So, insults such as “fuckface” or saying someone has semen dripping out their mouth and ass are not a deliberate attempt to elicit negative reactions? Are you serious? But heaven forbid someone poke a bit of fun at liberals or liberalism and then you all bitch and moan about standards. Intellectual dishonesty at its most obvious.
For the record, if anyone else is thinking of reporting Clot’s post as “an admission of trolling,” this is precisely why you’re being ignored. It’s the Pit, people. If you’re not posting here to deliberately annoy someone, you’re doing it wrong.
Shrug. You do it too, and worse. You want to call people rude names, without getting labeled a bigot for it. You bitch and moan (and whine and whinge and bleat) just as badly as those you scorn.
Your own intellectual dishonesty is marred primarily by your lack of intellect.
Oh snap! Someone’s projecting.
you
You folks have an interesting lack of self awareness. It’s sad that when people respond to the fights that certain knuckleheads on this forum start the one who responds gets the critique! Again, intellectual dishonesty. Sad.
Being attacked by liars or those who don’t read very well would actually be meaningless if those weren’t real adults who are free to roam the real world and do things like vote and reproduce. Then it becomes scary. I usually keep my responses PG or PG 13 so someone’s kid or partner won’t be abused by an enraged nerd.
Provoke fights. Get fought back. Whine that people are trolling. 
i said one word. You wrote over 100. You are a loser.
I don’t disagree that Bricker is at times phenomenally dishonest, and there have been numerous times where I’ve wanted to reach through the screen and shake him, screaming, “DO YOU EVER TURN OFF LAWYER MODE YOU FUCKING ROBOT?”, but he not infrequently posts well-thought-out, reasonable arguments that actually contribute to the fight against ignorance, or at least require me to think for a while, and for that I’m genuinely grateful. I very rarely agree with him, but I think he’s one of the conservatives on the board that really contributes to the level of discussion.
You’re one of the first to say, “Your side does it too.” Now, when it is pointed out that your side does it too, you fall back on an accusation of projecting. This is so self-referential, it makes Goedel/Escher/Bach seem linear.
But, then, it is always the bigot who says, “I don’t hate blacks. It’s just…” And they then betray how strongly they hate blacks.
Meanwhile, you’re out of work, son: theaters don’t use projectionists any longer.
(Hm… Vomiters do…)
Well… Sometimes. When it’s a perfectly straightforward matter of law, he usually gives a true answer.
Also, he has really good taste in music, and I wish he’d post more often in Cafe Society.
There are any number of message boards where your point of view would be welcomed. Not in any special way, of course, you wouldn’t stand out amongst the other meth-addled mynah birds. Or is that the crux of the biscuit, here? You might be pleased to have approving attention, but since your shit is the same shit everybody else is saying, you don’t get much attention, approving or otherwise.
I oftimes argue, collegially, with people less left than me, and sometimes with people more left than me. Few of us have the slightest interest in your disdain and contempt. Which is pretty much all you have to offer us. If you really believe that we are so stupid, why in the world would you even bother to talk to us? We didn’t come looking for you, you weren’t recruited.
You know, you could just go ahead and tell folks that you were banned from here. Nobody is going to check. We aren’t famous, or anything. Maybe you should get a hobby, or a degrading sexual perversion. Just a thought.
The Democrats ran probably the only candidate in the entire party who could lose against Trump. I’m afraid the very least price they pay for that idiocy is to be mocked for the next 4 years
Do you even know what you’re writing?
Your mockery is a love tap compared to the punishment of having Trump as president, which you are going to have to endure as well, so tap away if it helps.
From the posted rules;
No trolling
By trolling, we mean posting of inflammatory comments solely to get a rise out of people. If we feel your primary goal as a poster is to make people mad, you’ll quickly find yourself on the road to banning. On the flip side, the fact that a poster consistently makes you mad doesn’t automatically make them a troll.
So apparently the Pit moderator has decided to change the rules? :dubious:
Exactly why I miss Lynn. No telling what Miller will let pass. Hell, I’ve reported somebody obviously ignoring his instructions as a moderator and nothing happened.
At this point, Clothahump isn’t even passing a Turing test.
Context, man, context. I’m guessing you haven’t seen Gran Torino.
(posts not altered in any way, shape, or form)
Am I on double-secret probation now? Where is my confirming PM?
Just to clarify, what do you mean when you say, “Altering quotes to change their meaning”? Budget Player Cadet post was clearly meant to be insulting. It’s entire post was meant to be insulting. The “meaning” of it’s post wasn’t changed, but the post was shortened, and I identified the quote as being shortened. Just like I’ve been doing for years. Plus the original post is still available for everyone to see.
According to your post 202, “If you’re not posting here to deliberately annoy someone, you’re doing it wrong.”
So what did I do that was wrong? Budget Player Cadet insulting post was still insulting. Nothing changed.
p.s. Should my question be addressed in this thread, or in the About This Message Board forum?
Hey doorhinge, you’re not laughing.