Cheney has this ‘little-girl crush on strongmen.’
By on Aug 20th, 2007 at 9:40 am
Cheney has this ‘little-girl crush on strongmen.’
The Washington Post updates the progress of Bush’s “freedom agenda.” Peter Baker writes, “Two and a half years after Bush pledged in his second inaugural address to spread democracy around the world, the grand project has bogged down in a bureaucratic and geopolitical morass, in the view of many activists, officials and even White House aides.” Complaining about the influence of Cheney, one official tells the Post, “OVP [Office of Vice President] has this little-girl crush on strongmen.”
UPDATE: Laura Rozen suggests a few things that Baker may have missed.
View Most Popular
Advertisement
What We're About
What We're Fighting For
What We're Fighting Against
Featured
Subscribe to the Progress Report
Topic CloudView topics sorted by popularity
Beck
Birther
Brown
Budget
Bush
Business
Civil Rights
Congress
Corporate Ethics
DADT
Deficit
Economy
Education
Election
Environment
Ethics
Fox News
Global Warming
Haiti
Health Care
Immigration
International Relations
Iran
Justice
LGBT
Limbaugh
Lobbying
McCain
Media
Military
National Security
O'Keefe
Obama
Palin
Race
Radical Right
Robertson
Sports
Steele
Steve King
Stimulus
Tea Parties
Terrorism
Torture
Women's Rights
Visit Our Affiliated Sites
Reports
In-depth studies on select topics
Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.
ArchivesBlog Roll
Whoa… fire away, boys.
August 20th, 2007 at 9:45 amCheney loves him some Dick-taters.
-GSD
August 20th, 2007 at 9:45 amoh, i get it… there’s only so much to go around…
he has to take democracy from US to pass it around…
so, under the guise of “sharing”… i see…
…
(snark… i guess i should add that…)
August 20th, 2007 at 9:46 am.
“Two and a half years after Bush pledged in his second inaugural address to spread democracy around the world…”
Exactly how does this accord with President dinkledorf’s uncritical, wholehearted support for the dictator, Mursharraf?
August 20th, 2007 at 9:48 amToo close to home, Makarios?
August 20th, 2007 at 9:50 amand so it begins… flush it…
August 20th, 2007 at 9:51 am.
I guess so, Makarious — maybe they’re jealous?
August 20th, 2007 at 9:51 amOVP [Office of Vice President] has this little-girl crush on strongmen.
Yup. I think that’s why he was first attracted to Lynnie Cheney and also why he cares so much about Mary.
August 20th, 2007 at 9:53 amthe Dickster has a thing for guns, too…
August 20th, 2007 at 9:56 amand oil
and safe, secure hidey holes in the ground
Is this the best that the Left can do today?
Comment by Makarios — August 20, 2007 @ 9:49 am
It’s only 9:40 am on Monday Makarios. The Admin has to wait for Bush to finish watching cartoons before he makes it look like he is working. ‘Can I veto something today. huh huh he he. Gonna be a good day today, I can feel it in my gut. huh huh he he Oh no, can I go to the bathroom?’
August 20th, 2007 at 9:58 amCheney = The Presinator
August 20th, 2007 at 10:00 am“OVP has this little-girl crush on strongmen,” said an official on the losing side.”
Heh, heh, said by the losing side. Imagine that. Interesting how the tolerant left promotes homosexuality, yet accusing people of being gay is a their insult of choice. Being gay must be a pretty bad thing then. ;)
August 20th, 2007 at 10:02 amBeing gay must be a pretty bad thing then. ;)
Comment by upright left — August 20, 2007 @ 10:02 am
I dunno. You tell us. You seem to know all about it. ;-)
BTW, is you’re clearly a nitpicker for accuracy, where does it say “an official for the losing side” in the article? IT DOESN’T.
(You can read, can’t you?)
Foa all we know, that comment was made by a GOOPer who’s FINALLY exhausted and fed up w/ the endless nonsense that comes out of the WH. perhaps GOOPers think something’s wrong w/ gays. After all, it was Denny hastert who forced mark Foley to resing IMMEDIATELY, once Hastert’s attmepts to cover up Foley’s behavior failed.
Got answers? ;-)???
August 20th, 2007 at 10:08 am“OVP has this little-girl crush on strongmen,†said an official on the losing side.â€
Heh, heh, said by the losing side. Imagine that. Interesting how the tolerant left promotes homosexuality, yet accusing people of being gay is a their insult of choice. Being gay must be a pretty bad thing then. ;)
Comment by upright left — August 20, 2007
“…in the view of many activists, officials and even White House aides.†Complaining about the influence of Cheney, one official tells the Post, “OVP [Office of Vice President] has this little-girl crush on strongmen.â€
Ahem, it was a white house official who made the comment, so you are correct in stating that the “losing side” made the statement.
Where you came up with a correlation to homosexuality from that statement is unclear, I can only guess it may be a favorite obsession of yours.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:08 amLots of paid trolls have been appearing at major blogs.
Right wingers are so supportive of illegal wiretaps and spying on citizens, until they provide full name, address and contact info, social security numbers, etc. to the discussion their words should even be considered part of the topic.
Consistency and all that.
They’ve got nothing to hide, only terrorists fear being spied on, right?
C’mon paid trolls, hand over the jewels, you got nothing to lose…
August 20th, 2007 at 10:09 amAs much as I do not like Cheney, his private life is of no interest.
It is the lies and deceit that trouble me
August 20th, 2007 at 10:11 amfrom the article:
Other presidents had promoted liberty or human rights, from Woodrow Wilson and Franklin D. Roosevelt to John F. Kennedy and Jimmy Carter. But none had gone as far as Bush. “Rhetorically, nobody, including even Ronald Reagan, devoted more words in a major speech to this objective than George W. Bush,” said Michael McFaul [...]
words… meaningless words…
August 20th, 2007 at 10:13 amcoming from a toad…
.
Leave private lives alone.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:13 amIt’s not like they pay us well, you know. I have to sit here in a windowless room in Akron for ten hours a day, and Norquist pays me $.25 per comment. David Horowitz’s troll center is even worse — it’s located in Sioux Falls, SD and pays $.15/ comment and penalizes commenters for bathroom breaks.
But the little-girl crush on strongmen is not so odd. Cheney should talk to Chris Matthews about it.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:14 amWhy head up a serious article on the fading neocon mirage with the horrendous mental image of cheney lapdancing a ’strong man’?
Private reasons great or small can be seen in the eyes of those that call to make all who should be killed to crawl.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:15 am#17 Lots of paid trolls have been appearing at major blogs
Whoever’s paying for all this “quality” trolling is wasting their money.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:16 amCheney got 5, count ‘em, five, deferrments, just in case one or two didn’t pass muster.
That’s a girlie-boy.
His fixation on strongmen is logical, as he always wanted to be one.
That’s the same obsession that got him the deferrments.
So, let’s get this straight…
Cheney is obsessed at being something he’s not…
Strong.
He’s a chickenshit. Even with a gun, he’s a scared man who lies for a living; trying forever to something he’s not.
He’ll go down in history as a mean, twisted narcissist who routinely lied to the American people.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:17 amLeave private lives alone.
Comment by Hans Stein — August 20, 2007
“OVP [Office of Vice President] has this little-girl crush on strongmen.â€
This is a metaphor, Hans, describing Cheneys prediliction for supporting dictatorial, repressive regimes.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:18 amOf course Cheney loves “strongmen,” but then, so does Rummy:
http://www.gwu.edu/~nsarchiv/NSAEBB/NSAEBB82/
Reich wingers love to watch their fellow fascists loot their respective countries and put their boots on the necks of anyone who dares to complain. Somoza, Franco, Duvalier, The Shah, Suharto, Pinochet, Marcos, King Fahd, Saddam, it’s all a matter of public record:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/US_ThirdWorld/dictators.html
August 20th, 2007 at 10:19 amMakes a lotta sense, as we continue to back soon to be ex-dick-taters like Musharref in Pakistan…
August 20th, 2007 at 10:21 amBut I have to tell you, this goes to show that the left will try anything to try to smear the good name of Vice President Cheney.
Comment by Makarios — August 20, 2007 @ 10:00 am
Don’t you just hate it when they do that? Like when they tried to smear Hitler’s good name.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:21 amto smear the good name of Vice President Cheney.
Comment by Makarios
Last throes, buddy. Greeted as liberators.
Oh, the memories.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:22 amReich wingers love to watch their fellow fascists loot their respective countries and put their boots on the necks of anyone who dares to complain. Somoza, Franco, Duvalier, The Shah, Suharto, Pinochet, Marcos, King Fahd, Saddam, it’s all a matter of public record:
http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/US_ThirdWorld/dictators.html
Comment by War4Sale — August 20, 2007 @ 10:19 am
It’s not just Republicans either – Democrats have had more than their share of dictator-coddling.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:22 am“Little girl crush…”, well, well.
Very Glenn Reynolds. Or Jonah Goldberg.
Or very W for that matter.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:22 am“…pays $.15/ comment and penalizes commenters for bathroom breaks.”
Here in Oklahoma, we get 0.20 per comment, if it is our own words.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:24 amWe don’t have bathrooms, and now the porta-potties have been washed away in the floods.
I never understood the mentality on either the left or the right that would compel one to go into sites like this and make comments. I have rarely seen anything that resembles substantive debate.
Other than to disrupt or obsfucate the original discussion, it seems to be a pointless waste of valuable time. Unless, you’re just sitting there eating Cheetos.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:25 amBeing gay must be a pretty bad thing then. ;)
Comment by upright left — August 20, 2007 @ 10:02 am
“I dunno. You tell us. You seem to know all about it. ;-)”
Good morning, stupid. I just know I see lots of lefties insinuating that people are gay. Seems like they think that’s the ultimate insult. ;)
—–
“BTW, is you’re clearly a nitpicker for accuracy, where does it say “an official for the losing side†in the article? IT DOESN’T.
(You can read, can’t you?)”
What? You didn’t check the Daily Kos today? They had the whole quote, unlike TP. Oops!
So, as I shown ya before, stupid, not only can I read, but I know when to read between the lines. ;)
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/8/19/20197/8087
——
“perhaps GOOPers think something’s wrong w/ gays. After all, it was Denny hastert who forced mark Foley to resing IMMEDIATELY, once Hastert’s attmepts to cover up Foley’s behavior failed.”
The problem here was not being gay, but inappropriate contacts with minors. You also disapprove of inappropriate contact with minors, no matter the ideology, right? ;)
——
“Got answers? ;-)???”
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 20, 2007 @ 10:08 am
So, yeah, stupid, I’ve got answers. How do you like them? ;)
August 20th, 2007 at 10:25 amMy oh my. This really does seem to have struck a tender chord with the “Save Me Big Strong Daddy Party”.
A very tender chord.
-GSD
August 20th, 2007 at 10:29 amUnless, you’re just sitting there eating Cheetos.
Comment by Lee Burl
That would be “Cheerios” at this hour of the day.
:)
August 20th, 2007 at 10:33 amYou are right GSD, a very tender chord. It seems a silly topic on one hand, but it is indicative of the cowardly and weak “leaders”. Boy George is upset at an article about his clothes, and simpers about it. WTF?
They are all so inadequate and weak little people that they are over compensating to hide the fact that they have piss stains all the way to their shoes.
Bush is desperately trying to finally be someone that Daddy would approve of. He is going down in history as the weakest, most cowardly and stupidest pResident ever. Maybe he and Cheney can star in the sequel. “Brokebank Mountain”.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:40 amIt wouldn’t suprise me if this clown also dresses up like a little girl.
Probably a little clown girl.

August 20th, 2007 at 10:45 amWhere you came up with a correlation to homosexuality from that statement is unclear, I can only guess it may be a favorite obsession of yours.
Comment by Raven — August 20, 2007 @ 10:08 am
Once again, the lefty insult of choice. I’d be ticked off if I was gay and you all consider that to be the worst insult. ;)
August 20th, 2007 at 10:47 amthe worst insult. ;)
Comment by upright left
Oh, I wasn’t insulting you, just wondering why you brought the subject up, as it had no correlation to the topic at hand.
August 20th, 2007 at 10:52 amLeave private lives alone.
Comment by Hans Stein — August 20, 2007 @ 10:13 am
tell it to the NSA
August 20th, 2007 at 10:57 amIn #34, upright left maintains s/he read the “entire quote” and, by doing so, knows that the boogeyman of the Left lost an argument and so started to accuse Cheney of being gay.
The FULL quote from the Kos diary is “The National Security Council pushed for a stronger response, but the State Department and the office of the vice president resisted. “OVP has this little-girl crush on strongmen,” said an official on the losing side.’”
The “losing side” is NOT anyone from the Left, but the National Security Council, an official of which simply noted that Cheney was soft on fascism.
Upright left might be able to read, and might be able to read between the lines, but we know know s/he can MIS-read also.
August 20th, 2007 at 11:01 amSo, yeah, stupid, I’ve got answers. How do you like them? ;)
Comment by upright left — August 20, 2007 @ 10:25 am
as usuual, you have the wrong answers.
August 20th, 2007 at 11:02 amOnce again, the lefty insult of choice. I’d be ticked off if I was gay and you all consider that to be the worst insult. ;)
Comment by upright left — August 20, 2007 @ 10:47 am
nobody’s implying gayness, just the usual rightwing sissy cowardice. wake up. your leaders are whiners, cowards, deserters and sissies.
August 20th, 2007 at 11:04 amSo, yeah, stupid, I’ve got answers. How do you like them? ;)
Comment by upright left — August 20, 2007 @ 10:25 am
Gee, Wrongie, get on your nerves a little???
Tufts Republicans: Homosexuality = Death?
Republican students at Tufts University apparently believe that homosexuality is one of the greatest threats facing America today.
http://atheism.about.com/b/a/123319.htm
Why the insults??? We’re jes’ funnin’ here?
BTW, you never COORECTED your own misperception about “an officiasl from the losing side”. Wasn’t even in the article.
Je’s pointin’ it out, Li’l Feller. ;-)!!!
Once again, the lefty insult of choice. I’d be ticked off if I was gay and you all consider that to be the worst insult. ;)
Comment by upright left — August 20, 2007 @ 10:47 am
Actually, the worst insult I could think of at this point would to be called a GOOPer. ;-)!!!
August 20th, 2007 at 11:05 amOh, I wasn’t insulting you, just wondering why you brought the subject up, as it had no correlation to the topic at hand.
Comment by Raven — August 20, 2007 @ 10:52 am
I’m fairly certain you get the correlation just fine. Just in case you don’t, your fellow lefties can explain it. Like this one, perhaps? ;)
Maybe he and Cheney can star in the sequel. “Brokebank Mountainâ€.
Comment by nanlichi — August 20, 2007 @ 10:40 am
August 20th, 2007 at 11:06 amSo, Gannon is Cheny’s biatch? Or was there menage-a-trios with Rove.
August 20th, 2007 at 11:06 amThe article says that Bush ordered Ambassadors in unfree nations to meet with dissidents.
As a resident of the US under Bush, when do I get to meet with the Ambassador ?
August 20th, 2007 at 11:13 am?!?
how in the hell did you LET this “conversation” get steared into
a stupid argument about GAYness !?!?!
WISE UP, PEOPLE.
FOCUS.
August 20th, 2007 at 11:18 am.
“Gee, Wrongie, get on your nerves a little???”
Oh, c’mon stupid. You, get on my nerves? I’ve got all the patience in the world for ya, bud. ;)
——
“BTW, you never COORECTED your own misperception about “an officiasl from the losing sideâ€. Wasn’t even in the article.”
I pasted the quote and the link for ya, buddy. I can’t come to your house and point it out. Ya gotta do something for yourself.
——
“Republican students at Tufts University apparently believe that homosexuality is one of the greatest threats facing America today.”
Tufts folks aren’t the ones on this blog using gay references as insults, are they buddy? It’s the libs who say it’s ok to be gay doing that. Interesting. ;)
——-
Actually, the worst insult I could think of at this point would to be called a GOOPer. ;-)!!!
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity — August 20, 2007 @ 11:05 am
Hmm, GOP as an insult. Since it’s the ultra-libs who drove a lot of us there, seems somewhat hypocritical. But, so be it. Fire away, bud. ;)
August 20th, 2007 at 11:21 amThis story seems to elude me. What do they mean Cheney likes “strongmen”?
:|
You mean the guys in the old days who lifted big round barbells in the circus?
August 20th, 2007 at 11:26 amAn insult is only good when the person you are referring to views it as an insult. The Repugnicunts who profess to think being gay is a sin, yet invite Jeffy Lube to spend the night and play house are insulted when you point out their hypocrisy and sissy nature.
I would be insulted if you called me a Republican. Them’s fighting words.
I would bet good money that Bush is a closet gay. Watch the way he struts, his soft hands, his penchant for playing dress up. There’s nothing wrong with being gay, just as there’s nothing wrong with being short, or bald, or left handed. It is wrong to be gay and promote hating gay.
See the difference upyours?
August 20th, 2007 at 11:28 amCheney has this ‘little-girl crush on strongmen…except when it comes to POTUS. Then he likes them stupid, lazy and gullible.
August 20th, 2007 at 11:31 amAn insult is only good when the person you are referring to views it as an insult. The Repugnicunts who profess to think being gay is a sin, yet invite Jeffy Lube to spend the night and play house are insulted when you point out their hypocrisy and sissy nature.
Comment by nanlichi — August 20, 2007 @ 11:28 am
Lich, I believe being gay is a sin, and I wasn’t the least bit insulted at the references that maybe I’m gay. But if I chose to live a gay lifestyle, I be a little mad that you think it’s a good insult. Insults say more about the one making them than you want to admit. ;)
August 20th, 2007 at 11:44 am“I believe being gay is a sin, and I wasn’t the least bit insulted at the references that maybe I’m gay. But if I chose to live a gay lifestyle, I be a little mad that you think it’s a good insult. Insults say more about the one making them than you want to admit. ;)
Comment by upright left”
You seem to be a rather contorted individual… best of luck…
August 20th, 2007 at 11:54 amAround my town calling someone ‘american’ can start fights. We dont like yanks very much.
August 20th, 2007 at 11:56 amYou seem to be a rather contorted individual… best of luck…
Comment by Raven — August 20, 2007 @ 11:54 am
Because I don’t respond as you would like? Sorry to disappoint! ;)
August 20th, 2007 at 11:56 amT0 uptight right – the insult isn’t that Cheney’s gay; it’s that he seems to have some kind of soft spot for dictators when it comes to foreign policy, to the point his office obstructs any policy against them. This may or may not be homoerotic, but the important thing for any American is whether the veep’s office protects these guys. Maybe you like the dictators of Nigeria, Myanmar, and Turkmenistan (or wherever), but it’s an important matter. The ironic part is that it seems like a man crush to that NSA official, and we all know Cheney’s position on gays, gay marriage. To try to use homophobia against the commenters here, calling them “the left” shows your pathetic willful ignorance.
August 20th, 2007 at 12:06 pmOf course, you know that, but why let a serious point remove your ideological blinders? So much fun to bash “the left” even when said left is mostly center. You don’t even know the real “left”, because your head has been up your right-wing rectum so long, you think what you see is the (w)hole universe.
I’m certainly not disappointed, and I have no presumptions upon how you, or anyone, may respond.
August 20th, 2007 at 12:08 pmI was simply making an observation of the tone of your posting.
By the way, your screen name is the first clue ….
Well upright, I am glad that Jebus didn’t say anything bad about left-handed people. You puritans would be all over that.
The people in the town I grew up in believed that having dark skin meant you were the spawn of Satan. Until their Beloved Leader got an email from God saying that he changed His mind and black, brown, red, yellow were people after all.
Just a few years before that Beloved Leader got an email saying that women were almost equals. Not quite fully equal to a man, but closer than say, the horses and chickens.
Today there are a number of you fanatics that say that gays are less than, and point to your silly little book to substantiate your fears. I think God needs to send another email, que no?
August 20th, 2007 at 12:12 pmInsults say more about the one making them than you want to admit. ;)
Comment by upright leftâ€
How ironic…
August 20th, 2007 at 12:19 pm“Maybe you like the dictators of Nigeria, Myanmar, and Turkmenistan (or wherever), but it’s an important matter. …”
Since the dictators are wrong, it makes it ok to insinuate someone is gay? Got it. ;)
——
To try to use homophobia against the commenters here, calling them “the left†shows your pathetic willful ignorance.
Of course, you know that, but why let a serious point remove your ideological blinders? So much fun to bash “the left†even when said left is mostly center.
Comment by reverter — August 20, 2007 @ 12:06 pm
You think the folks posting here are in the center? Heh, heh, now that’s a good one, bud. And you talk about someone else having ideological blinders? Thanks for a good laugh this morning!
August 20th, 2007 at 12:30 pmThe people in the town I grew up in believed that having dark skin meant you were the spawn of Satan. Until their Beloved Leader got an email from God saying that he changed His mind and black, brown, red, yellow were people after all.
Comment by nanlichi — August 20, 2007 @ 12:12 pm
Some people do the wrong thing, so that makes it ok to insinuate others are gay? That appears to be the refrain here. ;)
August 20th, 2007 at 12:34 pmComment by upright left — August 20, 2007 @ 12:34 pm
You obviously didn’t read the article in the Washington Post.
The person who made the “little girl crush” comment is an official at the National Security Council, regarding Cheney’s office.
There was no accusation or insinuation of Cheney being gay.
August 20th, 2007 at 12:41 pmYou obviously didn’t read the article in the Washington Post.
The person who made the “little girl crush†comment is an official at the National Security Council, regarding Cheney’s office.
There was no accusation or insinuation of Cheney being gay.
Comment by Gregor Samsa — August 20, 2007 @ 12:41 pm
You obviously didn’t read the comments here. I’m surprised that you are the only one who picked up on the fact that the article referenced the office, not Cheney. But TP’s item says Cheney and several posters here ran with it as many of them do regularly. TP ran it a certain way to insinuate Cheney is gay and posters bit. I simply pointed out that posters here regularly use insinuation of being gay as degrading to people they oppose. Is it right to hold yourself up as the party for gay rights and then use that lifestyle as an insult? Obviously, many here think so. ;)
August 20th, 2007 at 12:52 pmI’m surprised that you are the only one who picked up on the fact that the article referenced the office, not Cheney.
Comment by upright left — August 20, 2007 @ 12:52 pm
I didn’t go through all the comments, but I bet there were others who saw that too. It’s obvious from the story tag/snippet.
Is it right to hold yourself up as the party for gay rights and then use that lifestyle as an insult?
Many here are not Democrats -assuming that is what you mean by the “party for gay rights”. You will have to go ask that question elsewhere.
I won’t defend the words of others, but I will leave with one final thought: Being gay is not a “lifestyle”. People don’t choose to be gay; it’s something that they are or aren’t.
August 20th, 2007 at 1:19 pm“It’s obvious from the story tag/snippet.”
It’s obvious if you aren’t so eager for every opportunity to slam someone that you fall for anything. ;)
Is it right to hold yourself up as the party for gay rights and then use that lifestyle as an insult?
“Many here are not Democrats -assuming that is what you mean by the “party for gay rightsâ€. You will have to go ask that question elsewhere.”
The overwhelming majority here are Democrats. But I won’t be surprised not to receive an answer to this question.
“I won’t defend the words of others, but I will leave with one final thought: Being gay is not a “lifestyleâ€. People don’t choose to be gay; it’s something that they are or aren’t.”
Comment by Gregor Samsa — August 20, 2007 @ 1:19 pm
People choose how to live their lives. We all have our temptations and choose whether to give in to them or not. ;)
August 20th, 2007 at 1:35 pmJust so I understand … upright left makes the incorrect conclusion that “the losing side” referenced in the article refers to the left and that “the tolerant left … accus[es] people of being gay is a (sic) their insult of choice.” When it is pointed out to him that the losing side official is with the NSC, he offers no corrections or apologies for his hubris (”I shown ya before, stupid, not only can I read, but I know when to read between the lines”). Is this all the right has? Factually incorrect arguments that change their underlying premise (official from losing side now morphs into the posters here), without even an acknowledgement of the error?
August 20th, 2007 at 1:52 pmIs this all the right has? Factually incorrect arguments that change their underlying premise (official from losing side now morphs into the posters here), without even an acknowledgement of the error?
Comment by David — August 20, 2007 @ 1:52 pm
Yup… over and over and over and over and over and…
August 20th, 2007 at 1:59 pmRepublican TrollCorp seems to have tasked a lot of their associates in the Bangalore center to swarming the comments today.
You must really be onto something.
August 20th, 2007 at 2:25 pm“Just so I understand … upright left makes the incorrect conclusion that “the losing side†referenced in the article refers to the left and that “the tolerant left … accus[es] people of being gay is a (sic) their insult of choice.†When it is pointed out to him that the losing side official is with the NSC, he offers no corrections or apologies…”
Comment by David — August 20, 2007 @ 1:52 pm
I made no apology because I assumed it was obvious to everyone that “the losing side” referred to someone in the NSC who wanted an action different than Cheney. Apparently it wasn’t obvious to all. There is only so much that one can spell out in a post. The point of my original post was that lefties on this site regularly use homosexuality as the insult of choice and often quite derisively. TP showed that in title of this post. Seems somewhat degrading to the very folks they claim to support. ;)
August 20th, 2007 at 5:22 pm“OVP has this little-girl crush on strongmen,†said an official on the losing side.â€
Heh, heh, said by the losing side. Imagine that. Interesting how the tolerant left promotes homosexuality, yet accusing people of being gay is a their insult of choice. Being gay must be a pretty bad thing then. ;)
Comment by upright left — August 20, 2007 @ 10:02 am
to upright left … I understand your argument, but still am puzzled. You state that it was obvious to you that the article referred to Bush’s NSC. Is it that you conflate the NSC with the left, or is it your argument that the best example of the left insulting someone by stating they are gay is a statement from an official at the NSC? While your post was somewhat vague, I think a non-tortured reading is that you assumed the “losing side” referred to was the left. Rather than admit a mistake, you are trying to hide behind the ambiguity. Otherwise the segue from the “losing side” to the left is a glaring non-sequitur.
August 20th, 2007 at 9:42 pmComment by David — August 20, 2007 @ 9:42 pm
I have to say I’m impressed with the number of bloggers here who can so consistently misconstrue a comment and then beat it to death. Your tenacity is to be commended. I believe, to anyone who wants to understand, the first line of my comment stands alone. I then moved to the comment that the most virulent lefties have avoided. Can’t say I’m surprised, though, bud. ;)
August 20th, 2007 at 10:56 pmSurprise, surprise. Did you ever check out his wife Lynn? He probably finds it impossible to get it up with her, she has an ass two axehandles wide.
August 21st, 2007 at 1:29 am>It is wrong to be gay and promote hating gay.
> See the difference upyours?
no, she doesnt. the conservative mind is pretty incapeable of
fathoming the kind of “do as I say, not as I do” hipocracy that is rife in thier ranks.
> I beleive homosexuality is a sin…
> We all have our temptations and
> choose whether to give in to them or not. ;)
Ah you you need to make a consciouness choice to avoid indulging in the gaysex you think is so sinful? hahaha.
H-I-P-o-C-R-I-T-E
how many times have you seen TP’ers use the insult “gay” when they wern’t discussing individuals with anti-gay followers and/or who further homophobic policies? Yes…we make fun of Guilanni’s crossdressing because he’s running as a presidential candidate for a party which basically
espouses the idealogoy that homosexuals are subhuman sodomites underserving of the same right to be happy other people have.
its the hipocracy of thier gayness, not the gayness itself, we’re mocking.
do you understand the concept of hipocracy, uptight cleft?
August 21st, 2007 at 8:56 amComment by Free RePubic Readers Have Sex with Their MOthers — August 21, 2007 @ 8:56 am
Wow, hit a nerve there, eh pubic? Don’t worry, bud, I’ll help ya out in spite of your shrill rant. Try very hard to stay with me now:
> I beleive homosexuality is a sin…
> We all have our temptations and
> choose whether to give in to them or not. ;)
“Ah you you need to make a consciouness choice to avoid indulging in the gaysex you think is so sinful? hahaha.
“H-I-P-o-C-R-I-T-E”
Buddy, this means that I have temptations other than homosexuality. See how that works? If homosexuality was my weakness, I’d be slamming the hypocrites here who claim to be the friend of gays, yet take every opportunity to degrade people by calling them gay. Now if I lectured others for making snide remarks to foolish ultra liberals, I would certainly be a hypocrite. But I refrain from that. Now, pubic, you read through this a few times, think it over, call mom for some clarification if needed, and get back to me, ok, buddy? ;)
August 21st, 2007 at 5:10 pm>its the hipocracy of thier gayness, not the gayness itself, we’re mocking.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS CONCEPT? DOES IT SINK INTO YOUR TINY BRAIN?
YES OR NO?
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF MOCKING SOMEONES ACTIONS PURELY BECAUSE THEY ARE HIPOCRITICAL AND FOR NO OTHER REASON?
If someone is a hipocritital homsexual, im going to mock thier homosexuality because they do….
August 22nd, 2007 at 12:12 am>its the hipocracy of thier gayness, not the gayness itself, we’re mocking.
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THIS CONCEPT? DOES IT SINK INTO YOUR TINY BRAIN?
YES OR NO?
DO YOU UNDERSTAND THE CONCEPT OF MOCKING SOMEONES ACTIONS PURELY BECAUSE THEY ARE HIPOCRITICAL AND FOR NO OTHER REASON?
If someone is a hipocritital homsexual, im going to mock thier homosexuality because they do….
Comment by Free RePubic Readers have sex with their mothers — August 22, 2007 @ 12:12 am
C’mon, pubic, stay with the discussion, bud. We are talking about people for whom there is no reason to believe they are gay. We are talking about straight people that libs want to slam so the libs call them homosexual. Just like adolescent boys do when they want to insult their friends. ;)
August 22nd, 2007 at 7:50 am