Don’t worry. I’m sure he’s off hunting for something he can copy and paste that will ‘prove’ how all his screw-ups, lies and vitriol are caused by someone else – like the PJM moderators editing his posts or something.

So that’s why trollmo is no longer considered a ‘practicing’ Muslim.

I think our resident 12-stepping, wagon wobbler just got pwned by his own petard.

Sure. That’s why your pointless drivel is plastered all over the site. Color me unconvinced.

– Why else would you have gone back and edited your post to delete the section I just posted here.

Wow. Talk about raving lunatic delusions forced by your own incompetence! Clearly, you really do believe the crap you shovel!

Pay attention…

The stuff you copied, pasted, bolded and choked on is still all there exactly as you misquoted it – along with the stuff you omitted which, par for you, is what actually gave it meaning. Anyone can verify this for themselves.

Here’s the funny part…

Now that you’re half sober, you apparently can’t recognize that ‘quote’ because you did such a pathetic hack job on it when you originally copyied and pasted it in a drunken stupor: that last bolded section you’re now lying about is from a completely different article, dipsh!t. LOL!!!

Not only can’t you think or write for yourself, you can’t even copy SOMEONE ELSE’S thoughts accurately!!! ROTFLMAO!!

What’s funnier still is that the second bit you bolded completely discredits your stupid assertions about my support of Bush. That is, it’s an indictment of the MSM in the context of actions taken by Tony Blair after the islamist terrorist bombings in London, not a defense of GWB “in every way, shape and form”.

Nice work, nimrod. You’ve beclowned yourself. Again. Heh.

Try drinking less, thinking more.

And just because you recieve a benefit does not mean you approve of its existance. Just like the fact that someone is African American does not mean they have to approve of affirmative action, the fact that they are old does not mean they have to think social security is a good thing . . .

And they fact that they recieve social security after paying a tax for it all their lives doesn’t make them a hippocrite either.

I realize that you can’t actually argue for your programs on their merits so you try to attack the opposition instead of the argtument, but really, come on. . .

…anyone who likes can take a look at the article I wrote, from which you copied, pasted, bolded… and choked. The point, ultimately, was in the part you sloppily edited out of your cite (which you seem to make a habit of doing when you want to lie about a quote):

I believe that’s part of the reason we see no more Ernie Pyles in “mainstream” journalism, hijacked as it seems to be by a radical, vengeful element of the Democratic party which still believes “Gore Won”.

Incessant press and partisan hysteria has focused on “lies” used to justify the liberation of Iraq – lies that were apparently held as truth by every major intelligence agency in the world. Additional press and partisan hysteria has focused on isolated elements of the war itself, specifically Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo Bay – despite the fact that while these issues certainly need to be addressed, they are the minutiae of war. Still more press and partisan hysteria seeks to paint recent terrorism in the UK as something caused by the liberation of Iraq while conveniently and disingenuously ignoring the terrorist acts stretching as far back as 1979.

This is hardly evidence of being “solidly behind Bush” – especially “in every way, shape and form.” That’s just another fallacy – in this case a sweeping generalization based on your inability to comprehend what you read.

As you’ve already been instructed, calling B.S. on a bogus criticism of Republicans (or attacks, in this case) is not a “defense” of Republicans, it’s an appropriate response to a bogus criticism.

QED. And again, you really should go and actually look up ‘red herring’.

- Like many Republicans, your current revulsion with the Republicans is based on a reading of the Democrats.

There you go again, nimrod, projecting motives from your own paranoid, fevered fantasyworld onto others. You just can’t seem to breathe without the assistive aid of a straw man fallacy.

You just refuse to get it. I’m not an “Independent”. I’m not a “Libertarian”. I’m not labeling myself in anyway that might make you feel more comfortable. And what’s more, I’m not distancing myself from Republicans in any way. I’m rejecting bogus, lying, opportunistic, craven Republicans-in-name-only who are not representing their erstwhile, conservative base and who are in NO way preserving the Republican form of Government guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution. I’m doing this in precisely the same way I rejected bogus, lying, opportunistic, craven Democrats when it became clear that they’d abandoned any pretense of obeying the Constitution in favor of beating the drum for Socialism’s long march through American institutions.

- A look at your blog circa 2005…

You copied. You pasted. You bolded (actually, bolded a quote from someone else, LOL!!). But, as usual, you choked at the end.

Hazarding a guess – since you never made a point – you appear to believe that support for a President’s foreign policy – and, more importantly, rejecting politically motivated, bogus attacks on that foreign policy – automatically signifies unqualified support for him in every other area. Sorry, that’s how ideologically blind, leftist idiots think. That would be you. And that’s why you try to project that sort of irrational behavior onto me.

How sad and empty your naive, morally adolescent, black-and-white world must be. No wonder you’re such a rage-filled hack.

Of course yer right. There is no evidence that they do, and there is no evidence that they don’t. That, my friend, is a classic red herring. You don’t have to thank me for demonstrating the definition of this word that is so obviously not in your vocabulary.

Like many Republicans, your current revulsion with the Republicans is based on a reading of the Democrats. You seek to distance yourself from the Republican defeated brand, their record disapproval ratings by claiming that you were always against them BECAUSE THEY ARE TOO MUCH LIKE DEMOCRATS! LOL. You are now an indpendent or perhaps even a LIbertarian…. Who do you think you’re fooling you coward. I respect the idiots who write the drivel in these columns far more [and you can measure this in micro-give-a-sh&&^ts] because they actually have some kind of consistency. A look at your blog circa 2005, before the gloss came off your idol, shows you solidly behind Bush in every way, shape and form. Why do you bother to lie about it and then give me a link where I can find this:

Second, now that this strategy is succeeding, now that al Qaeda and the Taliban have been neutralized in Afghanistan, now that the link between Saddam and al Qaeda has been severed, now that millions in Syrian kickbacks from the Oil-For-Food Programme are no longer flowing into terrorists’ offshore accounts, now that Iraqis have held their first election, and surrounding countries – Lebanon, Egypt, Iran – are feeling the pangs of the desire for self-government – now that all of these things are happening, enormous efforts are being exerted to downplay the validity of that strategy, and paint it’s lynchpin – Iraq’s inevitably difficult recovery from decades of homicidal tyranny – with the false colors of illegitimacy and “quagmire”…The war in Iraq is over. Saddam lost. Mission accomplished. Now we move to the next phase – the replacement of a murderous, insane ideology with one that the Islamic world can use to flourish in peace. That alternative is alluded to by acknowledgements such as that of Victor Hanson:Taking the fight to the terrorists has been Phase One and so far, despite herculean efforts by the MSM and Bush/Blair-haters to mischaracterize this fight as everything from American Imperialism to muslim genocide, it has been successful.

Nice work, Einstein. As I said, I wish you’d write more. No one makes a fool of themselves quite like you.

Only in the left’s morally adolescent Bizarro World does ‘pr’ equal actual policy. And this claim is hardly evidence that anyone in the DNC has the slightest clue regarding all the details of their health care coverage. No such evidence exists.

– … I find it funny that none of your posts ever seem to reflect that sentiment.

The only funny thing is that you haven’t been reading what I’ve (or anyone else here has) been writing; you’ve been reading what’s tattooed on the inside of your forehead, which is your fantasy version of what I’m writing. You’re incapable of responding to what’s written, so you make sh!t up and ‘respond’ to that, a/k/a straw man.

Here’s a perfect example: “…you tried to blame the RNC debacle on Steele while defending previous RNC administrations.” I’ve already demonstrated that this entire issue is a red herring (and your selective blindness keeps ignoring it). That’s not a ‘defense’ of the RNC, it’s calling B.S. on a bogus criticism. As such, I haven’t tried to defend anyone or blame anyone for anything. You’re the one doing that.

Your ravings are nothing less than you transferring your fantasies about Steele onto me, to wit: “Here’s Steele blaming it on the past RNC…” morphs into “…you tried to blame the RNC debacle on Steele while defending previous RNC administrations.” Clinical transference.

I know the whole issue is bogus. You are the only one here who thinks previous RNC administrations did anything in this regard that requires defense. Steele is just kowtowing to The Left Wing Media, looking for a way to avoid the appearance of incompetence they’re projecting onto him, because he’s just a failed lawyer, not a real leader, and he doesn’t know any other way to respond. In this, he’s following GWB’s example – GWB did exactly the same thing for the entire 8 years that the Anti-Bush Party and its lapdogs in The Left Wing Media lied about and attacked him and his adminstration 24/7/365 (thus, giving us an economy-destroying Democrat Congress in 2006 and a Republic-destroying President in 2008).

- Your kneejerk defense of the Republicans…

The knee-jerk you think you’re seeing is just your own knee impacting your own forehead. Last time I checked, Steele claims to be a Republican. So does McCain. On more than one occasion, I’ve referred to McCain as a Socialist. I’ve noted that GWB was an absolutely abysmal leader and that his “compassionate conservatism” is nothing less than Socialist Lite® a number of times. All three (and others) have turned out to be self-aggrandizing opportunists, and I’ve made that clear many times. And the ‘recent conversion’ you’re fantasizing is just you not paying attention. Again, you’re constructing a straw man driven by your raging, unreasoning hatred of anything labeled “Republican” and your insipid, suicidally naive, morally adolescent, black-and-white view of the world.

Calling B.S. on a bogus criticism of Republicans (or anyone else, for that matter) is not a “defense” of Republicans, it’s an appropriate response to a bogus criticism.