Same challenge, asshole! $100! Show where I said this or admit you’re a lying piece of shit!
To whatever degree I may be garbage, I’m garbage on a significantly less malodorous level than you.
From the quote Big T used in the OP here -
We can all see you, Starving Artist. We can all see you saying that “what [Ford] alleges to have happened” was NBD. We can all read your garbage. We all know what you mean. We all know what that makes you.
Of course what you actually find is a sizable glurge consisting of snippets of a phrase I’ve posted here and a sentence that I’ve posted there there, pasted together with an endless number of these: “[…],” followed by Kimstu’s imaginings of what they really mean, consisting of nonsensical ideas and beliefs that have never so much as crossed my mind.
Here you reveal not only your own ignorance but your proclivity to jump to wrongful conclusions.
I neither watch nor listen to right-wing media. It’s apparently inconceivable to you that we conservatives have minds of our own, but the reality is that to whatever degree right-wing media may agree with me or other of its followers, it’s because they are espousing the same views their audience already has. The fact is, I’ve been of a conservative turn of mind all my life, even in my teens, and I’m perfectly capable of making my own observations and drawing my own conclusions without help from outside sources.
Impressed though I am at your apparent erudition, I’m afraid I must ask just which of my rantings it is that you find “illogical,” and for a demonstration of your “rational” opposition to them. So far all I’ve seen from you is the type of cut/paste/Kimstu-imaginings posts I referred to above.
So NBD = acceptable?
If a firecracker should go off in my hand, and I receive a blister as a result which I characterize as no big deal, does that mean I think it’s fine to hold firecrackers in your hand until they explode?
So far you’re not even close to getting your $100. In fact, you should probably pay me $100 in penance for the fallacious stupidity you’ve employed to sully my good name.
Oh, so now I think rape is not serious? $100. Check. Prove.
And is it your assertion that I’ve pointed out someone I’d like to rape? Same $100. Cough up where I said this.
How about YOU go back over your previous posts and read what you have written? There’s an idea.
Why is it I’m finding myself thinking there are more than a few people here who the board might be better off without, yet I’m not one of them?
I mean, regardless of my views and how well they sit with this nest of liars, at least I’m honest.
See, all you’re doing here is provoking the usual tortuous set of verbal gymnastics where our resident defender of sexual assault wails at the indignity of being accused of finding it acceptable, when all he said is “I don’t think what she alleges to have happened to her is all that serious”, that such behavour “was fairly commonplace”, and that it’s best for women if “they forgot about it.”
This is a man who will attempt to fuck a paper tube to defend an enabler of child rape. Do you really believe he’s going to actually accept an accurate interpretation of his own words?
*Sigh, so much dishonesty, so little time.
Same challenge to you. I’ll mail you a check for $100 dollars if you can prove I’ve ever defended sexual assault (in some manner other than to point out that it wasn’t as serious in fact as was being alleged).
More idiocy. Doesn’t being stupid ever grow tiresome for you?
First of all you still seem unable after all these years to grasp that the tubes were for the likes of you, not me.
And of course you were never able to prove Paterno “enabled” Sandusky’s abuse. None of you were. Not ever and not at all. This is obvious from the fact that you still can’t let go of it some five or six years later.
Do you really want me, and your ignoble defeat, living in your mind all the time like this?
No, you’re not.
No. I don’t believe he will change. That’s what I meant when I said that being garbage is just who he is.
Yes. In as much as you describe sexual assault as being “commonplace” and “not that serious”, both synonyms for NBD.
Who cares? This is a thread about how you think sexual assault is acceptable, based on your description of it as being “commonplace” and “not that serious”.
You can tell what Starving Artist thinks about women based on how he treats the women on this message board. Every single one who takes part in these threads about sexual assault and rape tells SA, over and over again, that his rhetorical approach is very harmful to women, and he has never shown the slightest inclination to maybe consider that all these women could be correct and he could be wrong.
Never. I’ve never seen a single self-reflecting post from SA, in which he might reevaluate his thoughts about an issue that he has no personal experience over based on the disagreement of women.
Do you really think anybody would want you to know his or (particularly) her address? You must be kidding, mate. 
You’re not defending it, you claim. You’re just downplaying it as being “commonplace” behaviour. You’re just mitigating it saying it’s not that serious. You’re just palliating it by saying girls should just forget about it.
Sophistry is tedious at the best of times. When it’s attempted by an idiot such as yourself, it’s not just tedious, it’s sad.
True, but fortunately he’s quite old.
Nah. Barely seventy.
This ^
A complete lack of self-reflection; a total sense of self-righteousness.
But — gee, that old La Salle ran great!
Maybe, but not when the writer uses the incredibly condescending phrase “Ladies, you need to get your sisters to understand.”