Thread Rating:
  • 2 Vote(s) - 4.5 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
SUPREME COURT: JUSTICE SCALIA DEATH AND SCOTUS CHANGES
(10-10-2018, 11:25 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote:
(10-10-2018, 10:47 AM)sally Wrote: Maybe its because im not an asshole.

Yeah, you're typically not an asshole.  More to the point, even when you are an asshole, I'll go back and forth with you because you're not obsessed with other posters and you don't have a screw loose.

hah    
You couldn't get a clue during the clue mating season in a field full of horny clues if you smeared your body with clue musk and did the clue mating dance.
Reply
I read everything you wrote Mags.

And, I did give a crap or I wouldn't have bothered engaging in discussion.

I don't struggle with reading comprehension, so no need for you to bother with appendages, sub categories, and subsections over one discussion, you over-dramatic smartass.

From now on, when you post a comment where the wording is not clear to me, I won't use the context to interpret like I usually do. I'll ask for clarification when I care.
Reply
FryGuy jumped in and saved your bacon Maggs, IMO.
Reply
Im not sure fryguy saved maggots buns or bacon or testicles. Maggot never said it was the girl's fault unlike what you said about the Corey actors. They too were molested and reported it to adults and parents and nothing was done because money and power were more important, but you blamed them instead.
Reply
Fryguy is conservative, and thats always good. He has a better eye for the truth from a foreign country than many that live here do. 
You couldn't get a clue during the clue mating season in a field full of horny clues if you smeared your body with clue musk and did the clue mating dance.
Reply
(10-10-2018, 10:21 AM)Fry Guy Wrote: I can't believe Duchess was of the impression she was not a liar.

I trust HotD as much as I've ever trusted anyone in my life. I've never viewed her as a liar and I don't now. I respect her and I hold her in very high regard. She is a quality person and it's been my great pleasure to know her.
[Image: Zy3rKpW.png]
Reply
Thank you Duchess.  I really appreciate and respect you too.  

I have a lot of flaws, for sure.  But, yeah, being a liar isn't one of them.

So, anyone who doesn't like my style, or my opinions, or what I share of myself here.........wouldn't like me anywhere.  That's not a problem.
Reply
You sound well-informed and eloquent and that's apparently enough to annoy the shit out of fryguy.
Reply
Fryguy used to be fixated on another female member here, I think her name was Syberchick. Her and HotD are similar in ways, although HotD is thin and good looking. I think fryguy sets his sights on women with certain characteristics, kinda like Ted Bundy.
Reply
(10-10-2018, 10:47 AM)sally Wrote: Maybe its because im not an asshole.

(10-10-2018, 10:47 AM)HairOfTheDog Wrote:
(10-10-2018, 10:37 AM)Maggot Wrote: See, that's what i was saying the same with Wienstiens victims. They were passive because the end result would be good for their careers. A person in power using that power to manipulate. I'm just surprised you would think I was trying to say what Nassar or Weinstien did was OK. I'm not that much of a nitwit and will just move on and forget about it. Sometimes you just read into things to much. 

I didn't think you were saying that what Nassar and Weinstein did was okay Mags.

Your sentence wasn't clear and I'm sorry if I misinterpreted it to suggest the girls themselves let it happen in order to win gold. That's the only implication whereby your comparing Nassar's case to Weinstein's (who you think was given sex by his alleged victims in exchange for reward) makes sense.

I disagree with what you actually meant, as well. I do not believe that the parents are to blame. One of the fathers committed suicide after it turned out his daughter was right and he'd believed she just misunderstood the medical technique. The victim impact statements of the other parents are very sad to read -- they were completely fooled and carry a lot of guilt.

Nassar (and any of the officials who intentionally or negligently allowed him to get away with it) are to blame.

And, I still think there's no comparison to Nassar and Kavanaugh.

But it is completely fine for him to believe the parents ought to have known and ought to have done more and that going from 0 victims to 300 victims without an adult jumping in to their defence is a hard pill to swallow. Sounds suspiciously to anyone who is a little bit honest, that this is (rightly or wrongly with the facts) someone who cares that these poor kids were victims.

So with that base level of understanding what do YOU do? You accuse him of supporting child molestation and being a rape apologist.

Immoral, slimy and dishonest. Why are you immoral, slimy and dishonest?

Did you at ANY stage say "Well I know Maggot seems to be saying (above) that he supports "the women's movement" and seems she dislikes seems to indicate that holding a gold medal or child molestation is bad. God knows he has never seemed to indicate that rape is good or children should be molested. So I am going to clarify exactly what he means BEFORE accusing him of being a supporter of child molestation and rape"?

It was not an unclear reading and you were not mistaken as to the context. You weren't, because you are not stupid. Therefore you did it deliberately.
(10-09-2018, 02:13 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: you believe men have the right and entitlement to molest and sexually assault minors and women.  

If HoTD doesn't agree with you politically you better humour her snowflake mentality or she will smear you for no good reason, like every other indoctrinated SJW. Liar and Slimeball. 
Reply
(10-10-2018, 01:30 PM)Rootilda Wrote: You sound well-informed and eloquent and that's apparently enough to annoy the shit out of fryguy.

No. She is not really well informed. She is not eloquent. She is not honest and judging now by the way she spun shit out of a very innocuous set of statements but Maggot (none of which were rape apology or victim blaming) and smeared him as a rape apologist and supporter of child molestation, she is immoral too and very slimy. No issue with either eloquence or being informed.

(10-10-2018, 02:01 PM)sally Wrote: Fryguy used to be fixated on another female member here, I think her name was Syberchick. Her and HotD are similar in ways, although HotD is thin and good looking. I think fryguy sets his sights on women with certain characteristics, kinda like Ted Bundy.

Is that true Sally? I DO remember Syberpig and she was great value. I got under her skin easily. Of course no more than Ordinary Peephole. Remember that little dwarf? No? I know, I know does not fit the narrative. But then there was The Antagonist and I have no idea what gender they were. D, I am sure was male. Borndragon was definitely male and I went at him. Sinister's husband (Bullet?) I went at. But I came for Sinister.

Syberpig was a bit player. But she was a good laugh.

So it is a cool story but pretty selective.
(10-09-2018, 02:13 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: you believe men have the right and entitlement to molest and sexually assault minors and women.  

If HoTD doesn't agree with you politically you better humour her snowflake mentality or she will smear you for no good reason, like every other indoctrinated SJW. Liar and Slimeball. 
Reply
(10-10-2018, 12:02 PM)Duchess Wrote:
(10-10-2018, 10:21 AM)Fry Guy Wrote: I can't believe Duchess was of the impression she was not a liar.

I trust HotD as much as I've ever trusted anyone in my life. I've never viewed her as a liar and I don't now. I respect her and I hold her in very high regard. She is a quality person and it's been my great pleasure to know her.

Was Maggot supporting child molestation, victim blaming or is he a rape apologist? No it was not misread because I showed from any reasonable reading that it was saying the opposite. It also, as I showed needed to ruin the narrative flow to presume these things and would not make sense.

Was she telling the forum the truth when she made these claims?

Okay what about what she said about me? was THAT true. I refuted it, not only easily but in such a way to show where her point of making the accusations was.

I have been here 10 minutes. I get that. I do not have a lot of recent time here to marinate in the forum and soak in the nuances and eccentricities of each member. I see each person as a potential foe as much as a potential friend. So I have not got through the getting to know you stage. I accept that completely and maybe I will come warm to HoTD and see her as you and her other supporters like this Love Child and Roothilda (who between you me and the forum I see as nothing but little sycophants) do.

But ask yourself. If I point out dishonesty and Snowflake Progressivism in HoTD so very easily now and you tell me not to believe my lying eyes AND I have only been here 10 minutes, is it because my eyes are NOT lying eyes but because they are fresh eyes?
(10-09-2018, 02:13 PM)HairOfTheDog Wrote: you believe men have the right and entitlement to molest and sexually assault minors and women.  

If HoTD doesn't agree with you politically you better humour her snowflake mentality or she will smear you for no good reason, like every other indoctrinated SJW. Liar and Slimeball. 
Reply
These are five cases likely to be decided by the Supreme Court during Kavanaugh's first term

1.  Protecting people from being tried for the same crime twice - double jeopardy

Gamble v. United States centers on the constitutionality of the “separate sovereignty exception” to the Fifth Amendment’s double jeopardy clause.  

The decision will determine whether people can continue to be tried twice for the same crime so long as one trial is brought in state court and the other trial is brought in federal court.


2.  Limiting who can be charged under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA)

Stokeling v. United States will decide which state robbery crimes should be considered violent felonies under the Armed Career Criminal Act, a statute that set a minimum sentence of 15 years for crimes involving firearms if the offender already has three serious or violent felony convictions on their record.

The case was brought forth by Denard Stokeling, who in 2016 received a federal conviction of being a felon in possession of a gun. He’s arguing that an unarmed robbery he was convicted of in Florida in 1997 should not be classified as a violent crime, thus disqualifying him from being sentenced under the ACCA.

(continued)
Reply
3.  Detaining immigrants during deportation proceedings

Nielsen v. Preap  will determine whether thousands of longtime U.S. residents face indefinite detention without a bond hearing.

At issue in this case is whether ― after being released from imprisonment ― “criminal aliens” who have been convicted of certain crimes may be detained in the federal government’s custody without bond hearings until their cases are resolved. The policy keeps immigrants in detention for months or years in some cases before they’re ever able to challenge their deportation.

Questions such as the following will likely be considered: “Does the statute really deny bond hearings to all of them ― longtime residents of the U.S. who were convicted of minor offenses 5, 10, 15 or more years ago?”  “What if a person has long ago been released and has returned to a community, established a family and put down roots, and lived a blameless life since that brush with the law? In other words, what if the immigrant would otherwise be a prime candidate for bond?”

(continued)
Reply
4.  Applying civil rights protections in LGBT discrimination cases

Zarda v. Altitude Express, Inc will determine whether the federal civil rights law that bans workplace sex discrimination also applies to sexual orientation.

The skydiving company asked the Supreme Court to hear an appeal in the case it lost in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit earlier this year. That decision found that the company violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 when it fired him for being gay.

“Because sexual orientation is a function of sex and sex is a protected characteristic under Title VII, it follows that sexual orientation is also protected,” the court ruled.

I think this Supreme Court will probably rule 5 - 4 that laws which protect people from workplace sexual discrimination should not also protect LGBT persons from workplace discrimination based on sexual orientation.  I hope I'm wrong about that.

(continued)
Reply
5.  Allowing religious symbols on public property

Another issue that could be added to the Supreme Court’s docket concerns the separation of church and state.  It addresses a set of rulings that barred the display of large crosses on public property.

In two lawsuits out of Maryland likely to be considered as one case if they’re granted an appeal before the Supreme Court, and a similar one out of Florida whose parties are hoping to bypass lower courts so that it may be considered with the Maryland cases, the Supreme Court may consider how far the government can go in preventing religious symbols on public property.

Considering the new conservative/religious leaning of the Supreme Court, I think there's a good chance that the court will overall the bans.
Reply
And that's why I said she seems well-informed and eloquent and you can shove your sycophant accusation up your rancid chocolate starfish.
Reply
(10-10-2018, 11:59 AM)Maggot Wrote: Fryguy is conservative, and thats always good. He has a better eye for the truth from a foreign country than many that live here do. 

No he doesn't, he's just getting in on the charade like everyone else. This shit is like an addictive soap opera to you people, you have some kind of sick relationship with it as embarrassing as it is. You get off on it and the elite know and control you with it.
Reply
I was driving today and saw two babies being baptized by the river and I thought to myself how creepy it looked, in a world where we're so goddammed brainwashed to this day we deserve to have old cheeto head as president
Reply
(10-10-2018, 07:32 PM)sally Wrote: we deserve to have old cheeto head as president

I've done nothing in my life to deserve such a wretched, piece of shit.
[Image: Zy3rKpW.png]
Reply