Maybe we can get a mod to change the title of this thread to: Stupid NFBW post of the day (or hour). I have a feeling this thread is going to stick around as long as he’s posting on this MB.
In fairness to ElvisL1ves, I myself at intervals of a few months feel compelled to remind him of his own particular moment of crowning stupidity. It carries a mild sense of satisfaction.
Alas, modern science has yet to discover a cure for the common clod.
How dare you disparage the subject of this pitting! He is NOT common!!
No indeed. You might even call him . . . colossal!
Ah…Mad Magazine of the 1950s… truly an oracle unto the ages.
I’m also trying to bring “Potrzebie!” back as a catchphrase.
Not true, you dumb-ass.
Putin’s action were illegal, no matter what his motive. And you’re extremely naive (read: stupid) if you think Putin acted to save “Russian Speakers”. He wanted the Crimea and so he took it.
Eh. There is another election coming up shortly. We’ll see what that produces, you blithering idiot.
Based on his complete ignorance of the concept of idiom/literal mindness, I think he might be Balki.
He claims to have never slept with any farm animals, but he smells like the swine he’s slept with. Right there with North Korea, Cuba and Swinestan.
The guy is such a fucking idiot, that he makes arguments like this, and thinks they add something to the discussion:
A coup isn’t a coup, democracy is where the military takes over, the Ukrainian constitution forbids what it allows, and now sending your army into another country isn’t an invasion.
They banned lekatt for not arguing in good faith. They have much better reason in this case.
Regards,
Shodan
Ahh…but where do the mods draw a masterful Red Line between posters who are not arguing in good faith and posters who are too stupid to realize that the previous sentence they just wrote contradicts their next sentence?
Is NFBW a masterful troll and we just don’t know it, or–much more likely–is he an idiot?
I’ve been tempted to create a sock puppet here and argue for something like Creationism, just to practice my debating skills. I mean, a skilled debater could take a position he doesn’t believe in and argue it persuasively enough to convince others. I’ve got friends in real life who do this, just to expose the fact that people on their side don’t have clearly thought-out arguments.
ETA: NFBW is an idiot–just to be clear.
In a way I almost hope he is a sock puppet. It is scary to think there are people like that who are allowed to chew thru the leather restraints and post on the Internet.
Regards,
Shodan
To be honest, I have suspicions that NFBW is an anti-sock puppet, if you will.
I mean, not one poster using multiple names, but multiple users sharing the NFBW name.
Has anyone noticed that the varying degrees of NFBW’s use of the quote function seems to fluctuate?
It’s almost like there is an original moron who created the NFBW name, but when out of depths with his arguments, he gets a friend to help him out with slightly more coherent posts?
Every once in a rare while, “NFBW” posts something I don’t take exception to (and I’d be hard pressed to find an example to cite). But mostly, it’s what medication have you stopped taking?
No need to create a sock puppet for that. I often debate with posters here with whom I agree, but whose arguments I find fallacious. This place is full of people who can’t support the positions they hold! 
I can hardly wait for his new Afghan Election thread to veer off into some tangental nonsense where he creates some new definition of “victory” that he, and only he, uses in order to prove that he’s right.
He didn’t say that it is a “win” for the United States. He’s saying it’s a “victory.” Does he have to spell it out for you? Like, duh!
Plus it’s not a real election until there is a military takeover to oust whoever they voted for. This is the truest and deepest expression of the will of the people.
Also, context.
Regards,
Shodan
He will be along shortly with a wall of strangely formatted text to really kick this thread off and spend the next 10 pages explaining how you all are wrong about the use of the word ‘win’, ‘victory’ and ‘invasion’, and then misread what you write to tie the discussion into painfully plodding semantic discussions that, eventually, will clearly show that he was right all along. I can hardly wait…