Rush Limbaugh Tells Men To Sexually Harass Women And Then Blame Breasts For It by Niki2

Quote:
Originally posted by Niki2:
"Evolution" is not relevant; human males evolved away from hitting females on the head and dragging them off to their caves, Rap and Rush both know that.

I'm fair certain they never evolved TO do that in the first place. :(

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 9:53 AM

America loves a winner!

It's funny /sad to see so many here twist and distort my words into things I never said. I said evolution involves many factors, not just the part of males who love to chase skirts. The whole POINT of all this is selection. From BOTH sides of the coin. But many, I suppose, don't WANT there to be 2 sides. They want 3 ? 4? Or just one ? Hell, I don't think they even know.

All I'm saying is that the sexual drive in men is hard wired. Same goes for women. Being some what different, they approach the issue via different means, with different goals, but the whole damn point is, you can't deny that it's a part of who we are.

Even Jimmy Carter lusted in his heart. But unlike Clinton, he displayed some level of civility and restraint. ( As far as we know, at least )

I do love seeing some of you do somersaults and twist yourselves into pretzels to find ways to disagree w/ me. Even when *I'm* not even the issue here. You're trying to disagree with human evolution. And I find that hi-larious.

Quote:
"Evolution" is not relevant; human males evolved away from hitting females on the head and dragging them off to their caves, Rap and Rush both know that

Yeah. Now some males just leave them on the ground, and run away.

/snark

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 10:18 AM

Auraptor,
you made yourself a target by being very unclear. First you state very reasonably that human beings have sexual urges but also have self-control, and then you add a "but sexual urges are hardwired" to it without clarifying what you mean by that. Because no one disagrees that human beings have sexual instincts.

So clarify.

Do you agree that having sexual instincts is no excuse for not controlling them to refrain from harassing other people?

Do you agree that Rush's "joking" scenario would constitute utterly inexcusable behavior?

Do you agree that there is a difference between "casually glancing" and "staring" at a person?

It seems to me that potentially we could all enjoy a moment of utter agreement here.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 10:31 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
It's funny /sad to see so many here twist and distort my words into things I never said.

No, what's funny is having yet more proof of your cognitive dissonance. It's clear that in principle you agree with what all of us "crazy liberals" have been saying: that sexual attraction is normal and natural and fine, but every human is responsible for controlling their behavior. This is not at all what Rush said.

But you can't possibly admit that you agree with us, not Rush, so you twist and turn and make these ridiculous arguments that just make you look silly. I mean, do you read your own posts?

And you jump on all that about "drooling," which was clearly a metaphor but you took it literally so you'd have something to nitpick about. Anything to get off topic, right? You know I can debate you under the table if you stay on topic, so you grab what you can to try and dismiss me. So predictable!

OK, I'm done with the hijack. Sorry, all you sane posters.

*---------------------------------------*
The French Revolution would have never happened if Marie Antoinette had just given every peasant an iPhone.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 12:24 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
It's funny /sad to see so many here twist and distort my words into things I never said.

No, what's funny is having yet more proof of your cognitive dissonance. It's clear that in principle you agree with what all of us "crazy liberals" have been saying: that sexual attraction is normal and natural and fine, but every human is responsible for controlling their behavior. This is not at all what Rush said.

Rush was responding to the ABSURD NOTION by being absurd himself. How many FUCKING times does that have to be pounded into your skulls before you get it?

Quote:

But you can't possibly admit that you agree with us, not Rush, so you twist and turn and make these ridiculous arguments that just make you look silly. I mean, do you read your own posts?

I WROTE my own posts. Don't try to belittle me with that 'do you read your own posts ' crap. YOUR problem is that you don't listen to Rush, you completely miss his context, and due to a built in bias to him or just about ANYONE conservative, you buy into the whole bogus " war on women " lie because, in YOUR mind, it some how gives you the moral upper hand. It DOESN'T.

Quote:

And you jump on all that about "drooling," which was clearly a metaphor but you took it literally so you'd have something to nitpick about. Anything to get off topic, right? You know I can debate you under the table if you stay on topic, so you grab what you can to try and dismiss me. So predictable!

It was a poorly used and silly metaphor which hyper exaggerated the point of checking out someone. Your over use of it was the attempt to divert attention away from the topic. Funny you accuse ME of trying to do the same.

You THINK you can debate me under the table, and that's just dandy. Debate is nothing but who can b.s. better, and quite frankly, I don't deal in b.s.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 12:29 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Rush was responding to the ABSURD NOTION by being absurd himself. How many FUCKING times does that have to be pounded into your skulls before you get it?

What "absurd notion" is that? That staring at a woman's breasts is unwelcome and shouldn't be done? That's not absurd, it courtesy. Also, it's in any workplace handbook as a non-no. Leering and gesturing, while harder to prove without cameras, is recognized as a form of sexual harassment and is prohibited.

Quote:
Debate is nothing but who can b.s. better, and quite frankly, I don't deal in b.s.

Well, you just did! You deal in BS nearly 100% of the time.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 12:33 PM

Quote:
Rush was responding to the ABSURD NOTION by being absurd himself.

That staring at breasts shouldn't be made illegal? It isn't.

So it's less so much that he was responding to an absurd notion, but more that his entire argument was absurd. And also offensive for both men and women. It was quite the achievement.

Quote:
But many, I suppose, don't WANT there to be 2 sides. They want 3 ? 4? Or just one ? Hell, I don't think they even know.

I don't limit myself to sides. I mean you never know when we'll find compatible extraterrestrial species or sentient alternate universe creatures or abominations of mad science or anthropomorphic animals or shapeshifters or self-aware emotional robots or energy beings, and while the whole concept is rather repulsive with even the vanilla options, it's none of my business if both/all parties are in agreement and enjoy it.

I will not comment on the potential diseases or complications or "how compatible is compatible" issues that might result. Because the LESS SAID THE BETTER.

In any case I figure I can get through anything with enough willful amnesia and brain bleach. I've lived on the internet man. I have seen some shit. So provided I don't find myself suddenly appointed the world's foremost expert on xeno-medicine and trauma surgery, I should be fine.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 12:42 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
Auraptor,
you made yourself a target by being very unclear. First you state very reasonably that human beings have sexual urges but also have self-control, and then you add a "but sexual urges are hardwired" to it without clarifying what you mean by that. Because no one disagrees that human beings have sexual instincts.

This crowd is so predictable, I knew that merely saying humans are hard wired for sex, in the context of appearing to support Rush's comments, I'd be painted as some knuckle dragging, over sexed caveman who OBVIOUSLY views women as sex objects and nothing more. And I was right.

Quote:

So clarify.

Do you agree that having sexual instincts is no excuse for not controlling them to refrain from harassing other people?

I never said anything else, but you're still missing the point. What constitutes 'harassment ' ? If you start w/ the premise that men are pigs, and that every glance is an affront to a woman's dignity and personal space, then life just got a heck of a lot tougher for you. Because men ARE gonna want to look. That should be a given. And to make them feel like creepy perverts for doing what - I'm sorry, NATURE has programmed us into being, then you're setting the table for absurd confrontation.

But sure, if a guy has to question on whether to look twice ,or glance a bit longer and thinks... " should I ? " , then the answer is probably no, and he should just refocus himself. But hell, what do I know ? That's just my 2 cents.

Quote:

Do you agree that Rush's "joking" scenario would constitute utterly inexcusable behavior?

That's what makes it a JOKE. Being absurd to demonstrate absurdity. How many damn times must I repeat this to everyone ? But sure, if some idiot proceeded to do exactly as Rush was saying, which was never the intent, then by all means, harassment charges commence.

Quote:

Do you agree that there is a difference between "casually glancing" and "staring" at a person?

Umm... yes.

Quote:

It seems to me that potentially we could all enjoy a moment of utter agreement here.

Yay ! Then let it be so! Utter agreement !

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 12:49 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

I just wanted to bring this to everyone's attention. There is an author, Daryush Valizadeh (Roosh V) who has written a series of books called Bang fill in nation here.

Quote:
If you like thin, petite women, Ukrainian women have a clear edge. I estimate that around 30% of Polish women are at least chubby, whereas in Ukraine that number is under 15%. In Poland you also see many women with linebacker body frames....Ukrainian girls are simply not good in bed, perhaps the worst I’ve encountered in my travels. They view sex more as something to be endured them a means of self-gratification. They are also pretty horrible at sucking dick. Polish women, on the other hand, while not as pornographic as American women, have a far healthier attitude towards sex that translates into competent performances inside the bedroom. Ukrainian women may take quite a bit of training to please you while Polish women are better right out the box.

Talk about objectification!

However, I got quite chuckle out of Don't Bang Denmark. The problem that Roosh had with Denmark is that

Quote:
“A Danish person has no idea what it feels like to not have medical care or free access to university education,” an awed Roosh reports. “They have no fear of becoming homeless or permanently jobless. The government’s soothing hand will catch everyone as they fall. To an American like myself, brainwashed to believe that you need to earn things like basic health care or education by working your ass off, it was quite a shock.”

Shock turns into disbelief and then rage when Roosh is rejected by heaps of “the most unfeminine and androgynous robotic women” he’s ever met. “Not a feminine drop of blood courses through their veins,” Roosh rants. He concludes that the typical fetching Nordic lady doesn’t need a man “because the government will take care of her and her cats, whether she is successful at dating or not.”

So, is seems that economic inequality accounts for much male success at sex, and where women don't actually NEED men, men have to succeed on the basis of their charm and personality, god help them.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 1:00 PM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
I knew that merely saying humans are hard wired for sex, in the context of appearing to support Rush's comments, I'd be painted as some knuckle dragging, over sexed caveman who OBVIOUSLY views women as sex objects and nothing more.

Oh, so you ARE a just troll and not a pervert -as your posts about 14-year-olds and Jessica Alba would indicate?. Wow. Sucks to be you, doesn't it?

Got it!

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 1:17 PM

America loves a winner!

I'm neither entirely one or the other.

It's like Jimmy Buffett said, when asked by a reporter ... " How can you write such sensitive songs and then write such trash " ?

Jimmy replies - " I can be very sensitive on occasion, and very trashy on others "

Also...

Nancy Callahan was 19! Not 14 !

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 1:28 PM

Listen, I can prove my brain can take anything.

Do you all know, that sometimes during the day, Rush Limbaugh is COMPLETELY NAKED? It's true.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 1:56 PM

NIKI2

Gettin' old, but still a hippie at heart...

Ew, Byte, please; I haven't even had breakfast yet! ;o)

"So it's less so much that he was responding to an absurd notion, but more that his entire argument was absurd. And also offensive for both men and women." Bingo. The entire premise of this thread, which Rap then threadjacked into seeming to defend Rush, WAS an absurd notion, followed by Rush's absurd argument:

Quote:
Raptor:…what's REALLY sad is the whole point behind this issue, and that's the idea that some want to make merely LOOKING at a woman to be *illegal. Hell, why not just put 'em all in Burkas ? Seems that's where the feminazis are headed with this asinine idea for a law.

That's where Rap left the conversation and went off into la-la-land, JUST as Rush did, JUST as the Daily Caller article Rush was talking about did. They took a REPORT "into the science of the male “objectifying gaze” in the December 2013 volume of 'Sex Roles: A Journal of Research' (Volume 69, Issue 11-12, pp 557-570)" and went straight to "Liberals want to make it a crime for men to ogle or otherwise look at or otherwise admire or otherwise dream about or otherwise fantasize about or otherwise look at and laugh, whatever, women." ( http://www.rushlimbaugh.com/daily/2013/12/09/libs_want_men_to_stop_loo
king_at_women) THAT is what Rush said. THAT is the premise from which he began.

There is no such law, there is no such "idea" for such a law, "some" don't want to make it a law, there is no such "point" behind the issue; it's a way to go from Point A to Point Z with nothing in between. Going way over the top is what Rush is all about, and this was the perfect way to take something and make it SOMETHING IT IS NOT, and do his shock-jock thing with it. Not only did the Daily Caller leap there, Rush lept there and, as we can see, Rap followed like the good little lemming he is. It's pure bullshit, and only Rap, Rush and the Daily Caller making the argument, so again, why is anyone bothering further?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 4:26 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

This is such a ridiculous thread. Trying to have an intelligent discussion with Rap who cannot grasp a basic argument, let alone try make one that is consitent and coherent. He just parrots Rush and has no idea what he is saying.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 5:21 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by Magonsdaughter:
This is such a ridiculous thread. Trying to have an intelligent discussion with Rap who cannot grasp a basic argument, let alone try make one that is consitent and coherent. He just parrots Rush and has no idea what he is saying.

Tell it to Niki, or the DNC, who are all bent out of shape.

I'm the only one who DOES know what Rush is saying, as I've been listening to him for over ... 23 YEARS.

Trust me, I know his humor. May not always agree, or find him funny, but at least I know what he means.

This " issue " ? Is 100% phonied up go-se , by those on the Left, who insist on using Rules for Radicals 101 tactics, to belittle, demean, distract and attack those they deem their political rivals.

This is nothing but a fund raising scheme, by the Left.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 5:44 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
100% phonied up go-se

Yes you are.

Next topic?

*---------------------------------------*
The French Revolution would have never happened if Marie Antoinette had just given every peasant an iPhone.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 6:04 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
100% phonied up go-se

Yes you are.

Next topic?

OOOH ! BUURRNN!!

LOL.

Apparently, you're gonna love 1st grade.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 8:41 PM

Quote:
OOOH ! BUURRNN!!

LOL.

Apparently, you're gonna love 1st grade.

But... My culture... :(

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 8:59 PM

MAGONSDAUGHTER

The mind blowing arguments of Aurapter.

“If you don't think that evolution hasn't hard wired ( no pun ) sex into men's brains, you're uninformed. Yes, we notice women's bodies. Can't help it. But our actions, we can control.”

Evolution has designed us to look, but we don't have to.

"It IS hard wired, and we DO have self control.
But we can't ignore millions of years of evolution. Try all you want, can't be done. "

We do have self control, but we don't. ???? (work that one out.)

"Hey, I embrace my evolution. You act as if you're some how removed from it. I find that funny."

I embrace the evolutionary response of staring at women's breasts.

"Seriously, by whose standards will it be judged that a man was "ogling " a woman. Not all cultures view such things the same. Many Europeans view looking at a person for more than a glance differently than we do here in the U.S."

It is acceptable in some cultures to ogle women's breasts.

"I already DO stare at women's breasts."

No translation needed.

A quote Auraptor posted from Dailer Caller.“This is what the progressives exist to do. They take away our activities. If it’s an activity and it’s kind of fun or pleasurable, the progressives are going to take it away.”

It is men's right to stare at women's breasts. It is considered an 'activity'

"I'm a guy. Would you want me to lie and say I didn't ?"

I give into my evolutionary responses.

"All I said ,and it's not even debatable, is that humans have basic natural responses. Doesn't mean they MUST obey them, or are compelled to act upon them."

People don't have to give into their evolutonary responses.

"All I'm saying is that the sexual drive in men is hard wired. Same goes for women. Being some what different, they approach the issue via different means, with different goals, but the whole damn point is, you can't deny that it's a part of who we are."

People must obey their evolutionary responses.

"Because men ARE gonna want to look. That should be a given. And to make them feel like creepy perverts for doing what - I'm sorry, NATURE has programmed us into being, then you're setting the table for absurd confrontation."

Men will obey their evolutionary responses.

"But sure, if a guy has to question on whether to look twice ,or glance a bit longer and thinks... " should I ? " , then the answer is probably no, and he should just refocus himself."

Men are able to control their evoluntionary responses.

???????

The only vague sense I can take out of this is that Auraptor believes

a) evolution has hardwired men to stare at women's breasts
b) men are able to control their responses IF THEY SO CHOOSE
c) men need not choose to control their responses, because women should accept that its perfectly acceptable for men to stare at their breasts

And this is the clincher
d) why the hell should any uptight woman tell a man what to do. It's his right to stare at breasts if he wants to. It's an activity. Women who don't appreciate men staring at their breasts are FEMINAZIS who deserve public derision.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 9:00 PM

I have posted before about how RWA's react when criticism hurts them. They don't admit it, of course, but their little RWA brains take note, and they figure that - hey - it worked against them, so they should use it.

The obvious example: W was the worst president ever! This well-supported claim hurt the RWAs in 2008, so RWAs like the RAP in their altered reality figured it'd work for them too. They starting saying the same thing about O. They really don't get that data *matters*. The direction of the country under O's leadership? Very different than that under W, but RWAs can't stop to consider that.

I have noticed a similar reaction from the Rap lately. I (and others) don't have much problem deciphering the twists of his cognitive dissonant brain, and we call him out. He's taken note of how we impale him with our insights, and in desperation he's started using the same language re cognitive dissonance back at us. This is how I know that we hurt him - he expects it to hurt us. Sad that he can't support it like we can.

A primitive example in this thread:

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
OOOH ! BUURRNN!!

Which is what I said to him when AR cut him down about his history of calling women sluts. He didn't reply to AR's post, or my

Quote:
Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
BUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUUURN!

because he can never admit how much that hit home. He was truly, really burned, which I know because he tried to deflect it back at me.

FFFFFAAAAAAAIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLL!

*points at the rap and laughs*

*---------------------------------------*
The French Revolution would have never happened if Marie Antoinette had just given every peasant an iPhone.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 9:21 PM

KPO

Sometimes you own the libs. Sometimes, the libs own you.

Can we all agree that (not overt) glancing at attractive human bodies is fine, and that attraction is natural?

I want to shoot this thread in the head.

It's not personal. It's just war.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 9:31 PM

JONGSSTRAW

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 9:35 PM

America loves a winner!

M4P - Sorry, I don't even remember what you said, so it's not possible for me to turn anything back onto you... I was just reacting to the absurdity of your comment.

ETA - Jongs gets it!!

Sir Mix-a-Lot!! CLASSIC !

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 9:37 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Can we all agree that (not overt) glancing at attractive human bodies is fine, and that attraction is natural?

Of course that's obvious, but it's beside the point. This thread's life (for me) is all about providing further insight into the workings of the RWA brain.

*---------------------------------------*
The French Revolution would have never happened if Marie Antoinette had just given every peasant an iPhone.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 9:42 PM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Can we all agree that (not overt) glancing at attractive human bodies is fine, and that attraction is natural?

Of course that's obvious, but it's beside the point.

No. That IS the point !! It's OBVIOUS ! Now, let the damn thread die and be done w/ it.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 9:48 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
Quote:
Originally posted by kpo:
Can we all agree that (not overt) glancing at attractive human bodies is fine, and that attraction is natural?

Of course that's obvious, but it's beside the point.

No. That IS the point !! It's OBVIOUS ! Now, let the damn thread die and be done w/ it.

LOL! Of course you quote that and leave out the rest of my post:

This thread's life (for me) is all about providing further insight into the workings of the RWA brain.

Regarding that:

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
M4P - Sorry, I don't even remember what you said, so it's not possible for me to turn anything back onto you... I was just reacting to the absurdity of your comment.

BS. Your obvious parrot of my BUUUUURRRRN betrays you. Deny it to yourself if you so badly need to stay in your denial world, but no one else is blinded. It's right here in the thread, plain to see. Little Rappy the parrot.

You don't even remember, but you *know* my post was absurd? You need that to be true so badly that you won't ever go back and address my post. Like I've said before: you KNOW I can bury you on any on-topic discussion, so you wiggle and twist to get out of it.

No wonder you want this thread to die.

*---------------------------------------*
The French Revolution would have never happened if Marie Antoinette had just given every peasant an iPhone.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, December 14, 2013 10:21 PM

CHRISISALL

Quote:
Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:
Like I've said before: you KNOW I can bury you on any on-topic discussion, so you wiggle and twist to get out of it.

Oh yes. And he is well aware.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 1:25 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by MAL4PREZ:

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
M4P - Sorry, I don't even remember what you said, so it's not possible for me to turn anything back onto you... I was just reacting to the absurdity of your comment.

BS. Your obvious parrot of my BUUUUURRRRN betrays you. Deny it to yourself if you so badly need to stay in your denial world, but no one else is blinded. It's right here in the thread, plain to see. Little Rappy the parrot.

Don't care. There are others who say 'Buuurrn ', that have zero connection to anything you say. It's childish, annoying and was perfect for this situation. So I used it.

Quote:

Like I've said before: you KNOW I can bury you on any on-topic discussion, so you wiggle and twist to get out of it.

I do NOT " know " that. Don't even have faith in it. Quite to the contrary, I know the opposite to be true.

Quote:

No wonder you want this thread to die.

Me and any adult who has a sense of humor and doesn't care for this topic any longer.

Guess that counts you out.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 9:33 AM

Niki is pretty much right about Rush. I don't have much respect for the man since he's pretty much just a performing monkey like Howard Stern or Jessie Jackson. He's just one of those guys who lucked into a great high paying "job" that actually has no responsibility behind it. Like the others mentioned, and hundreds more like him, he has the personality and charisma to take him places that no man as ugly as him should ever be allowed to go. It would not surprise me at all if tomorrow we heard that Rush is a closeted Liberal, Howard Stern was really some Irish dude from southern Kentucky named Howie McSturnaghee who's 2 hour daily curling ritual is brought to you by Conair, and Jessie Jackson has ever used his platform to actually do anything to help anyone other than himself.

All that being said... I don't see anything wrong with this particular point of view. Actually... I've heard and even used way worse pickup lines in my day. Good for that geezer to come up with one I've never heard before.

Back when dinosaurs roamed the earth and Niki was a teenager, breast implants weren't even invented yet. All of the girls who never developed breasts had no recourse. They had to spend a lot of free time primping themselves extra hard to make sure that no man mistook them for a boy when they went out.

This, however, is beside the point though....

Back in the days of the Flintstones, when Niki was Prom Queen, women dressed much less flattering than they do today.

Because of Wonderbra and VS Fashion Shows and the A-cup Princesses they showcase, it's never been easier and cheaper for a woman to SHOW men that she's not a boy, simply by showing a little cleavage (see: false advertizing).

I don't see anything wrong with anything he was quoted as saying here Niki.

If a woman doesn't want her breasts ogled over, she will not wear outfits that showcase them to the world. A woman who does so, wants the attention.

Maybe in your image of the perfect world, men will just bow down to the great 1/2-bare-chested young women and praise their glory, but in my book any woman confident enough to make a spectacle of her own rack in public should be able to deal with both the good and the bad that come from it.

A young, intelligent, attractive woman with self-esteem will find NO problem making the GOOD outweigh the BAD. It's usually the young and unattractive or the old and used-to-be-attractive women who have any sort of problem with this way of thinking.

I, for one, had FANTASTIC long, brown, wavy, shiny, luxurious hair past my shoulders somewhere between the era of R.E.M. and Fallout Boy. I wish I never cut it. I got in a fight with one of my good friend's ex-con brother's one day and he called me a fag for it and I didn't wear it much longer after that. I had always been secretly way too self conscious for sticking out so much for the long hair in public even though the girls loved it, but nobody ever said anything negative before that night. Had somebody said something negative earlier, I probably would have cropped it far before it was long enough to donate when I cut it.

Lucky bastard(ess?). I hope he/she's wearing the shit out of my old mane now.....

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 9:47 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

He's just one of those guys who lucked into a great high paying "job" that actually has no responsibility behind it.

Actually, there was no job such as his before he came along. He literally MADE this job. It wasn't as if his name was picked out of a hat and he was dropped into multi million dollar gig.

Like, love or loathe the guy, just understand that what he's done paved the way for an entire industry to follow. ( Unless you're AirAmerica. Then your suck is entirely on you )

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 10:14 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

He's just one of those guys who lucked into a great high paying "job" that actually has no responsibility behind it.

Actually, there was no job such as his before he came along. He literally MADE this job. It wasn't as if his name was picked out of a hat and he was dropped into multi million dollar gig.

Like, love or loathe the guy, just understand that what he's done paved the way for an entire industry to follow. ( Unless you're AirAmerica. Then your suck is entirely on you )

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

And again, I'll refer you to the other two people I was talking about.....

Howard Stern. Here in Chicago, Mancow and Eddie and Jobo, and dozens of spin-offs wouldn't have been who they were without him.

Jessie Jackson. What the hell does the good reverend do for all of that money anyways?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 10:53 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
I knew that merely saying humans are hard wired for sex, in the context of appearing to support Rush's comments, I'd be painted as some knuckle dragging, over sexed caveman who OBVIOUSLY views women as sex objects and nothing more.-rappy

Oh, so you ARE a just troll and not a pervert -as your posts about 14-year-olds and Jessica Alba would indicate?. Wow. Sucks to be you, doesn't it? -signy

I'm neither entirely one or the other. It's like Jimmy Buffett said, when asked by a reporter ... " How can you write such sensitive songs and then write such trash " ? Jimmy replies - " I can be very sensitive on occasion, and very trashy on others " -rappy

Too bad that in your entire history here, you haven't been "sensitive" on ANY topic. So I have no idea what you're talking about. You must be a legend in your own mind, but far as I'm concerned your behavior is is very limited: RWA parrot, troll, or pervert (who calls women "sluts" while he masturbates to rape fantasies). It still sucks to be you, doesn't it?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 10:53 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:

Jessie Jackson. What the hell does the good reverend do for all of that money anyways?

Jessie shakes down large corporations for huge " donations " and in return, he doesn't organize protest rallies in front of their businesses, where folks carry signs and scream about phonied up racism charges.

That's the con that he and Sharpton have crafted , over the years.

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 10:55 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Yes, just like te RW, who cry about phonied-up issues like the "war on Christmas", or how glancing at breasts is illegal, or how Obama is a socialist. And their followers believe them, poor sods.

[/snicker]

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 10:59 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:

Too bad that in your entire history here, you haven't been "sensitive" on ANY topic. So I have no idea what you're talking about. You must be a legend in your own mind, but far as I'm concerned your behavior is is very limited: RWA parrot, troll, or pervert, Or maybe all three.

What does being sensitive have to do w/ telling the truth ? Seriously, Niki and the Left have phonied up this entire issue, and just because I'm not falling for it like some dupe, in YOUR eyes, makes me some how insensitive ?

Go back and read the thread, genius. It's already been agreed to that noticing, glancing at are far different than ogling and overtly staring.

IT WAS A JOKE ! GOD DAMN IT! JUST LET THIS FUCKING THREAD DIE ALREADY !

Merry Christmas, y'all

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 11:02 AM

America loves a winner!

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Yes, just like te RW, who cry about phonied-up issues like the "war on Christmas", or how Obama is a socialist. And their followers believe them, poor sods.

[/snicker]

Actually, none of those things above are 'phonied up', in the least.

ETA - I just saw this on the bottom of page 1, and as it wasn't a reply to anything I said, I missed it.

Quote:
BINGO! Going back to my personal observations of rappy's interactions with women (and his dream of being stuck on an elevator with 14-year-old girls, or taking Jessica Alba from behind by surprise) I think he's porn-educated.

Where in the HELL are you coming up w/ these things? Seriously. Your " personal observations " are fraking warped! You've never observed ANY of my actions in person, so you have no idea what in the hell you're even talking about!

I never SAID those things. Jeezus. How does your mind invent such fantasy in the first place ?

Fathom the hypocrisy of a government that requires every citizen to prove they are insured... but not everyone must prove they are a citizen

I'm just a red pill guy in a room full of blue pill addicts.

" AU, that was great, LOL!! " - Chrisisall

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 11:04 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
Yes, just like te RW, who cry about phonied-up issues like the "war on Christmas", or how glancing at breasts is illegal, or how Obama is a socialist. And their followers believe them, poor sods.

[/snicker]

Hey Sigs.... :)

Merry Christmas to you, and I say that with zero disrespect to you if you'd be more comfortable with a Happy Holidays. It's certainly more to talk about with a stranger though than being all bah-humbug because you're a science-type and 100% sure there is no God.

Nothing wrong with this....

Nothing wrong with tits.....

Tons of insecure women would agree with that sentiment seeing as how those plastic surgeons get paid a few dollars more an hour than I do.

If you had to pay for them, enjoy them. If you were blessed naturally with them, flaunt the shit out of them and make that money while the money is good, I say....

The only women who will agree with the original poster of this thread, which I optimistically hope isn't the majority, are women who are or never have been well endowed and hope to take this power away from their more well endowed and self-assured sisters.....

It's seriously a bummer for everyone around except for you, poindexter....

Way to ruin the party....

Shame on you........ :(

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 11:47 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Quote:
Where in the HELL are you coming up w/ these things? Seriously. Your " personal observations " are fraking warped! You've never observed ANY of my actions in person, so you have no idea what in the hell you're even talking about!

I never SAID those things. Jeezus. How does your mind invent such fantasy in the first place ?

Rappy, Ive read your posts in person. YOUR posts, not anybody else's Along with the ones where you call women "sluts". I just feel they need to be brought up once in a while, as a public service reminder not to share your more disgusting fantasies online.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 11:49 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

Oh, and....

Quote:
Yes, just like the RW, who cry about phonied-up issues like the "war on Christmas", or how Obama is a socialist. And their followers believe them, poor sods.-signy

Actually, none of those things above are 'phonied up', in the least.-rappy

Show me, first of all, that you even know what a socialist is. Please DEFINE the word that you throw around so cavalierly. Then show how Obama meets that definition.

Also, define the word "war", and show how it applies to Christmas

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 11:55 AM

I believe in solving problems, not sharing them.

6IX, I got quite a rack. But I also have a degree in Chemistry and a responsible position doing what I think is important,, and since I supervise 11 people (7 men) I prefer not to have them staring at my breasts while I'm trying to explain some important quality assurance concept, or the EPA requirements for method validation. I guess in the world you live in, women make their living with their breasts?

Wow, it must suck where you live.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 11:58 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The only women who will agree with the original poster of this thread, which I optimistically hope isn't the majority, are women who are or never have been well endowed and hope to take this power away from their more well endowed and self-assured sisters.....

It's seriously a bummer for everyone around except for you, poindexter....

Way to ruin the party....

Shame on you........ :(

You are such a sad excuse for a human being, it's really difficult to put into words.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 12:15 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AURaptor:
IT WAS A JOKE ! GOD DAMN IT! JUST LET THIS FUCKING THREAD DIE ALREADY !

Hmm, yes, agreed. For a thread that is about an issue that doesn't even exist, there has been an awful amount of arguing.

But perhaps the real problem with this thread is exemplified by Jack's response, even though I KNOW that he's just putting us all on: the problem with (bad) jokes like Rush Limbaugh made, is that someone inevitably doesn't realize it's a joke and takes it seriously. Maybe even thinks that it's a good idea, let's go try that on someone.

You must understand, when something ridiculous inspires further ridiculous, it makes the Bytemite's forehead meet her palm.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 12:26 PM

Quote:
I just feel they need to be brought up once in a while, as a public service reminder not to share your more disgusting fantasies online.

As unsavoury as it is, I was under the impression that this comprises a majority of content on the internet. Coupled with an internet culture that delights in unsettling and angering people, and suddenly the comments this board has seen along these lines begin to make sense.

It is still an overshare, of course, because it is intended to be. Perhaps what I don't understand is why when they make such comments they feel the need to defend them. Just watch the reactions, get the lols, and move on guys. Sticking around after you've dropped a conversation bomb just means you can get hit by the shrapnel.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 12:31 PM

Quote:
Originally posted by AgentRouka:
Quote:
Originally posted by 6IXSTRINGJACK:
The only women who will agree with the original poster of this thread, which I optimistically hope isn't the majority, are women who are or never have been well endowed and hope to take this power away from their more well endowed and self-assured sisters.....

It's seriously a bummer for everyone around except for you, poindexter....

Way to ruin the party....

Shame on you........ :(

You are such a sad excuse for a human being, it's really difficult to put into words.

I know...

There's seriously no way the 20 year olds at my job could ever even contemplate the words you so callously typed just now.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 12:33 PM

Sorry Byte....

If a girl dresses up to SHOW HER TITS OFF....

That's no different than me in 60 years showing my BALLS OFF in "VS For Him" clothing.....

If you've got tits and they're staring at me, I'm going to say something about it.

Don't be a Middle-Eastern Warlord.....

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 12:38 PM

You see? You could have managed to sow confusion in the thread, but you outed yourself with that post.

I'm pro-extra cleavage cosplay and fashion, because if someone is self-confident enough to pull that off, more power to them. I don't really give a damn what other people wear. It's part and parcel of the whole asexual thing - the naughty bits are all just slowly decaying polymers of organic compounds in my mind. Who cares.

And you knew that before you posted, which makes your attempt to rile me utterly transparent.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, December 15, 2013 12:38 PM