The Hofoid House of Absurd & Ignorant Posts VII

[AtorBoltox]

Does Trump's base actually like Ivanka or care what she thinks? Serious question.

Nice sig.

Listen I am starting to think that Moore is recovering and will win 2-5 point victory.
I also think the stuff about him is fake news because the yearbook person says she started working st the restaurant when she was 15 but other coworkers say that’s not true because you have to be 16 and she said the trash cans were on the back of the building they were on the side. She said that it would close at 10PM coworkers said that it was 12AM.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

Does Trump's base actually like Ivanka or care what she thinks? Serious question.

Nice sig.

Listen I am starting to think that Moore is recovering and will win 2-5 point victory.
I also think the stuff about him is fake news because the yearbook person says she started working st the restaurant when she was 15 but other coworkers say that’s not true because you have to be 16 and she said the trash cans were on the back of the building they were on the side. She said that it would close at 10PM coworkers said that it was 12AM.

This is exactly what Trump/Moore supporters think fake news is - any news that challenges their viewpoints.

[Cashew]

There isn't really such a thing as a victimless crime, except in countries where being gay is a crime.

This depends on how you define "victimless", in some places, things like gambling and smoking weed are crimes and I'd consider those victimless crimes.

And possessing child porn is supposedly a victimless crime, but we went over this already.

[Chancellor Tanterterg]

Trump breaks his silence: https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/donald-trump-roy-moore_us_5a148af4e4b03dec8248bf02

Moore winning by double digits is a real possibility again. The God Emperor of Alabama has spoken.

lmao

I don't see how IceSpear spamming the exact same comments (almost always some variation of "Moore's gonna win cause Alabama lmao") isn't trolling.

I can tell you're new here. My posts about Moore's inevitability don't even hold a candle to my posts on Hillary's inevitability in the primary.

Before I created an account, I'd been lurking for 2.5 years or so... I tried not to pay attention to really annoying posters back then.

You might want to go back to lurking after your implosion on the FC board.

I beg to differ. I'm basically like a penis, no matter how many times you beat me down, I will always stand right back up.

[Santander]

What in the literal f**k? Can we please get rid of him already?

[JA]

What in the literal f**k? Can we please get rid of him already?

No way! He's so damn weird and creepy that I actually find him amusing.

[Sprouts Farmers Market ✘]

Ignorance can be amusing. Creepiness is discomforting and always unwelcome. I would hope our community can take a stand against that.

[Antonio the Sixth]

What in the literal f**k? Can we please get rid of him already?

I can't believe I agree with Santander on something. Bring down the ban hammer.

[America's Sweetheart ❤/𝕿𝖍𝖊 𝕭𝖔𝖔𝖙𝖞 𝖂𝖆𝖗𝖗𝖎𝖔𝖗]

What in the literal f**k? Can we please get rid of him already?

I can't believe I agree with Santander on something. Bring down the ban hammer.

Making that one crappy joke is the only thing I've ever done on Atlas that was even remotely bannable. I try to be serious and post thoughtful comments.

[AtorBoltox]

Some observations from a Russian person, who spent part of his life in US.....

1. I hate Roy Moore. And even not because of the last scandal (which, of course, must be carefully investigated, and, if supported by FACTS (not words) - all neccessary measures against him must be taken, American law contains all, what's needed, for that), but more so because of his generally ultraextreme positions on a lot of issues (i generally hate all extremists, be them "right" or "left"). But i still think he will be elected, albeit narrowly. The accusations came too early, they will not fade completely, but they will subside enough to give him win in really conservative Albama. As i also said - too many Alabama's Republicans and Indies will be brought back by 100% pro-choice position of Jones. In the end it will outweigh...

2. While i hate Roy Moore - i have no respect for his women accusers, who charge him with anything (from inapproprieties to crimes) NOW, 20-30 years after everything happened. I would respect them a lot if they would do that immediately after what happened, or, at least, soon enough after that, but 20-30 years later? One can't NOT to think that it was simply an appropriate moment to get a revenge (and, may be, considerable material compensation) - and nothing more. There is a very old and admittedly - very sexist - Russian anecdote about 80-years old woman crying "rape" on city street.. I will not quote it here, but most of you will wasily guess an idea.

3. While i (and almost all people in Russia) fully support a principle of political and economical equality between genders , most people here (including vast majority of women) have no other word then "crazies" about US feminist movement, which, seemingly, more conserned about why "professor" is a "masculine"  word, and how to call woman professor "genderly correct", then about these above mentioned  problems of political and economic equality. And, yes, vast majority of Russian woman (there are some ultrafeminists too, but - not many) want men's attention (i would even say - frequently crave for that). And yes - they want to get married, say "thank you!" when man gives them way in transport, or when he pays for BOTH in restaurants.  And i agree with them - there is nothing humiliating in that. Woman in Russia can (legitimately) call man "a fool" if he tries to slap her ass, or even - slap him in the face, but i  don't think about anything else possible, and, surely, it wouldn't be a first page news in Russian press for weeks. For good or for bad - feel the difference. But i never saw so frightened (or even "terrorized") by feminist movement men in Russia as i saw in the West.....

We're getting to the point where every post in the Alabama senate thread belongs here

[they don't love you like i love you]

People who don't think Ellison would do well in Minnesota miss that the Minnesota was a state that was overwhelmingly for Bernie.

[publicunofficial]

What in the literal f**k? Can we please get rid of him already?

No way! He's so damn weird and creepy that I actually find him amusing.

Strong disagree. He's both a creep AND more unforgivable, forcing his own meme.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Wow, I support the President’s decision to turn WV into a Chinese vassal state. Look out for Mandarin-speaking hicks in 10-20 years.

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

Please, do tell what you consider to be "REAL" harassment.

Roy Moore, Donald Trump, Bill Cosby, Harvey Weinstein, etc.

Not what we have heard about Al Franken.

Playfully grabbing someone's ass (who is not someone that you employ or hold any other type of power over): Not harassment.

Continually grabbing that person's ass after you have been told not to do it, or grabbing someone's ass you you hold some king of power over: Harassment.

Please be advised that "not" labelling something harassment, doesn't mean that said behaviour is condoned.

[Kingpoleon]

*Absurd and Ignorant One-Liners

Supporting an immoral ideology is a grave moral failing. To claim otherwise means to be fundamentally unserious about one's political beliefs.

Of course, everyone has their moral failings and we shouldn't be too quick to judge people for them, but I thought "terrible person" was pretty widely accepted forum hyperbole for someone who does something that's clearly bad and is unrepentant about it.

So, to be clear, if I regularly volunteer at homeless shelters and donate a large portion of my income to charity, but I oppose welfare legislation, then I’m a terrible person?

Yes, actually

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

*Absurd and Ignorant One-Liners

Supporting an immoral ideology is a grave moral failing. To claim otherwise means to be fundamentally unserious about one's political beliefs.

Of course, everyone has their moral failings and we shouldn't be too quick to judge people for them, but I thought "terrible person" was pretty widely accepted forum hyperbole for someone who does something that's clearly bad and is unrepentant about it.

So, to be clear, if I regularly volunteer at homeless shelters and donate a large portion of my income to charity, but I oppose welfare legislation, then I’m a terrible person?

Yes, actually

[they don't love you like i love you]

This is an awful idea because somebody can fail high school for any number of reasons, but that said I'd be in favor of being required to pass, or at the very least attend, some sort of civics class before being allowed to register.

[they don't love you like i love you]

If Frankenstein goes....they should appoint that female Somali Muslim state legislator...just to see GOP heads explode

[junior chįmp]

If Frankenstein goes....they should appoint that female Somali Muslim state legislator...just to see GOP heads explode

Huh....I was being serious

[they don't love you like i love you]

If Frankenstein goes....they should appoint that female Somali Muslim state legislator...just to see GOP heads explode

Huh....I was being serious

Exactly, so you had no reason to make that suggestion over several far more qualified and electorally viable candidates other than the liberal equivalent of "Trump is so awesome because THE LIBTARDS ARE TRIGGERED LOLZ"

[junior chįmp]

If Frankenstein goes....they should appoint that female Somali Muslim state legislator...just to see GOP heads explode

Huh....I was being serious

Exactly, so you had no reason to make that suggestion over several far more qualified and electorally viable candidates other than the liberal equivalent of "Trump is so awesome because THE LIBTARDS ARE TRIGGERED LOLZ"

Listen ere...calm down. Now that you are calm...think straight....the very opposite wins elections you stiff. Look at the VA HoD races

[they don't love you like i love you]

Uh....what? The VA HoD races were won by a clear message and well targeted and organized campaign, not by trolling tactics.

[junior chįmp]

Uh....what? The VA HoD races were won by a clear message and well targeted and organized campaign, not by trolling tactics.

I think your big brain is missing the point

Those least likely to win are now most likely

[Since I'm the mad scientist proclaimed by myself]

I would also state that the idea that kids are sent to such programs just because they are "LGBT" is a canard and a copout. 

Parents are responsible for their childrens' sexual behavior.  What that means, quite honestly, is that teenagers under 18 aren't supposed to be having sex.  Any kind of sex.  Period.  Parents are responsible to control the sexual acting out of their teenagers, period. 

This may come as a shock to millenials, but that's the way it is.  Parents are responsible to curb their childrens' sexual activity.  I will say this:  If a teen is acting out sexually, and the only way to get that teen to stop is to sent him to a facility such as what is talked about in these articles, and the parents have the means to do so, then consider that what it is. 

Is the cure worse than the disease here?  Lots of folks complain about what they went through with medical procedures.  They didn't like the doctor or the hospital or the side effects of the meds, etc.  That they say they'd have been better off without the treatment is not necessarily so.

My daughter-in-law lives with the son I'm talking about, with us, and with our son, who was HER son that we adopted when their lives went sideways.  One of the conditions of her living with us is that she comply with her meds, which she's always bitching about.  Yes, her meds have side effects, but so does smoking spice, and Cannabis Psychosis is a real thing.  Yes, a psychotropic med may have contributed to seizures she suffers from, but what about the secret cocaine use that my son disclosed was a part of her life in past years?  (Shhhhhhhh.)  Her lot in life is not pleasant, but what she hates has kept her alive and kept her from not attempting suicide. 

Life, and its events, occur in a context.

I don't condone this sort of thing, but I will assure you that much of this stuff (whose legality is dubious) is a desperate measure taken (quite often) by desperate parents.

I have been a parent of a "troubled teen" (drugs, alcohol, and crime).  Aside from my concern for his life (he would have died of liver failure at 15 from drinking "shroom juice"), parents in our position have real concerns.  One is the concern for the civil liability we face for the actions of out-of-control teens.  We're on the hook for every stupid thing they do until they turn 18.  The other is concern for the rest of the family, especially when there are other kids at home; we are responsible for the harm the out-of-control sibling inflcts on other kids in the house.

Out of curiosity (sorry to hear about such  a non-ideal situation w/ your son) how was that resolved? Did you have him go to a troubled teen center?

No, I did not.  My wife and I didn't have that kind of money.  I would have been open to something like these programs if money were no object.

Our son was addicted to drugs, non-compliant with counseling, acting out in school to where I had him drop out before he was expelled, and outside of our control to where we were not able to stop him from his worst behaviors (and we tried), but still liable for his foolish actions while he was under 18.  And, yes, we went after him when he went out, got in between him and his criminal friends, worked with the school (knowing their whole goal was to kick him out) and even trying to get him into residential treatment. 

Here's the little kicker:  Unless your teenager is either (A) ordered by juvenile probation to a residential program, or (B) involuntarily committed by a court order to a mental health/substance abuse facility, a teenager, even one who is appropriate for treatment can give the middle finger to all concerned and refuse to enter treatment.  This is true even of Juvenile Probation programs; they can violate your kid, but the havoc between the violation report and actually re-taking the teenager can be limitless.  The law heaps responsibility on parents, but it provides them with amazingly few means to deal with situations gone sideways, and gives teens unbelievable "rights" to refuse interventions.

While I am skeptical of many of the treatment methods described in this articles, I also believe that many of the former inpatients of these programs aren't pure victims; they were teenagers who became beyond the control of their parents and who posed real problems for their parents.  Some of these teenagers acted in ways to where there was NEVER any kind of real peace in the home.  I know what that's about.  I remember the arguments I had with my wife where I would have to tell her to stop kidding herself.  Indeed,  my son didn't get any kind of recovery until, after being arrested as an adult, I persuaded the Court to require him to complete an inpatient program.  Once there, I insisted he go out of state to a long-term re-entry facility (which he hated at the time; he hooked up with some relapse-bound female in intensive treatment). 

I never seem to see these folks who have been sent, involuntarily, to these facilities, express any remorse for their behaviors that kept their homes in turmoil.  They paint a picture of parents who didn't care about them, magnified their misdeeds, were only interested in themselves, and presided over family dysfunction, and that may be true, but their own behavior was, very often, either the root of the dysfunction, or the catalyst that kept it going and intensifying.  Kids die in these programs, that's true, but kids die because they persuaded their parents to give them another chance to avoid a residential setting, and they spend the chance overdosing on drugs, driving drunk, etc.  Parents get most of the blame for what these kids do, and it's true that parents are responsible for kids until their 18, but teenagers are autonomous human beings that make decisions and act on them.  They have wills of their own and can carry their will out to varying extents. 

Parents are under a real gun to control their teenagers' behaviors, but many lack the effective resources to do so.  That rich parents have those resources and go to these extremes, I'm not going to criticize.  And I WOULD like to see some teen product of such a program actually voice some remorse for the damage THEY inflicted on their family, instead of whining about how their parents "threw them away", etc.  Not taking responsibility for one's own actions is a habit that can sometimes last a lifetime, if enabled enough.

This man should not be a parent.

[Atlas Has Shrugged]

I would also state that the idea that kids are sent to such programs just because they are "LGBT" is a canard and a copout. 

Parents are responsible for their childrens' sexual behavior.  What that means, quite honestly, is that teenagers under 18 aren't supposed to be having sex.  Any kind of sex.  Period.  Parents are responsible to control the sexual acting out of their teenagers, period. 

This may come as a shock to millenials, but that's the way it is.  Parents are responsible to curb their childrens' sexual activity.  I will say this:  If a teen is acting out sexually, and the only way to get that teen to stop is to sent him to a facility such as what is talked about in these articles, and the parents have the means to do so, then consider that what it is. 

Is the cure worse than the disease here?  Lots of folks complain about what they went through with medical procedures.  They didn't like the doctor or the hospital or the side effects of the meds, etc.  That they say they'd have been better off without the treatment is not necessarily so.

My daughter-in-law lives with the son I'm talking about, with us, and with our son, who was HER son that we adopted when their lives went sideways.  One of the conditions of her living with us is that she comply with her meds, which she's always bitching about.  Yes, her meds have side effects, but so does smoking spice, and Cannabis Psychosis is a real thing.  Yes, a psychotropic med may have contributed to seizures she suffers from, but what about the secret cocaine use that my son disclosed was a part of her life in past years?  (Shhhhhhhh.)  Her lot in life is not pleasant, but what she hates has kept her alive and kept her from not attempting suicide. 

Life, and its events, occur in a context.

I don't condone this sort of thing, but I will assure you that much of this stuff (whose legality is dubious) is a desperate measure taken (quite often) by desperate parents.

I have been a parent of a "troubled teen" (drugs, alcohol, and crime).  Aside from my concern for his life (he would have died of liver failure at 15 from drinking "shroom juice"), parents in our position have real concerns.  One is the concern for the civil liability we face for the actions of out-of-control teens.  We're on the hook for every stupid thing they do until they turn 18.  The other is concern for the rest of the family, especially when there are other kids at home; we are responsible for the harm the out-of-control sibling inflcts on other kids in the house.

Out of curiosity (sorry to hear about such  a non-ideal situation w/ your son) how was that resolved? Did you have him go to a troubled teen center?

No, I did not.  My wife and I didn't have that kind of money.  I would have been open to something like these programs if money were no object.

Our son was addicted to drugs, non-compliant with counseling, acting out in school to where I had him drop out before he was expelled, and outside of our control to where we were not able to stop him from his worst behaviors (and we tried), but still liable for his foolish actions while he was under 18.  And, yes, we went after him when he went out, got in between him and his criminal friends, worked with the school (knowing their whole goal was to kick him out) and even trying to get him into residential treatment. 

Here's the little kicker:  Unless your teenager is either (A) ordered by juvenile probation to a residential program, or (B) involuntarily committed by a court order to a mental health/substance abuse facility, a teenager, even one who is appropriate for treatment can give the middle finger to all concerned and refuse to enter treatment.  This is true even of Juvenile Probation programs; they can violate your kid, but the havoc between the violation report and actually re-taking the teenager can be limitless.  The law heaps responsibility on parents, but it provides them with amazingly few means to deal with situations gone sideways, and gives teens unbelievable "rights" to refuse interventions.

While I am skeptical of many of the treatment methods described in this articles, I also believe that many of the former inpatients of these programs aren't pure victims; they were teenagers who became beyond the control of their parents and who posed real problems for their parents.  Some of these teenagers acted in ways to where there was NEVER any kind of real peace in the home.  I know what that's about.  I remember the arguments I had with my wife where I would have to tell her to stop kidding herself.  Indeed,  my son didn't get any kind of recovery until, after being arrested as an adult, I persuaded the Court to require him to complete an inpatient program.  Once there, I insisted he go out of state to a long-term re-entry facility (which he hated at the time; he hooked up with some relapse-bound female in intensive treatment). 

I never seem to see these folks who have been sent, involuntarily, to these facilities, express any remorse for their behaviors that kept their homes in turmoil.  They paint a picture of parents who didn't care about them, magnified their misdeeds, were only interested in themselves, and presided over family dysfunction, and that may be true, but their own behavior was, very often, either the root of the dysfunction, or the catalyst that kept it going and intensifying.  Kids die in these programs, that's true, but kids die because they persuaded their parents to give them another chance to avoid a residential setting, and they spend the chance overdosing on drugs, driving drunk, etc.  Parents get most of the blame for what these kids do, and it's true that parents are responsible for kids until their 18, but teenagers are autonomous human beings that make decisions and act on them.  They have wills of their own and can carry their will out to varying extents. 

Parents are under a real gun to control their teenagers' behaviors, but many lack the effective resources to do so.  That rich parents have those resources and go to these extremes, I'm not going to criticize.  And I WOULD like to see some teen product of such a program actually voice some remorse for the damage THEY inflicted on their family, instead of whining about how their parents "threw them away", etc.  Not taking responsibility for one's own actions is a habit that can sometimes last a lifetime, if enabled enough.

This man should not be a parent.

At least he'll have the opportunity to, well you know, actually love and be loved enough to produce a child . Can't say that about you nor can I?