The Womb Whisperer Suddenly Wants Evidence?

Finally back from DC, had a wonderful meeting with a national political organization. I think I'll withhold the name just to give the leftosphere something else to ohh and ahh about. But thanks to all the morons for linking. As always flapable, laughable Andy bakes takes the cake. 

We still don't know very much about the death of Bill Sparkman in a brutal scene in Kentucky. But the far right is obviously concerned that its violent anti-government rhetoric might at some point be implicated. So what do these people do? Notorious homophobe Dan Riehl pre-emptively asks if Sparkman was a gay child predator, because he had an adopted son. He has no other evidence at all.

The man spent an entire year channeling the womb of Sarah Palin, an odd fixation for a gay guy to start, now suddenly he wants evidence before one is permitted to speculate? Damn, looks like the nurse flipped the med cart again and Andy hasn't had his daily fix.

Have a nice day!

Comments

[gary gulrud]

Apart from columnists, bloggers-who both need grist for their mills-and buggerers, I have no idea why anyone reads Sully. Its like deliberately standing behind a plumber.

[Bruce, NV]

Congrats, Dan! Notorius homophobe! Are you also a raaaaacist? Hey, if you caught the Beagle Boy's attention, you can't be all bad.

[Terry]

So...Because you find Sullivan to have jumped to conclusions insanely, you are justified in jumping to conclusions insanely? Genius.

[Dan Riehl]

Someone needs to back up the short bus and haul some of these retards home. FYI Terry you moron. Sully did jump to a conclusion and said so. I did no such thing. Why are all libs so mentally impaired?

[CraigR]

Newsflash to Mr. Riehl, who apparently was absent that day:

The "But Johnny did it too!" kindergarten defense stopped working in, err, kindergarten.

[Bruce, NV]

Dan, you should ask "why are all mentally impaired so liberal?"

[North Dallas Thirty]

"So...Because you find Sullivan to have jumped to conclusions insanely, you are justified in jumping to conclusions insanely? Genius."

The entertaining thing is that Terry seemingly doesn't have anything to say about Sullivan's behavior, only Riehl's.

Probably because, as I pointed out previously, Terry seems to be imposing standards of behavior on others while refusing to follow them himself. It's very typical of liberals like Terry, whose primary purpose for posting here is message control; he is obediently spreading the meme that conservative talk radio and comments killed Bill Sparkman, and for Riehl to call that into question is a threat to the fundamental desire of the left to justify their suppression of Republicans.

[Terry]

Actually, North Dallas, you'll find that I have never said anything about conservative talk radio and the death of Sparkman. Go ahead...I'll wait...

The point is that it's impossible to have a meaningful discussion with conservatives these days because they're just so dang illogical. For example: Sullivan jumps to a conclusions and I tell people he's full of crap. Riehl jumps to conclusions about Sparkman and I say he's full of crap. But Riehl dismisses complaints about his own leap into the logical abyss by citing someone else's. This is a nice mix of a non sequitur, an ad hominem attack and a sentimental appeal. In other words, it's idiot logic.

Another way to phrase this post is this, "Riehl spent an entire year complaining that Sullivan speculated about the parentage of Sarah Palin's baby, now suddenly he argues evidence isn't required before one is permitted to speculate?"

Riehl's been dumb for a long time, but he can't be nearly as stupid as those who would follow and defend him. Good luck with that, Thirty.

[Dan Riehl]

Terry, open a window if you're going to hit the pipe that hard down here. Everyone knows you're an idiot, you can stop trying to convince us now. We get it.

[North Dallas Thirty]

"The point is that it's impossible to have a meaningful discussion with conservatives these days because they're just so dang illogical."

Let's point out an example.

"For example: Sullivan jumps to a conclusions and I tell people he's full of crap. Riehl jumps to conclusions about Sparkman and I say he's full of crap."

But you never stated that Sullivan was full of crap.

Hence the problem. You expect us to treat this situation as if you did something when clearly you did not -- and then start whining about how "illogical" conservatives are when we insist that you actually do something prior to claiming credit for doing it.

What that makes obvious, Terry is that "illogical" in the minds of liberals simply means that you disagree with them or require them to follow the same rules that they require of everyone else. It is "illogical" in your mind that your prejudices and bigotry against conservatives, who you clearly blame for Sparkman's death, are not accepted immediately as fact.

[Terry]

Here you go: Andrew Sullivan is as much full of crap about Palin's baby as Dan Riehl is about the death of Sparkman. Done.

Now, if you can say the same thing, North Dallas, considering the weak evidence they both cited, then you're being logical. If you defend Riehl but say that Sullivan's full of crap, you're being illogical and unreasoning, which is the very definition of stupidity.

Yet again, I have never, ever blamed conservatives for the death of Sparkman. You can make up all the conversations and posts you wish I'd written in your head (as you clearly will), but it still doesn't mean I've said them.

[AL]

Dan Riehl was obsessed about the murder of Natalie Holloway. The real reason might be that he was jealous that someone else murdered and probably raped her before Riehl could get his crack at it, so Riehl then had to find another teen girl victim closer to home. Now, I'm certainly not accusing Riehl of being a murdering pedophile rapist, but we can't rule things out until we get some firm answers.

[North Dallas Thirty]

"Here you go: Andrew Sullivan is as much full of crap about Palin's baby as Dan Riehl is about the death of Sparkman. Done."

Actually, no.

I quote your first statement:

"So...Because you find Sullivan to have jumped to conclusions insanely, you are justified in jumping to conclusions insanely?"

Your argument there was that the two events are not relevant to each other or linked.

Then you equivocate for Sullivan's behavior by citing Riehl's behavior as relevant and linked to it.

In short, you attempt to argue that your linking the two in an attempt to minimize or defend Sullivan's behavior is "logical" after you had specifically stated above that to do so is "illogical".

The issue here, Terry, is that your use of the word "logic" is only comprehensible if one understands the basic underlying principles: liberals are always right, conservatives are always wrong, and that no matter what a liberal does, it is acceptable because conservatives are always wrong.

[Terry]

The word logic means simply logic, which you clearly don't understand. To suggest that a man was killed because he was a sexual predator based on the fact he adopted a son is a baseless accusation. Period. If you can't understand that, then there's little you do understand.

[David R. Graham]

Dan implies what is IMO a salient fact (bourgeois truth): today's so-called "liberalism" or "progressivism" depends on psychotropic drugs. You have to be loaded to do the things they do, believe the things they believe and pose the ways they pose. Not all psychotropic drug users are progressives, but all progressives are psychotropic drug users or under the influence thereof. There is no other way to come up with the stuff progressives come up with. Criminal organizations running the electoral process and branches of government, yet, sneering at the US Constitution, American citizens and national security. That can only be drugs. Ordinary delusion cannot account for it. It's chemically induced.

[North Dallas Thirty]

"To suggest that a man was killed because he was a sexual predator based on the fact he adopted a son is a baseless accusation."

No; there is evidence that pedophiles foster and attempt to adopt children to sexually abuse them, so it can hardly be called "baseless".

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-480151/Gay-couple-left-free-abuse-boys--social-workers-feared-branded-homophobic.html

Of course, that's not something that is brought up often, because liberals and progressives like Andrew Sullivan prefer not to let people know that their screams of "homophobe" are what they use to ward off those who would investigate what they're doing.

[North Dallas Thirty]

The word logic means simply logic, which you clearly don't understand.

Again, not in the context you establish it.

Back when I was being educated, "logic" involved using facts and by definition excluded personal prejudices.

Now, in our enlightened day and age, progressives and liberals like Andrew Sullivan can go without facts and base things solely on their personal prejudices and bigotry while having it praised by the Obama Party as "logical".

The problem here, Terry, is that you want conservatives to follow the rules that you and your Obama Party have demonstrated don't apply to you. That's been quite useful; after all, if you can cheat while others are forced to play by the rules, your odds of winning are greatly increased.

[North Dallas Thirty]

The nice thing about liberals is how easily they make fools out of each other.

It's rather entertaining to sit here and watch Terry babble about how "illogical" conservatives are, while right next to him his fellow progressive and liberal "Where all the White Women At" makes it clear that it is "rational" to state that Sparkman was killed by Republicans and conservatives and that they are "morally responsible" for his death.

Liberals simply lack intellectual honesty. Their bigotry and prejudices are their fact, their "logic" based on the fallacy that they are always right.

[Mavis Beacon]

So Sparkman was found bound and gagged. http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090926/ap_on_re_us/us_census_worker_hanged

I suppose Dan Riehl could speculate into existence a scenario where Sparkman bound and gagged himself and then hanged himself and perhaps then scrawled "Fed" onto his chest. Alternatively, he could post a correction admitting that his speculation was totally wrong. Let's see what Dan does.

[celticdragon]

Of course you didn't "jump to conclusions", Mr Riehl.

You just put out an insanely venomous trope (especially in our culture) for "speculation".

Cute.

This isn't conservatism. It's character assassination.
You don't even have the guts to throw the card on the table though, so you try disingenuous tricks like this.

[Cautious Man]

Also, some of the "support" perceived by Mr. Riehl, for making the outrageous claim, appears to be due to not understanding some facts.

If Mr. Sparkman was employed as a local director for the Boy Scouts of America, that doesn't mean that he was working with children. It means that he was meeting and coordinating with local adults, to support the formation and maintaining of scouting troops and packs. The local BSA executives and officials don't work with the kids directly, and the only time they see them is if they are attending a meeting of a local troop or pack.

[North Dallas Thirty]

"You just put out an insanely venomous trope (especially in our culture) for "speculation"."

And of course, CelticDragon, we can find all sorts of examples of you and your fellow Palin haters throwing out "speculation" against Sarah Palin and talking about how you find Andrew Sullivan's statements that she faked her pregnancy to be "justified".

http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=26296#comment-1352460

Fortunately for you, you're a liberal, so you don't have to follow your own rules, under liberal "logic".

[j.]

Old news, Mavis. And disputed by law enforcement, in that he was not found hanging. Unless the info is from a named law enforcement source, I would discount it. As to whether Sparkman bound and gagged himself, law enforcement has certainly not ruled it out because they continue to say that there has been no determination as to whether this is a homicide, suicide, or accident. And yes, it's pretty easy to write on your body with magic marker.

[Lala]

Mr. Sparkman taught an after-school class.

[Bruce, NV]

Beautiful. The Beagle Boy calls it "Southern populist terrorism, whipped up by the GOP and its Fox and talk radio cohorts”, and the lefty blogs are silent. Dan speculates, and to them, it's a travesty. No ideological consistency from the deranged nut roots.

[William Teach]

BTW, Dan, did you see Excitable Andy's womb whispering post just 14 minutes before he attacked you? Serendipity?

[Mavis Beacon]

j, if it's "old news" that makes the conjecture even more embarrassing.

j, just to be clear, you find compelling the following version of events: A man stripped naked and mysteriously wrote FED on his chest. He then asphyxiated himself and tied a rope around his neck (or vice versa). Jerry Weaver, the man who found Sparkman's body is confused or lying to the press about finding him bound and gagged. Also, based on his boy scout work, we can assume the reason that Sparkman killed himself is because he was a pedophile.

[unemployedunionworker]

What this all boils down to is that we have to find a cure for life-shattering curse of homosexuality. With all of the advances in stem-cell research, a cure will be found soon. Then these types of tragedies will not occur anymore.

[wooga]

If it were some 'perv killing', I would think the writing on his chest would say "PED" rather than "FED" (as in pedophile). Of course, it very well may say "PED," since the actual facts are so sketchy and -- as anyone who has written on the face of a passed out drunk knows -- felt tip writing on bodies is a bit sloppy. But there is definitely some bizarre sexual thing here, and the refusal of the police to rule out "accident" only compounds the weirdness.

[Janet]

Some people have been guy since, well, forever. Why do you care what people do with other adults on a consensual basis?

By the way is it true that Riehl is a child sex predator? We must be responsible and consider the possibility since there's no way to rule it out.

[Gary]

Dude, this is funny. These morons just can't grasp the irony.

[j.]

j, if it's "old news" that makes the conjecture even more embarrassing.

For you, maybe.

j, just to be clear, you find compelling the following version of events: A man stripped naked and mysteriously wrote FED on his chest. He then asphyxiated himself and tied a rope around his neck (or vice versa). Jerry Weaver, the man who found Sparkman's body is confused or lying to the press about finding him bound and gagged. Also, based on his boy scout work, we can assume the reason that Sparkman killed himself is because he was a pedophile.

Just to be clear, that is your version of events - not mine. Once again, unless it comes from a named law enforcement source, it is not trustworthy. And law enforcement has still not made a determination as to whether this death is a homicide, suicide, or accident.

[Ran]

Gee Dan,
The guy who called you a notorious homophobe... Feh? I don't recall anything of the sort in your work.

One of your earlier posts, though, did strike an old chord:

Oh yes. The faulty - but sometimes quirkily accurate grey-matter drive - pulled up a recollection of having read an article - circa 2000? - by a certain "conservative" who recounted in the New York Times Magazine how he had shed tears when the took the Oath of Allegiance upon becoming a naturalized citizen. Had left his native Britain, came to Harvard, proud now to be a Yank, all that.

How then could pot-on-the-beach charges affect an immigration issue? Something less than kosher about the pot story. I don't have Lexis-Nexis. Google isn't pulling in anything yet. Like I say, those old grey circuits aren't perfect.

[celticdragon]

North Dallas

Fortunately for you, you're a liberal, so you don't have to follow your own rules, under liberal "logic".

Uh huh. By "librul", you mean "not part of my tribal identification unit".

Do you even have any real clue just what constitutes (or used to) conservatism? Neo liberalism vs classical liberalism? Libertarianism? (Which is what I lean towards on many things...leave my land alone, my guns alone and me alone. I have no use for religious wackos telling me that God hates gay people or what women should do wrt abortion. Not my business...and not the business of the government. Same thing for the two assault rifles I own)

Sorry, but Sarah struck me as an inveterate liar(and someone with a knack for making lots of Republican enemies and backstabbing her friends), even if Sullivan went overboard with the Trig thing. Saying her water broke in Texas and she flew to Alaska and then took a two hour ride to Wasilla? Bullshit. I have no idea what happened...and I don't particularly care. She exaggerates to the point of absurdity, and I don't trust anything she says. (kind of like that bit where she was against the Bridge to Nowhere, except when you see her enthusiastically lobbying for it on a video.)

Anyways, I and my spouse may still have voted for McCain...until she showed up. I'm a defense and foreign policy Republican (or at least I was until people like you said if you don't drink the kool aid, then you are a RINO LIBRUL commie fascist whatever)

So where does that leave me? A former Goldwater Republican looking at the ruins of my beloved party as they engage in idolatry before the altars of Beck and Limbaugh, surrounded by anti intellectual "know nothing" populists.

Beats the hell out of me. If you want to go engage in rabid partisan posturing and call everyone outside of your cocoon "libruls", then knock yourself out. I'll go back to reading my defense blogs and wondering when a real Republican Party can come back with exciting ideas and solutions that work for our real problems. I think it may be interesting for an enterprising Cultural Anthropologist to examine the culture of rabid, unthinking partisanship on the Left and the Right, however. Rod Dreher and Conor Friedersdorf are two of my favorite conservative writers trying to break the unthinking, rabid partisan thinking that is stifling us today.

(The Anthropology Department at my college tried to recruit me, but I'm sticking with Geology, thank you very much. I'm an adult continuing education student at Guilford College)

[Gary]

celticdragon, go sell your crap somewhere else. The Dems play for keeps, and we as a party need to take the gloves off and make them bleed. We had to listen to 8 freaking years of bullshit and a president who would not defend himself. Even though i liked the man as a person, he was not a conservative and he destroyed the movement. Its time to fight back and save our country from the horrid socialists and Nobama.

[North Dallas Thirty]

"Sorry, but Sarah struck me as an inveterate liar(and someone with a knack for making lots of Republican enemies and backstabbing her friends), even if Sullivan went overboard with the Trig thing."

In other words, even though Sullivan was lying, you used his lies to support your hatred of her. That makes perfect sense.

What makes your rant particularly hilarious, though, is that you claim to want people to "leave my land alone, my guns alone and me alone"....and then voted for the candidate who supports government confiscation of private land for resale to cronies, confiscation and banning of guns and ammunition, and government intrusion into every facet of your life.

"Rod Dreher and Conor Friedersdorf are two of my favorite conservative writers trying to break the unthinking, rabid partisan thinking that is stifling us today."

Well, that's no surprise. Both of them will sacrifice anything to be liked by the Obama Party too.

[Bob]

"We had to listen to 8 freaking years of bullshit and a president who would not defend himself. Even though i liked the man as a person, he was not a conservative and he destroyed the movement. Its time to fight back and save our country from the horrid socialists and Nobama."

Hah. Wing nuts got everything they wished for with the Bushies. It was wing nut paradise for much of those "8 freaking years," with Republicans in control of the White House and both houses of Congress. And what does the nation have to show for it? Squat. Diddly. Nothing but debt and unresolved issues. The problem seems to be that Republican theory, in practice, is crap. Go ahead and blame Bush for it in retrospect, even though -- let me guess -- you were cheering him on the whole way when he was still in office.

Your movement is totally bereft of ideas. All you can do is hope for Obama to fail, even if it means opposing things (like healthcare reform) that the country desperately needs. You have nothing to offer but bitter whining and hypocritical posturing.

[North Dallas Thirty]

"It was wing nut paradise for much of those "8 freaking years," with Republicans in control of the White House and both houses of Congress."

Not really.

Obama Party members controlled the Senate in 2001, right when we went into the last recession.

Obama Party members controlled both houses in 2006, right when we started the long slide into the next.

So Obama Party members have demonstrated that their being in power pushes the country into a recession and causes economic damage. No surprise, since the only thing the Obama Party knows is the Marxist pap that disproved itself with the fall of the Soviet Union.

And as for being totally bereft of ideas, the problem is that Bob and his fellow anti-private industry Obama Party members recognize nothing but that Marxism as being an idea. Their only answer for everything is to take rights, freedom, and money away from people. They openly distrust people and insist that Americans are too stupid to manage their own money and take care of their own health.

No wonder Bob is getting so strident and shrieking. We're not doing what he demanded. Furthermore, the fact that Barack Obama lied is becoming more and more obvious every day as Bob and his fellow leftist wingnuts try to push through their welfare giveaways.

http://hotair.com/archives/2009/09/28/congressional-dems-to-open-obamacare-to-illegals/

[Gary]

The last i checked Bob, was that the dems controlled the senate and house the last 2 years, only then did bush use his veto pen to try and curb spending by the dems. Bush lost the conservatives with Harriet Meyers, medicare spending,and illegal immigration. Believe me the "bushies" didn't give us everything we wanted.

[FormerPalinHater]

Exactly Dan.

Andrew Sulivan, and all the liberals commenting here are irrational liars and self-righteous individuals.

They demand conservatives to follow certain rules .... rules that they themselves do not follow. Typical Alinsky strategy.

As for those people who call Sarah Palin is a liar ... what can you call the total inconsistencies of the statements by Obambi/Sullivan/Pelosi/Reid/Axelrod/Rah/VJones? ARe they the bunch of demons?

I voted for Obambi in Nov2008. I thought he was different. Six months passed. I NOW FULLY KNOW THAT HE IS A LIAR.

I didn't like her first. She really succeeded in debating my own liberal demons through her Death Panel. I found my President lying to me and to the entire nation. Then miracle happened. After having a second look at the issues of Levi, BridgeToNowhere, RussiaSeenInAlaska twists by my former fellows (liberals) .... I found myself believing in lies of the MSM and my fellow democrats against Palin.

Enough of this. I will make things right in 2012.

In 2012, I WILL VOTE FOR SARAH PALIN!!!!

[FeFe]

Isn't it "additional adverse effect” to pot possession Andy...
Remember, Mondays used to be his high as a kite day so I expect his Mondays will be a bit rough for awhile.
http://blogs.masslawyersweekly.com/news/2009/09/10/judge-angered-by-special-treatment-for-andrew-sullivan/

[celticdragon]

I am a liberal. Here me whine!! Waah! Waah!

[NorthDallasFifteen]

I am a conservative. Hear me whine!! Waah! Waah! I don't want to pay my taxes. MINE is MINE. Every man for himself. Waah. Obama Party. waah!

@@