro says Democrats are pro-child-molester.
I’m confused as to why you have an anti-Kaine website linked to your site?
Instadunce said wingnut bloggers are an army of Davids? Against what Goliath? Librul college professors? Hollywood movie actors? Ed Schultz?
Maybe an Army of David Koreshes? Fearlessly leading the Faithful into a fiery nightmare?
Yeah, he’s been promoting his book and linking to the Amazon preorder page a lot lately. “Big Media and Big Government” are the goliaths in question. He’ll take on anyone — just not Big Government in the sense of one that can torture and detain citizens without judicial oversight. And not Big Media if it’s an outlet that passes along GOP talking points unquestioned. Every other Goliath — especially liberal college professors — you’re on notice!
So Glenn Reynolds only believes in torturing foreign brown people. Domestic ones are different. That’s a relief.
Seriously, is this the best you can do? Is this your idea of a defense?
TomY…What examples from Glenn Reynolds lead you to say he’s not against the government detaining citizens without judicial oversight? Here’s a recent post (Oct 3, 2005) about Jose Padilla:
Hmmm…maybe “say anything” isn’t just limited to the GOP? It seems as if you will “say anything” about someone else without any supporting evidence.
This statement is so unbelievably stupid. Oh, wait…”say anything” is acceptable now, right?
How about one piece of evidence to support your statement? Or are you as pathetic as the RNC bloggers that you despise?
It s okay if you re NOT a republican?
I’m a generous person. Here goes:
“American citizens arrested on American soil are a whole different kettle of fish from unlawful foreign enemy combatants. Most significantly, the risk of political abuses, as I ve noted before, is much, much higher when it s American citizens being imprisoned.”
“American citizens are a whole different kettle of fish” — from what? from non-citizens. With me so far?
“Unlawful enemy combatants.” This is a made-up category not recognized by the UN, the Geneva Convention, or any self-respecting human being. What it really means is “people it is okay to torture.” That’s why they made this category up.
In practice what “unlawful enemy combatant” means is brown people.
“The risk of political abuses is much higher when it’s American citizens being detained.” He is totally talking out of his ass here and I have no idea what this means. I don’t think that Canadian guy who was kidnapped and send to Saudi Arabia for torture would share this point of view. The best I can tell, Mr Reynolds is pro-torture, but he gets squeamish at the idea of Americans being tortured (even wingnuts have their limits) so he tries to make up some bogus-sounding explanation of why torture is good for some people but not Americans.
You’re welcome.
Find me one, just one, post from Reynolds that says he supports torturing human beings. You’re trying to take a statement regarding the imprisonment of people (specifically comparing Jose Padilla to other combatants) into a support of torture.
Some of you on this blog are so pathetic that you can’t even get the point of the post you are commenting about.
Say anything, indeed.
Maybe if you keep saying “say anything” over and over again, a point will materialize out of thin air. Maybe if you keep calling people “pathetic,” etc., the world will turn upside down and the truth will instantly be on your side, once and for all. Or maybe not.
Find me one person who uses the expression “unlawful enemy combtants” who opposes torture. The very use of that phrase telegraphs what side you are on. Sorry.
BTW, since I know you won’t bother looking for evidence that Reynolds supports torture since it is easier to just make the baseless accusation (say anything…remember?), here is just one example of many in which he explains his position:
He separates the issue of torture from the Geveva Convention. Using the phrase “unlawful enemy combatants” does not mean one supports torture.
Reynolds has argued repeatedly against the use of torture as well as unregulated detention. Both you (SadieB) and TomY are demonstratably wrong in claiming otherwise. The fact that you continue to claim the opposite just because you don’t like his politics proves the point of this thread.
It is the responsibility of the person making the accusation to provide the evidence.
What evidence do you have that Reynolds supports the torture of humans? If you fail to provide evidence, then you are exactly the type of person that OW was condemning in this post.
Unfortunately, it seems like many left-wing commenters do as well, as evidenced by several different people trying unsuccessfully in this and another thread to claim Glenn Reynolds supports torture.