Bricker is a Pile of Shit Sculpted into Human Shape

[Scumpup]

@ElvisL1ves

Yes, obviously this *is *how you’re going to spend your free time, now copious since no one wants you around their children anymore. You’re going to spend it going on the internet to tell strangers they’re stupid.

That’s the 41,753rd addition to the Stupid ElvisL1ves Post of the Day tally. You’re still the Galactus of Dumb.

[Budget_Player_Cadet]

@Bricker

You cannot simply repeat “equal treatment,” as the animating principle, because you don’t favor it.

Or do you? May six year olds marry?

No? Then there has to be some further principle beyond simply “equal treatment.”

I wonder - is Bricker not a lawyer, or is Bricker perhaps a fucking pedophile? Because for a lawyer to make an argument this bad, you have to imagine that they have a firm personal motivation to pretend that children are capable of consent and legal action.

[Chisquirrel]

@Budget_Player_Cadet

I wonder - is Bricker not a lawyer, or is Bricker perhaps a fucking pedophile? Because for a lawyer to make an argument this bad, you have to imagine that they have a firm personal motivation to pretend that children are capable of consent and legal action.

It’s Bricker, the guy who somehow tried to pin the repeated repeal of the Ethics in Government Act on Democrats. Something something, lawyer unethically talking about ethics in government while trying to constantly claim the moral high ground, something something.

And yet, no one brought up the simple fact that minors cannot sign contracts with the government (which is what a marriage license is)? You know he’s going to bring up relations with his lawnmower next.

[elucidator]

Lawn order issue.

[Gyrate]

@Chisquirrel

And yet, no one brought up the simple fact that minors cannot sign contracts with the government (which is what a marriage license is)? You know he’s going to bring up relations with his lawnmower next.

Clearly it’s the same issue. They’re called Lawn-BOYS, not Lawn-MEN.

[John_Mace]

Lends a whole new meaning to the phrase “get off of my lawn!”

[ElvisL1ves]

Gotta be a cardboard tube in there somewhere …

[Scumpup]

@ElvisL1ves

Gotta be a cardboard tube in there somewhere …

Tick.

[ElvisL1ves]

Either coat it with nail polish, or hold a burnt-out match to it, and it will pull its head out. Don’t pull on the body or it will leave the head and you’ll still risk Lyme Disease.

Next time say “Need answer fast”, okay? It helps.

[The_Tooth]

I think it’s some weird right-wing kids game: Tick, tick, tick, tick, WORM! And then they chase each other’s tails.

[Scumpup]

@ElvisL1ves

Either coat it with nail polish, or hold a burnt-out match to it, and it will pull its head out. Don’t pull on the body or it will leave the head and you’ll still risk Lyme Disease.

Next time say “Need answer fast”, okay? It helps.

41,780 stupid posts. You are persistent and consistent.

[ElvisL1ves]

@The_Tooth

I think it’s some weird right-wing kids game: Tick, tick, tick, tick, WORM! And then they chase each other’s tails.

Naw, I think the guy’s just trying to tell us he’s a time bomb about to explode.

[madsircool]

@ElvisL1ves

Naw, I think the guy’s just trying to tell us he’s a time bomb about to explode.

Nope…that’s BigT…

[BigT]

@k9bfriender

Bricker was trying to imply that it was the democrats who got rid of it after the investigations into clinton, and therefore, have no one but themselves to blame for the lack of a special prosecutor now, but that rather disingenuous implication is false.

What’s really interesting is that I’d just seen an old tape from a lawyer telling other lawyers the 10 rules of cross examination, and this tactic was pulled directly from it. Never include facts that hurt your narrative.

What he did in the healthcare thread wasn’t pulled straight from there, but he still thinks that he can pull all these dishonest tactics and think none of us will call him on it.

Whether children can get married has nothing to do with whether the current healthcare bill is a good one. It was just him hijacking the thread so he could change the argument.

It was, dare I say it, a Trumpian tactic, just all gussied up. If you can’t argue against something, say something stupid and get everyone discussing that.

[Chisquirrel]

@BigT

What’s really interesting is that I’d just seen an old tape from a lawyer telling other lawyers the 10 rules of cross examination, and this tactic was pulled directly from it. Never include facts that hurt your narrative.

What he did in the healthcare thread wasn’t pulled straight from there, but he still thinks that he can pull all these dishonest tactics and think none of us will call him on it.

Whether children can get married has nothing to do with whether the current healthcare bill is a good one. It was just him hijacking the thread so he could change the argument.

It was, dare I say it, a Trumpian tactic, just all gussied up. If you can’t argue against something, say something stupid and get everyone discussing that.

I’m pretty sure blatant lies that are easily contradicted by a 5 minute Google search are not one of the 10 rules of cross examination.

[BigT]

You can’t use Google in the court room. And the point is that the rules allow them to give false narratives but not have it considered “lying.”

This is why Bricker is so dishonest. It isn’t lying as far as he is concerned, so he’s not worried about his eternal soul as a Catholic should be.

[Fotheringay-Phipps]

One result of the reputation you have is that very few people care what you said, even if they read it.

[Gyrate]

I’m not entirely sure why we would be remotely concerned about Bricker’s immortal soul. I’m pretty sure that’s outside the Board’s purview.

I’ll settle for addressing the pervasive disingenuousness he’s demonstrated here.

[Snowboarder_Bo]

@BigT

I honestly don’t think he even knew what was wrong with Snowboarder Bo’s argument. How hard would it have been to say “By passed I meant became a law. I acknowledge the House has passed a law.” Instead, he called him stupid and begged other people to explain it for him.

There was nothing wrong with my argument. The problem was, as described above, Bricker wanted to say one thing and argue another. The way I called him out is exactly what he has done for years here, often de-railing threads for many posts while he argues about some pedantic minutiae as if this were a court of law and not one of public opinion. It’s the tactic of a cowardly jackass, IMO, because it reeks of his wanting to “win”. He’s constantly focused on it.

IMO tho, the thing that really made him mad was my bringing up the time he flat out lied and was caught red-handed. And once caught, he fled. He ran away rather than take his lumps and admit it. I’ve never read his posts the same way since. He’s not an honest debater. He has an agenda and he will lie, at least, in order to further that agenda. How much further will he take his dishonesty if it furthers his cause?

And yeah, it’s kind of a shame. Bricker is a smart guy and when he’s not being a manipulative jackass, he’s… well, he’s at least not being that.

See ya, Bricker! Always remember: I won!

[Shodan]

@Snowboarder_Bo

IMO tho, the thing that really made him mad was my bringing up the time he flat out lied and was caught red-handed. And once caught, he fled. He ran away rather than take his lumps and admit it.

But you see, this didn’t really happen.

Regards,
Shodan