Ogre’s amazing denseness

Wheeee! When an ignorant liar like Ogre decides to make a fool of himself, he goes whole hog!

From a recent post:

And the Democrat Party motto:

“The whole aim of practical politics is to keep the populace alarmed (and hence clamorous to be led to safety) by menacing it with an endless series of hobgoblins, all of them imaginary.” — H. L. Mencken

Three words, imbecile: WMDs in Iraq. That particular hobgoblin was constructed and deployed by a Republican administration — and over 4000 Americans, as well as countless Iraqis, have died as a result.

Stay stupid, jackwad.

  1. It’s funny the Ogre doesn’t see the irony of his quote. The wingnut blogosphere is full of vaguely menacing posts about how ‘Islamo-fascists’ – who have neither armies, navies or air forces capable of ‘taking over’ America – are just about to subjugate America, the most heavily armed country on the planet.

  2. It was constructed AND deployed by the Republicans? I think it was constructed before Bush ever took office and it was constructed by prominent Democrats.

    It was indeed deployed by the Republicans.

    Maybe I am wrong but I am sure that the Dems were saber rattling on this when Bubba was prez.

    Is this incorrect?

  3. Please explain Dearborn Michigan…..they didn’t need an army, navy or air force to take over there…..

  4. The historical record shows quite clearly that the Bush administration sold the Iraq war to the US public with a series of lies and distortions regarding the WMD capabilities of Saddam’s regime.

  5. I am pretty certain that many of those quotes were from before he was in office. It means that the Democrats who said them had those thoughts, ideas, opinons or feeling before Bush did AND BEFORE 9/11.

    Bush might have sold it (concocted, amazingly the Dems cite intelligence that they have seen. They tell us there is no doubt) but the Dems were the ones who came up with it. You said that the Republicans constructed it when it is obvious that the dems were building it before Bush took office.

    It is fair to say that it was the work of both parties.

  6. It is fair to say that the Bush administration sold the Iraq war to the US public with a series of lies and distortions regarding the WMD capabilities of Saddam’s regime.

  7. Everything he said was what the dems said before he was president which means that they must have lied too.

    I don’t call it lying when you use the intelligence to make an assessment and you are wrong. I did not call Clinton a liar for bombing an aspirin factory based on faulty intelligence.

    Given that every major intelligence agency said the same thing there must be an awful lot of liars out there, based on your position.

    They were all complicit in starting it (except those who voted no). They should have voted no if they did not think it was true.

  8. And Media Matters is a left wing source. You always say to use an independent and varifiable source so try doing that.

  9. Everything he said was what the dems said before he was president which means that they must have lied too.

    Cite examples of Democrats making each of the specific claims listed in the article before George W. Bush took office in 2001.

    And Media Matters is a left wing source.

    Are there specific errors in the article? If so, Dogmeat can cite them.

  10. I am not going to do it for you. It would be pointless. The conversation would go like this:

    [Sources cited]

    Meatbrain:
    Liar, prove it, liar, that is not credible. Once again I say to cite specific errors. And your response to this will be Big Dog says that something is so but does not prove it, liar.

    As for the quotes, any thinking person (that is your name?) can see the similarities in the statements and will agree that this was caused by all parties concerned.

    Except of course…

  11. Dogmeat refuses to back up his claim because he knows that it is a baseless invention for which no evidence can be found.

  12. This could be a lie

    Or this

    Or
    this

    Or
    this

    Or
    this

    These point to differences between what MM said and what others have said. One of the sides has to be in error. That last one is pretty damning. It comes from fact check and says that the Yellow Cake statement (the 16 words) were well founded.

    And then there is this pointing out that Hussein’s men did indeed meet with Nigerian officials.

    So at least part of what MM wrote is in dispute.

  13. Dogmeat refuses to back up his claim because he knows that it is a baseless invention for which no evidence can be found.

    Just as I predicted.

    Your links are posted and my claim is backed up.

  14. Dogmeat again demonstrates that he is utterly incapable of reading for comprehension. Anyone can “dispute” anything. Dogmeat was challenged to cite specific errors in the Media Matters article. He has failed to do so.

    He was also challenged to cite examples of Democrats making each of the specific claims listed in the article before George W. Bush took office in 2001. He has failed to do so.

  15. Cite specific truths in the MM article. You can’t because there is no proof other than this one said or that one said.

    My sources show that the yellow cake issue is in error as is the claim about chemical weapons. Though MM just rehashes conversations and never makes the claim that the words were false, only that others said they might be wrong. The Bitish report shows they were well founded.

    The Iraqi officers cited state that Hussein had chemical weapons and that they were moved to Syria. They were there and MM was not. MM relies on the same intelligence that the left said is faulty. I tend to believe the guys who were there.

    As for the rest, I am not wasting my time. An earlier poster was correct. You must be one miserable person.

    I know, Big Dog was asked to show something and he did not. I have an idea, you claim it was all Bush. Prove it and show that the Dems and him were not saying the same things. Prove it.

  16. I had a comment that said awaiting moderation and now it is not here. Are you deleting them?

  17. Cite specific truths in the MM article. You can’t because there is no proof other than this one said or that one said.

    False. In each case, Media Matters cites assessments from specific intelligence agencies that fail to support the distortions employed by Bush et al.

    Note that Dogmeat is still unable to cite specific errors in the Media Matters article.

    As for the rest, I am not wasting my time.

    Dogmeat is unable to support his claims. Once again, he runs away from his own assertions. Such intellectual cowardice is, of course, quite common amongst the wingnuts.

    Prove it and show that the Dems and him were not saying the same things.

    Dogmeat’s intellectual dishonesty is boundless. He actually seems to believe that when he makes a claim, he bears no responsibility to support it with facts; that it instantly becomes someone else’s responsibility to disprove it.

  18. I had a comment that said awaiting moderation and now it is not here. Are you deleting them?

    Perhaps Dogmeat can find a bright twelve-year-old to explain the concept of comment moderation to him.

  19. The words went away but the comment did not appear. Did you delete it or not. If you moderated it and decided not to publish then have the testicular fortitude to say so.

    In other words, is it waiting for you to decide or did you trash it?

    MM cites assessments and my articles are interviews with people there. They show MM is in error.

    I am glad you did not delete my comments where I wrote how you would respond. It is not worth the time for me to produce anything. If we had video of the transfer or if we had a recording of the yellow cake conversation you would fund some way to call people names and say it is a lie.

    We have played this game too many times. You always insult people and their assertions, claim their stuff is not good enough and generally act like an ass. I am not going to keep playing the game so you can run your visitor total up.

    You are delusional. That is what happens when you take too many drugs. How stoned did you get at the University of Louisville? You were there in the 60s so you must have found good drugs. It explains quite a bit.

  20. They show MM is in error.

    False. None of the articles Dogmeat referenced provides any evidence of errors in the Media Matters article.

    It is not worth the time for me to produce anything.

    Dogmeat is unable to produce evidence for his claim regarding “what the dems said before [Bush] was president”. For some unknown reason, he insists on posting multiple reminders of his failure.

    You are delusional. That is what happens when you take too many drugs.

    Dogmeat is unable to produce evidence for his claim regarding “what the dems said before [Bush] was president”. He therefore falls back on that hoary old standby of the wingnut, the ad hominem attack.

  21. You are wrong as usual.

    It is not that I am unable to do anything. I have decided not to play games with a 66 year old bitter man. It is not an ad hominem attack, it is the truth, you are delusional.

    MM is in error. Prove they are not. I asked you to prove it earlier but you were unable to so you resorted to attacking me.

  22. It is not that I am unable to do anything.

    False. Dogmeat is unable to produce evidence for his claim regarding “what the dems said before [Bush] was president”. For some unknown reason, he insists on posting multiple reminders of his failure.

    It is not an ad hominem attack…

    Dogmeat is lying. He is unable to produce evidence for his claim regarding “what the dems said before [Bush] was president”. He therefore falls back on that hoary old standby of the wingnut, the ad hominem attack.

    MM is in error.

    Dogmeat has yet to cite a single error in the Media Matters article, much less provide evidence of same.

    Prove they are not.

    Dogmeat’s intellectual dishonesty is boundless. He actually seems to believe that when he makes a claim, he bears no responsibility to support it with facts; that it instantly becomes someone else’s responsibility to disprove it.

  23. You made the original claim that MM was the supporting evidence . Prove they are right.

    [sarc]
    You are so right Meatbrain. I can’t prove anything. I am worthless when compared to your superior intellect. I should have never come here to point out that the war was the fault of all the politicians when it is obvious that George Bush is so intelligent and superior to all of us that he could carry this out on his own. Despite you and others questioning his intelligence, Bush has proven far superior and you have admitted as such by letting everyone know he was so smart he fooled all the so called brilliant people in Congress and on the left.

    I am sorry for doubting your wisdom and will not bother trying to have a civil conversation again.
    [/sarc]

    It would be pointless. You are not civil.

    Good bye Terry. Go write another brilliant piece about Meat that thinks….

  24. Prove they are right.

    Note that Dogmeat originally claimed that “MM is in error”. He seems eager to abandon that position, now that he has been challenged to back it up with facts.

    You are not civil.

    This is an interesting accusation, coming as it does from one who accuses me of being “delusional” and on “too many drugs”.

  25. Its useless Big Dog, Meathead will NEVER admit that his position is on shaky ground.

    Imagine a 6 year old child sitting on the floor crying and covering his ears all while loudly saying .. LA LA LA LA LA LA

    Once you have that picture, you will know what Meathead looks and acts like

  26. No evidence of ‘shaky ground’ has been presented — merely innuendo and ad hominem attack.

  27. I see big dog giving you what you asked for, links and proof, but you instead retaliate by picking up your ball and going home.

    Waaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhhhhhhhhhh

    LALALALALALALALALALALALALALA

  28. I see big dog giving you what you asked for, links and proof…

    False. Dogmeat was challenged to cite specific errors in the Media Matters article. He has failed to do so.

  29. meaty, you still haven’t explained dearborn….they took over there…they can do it anywhere.

  30. Dont count on meathead to explain dearborn, you cant explain that which you cover your ears and eyes and scream and cry on the ground.

    Right meathead?