No honesty, no guts at StopTheACLU.com

Meatbrain, I just found this ridiculous claim of yours that you “called me on it”. It’s ashame that Jay deleted you lame comment. You seem to have an unwarranted high opinion of your reasoning skills. Just as you have done on Jay’s site, and on mine, you conveniently respond to maybe 3% of any comments I have made and think you have, “won the arguement”. I see by perusing your site that you seem to be obsessed with your immature “liar, liar you’re pants are on fire” game by devoting quite a few posts calling people “liars” and other names. This is typical liberal moonbat tactics. You aren’t so much “meat that thinks”, as “meat that uses childish tactics of name calling” as opposed to any actual thinking. Of course there is something rather odd about a human being who sees himself as some other beings meal.

You babbled:

“You claimed that there are (conveniently unnamed) people on “the left” who are guilty of a “love affair with the Euro-left’s appeasment policy”. I challenged you to name those people. You turned tail and fled the conversation — thus demonstrating that you cannot or will not back up your claims with facts.”

I didn’t “turn tail and run”. I just didn’t believe that a liberal like you were this stupid that you needed your idealogy’s position on the War on Terror spelled out for you. I see now that you are. So, for your benefit, insert the name of any liberal whether US Democrat, or European, and you will then get an idea of who I am talking about. They weren’t “conveniently unnamed”, just too many to begin with.

Your whole provide me names tactic is about as stupid as asking me to provide the names of liberal democrats who hate Bush. That hatred for Bush is one of the left’s major themes is so prevelant everywhere in the liberal blogosphere, peace rallies etc. makes such a request patently stupid and not worth responding to. Likewise, your idiotic, “prove it, give me names” of liberals who share in the Eurpoean liberals appeasment mentality.

You know very well the left wants us to cut and run. You and others from the left just prefer the words “re-deploy our troops”. You know very well that you all would have the rest of us believe that it is our War in Iraq that has made the terrorist hate us and improved their recruitment rates, and that if we would just leave, then they would leave us alone.

As for appeasment, let’s see, Spain capituation to al Qaeda after the Madrid train bombings by voting in a liberal president who in turn pulled Spain’s troops out of Iraq serves as a very good example of modern European appeasement. No doubt spaniards think that now the Islamo-Facist terrorists will leave them in peace. Fat chance. They have already declared that they desire the recapture of Spain.

As for American appeasment: the Democrats call for us to withdraw our troops immediately from Iraq (read cut and run) because we are making the terrorists mad at us and driving up their recruitment. The underlying thought here is that if we just withdraw from the Middle East, and quit supporting Israel then the Islamo-Facist brutes will leave us alone.

Again nothing could be further from the truth.

Bin Laden commented after the Somalia affair that watching the American troops withdraw after the display of the bodies of American soldiers being drug through the Somalian streets, demonstrated to him that American soldiers are nothing more than paper tigers and that America can be brought down to her knees after all.

Hence my comment that the left’s love affair with European appeasment toward our enemy will be our undoing.

That’s my stance and I am sticking to it.

The Islamo-Facists have declared war on us. Their hatred of us and the rise in recruitment to their cause, began not in Iraq but back in the late 70’s during the Jimmy Carter presidency. It took 9/11 to get our attention.

You can’t appease an enemy who has your death or submission as their mission. Europe should have learned that lesson when the appeasment tactics of Britan’s Chamberlain only stalled Hitler’s bombing of England.

I said:

“”...you conveniently respond to maybe 3% of any comments I have made and think you have, “won the arguement”.”

Your lame response:

“When did your delusion that you can read minds first manifest itself, Clay?

When do you plan to develop a spinal column and respond to my challenge to back up your claims with facts?”

I don’t need to “read your mind”. My experience debating with you has provided example after example to back up my statement. If anyone needs to grow a back bone, it would be you. All that meat and no bones, makes for one sloshy mess that never gets past one or two, at the most statements, and then gets bogged down in semantics and playing “liar, liar pants on fire” games.

I leave you to your fantasy world where you think you have won the debate against all of the “liars” out there. After all, you have to do something while you wait to be devoured by whatever creature out there is coming to eat you. (Isn’t that what meat is for in the first place?)

meatbrain,

You are the one who is lying. I never turned tail and ran. In fact I returned several times for days after I responded to you. I finally gave up after it appeared to me that you had decided to cut your losses.

Obiously, for a leftwing blowhard like yourself it is comonplace to equate the sensible positioning of troops to continue combating terrorism equals the cowardly leftist recommendation of re-deploying the troops home and away from the Middle East so that the terrorist will leave us alone.

Showing you what cut and run means is impossible with leftist blowhards such as yourself. It is a waste of time trying to discuss anything with some lamebrain who spends his energy calling people liars and other assorted names and who refers himself as “meat”.

Like I said before, I leave you to your fantasy world.

meathead,

First you whined about how Jay had deleted your comments from his blog post challenging me. Now you claim they are there. I checked for them the other day when I came across this ridiculous nonsense you are on about and it wasn’t there hence the “It’s ashame that Jay deleted you lame comment.” statement by me on my first comment to this post. Could it be that you are a liar?

As for which democrats are calling for re-deployment of troops out of Middle East, insert any name you wish. The liberal viewpoint is cut and run, because a). Iraq is a failed effort, a quagmire, b). lt is generating more terrorists and hatred for us, so c). If we do this Osama bin Laden, al Qaeda and other Islamic terrorists will leave us alone.

As a liberal blowhard you know this to be the truth. You are just playing the disengenous role of demanding names, because you really can’t offer any counter arguments to any of the points that either I or Jay make, or any other conservative with a different view point than yours for that matter.

There is a reason why you cling to calling your opponents “liars”, getting hung up over semantics and demanding names, and of course responding to only one or two points that have been made. You seem to be proud of calling people liars, and you erroneously think you have won the argument because you didn’t get the names you demanded.

I can’t speak for Jay, but I haven’t made any attempt to supply you with names, citations, nor offered you any lengthy research papers in response to your demands, because I’m not going to waste my time with some knuckle head who is selectively ignoring most of what I post, and is being disengenous.

Like I said….I leave you to your fantasy world. And just as I told you on my blog, I am through responding to you. You are a collosal waste of time, and evidently more of a liar than you claim your opponents are.

Oh, by the way, unlike you, I have no plans for featuring you in a seperate post on my blog, like you have done with me on yours. It isn’t necessary. You did a bang up job of demonstrating what an ass you are when you commented on one of my blog posts. Besides, my blog is about expressing my personal political viewpoints, not introducing some person who thinks he is meat that thinks.

Once again you have done a bang up job of making an ass of yourself in public. This time on your own blog. Maybe one of these days you’ll get past name calling and actually learn to debate the issues. Or, maybe not, after all you think you are meat that thinks.

Again…I leave you to your fantasy world where you are a legend in your own mind.

Ciao

As long as you keep pretending that Democrats have not called for the “re-deployment” of troops (for instance, John Kerry) and needing “names” why should anyone believe you?

Talk about lying and running away. Anyone following this, and everywhere else that you post, can plainly see that you are incapable of anything beyond needing “names” and calling people liars.

Facts? You are either so incredibly stupid that current events evade you, or you are a liar who hides behind doling out “homework assignments” vice actually debating. (btw “vice” means instead of)

Do you remember the times I have called you out on ignoring 97% of what I have commented on? There is a reason for that isn’t there? You don’t respond because you have no responses beyond: “liar, liar pants on fire”, “you are running away” and “give me names, names and more names”.

Ok. Let’s see if you can take what you dish out. I need from you, a 100 page dissertation, completely documented from non-biased sources, proving that the democrat/liberal position of “cutting and running” from Iraq is the best option. Prove how it is perfectly ok, if Sadaam regains power and slaughters those who were trying to form a democratic constitutional government. Demonstrate for all of us how once we do this, Osama bin Ladin, al Qaeda, and all of the Islamo-Facist terrorists out there will leave us alone. Demonstrate that sacrificing the most prevelant democracy in that hot bed of terrorism, Israel, is the best option for securing world peace. Finally, demonstrate how, America, after ensuring these things happen can finally be respected by the rest of the world as a great nation who loves peace and freedom.

Put up meatbrain, or shut up!

Or continue living in you fantasy world…...

Another words, you give up. Right?

Just as I thought….

You are still whining about names.

Why should anyone take you seriously?

I can’t think of any reason.

But, in your fantasy “meat” world, I bet you can.

I especially like your terms of endearment for me: “little liar”, “little coward”
Beyond this, it is telling, your refusal to comply to what was asked of you by me in my last post. In other words, you can dish it out but you can’t take it.

I’m not surprised!

It still rests on, meatbrain, put up or shut up!!!!

meatbrain, your name apparently fits you.

You can’t seem to put up, so that leaves only the impression that you are so stupid that you need protection from progress.

Glad to help!

Clarify how incredibly inept you actually are.

You can’t seem to put up, nor can you shut up, so we are left with….what?

Meat. That’s what. Meat. And I dare ask, “What does “meat” have to do with truth? Absolutely nothing!” In other words, “thinking meat” is totally irrelevant to any scholastic conversation.

While we’re on the topic of adult discussion. As the rest of know it usually goes something like this:

Person A: Point

Point
Point
ect…

Person B: Disagrees with Point 3

Reason

An attempt at adult discussion with meatbrain:

Person A: Point

Point
Point
Point

Meatbrain: ignores points 1, 3, 4 & 5

Give me names

Person A: provides best answer possible to what is evident to everyone else but meatbrain.
Meatbrain: Liar
Meatbrain: calls opponent assorted other names

Meatbrain creates whole new posts on his blog dedicated to opponent and designed to call opponent names while meatbrain pretends that he is somehow superior in his intellect over opponent.

Ladies & Gentlemen,

All you have to do is read any of meatbrain’s posts or comments that he leaves at other blogs to readily see that he knows nothing about adult discussion.

He doesn’t even engage in any meaningful conversation beyond name calling and asking for proof of things that are already well known.

It thinks it is meat and it also thinks it can think.

I rest my case.

meatbrain,

I see you are still being disengenous. In case your not, and you really are this ignorant over the left’s side of the war in Iraq, here you go. Democrats have taken heat by their demands that the troops be withdrawn from Iraq and that Bush should provide a timetable as to when this can be accomplished.

The obvious response to the Democrats regarding this ludicrous idea was that providing a time table for when troop withdrawl will be accomplished, will only serve to tip of the enemies we are fighting in Iraq, so that then, all they would have to do would be to just wait us out, and then after we are out of Iraq, they could then ramp their activities back up so that they can topple the fledging new democratic government in Iraq and establish their Islamic rule.

You wanted names, I told you before, pick any outspoken Democrat regarding the war in Iraq. Withdrawl of American troops from the “quagmire” in Iraq has been the Democrat party’s position every since Sadaam Hussien’s regime was overthrown, and we began having problems with reminant Baath party officials, insurgents and al Qaeda terrorists pouring into Iraq via Iran.

If you still need a name, try John Kerry. In fact he has even used the term “redeployment of troops”.

Assuming that you are honestly uninformed about current political matters and are not just lying and hiding behind “give me names” or “you’re a liar tactics”, you really ought to try and keep up. Watch the news, visit political websites. Keep informed.

Just because no one gives you names, or writes dissertations that you demand does not make what they are asserting untrue.

Why don’t you try actually outlining whatever argument you have in contrary to what the other person is saying. Then you will be worthy of debate. Calling people liars, and crybabies only make you look some immature teenager trying to pass himself off as a mature adult thinker.

In all fairness, you may be very intelligent and mature, but you aren’t acting that way. Until you do, I am not going to waste any more of my time trying to have an adult conversation with you. Fair enough?

Ciao.

Just as I thought. You are too immature for adult discussion. Even when given a name it’s still not good enough. What can I say? I guess if want to keep on pretending that the democrats don’t want us cut and run from Iraq that’s your peragative. After all, as Paul Simon once sang…a man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest….

What? If John Kerry, or any other Democrat for that matter, calls for the redeployment of our troops what else could it mean than out of Iraq?

It is easy to see that you are incapable of actual discussion. You hide behind “prove it” tactics. No matter how many proofs you are given you will still claim that it’s not enough.

Let’s see if you take what you dish out.

Prove that the democrats don’t want us to cut and run from Iraq.

Since you are such a proven immature ass, I won’t settle for just one name or reference to support the proposition that Democrats don’t want to cut and run from Iraq, I need at least 20. That’s being conservative for such an ass as you, but, hey….I am really a nice guy, so I’ll cut you some slack.

Not that anyone is actually following all of this, but just in case, watch meatbrain spaz into even more name calling against me vice actually proving any thing.

My guess is, since he won’t be able to rise to the challenge, he will just spew more namecalling, and self-deluded arrogant rants, no, temper tantrums about how he is somehow so much more intelligent than me.

Remember…this is a person who thinks that he/she is nothing more than meat, and he/she thinks.

I don’t know about you, but it is starting to smell pretty rank around this website. I think it could be because the meat being offered here is decaying.

Let’s say Kerry does want to cut and run. How does that necessarily represent “the left?” Do you have any surveys of liberal opinion, or are you basing your claims solely on what conservatives say liberals believe?

Have you ever stopped to consider who exactly is “the left”? If a pro-military Republican was against this particular war, would that make him a leftist? Consider this: George H.W. Bush has always had the position that an occupation of Iraq would be an unmitigated disaster. That is why he didn’t invade Bagdad when he had the chance. Containment was his chosen strategy. Many conservatives have opposed this war from the very beginning. For specific examples, see here: http://www.antiwar.com/orig/duncan1.html

If Kerry doesn’t mean out of Iraq and back home then what does he mean? Neither he nor anyone from the democrat party have announced any plan other than cut and run. He hasn’t followed up his “redeployment of troops” with any specific place whatsoever.

Rhyleh,

The left is fairly consistent, I will give them that. Kerry is a liberal and he is expressing the sentiments of the left, which is largely anti-war, anti-Iraq War in particular. The poll to check for leftist is simple by visiting leftist blogs i.e. Daily Kos, Listening to Air America, the left’s poster girl, Cindy Sheehan etc.

Of course I wouldn’t refer to a conservative who was against the war in Iraq a liberal. But, just because a few conservatives don’t favor the war doesn’t impact my stance in favor of it at all. I’m not sure what you are getting at there.

Kind of like you huh? You sit there and scream “liar”, “crybaby” etc. Yet you yourself offer no particular defense for why you think democrats aren’t for pulling our troops out of Iraq. By the way, you can add Nancy Pelosi to the list of Democrats calling for re-deployment. Of course that won’t matter. No number of democrat names will suffice. It’s all part of the game you are playing. I ask you what Kerry could mean, and Pelosi for that matter, when they don’t specify where the troops are to be redeployed, if not back home? And you are silent. When Kerry states that the first thing he will do if elected is pull the funding for Iraq (which is disengenous since, Congress, not the President funds wars) it is clear to those possessing common sense that withdrawl and abandonment of Iraq is in the Democrats’ agenda. Unless, of course, you would have us all believe that all of our troops should be loaded in to cargo planes that circle the airways of Iraq a coulple of thousand feet in the air until Kerry and Pelosi figure out where to “re-deploy” them to. Yet, you don’t answer. That is telling. You just sit there and hurl names and other immature tactics. You’re kind of like the monkey in the zoo who sits there and hurls his defecation at passerbys.

It is clear that you are incapable of any sound reasoning. Just childish name calling and using phrases like “straw man” and “argumentum ad ignorantiam” to fool, I guess, the gullible into believing that you are sharp.

You aren’t sharp. You are playing a little game where you take a well known position (i.e. the Democrats are for withdrawing from Iraq ASAP no matter what that might mean) and pretend that I am making some “brand new” claim concerning the Democrat position. You call for names to be dropped. However, no number of names will suffice because you will continue to hide behind “insufficient proof”.

You have been asked several times to come out of hiding and state why you don’t believe the democrats wish to cut and run, yet you don’t. You just keep accusing me of being a “crybaby” or “a liar”. I contend that you are simply unable to defend any position. That is why you sit there and demand proof and call your opponent names. That is apparently all that you are capable of doing

Your blog is replete with examples of you trying to smear your opponents with name calling, sans any real rational argument from you.

I have lingered here far longer than I should have. I fully expect you to follow up my exit with more childish name calling but I frankly don’t care any more. I have wasted my time expecting meaningful debate from you. You are incapable of any reasoned discussion. You apparently live in a fantasy world where name calling means to you reasoned debate.

At least Rhyleh, was able to express herself with dignity.

You can call me crybaby and stomp up and down until you’re red in the face, I could careless. I will not respond any longer.

Actually, it would be to my credit if you do respond to this, my last comment, the way I expect you to. Then it will be broadcast yet again, loud and clear, just what sort of loser you actually are. Completely incapable of reasoned argument, just name callling. The real liar and crybaby is you….crybaby meatbrain.

Cry baby cry…...

Thanks you made my point excellently

Ciao

Not only has meatbrain managed to make my point, (more inane name calling) but watch him now. Let’s see how much denial he is in with this proof of the democrat desire to “cut and run” from Iraq:

Sen John F. Kerry (D-MA), 6 Apr 2006 e-mail to supporters – “I believe that American combat troops should come home from Iraq in 2006 … I believe we must set a May 15th deadline for the Iraqis to form an effective unity government. And, if the Iraqi politicians choose to ignore that deadline, then I believe things will only get worse and we will have no choice but to withdraw immediately.”

Sen John F. Kerry (D-MA), 6 Apr 2006 floor speech – ”...withdrawing U.S.
troops from Iraq is necessary to give democracy a chance to succeed and is vital to America’s national security interests. ... I set a goal of withdrawing most American combat forces by the end of this year. ... I believe most of our forces should be out by the end of the year. ”

DNC Chairman Howard Dean, 8 Dec 2005, “American Morning”, CNN – “We need a strategic redeployment of our troops. We need to bring the 50,000 [National] Guard troops home in the next six months. They don’t belong there in the first place.”

Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), Jan 2006 – “My plan calls for an immediate redeployment of U.S. troops consistent with the safety of U.S. forces.” ...
“I think the vast majority will be out by the end of the year. And I’m hopeful it’ll be out sooner than that.” ... “Sure, you’re gonna see a plan for withdrawal [before the November elections.]” ... Murtha wants all the troops home within six months, except for a quick reaction force of about 20,000 who would be based nearby in Kuwait. (Bob Anderson, CBS) ... ”...my recommendation, where we redeploy as quickly as possible.”

Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), July 20, 2006 speech – “We can no longer afford to sit and wait. It is too costly to wait for future administrations to resolve. We must act now and adopt a policy of redeployment.”

Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), 17 Nov 2005 statement – I believe before the Iraqi elections, scheduled for mid December, the Iraqi people and the emerging government must be put on notice that the United States will immediately redeploy. ... To immediately redeploy U.S. troops consistent with the safety of U.S. forces.

Rep. John Murtha (D-PA), Nov 2005 press conference – The United States will immediately redeploy – immediately redeploy. No schedule which can be changed, nothing that’s controlled by the Iraqis, this is an immediate redeployment of our American forces because they have become the target.

Rep. Cynthia McKinney (D-Georgia) Jose Serrano (D-New York) & Robert Wexler
(D-Florida) – All voted in favor of House Resolution 571 (18 Nov 2005) which states “Resolved, That it is the sense of the House of Representatives that the deployment of United States forces in Iraq be terminated immediately.”

Rep. Michael Capuano (D-MA) William Clay (D-MO) Maurice Hinchey (D-NY) Jim McDermott (D-WA) Jerrold Nadler (D-NY) and Major Owens (D-NY) all voted “Present” on HR 571, thus refusing to vote against an immediate withdrawal.

meatbrain has demonstrated that not only is name calling his only tactic, but when you do give him what he wants, it is never enough. In other words, he is incapable of debate and just wants attention. Poor little liberal.

See what I mean? meatbrain is just incapable of any real debate. It’s interesting how he tries to label my reasoning “classic either/or fallacy” aka “false dilemna” when he himself uses the “fingers in his ears, name calling, and repeating the same thing over and over and over again” tactic.

Instead of demonstrating why the democrats are right in their assertion that we cut and run from Iraq, meatbrain keeps pretending that they don’t hold that position and that I’m just making it up. Even when being provided examples of democrats calling for that very thing.

He also seems to think that because the republicans called the democrats out on their demand that we pull the troops out of Iraq with HR 571 it’s somehow a political trap. So, I guess democrats can whine all they want but should never be called upon to put their money where there mouths are?

meatbrain spouts:

“Oh, and as for “he… just wants attention”... I would remind Crybaby that he came to my blog and started this comment thread — and he’s been posting to it ever since…”

and meatbrain keeps being strung along with each and every comment. At first I foolishly tried to reason with him, but after he started coming unhinged and resorted to becoming more and more childish it became more amusing to just keep stringing him along.

It’s pretty easy to just put your fingers in your ears and call everyone else liars and all kinds of other names, and then claim that it’s never good enough when provided what you ask for. To actually present well thought out reaons to support you viewpoint is quite another.

But, as we have seen, that is not how meatbrain “thinks”.

“Crybaby Clay didn’t assert that there were only examples. Crybaby Clay claimed that this was the view held by all Democrats. He lied.”

Now that is a lie. I never said every single democrat held that view point. Every republican is not necessarily in favor of staying the course in Iraq, but the majority are.

“Lying and backpedalling do not qualify as “present[ing] well thought out reaons”.”

Exactly, and that is precisely what meatbrain is good at, along with namecalling.

yawn