Open Side Menu Go to the Top
Register
!!! 2017 February LC Thread (Political Poo Is Political) !!! 2017 February LC Thread (Political Poo Is Political)

01-13-2017 , 11:03 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BroadwaySushy
Speaking of vomiting....
Hey, wanna play some 1on1 basketball?

Before you answer, full disclosure: This would require us obtaining a basketball and going to a basketball court.
01-13-2017 , 11:08 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerowo
Defending what?
Are you really, truly, this stupid? Do you know how to read English, and do you understand what words mean?

He's saying your position is indefensible, you ****ing idiot douchebag.

I know you think you can argue out of anything you are called out on, but you can't slither your way out of this one. You are a bad human being, kerowo. I guess your attempt at virtue signalling backfired on you this time.
01-13-2017 , 11:45 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerowo
Cumdumpster, what could I do to prevent someone from opening an ATF thread while I was mod? ...

...
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
...

BTW cumdumpster typically refers to females
. Roadkill refers to animals. You aren't even smart enough to insult people correctly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerowo
Make sure you share that knowledge of cumdumpsters with your child. ...
wil's child is a 4yo female human.


Does it need to be spelled out even more?
01-13-2017 , 11:49 PM
I sometimes forget I'm only figuratively Goodalling outchea and that you people are literally adult humans.
01-14-2017 , 01:07 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerowo
Now you're claiming that talking about what you claim is an attack on your family is a NEW attack on your family? That's just ridiculous. Why are you shouting down my conversation? I think you're putting up all this fuss to distract us from this:

You did all of these things, why are you saying they're lies now?
Your points have no merit. You claim I tried to back out of a bet but yet I didn't when I had the chance to. You contradict yourself because you're an idiot.

I've explained each situation ad naseum. I don't want or need your approval in anything, and I sure am not trying to distract from anything. I stand by everything I've said, as always. I am not you.
01-14-2017 , 01:10 AM
But you haven't Wil. You've claimed I've lied when I said you support punching a child in the face. Do you claim that is a lie?
01-14-2017 , 01:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerowo
But you haven't Wil. You've claimed I've lied when I said you support punching a child in the face. Do you claim that is a lie?
I won't ask again if you are stupid, since we know the answer to that already. You don't know how to read.
01-14-2017 , 01:13 AM
Wil, all you have to do is answer the ****ing question. Do you not support punching a child in the head?
01-14-2017 , 01:16 AM
Seriously, you two need to stop tarding up the forum.
01-14-2017 , 01:18 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerowo
Wil, all you have to do is answer the ****ing question. Do you not support punching a child in the head?
I answered it many times. The thread speaks for itself and you are welcome to link it. This is something you've brought up endlessly, at least 20 times now in multiple threads, often after I've embarrassed you countless times. I'm sure the next time I make fun of your multiple failures on this site and in your pathetic, loser life, you'll bring it up yet again.

Maybe one day you'll grow up and actually do something good with your time?
01-14-2017 , 01:20 AM
Right then, you won't answer the question so I'm assuming you're dodging the question and still do, in fact, support punching a child in the head.
01-14-2017 , 01:25 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerowo
Right then, you won't answer the question so I'm assuming you're dodging the question and still do, in fact, support punching a child in the head.
It's been answered multiple times, its been discussed in its own thread. You are welcome to go back to the thread to continue the discussion. Again, you bringing it up in every thread either of us participate in is a waste of everyone's time and a habit you and the ****** crew do constantly. Is it a coincidence that the tactics that people like fly and lg use are ones you use now?

It doesn't take away from what an utter failure and laughingstock you are. Even people who never speak to you call you an idiot.
01-14-2017 , 03:50 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BroadwaySushy
That's how idiots on the left like kerewo operate. Label someone they disagree with as a racist or bigot without any actual concrete evidence, just their subjective opinion.

It's a well-used tactic in P and it's hard to combat because if you fling dirt at someone often enough some of it sticks.
Weird. People could call me a racist ten thousand times a day and it would never stick.

Once again those who are most worried about being labeled, ironically, have the most reason to be worried.

You know what non-racists do when they are called racists? I guess not.
01-14-2017 , 04:25 AM
Oh go nuke a thread somewhere Zeno.

j/k
01-14-2017 , 06:12 AM
Well I guess it does.


wil: I'm a male, and cumdumpster is a correct insult for a female.

kerowo: Lol, more awesome life lessons for wil to impart upon his daughter.

wil: Why are you attacking my child?!?

5ive: See Spot run.


Quote:
Originally Posted by 5ive
...


Does it need to be spelled out even more?
01-14-2017 , 06:41 AM
I'm not even sure how one would go about attacking a 4yo child, other than a literal physical attack, like, say, punching him or her in the face, just to name a random thing.

But as for a cut-to-the-bone insult, I'm at a loss. Maybe, "Your taste in coloring books sucks big time, kid. Come on, let's get with the program here." Who knows?

And even then, at that age it's going to be an almost pure reflection of the parenting. I can't say, "Hey kid, that's an ugly-ass onesie you're wearing there. And who in the hell even wears onesies?" Because he or she will of course reply, "Back up there killer, I'm 4 ****ing years old, you think they let me pick these bull**** clothes out for myself? Give me a goddamn break already."

Likewise with the 1st example, in that if I saw a 4yo child coloring in a picture of some sort of bin filled with ejaculate I'd be incredibly concerned about her father's parenting skills and general worldviews.
01-14-2017 , 07:08 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by markksman
You know what non-racists do when they are called racists? I guess not.
Vote for Trump.
01-14-2017 , 08:12 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by BroadwaySushy
Vote for Trump.
You don't happen to have any children, do you?
01-14-2017 , 10:54 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
It's been answered multiple times, its been discussed in its own thread. You are welcome to go back to the thread to continue the discussion. Again, you bringing it up in every thread either of us participate in is a waste of everyone's time and a habit you and the ****** crew do constantly. Is it a coincidence that the tactics that people like fly and lg use are ones you use now?

It doesn't take away from what an utter failure and laughingstock you are. Even people who never speak to you call you an idiot.
Wil, I just re-read the last couple hundred posts in your spanking thread and this is the last substantive discussion on the topic you had:

Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
Your statement of 'It's ok to use physical force to punish a child if its the best punishment for them.' isn't exactly clear when you say "for them".

My position has been "if it's in their best interest". There are also some situations where I think it may need to be done for someone else's sake and the behavior must not occur again, as in the example of a teenage boy punching his mother in the face.

If you were in a situation where your son punched your wife for a second time after having a long conversation the first time and explaining to him how that can't happen again, what would be the best course of action?

In an easier scenario : what if you witnessed your son chase a ball into the street without stopping to look for oncoming traffic? What if he did it multiple times?

The 1st scenario is based more on the idea of "this can never happen again". The 2nd scenario is more along the lines of "I'll take the risk of the repercussions of giving them a spanking over them being killed by a car".
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjshabado
I don't think your semantic changes are meaningful. Part of punishment (at least in how I think we've been using it) is in stopping the behaviour from happening again. In all cases I assume there are negative consequences to the behaviour happening again.

I suspect in neither of your situations is spanking the kid the right answer.

I'm not sure why you think that spanking the kid has a higher EV (if you will) of stopping the behaviour in the future. Do you have anything to support this?

Let's pick the chasing the ball into the street without looking for traffic.

First, a big part of this is knowing your kid and making sure they are developed enough to be able to understand and carry out the concept. If they aren't it doesn't matter what punishment you use its not going to be effective.

Second, is being a proactive parent. If your kid can't control themselves they shouldn't be out there. If they're still learning you should be out there prompting them on what they need to do and offerings positive reinforcement when they obey the rule.

Third, if it happens and punishment is necessary it seems like there are lots of options: the talk, stopping the game immediately, removing privileges, whatever. Different things work for different kids.

At no point does it seem like hitting them is the only or best option.
Quote:
Originally Posted by jjshabado
I guess to at least somewhat address the teenage boy punching his mother - this is a significantly more complex issue. The right course of action depends on history and what happened.

But it's a very serious problem and using physical force back is almost certainly NOT the right answer because it's not addressing the underlying problem and it's reinforcing that it's ok to hit people. And teenage boys that are hitting their mothers have an underlying problem that needs to be addressed.

Edit: Not to mention that the amount of force necessary to actually have an effect on a teenage boy is almost certainly classified as assault by the majority of the western world. We're not talking a spanking on the bum.
Quote:
Originally Posted by wil318466
Your last two posts are complete nonsense.

As I've said, discussing any meaningful topic with people like you is worthless. I asked you a direct question and you answered me with word salads. I have better things to do with my time.
Which shows you have questionable parenting skills and a problem with reading things but doesn't show you've changed your opinion. Your opinion is so out of line with public thinking that I'll continue to use "supports punching children in the face" to show that your opinions on anything are suspect and shouldn't be given as much as say JJs whose actually thought about this stuff.
01-14-2017 , 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerowo
Wil, I just re-read the last couple hundred posts in your spanking thread and this is the last substantive discussion on the topic you had:









Which shows you have questionable parenting skills and a problem with reading things but doesn't show you've changed your opinion. Your opinion is so out of line with public thinking that I'll continue to use "supports punching children in the face" to show that your opinions on anything are suspect and shouldn't be given as much as say JJs whose actually thought about this stuff.
Obsess much?
01-14-2017 , 11:07 AM
I thought you only added substance in your posts modsasils?
01-14-2017 , 11:09 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by kerowo
I thought you only added substance in your posts modsasils?
As much substance as needed.
01-14-2017 , 11:11 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by bundy5
I wouldn't have thought that was necessary because if he was exiled from politics and allowed in unchained why is it of any concern to wookie if he doesn't mod unchained (or politics v7.0 as it is called now) and is only responsible for P. Seems like this is a pretty open and shut case where a mod shouldn't be allowed to restrict access to other forums for a member that the mod doesn't moderate.
"Please reinstate my racist friend! I have no one to talk to! Sure, wil is racist, but he's not THAT racist.""
01-14-2017 , 11:16 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 13ball
"Please reinstate my racist friend! I have no one to talk to! Sure, wil is racist, but he's not THAT racist.""
You can talk to any conservative, their all racist..right?
01-14-2017 , 11:37 AM
Soothsayer is a racist.

Not all conservatives are racist.

Hope that helps!

      
m