:( #MePoo

[Pavlov]

Is Uma a profile in courage for #MeToo?

Yes or No.What do you mean by profile in courage?

[Spurtacular]

Your original term was "shameless opportunist."

She's an opportunist with highly questionable morals. Shameless might be strong as I said. But thanks for quoting it as if it changes that sentiment that I had already purveyed.

[Pavlov]

She's an opportunist with low morals. Shameless might be strong as I said. But thanks for quoting it as if it changes that sentiment that I had already purveyed.You lied about what your original term was.

Even if she's telling the truth and was a victim of sexual assault, she is a shameless opportunist with low morals according to you.

And now you just edited "low" to "highly questionable."

:lmao

[Spurtacular]

And now you just edited "low" to "highly questionable."

:lmao

I made the change for accuracy and fairness. I guess that's funny to you.

[Spurtacular]

What do you mean by profile in courage?

It's a colloquial term; don't act like you don't know that.

[Pavlov]

I made the change for accuracy and fairness. I guess that's funny to you.You're backing down again.

That's funny to me.

[Pavlov]

dying career... what could make you prevalent again uma? hmm...


DING!

She was going out for drinks with this guy just a year ago.Currently in her debut Broadway run in the starring role.

Five movies coming out this year.

Yeah, she's really hurting for work.

[Pavlov]

It's a colloquial term; don't act like you don't know that.If you can't be any more specific, then it's far too vague to apply to a person in this discussion.

[Spurtacular]

If you can't be any more specific, then it's far too vague to apply to a person in this discussion.

Too scared to answer the question: Check.

[Chucho]

Uma Thurman is awful. Whoever is giving her work must have really low standards- either in who they are able to cast or in who sucks their dick.

[AaronY]

Uma Thurman is awful. Whoever is giving her work must have really low standards- either in who they are able to cast or in who sucks their dick.
Why do you say this? I mean she lost her looks but she was pretty hot at one point and a good actress

[spurraider21]

Why do you say this? I mean she lost her looks but she was pretty hot at one point and a good actress
because she's a woman who spoke out

[AaronY]

oh yea right.

bitches

[Pavlov]

Too scared to answer the question: Check.Too scared to say what you mean: Check.

[koriwhat]

Why do you say this? I mean she lost her looks but she was pretty hot at one point and a good actress

she was never hot. not disgusting either but by no means hot. as for her acting, anyone can "act" in a tarantino film.

[Spurtacular]

:lol


A California state lawmaker at the forefront of the #MeToo movement faces a growing number of sexual misconduct allegations (https://www.cbsnews.com/news/california-assemblywoman-cristina-garcia-accused-of-groping-daniel-fierro/) herself. Four former employees filed a formal complaint against Democratic Assemblywoman Cristina Garcia. Another says he was fired after protesting when she suggested playing "spin the bottle."
https://cbsnews1.cbsistatic.com/hub/i/r/2018/02/20/52454a6b-7150-4324-93b2-40d5c23fea5e/crop/507x360+133+0/resize/270x/da47c196793a79bba7c30fa888e928ac/0220-ctm-caassemblywoman-villarreal-1505678-640x360.jpg#Cristina Garcia

CBS News
Garcia has authored numerous bills about sexual assault and consent. She was even recently featured in Time magazine's "Persons of the Year" issue recognizing the #MeToo movement's "silence breakers." But now she is on voluntary leave, as investigators look into claims she groped two men.
Daniel Fierro was working in the California State Capitol when he said Garcia cornered him at a staff softball game.
"I remember feeling a little confused about what happened," Fierro said.

"She touched you sexually?" Villarreal asked.
"Yea, she -- her hand dropped down. She touched – she grabbed my butt. And I spun to turn around … and as I turned, she tried to reach for my crotch and she did," Fierro said.
When Villarreal asked Garcia whether Fierro's claims happened, Garcia said, "No."

....

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/cristina-garcia-california-assemblywoman-denies-sexual-misconduct-accusations/

#MePoo

[spurraider21]

https://i.imgur.com/x6xtAGq.jpg

"#MePoo"

[Spurtacular]

NYT lamenting that Harvard president selection doesn't suit Black Crimes Matter and #MePoo.

https://www.nysun.com/national/harvards-new-president-finds-a-teaching-moment/90196/

[Pavlov]

NYT lamenting that Harvard president selection doesn't suit Black Crimes Matter and #MePoo.

https://www.nysun.com/national/harvards-new-president-finds-a-teaching-moment/90196/Now you're saying the New York Sun is the New York Times.

lol

[Spurtacular]

Now you're saying the New York Sun is the New York Times.

lol

Try again.

[Pavlov]

Try again.You are right about the Sun.

OK. The Times article mentioned that the opportunity was there and not taken once and not lamented at all.

Did you read the article the Sun linked to?

[Spurtacular]

You are right about the Sun.

OK. The Times article mentioned that the opportunity was there and not taken once and not lamented at all.

Did you read the article the Sun linked to?

I read enough to make an accurate statement. So, let your tears flow.

[Pavlov]

I read enough to make an accurate statement. So, let your tears flow.There was no lamenting in the Times article whatsoever.

You're going to have to live with that.

[Spurtacular]

There was no lamenting in the Times article whatsoever.

You're going to have to live with that.

I doubt that; but :lol at you trying to ask your little set-up question (par) instead of just coming out with it.

[Pavlov]

I doubt that; but :lol at you trying to ask your little set-up question (par) instead of just coming out with it.There was no lamenting in the Times article whatsoever.

You didn't read it.

[Spurtacular]

There was no lamenting in the Times article whatsoever.

You didn't read it.

Yup. They expressed their sorrow that a white man was picked for president in the wake of #MePoo and Black Crimes Matter; that is quite clear. In fact, the university is "under fire" for it. :lol

[Pavlov]

Yup. They expressed their sorrow that a white man was picked for president in the wake of #MePoo and Black Crimes Matter; that is quite clear. In fact, the university is "under fire" for it. :lolShow me in New York Times article where the New York Times expresses sorrow over the decision.

You're a real stickler for sources and citations, so let's see yours.

[Spurtacular]

Show me in New York Times article where the New York Times expresses sorrow over the decision.

You're a real stickler for sources and citations, so let's see yours.


he departure of Drew Gilpin Faust, Harvard’s first female president, who is stepping down after 11 years, created an opportunity for Harvard to choose a leader who would reflect the #MeToo and Black Lives Matter movements that have shaped campus dialogue in recent years.Instead, it chose Mr. Bacow

Is it that the regret is not expressed strongly enough for you? Would you prefer the word pout? :lol

[Pavlov]

Is it that the regret is not expressed strongly enough for you? Would you prefer the word pout? :lolZero regret expressed.

And you didn't provide a link or proper citation.

:lol stupid hypocrite

[Spurtacular]

Zero regret expressed.

And you didn't provide a link or proper citation.

:lol stupid hypocrite

Wallowed a better word for you? They made it a point to make the opening emphasis of the article about that in outright defiance of the facts purveyed in the article. Tell me, why you think they'd do that?

[Pavlov]

Wallowed a better word for you? They made it a point to make that the opening emphasis of the article about that in outright defiance about the facts purveyed in the article. Tell me, why you Itthink they'd do that?:lol "outright defiance"

No. They told of a choice that could have been made reflecting some political movements on campus that have been in the news, then said they didn't make that choice.

It's incredibly simple to understand. I can see how you can't understand it.

[Spurtacular]

:lol "outright defiance"

No. They told of a choice that could have been made reflecting some political movements on campus that have been in the news, then said they didn't make that choice.

It's incredibly simple to understand. I can see how you can't understand it.

What's "incredibly simple to understand" is the reality that newspapers understand that a typical reader reads the first three paragraphs of an article and moves on. The NYT effectively lamented not choosing a #MePoo or Black Crimes Matters candidate by their order of selection.

[Pavlov]

What's "incredibly simple to understand" is the reality that newspapers understand that a typical reader reads the first three paragraphs of an article and moves on. The NYT effectively lamented not choosing a #MePoo or Black Crimes Matters candidate by their order of selection.Nope. No lamentation at all.

You're free to prove your "first three paragraphs" contention with proper citation though.

[Spurtacular]

Nope. No lamentation at all.

You're free to prove your "first three paragraphs" contention with proper citation though.

You're unfamiliar with the concept of frontloading and why it's done? That sounds like your problem, not mine.

[Pavlov]

You're unfamiliar with the concept of frontloading and why it's done? That sounds like your problem, not mine.Sounds like you don't have proper documentation to back up your claim. That is your problem, not mine.

[Spurtacular]

Sounds like you don't have proper documentation to back up your claim. That is your problem, not mine.

"Proper documentation" is your thing, huh? You must really want to ship all those illegal Mexicans back.

[Pavlov]

"Proper documentation" is your thing, huh? You must really want to ship all those illegal Mexicans back.So you're trying to change the subject in your own thread now.

:lol

[Spurtacular]

So you're trying to change the subject in your own thread now.

:lol

No, I'm just pointing out who the "hypocrite" may be. But let's get back to you not understanding the concept of frontloading. No wonder you're so easy to blue pill.

[koriwhat]

No, I'm just pointing out who the "hypocrite" may be. But let's get back to you not understanding the concept of frontloading. No wonder you're so easy to blue pill.

:tu

[Pavlov]

No, I'm just pointing out who the "hypocrite" may be. But let's get back to you not understanding the concept of frontloading. No wonder you're so easy to blue pill.OK, we're back to your providing proof for your claim, which actually has nothing to do with your original argument since you failed to prove any lamentation from the NYT.

[Spurtacular]

OK, we're back to your providing proof for your claim, which actually has nothing to do with your original argument since you failed to prove any lamentation from the NYT.

:lol "claim"

Frontloading is something that is routinely done in the media. Are you the idiot who denies this?

[Pavlov]

:lol "claim"

Frontloading is something that is routinely done in the media. Are you the idiot who denies this?You just moved the goalposts.

Again.

[Spurtacular]

You just moved the goalposts.

Again.

You just made a vague post.

Again.

[Pavlov]

You just made a vague post.

Again.Nothing vague about it. You're changing the subject and moving the goalposts all over the place because you couldn't prove the NYT was lamenting anything.

[Spurtacular]

Nothing vague about it. You're changing the subject and moving the goalposts all over the place because you couldn't prove the NYT was lamenting anything.

NYT frontloaded a political talking point sympathetic with their editorial outlook even though it was of little to no material consequence to the substance to the article; this they did as a form of lamentation. This has been "proved" to you. Now, you're just throwing a tantrum.

[Pavlov]

NYT frontloaded a political talking point sympathetic with their editorial outlook even though it was of little to no material consequence the substance to the article; this they did as a form of lamentation. This has been "proved" to you. Now, you're just throwing a tantrum.There was no "editorial outlook" at all.

Sorry, you failed again.

[Spurtacular]

There was no "editorial outlook" at all.

Sorry, you failed again.

:lmao

Like a child. 'Nuh uh!'

[Pavlov]

:lmao

Like a child. 'Nuh uh!'There simply wasn't any in the excerpt you so sloppily tried to cite.

Sorry. It's just that simple. Even a child could see you failed.

[Spurtacular]

There simply wasn't any in the excerpt you so sloppily tried to cite.

Sorry. It's just that simple. Even a child could see you failed.

'Nuh uh!'

I gave you the excerpt. You're throwing a tantrum cos it doesn't mesh with your politics.

[Pavlov]

'Nuh uh!'

I gave you the excerpt. You're throwing a tantrum cos it doesn't mesh with your politics.Yeah, the excerpt failed to prove your claim.

Simple. Not a thing you can do about it.

[Spurtacular]

Simple. Not a thing you can do about it.

Yup. Just got to let the tantrum run its course.

[Pavlov]

Yup. Just got to let the tantrum run its course.Doesn't change your failure.

[Spurtacular]

Doesn't change your failure.

There is no failure. NYT shamelessly made a Harvard hire about #MePoo and Black Crimes matter even though the incoming president is eminently qualified.

[Pavlov]

There is no failure. NYT shamelessly made a Harvard hire about #MePoo and Black Crimes matter even though the incoming president is eminently qualified.No, they did not.

They never said he was unqualified either.

:lol "lamenting"

[Spurtacular]

No, they did not.

They never said he was unqualified either.

:lol "lamenting"

Nor did I say they did. More failure from you.

[Pavlov]

Nor did I say they did. More failure from you.So why bring it up?

It totally undermines your own argument.

[Spurtacular]

So why bring it up?

It totally undermines your own argument.

Wow. You are not hitting on any cylinders, are you?

It doesn't undermine my argument one iota.

Also :lol at you taking all these L's in pursuit of just the smallest W you can find. Par.

[Pavlov]

Wow. You are not hitting on any cylinders, are you?

It doesn't undermine my argument one iota.

Also :lol at you taking all these L's in pursuit of just the smallest W you can find. Par.:lol The NYT didn't lament anything in that article. That's all.

The thread didn't work out for you.

[Spurtacular]

:lol The NYT didn't lament anything in that article. That's all.

The thread didn't work out for you.

Yup. They made what could've been a straight-forward article one big lamentation about so-called white male privilege trumping #MePoo and Black Crimes Matter. And they did so through the methodology of frontloading (something they apparently don't teach at UTSA).

[Spurtacular]

:lol #MePoo


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sNwuaOQEMkE

[Pavlov]

Yup. They made what could've been a straight-forward article one big lamentation about so-called white male privilege trumping #MePoo and Black Crimes Matter. And they did so through the methodology of frontloading (something they apparently don't teach at UTSA).No lamentation.

Sorry.

[Spurtacular]

No lamentation.

Sorry.

The subtext is a big lamentation.

Not sorry.

[Pavlov]

The subtext is a big lamentation.No and lol the idea of burying lamentation in subtext.

[Spurtacular]

No and lol the idea of burying lamentation in subtext.

:lol at the idea that you consider yourself any sort of analyst while writing off the concept of subtext.
:lol Today's blue-pill recipient.

[Pavlov]

:lol at the idea that you consider yourself any sort of analyst while writing off the concept of subtext.
:lol Today's blue-pill recipient.:lol no one ever said anyone is an analyst.

:lol today's lying doucherag

[Spurtacular]

:lol no one ever said anyone is an analyst.

:lol today's lying doucherag

Well, it's good that you don't consider yourself to be any sort of substantial political analyst.

:lol Rather you're here in the role of a chirping hen.

[Spurtacular]

DMX7

What's your (likely sanctimonious) take on this?

970442283698057217

970426181572022272

[Pavlov]

Well, it's good that you don't consider yourself to be any sort of substantial political analyst.

:lol Rather you're here in the role of a chirping hen.as long as you know you're wrong about the lamenting.

[Spurtacular]

as long as you know you're wrong about the lamenting.

:lol Chirping hen response.

[Pavlov]

:lol Chirping hen response.You're the one who failed to prove "the subtext"

:lol

[Spurtacular]

You're the one who failed to prove "the subtext"

:lol

I've shown you sufficient evidence. You're now doing your typical nu uh schtick.

[Pavlov]

I've shown you sufficient evidence. You're now doing your typical nu uh schtick.You showed the Times said Harvard could have made one choice but did not.

That's all.

[Spurtacular]

You showed the Times said Harvard could have made one choice but did not.

That's all.

Frontloading a lamentation that was not the crux of the article. Are you unfamiliar with the concept of subliminal advertising, or is this another way that UTSA failed you?

[Pavlov]

Frontloading a lamentation that was not the crux of the article. Are you unfamiliar with the concept of subliminal advertising, or is this another way that UTSA failed you?Now it's subliminal advertising of lamentation?

:lmao

[sickdsm]

DMX7

What's your (likely sanctimonious) take on this?

970442283698057217

970426181572022272

How come this doesn't have its own thread? Seems to me this speaks volumes that no one here is talking about it.

[Spurtacular]

Now it's subliminal advertising of lamentation?

:lmao

:lol Too dumb to get that the two are not mutually exclusive.

[Spurtacular]

How come this doesn't have its own thread? Seems to me this speaks volumes that no one here is talking about it.

You gave zero insight on it even in this thread, tbh.

[Chris]

970463771423490048

[sickdsm]

You gave zero insight on it even in this thread, tbh.

I don't pay attention to the Oscars but it kept popping up on my news app. Of course I kept skipping over it. I just found out what's going on. Thought I'd check the discussion here but apparently one needs to be involved from the beginning to even mention it.........

[Spurtacular]

I don't pay attention to the Oscars but it kept popping up on my news app. Of course I kept skipping over it. I just found out what's going on. Thought I'd check the discussion here but apparently one needs to be involved from the beginning to even mention it.........

It's basically a political football.

[Spurtacular]

970488906666913793

:lol #MePoo
:lol Hollywood sh***ing on the "victims."
:lol The elites' hypocrisy working like clockwork.

[spurraider21]

Imagine the level of a brain that finds #mepoo funny

[Spurtacular]

It's nothing to laugh about, guys! This is serious stuff!

[Spurtacular]

:lmao NBC basically mocking #MePoo before it was prevalent.

935909460031152129

[Spurtacular]

Uh oh. Sean Penn might be the worst person in the world.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/movies/celebrity/sean-penn-slammed-for-poem-calling-supernumbermetoo-a-‘toddler’s-crusade’/ar-AAvfjzf?ocid=spartandhp

[spurraider21]

https://i.imgur.com/x6xtAGq.jpg

"#MePoo"

[Spurtacular]

^^^

Triggered.

[Spurtacular]

:lol Pavlov 's fag hag need to start #MePoo 'ing her complaints.
:lol Complaining that a man wouldn't be told to shut up after being a bitch crybaby.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/hillary-clinton-fires-back-at-critics-no-one-told-a-man-who-lost-an-election-to-shut-up/ar-AAvglRD?ocid=spartanntp

[Pavlov]

:lol Pavlov 's fag hag need to start #MePoo 'ing her complaints.
:lol Complaining that a man wouldn't be told to shut up after being a bitch crybaby.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/hillary-clinton-fires-back-at-critics-no-one-told-a-man-who-lost-an-election-to-shut-up/ar-AAvglRD?ocid=spartanntp

You're very shrill and hysterical.

[Spurtacular]

You're very shrill and hysterical.

You're still #HerPoo :lmao

[Spurtacular]

https://s.hdnux.com/photos/72/42/22/15344813/3/920x920.jpg

[Spurtacular]

:lmao Hillary saying her loss accelerated #MePoo

https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Hillary-Clinton-says-her-loss-advanced-the-MeToo-12809338.php

[spurraider21]

https://e3.365dm.com/17/10/1096x616/skynews-donald-trump-melania-trump_4123111.jpg?20171008143034

[Spurtacular]

https://e3.365dm.com/17/10/1096x616/skynews-donald-trump-melania-trump_4123111.jpg?20171008143034

It's not the right championing #MePoo.

[Fabbs]

https://e3.365dm.com/17/10/1096x616/skynews-donald-trump-melania-trump_4123111.jpg?20171008143034
Who's the brown haired chick?

[Spurtacular]

#GuysPoo

https://apnews.com/5d84308483644be8a4acf14975420e11/Some-male-sexual-assault-victims-feel-left-behind-by-MeToo

[DMX7]

:lmao Hillary saying her loss accelerated #MePoo

https://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Hillary-Clinton-says-her-loss-advanced-the-MeToo-12809338.php

I actually agree with her. If she were POTUS instead of Trump there would probably less general awareness of the issue.

[Spurtacular]

I actually agree with her. If she were POTUS instead of Trump there would probably less general awareness of the issue.

I agree. If Hillary was president, the media wouldn't be fabricating / embellishing #MePoo matters.

[DMX7]

I agree. If Hillary was president, the media wouldn't be fabricating / embellishing #MePoo matters.

So you agree with statement you were laughing at? :lol

[Spurtacular]

So you agree with statement you were laughing at? :lol

Agreeing doesn't mean Hillary isn't pathetic.

[Pavlov]

https://i.imgur.com/x6xtAGq.jpg

"#MePoo"

[Spurtacular]

Repeating a meme won't get you that W, bro.

[Pavlov]

Repeating a meme won't get you that W, bro.It's not about my winning.

It's about your losing.

[Spurtacular]

It's not about my winning.

It's about your losing.

Whatever you got to tell yourself to power through that one percent win rate / take L's in bulk. :lol

[Pavlov]

Whatever you got to tell yourself to power through that one percent win rate / take L's in bulk. :lol:lol declaring all the victory is working so well for you.

[Blake]

This thread was an L from the get go

[Fabbs]

Has legitimate MeToo abuse driven Rose McGowan to dykehood?

[Spurtacular]

:lol declaring all the victory is working so well for you.

Taking L's in bulk isn't working well for you.

[Spurtacular]

This thread was an L from the get go

:lol Another cuck chime-in.

[Blake]

:lol Another cuck chime-in.

Another L thread.

[Spurtacular]

:cry I'm #cuckedtoo :cry

:lmao

[AaronY]

Lol still riding dat awesome mepoo pun I see

[Spurtacular]

Lol still riding dat awesome mepoo pun I see

Good times.

[Blake]

desperate times.

[Spurtacular]

:cry Still #CuckedToo :cry

[Spurtacular]

:lmao Crowning achievement of #MePoo is sending a doddering old black guy to prison for life after his sugar baby was mad that he didn't turn her into a TV star.

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/U/US_BILL_COSBY_PAOL-?SITE=TXMCA&SECTION=US&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT&CTIME=2018-04-26-14-21-06

[AaronY]

Still riding #mepoo lol

This is like passing around pics of your small micropenis

[Spurtacular]

Still riding #mepoo lol

This is like passing around pics of your small micropenis

If you lost your preset indignation you'd see the cascading waterfalls and rich landscapes. But fuck if I care, noob.

[DMX7]

only through charity and sheer boredom has this thread reached 13 pages

[Spurtacular]

only through charity and sheer boredom has this thread reached 13 pages

Only throgh coercion and political engineering has #mepoo been a big thing.

[Spurtacular]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xRjB48eAh8I

Top YT comments:


the "me too" movement is more like a bad bowl movement.


Sad state of modern society when someone can be found guilty of a crime based purely on what the accuser SAYS .......... and without a shred of evidence whatsoever. That just opens the flood-gates for ANYONE who has a grudge against a person to say ANYTHING derogatory. Dangerous road to go down judicially when the 'Law of the Land' can convict based upon hearsay.
AaronY Just cos you live in a chupette echo chamber doesn't mean this is just my thing.....

[Spurtacular]

:lmao Sycophant George
:lmao #MePoo


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TLjDJywc1M

[Spurtacular]

Bill Clinton up next, or was this just the establishment going after a black guy who espoused conservative views?

#MePoo

[Pavlov]

Spurtacular just a totally pro-rape incel tbh.

[Spurtacular]

Spurtacular just a totally pro-rape incel tbh.

What do you propose should be done about serial sex offender Bill Clinton?

[Pavlov]

What do you propose should be done about serial sex offender Bill Clinton?If you have a criminal case to present against him, go right ahead. I think most of the possible civil remedies have been exhausted.

Make your case, counselor.

You won't.

[Spurtacular]

If you have a criminal case to present against him, go right ahead. I think most of the possible civil remedies have been exhausted.

Make your case, counselor.

You won't.

You obviously don't believe in the #MePoo movement in any pure form.

[Pavlov]

What if there is no criminal case to be presented?Then he can't be tried in a criminal court.

Do you have a criminal case to present against Bill Clinton?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

Then he can't be tried in a criminal court.

Do you have a criminal case to present against Bill Clinton?

Yes or no.

So, we've conveniently decided that we won't believe the victims?

Yes or no.

[Pavlov]

So, we've conveniently decided that we won't believe the victims?

Yes or no.You conveniently built a straw man.

Do you have a criminal case to present against Bill Clinton?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

You conveniently built a straw man.

Do you have a criminal case to present against Bill Clinton?

Yes or no.

No. #MePoo is about believing the victims who have the "courage" to accuse their attackers. Why are you not following the tenets of your (bowel) movement?

[Pavlov]

No. #MePoo is about believing the victims who have the "courage" to accuse their attackers. Why are you not following the tenets of your (bowel) movement?Believing a victim and criminally prosecuting an alleged offender are two different things.

Thank you for admitting you have no criminal case against Bill Clinton.

[Spurtacular]

Believing a victim and criminally prosecuting an alleged offender are two different things.

Thank you for admitting you have no criminal case against Bill Clinton.

So, are you saying you believe the victims?

[Pavlov]

So, are you saying you believe the victims?For the most part, yes.

Do you believe Trump's victims?

[Spurtacular]

For the most part, yes.



So, you decided to reward that by putting him back in the White House?

[Pavlov]

So, you decided to reward that by putting him back in the White House?No.

Do you believe Trump's victims?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

:cry

Bro, you just admitted you tried to put a sexual predator in the White House. Let that sink in.

[Pavlov]

Bro, you just admitted you tried to put a sexual predator in the White House. Let that sink in.No.

Do you believe Trump's victims?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

So, are you saying you believe the victims?


For the most part, yes.



Bro, you just admitted you tried to put a sexual predator in the White House. Let that sink in.

Let that marinate, bro.

:lmao #MePoo

[Pavlov]

Let that marinate, bro.

:lmao #MePoo:lol you're wrong. Guess again.

Do you believe Trump's victims?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

:cry

You believe the victims or you tried to put a sexual predator in the White House. Which is it, bro?

[Pavlov]

You believe the victims or you tried to put a sexual predator in the White House. Which is it, bro?You're wrong.

Guess again.

Also, do you believe Trump's victims?

Yes or no.

[pgardn]

I don’t like Clinton’s antics either but seriously just take him to court.

Pavlov taking Spurter apart per usual.
Dont care how black or how old Cosby was, they had the goods.
He used the same method on far too many women who did not even know each other and told basically the same methodology. And the vast majority of them did not even get their day to tell him in court. Too bad. Justice is served.

The interesting part of this is how the majority of blacks are treating this compared to the first OJ verdict. Hell, even the 2nd one... crickets.

[Spurtacular]

:cry Nuh uh :cry

You believe the victims - check.
You tried to put Bill Clinton in the White House (a sexual predator) - check

Explain your retard logic, son.

[Pavlov]

I don’t like Clinton’s antics either but seriously just take him to court.

Pavlov taking Spurter apart per usual.
Dont care how black or how old Cosby was, they had the goods.
He used the same method on far too many women who did not even know each other and told basically the same methodology. And the vast majority of them did not even get their day to tell him in court. Too bad. Justice is served.

The interesting part of this is how the majority of blacks are treating this compared to the first OJ verdict. Hell, even the 2nd one... crickets.Inceltacular is terrified to speak about Trump in this context. I'm fine with all the investigations and trials.

[Pavlov]

You believe the victims - check.
You tried to put Bill Clinton (a sexual predator) - check

Explain your retard logic, son.You're wrong.

Guess again.

Also, do you believe Trump's victims?

Yes or no.

[Spurtacular]

Pavlov taking Spurter apart per usual.



So, are you saying you believe the victims?


For the most part, yes.


Bro, you just admitted you tried to put a sexual predator in the White House. Let that sink in.

:lol It doesn't pay to be a chumpette.
:lol Doesn't actually read the transcript.

[Spurtacular]

You're wrong.



Are you saying you didn't try to put Bill Clinton into the White House?

[Pavlov]

Are you saying you didn't try to put Bill Clinton into the White House?To do what?

[Spurtacular]

To do what?

"First lady" obviously. You're stalling for time. :lol

[pgardn]

:lol It doesn't pay to be a chumpette.
:lol Doesn't actually read the transcript.

You can be outraged at Clinton without rooting for Cosby.
Try that. Cosby got lucky with one juror holding out. Once they allowed just two more testimonies in, guilty as hell. He is every bit as guilty as OJ imo. And they both lie like Clinton.

But like Pavlov said. Go get Clinton. You obviously are trying to bind these cases but it’s tough. Cosby had so many women he used drugs on in basically the same manner. I get the frustration you must have of Clinton “going Trump” and grabbing this and that because he could... you have that outrage dontcha?

[Pavlov]

"First lady" obviously. You're stalling for time. :lolSo no real power?

Better than having the rapist as President now.

Do you believe Trump's victims?

Yes or no.

For the most part, I do.

[Pavlov]

You can be outraged at Clinton without rooting for Cosby.
Try that. Cosby got lucky with one juror holding out. Once they allowed just two more testimonies in, guilty as hell. He is every bit as guilty as OJ imo. And they both lie like Clinton.

But like Pavlov said. Go get Clinton. You obviously are trying to bind these cases but it’s tough. Cosby had so many women he used drugs on in basically the same manner. I get the frustration you must have of Clinton “going Trump” and grabbing this and that because he could... you have that outrage dontcha?Cosby does have decent grounds for appeal tbh but he'll probably die during the process, which might be the plan.

[pgardn]

Cosby does have decent grounds for appeal tbh but he'll probably die during the process, which might be the plan.

Based on what I read about the first trial, the mistrial, was enough.
The guy was/is serial. He basically had a infrastructure in place to help him continue.

[Spurtacular]

So no real power?

Better than having the rapist as President now.


You and I both know that's not true, especially in the case of the Clintons.

Why were you willing to put a sexual predator into the White House? That seems hypocritical for a guy on the #MePoo bandwagon.

[Pavlov]

You and I both know that's not true, especially in the case of the Clintons.

Why were you willing to put a sexual predator into the White House? That seems hypocritical for a guy on the #MePoo bandwagon.That's why I didn't vote for Trump.

Do you believe Trump's victims?

Yes or no.

For the most part, I do.

[pgardn]

When Clinton looked straight into the camera and stated he did not have sex with that woman...
I was younger and that did it for me with dollar Bill. So easy...

[Spurtacular]

That's why I didn't vote for Trump.



You voted for a person who supports sexual predators and her sexual predator husband. You do realize this is an L for you, right?

[Pavlov]

You voted for a person who supports sexual predators and her sexual predator husband. You do realize this is an L for you, right?Who says I voted for Hillary Clinton?

That's why I didn't vote for Trump.

Do you believe Trump's victims?

Yes or no.

For the most part, I do.

[Spurtacular]

Who says I voted for Hillary Clinton?



You voted for her on ST. You put in months of campaign work, bro. :lmao

[Pavlov]

You voted for her on ST.https://media1.tenor.com/images/c924b622b71a51d0c4aa21760c69b9f3/tenor.gif?itemid=9264828That's why I didn't vote for Trump.

Do you believe Trump's victims?

Yes or no.

For the most part, I do.

[Spurtacular]

:cry It's okay to pick your sexual predator :cry

:lmao L's in bulk
:lmao #MePoo

[Pavlov]

:lmao L's in bulk
:lmao #MePoolol quote change and declaring victory. This is where you start doing everything possible to avoid simple questions:

That's why I didn't vote for Trump.

Do you believe Trump's victims?

Yes or no.

For the most part, I do.

[Spurtacular]

lol quote change and declaring victory. This is where you start doing everything possible to avoid simple questions:

That's why I didn't vote for Trump.

Do you believe Trump's victims?

Yes or no.

For the most part, I do.

I don't mind answering the question now that we've established that you're a complete and utter hypocrite; that is pretty emblematic of #MePoo. You're willing to try and brand and ruin some as "sexual predators" while embracing others for the top of office in the land. That's the epitome of phoniness and cowardice. This is a giant L for you.

[Pavlov]

I don't mind answering the question now that we've established that you're a complete and utter hypocrite; that is pretty emblematic of #MePoo. You're willing to try and brand and ruin some as "sexual predators" while embracing others for the top of office in the land. That's the epitome of phoniness and cowardice. This is a giant L for you.lol you didn't answer the question.

ol quote change and declaring victory. This is where you start doing everything possible to avoid simple questions:

That's why I didn't vote for Trump.

Do you believe Trump's victims?

Yes or no.

For the most part, I do.

[Spurtacular]

lol you didn't answer the question.

ol quote change and declaring victory. This is where you start doing everything possible to avoid simple questions:

That's why I didn't vote for Trump.

Do you believe Trump's victims?

Yes or no.

For the most part, I do.

I said I don't mind answering the question and I will get to it. But you have not reconciled your support of sexual predator enabler for the top office in the land. You do realize that's cowardly, right?

[Pavlov]

I said I don't mind answering the question and I will get to it. But you have not reconciled your support of sexual predator enabler for the top office in the land. You do realize that's cowardly, right?lol you didn't answer the question.

This is where you start doing everything possible to avoid simple questions:

That's why I didn't vote for Trump.

Do you believe Trump's victims?

Yes or no.

For the most part, I do.

[Spurtacular]

lol you didn't answer the question.

This is where you start doing everything possible to avoid simple questions:

That's why I didn't vote for Trump.

Do you believe Trump's victims?

Yes or no.

For the most part, I do.

:lol Your question (and subsequent butt posting) was designed to "avoid" reconciling your support for someone you classify as a sexual predator.

As it is, I've seen no credible evidence of Trump being a sexual predator in a criminal context.

[Pavlov]

:lol Your question (and subsequent butt posting) was designed to "avoid" reconciling your support for someone you classify as a sexual predator.

As it is, I've seen no credible evidence of Trump being a sexual predator in a criminal context.Of course you haven't.

But you believe the allegations against Bill Clinton, right?

[Spurtacular]

Of course you haven't.

But you believe the allegations against Bill Clinton, right?

You want to think you're calling me out for something, but you're not.

[Pavlov]

You want to think you're calling me out for something, but you're not.I'm not calling you out on anything.

You believe the allegations against Bill Clinton, right?

[Spurtacular]

I'm not calling you out on anything.

You believe the allegations against Bill Clinton, right?

:lol The only reason to ask this is that you think you're trying to prove a bias. But you're only showcasing your own cowardly bias.

[Pavlov]

:lol The only reason to ask this is that you think you're trying to prove a bias. But you're only showcasing your own cowardly bias.I'm not trying to prove anything.This is where you start doing everything possible to avoid simple questions:

You believe the allegations against Bill Clinton, right?

[Spurtacular]

I'm not trying to prove anything.This is where you start doing everything possible to avoid simple questions:

You believe the allegations against Bill Clinton, right?

Well, what are you trying to prove then, bro? Tell me how I'm wrong.

[Pavlov]

Well, what are you trying to prove then, bro? Tell me how I'm wrong.I'm not trying to prove anything.This is where you start doing everything possible to avoid simple questions:

You believe the allegations against Bill Clinton, right?

[Spurtacular]

I'm not trying to prove anything.This is where you start doing everything possible to avoid simple questions:

You believe the allegations against Bill Clinton, right?

:lmao Admitting you're asking a pointless question.
:lmao L's in bulk.

[DMX7]

On a somewhat related note, Joy Reid didn't pull any punches back in the day... (assuming this is legit).

988548834321223680

[Pavlov]

:lmao Admitting you're asking a pointless question.
:lmao L's in bulk.

Declaring victory and doing everything you can to cower from a simple question.

You live in fear on a message board.

[Spurtacular]

Declaring victory and doing everything you can to cower from a simple question.

You live in fear on a message board.

You admitted your question is pointless, bro. It's not my fault you suck at this.

[Pavlov]

You admitted your question is pointless, bro. It's not my fault you suck at this.

Of course there's a point. There's just no reason for you to be as terrified to answer as you admit to be.

[Spurtacular]

Of course there's a point. There's just no reason for you to be as terrified to answer as you admit to be.

What are you trying to accomplish, then?

[Pavlov]

What are you trying to accomplish, then?To find out if you believe the accusations against Bill Clinton.

Pretty simple.

[Spurtacular]

To find out if you believe the accusations against Bill Clinton.

Pretty simple.

You're trying to find out if I believe what you've already conceded? Geez, you really suck at this. Yes, I believe that Bill Clinton is a sexual predator.

[Pavlov]

You're trying to find out if I believe what you've already conceded? Geez, you really suck at this. Yes, I believe that Bill Clinton is a sexual predator.Why? What convinced you?

[pgardn]

Metoo#

Women helping each other in attempting to change the visuals men have on women...?
Thanks to Michelle Wolf for blasting Sarah Sanders appearance.
Who will Call me a snowflake?

So unattractive women are fair rich targets for comedians at this dinner... Good work Michelle. Only Barbie Dolls invited.

[Winehole23]

Sarah Huckabee Sanders is a target because she lies on a daily basis for a deranged sadist who happens to be the most powerful man in the world.

But yeah, a comedian was mean to people at a roast...focus on that.

[Winehole23]

990618204597833728

[Winehole23]

No, things are changing. Men are being held accountable. You know, Al Franken was ousted. That one really hurt liberals. But I believe it was the great Ted Kennedy who said, “Wow, that's crazy; I murdered a woman.”

“Chappaquiddick” in theaters now.

[Winehole23]

It is kind of crazy that the Trump campaign was in contact with Russia when the Hillary campaign wasn't even in contact with Michigan. It's a direct flight; it's so close.

[Winehole23]

We've got our friends at CNN here. Welcome, guys, it's great to have you. You guys love breaking news, and you did it. You broke it. Good work.

The most useful information on CNN is when Anthony Bourdain tells me where to eat noodles.

[Winehole23]

I watch “Morning Joe” every morning. We now know that Mika and Joe are engaged. Congratulations, you guys. It's like when a Me Too works out.

[Winehole23]

And, of course, Megyn Kelly. What would I do without Megyn Kelly? You know, probably be more proud of women.


Megyn Kelly got paid $23 million by NBC, then NBC didn't let Megyn go to the Winter Olympics. Why not? She's so white, cold and expensive, she might as well be the Winter Olympics.

[Spurminator]

Sarah Huckabee Sanders is a target because she lies on a daily basis for a deranged sadist who happens to be the most powerful man in the world.

But yeah, a comedian was mean to people at a roast...focus on that.

Not only that, it's a stretch to suggest her appearance was even being mocked.

[Winehole23]

You guys are obsessed with Trump. Did you used to date him? Because you pretend like you hate him, but I think you love him. I think what no one in this room wants to admit is that Trump has helped all of you. He couldn't sell steaks or vodka or water or college or ties or Eric, but he has helped you.


He's helped you sell your papers and your books and your TV. You helped create this monster, and now you're profiting off of him. And if you're gonna profit off of Trump, you should at least give him some money because he doesn't have any.

[Winehole23]

here's the comment that libtards and Trumpalos alike are clutching their pearls over:


I actually really like Sarah. I think she's very resourceful. Like, she burns facts, and then she uses the ash to create a perfect smoky eye. Like, maybe she's born with it; maybe it's lies.

[Spurminator]

990612847435702275

[pgardn]

Sarah Huckabee Sanders is a target because she lies on a daily basis for a deranged sadist who happens to be the most powerful man in the world.

But yeah, a comedian was mean to people at a roast...focus on that.

So focus on her looks...

Makes perfect sense since she lies on a daily basis.

[pgardn]

Not only that, it's a stretch to suggest her appearance was even being mocked.

Uhhh no.

Seriously, make fun about her lying.
These are horrible excuses.

[Pavlov]

Metoo#

Women helping each other in attempting to change the visuals men have on women...?
Thanks to Michelle Wolf for blasting Sarah Sanders appearance.
Who will Call me a snowflake?

So unattractive women are fair rich targets for comedians at this dinner... Good work Michelle. Only Barbie Dolls invited.Did Wolf call Sanders unattractive? I haven't seen that one yet.

[Winehole23]

Uhhh no.

Seriously, make fun about her lying.
These are horrible excuses.they're not excuses. a comedian paid to say mean things at a roast needs none.

[Winehole23]

So focus on her looks...

Makes perfect sense since she lies on a daily basis.you should read the transcript again. the smokey eye comment was fleeting, the focus on lies persistent.

.

[Winehole23]

Did Wolf call Sanders unattractive? I haven't seen that one yet.pgardn just did. overly focused on looks, tbh.

[pgardn]

you should read the transcript again. the smokey eye comment was fleeting, the focus on lies persistent.

.

Aunt Lydia... focus on her looks.
Can we find an evil bitch with these same qualities and good looks.
Nope...

[pgardn]

pgardn just did. overly focused on looks, tbh.

If you don’t think looks were implied then I can’t help you.

[Winehole23]

well. you have me there, I never saw The Handmaid's Tale, but I just did look up some pics online.

do you think "Aunt Lydia" is physically unattractive?

[Winehole23]

I don't think the character is unattractive... maybe just, more middle-aged than the protagonist

(shrugs)

[pgardn]

well. you have me there, I never saw The Handmaid's Tale, but I just did look up some pics online.

do you think "Aunt Lydia" is physically unattractive?

What do you think?
Do you think she was cast to look pretty and evil?

[Winehole23]

If you don’t think looks were implied then I can’t help you.disagree on the Aunt Lydia. the smokey eye is undeniably a physical trait.

whether it's attractive or unattractive is a matter of taste.

[Winehole23]

What do you think?
Do you think she was cast to look pretty and evil?not physically unattractive, IMO

[pgardn]

disagree on the Aunt Lydia. the smokey eye is undeniably a physical trait.

whether it's attractive or unattractive is a matter of taste.

Sure thing.
Aunt Lydia was cast with no thought on attractiveness.

[Winehole23]

maybe the comparison had to do with more than looks...demeanor say...

[Winehole23]

Sure thing.
Aunt Lydia was cast with no thought on attractiveness.it's clear you think Sanders and Aunt Lydia are unattractive. Can't help you there.

[Pavlov]

Was the only comment about her looks the smoky eye thing?

[pgardn]

not physically unattractive, IMO

How about in a 32 yo pretty comedian... waddya think?

[Winehole23]

not sure what you're asking

[pgardn]

maybe the comparison had to do with more than looks...demeanor say...

They both work.
As did the Smokey eye and lying.

[Winehole23]

are you pissed because Wolf showed disrespect to her elders...at a press roast?

[Winehole23]

They both work.
As did the Smokey eye and lying.so, it's more complex than just looks.

[pgardn]

not sure what you're asking

Who delivered the Line?

It’s pretty darn clear what was implied imo.

[Pavlov]

Is this some kind of code we're supposed to decipher?

[Winehole23]

Was the only comment about her looks the smoky eye thing?Pretty much, unless you think the Aunt Lydia comment was a knock on Sanders's physical appearance. pgardn does.

[pgardn]

are you pissed because Wolf showed disrespect to her elders...at a press roast?

Sure.

Im not pissed.
Im basically saying the addition of looks fits right into the desired portrayal of the shallow women fight when Wolf is clearly a very bright woman. And so is Sanders at plowing thru lies for Trump, she’s good at the impossible.

And I absolutely despise Sanders willingness to lie for a job.
She’d make a lovely mercenary.

[Pavlov]

Pretty much, unless you think the Aunt Lydia comment was a knock on Sanders's physical appearance.Ah, limited knowledge of The Handmaid's Tale at this point. reserving final judgment until I read/watch.

[pgardn]

Is this some kind of code we're supposed to decipher?

Sure its a code.
For men.

Which has been portrayed as part of the problem.

[Winehole23]

How about in a 32 yo pretty comedian... waddya think?I don't find Wolf strikingly attractive. She does have a nice smile. Haven't really checked out her physique yet.

Her words seem to have hurt your feelings. Do you find her unattractive as well?

[Winehole23]

Sure its a code.
For men.

Which has been portrayed as part of the problem.What's the code?

[pgardn]

Ah, limited knowledge of The Handmaid's Tale at this point. reserving final judgment until I read/watch.

The character is controlling fertility and the uglier feminine matron.
If you look at who she is controlling, it makes perfect sense for casting that she is relatively unattractive. It’s not rocket science. I heard about it from my wife. So there’s that.

[Winehole23]

oh right, she's pretty, so she can't say anything mean about another woman...at a press roast

[pgardn]

What's the code?

The code we men are not suppose to know.
We need to be told.

[Winehole23]

I thought the comment about Megyn Kelly was far more cutting and cruel, tbh

[pgardn]

oh right, she's pretty, so she can't say anything mean about another woman...at a press roast

You don’t think anything was implied about Sanders looks.
My wife, and now I, do.

[Winehole23]

The code we men are not suppose to know.
We need to be told.I have no idea what you're talking about or how this relates to what Michelle Wolf said at press schmoozefest.

[pgardn]

I thought the comment about Megyn Kelly was far more cutting and cruel, tbh

So did my wife.

Where was she sitting?

[pgardn]

I have no idea what you're talking about or how this relates to what Michelle Wolf said at press schmoozefest.

Then stick with disagreeing with my opinion that looks were apart of the jab to Sanders.
Call me a snowflake.

[Winehole23]

You don’t think anything was implied about Sanders looks.
My wife, and now I, do.I don't particularly mind that someone's looks came up. I recall Obama ribbing John Boehner for having orange skin at a previous one. Calling attention to a smokey eye doesn't seem beyond all decent bounds...at a roast.

Probabaly wouldn't be hard to find other comments making fun of people's looks over the years.

I find it interesting that you put Sanders up on a pedestal and seek to exempt her from the rough and tumble.

[Spurtacular]

Why? What convinced you?

I could tell you; but again, admit what you're trying to prove. Stop dancing.

[Pavlov]

You don’t think anything was implied about Sanders looks.
My wife, and now I, do.Well, as it is a roast joke, I think one has to go out of one's way to be so offended at the Handmaid's Tale reference. Smoky eye doesn't register on my outrage-o-meter at all tbh.

[Pavlov]

I could tell you; but again, admit what you're trying to prove. Stop dancing.I'm not trying to prove anything. Why are you so terrified to say what you think?

[pgardn]

I don't particularly mind that someone's looks came up. I recall Obama ribbing John Boehner for having orange skin at a previous one. Calling attention to a smokey eye doesn't seem beyond all decent bounds...at a roast.

Probabaly wouldn't be hard to find other comments making fun of people's looks over the years.

I find it interesting that you put Sanders up on a pedestal and seek to exempt her from the rough and tumble.

Part of this whole movement clearly involves the perception that men have glorified looks of females over other qualities. Women have clearly felt the look thing more than men. So much so that it does not help when women argue about trying to straighten this perceived problem amongst themselves. Especially between the older females that are more accepting than the young ones who are more likely to question why... Males are very visual sexual animals compared to females. But females are, imo, brought up to think about their looks compared to other women much more closely than men. So they tire of it.

This is my attempt and takes in understanding this movement.
It’s of course bigger than # mepoo

[pgardn]

Well, as it is a roast joke, I think one has to go out of one's way to be so offended at the Handmaid's Tale reference. Smoky eye doesn't register on my outrage-o-meter at all tbh.

Yep.
Mine either.

But interestingly females picked this up big time.
The females around me anyways...

And I’m not crying for Sanders. She is a mercenary for a liar. I’m saying women basing part of a joke on looks is cruel considering the current climate of what women are complaining about. So the Uncle Tom thing from Wolf is even more ironic.

[Spurtacular]

:cry I'm not trying to prove anything. :cry

:lol Don't even have to put the "fake quote"

[pgardn]

The person who really needs to comment is Sanders.
If she’s a good Trump Republican then she will not complain, so says my wife.

[Winehole23]

So you think Wolf was pandering to the male gaze, or something like that?

[pgardn]

So you think Wolf was pandering to the male gaze, or something like that?

No.

Just being mean because she knows women care too much about their looks and she knows it.
If she really wanted to dig at Sanders because of her distasteful job which she carries out like a good trooper, go for the looks as well. Because Sanders has been trashed already on her willingness to dance for a liar.

[Pavlov]

:lol Don't even have to put the "fake quote"Actually you are faking it with the emojis.

Why are you so terrified to say what you think?

[Pavlov]

No.

Just being mean because she knows women care too much about their looks and she knows it.
But she said the smoky eyes were perfect. This is weird.

[Winehole23]

seems a bit of a stretch to me, but it's understandable that pgardn would stand with his wife against random Spurstalkers.

[Spurtacular]

Actually you are faking it with the emojis.

Why are you so terrified to say what you think?

I assure you my laugh couldn't have been more real. You can't even state that you are trying to prove anything. Worse yet, you don't get how pathetic that is. :lol

[Pavlov]

I assure you my laugh couldn't have been more real. You can't even state that you are trying to prove anything. Worse yet, you don't get how pathetic that is. :lolI'm not trying to prove anything. I am asking you how you arrived at your conclusion.

You are terrified into submission because I asked you what you think. You proved that all on your own.

[pgardn]

seems a bit of a stretch to me, but it's understandable that pgardn would stand with his wife against random Spurstalkers.

More than just my wife. Her friends as well. Relatives...

I gotta go running now. But I wish to take this up further as I have learned other things as well that I did not consider which I wish to share. And I can see where the frustration comes from with the males who don’t/are not fully aware of what younger females think and explain. My nieces one up my wife, my sister, and all their friends. I got things I wish to share and read the comments back at me.

I need feedback.