Does this mean I am a bigot?

Go Coogs' · Post by **Go Coogs'** » Thu Oct 16, 2014 6:04 pm

Screw_Michigan wrote:She's a cum dumpster in general. Would lack of tatts make her any less of a semen receptacle?

So you wouldn't?

pfft...faggot.

Screw_Michigan · Post by **Screw_Michigan** » Thu Oct 16, 2014 6:20 pm

When did I say whether I would or wouldn't?

I know what I certainly wouldn't do, that's fuck your heifer wife.

Jay in Phoenix · Post by **Jay in Phoenix** » Thu Oct 16, 2014 9:24 pm

Screw_Michigan wrote:I don't have any ink, cunt cookies, and toughen up your vagina. This is a smack board, remember? Also, I agree with Left Seater about visible tatts. GF wants to get one on her forearm or wrist, I actively discourage her against it.

Now go fuck yourself.

For someone who isn't inked, you sure are defensive about it.

As well, we are all aware that this is a smack board, or at least, something that sometimes resembles the concept. When you actually run some smack, let us know. In the meantime, figure out your stance on this and pick a side already. You say women can compliment their appearance by wearing tattoos, dependent upon how attractive they already are, yet you actively discourage your GF from getting one.

Huh?

Sounds like that means your GF is already pig ugly and you don't want to make your suet slurping sow even worse.

R-Jack · Post by **R-Jack** » Thu Oct 16, 2014 10:49 pm

Screw_Michigan wrote: If she's unattractive, the ink makes her even more unattractive.

Fixed that for me.

I look at the women with tats thing like Joe Flacco's contract year. You really are betting on yourself on the hotness scale. If you are, you're going to be just fine. If not it's all bad, because an ugly chick with tats approaches "even Dinsdale will pass" territory.

poptart · Post by **poptart** » Fri Oct 17, 2014 5:29 am

If you took 10 random tatted women and put 'em in a tug of war contest with 10 non-tatted women, I would bet on the tatted women.

It's not necessary to explore further than this.

DiT · Post by **DiT** » Sat Oct 18, 2014 11:36 am

poptart wrote:If you took 10 random tatted women and put 'em in a tug of war contest with 10 non-tatted women, I would bet on the tatted women.

It's not necessary to explore further than this.

They could play tug of war with my cock and I would not be biased as to wear I blasted my frothy load.

Felix · Post by **Felix** » Sat Oct 18, 2014 3:38 pm

smackaholic wrote: memo to decent muzzies: we will continue to look at you with a suspect eye until you unfukk your community. the only ones that can stamp out muzzie shitbag terrorist activities are muzzies themselves. so far, you've done a pretty bad job at it.

the most reasoned statement within this thread

btw, have you ever seen what was formerly a good looking tatted up woman who's hit the age of 50?

to me this just screams "skeezer"

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 4:14 pm

Screw_Michigan wrote:
KC Scott wrote: Maybe you've forgot the Marathon Bombers, the Green Nissan Pathfinder in Times Square or Nidal Hasan, but I haven't
I don't know if you forgot the Oklahoma City bombing, but I haven't.

The OKC bombing didn't have fuck to do with religion, you brainless shit bag.

Dr. McCoy · Post by **Dr. McCoy** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 5:09 pm

mvscal wrote:The OKC bombing didn't have fuck to do with religion, you brainless shit bag.

jiminphilly · Post by **jiminphilly** » Mon Oct 20, 2014 8:20 pm

Shlomart Ben Yisrael wrote:...and by my people, I mean Canadians!

I hung out with some Canadians last week while in Vancouver. They're good people. Especially the female ones.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Tue Oct 21, 2014 1:59 pm

Screw_Michigan wrote: GF wants to get one on her forearm or wrist, I actively discourage her against it.

Is that before or after she punches you in the face and drags your bitch ass off to another T. Hanksgiving?

Screw_Michigan · Post by **Screw_Michigan** » Tue Oct 21, 2014 3:39 pm

It's after Iowa State proves you as wrong as you were about the 2006 midterms. Suck on that, bitch.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Tue Oct 21, 2014 3:41 pm

Iowa State lost, dumbfuck.

Screw_Michigan · Post by **Screw_Michigan** » Tue Oct 21, 2014 3:43 pm

mvscal wrote:Iowa State lost, dumbfuck.

You thought their "popgun" offense would be no match for Texas' "top 20" defense. Try again, idiot.

mvscal · Post by **mvscal** » Tue Oct 21, 2014 4:01 pm

Obviously it wasn't...hence the scoreboard. That wasn't even the point, you fucking idiot.

If the Texas teams have shown us one thing the last three years it is that their players are mentally weak and easily demoralized. I think after double ass kickings and all the turmoil between the new staff and Mack's players that this Texas team is going to fold like a lawn chair.

Didn't happen.

Derron · Post by **Derron** » Tue Oct 21, 2014 4:07 pm

Just saying...

Screw_Michigan · Post by **Screw_Michigan** » Tue Oct 21, 2014 4:22 pm

mvscal wrote:Obviously it wasn't...hence the scoreboard. That wasn't even the point, you fucking idiot.

If the Texas teams have shown us one thing the last three years it is that their players are mentally weak and easily demoralized. I think after double ass kickings and all the turmoil between the new staff and Mack's players that this Texas team is going to fold like a lawn chair.
Didn't happen.

Sure, that's like picking a team to win but not cover. "See, they won, but didn't cover, so I was right!"

T1B

Does this mean I am a bigot?

Re: Does this mean I am a bigot?

Re: Does this mean I am a bigot?

Re: Does this mean I am a bigot?

Re: Does this mean I am a bigot?

Re: Does this mean I am a bigot?

Re: Does this mean I am a bigot?

Re: Does this mean I am a bigot?

Re: Does this mean I am a bigot?

Re: Does this mean I am a bigot?

Re: Does this mean I am a bigot?

Re: Does this mean I am a bigot?

Re: Does this mean I am a bigot?

Re: Does this mean I am a bigot?

Re: Does this mean I am a bigot?

Re: Does this mean I am a bigot?

Re: Does this mean I am a bigot?

Re: Does this mean I am a bigot?