KXCD has made the joke that Tommy Wiseau is actually D.B Cooper, but it got me thinking...

this

...

2011 called, they want their word back

How do i answer?
i want to get back

isn't that guy a "lolbertarian" american right-wing idiot who thinks that STEM is all that matters in life? if you knew those guys in college you'll know how easy they are to hate

I find that most conservatives literally can't grasp the concept of Egalitarianism, they think it means "force everyone to be equal" like in Harrison Bergeron [which they have never read, sorry this reference went over their heads] rather than "equal protection under law & equal opportunities". Why are they so fucking stupid? They can't understand a concept that was invented centuries ago.

no he's a hillary

No such a thing exists.

Fuck, that's some top-tier white knight cringe.

why you gotta ruin a god tier song by associating it with this?

Someone needs to send this faggot that screencap explaining what tits or gtfo really means. To prevent attention whoring sluts from trying to win their girl points back online– teehee i'm a girl, here's what I think, pay attention to me.

cuck

It was a much simpler time, and bullying bronies was fun too

cooper died, didn't you watch unsolved mysteries? that's the whole running joke of twin peaks.

Sorry. Is this better?

much better, thanks

Yeah, in all honesty I agree that's the one thing I'd take back. At least back then it was anons vs. anons and the occasional NORP. Nowadays it's anons and awoken NORPs vs. the elite and brainwashed NORPs who believe we're dangerous women-hating thugs. The internet stopped being fun once GG got co-opted by the very people we feared would co-opt it.

No problem.

Pretty sure it's because everything women do centers on social climbing. What would they want with an anonymous imageboard? Unless it's a board like /soc/ that they flock to to flash their tits and get compliments.

Pretty easy to be a woman on imageboard. I just don't admit my sex on the site. duh

The reason Egalitarianism is dumb is because ensuring equal opportunity does not produce equal results. So the same people who sperg out about "muh equality" enough to champion Egalitarianism begin tampering with their definitions until it eventually does become "force everyone to be equal." If individuals are not equal, why is equal treatment necessary at all? What's wrong with heirarchy?

This is the saddest white knight shit I've seen.
"Tits or GTFO" isn't a joke. The point is usually there's no reason to bring attention to the fact that you're a woman other than for the purpose of bringing attention to yourself.

I was a pussy most of the way through high school, thirty as fuck beta. I realised the chicks were retarded, stopped pining and started treating them like dumb bitches. The cliché is real. Once they get over the initial shock of me not responding to them like a loser, they wanted my attention, then they wanted my affection, and when I told them what they were doing wasn't good enough, and didn't treat them any better, they would literally do what I wanted when I wanted it.

Broads are simple as fuck. They know what they want, but are too afraid to admit it because they think they're meant to be STRONK WOMYN. But they aren't. They're holes for me to stick my dick in.

there's a reason the right-wing is known as the most cucked.

Don't respond to tripfags.

Remind me what exactly is fallacious about acknowledging a likely progression of cause to effect?

You're retarded, kys.

...

i'm convinced more each day that those crafty cucks slipped that one into the fallacy list when in fact it isnt a fallacy at all.

i'm just sad it took me so long to consider it.

Cringe bro

Slippery slope is a fallacy but most people on the left are retarded so ironically they use the fallacy fallaciously, saying shit like
>If we start putting more regulations on guns, this could' lead to the outright banning of guns
Is "slippery slope", when really it's not because the claim says it COULD happen, not that it WILL happen.

no reasoning adult would claim a likely sequence of events without there being some evidence for it. Whether or not it's a ridiculous claim is normally evident once you hear it. Its the difference between a child telling you some nonsense and someone saying " you know if you don't get any sleep you could wind up in an accident."

probability of any one occurrence is never 100% so the difference between could and will is equally meaningless, if we're being technical. The main issue ultimately is likelyhood. Being wishywashy on this isnt going to get us anywhere. i'm taking a stand, not that it will matter to most of these plebs but i'm going to explore this fully.

i guess guns are bad too?

I see so many married couples that seem to act like this. It's weird realizing how cliche women can be.

This is completely irrelevant relevant. There are many claims about the world that are rational, rather than empirical. Ex: In economics it's not possible to look at differences in policies between two countries to check which is the best, because there are allways many, many variables differing. Instead, you need economic models to interpret the differences in results.

Liberals also like to select one single difference between A and B, claim that that difference is vital, and use that as evidence that A will never lead to B. Ex:
The left and (((the left))) have no real values (even if they think they do) but only a psychological compulsion to tear down and denegrate everything holy and healthy. As soon as they manage to normalise homophilia, and transsexuality, they'll move on to paedophilia. I'd rather fight them on their current topics, than having to fight about paedophilia (and risk loosing) down the line.

where?

Fresh from Reddit I see.

...

things can be good
Fresh from Holla Forums I see.

I like the part where he's got a woman doing his bidding, expected to obey his every command.

Never thought about it that way, I wonder if anyone else pointed out that part of his virtue signalling?

Does the right really not understand why society tends to become more and more socially "progressive"? People like freedom, it's literally that simple. Stop being anti-freedom & people will stop hating your dumb asses.

Of course they are, they worship authority & can't think without blindly following orders. Facts are tough, aren't they?

right-wing kids seriously think "h-heh i can just decide it's not a fallacy because i said so, i can just alter reality with my whims to win this argument on the internet, heh everyone but me is btfo". no wonder they all love trump so much, they're psycho solipsists like him…

There is such a thing as fallacy-fallacy, where the opposing argument relies too much on deconstructing the other arguments logical fallacies than addressing the points. In fact, in real debate circles, fallacies are NOT taboo arguments, but rather, terminology to quickly refer to a style of argument. There is nothing wrong with an appeal to emotion IF you can pull it off without getting noticed.

Of course, wannabe intellectuals just realized "lol i can call out their phallucees and never actually have to make a real argument"

egalitarianism means that you have to bake faggot wedding cakes lmfao

...

How intellectually dishonest can you get? Liberals are literally rioting because people are using their freedoms to do and think things they don't personally like. There's a small section of conservatives that hate anyone not thinking the same as them, and even though they own all the guns in the U.S, they don't go around the country beating people. Even the Phelps cult doesn't engage in violence. Get back to reality.

kill yourself you fucking commie scum

git a load of this debate club faggot you need an emotional wedgie-flushie combo ya faggot lmao your dad is gay

my dog will kill and rape you