Dennisism #4: Old Bones

Dennis Marks (AKA dmarks) frequently objects to discussing topics he deems to be "old bones". What he means by this is that, in his estimation, the topic at hand has previously been discussed, an impasse was reached, and therefore further discussion is pointless.

Or, that is what he would like you to believe. That way he can continuously refer to old topics, spew his lies about them, and go unchallenged. He'll lie about Russ Feingold being in favor of infanticide, for example... and if you call him on it by presenting him with the truth, Dennis pulls the "old bones" card (or canard).

He can lie, but nobody can call him on his lies. I mean, HOW DARE anyone call Dennis out for the liar that he is? "Old bones", in other words, is a deflectionary phrase that means "how dare you call me on my spewing of lies"?

In addition, as I previously revealed on this blog, "old bones" is a coping mechanism that allows Dennis to deal with the cognitive dissonance that hurts his head.

As per this prior example, Dennis lied about Russ Feingold, and when presented with the truth (Russ Feingold saying "once a child has been born, there is no conceivable argument that would suggest a woman's life or health would any longer be at risk or an issue") he simply continued to lie.

Then, when I pressed the issue, Dennis said "I hear the sound of old bones being knawed, and... this time, turn away".

Dennis turned away because his mind couldn't handle the cognitive dissonance his insisting Feingold wants to murder babies and this statement by Feingold caused.

"Dennisism", BTW, refers words or phrases that Dennis Marks has rewritten to serve his own purposes (see here for the post in which I explain in greater detail what a Dennisism is).

Here the "Dennisism" is his rewriting of "old bones" to mean [definition 1] "how dare you call me on my lies! I get to lie with impunity. If not, I shall whine about bogus old bones".

And, [definition 2] "how dare you cause me cognitive dissonance! I shall now distract from you revealing me to be a liar by calling your pointing to facts as old bones, thus eliminating the cognitive dissonance".

Is this not sad and pathetic? Obviously it is both. Unfortunately the proprietors on the blogs Dennis frequents support their delusional buddy due to them having cognitive dissonance issues of their own.

TADM #49

Vile Lie Concerning Russ Feingold From Dennis Marks, Then Cognitive Dissonance When He Is Confronted With the Truth

That former WI Senator Russ Feingold wants abortion doctors to be able to murder babies is a vile lie Dennis Marks (AKA dmarks) clings to.

Dennis Marks: Feingold has a lot of statist, anti-liberty views, including his support of abortionists killing already-born US citizens without any due process. (7/4/2014 AT 7:38:00 PM EDT). Dennis Marks: Here is a transcript where Feingold says killing a born child is up to the "doctor". Yes, Santorum has out of the mainstream views on this issue, to say the least. But so does Feingold. (7/5/2014 AT 10:04:00 AM EDT). Dennis Marks: The [Russ Feingold/Rick Santorum] situation involved a born child (a legal US citizen under the constitution). This is the extreme, and unpopular one, of the abortion debate. If the government wants to appoint abortionists as ad-hoc executioners of American citizens, lets see legislative action and the appropriate judicial review in relevance to due process, etc. (7/5/2014 AT 05:21:00 PM EDT).

Dennis refers to an exchange between Sen. Rick Santorum (R-PA) and Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) that took place on the Senate floor on 9/26/1996 in which the Religious Right Nutjob Santorum puts forward a ridiculous scenerio in which, during the performance of a late term abortion, the head of the baby "slips out". This is, of course, would mean the baby was born; and abortions, as we all know, only take place before birth... by definition.

A "surgical method for terminating a pregnancy" can't apply to a woman who isn't pregnant, which she is NOT once the baby is born. Also "removal of an embryo or fetus from the uterus" can't apply since a born baby can't be "removed" from the uterus.

Anyway, what Dennis objects to Feingold's reply...

Senator Feingold: I am not the person to be answering that question. That is a question that should be answered by a doctor, and by the woman who receives advice from the doctor. And neither I, nor is the Senator from Pennsylvania, truly competent to answer those questions. That is why we should not be making those decisions here on the floor of the Senate.

Do a Google search for this statement and you will find it spread across the interwebs far and wide as "proof" that the former Senator supports murdering babies (just as Dennis claims).

Problem is, Dennis' link contains another transcript of an exchange between Sen. Russ Feingold (D-WI) and NRLC president Douglas Johnson took place in a joint hearing between the Senate Judiciary Committee and the House Judiciary Constitution Subcommittee, on 3/11/1997. And those remarks make it CRYSTAL CLEAR that Senator Feingold does not think doctors should be allowed to kill babies once they are fully delivered (born).

Russ Feingold: Once a child has been born, there is no conceivable argument that would suggest a woman's life or health would any longer be at risk or an issue. This distortion of our exchange is the kind of tactic which undermines efforts to reach an agreement that would ban late-term abortions, except for the most narrow circumstances where a woman's life or health was at stake...

That sounds pretty definitive to me. "No conceivable argument". Why he did not say this during the earlier exchange with Santorum, I don't know. I suspect it might have been because he was thrown for a loop due to the ridiculousness of the nutjob Santorum's setup. During the performance of an abortion, has a baby EVER been "delivered accidentally" because "the head slipped out"? EVER?

I mean, late term abortions usually involve vacuuming out the brain and crushing the skull in order to make the fetus easier to remove. In which case it is dead, regardless of the head "slipping out" or not. If the fetus "slips out" and is alive... then it is born and killing it then would be murder. Unless it is going to die shortly (for whatever reason) and killing it would be an act of mercy. I would be supportive of that. But, that specific situation was never discussed. Santorum was, I presume talking about a viable birth (AKA "slipped out").

In that situation Feingold is clear (in the later exchange)... there is "no conceivable argument".

In any case, as I said, the Feingold quote that "proves" he supports infanticide can be found in many places on the interwebs; and most of these pages do not also include the second "no conceivable argument" quote. Strange that Dennis would make his tired claim about Feingold saying that "killing a born child is up to the doctor" AND link to a page that DISPROVES this.

So, what happened when I pointed out to Dennis that his own link disproved his claim that Feingold has "support of abortionists killing already-born US citizens without any due process"? Extreme (and hilarious) cognitive dissonance...

Dennis Marks: I hear the sound of old bones being knawed, and... this time, turn away. (7/6/2014 AT 05:55:00 AM EDT).

Dennis turned away because his mind couldn't handle the conflicting information. This, by the way, is the CLEAREST case of cognitive dissonance I have ever witnessed! Although, instead of pointing out the cognitive dissonance and laughing at Dennis, I said "you're the one who dug up the old bones! Now, having been called on doing so, you're running away".

An opportunity missed that I regret. Although, if I pointed out Dennis' cognitive dissonance the blog proprietor (this conversation took place on the blog of one rAtional nAtion uSA) may not have published my reply... as this "rational" fellow has a habit of rejecting comments he does not like.

A coping mechanism of his own to prevent any uncomfortable cognitive dissonance? Perhaps.

Supporting Documents
[DSD #6] Feingold's Views, Which Are Pro Infanticide (April 16 to April 20, 2012).
[DSD #7] Russ Feingold View Of Special Rights To Abortionists To Butcher Live Born Americans.
[DSD #17] Anti-Choice Extremism. (A catalog of many radical anti-choice comments from dmarks).

TADM #48