WR Posters You Don't Agree With but Respect...

I think that's a fair criticism. She was definitely stacked on paper, but the traits you mentioned are definitely valid as well.

The only reason why I downplay those now is because we elected a dude who has those traits on steroids, if it was THAT big of a deal, John Kasich would be president right now lol.
Saying that she's far better than Trump is one thing and I might even agree though to be fair its a counter factual and we can't know. But what I object to is the characterizing of her as one of the most qualified candidates ever for presidency. She has a lot of relevant experience but I don't think it paints as rosy a picture as the titles on her resume do.
 
And she's just an untrustworthy, elitist, and duplicitous person and unfortunately some people are too willing to excuse those traits something that's just an inherent part of the package when it comes to politicians.

That's just not true, though. That's the smear, but any attempts to examine it fail. She's actually unusually scrupulous about accuracy.


Saying that she's far better than Trump is one thing and I might even agree though to be fair its a counter factual and we can't know. But what I object to is the characterizing of her as one of the most qualified candidates ever for presidency. She has a lot of relevant experience but I don't think it paints as rosy a picture as the titles on her resume do.

Very qualified is fair, I think. Lots of candidates have been, though. Nixon was a two-term VP, former governor of California, former Senator, and former Congressman. FDR won his last term after three previous ones, was also former governor of NY, assistant secretary of the Navy, and state senator. Etc. Clinton wasn't near the top of the most qualified, but she was above average. It was something to highlight in contrast to Trump, who was likely the *least* qualified major party candidate ever.
 
Last edited:
You know, I actually do feel a bit bad for hijacking Snitch’s thread because he is, bar none, one of the most upstanding guys in this forum.

Thanks for the kind words, and for the record, I am not bothered in the least which way this thread goes, since it already served it's purpose. Hijack away.
 
Respect is a default for me. It can only be lost not earned. No belief systems are objectively, or at the very least universally accepted as correct . Nature doesnt care about human belief systems whatsoever. The only thing I find particularly egregious is willfully, knowingly harming others. Ignorance is forgivable. Short of the malicious harm thing, much hespeck to all members of my spectacularly fucked up species.
 
Last edited:
I remember when I first saw him posting I noticed he was an asshole but I liked his style.

Hahaha

Then I remember someone else said he was confirmed to be a sock puppet of @Rex Kwon Do and I figured that must be why I like his posting lol. I don't think its true but I never really did figure out for sure what happened with that..

[<dunn]

Who the fuck said that?
 
*looks at Falsedawn making a post several times longer than would be required to answer the question explaining why he’s not answering the question*

Yep, that’s some serious dodging going on there. Why are you afraid of the question False? Do you know the implications of the answer for either this argument or every second argument you’ve had in this forum? I’m curious Here it is, again, just in case you forgot it:

"So, what I need from you is an answer to this line of querying. In an incidence of sexism, racism, ableism, etc etc, is it the sexist/racist/ableist/whatever who gets to decide what's racist, or is it the person who is the target of the sexist/racist/ableist in question? Basically, if a white guy uses a term directed at you, is it him or you who decides if it's racist? Clear that up before we begin and I'll get you your quotes."

Dodge away!

Anyways, you’re a sexist. I have gathered the relevant quotes and my case is prepared to detail just a smidgeon of the blatant unapologetic misogyny you’ve evidenced in this forum. For someone who is so concerned about what essentially amounts to political correctness, I’d think you’d be interested in identifying what a member of the oppressed group identifies as your racist activity – I mean, you’d hope that whites making things you consider to be slurs would do that for you, right? So, I’m asking you to tell me who gets to determine what’s racist – the white guy making a joke about picking cotton, or the black guy hearing the joke? And, by extension, the man making the crude objectifying comments or the woman they’re directed at? Answer it and you’ll get what you want. Dodge it again with a host of longwinded excuses if you’re scared. Given that you are sexist, my thought is it’s worse if you get beaten by a girl.

As per the rest of your stuff… You’re damned right I backed out of that thread. My premise was utter and complete hogwash. Frankly, I’m quite pleased with how well I did with it given the uphill battle I’d chosen and that I knew I was entering a thread where almost everyone would be hostile to my position. But then again, you actually think that was what I believe, don’t you? You haven’t noticed a pattern reflected by what is brazenly advertised in my signature?

"The most perfidious way of harming a cause consists of defending it deliberately with faulty arguments." - Nietzsche


But you’re just trying to distance yourself from a lost argument Ehtheist – you’re not fooling anyone!” One might think that if I hadn’t done it before with you, specifically, and came clean about it. Yep, remember that thread where we were discussing racism and I spent pages arguing on your side? And then a dozen pages later came clean with this?






Yes, I have an admitted and documented history of arguing positions I vehemently don’t believe either to undermine it or just to see how well I can do with it. What’s more, I literally advertise in my signature that this is something I like to do. But yeah, treat that like it’s a win The difference is, when I kicked your ass, I’m betting it’s something you actually believed. I bailed on the thread you listed – but, it was argument for sport, adopting an absurd position and seeing how far I could go with it, as you already knew I did sometimes. Now you’re playing dumb to make me look bad – shocking.

Frankly, with you, I enjoy yanking your chain. And do you know why? Because you’re a sexist who shows a constant pattern of disrespecting women using slurs and derogatory comments which women generally find deeply offensive and touches upon many facets of the type of actual, genuine oppression and discrimination that women have faced – and this coming from a guy who is pretty much the poster boy of the victim Olympics for black oppression. Frankly, as you scream “RACISM!” at everyone who mentions they’re wearing a shirt of American picked cotton, you are the picture of a misogynist who is either uncaring or unaware of how much you transgress into the realm of blatant sexism against women. The irony of it all, if someone used the types of slurs and comments that you use about women against blacks, you’d be first in line to say “RACIST!” – but when you’re doing it against women? “Oh, deary me! I don’t do that…

Back to the point. Falsedawn, that “manhood” I’ve seen you reference before – you actually got the goods, or are you doing to keep dodging the question? Again, for you:

"So, what I need from you is an answer to this line of querying. In an incidence of sexism, racism, ableism, etc etc, is it the sexist/racist/ableist/whatever who gets to decide what's racist, or is it the person who is the target of the sexist/racist/ableist in question? Basically, if a white guy uses a term directed at you, is it him or you who decides if it's racist? Clear that up before we begin and I'll get you your quotes."

Answer and you get to find out a member of the oppressed class has named you a sexist. You man enough for that?
1444499166889758.png
 
Yeah, that's his standard play. It's basically an ink cloud defense. And he'll do it while refusing to provide evidence for his claims, claiming that he's too lazy.
Omg lol
One of the hardest laughs i've had on here in a while
I legitimately cackled
 
<18><18><18><18><18>
It might just be because I'm an idiot, but surely no one was actually reading those walls of text, right?

99% of personal arguments are not interesting to me, so I always have to scroll past it. Remind me to take my adderall when Falsedawn slaps etheist or etheist sends FD to jail on phony rape accusations or SOMETHING interesting.
 
It might just be because I'm an idiot, but surely no one was actually reading those walls of text, right?

99% of personal arguments are not interesting to me, so I always have to scroll past it. Remind me to take my adderall when Falsedawn slaps etheist or etheist sends FD to jail on phony rape accusations or SOMETHING interesting.
LMAO. No, I read about 5-7 sentences and that was enough for me.
 
It's not the "Peace Room", you know.

It's not the "The Dump" either, but how do you explain the fecal matters floating up to your ankles in most WR threads?
 
Last edited:
I always thought you were alright, I just don't like it when people change their avatars, it throws me off.

Thanks dude . . . I can't say the last time I changed from my Chael Simpson creation. :)
 
Always happens in these social chat threads. Always. From kumbaya to fu in a split second.
These threads are the best because people ditch the political posing and straight up explain why they don't like each other.

It's like the OT for grown-ups.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
1,280,182
Messages
58,264,403
Members
175,986
Latest member
Dakota DeSousa
Back
Top