patrick.net

iwog's comments

« First    « Previous     Comments 33056 - 33095 of 33,740     Next »     Last »

  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 8:42am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

socal2 says
Liberals have spent the last 50 years trying to breakdown basic family structure and societal norms.


Conservatives do this by making everyone poor and unable to pay the rent.

Women naturally react to this situation by not getting married and becoming sugarbabies or having children on their own with the state paying the bills.

Conservatives are FAR FAR FAR more damaging to the family structure than liberals are. Follow the money. This is why in 3rd world nations, even very religious ones, marriage is almost non-existent. The archetype is Columbia which has the lowest marriage rate in the world, a devout Christian population that endorses marriage, and widespread poverty. Unrestrained capitalism destroys the family. Always.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 8:45am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

bob2356 says
So you believe a doctor doing a cavity search pursuant to a warrant is the same thing as a married 53 year old predator like wiener sending pictures of his dick to a minor.


I think it's pretty clear to anyone with a brain that the cavity search would be far more traumatizing and destructive to a girl's self-esteem than a dick pic. I think a 53-year old (predator LOL) sending that picture is going to be a non-event in her life.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 8:51am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

komputodo says
Now you are saying it wasn't the Russian intervention that swung the election?


No, you misread. Really no other reason why people thought she was in the pocket of Wall Street. She was labeled corrupt because of donations and speaking fees.

However because of the blind idiocy of Trump supporters, NOW packing your administration with actual Goldman Sachs insiders is apparently NOT corruption and NOT being in the pocket of Wall Street because fuck you apparently.

You couldn't even paint this hypocrisy in a science fiction novel. No one would believe it.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 10:48am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

me123 says
Why does a 50 year old guy even know this or keep up with the changing statutes?


It was relevant to the conversation so I looked it up Piggy.

LOL @ "Keep up with" You're an idiot Piggy.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 10:57am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

TwoScoopsMcGee says
And they don't pay tax. Jesus Christ, you know our fucking doormat Congress will probably give them our money they don't pay federal income tax into.


You have no idea what you're talking about and are pulling 'facts' out of your ass. The most disgusting aspect of economic right wing idiots is their contempt for people they are exploiting. It's sickening and fuck you.

  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 11:07am   ↑ like (3)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

me123 says
Just like knowing it's 14 in Chile?

I doubt i could find any adult that I know that could accurately answer the question of age of consent, but that's probably because they are adults and don't need to know.


Well Piggy, YOU don't need to know because you're an idiot and you don't need facts when you write your bullshit here.

I need to know because I like making informed arguments. When the topic is "Can a 15-year old see a penis without being a victim", obviously the age of consent is of primary interest to the topic being discussed. Again, you have no idea what I'm talking about because you're an idiot.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 11:15am   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

me123 says
Why do you keep projecting your mental illness on others with your delusional daily posts?


Piggy, I don't understand, didn't you want to talk about why I looked up the age of consent? Now you just want to talk about projecting mental illness?

If I was cynical, I'd say you aren't interested in discussing ANY topic and just want to troll the site. It's a good thing I'm not cynical huh!
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 11:21am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Ceffer says
Dicey problem. How to incorporate Latin American patronage and corruption into a fake USA framework?

Do we actually NEED a tropical money pit?


We need to make it a state and start governing it like we do all other states. There's no reason why this can't be Hawaii with a large tourism draw and tropical cultivation of expensive produce like coffee.

The reason it's not a state, like everything else, is entirely due to Republican national vandalism. They always block the vote when they are in power and prevent Democrats from passing the bill when they aren't.

http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/civil-rights/203131-with-gao-report-momentum-builds-for-puerto-rican-statehood
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 11:24am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

me123 says
So, pointing out the errors of your narratives is trolling?

Why can't you handle the truth?


And Piggy dodges again!!!!!!!!

No Piggy, being a stupid little Piggy and implying that I'm abnormal for looking up ages of consent on Google is trolling. So is claiming I have a mental illness for pointing it out. Being dishonest and destroying threads is why most people hate you here.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 11:30am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

The most vile thing about the Piggy problem is how other people on the hard right want him here for no other reason than he's on their team.

I used to vehemently attack the 9/11 truther/'sandy hook is a fraud guy' despite the fact that he liked nearly every post I made and agreed with almost all my politics. (sorry I forget his name) Why? Because he hurt people. He put his own ego ahead of people who had family members killed in horrible tragedies. He was a scumbag.

Piggy called Robert's place of work and issued a fake threat so they would blame him and close down the school. Piggy is a disgusting individual who hurts people. However a few Trumpistas want to welcome him back because "He's one of us yo!!".

Pathetic is the only word I can use here.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 11:31am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

zzyzzx says
Allowing people to retire at 55 with 75% of their pay is the biggest problem here. They need to cut off these people under 65 and make them get a job.
They already moved government employees to 401K's.
Then deal with the insane electric prices, since, oil is one of the more expensive, if not most expensive way to generate it. I get it that oil is the easiest to import to the island, but a combo of wind/solar/hydro/pumped storage hydro/natural gas could cit electricity costs quite a bit.
They also need to do whatever it takes to become the preferred tourist destination for Americans (since there are plenty of people who really don't want to get a passport). They can do this if they try. Never having been there, I can't say for sure, but it does have a bad reputation and that is something that can be changed.
After that, their higher than surrounding area minimum wage might still be a problem as well.


Maybe they should just be allowed to keep their money and not tithe to the USA. Sound like a good plan?
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 11:40am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

zzyzzx says
Are you saying that it's acceptable to give people defined benefit pensions of 75% of their salary, plus benefits, at age 55?


It's perfectly acceptable and even affordable as long as a nation can budget it. In fact it probably was the norm before your bloody Reagan Revolution.

If Puerto Rico was allowed to determine its own destiny, and decided to keep its money with its citizens instead of what you want to do with it which is murder Iraqi citizens, I daresay they could easily afford it without debt.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 12:05pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

SpecialSnowflake says
What more do you want? The power to declare anyone "a piggy" by fiat and ban him from Patrick's site?


Yes. I would ban every Republican who was too afraid to answer a question.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 2:25pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

TwoScoopsMcGee says
As long as they don't expect aid.

They vote against Independence every time. Like I said, most Puerto Ricans are smart enough to like the current deal that gives them mostly benefits with a minimum of duties.


Your first claim is a lie.

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/06/11/us/puerto-ricans-vote-on-the-question-of-statehood.html?mcubz=0
However even acknowledging that Puerto Rico has in the past voted against statehood, these were always in extremely flawed referendums where three or more choices were offered. Statehood, independence, status quo, and frequently some other option. Obviously you aren't going to get a majority with this type of voting AND you aren't going to get a lot of people interested in becoming a state when the federal government has voted down giving them the option numerous times.


TwoScoopsMcGee says
Do Puerto Ricans pay income tax on money earned in Puerto Rico or not, Duck? You know, the #1 source of Federal Tax Revenue.


I was crystal clear when I detailed their taxes. Yes often they do. It depends on if they also have income from the USA. Yes they always do if they earn the money in the military or working for the government. Yes they do on capital gains and payroll taxes. YES! Again it is painfully obvious you have not studied this at all and are simply bandwagoning the idiocy from the Republican party. Do Puerto Ricans who don't earn any income overseas and don't work for the government and don't have capital gains and aren't involved in import/export pay income tax? No. Nuance is shit to people like you.

TwoScoopsMcGee says
I'd like to know the source, please.


The source is in Spanish and published in Puerto Rico however the numbers I checked are valid. This is an average yearly budget. A fact you can verify yourself if you spend the time.

However before I link the source, either admit YOU DON'T FUCKING HAVE A SOURCE or link the source you used when you determined they were a welfare state.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 2:27pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

She's probably right. However by now I'm sure one of his aids has hammered it into his head.

Also where do you get off calling her a cunt when Donald Trump is guilty of insults like this times 1000? Donald Trump: TWITTER HERO!!!!! Hillary Clinton: CUNT!!
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 2:31pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

FortWayne says
NFL has let America down by catering to liberals and that stupidity.


Maybe the NFL owners have accurately determined that Donald Trump is a fucking retard. Maybe?

Let America down. Brilliant. Did you let America down when you slaughtered 100,000 innocent Iraqi citizens who were only trying to get to work one day?
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 3:40pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

me123 says
Do you think repeating the same absolute lie, without any proof, will make it true?


The reason you were banned is I linked your doxxing of Robert and where you published information on his office and employment at exactly the same time you called in the threat.

There are no other suspects.

Are you trying to tell us that yes you doxxed him and yes you published information about his job but you had nothing to do with contacting his office? I think you're lying. You are pretending that lots of people had the inclination to do that when in fact you are the only one here who seems to care about real life information of users. I know of ZERO other instances of anyone being doxxed by anyone else other than the multiple times you have done it.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 4:20pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Ceffer says
Is she worth a jail sentence? Only Iwog knows for sure.


Nope, absolutely not. One of the problems with living in a gynocentric male-hating police state is that you need to conform for your own good.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 4:33pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

anonymous says
Competition + adaptability leads to cooperation.


Empirically babble. It's like a drunk Austrian trying to contribute something.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 4:44pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

anonymous says
Dan thinks he can go back in time and make Soviet Union work.

To the time machine Dan you go!


Aaaaand the predictable idiocy that anyone who doesn't support total unrestrained capitalism is necessarily communist.

This makes Reagan a communist but the ridiculous stupidity of the argument is always lost on those making it.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 5:19pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

drBu says
Please read the Harvard study, which has been published in a peer-reviewed journal. The investigators have no hidden agenda.


This is a deeply flawed study with a conclusion that doesn't really support either side. The most striking example and the one that I'm sure destroys the rest of the data is Russia. A former iron curtain nation with SEVERAL revolutionary movements, multiple tribes and cultures, a strong mafia, a huge problem with alcoholism caused by depression, and an outright liquidation of most of their military stockpile into the open market with the collapse of the Soviet Union has a high murder rate despite guns being illegal.

YOU DON'T SAY!!!!!!!

So I go to the second highest murder rate on the chart which is Luxembourg, a very small landlocked country which shouldn't have this problem with such a low gun ownership rate. Checking the data, I find that 9 per 100,000 is total bullshit. Even if this was true during the single year examined by the study, (which I highly doubt) it's not true now.



This is EXTREMELY shoddy science, made even more ridiculous by the fact that they are examining a single year for the data. I'm going to keep going down the list however so far the Harvard study looks like partisan hack job.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 5:29pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

So it looks like the Russian data is crap also. Your "study" reports 20 homicides per 100,000 people however if true for 2003, it was the peak and the murder rate has dropped every single year since. The current homicide rate in Russia is around 9 per 100k. This is getting DANGEROUSLY CLOSE to the United States murder rate which exceeded 9 per 100k in the 1990s and may someday do so again. I'm sure this is a fact that the NRA would like to obliterate.

I don't know when Russia effectively banned guns but I'm going to laugh my ass off if it was close to Y2K.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 5:41pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

drBu says
Luxembourg rate is wrong (should be 1.9), but the rest of data appears to be correct. They used CANADIAN  CENTRE  FOR  JUSTICE  STATISTICS,  HOMICIDE  IN  CANADA, 


Luxembourg is not only wrong, it's extremely wrong and has been less than 1 for six years. You can't simply pretend this is 2003 and all the facts frozen in time are still relevant.

Russia is still Russia. Gun laws aren't going to be relevant in that country. There is too much going on, too many nations surrounding it, too many problems with revolutions, terrorism, alcoholism, and depression to give any credence whatsoever to the hypothesis that strict gun laws have any impact at all.

This is a bad study. It doesn't attempt to correct for flaws, it's EXTREMELY limited by excluding all the African and South American and Asian nations that would undoubtedly screw up the results they were looking for, and just a layman's check found at least one glaring error that you admit to and absolutely no corrections for a very limited sample. Finally, using one single year for a conclusion on gun laws is ridiculous. I can't even believe Harvard published this.

I also find it hilarious that the United States was excluded from the study. You know, the nation with the extremely high gun homicide rate?
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 5:53pm   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

drBu says
as the murder rates began spiking again in 2014.


You need to get used to posting data with your points like I try to do every time.

For kicks I looked up the highest homicide rate in the world. It's El Salvador with 108 per 100k where guns are mostly legal. There is a shit ton of guns being dumped into that country from multiple sources, not including those left over from recent civil war. Apparently the United States has a pipeline of firearms going directly to El Salvador because we like guns.

http://www.insightcrime.org/news-analysis/world-most-violent-country-el-salvador-30-firearms-registered-every-day
I would say this one example is so strong that it invalidates the entire study you linked.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 6:00pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

LOL @ the U.S. Virgin Islands having the 4th highest murder rate in the world.

Look, all I have is undergrad training in science but I can spot a hack job study when I see one. A REAL analysis of gun laws and gun violence would have to include EXTENSIVE data spanning decades combined with an analysis of all the nuance involved with each nation attempting to rid itself of guns in a world where the 1st world treats 3rd world warfare as a major source of corporate profits.

I can't even begin to consider a "study" where they can't tell the difference between 9 and 1.9 in the final publication.

This is one reason Australia is so compelling. No civil war, no mafia, a mostly homogeneous population and no borders with gun saturated neighboring countries.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 6:57pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

me123 says
Just another one of your lies, you really can't help yourself

repost the actual proof or shut the fuck up with your lies and false allegations.


I gave the proof to Patrick.

Why do you think he banned you??

Seriously if you think everyone including Patrick is just out to get you and make you look bad, why are you even here?
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 7:14pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

me123 says
Because you cried like a little girl to him with all the lies you emailed him. You really need to grow up and stop being such a little pussy.


Yes Piggy, I know all the old threads are deleted. Lucky I saved a screen shot huh!!

My guess is you attacked his rating yourself and then gleefully posted it along with all his personal information.

  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 7:18pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Strategist says
he he he
CIC hasn't even confessed to being me123, and I already see blood flying around.


I know it's him.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 7:24pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

me123 says
Try to remember, Roberto Originally posted here under his real name. He was the one that posted his personal information.


LOL @ if there was any doubt who you are.

You were still doxxing him and attacking him over a year after he left the board. The screen shot proves it. You are a very sick and pathetic individual.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 7:38pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

SpecialSnowflake says
"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."


That quote doesn't change the fact that nothing can conclusively be known or learned without statistics. Reality is all about how they are handled.

On a subject so saturated with rage and emotion like gun control, nearly all research is going to be biased and agenda driven. Take the study linked above for example, a study that is curiously missing from the Harvard catalog. (I wonder why that is?) http://www.harvard-jlpp.com/vols-30-34/#303
Volume 30 was published in 2007 however the only data published for Russia was 2002. What's more curious is the fact that 2002 was the peak of the murder rate in Russia and it fell sharply afterward being cut by more than half. Certainly the authors were aware of this fact. They even published 2004 data for Finland and 2003 data for most other countries so why 2002, the PEAK of Russia's murder spree, to represent what is supposed to be a nation under gun control restrictions?

Anyway it's a silly argument because fewer guns will mean fewer gun homicides. I say this with a locked safe full of handguns and rifles. Most of the time someone is killed with a firearm, it's because there's a convenient firearm handy during a moment of rage.

The argument that a bunch of NRA freaks are going to hold off an Apache attack helicopter trying to quell a revolution is asinine. Nearly all weapons used abroad in ACTUAL wars of independence are already illegal here so what is the 2nd amendment argument now? You need a 30 round rifle magazine to hunt deer? I like guns and I use guns sometimes but I choose only to believe what is real. Banning guns may not be the answer but it does result in lower murder rates.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 7:47pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Fucking White Male says
Banning guns in the us won't lower murder rates. The crooks will get illegal guns regardless.


That's not true and a large number of murders are not done by crooks. They are family members getting pissed at each other, ex wives, ex husbands, shooting sprees because someone hates the boss and goes postal, or accidents because some idiot doesn't know what a trigger lock is.

Fucking White Male says
What will work is sentencing felons in possession of guns in federal court which calls for 15 year minimums rather than California's feeble 18mo/30 mo/60 mo guidelines.


That will do absolutely nothing.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 7:48pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

SpecialSnowflake says
Yeah, and fewer 15-inch black rubber cocks means fewer people beaten do death with 15-inch rubber dicks. Or fewer "dildo homicides" to put it in form preferred by people insisting of adding modifiers to "homicide".


Some day you NRA idiots are going to learn to discuss this in something other than childish cliches.

Not today however.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 7:51pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Did you people even care to read the peer reviewed Scientific American article or did you just decide it didn't fit your narrative so it's shit?

Key points:

- The claim that gun ownership stops crime is common in the U.S., and that belief drives laws that make it easy to own and keep firearms.

- But about 30 careful studies show more guns are linked to more crimes: murders, rapes, and others. Far less research shows that guns help.

- Interviews with people in heavily gun-owning towns show they are not as wedded to the crime defense idea as the gun lobby claims.

The study goes on to prove these assertions. Which one of you is going to type one single word giving support for the opposite conclusion?? Anyone?? Huh?? Bueller?
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 8:34pm   ↑ like (2)   ↓ dislike (3)     quote      

anonymous says
If me123 is actually Ironman, then welcome back dude!!!

As you can see iwog has severe TDS. Even tovarichpeter has healed himself...


Now Piggy is sock puppetting with himself.

He truly does destroy the board. This is nothing but vandalism.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 26, 8:36pm   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Is he going to keep firing prosecutors until he gets one who does what he wants?

I guess banana republic dictators are what you call justice.

One of the most dangerous things in any country is idiots cheering the lawlessness of their leader.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 27, 8:46am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (1)     quote      

Strategist says
And communism is my devil. There are an infinite number of choices between the two, but you are still either in the capitalist camp, or the communist camp. And Dan, you are in the communist camp.


WTF is wrong with you??

This is unbelievably wrong. Pure capitalism fails and pure communism fails. What am I then?
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 27, 8:48am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

drBu says
How about Switzerland or Israel? Does that invalidate Salvador example?


Nope.

El Salvador is the most violent place on earth with by far the highest murder rate. Guns are pouring into that country in a flood and have been doing so since the last civil war.

Peace? Security? Exactly the opposite. Furthermore, and this is a point you really need to look at, the influx of guns into that country is probably responsible for all of the tinpot dictator revolutions that have occurred there!

To draw parallels with the United States, there is probably a 99% chance that NRA guns will be used by some lunatic leading a bullshit revolution against nothing and maybe a 1% chance those guns will ever be used to defend against government tyranny. I think nearly every example in history proves this.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 27, 8:53am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (0)     quote      

Tenpoundbass says
Every Constitutional lawyer but Obama says the DOJ has no real legal authority over Trump and Congress trying to tie Trump's hands has no legal basis.
Trump could fire Mueller and his whole team and laugh at them while he stands at the door and calls them all losers while they pack their desks into their cars.

Trump isn't doing that because he's finding the whole affair very useful to help him drain the swamp.
When he sends mixed signals that he's campaigning for the Swamp candidates. But sends everybody that's is the Who's Who of this movement to praise Trump at said rally.
The outsider will get elected every time. Corker quit yesterday his announcement is expected to be the first of many. We may have about Ten Senate Races in 2018, that wasn't scheduled for this Midterm.


Translation: Everything Donald Trump does is good! Gooooood! Believe in your messiah, believe in what he does. He is the way, the truth, and the light. He's draining the swamp even when he's filling it with more crocodiles. He's keeping his campaign promises even when he's keeping none of them. Aaaaaaaand Chewbacca.

You're a fucking moron dude. Get help. Now.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 27, 9:10am   ↑ like (0)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

Strategist says
Those that lean towards capitalism are capitalists, and those that lean towards communism are called communist or some type of socialists.


You are probably the only one in the world that believes this nonsense and btw your terms are horribly subjective.

How about an ACTUAL capitalist who runs a business and believes in strong government controls and high taxes? You're going to call the literal capitalist a communist?

Sorry but this is extremely retarded.
  iwog   ignore (3)   2017 Sep 27, 9:24am   ↑ like (1)   ↓ dislike (2)     quote      

me123 says
Base on lies and false accusations Without proof by a certain poster in this thread. Can you guess which poster it is?


How come you're using a New Jersey IP address?