Duck Dynasty shitstorm

[Quick Karl]

Really, all this name calling destroys any credibility the poster may have had.

The ignore feature works perfect for that, Juan. 

[DanTSX]

Never trust a man with a beard..ever. And four together with beards; don't trust them four times more. It's a fact.



Do people actually watch that shit?  Four blokes with beards pissing into cammo fatigues, and it's entertainment?

A beard can hide many bad habits that a man has.....

[Sambo]

Much like today, it happens, and was recorded somewhere in a writing - and that is all.

Ok so you're not versed in Greek and Roman literature I see. It was recorded in much more than in a writing. In most of the most important works of the time it comes up. Not sure where you think it was intolerable back then.

I thought you were a bit more of a critical thinker Karl. I was going to read some of your essays on here to gain some hopefully valuable perspective

[DanTSX]

Or how liberals are accused of waging a "war on Christmas".
Stupidest thing I ever heard.

Did anyone really think Duck Dynasty Douchebag was going to say anything nice about gays?  Anyone?  Poor dumb bastard was rope-a-doped.

He shouldn't have lost his job.  People have a right to their opinion and I would have been curious to see what effect it would've had on the show's ratings.

I didn't say anything about Christmas.

But yeah, he was set up and fell for it.  Miss California style.  Not that either said anything particularly wrong.  They are entitled to their views.  The righteous indignation over homosexuals seems to be misplaced.  Nobody cared about gay rights when racism or women's lib were the big thing to be upset about.

[NowhereInTime]

Really, all this name calling destroys any credibility the poster may have had.

I'm sorry, but you all keep qualifying Quick Karl and dignifying his posts, no matter how churlish, with responses and he has made one too many out-of-bounds remarks to be treated with such respect and dignity.

[Quick Karl]

Ok so you're not versed in Greek and Roman literature I see. It was recorded in much more than in a writing. In most of the most important works of the time it comes up. Not sure where you think it was intolerable back then.

I thought you were a bit more of a critical thinker Karl. I was going to read some of your essays on here to gain some hopefully valuable perspective

So because you interpret what you read the way you want, and I interpret it differently, you are a critical thinker, but I am not?

I wrote a book report on Richard the Lionheart and Saladin in the Third Crusade, and the mental case author implied, more than once, that King Richard was a homosexual, but did not cite a single verifiable legitimate source to back it up - hearsay is NOT a fact. Pure conjecture to promote an agenda. And Richard is gone far too long to respond to the false accusation.

By the way - A+ on the book report! I love History!

[DanTSX]

What stake do you have in the homosexual lifestyle? How does it affect you, Karl?  It was accepted in ancient Greek and Roman times, and throughout other stages in our history. These are consenting adults making their own choices no?

What is your stake in being a white knight for homosexual lifestyles?

I never had a problem with homosexuals.  But I never felt the need to be a advocate or defender of them.  Some people act like you insulted their mother if you don't wrap your arms around a lifestyle that you find unnatural.

[NowhereInTime]

wtf. Some of you should think about growing up. Christ you are making this forum fucking miserable to visit.

This forum devolved (or, in other's parlance, "de-evolved") into a shitshow some time ago.  It is my own failing that I find it an injustice that certain posters (Ok, Q. Karl) are granted the respect and dignity afforded a statesman when he has demonstrated time and again he isn't.
Why people here keep up discourse with him is beyond me. 
It's a free country, so speak with whomever you like but, until it bores me, I'm going to hammer him as the rascist, classist, misogynist, insufferable double talker he is.
So, yeah, I think it's miserable here, too.

[DanTSX]

I'm sorry, but you all keep qualifying Quick Karl and dignifying his posts, no matter how churlish, with responses and he has made one too many out-of-bounds remarks to be treated with such respect and dignity.

Is that how you see it?

Telling.

[Quick Karl]

Is that how you see it?

Telling.

The childish hypocrisy is unreal, isn't it?

[bateman]

What is your stake in being a white knight for homosexual lifestyles?

I never had a problem with homosexuals.  But I never felt the need to be a advocate or defender of them.  Some people act like you insulted their mother if you don't wrap your arms around a lifestyle that you find unnatural.

Because it's wrong to treat them like second class citizens.

I find many sexual proclivities "unnatural" but I don't look down my nose at them. Who fucking cares.






Ok, yes I do. Chubby chasers. Blecchh.

[NowhereInTime]

Is that how you see it?

Telling.

Yeah, it's how I see it.  And I don't know what you mean by "telling" considering I publicly explained my rationale.

[Sambo]

So because you interpret what you read the way you want, and I interpret it differently, you are a critical thinker, but I am not?

I wrote a book report on Richard the Lionheart and Saladin in the Third Crusade, and the mental case author implied, more than once, that King Richard was a homosexual, but did not cite a single verifiable source to back it up. Pure conjecture to promote an agenda.

By the way - A+ on the book report! I love History!

Yea well a little historical note for you....12th century history wasn't quite the golden age of Greek and Roman times

[NowhereInTime]

The childish hypocrisy is unreal, isn't it?

Yet you persist.

[NowhereInTime]

Because it's wrong to treat them like second class citizens.

I find many sexual proclivities "unnatural" but I don't look down my nose at them. Who fucking cares.






Ok, yes I do. Chubby chasers. Blecchh.

Double on both counts.

[Quick Karl]

Yea well a little historical note for you....12th century history wasn't quite the golden age of Greek and Roman times

OK now you are intentionally using Red Herring arguments to distract from the point that History isn't always perfect on the topics you want it to be perfect on - I thought you were a better critical thinker than that?

[aldousburbank]

Don't have broadcast services, ain't seen the show but, what does arguing about gayness have to do with ducks?

Heh my iTweek didn't spell check gayness. Twice.

[DanTSX]

Because it's wrong to treat them like second class citizens.

I find many sexual proclivities "unnatural" but I don't look down my nose at them. Who fucking cares.






Ok, yes I do. Chubby chasers. Blecchh.

I tend to treat everyone like second class citizens. 

Which works fine in the socialist better world many here would like to build.

[Sambo]

What is your stake in being a white knight for homosexual lifestyles?

I never had a problem with homosexuals.  But I never felt the need to be a advocate or defender of them.  Some people act like you insulted their mother if you don't wrap your arms around a lifestyle that you find unnatural.

My stake is empathy/sympathy for the oppressed and marginalized. Perhaps you had a great childhood and don't have first hand experience of what it's like to be the object of ridicule and bullying. To live each day feeling like your existence is wrong

[Quick Karl]

Don't have broadcast services, ain't seen the show but, what does arguing about gayness have to do with ducks?

Heh my iTweek didn't spell check gayness. Twice.

Don't blame me, Bateman started it! I tried to start it but someone moved my post to this thread so I'm just goin' along - with the argument, not the lifestyle.

[NowhereInTime]

Is that how you see it?

Telling.

Look, I'm not going to pretend to be some statesman or absolve myself from aberrant behavior on these threads, but as I recall it wasn't too long ago you wanted to pick a fight with me only to back off with some vague threat about how you don't fight because you're "carrying".
Honestly, how should anyone respond to that?
How should anyone respond to being threatened or demeaned on this thread?
You yourself have tossed a few slurs into the porridge.

[Quick Karl]

My stake is empathy/sympathy for the oppressed and marginalized. Perhaps you had a great childhood and don't have first hand experience of what it's like to be the object of ridicule and bullying. To live each day feeling like your existence is wrong

Holy fuucking shit Sambo, please, you're going to make me cry. Little Richard got along just fine in life and millions of people tuned in to watch Liberace perfume (Freudian slip) every week, and everyone knew he was a gay as shit!

He didn't shove it in heterosexual people's faces! The guy was a multi-millionaire, and he was cool!

[Sambo]

Holy fuucking shit Sambo, please, you're going to make me cry.

lol.

Then why would you be concerned?

[DanTSX]

My stake is empathy/sympathy for the oppressed and marginalized. Perhaps you had a great childhood and don't have first hand experience of what it's like to be the object of ridicule and bullying. To live each day feeling like your existence is wrong

I don't think they (homosexuals)should feel ashamed in the first place.

But I feel the same about the duck rednecks.

They are all in charge of their destiny.     Happy when anyone succeeds. 

[NowhereInTime]

OK now you are intentionally using Red Herring arguments to distract from the point that History isn't always perfect on the topics you want it to be perfect on - I thought you were a better critical thinker than that?

God, you are the master of the feint.  You, in broad daylight with actual text on the screen, would obfuscate what we all could read with an incongrous response attempting to demean your opponents skill in besting you at dialectic?
You are a pathetic and contemptible coward.

[Quick Karl]

lol.

Then why would you be concerned?

I said earlier, I am balancing the scales of justice! My civic duty!

[DanTSX]

Look, I'm not going to pretend to be some statesman or absolve myself from aberrant behavior on these threads, but as I recall it wasn't too long ago you wanted to pick a fight with me only to back off with some vague threat about how you don't fight because you're "carrying".
Honestly, how should anyone respond to that?
How should anyone respond to being threatened or demeaned on this thread?
You yourself have tossed a few slurs into the porridge.

You wanted to pick a fight with me Chuck.

I just asked if you hit like a girl because you argue like a woman on the rag. 

You invited me to that shithole, Waterbury to find out.

That's not a threat that I'm carrying.  I'm telling you that I don't get into childish fistfights.  I only fight to protect limb or life.  You are just scared of guns like any other liberal because they would make you more aggressive.

[NowhereInTime]

Holy fuucking shit Sambo, please, you're going to make me cry. Little Richard got along just fine in life!

Yes, everyone, respect him for his rascist condecension!  Where the FUCK are you, now, JUAN?!?!?

[bateman]

Don't blame me, Bateman started it!

Heh.

[NowhereInTime]

You wanted to pick a fight with me Chuck.

I just asked if you hit like a girl because you argue like a woman on the rag. 

You invited me to that shithole, Waterbury to find out.

See, this is crap.  You were the bigmouth who wanted to bet I "hit like a girl" but didn't want to put your money where your big mouth is.
You think you're so damn clever with your fucking one line slurs.
Yeah, genius. 
Oh, and could you show me which paper in "the city" had coverage of your heroic act stopping a machete wielding maniac?