Another Little Drivel from the Bob Dutko Hateblogs

Reprinted under the Fair Use Act!

"Bobbo Loves the Torture!"

Collapse comments

Bobbo,

I imagine you spend a great deal of time in masturbatory glee at your presumed brilliance. But I find you to possess a vile little mind, filled with hatred and paranoia for anything you cannot understand.

First you you commit the intellectual sin of post hoc ergo propter hoc by making the spurious claim that torture has protected us from further terrorist attacks. Then you go on to justify the torture of prisoners at Guantanmo by claming its a great place to be! For good measure, you debase the American justice system by claiming that "slick" defense attorneys "like O.J. Simpson's" would be lining up to free Khalid Sheikh Mohammed.

None of this compares the Grand Whopper of Ignorance you laid at the end of your bullshit parade! You all summed it all up by claiming that only Americans have rights protected by the U.S. Constitution.

What an amazing mixture of racism and ignorance you are Bob! The abuse you suffered at the hands of your father sure has lasting effects, doesn't it?

I'll try to be as plain as I can so even your feeble mind can understand: By your own admission our rights are granted to us by God. If God granted us our rights, did he grant them to everyone or just believers? If God granted rights to everyone, then the terror SUSPECTS are due the protections of the Constitution, right? Or does your God make exceptions for the scary brown people?

And if God only grants right to believers, then would you advocate the imprisonment and water boarding of atheists? Those mean, nasty atheists have the temerity to not be afraid of your mythical big scary man in the sky, so they deserve what they get, right?

Which is it Bob? Why don't you use you big brain to cut the Gordian knot of this little dilemma?

And while you're at it, why don't you do an in studio demonstration of water boarding? If it's not torture, a big strapping guy like you would have no trouble being water boarded, right? If you're too afraid of the demonstration, why don't you bring in one of your kids to be water boarded? If it's not torture, they won't be harmed, right?

Bobbo, you can redeem yourself by two simple acts: First, host an in studio demonstration that proves water boarding isn't torture, and, second, try practicing the compassion that Christ displayed.

Oh, my mistake, you don't believe Jesus of compassion. You believe in Jesus, Lord of War.

Irl

djtyg said...

Yeah, even a good chunk of his supporters would have to know that comparing trying terrorists to trying OJ was over the top.

January 14, 2009 12:15:00 AM EST

IliveBcauseofJC said...

Hey Irl,

Are you interested in solving the "little dilemma" you brought up? If so, then I believe the first step would be to define what you mean by "rights". It is crucuial to your statement, "By your[Bob's] own admission our rights are granted to us by God". It depends on your definition of "rights" to say wether God has "granted" us rights. If rights cannot be taken away, then perhaps the only rights we have are the rights of free will and God's love for us.

January 14, 2009 8:50:00 AM EST

Kramer said...

It must have been five, or six monthes ago that I heard Bob and the effeminate sounding friday movie review guy critiquing the latest Rambo movie that I believe had just recently been released on DVD. Bob went to see Rambo(for research purpose's of course)
The thing I found somewhat disturbing about this so called christian was the delight, and glee in his voice as he described the methods, and number of bad guy's Rambo dispatches. Bob sounded absolutely giddy while describing Rambo's bloodletting.

January 14, 2009 9:48:00 AM EST

djtyg said...

Hey, IliveBcauseofJC, you're missing the bigger point:

Bob Dutko, a man who claims to defend Christianity, is defending the torture of human beings to extract a confession.

Does that sound Christian to you?

January 14, 2009 12:40:00 PM EST

mystere's moonbat slayer club said...

Oh Irl...why are you telling everyone what you do in private, by accusing Bob? You really should listen to "I live Because of JC"...he's trying to be nice to you and warn you of your outright foolishness!

January 14, 2009 10:42:00 PM EST

Another Bob Dutko hating moonbat attack:

Okay, here's another moonbat attack from the 4 harpies who run the hate site "10 Minutes With Bob Dutko" (Reprinted under the "Fair Use" act):

"Grady McMurtry: January 6, 2009"

Collapse comments

I love it when "Doctor" Grady McMurtry is on the show. He seems to bring a fresh bag of crazy every time he is on. A few months back, Bob and Grady couldn't agree on which radiometric dating methods work and which don't. Then Grady went on to analogize gravity with evolution.

But on Tuesday, the good doctor threw out this whopper:

The last known dinosaur that can be documented living with people was in 1887. This was down in Bolivia, when a small armored dinosaur was killed.
Well, that's a new one for me! I scoured the Internets (OK, I just did some mild searching), but couldn't find anyone else making this claim. Perhaps Grady is confusing "small armored dinosaur" with an armadillo.

So, I hope Dutko and McMurtry fans will please point me towards this "documentation". I'm dying to see it.

P.S., I'm still waiting for the fossil evidence of the fire-breathing dragons....

Gordon said...

I wonder how many of McMurtry's fans realise that his father was a leading occultist?

January 7, 2009 9:19:00 AM EST

Lumberjack said...

Typical of McMurtry's dishonesty is a statement he made several years ago when discussing Louis Pasteur's experiment in which he allowed a piece of meat to rot in order to examine any possible emergence of new life. I state this from memory and may be off on some details.

I do, though, accurately recall McMurtry's chest-pounding summary of the experiment. "Pasteur proved it can't happen (life emernging from non-life)" No, Grady, he did not

Grady porports to be a creation "scientist" yet no "real" scientist would make such a blatently inaccurate, irresponsible statement.

Grady and Bob often take advantage of the fact that the general public is hopelessly uninfomred in matters of science. Only about 18% of the public can correctly describe a molecue and only 50% know the earth circles the sun annually.

Neither Bob or his audience would catch McMurtry's blunder, but an estute sceince editor would. That, I wish Bob understood, is why "real" scientists are quoted in the media and creation "scientists" are duly and properly ignored. prove that at all. All he showed is that it did not happen in that instance -- and nothing more. Pasteur did not, and neither can anyone else, prove an unbounded negative. You can't prove there is no Santa Clause. That's logic 101. Got that Grady and Bob?

January 7, 2009 11:31:00 AM EST

realemon said...

I call him Dr. awkward pause. He is a Snarky ologist, who gives attitude to everyone who calls in, even the ones who are stupid enough to agree with him

January 7, 2009 3:55:00 PM EST

Jon said...

He says it was in Scientific American that this Bolivian dinosaur was documented in, if that helps.

January 7, 2009 5:21:00 PM EST

Kramer said...

I wonder if Mcmurtry knows he is not a scientist, and just hope's everyone will believe he is if he keeps refering to himself as such, or is he so delusional that he has actually come to believe himself a scientist.

January 7, 2009 6:32:00 PM EST

mystere's moonbat slayer club said...

You want some evidence for some fire breathing dragons Jeff? When your 3 boyfriends are about to fart, light a bonfire in front of them before they pass gas...You'll have some fire breathing dragons then!

As for the Big Bang Theory, when you fart with your boyfriends with the big bonfire going, there will be proof of the big bang: maybe all of Detroit will go up in flames!

January 8, 2009 10:37:00 AM EST

End of copied post.

Okay, maybe I'm being a bit rough on these guys this time? HAR HAR! NOT! After what they keep doing, they need to be shook up and awakened to truth and reality.

Area 51 Moonbat confirms Roland Burris to Senate Seat.

Funny how bad publicity changes the mind of the senator from "Area 51" and gets him to welcome the Vich's choice of replacement for Junior Senator Barack Obama. With the huge flack Moonbat Harry Reid got for his hemming and hawing, he finally approved Roland Burris for the vacated seat of President - elect Barack Obama. The comparison to Lester Maddox and George Wallace got through to this Kook! Call this moment for what it is: When Harry Met Silly! Now what's going to happen to the Democratic Party? Are they still falling into the hall of shame? By the way, Burris is a good man! He is honest, and has gotten praise from both the moderate Democrats and moderate Republicans.

'Vich-ski Creates more political moonbat cannon fodder

Oh my my! The guano gets dumped in the Senate - BIG TIME! While Rod Blagojevich appoints Obama's former rival Roland Burris to the Senate seat, moonbat majority leader Harry Reid dares to block the " 'Vich-ski's" appointment for some petty political reasons. We all know that Blagojevich tried to sell the seat to the highest bidder, and the poo flinging continues. Some thought Jesse Jackson Jr. would be a shoe-in, while others hoped that attorney general Lisa Madigan would be in, or perhaps war veteran Tammy Duckworth would be so qualified to be Senator? Well, let me ask Harry this question: What's wrong Harry? Is Rod Blagovich's appointment poop stained too much for you? Hey, the 'Vich-ski hasn't been convicted of corruption yet! You think he played the race card? Now let's not waste any more money on the political circus! After all, aren't there some businesses and institutions hurting for cold hard cash? Is Burris not far left enough for you? Is that your problem?

Animated funny avatars - part 2

Another cheap swipe at Bob Dutko - BAAAAH HUMBUG!

Looks like these two moonbats have had too much vodka in their eggnog! Look at how these commies are ranting:

"This Is News?"

4 Comments Collapse comments

Bob discussed on his news hour that some city council in the Netherlands had a live nativity scene with a transgender playing the virgin Mary.

This is news? Really, Bob? You had one hour to pick all the news stories you wanted, and you chose this one?

Like my old Sergeant in the Army used to say: "You know, I was really hoping to care for a second. But I don't."

djtyg said...

Sorry for the short post. I just don't know what else to say to Bob's choice in tabloid b.s.

December 23, 2008 12:57:00 PM EST

Jeff said...

You would think that a transgendered person playing Mary in a government sponsored nativity scene would be enough to make Bob a staunch advocate for an absolute separation between church and state!

December 23, 2008 11:07:00 PM EST

djtyg said...

Maybe that's how you get Bob to jump onto the church vs. state issue. Elect a bunch of Muslims and Jehovah's Witnesses to office so he won't want them endorsing religion:).

December 24, 2008 5:34:00 AM EST

mystere's moonbat slayer club said...

Soooo, you two guys made the front page tabloid news eh? How did you get back from Europe so fast? Did you two have fun with your 15 seconds of shame in the nativity scene? How was it Jeffy Lube and DJ?

January 4, 2009 8:16:00 AM EST

Copied from 10 minutes with Bob Dutko under the Fair Use Act.

Good thing I can't stand eggnog! Neither will I drink liquor of any kind, including the commies' favorite drink Vodka!

Another cheap swipe at Bob Dutko

THEY'RE BACK AT IT AGAIN! A BUNCH OF DRUNK WHINERS ARE RANTING THEIR STUPIDITY ON THE BLOGS:

"This Should Tick Bob Off..."

7 Comments - Hide Original Post Collapse comments

Here's a website that should get Bob's panties in a bunch. Check it out:

http://www.aclufightsforchristians.com/

Without Bob crying about the evils of the ACLU, who will listen to him as he tries to keep the persecution complex going?

Kramer said...

Any rational individual know's the ACLU is not anti-Christian, or anti-religion. Bob on the other hand contends that the earth is only 6000 years old, and dinosaurs rode around on the mythical Noah's ark. I dont think Bob will have any problem completely dismissing this list as lies, and left wing propoganda.

December 31, 2008 3:45:00 PM EST

Suzanne@OTPL said...

The list of ACLU "proof" that they are not anti-Christian is from all the way back to 1998. Let's see proof in the present tense please. I agree with Bob.

January 1, 2009 12:07:00 PM EST

Jeff said...

Suzanne,

12/2008: ACLU Files Federal Lawsuit To Protect Religious Liberty Of New Jersey Prisoner

11/2008: ACLU Represents Minister Thrown in Prison for Criticizing Judge

10/2008: ACLU Sues School District For Punishing Kindergarten Student Because Of Family's Religious Beliefs

Is that "present tense" enough for you? I could go on all day with 2008 examples.

Still agree with Bob?

January 1, 2009 2:22:00 PM EST

djtyg said...

Suzanne, the first three stories took place in 2008. Six of the first seven took place within the past two years.

January 1, 2009 4:41:00 PM EST

Kramer said...

Suzanne is a perfect example of a typical Bob Dutko follower. She is quite happy to blindly believe the B.S Bob spews. Here is proof positive that the ACLU is not anti-religion, and still Suzanne is unwilling to change her view. I would be willing to bet that Suzanne still blindly believes we are all decendants of Noah despite the scientific proof to the contrary.

January 1, 2009 6:29:00 PM EST

Megaaverage said...

Dear Suzanne,

The list of Bob's "proofs" about the truth of Christianity is from all the way back to 6000 b.c. to 300 a.d. Let's see proof in the present tense please. I agree with rational people.

January 3, 2009 9:33:00 AM EST

mystere's moonbat slayer club said...

Suzanne is the only other sane person here besides me. The American Civil Liberties Usurpers have ruined California, and will soon come after you!

By the way, why are you guys so down and sad at this time of year? Did your bosses at the GM plant give you a pink slip for goofing off on the assembly line?

January 4, 2009 8:31:00 AM EST

ORIGINALLY POSTED ON 10 MINUTES WITH BOB DUTKO. COPIED UNDER THE FAIR USE ACT.

Funny pictures For Avatars and other things

"Lumberjack" from 10 Minutes With Bob Dutko.

"Jeff" & his gay lover "DJTYG" from 10 Minutes With Bob Dutko

"Irl Duhnutt"

"Kramer" the dumbo blogger from Bob Dutko

Irl's gay NAMBLA loverboy.

Lumberjack's gay underage NAMBLA boyfriend!

The Bob Dutko hating turd burglars after getting charged with sex crimes!


ANY QUESTIONS???!!!!???

Jerry Brown's an unfaithful closet queen idiot!

From National Review Online:


December 23, 2008 4:00 AM

Gross Dereliction of Duty
By the Editors

As attorney general of California, Jerry Brown has a duty to defend the state and its laws in court. That duty requires him to offer the best grounds in defense of any law that may reasonably be defended. In a brief he filed last Friday in the case challenging Proposition 8 — the ballot measure that amended California’s constitution to ban same-sex marriage — Brown grossly violated that duty. On Election Day, California voters approved Proposition 8. Opponents of Proposition 8 then rushed to court to invalidate it on the novel theory that it was a “revision” to, rather than an “amendment” of, the state constitution, and that this “revision” could not be accomplished through the ballot-initiative process.

The brief that Brown filed for the state last Friday properly rejects the claim that Proposition 8 amounts to a revision rather than an amendment. But instead of presenting the best grounds in defense of the legality of Proposition 8, Brown’s brief offers the crackpot theory — beyond anything the opponents of Proposition 8 have argued, and beyond the scope of the briefing that the supreme court invited — that the constitutional amendment achieved by Proposition 8 is itself unconstitutional.

Here is how Brown summarizes his argument in his press release: “The amendment process cannot be used to extinguish fundamental constitutional rights without compelling justification.” Brown invents this argument out of whole cloth: Further, how is it that a “right” to same-sex marriage that the state supreme court invented just months ago, and that even Brown’s brief concedes was not something “the Framers [of the state constitution] contemplated,” should suddenly be deemed a “fundamental” constitutional right?

Brown’s answer is judicial activism on stilts: Any right that the state supreme court has found to be protected as (in Brown’s phrase) “part of fundamental human liberty” under the state constitution is ipso facto a “fundamental” right. And, further, the fact that the court found such a right means there is no “compelling justification” for its abrogation. In Brown’s theory, there is no popular check on the judicial-activist invention of rights.

This is not the first time Brown has indulged his policy preference for same-sex marriage. In the marriage case that led to the supreme court’s creation of a right to same-sex marriage, Brown expressly repudiated the procreation-based argument for traditional marriage that had prevailed in some liberal courts. And he changed the ballot title for Proposition 8 from “Limit on Marriage. Constitutional Amendment” to “Eliminates Right of Same-Sex Couples to Marry Initiative. Constitutional Amendment” — a move seemingly intended to cost the initiative votes.

Brown’s brief is both a violation of his duty and professional malpractice. It’s good to see that some liberal law professors in California have already criticized Brown: One says that Brown’s argument “turns constitutional law on its head,” and another calls his position “extraordinary.” But Brown’s betrayal of the public trust deserves broader condemnation from political and legal leaders in California, including governor Arnold Schwarzenegger,
irrespective of their own positions on marriage.

Now why didn't Jerry marry Linda Ronstadt back in the 70s, when most red blooded men would have done about anything to get a date with her? Perhaps Jerry's a closet queen? You think? Jerry deserves the next award I'm just about to hand out to him: