Honestly, with some of the insanely clueless posters who’ve turded up these boards in my time here, I don’t know why I should be fascinated by your monumental stupidity. But I am. Please keep this hijack going.
Marley, you very clearly misrepresented what he said and lied. You accused him of calling you a fascist, but as shown he didn’t call you a fascist.
He called you a Nazi.
That’s completely different.
Second Stone: The above is an example of sarcasm.
Stephen Colbert
Bill O’Reilly’s parodic bugbear
Has great big balls
But bears send him climbing the walls
You are correct, I did call him a Nazi. I was mistaken when I said I didn’t. However, Marley is an administrator, and all administrators are Nazis, therefore, Marley is a Nazi. Not all racists are Nazis. But all Nazis are racists. Not all racists are administrators, but all administrators are racists. Therefore something, something, Marley’s still a dick.
Forget whether or not there is sarcasm - what part of those posts do you consider racist? “Illegal alliens”?
Republican Rep. Don Young from Alaska has another name for them. He apparently thinks they all got here by doing the back-stroke-ee-o across the rio-grande-ee-o.
I think it’s the fact that he’s saying that even if he is wrong, he’s still right.
I haven’t seen this level of stupid since Gonzomax got banned.
Yes, I consider “illegal aliens” to be racist, and the part where he agrees that the OP is correct, it is the only term to be used.
They are not “illegal”, no court has said their existence is in violation of the law, nor that their actions have yet been adjudged in violation of the law. Nor are they “aliens”, they are people. The use of the phrase “illegal aliens” as the OP uses it is racist and dehumanizing.
Except I was saying the OP was wrong and it’s not the only term that can be used. This extremely simple idea has been explained to you many times. There’s no coherent way to understand my subsequent post if you believe I was agreeing with the OP, and the OP understood (and told you himself) that I plainly did not agree with him. This is why you keep squirming when people ask you what you think I think. I guess you’ve convinced yourself that if you don’t admit the obvious, you’re not wrong. But it doesn’t work like that.
A lawyer should know better than this, or at least I think a halfway decent lawyer would know better: people can offer their opinions on the law, and we can say pretty confidently that at least some people are breaking immigration laws right now. And the term doesn’t refer to their existence, it refers to the alleged violations of the law.
And this is just braindead. Alien in this context means a person from somewhere else, not a monster from outer space. That’s the original meaning of alien. The space creature meaning came from that.
No, you racist douche, you did not say that the OP was wrong. The plain text of what you wrote says that you agree. Look the heck at it. English! Do you understand it mother kisser? After four pages you suddenly decided that it was opposite day and that you sarcastically meant exactly the opposite of what you wrote and that anybody and everybody knows that you meant exactly the opposite of what you wrote because scarasm, something something you get to speak out of both sides of your kissing mouth. Then, pages on, you finally claim sarcasm and that you suppose it could be dehumanizing. Suppose it could be? Really? That isn’t the opposite of the OP, that is moving a tiny bit away from the OP. Or is that sarcasm too and it is still opposite day?
Let’s face it Marley, if you are really sarcastic all the time and mean the opposite of whatever you say, you agree that the OP is racist and that, contrary to the face of the words you use to describe me as the stupidest person whatever, that you really think I really, really smart. Smarter and more observant than everyone else in this thread. Now, I’m not. I’m just a dummy and don’t claim otherwise. But when you behave like a nasty racist sarcastic teenager all the time, don’t be surprised when people conclude that you are a nasty racist sarcastic teenager all the time and treat you accordingly. But you are not my nasty racist sarcastic teenager, and as you have now observed, I’m not going to let your nasty racist sarcastic teenager act pass.
Yes, that’s how sarcasm and irony work. The text said I agree, the context said I didn’t. The OP understood this in post #19 - long before “four pages later” - and I confirmed my disagreement by stating it non-sarcastically in post #30. It’s not my fault that later on you stumbled into the thread and failed to understand just about every single word that I’d posted.
Does it bother you that you sound like a small child throwing a tantrum? Only a child does this “opposite day” crap and only a small, not very perceptive child would say you either have to be sarcastic all the time or none of the time. You’re not doing yourself any favors here, you stupid, lazy, illiterate, disingenuous asshole. I’m sarcastic sometimes - often, maybe - but not all the time. The first page of this thread has me arguing with the OP via sarcasm once and seriously once. It’s not hard to tell which is which… unless one happens to be a whiny, pompous, barely literate hydrocephalic like yourself.
Bullshit. A dummy would acknowledge the possibility that he misunderstood because it happens to them regularly. You’re an ignorant fuckwit, and you’re a stubborn one.
Except I didn’t do anything racist, nor do I do it all the time (or any of the time).
Project much? That paragraph says more about you than anyone else.
And so you are now saying that paragraph 30 you were not being sarcastic when you agreed “Exactly” with the OP? Okay then. You agreed exactly with the OP in post 30 and you weren’t being sarcastic. So how do you reconcile the context of serious 30 with 10? Or are you now going to change your mind and be sarcastic again in 30? The context of your posts does reveal who you are: A sarcastic, racist person who argues at length and publicly with someone who he considers to be an idiot. Who considers his often sarcastic statements to be okay in the context of his often sarcastic racism if you look at it as a whole.
Or are you being sarcastic again and you really mean the opposite of what you say, and I have to take it in context of the whole in that you’ve never in you 67,000 posts called me those names in another thread? I mean, you are, as you said often, but not always sarcastic. You actually mean the opposite?
And now you unfavorably compare people who suffer from being hydrocephalic to little old me? What did they ever do to you to deserve that? Surely that is just bigotry against hydrocephalics. You just used hydrocephalic as if it were something shameful and disgusting. Well, you bigoted asshole, I, for one, think you owe hydrocephalics an apology. Or were you being sarcastic again and it’s still opposite day.
First Marley came for the immigrants and the dopers supported him because they were not immigrants.
Then Marley came for the sarcasm impaired, cuz lord knows, Marley isn’t sarcasm impaired.
Next Marley came for the autistic, and dopers remained silent because they supported Marley.
Finally, Marley came for the hydrocephalics and the dopers remained silent and supported him because they were not hydrocephalics.
Marley, you are just a nasty, sarcastic sort of guy who doesn’t mind if your nasty sarcasm is offensive about immigrants or hydrocephalics. Or the illiterate. Is there any group of people you do not feel greatly superior to?
Oooo, I just noticed this one. I haven’t acknowledged the possibility that I misunderstood. Therefore, I am not a dummy. Oh, wait, that’s the fallacy of denying the consequent. Damn! I’m still a dummy. But at least I can comfort myself that I’m not bigoted against immigrants and hydrocephalics.
I never said I was being sarcastic in post #30. And in that post I agreed with the OP’s statement that “illegal aliens” is a term created by humans and nothing else. I added that this means we can make up other (better) terms. That undercuts the sarcastic comments entirely and it tells you what I actually think.
This is not that complicated, so don’t give me that “I’m just a dummy” bullshit. You’re being lazy because you think it’d better than admitting you were wrong. And the irony is that that’s really stupid. Everybody gets shit wrong sometimes, but sticking to your guns no matter how plainly the facts are presented makes you an idiot and an asshole.
I have already told you numerous times that the two posts say the same thing. Post #10 says it sarcastically, post #30 says it without the sarcasm. In both posts, I’m disagreeing with the OP’s insistence on using the term “illegal aliens.” The OP understands this. It might be fun to hear you try to explain to him how he misunderstood my post and I actually agree with him after all.
Yes, I’ve been known to waste my time smacking idiots around. We all have our failings.
That’s a fair question. Maybe it’s unfair to hydrocephalics: even if they have small brains they may be better at using them than you are. But I’m not going to get distracted from calling you on your idiotic bullshit.
Like I said: you sound like a small child. Eat some broccoli or you’re going to bed without any dessert.
Intelligent, educated people with senses of humor.
Or at least your problem is not mere stupidity, so you can knock it off with that “I’m just a simply dummy, but even I know blah blah racist wah wah wah” horseshit. A person can be stupid without being an asshole, and the problem here is that you’re an asshole. You misunderstood a very simple comment, which is kind of embarrassing but it happens. You then insisted on a really stupid interpretation of that comment and stuck to your own version of events no matter how slowly people explained everything to you and said you wouldn’t consider any other interpretation because you didn’t feel like it. That goes beyond being stupid into a real character flaw. You want to feel righteous, and that’s much more important to you than actually being right. Or using your brain at all, in fact.
So, the prosecutors in the Amanda Knox case are shoo-ins, then, eh? HEY-YA!
You are correct sir!
[Thinks about explaining who Ed McMahon was so The Second Stone won’t lose hit shit again, but fuck it, explaining jokes to idiots is boring and it never helps anyway.]
Post 30
So, not only do you have trouble understanding sarcasm but also context?
Let me explain context then. In post 30 Marley wasn’t agreeing with the OP’s original post, but with the one he was directly answering. Thus he writes “Exactly”. What follows does unambiguously declare that he thinks that the OP original post was WRONG.
Now, there seems to be another problem with your perception of sarcasm. When one posts one may, at times, write sarcastic posts. At other times one may write ironic posts. Sometimes people write straightforward posts.
But mainly, you should hire someone who can explain to you what kind of attitude each post contains. Maybe they should have some kind of signs on which they could write, for instance “Sarcasm” and they could hold them up whenever they feel a post is sarcastic? Maybe I should write an app and attempt to help you to read threads like this one, by coloring them according to the ideas they’re trying to convey?
It’s pretty strong evidence of an incomplete and simplistic understanding of racism and how it works–the cable TV news version. Racism is not simply about “hating other races,” and yes indeed you can do all those things with someone of a different race born in a different country and still participate in racism. Racism isn’t just about the intentions of the individual, however convenient it might be for one to construct it that way.