Login or register


Last status update:
Personal Info
Gender: male
Age: 24
Date Signed Up:4/12/2011
Last Login:5/31/2016
FunnyJunk Career Stats
Comment Ranking:#1688
Highest Content Rank:#5111
Highest Comment Rank:#926
Content Thumbs: 660 total,  1005 ,  345
Comment Thumbs: 11598 total,  14031 ,  2433
Content Level Progress: 90% (9/10)
Level 65 Content: FJ Cultist → Level 66 Content: FJ Cultist
Comment Level Progress: 67% (67/100)
Level 300 Comments: Lord Of Laughs → Level 301 Comments: Lord Of Laughs
Content Views:28159
Times Content Favorited:33 times
Total Comments Made:3037
FJ Points:11010
Favorite Tags: fuck (2) | You (2)
Fuck Unova. I'm still in Johto, having a blast with my Phanpy.

Text Posts

First2[ 12 ]

latest user's comments

#59 - Monsteranchergenki  [+] (7 new replies) 05/31/2016 on funnyjunk 0
User avatar
#60 - moviefuckthewhat (05/31/2016) [-]
And I have multiple accounts...
#61 - garbagebin (05/31/2016) [-]
for shitposting.
#62 - norokthur (05/31/2016) [-]
And I've know about funnyjunk...
User avatar
#63 - msmurielpfinster (05/31/2016) [-]
since it was yellow.
#64 - monsteranchergenki (05/31/2016) [-]
In conclusion Mr. lotengo

Go fuck yourself.
User avatar
#66 - lotengo (05/31/2016) [-]
thats quite sad.
#67 - monsteranchergenki (05/31/2016) [-]
#26 - Honestly? It's because the movie has a classic plot t… 05/13/2016 on TPB 0
#93 - Cuckolding is a fetishization of your own emasculation. … 05/12/2016 on Master +3
#13 - When I was a kid I kept my gameboy and my favorite games with … 05/11/2016 on nuts +2
#49 - I know you presented it as a joke... ...But it's 100%…  [+] (9 new replies) 05/11/2016 on GERMONEY IS WAKING UP +78
#141 - Jowi (05/11/2016) [-]
I mean not to be that guy but the migrant level is 1%
#164 - weepeep (05/12/2016) [-]
1% of 80 million is alot
#165 - Jowi (05/12/2016) [-]
It is a lot of people but it is not 1/3 of the countries population
#166 - weepeep (05/12/2016) [-]
Still alot of migrants
#168 - Jowi (05/12/2016) [-]
Yeah but the original comment stated, as a joke, that a 3rd of the population were the migrants. The comment I replied to said the statement was "100% accurate" which it wasn't
User avatar
#265 - grumpygrandpa (05/13/2016) [-]
Still a lot
#169 - weepeep (05/12/2016) [-]
Ok i admit im wrong
User avatar
#177 - larrisawsome (05/12/2016) [-]
Not to throw salt in the wound, but only EU citizens have the right to vote in Germany, so migrants can't vote. The entire premise was false to begin with.
User avatar
#213 - hetzerdk (05/12/2016) [-]
Eh, i hope its just german citizens that can vote in Germany.
#53 - Skyrim belongs to the Nords! Go back to Morrowind, Mi… 05/11/2016 on Fuck Off Elf Niggers Were Full +3
#80 - Dance thread 05/11/2016 on meanwhile 0
#70 - That doesn't make him a racist though. That just make…  [+] (14 new replies) 05/11/2016 on Guy spits on Trump supporter 0
#73 - migueldecervantes (05/11/2016) [-]
The best course of action for the world, and so for America, would be to take in some refugees but do it in a systematic way (no one without a document, extensive screenings, etc.).

While banning Muslim immigration is such a dumb move that even O'Reilly understood that and took a stance against Trump on the issue.

A stupid person's reaction to any tragedy is to categorize the people who did it, assign them to a group, and hate said group with the fervor of a true ultra-nationalist. This is a natural tendency and a biologically favorable one in the pleistocene, but since we are a bit more philosophically evolved today than we were two hundred thousand years ago, it might be a good idea to evaluate these issues with more scrutiny.
User avatar
#74 - greyhoundfd (05/11/2016) [-]
He literally never said he was going to ban immigration by Muslims. He said he was going to place temporary restrictions in immigration from Syria until they could confirm how effective the current vetting system was.
#75 - anon (05/11/2016) [-]
You should probably unblock me if you want to have a conversation about this (not that most ultra-nationalists are generally interested in conversations that challenge their worldviews...).

If “total and complete shutdown of Muslims entering the United States until our country's representatives can figure out what is going on" equals "temporary restrictions from Syria" in your view, then I don't think we have much to discuss.



Will you also be claiming that he never vaguely endorsed a database of Muslims in our country?


User avatar
#76 - greyhoundfd (05/11/2016) [-]
Neither of those articles contain clips of Trump making this declaration nor quotes of him directly stating it. They have vague quotes, and references to written statements by his campaign, not by him directly. Neither of these two things can be said to directly reflect his views.

Also, if you want me to unblock you, implying that I am a bigot in your very first sentence is a bad plan. Especially when the reason I blocked you in the first place was because you were implying that I and people who agreed with me were bigots Nevertheless, I will unblock you for the moment. Don't act like a jackass please.
User avatar
#79 - greyhoundfd (05/11/2016) [-]
Then we're both wrong. He's neither stating that it would only be Syria as I said, nor stating that it would be a permanent measure as you're saying. What he's saying is that all Muslim immigration would be temporarily suspended until the vetting process was fixed. This isn't politically correct, and I think it's an extreme measure, but to be frank we've seen him tone down a lot of his opinions, so it wouldn't surprise me if he rolls back this one as well. I certainly wouldn't describe it as some nutjob racist maneuver, especially considering that many of these Muslims are coming from secondary destinations in countries where they are already safe. The US is not directly extracting anyone from Syria, it's simply sharing the burden of refugee movements to Turkey and Greece. This would basically be just some family getting told "Look, we need you to stay put in this refugee camp while we make sure we're doing everything right here."

#88 - migueldecervantes (05/13/2016) [-]
I assume you won't be responding anymore, and certainly not in the mature way a respectful person would. Something like "I was wrong. Thank you for teaching me something I didn't know."

Actually, I have a feeling I'll be getting blocked soon for "being a jackass"--while my being right in our discussion will be "completely incidental" to said blocking...
User avatar
#89 - greyhoundfd (05/13/2016) [-]
Oh right, I remember why I blocked you now. I won't give you the satisfaction of doing it again, but if you think that gloating and harassing other people is a way to make them accept what you have to say, you're going to find yourself a bitter and lonely old man at the end of your life.
#90 - migueldecervantes (05/13/2016) [-]
You... You think people like being censored...?

You are fucking insane, however, if you think that having one follow up comment almost two days after a debate to which I didn't receive an answer.

You are too proud to admit that you are wrong because 1) you were somehow convinced in the past that you were intelligent, and 2) because you are still under the naive impression that being intelligent is about not being wrong.

You will do anything to not admit that you are the only one in this discussion that was wrong, and the defense mechanisms you employ range from confabulating some kind of phony way in which I could be construed as being wrong and outright refusal to comment on it (punctuated by an unwarranted accusation of harassment and the good old "you make me sad because you'll be miserable in your life because you want me to admit that I was wrong").

It is insane, because--and I'm being 100% genuine right now--you are the who has the highest discrepancy between his own perceived and actual intelligence. I can definitely feel that you think you are extremely intelligent, and yet exposing you to your stupidity would destroy your morale forever.

Not that I would be able to expose it to you, anyway...

I never know what to do with dumb cunts like you. If I tell you the truth, you censor me; and if I try to be polite in an argument but end up being right, you'll try to block it out of your memory, and then if I remind you, you'll accuse me of harassment.

Stupid people have the best defense mechanisms.
User avatar
#93 - greyhoundfd (05/13/2016) [-]
You want to know why you're wrong? It's because you are entirely incapable of reading between the lines. You're very good at feigning it, because what you do is construct a narrative based on how you presume I'm thinking, then you accuse me of that incorrect hypothesis and insult me based on it. This is how you argue, and I was sick of it before and I'm sick of it now, because it's impossible to refute. Not because it's correct, but in the same way that religion cannot be refuted: the evidence, regardless of how correct the hypothesis is, comes from your own personal feelings and unrelated experiences, so you take any attack on your opinions as an attack on the validity of your experiences, and try to respond in kind. When I say you're incorrect, you think I'm insulting your intelligence, so you project and accuse me of being angry that my intelligence is being insulted. Do you think I'm autistic? I have to start research lab work in a week, I don't have time to care about random people on the internet.

And God forbid I ever exaggerate, understate, or use sarcasm in my arguments: it's utterly lost on people like you. Forget metaphor, I can't even be snarky around people like you without falling flat.

Where you're also wrong is that I feel exactly 0 shame in admitting that I'm incorrect. Hell, when something goes wrong I'm usually the first one to accept blame, even when it's blatantly obvious that it wasn't me. But I know when I'm right, and when I have nothing to lose by fighting I'm not going to cave in just because the other guy got mad enough. And god forbid you call me the immature one. Your first instinct in this argument was to call those who disagreed with you morons, bigots, and ultra-nationalists. When I admitted that I was wrong but also pointed out areas where you too were incorrect, you called me ignorant for having the audacity to ever disagree with you.

You seem to think that everyone else on the internet sits around in the dark wringing their hands in anticipation of your next comment. Responding to people on FJ is what I do when I'm thinking through a maneuver in Stellaris or Victoria II, it's not a hobby, and I really don't care about anyone on here. The same goes for basically everyone else. Unless they're sad sacks they don't care about me, or you, or anyone.

Sorry to pop your ego, but you could get hit by a bus tomorrow and it would make no difference in the lives of anyone else on here unless they knew you personally. Stop acting like you're some kind of big cheese.
#94 - migueldecervantes (05/13/2016) [-]
"You're very good at feigning it" vs "construct a narrative based on how you presume I'm thinking"
"very good at feigning it" vs "based on how you presume I'm thinking"
"feigning it" vs "how you presume I'm thinking"
"feigning" vs "thinking"

Good job. At this point, does your insane hypocrisy even surprise you...?

"Not because it's correct, but in the same way that religion cannot be refuted"

What the hell are you talking about? The only thing I want you to admit is that you were wrong when you said that Donald Trump never proposed a complete ban on Muslim travel and immigration into the USA. You deflected it by saying that "we were both wrong" since I had claimed it would be a "permanent ban" which I never did.

That's all.

"And God forbid I ever exaggerate, understate, or use sarcasm in my arguments"

Put your money where your mouth is on this one at least. Provide one instance of using exaggeration, understatement or sarcasm in our discussion.

Is "We were both wrong" an instance of sarcasm? Are you actually going to try to dig yourself out of this one by claiming you were trolling?

"But I know when I'm right,"

So Trump never did declare a ban on Muslims... Or... Did he?

This discussion was very simple, and I feel like you are trying to complicate it in order to not feel the humiliation of intellectual defeat. Here is our discussion:

"Trump literally never said that."
"Yes. He did. *provides proof*"
"Proof is not good enough because it's not video." Fallacy #1
"Okay. *provides video proof*"
"Alright. I guess we were both right because you said the ban would be permanent."
"I never said that."
"Stop harassing me. You'll be miserable." Fallacy #2
"You should be wiser and admit that you were wrong."
"You are like religion. It's impossible to argue with you. I'm done with this." Fallacy #3

"you called me ignorant for having the audacity to ever disagree with you"

Quote me doing just that, please. It's very easy to say "You did that" and not give any proof, you know.

Again, you'll do anything not to admit you're wrong. "No, I'm not wrong because you think that everyone sits around in the dark wringing their hands blah blah blah" or 'No, I'm not wrong because against you no one can be correct because you're like religion".
I'm tired of this. I know you don't mean any ill; it's just that you are not very clever, and very unwise. So it's fine.

Have a good one.
#95 - greyhoundfd (05/13/2016) [-]
If you could see the tripe that you write...

Feel free to keep jerking yourself off onto a webpage, I'll reply if I feel like it, but I'm done with caring about anything you say.
#96 - migueldecervantes (05/13/2016) [-]
"I don't care about you or anything on this site"

"I'm done caring about anything you say"

I think we're done here.
#80 - migueldecervantes (05/11/2016) [-]
I never said it would be permanent, but please feel free to provide a quote.

And no, he's not saying that all Muslim immigration would be temporarily suspended. He never mentions "temporarily" either. It could be permanent, or it could be temporary. This is still uncertain. What is certain is that he calls for "complete shutdown on Muslim immigration".

"This isn't politically correct"

What does this have to do with anything? Be concise when you make your arguments, please.

"and I think it's an extreme measure, but to be frank we've seen him tone down a lot of his opinions, so it wouldn't surprise me if he rolls back this one as well"

Wishful thinking at its best. "I'm sure my dictator is actually very benevolent and cares deeply for me in his heart; all I have to do is submit more" is kind of the same mentality, which we have seen time and time again in history.

Before you lash out at me, this is a relevant analogy, not me calling Trump a "dictator".

"I certainly wouldn't describe it as some nutjob racist maneuver"

Great. Neither did I. However, the policy, despite not being a "racist nutjob maneuver", is still racist at its core. This is not about not letting some Canadian Muslim convert into his yearly vacation in Florida, it's about systematically discriminating against people of Semitic, Middle-Eastern ethnicity and location (maybe including Indonesia, but that would surprise me). That is the definition of racial discrimination, which is why an intake of genuine refugees is so difficult to obtain. People put their compassion for war victims aside as soon as a security threat, however objectively minor, is fed to them by their stupid leaders.

"especially considering that many of these Muslims are coming from secondary destinations in countries where they are already safe"

You don't understand how the crisis works. The camps in which these people are held are only moderately secure, and very lackluster in providing food and shelter for the influx of people. They were not expecting such a great number of refugees in the past years.

"The US is not directly extracting anyone from Syria"

How insightful. You've certainly done your research well...
#94 - So men everywhere just have to never stop jacking it so women …  [+] (1 new reply) 05/11/2016 on /r9k/ learns the truth +18
User avatar
#98 - tittylovin (05/11/2016) [-]
This works perfectly with the plan to coordinate boners

Patriarchy wins again.
#16 - That sounds like an improvement given the context... 05/11/2016 on /fa/ggot doesn't want a... +21