Gather Round S.N. CONservatives Sing"Wind Beneath my Wings" to Milo

[Steeltime]

The mantra of those losers who are left with nothing but ad hominem attacks.

Jesus, you make this too easy, elfiePoloLiar. I did this earlier, and need but copy what I previously wrote:

I know, right? I find it sooooo refreshing that you never engage in ad hominem attacks. Well, except for:

"I sure am glad the Racist in Chief ..."

"The intellect of the average Trumptard ..."

"You can not possibly be this stupid????"

"Not my president. I can relate in no way to that steaming pile of ****."

"Actually your cuck personality is more in line with Pelosi, but keep trying slugger."

"Love that the guy defending Trump looks like Hitler, perfect. Bwahahahahaha"

"Hey Deepthroat time if you're done with Nixon I got you something else you can gobble. Suck on that imPEACH pie douchebag. Bwahahahhahahah!"

"Well DeVoss "Grizzly Hunter" has an IQ of about 70 so at least by Trump cabinet standards they have one intellectual"

"Now go to bed little Trumptards"

"No, Reich wing losers do. You think I wouldn't know how to use a proxy if if [sic] I wanted to play your delusional part?"

"The only thing that idiot is rocking is a dead muskrat on his head, and an orange retarded cheetos suntan."

"This guy is just a boot licker obviously, but the narcissism/psychopathy of the Pisser in chief comes through loud and clear."

Yep, old elfiePoloLiar would never engage in ad hominem attacks. Nooooooo, such discourse is beneath him. Or in reality, the only thing beneath him is the pile of **** he spews non-stop.

Oh, I pulled those in about 5 minutes from your posts over the last 3 days.

So please, for God's sake you limp-dicked know-nothing, stop whining about poor, poor you being subjected to ad hominem attacks.

 

[ark steel]

Yea, Ron. It took a while but we have learned our lesson. We watched through the 1990s liberals support the sexual assaulter in chief Bill Clinton. They put aside all their righteous indignation when came to Bill Clinton. So ****, as long as someone agrees with me politically, why should I give a **** what they do? The standard was set.

This is when we truly learned that groups like NOW were more interested in being liberal than supporting women. A liberal womanizer (or woman) is A-OK. non-liberal woman or those women raped/groped by Liberal womanizers are to be condemned.

 

[Superman]

other than ethics and morals, why doesn't ANYONE just throw a (D) next to their name, even if they're not a (D)?
Not even the White Privilege card carries as much credit.

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

Don't forget the part where you later claim I registered as a pigeon and made sounds like a pigeon.....

The mantra of those losers who are left with nothing but ad hominem attacks.

Elftard, are you disputing that you've registered here under other names and aliases? are you? because if so, I'd absolutely love to place a nice wager with you.

I'm betting Elftard won't take the bet. This is when Elftard typically vanishes from threads, when the facts become irrefutable and his whiny-***, unsubstantiated, vile-racist opinions lose their steam. When the rubber meets the road, the Elftard runs.

Elftard keeps telling us he's not PaloMalo43 ("I don't even know who that person is"), that he's never been registered under another handle on this site pretending to be black.
The douchewad keeps saying these claims aren't true. Yet also insists that he IS in fact Jewish, American Indian, Hispanic and suffers from Aspergers and...might also be a tranny.

Will the Elftard have the backbone to take Supe's bet?

Doesn't have the balls. That's my bet. Like a Liberal, he'll shrink and shy away. Just like an antifa Liberal, wearing a black mask, cowardly throwing rocks from a distance. Can't go toe to toe.

 

[Elfiero]

Jesus, you make this too easy, elfiePoloLiar. I did this earlier, and need but copy what I previously wrote:

I know, right? I find it sooooo refreshing that you never engage in ad hominem attacks. Well, except for:

"I sure am glad the Racist in Chief ..."

"The intellect of the average Trumptard ..."

"You can not possibly be this stupid????"

"Not my president. I can relate in no way to that steaming pile of ****."

"Actually your cuck personality is more in line with Pelosi, but keep trying slugger."

"Love that the guy defending Trump looks like Hitler, perfect. Bwahahahahaha"

"Hey Deepthroat time if you're done with Nixon I got you something else you can gobble. Suck on that imPEACH pie douchebag. Bwahahahhahahah!"

"Well DeVoss "Grizzly Hunter" has an IQ of about 70 so at least by Trump cabinet standards they have one intellectual"

"Now go to bed little Trumptards"

"No, Reich wing losers do. You think I wouldn't know how to use a proxy if if [sic] I wanted to play your delusional part?"

"The only thing that idiot is rocking is a dead muskrat on his head, and an orange retarded cheetos suntan."

"This guy is just a boot licker obviously, but the narcissism/psychopathy of the Pisser in chief comes through loud and clear."

Yep, old elfiePoloLiar would never engage in ad hominem attacks. Nooooooo, such discourse is beneath him. Or in reality, the only thing beneath him is the pile of **** he spews non-stop.

Oh, I pulled those in about 5 minutes from your posts over the last 3 days.

So please, for God's sake you limp-dicked know-nothing, stop whining about poor, poor you being subjected to ad hominem attacks.

You are so stupid it's beyond my comprehension.

Are any of those statements in response to an argument someone here is making?

 

[Steeltime]

You are so stupid it's beyond my comprehension.

Are any of those statements in response to an argument someone here is making?

All of them, elfiePoloLiar.

All ... of ... them were specifically raised in flaccid "support" for your arguments, and have the common theme that Trump is stupid, Republicans are stupid, Trump supporters are stupid, Trump is a racist, etc.

"Ad hominem: ad ho·mi·nem
/ˌad ˈhämənəm/
adverb & adjective

1. (of an argument or reaction) directed against a person rather than the position they are maintaining."

 

[Tim Steelersfan]

....and he's still not taking Supe's bet...

 

[Superman]

we don't assume the elftard's fluid bigenderality.

 

[deljzc]

I don't agree with everything Milo says, but I damn wall stand for his right to say it.

Personally, I don't have a big problem with that interview above. I don't agree with it, but I understand where he's coming from and he did get himself in a corner with his argument. He sort of mixed his own personal history of sex with the broad brush of sex and the law and that can be tricky.

I mean we live in a country where something like 25% of people lose their virginity at age 16 or less and something like 10% lose their virginity at age 14 or less. For many of these individuals, it is completely a consensual choice of rebellion and empowerment. And there is certainly a subset of this group that willingly and intentionally look for older partners.

I also agree with him that this is not pedophilia to have sex with a 14 year old. It is statutory rape (and very culturally defined). And I do agree with him that the psychosis of pedophilia is the sexual attraction to prepubescence, which is extremely at odds with the instinctual reasons for sex (and why sex is appealing) which is for reproduction.

I think Milo struggles with this because homosexuality is a similar "wires crossed" issue in the brain which breaks the sexual attraction - sex - reproduction natural instincts most species are born with. I think he has commented on this before about homosexuality.

I don't think he's defending pedophilia at all. I think he could be arguing statutory rape is a complex issue, which I actually agree with him on. Believe me, I'm not advocating we go around letting 14 year olds get married and have sex. And I agree 100% with our statutory rape laws. But I think he is correct that not every statutory rape case is "predatory" in nature (i.e. the "predator" is the old person).

But that's me on the issue. The best way to prevent underaged sex is still the simpleist: good family/moral support, strong self confidence and self importance, and be active in good peer groups (sports, academics, arts, etc.). And be open and honest about what sex is.

Obviously, I don't think Milo got all these things when he was a child and that manifested itself into a traumatic "coming of age" time period for him. To expect him to throw everyone he (even falsely) cared about through this time period under the bus as "sexual predator" is unrealistic.

 

[MTC]

It does help to have the younger kids involved in positive groups like athletics, community service etc. Teaches responsibility/accountability.
In turn they'll understand the responsibilities involved around sex. Once teens hit a certain age, hormones are hormones. It helps to be honest in explaining the birds and the bee's. But also knowing and be smart with the risk. I agree

 

[wig]

Milo made the mistake of being a conservative who behaves very much like a liberal.

As such, he has no true home.

The Democrats have brought ALL this down upon themselves by bastardizing their party. They've become so convoluted and liberal that they've alienated what should have been their core, the working class. Now they have nothing but minorities and ironically the malaise infested uber rich young. But as they ought to know, those wealthy young are just slumming. They'll get with the program sooner or later and realize free love aint free. Socialism doesn't pay for trips to Cancun and Cabo. And it certainly doesn't pay for law degrees at Harvard. So, they can get community law degrees at St. James Community College for disadvantage Lawyers and continue the "good fight" at $32,000 a year in the city, or they can agree with Daddy and go on to an Ivy League school, settle down with a decent prospect for husband or wife and get a place in the suburbs and defend nice gentlemen wrongly accused of white collar crime.

Then a few times a year they'll get together, smoke some dope and burn their briefs. (read that as you will). They can ease their social conscience and go back to work on Monday and ***** about their taxes and wonder why so many people from the tenements seem to be encroaching on their offices in the city.

All the while the Democratic Party will CONTINUE to cater to high population centers in order to amass votes while ignoring the working class that they were originally pledged to support. Along the way the Republicans were savvy enough to change their verbiage slightly enough to appeal to those lost masses and make them feel loved and remembered and the Democrats continue to be left with no choice but to vilify the "White Man" that has abandoned the minorities and lower class that he "left behind" when really it was the Democratic Party who left HIM behind so many years ago.

 

[hamster]

We haven't seen the end of Milo.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

I'm going to go against the grain of conservatives defending Milo. His ambiguity about pedophilia in that interview illustrates perfectly the problem many have with putting gay men in a position of authority around kids. I don't want them in any position where they are alone with kids. Sorry boys, like it or not, you are not normal - and that's ok. I can hang with you, work with you, depend on you - but I will not put my kids in a situation where they are alone with you.

 

[Superman]

Question: Will the left eat their own now that George Takei has said something similar?

 

[Steeltime]

Question: Will the left eat their own now that George Takei has said something similar?

 

[Steelin]

This is when we truly learned that groups like NOW were more interested in being liberal than supporting women. A liberal womanizer (or woman) is A-OK. non-liberal woman or those women raped/groped by Liberal womanizers are to be condemned.

I think the far left lost a lot of people starting about then.

 

[oneforthebus]

My son is 13. A lot of his friends are 13. Yes, some of them are physically mature. Mentally and emotionally, they are as dumb as puppies.

Is it pedophilia for an adult man to have sex with them? Maybe not. Is it in any way shape or form beneficial to anyone or justifiable? No.

It probably messed up Milo for life like it messes up most kids. Sure, some come out unscathed, that doesn't make it ok. Sexual abuse is a massive risk factor for addiction and suicide for a reason.

 

[oneforthebus]

I also find it interesting how many gay men were molested as boys. Is this because gay men seek out gay boys? Or does this early sexual experience contribute to their ultimate sexual orientation in some way? It seems like more than a coincidence to me.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

I also find it interesting how many gay men were molested as boys. Is this because gay men seek out gay boys? Or does this early sexual experience contribute to their ultimate sexual orientation in some way? It seems like more than a coincidence to me.

How about we try not to find out. IMO gay men need to be kept away from kids. I think this is a common sense thing that now has some sort of PC taint. Tough ****. We have tolerance and acceptance, but that isn't good enough. Now we need to agree that it is normal. It isn't. Sticking your dick up another dude's shithole is not normal. Maybe 2% of people like doing that. That is abnormal. Live with acceptance and tolerance. Quit trying to make it mainstream.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

Lets not try liberal social experiments with my kids.

 

[wig]

Charles, you could argue from a biological point of view that putting your dick in ANYONE'S "****-hole" is completely counter productive and therefore not normal. You could further argue(from a biological standpoint) that oral sex is pointless. It serves no reproductive function.

Not that I'm defending vay male sex, but there's plenty of stuff a person could easily say is "not normal" based on one's own cultural or religious views.

 

[deljzc]

A person's sexuality is so incredibly tied to our mental health, if we open that can of worms to debate this thread could be 100 pages long and we still wouldn't resolve anything.

While I'm not quite in total agreement with the sexuality theroy that everyone is "grey" on some spectrum of 100% heterosexual to 100% homosexual, I do think we are extremely complex psychological beings. And our mental "health" (for a better word) is certainly complex for every single person and there is no blanket "normal" that can possibly cover everyone's mental state.

Like I said before, Milo started to get caught up in his own, very complex and personal psychology/sexuality with social "norms" and laws. And that's a very slippery slope because I think if we pulled back the curtain on many people's brains/sexual history/mental makeup, it would expose a lot of questionable decisions that could be second guessed and monday-morning quarterbacked to death.

But he brought this on himself. Like Howard Stern and many others, he has decided to put his sexuality (and that goes hand-in-hand with his mental state) out there for discussion. That's his right, but he has to be very careful how he reconciles his past with societal norms.

And I agree with the poster above that this is not the last we are going to hear from Milo.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

Charles, you could argue from a biological point of view that putting your dick in ANYONE'S "****-hole" is completely counter productive and therefore not normal. You could further argue(from a biological standpoint) that oral sex is pointless. It serves no reproductive function.

Not that I'm defending vay male sex, but there's plenty of stuff a person could easily say is "not normal" based on one's own cultural or religious views.

Yeah I think that is a weak argument.

 

[CharlesDavenport]

A person's sexuality is so incredibly tied to our mental health, if we open that can of worms to debate this thread could be 100 pages long and we still wouldn't resolve anything.

While I'm not quite in total agreement with the sexuality theroy that everyone is "grey" on some spectrum of 100% heterosexual to 100% homosexual, I do think we are extremely complex psychological beings. And our mental "health" (for a better word) is certainly complex for every single person and there is no blanket "normal" that can possibly cover everyone's mental state.

Like I said before, Milo started to get caught up in his own, very complex and personal psychology/sexuality with social "norms" and laws. And that's a very slippery slope because I think if we pulled back the curtain on many people's brains/sexual history/mental makeup, it would expose a lot of questionable decisions that could be second guessed and monday-morning quarterbacked to death.

But he brought this on himself. Like Howard Stern and many others, he has decided to put his sexuality (and that goes hand-in-hand with his mental state) out there for discussion. That's his right, but he has to be very careful how he reconciles his past with societal norms.

And I agree with the poster above that this is not the last we are going to hear from Milo.

When you confuse pedophilia with some sort of sexual mentorship, get the **** away from kids.

 

[Stewey]

Charles, you could argue from a biological point of view that putting your dick in ANYONE'S "****-hole" is completely counter productive and therefore not normal. You could further argue(from a biological standpoint) that oral sex is pointless. It serves no reproductive function.

Not that I'm defending vay male sex, but there's plenty of stuff a person could easily say is "not normal" based on one's own cultural or religious views.

The funny part about that is when you hear that a man and woman had sex, you don't know what kind of sex they're having....so its always normal, even if its up the butt. In nature opposites attract, that's the normalcy.

But when a man 'has sex" with another man, you know exactly whats goin on...and its grotesque. A man ain't supposed to be with another man. Thats where the unnaturalness starts.