November 19, 2008

Lame argument for the existence of God...

... of the day.

19 comments:

Sofa King said...

It's all right. I'm sure he'll get a fair trial in that district.

garage mahal said...

The existence of Andrew Sullivan and Dick Cheney on this planet is proof God doesn't exist.

MadisonMan said...

A fishing expedition is evidence of God? Not to the fishes.

MadisonMan said...

..and by the way, Andrew: Vengeance is mine, saith the Lord.

Meade said...

I'll believe in God the day He indicts Andrew Sullivan for alleged vagina prying abuses.

Fred4Pres said...

I do agree that Chenney's acts and policies when it came to detainees were wrong. I disagree with torture. It was a terrible mistake. But it is a complex one. And to just blithely call Chenney and Rumsfeld war criminals misses the serious debate about what is permissible self defense and what is not. But I know this much, that issue is not going to be decided in some county court house (be it in Texas or Vermont). So Sully's comment is pretty stupid.

The existence of Andrew Sullivan as the self appointed voice of conservatism is proof that George Orwell was right.


WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH
ANDREW SULLIVAN IS CONSERVATIVE

Quayle said...

How silly.

The only way to know if God exists is to ask Him to reveal Himself to you.

When He does: you know

(Then the problem is how to tell your friends about it.)

SteveR said...

You don't have to elaborate, if its AS, it's lame.

Freder Frederson said...

And to just blithely call Chenney and Rumsfeld war criminals misses the serious debate about what is permissible self defense and what is not.

If you agree that what the administration authorized was indeed torture, then there is no serious debate, whoever authorized it violated U.S. and international law and should can legitimately be called "war criminals" (or at least "alleged war criminals). It is why the president kept insisting "we don't torture" (even though simply "not torturing" still doesn't get him off the hook).

Torture is never legal under any circumstances.

m00se said...

I had to chuckle recently when Sully was condemning some other blogger's postings as "spittle flecked".

I mean, its hard to see what's right in front of your nose, innit?

Rob said...

m00se,

In AS's defense, when he reads those other blogs they are in fact "spittle flecked"...

...of course that's the spittle that's on his screen.

Henry said...

Apparently God exists only in South Texas.

Oddly enough, this local God allowed the prosecutor who brought the charges to lose the Democratic primary six months ago.

Sounds like a Greek god, not a monogod.

Chris Wren said...

Expect more indictments like this. May Cheney be hounded to his grave by them. And then he can explain himself to Sullivan's God.

Revenant said...

If you agree that what the administration authorized was indeed torture, then there is no serious debate, whoever authorized it violated U.S. and international law

Authorizing torture isn't illegal. In fact, if torture is illegal authorizing it is impossible. :)

Paul Zrimsek said...

Cheney is charged with engaging in an organized criminal activity related to the vice president's investment in the Vanguard Group, which holds financial interests in the private prison companies running the federal detention centers.

Does anyone else feel... deprived of specifics here? If Cheney has money in a Vanguard index fund, which happens to include a few private prison companies among its broad-based holdings, we have one story (or rather, a non-story); if Cheney has an equity stake in Vanguard itself as opposed to the funds it runs, and Vanguard has a substantial portion of its own capital invested in prison contractors, we have another story.

Michael said...

"And to just blithely call Chenney and Rumsfeld war criminals misses the serious debate about what is permissible self defense and what is not."

What would Americans call the people who waterboard an American soldier?

SMGalbraith said...

What would Americans call the people who waterboard an American soldier?

If he was wearing civilian clothes, violating all norms of warfare, massacring innocent civilians or involved in massacring women and children all of our attention would be focused on who this evil person is and who gave him the order.

In other words, your analogy leaves something to be desired.

Richard said...

Why do you even link to Andrew Sullivan? He has to be the most self-absorbed blogger on the Internet today. Very odd man.

Ann Althouse said...

"Why do you even link to Andrew Sullivan?"

Because he's a real blogger, blogging about subjects I'm interested in, and he's fun to bounce off of, which is something as a blogger I need. That's an extremely short list for me.

("Real blogger" means something important to me, but I'm not going to spell it out here.)