Spanking Leads To Child Aggression

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Ron wrote:

" krp" wrote in message
news:nq2sh.4674$AG6.2874@trnddc06...
"Ron" wrote in message
...

Whose rules Ron? Kane's THE GREAT GOD? Yours? Are you the Usenet
police?
You two do NOT get to dictate the rules. PERIOD! No matter HOW impressed
you two are with yourselves.
Kane told you the terms under which he would debate the subject with you.
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh! POOR BABY!



Compared to you ken, I am quite impressed with myself.
Apparently!!!
Life is made up of consequences kenny. Good and bad. Every decision you
make in life, tea or coffee, hot or cold cereal, turn left or turn right,
has a consequence. Every single decision kenny.

In this case you had a decision to make, abide by the rules that kane wished
or not. No one was twisting your arm, no one was threatening your life,
family, or home town, the only consequences that there were to the decision
was either he would debate you or he wouldn't. Simple, 'eh?

Obviously you didn't want to have to deal with rules (somehow I see that as
a main theme in your life). Fine by everyone here, no one said you had to.
And if you had left it at that there would have been no further
consequences. You just couldn't do that. Some personality flaw forced you
to make a big ****ing stink about the fact that kane wanted to debate the
subject with you but insisted on some boundaries. Boundaries that you felt
were unacceptable for some reason. And you could have left it at that, but
instead you decided to react like a 5 year old and obviously continue to do
so even to this post.

Having raised more than a few children in my time, I have seen this behavior
many times. Typically from a child of 5 to 6 years of age. My reaction to
this would normally be either a "time out" or a denial of privileges
depending on just how stuck the child is on himself. Infantile behavior
deserves nothing less.

In any case I cant impose a consequence on you, I can only make a decision
on how I am going to deal with you. SO, if you insist on acting like a 5
year old then I will choose to treat you like one. The other consequences
you are having to pay I have nothing to do with. Consequences like, a
totally trashed credibility (if its possible for you to have trashed your
own credibility any more than you already have), looking like a fool here
and in every news group that you post to, etc. Its time to grow up kenny,
and stop acting like a child. Your picture looks like an adult, you say you
run a business which is an adult activity, but here you let yourself devolve
to acting like a child. Imagine what the reaction will be of the client
that sees how you choose to behave here. I imagine they wont be a client
for long.

Grow the **** up kenny, its time.

Ron

Have you at your "consequences", Ron? ;-)
Odd, I thought he said, "In any case I cant impose a consequence on you."

Are you now claiming he said he was going to impose a consequence on you?

Keep exposing your STUPIDITY, Kane! ;-)

Can't answer the question, Liar?

And why are you running from the fact that that ken is an admitted liar,
just like you?

The only PROVEN liar here is you, Kane!

Still can't answer the question, Liar and coward?

And that he's a coward just like you that refuses to debate on the
facts, just like you?

The coward here is once again, YOU! You don't even have the nerve to
use your own name!

Go tell it to observer, fern, and the host of other butt buddies of
yours, dummy.

Doan

No, Doan, the only consequences to morally and ethically compromised
folks such as you is the exposure you create for yourselves nearly every
time you post.

Hihhi! Everytime I post, I EXPOSED you STUPID LIES!

Yeah, like claiming Straus ONLY said Baumrind's presentation represented
"excellent" research. R R R R R

Your contextual lies are becoming famous...or will, when I get through
with you.

Hihihi! If you want to know about quoting things out of context, ask Ron!

Well, he did a number on you when he caught you quoting again out of
context on the issue of foster parents being reported for abuse, and I
just recycled that for you to take another look at, just to remind you
of your lack of ethics.

Like it? Or are you going to defend posting other's comments out of
context as a valid and ethical debating tactic?

Doan

Or, you can dodge again, like you just tried to do, coward.

0:-

On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Ron wrote:

" krp" wrote in message
news:nq2sh.4674$AG6.2874@trnddc06...
"Ron" wrote in message
...

Whose rules Ron? Kane's THE GREAT GOD? Yours? Are you the Usenet
police?
You two do NOT get to dictate the rules. PERIOD! No matter HOW impressed
you two are with yourselves.
Kane told you the terms under which he would debate the subject with you.
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh! POOR BABY!



Compared to you ken, I am quite impressed with myself.
Apparently!!!
Life is made up of consequences kenny. Good and bad. Every decision you
make in life, tea or coffee, hot or cold cereal, turn left or turn right,
has a consequence. Every single decision kenny.

In this case you had a decision to make, abide by the rules that kane wished
or not. No one was twisting your arm, no one was threatening your life,
family, or home town, the only consequences that there were to the decision
was either he would debate you or he wouldn't. Simple, 'eh?

Obviously you didn't want to have to deal with rules (somehow I see that as
a main theme in your life). Fine by everyone here, no one said you had to.
And if you had left it at that there would have been no further
consequences. You just couldn't do that. Some personality flaw forced you
to make a big ****ing stink about the fact that kane wanted to debate the
subject with you but insisted on some boundaries. Boundaries that you felt
were unacceptable for some reason. And you could have left it at that, but
instead you decided to react like a 5 year old and obviously continue to do
so even to this post.

Having raised more than a few children in my time, I have seen this behavior
many times. Typically from a child of 5 to 6 years of age. My reaction to
this would normally be either a "time out" or a denial of privileges
depending on just how stuck the child is on himself. Infantile behavior
deserves nothing less.

In any case I cant impose a consequence on you, I can only make a decision
on how I am going to deal with you. SO, if you insist on acting like a 5
year old then I will choose to treat you like one. The other consequences
you are having to pay I have nothing to do with. Consequences like, a
totally trashed credibility (if its possible for you to have trashed your
own credibility any more than you already have), looking like a fool here
and in every news group that you post to, etc. Its time to grow up kenny,
and stop acting like a child. Your picture looks like an adult, you say you
run a business which is an adult activity, but here you let yourself devolve
to acting like a child. Imagine what the reaction will be of the client
that sees how you choose to behave here. I imagine they wont be a client
for long.

Grow the **** up kenny, its time.

Ron

Have you at your "consequences", Ron? ;-)
Odd, I thought he said, "In any case I cant impose a consequence on you."

Are you now claiming he said he was going to impose a consequence on you?

Keep exposing your STUPIDITY, Kane! ;-)

Can't answer the question, Liar?

Hihihi! Already did, STUPID! Or are you going to claim that I am
harassing you! ;-)

And why are you running from the fact that that ken is an admitted liar,
just like you?

The only PROVEN liar here is you, Kane!

Still can't answer the question, Liar and coward?

The proven liar here is you and a STUPID one at that! ;-)

And that he's a coward just like you that refuses to debate on the
facts, just like you?

The coward here is once again, YOU! You don't even have the nerve to
use your own name!

Go tell it to observer, fern, and the host of other butt buddies of
yours, dummy.

Hihihi! I don't know them!

Doan

No, Doan, the only consequences to morally and ethically compromised
folks such as you is the exposure you create for yourselves nearly every
time you post.

Hihhi! Everytime I post, I EXPOSED you STUPID LIES!

Yeah, like claiming Straus ONLY said Baumrind's presentation represented
"excellent" research. R R R R R

Hahaha! More lies! Where did I said "ONLY"? I said Straus said that
her study is "excellent", which is the truth that you denied! You are
either TOO STUPID to understand that or a bad liar. Which is it?


Your contextual lies are becoming famous...or will, when I get through
with you.

Hihihi! If you want to know about quoting things out of context, ask Ron!

Well, he did a number on you when he caught you quoting again out of
context on the issue of foster parents being reported for abuse, and I
just recycled that for you to take another look at, just to remind you
of your lack of ethics.

Go ahead, Kane. It will give me another chance to expose Ron's quoting
out of context, with proof of course. Hihihi!

Like it? Or are you going to defend posting other's comments out of
context as a valid and ethical debating tactic?

I don't quote things out of context, Kane! I caught Ron doing it and
he is still fuming at me.


Doan

Or, you can dodge again, like you just tried to do, coward.

The coward and STUPID LIAR is YOU!

Doan

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Ron wrote:

" krp" wrote in message
news:nq2sh.4674$AG6.2874@trnddc06...
"Ron" wrote in message
...

Whose rules Ron? Kane's THE GREAT GOD? Yours? Are you the Usenet
police?
You two do NOT get to dictate the rules. PERIOD! No matter HOW impressed
you two are with yourselves.
Kane told you the terms under which he would debate the subject with you.
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh! POOR BABY!



Compared to you ken, I am quite impressed with myself.
Apparently!!!
Life is made up of consequences kenny. Good and bad. Every decision you
make in life, tea or coffee, hot or cold cereal, turn left or turn right,
has a consequence. Every single decision kenny.

In this case you had a decision to make, abide by the rules that kane wished
or not. No one was twisting your arm, no one was threatening your life,
family, or home town, the only consequences that there were to the decision
was either he would debate you or he wouldn't. Simple, 'eh?

Obviously you didn't want to have to deal with rules (somehow I see that as
a main theme in your life). Fine by everyone here, no one said you had to.
And if you had left it at that there would have been no further
consequences. You just couldn't do that. Some personality flaw forced you
to make a big ****ing stink about the fact that kane wanted to debate the
subject with you but insisted on some boundaries. Boundaries that you felt
were unacceptable for some reason. And you could have left it at that, but
instead you decided to react like a 5 year old and obviously continue to do
so even to this post.

Having raised more than a few children in my time, I have seen this behavior
many times. Typically from a child of 5 to 6 years of age. My reaction to
this would normally be either a "time out" or a denial of privileges
depending on just how stuck the child is on himself. Infantile behavior
deserves nothing less.

In any case I cant impose a consequence on you, I can only make a decision
on how I am going to deal with you. SO, if you insist on acting like a 5
year old then I will choose to treat you like one. The other consequences
you are having to pay I have nothing to do with. Consequences like, a
totally trashed credibility (if its possible for you to have trashed your
own credibility any more than you already have), looking like a fool here
and in every news group that you post to, etc. Its time to grow up kenny,
and stop acting like a child. Your picture looks like an adult, you say you
run a business which is an adult activity, but here you let yourself devolve
to acting like a child. Imagine what the reaction will be of the client
that sees how you choose to behave here. I imagine they wont be a client
for long.

Grow the **** up kenny, its time.

Ron

Have you at your "consequences", Ron? ;-)
Odd, I thought he said, "In any case I cant impose a consequence on you."

Are you now claiming he said he was going to impose a consequence on you?

Keep exposing your STUPIDITY, Kane! ;-)
Can't answer the question, Liar?

Hihihi! Already did, STUPID! Or are you going to claim that I am
harassing you! ;-)

So, then where is the answer you claim you gave to this question: "Are
you now claiming he said he was going to impose a consequence on you?"

And why are you running from the fact that that ken is an admitted liar,
just like you?

The only PROVEN liar here is you, Kane!
Still can't answer the question, Liar and coward?

The proven liar here is you and a STUPID one at that! ;-)

Nope. You do it in every post now. Lie and lie and lie. How sad. Are you
mentally ill, Doan?

And that he's a coward just like you that refuses to debate on the
facts, just like you?
The coward here is once again, YOU! You don't even have the nerve to
use your own name!
Go tell it to observer, fern, and the host of other butt buddies of
yours, dummy.

Hihihi! I don't know them!

Yes?

So they were cowards?

Doan

No, Doan, the only consequences to morally and ethically compromised
folks such as you is the exposure you create for yourselves nearly every
time you post.

Hihhi! Everytime I post, I EXPOSED you STUPID LIES!
Yeah, like claiming Straus ONLY said Baumrind's presentation represented
"excellent" research. R R R R R

Hahaha! More lies! Where did I said "ONLY"? I said Straus said that
her study is "excellent", which is the truth that you denied! You are
either TOO STUPID to understand that or a bad liar. Which is it?

Nope. I didn't say you didn't say "excellent." I said you said it while
avoiding the rest of his comment.

You are even more plainly lying now.

Or even stupider or crazier than I thought.

Your contextual lies are becoming famous...or will, when I get through
with you.

Hihihi! If you want to know about quoting things out of context, ask Ron!
Well, he did a number on you when he caught you quoting again out of
context on the issue of foster parents being reported for abuse, and I
just recycled that for you to take another look at, just to remind you
of your lack of ethics.

Go ahead, Kane. It will give me another chance to expose Ron's quoting
out of context, with proof of course. Hihihi!

Sure, let's see if he misconstrued the meaning, as you did.

That's the criteria you tried to sell when he caught you...that you had
not changed the meaning of my claim ... that people were being lied to,
when you quoted only the portion you did.

I just showed you the rest of that portion of the report. YOUR context,
by isolating that and asking 'who is the liar here,' of course
pretending I was, is exposed simply by reading what I put INTO the
context that was correct.

Some have argued that indeed the rate of abuse in foster homes indicates
a rate that is comparably higher than in bio homes.

This article points to the facts as I have stated them in the
past...that indeed foster's are both held to a higher standard and live
in a fishbowl, where they are much more easily caught, than the general
population....hence such claims, in the face of evidence, are lies.

Just as they lie, you lie, by avoidance of context. Reality.

Like it? Or are you going to defend posting other's comments out of
context as a valid and ethical debating tactic?

I don't quote things out of context, Kane!

Liar. I just put up two examples of you doing exactly that.

You did it again in this post.

I caught Ron doing it and
he is still fuming at me.

Ron laughs 'til he fumes?

RR R R RR

I might be accused of that as well, lying coward.

You are damned funny from some perspectives.

Just as long as no one is too unfamiliar with your history of lies here
and might fail to notice you are lying in almost every post.

Say hello to Aline for us. She still, after all this time, has never
surfaced on Usenet again. I hope...R RRRR R R R "she's" okay.





Doan

Or, you can dodge again, like you just tried to do, coward.

The coward and STUPID LIAR is YOU!

Doan

On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Ron wrote:

" krp" wrote in message
news:nq2sh.4674$AG6.2874@trnddc06...
"Ron" wrote in message
...

Whose rules Ron? Kane's THE GREAT GOD? Yours? Are you the Usenet
police?
You two do NOT get to dictate the rules. PERIOD! No matter HOW impressed
you two are with yourselves.
Kane told you the terms under which he would debate the subject with you.
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh! POOR BABY!



Compared to you ken, I am quite impressed with myself.
Apparently!!!
Life is made up of consequences kenny. Good and bad. Every decision you
make in life, tea or coffee, hot or cold cereal, turn left or turn right,
has a consequence. Every single decision kenny.

In this case you had a decision to make, abide by the rules that kane wished
or not. No one was twisting your arm, no one was threatening your life,
family, or home town, the only consequences that there were to the decision
was either he would debate you or he wouldn't. Simple, 'eh?

Obviously you didn't want to have to deal with rules (somehow I see that as
a main theme in your life). Fine by everyone here, no one said you had to.
And if you had left it at that there would have been no further
consequences. You just couldn't do that. Some personality flaw forced you
to make a big ****ing stink about the fact that kane wanted to debate the
subject with you but insisted on some boundaries. Boundaries that you felt
were unacceptable for some reason. And you could have left it at that, but
instead you decided to react like a 5 year old and obviously continue to do
so even to this post.

Having raised more than a few children in my time, I have seen this behavior
many times. Typically from a child of 5 to 6 years of age. My reaction to
this would normally be either a "time out" or a denial of privileges
depending on just how stuck the child is on himself. Infantile behavior
deserves nothing less.

In any case I cant impose a consequence on you, I can only make a decision
on how I am going to deal with you. SO, if you insist on acting like a 5
year old then I will choose to treat you like one. The other consequences
you are having to pay I have nothing to do with. Consequences like, a
totally trashed credibility (if its possible for you to have trashed your
own credibility any more than you already have), looking like a fool here
and in every news group that you post to, etc. Its time to grow up kenny,
and stop acting like a child. Your picture looks like an adult, you say you
run a business which is an adult activity, but here you let yourself devolve
to acting like a child. Imagine what the reaction will be of the client
that sees how you choose to behave here. I imagine they wont be a client
for long.

Grow the **** up kenny, its time.

Ron

Have you at your "consequences", Ron? ;-)
Odd, I thought he said, "In any case I cant impose a consequence on you."

Are you now claiming he said he was going to impose a consequence on you?

Keep exposing your STUPIDITY, Kane! ;-)
Can't answer the question, Liar?

Hihihi! Already did, STUPID! Or are you going to claim that I am
harassing you! ;-)

So, then where is the answer you claim you gave to this question: "Are
you now claiming he said he was going to impose a consequence on you?"

And why are you running from the fact that that ken is an admitted liar,
just like you?

The only PROVEN liar here is you, Kane!
Still can't answer the question, Liar and coward?

The proven liar here is you and a STUPID one at that! ;-)

Nope. You do it in every post now. Lie and lie and lie. How sad. Are you
mentally ill, Doan?

And that he's a coward just like you that refuses to debate on the
facts, just like you?
The coward here is once again, YOU! You don't even have the nerve to
use your own name!
Go tell it to observer, fern, and the host of other butt buddies of
yours, dummy.

Hihihi! I don't know them!

Yes?

So they were cowards?

I know you are!

Doan

No, Doan, the only consequences to morally and ethically compromised
folks such as you is the exposure you create for yourselves nearly every
time you post.

Hihhi! Everytime I post, I EXPOSED you STUPID LIES!
Yeah, like claiming Straus ONLY said Baumrind's presentation represented
"excellent" research. R R R R R

Hahaha! More lies! Where did I said "ONLY"? I said Straus said that
her study is "excellent", which is the truth that you denied! You are
either TOO STUPID to understand that or a bad liar. Which is it?

Nope. I didn't say you didn't say "excellent." I said you said it while
avoiding the rest of his comment.

More STUPID LIES!

You are even more plainly lying now.

Another LIE!

Or even stupider or crazier than I thought.

Hihihi! The STUPID LIAR is YOU!

Your contextual lies are becoming famous...or will, when I get through
with you.

Hihihi! If you want to know about quoting things out of context, ask Ron!
Well, he did a number on you when he caught you quoting again out of
context on the issue of foster parents being reported for abuse, and I
just recycled that for you to take another look at, just to remind you
of your lack of ethics.

Go ahead, Kane. It will give me another chance to expose Ron's quoting
out of context, with proof of course. Hihihi!

Sure, let's see if he misconstrued the meaning, as you did.

Yes, he did!

That's the criteria you tried to sell when he caught you...that you had
not changed the meaning of my claim ... that people were being lied to,
when you quoted only the portion you did.

You are STUPID!

I just showed you the rest of that portion of the report. YOUR context,
by isolating that and asking 'who is the liar here,' of course
pretending I was, is exposed simply by reading what I put INTO the
context that was correct.

You are the PROVEN LIAR!

Some have argued that indeed the rate of abuse in foster homes indicates
a rate that is comparably higher than in bio homes.

This article points to the facts as I have stated them in the
past...that indeed foster's are both held to a higher standard and live
in a fishbowl, where they are much more easily caught, than the general
population....hence such claims, in the face of evidence, are lies.

The liar is YOU!

Just as they lie, you lie, by avoidance of context. Reality.

And you are STUPID too! ;-0


Like it? Or are you going to defend posting other's comments out of
context as a valid and ethical debating tactic?

I don't quote things out of context, Kane!

Liar. I just put up two examples of you doing exactly that.

No, you didn't. You LIED!

You did it again in this post.

Proving that you are a LIAR!

I caught Ron doing it and
he is still fuming at me.

Ron laughs 'til he fumes?

RR R R RR

I might be accused of that as well, lying coward.

The proven liar, and stupid, is YOU!

You are damned funny from some perspectives.

Just as long as no one is too unfamiliar with your history of lies here
and might fail to notice you are lying in almost every post.

Another baseles lie!

Say hello to Aline for us. She still, after all this time, has never
surfaced on Usenet again. I hope...R RRRR R R R "she's" okay.

Is she in Mexico? ;-)





Doan

Or, you can dodge again, like you just tried to do, coward.

The coward and STUPID LIAR is YOU!

And proven times and times that Kane is a STUPID LIAR!

Doan

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Ron wrote:

" krp" wrote in message
news:nq2sh.4674$AG6.2874@trnddc06...
"Ron" wrote in message
...

Whose rules Ron? Kane's THE GREAT GOD? Yours? Are you the Usenet
police?
You two do NOT get to dictate the rules. PERIOD! No matter HOW impressed
you two are with yourselves.
Kane told you the terms under which he would debate the subject with you.
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh! POOR BABY!



Compared to you ken, I am quite impressed with myself.
Apparently!!!
Life is made up of consequences kenny. Good and bad. Every decision you
make in life, tea or coffee, hot or cold cereal, turn left or turn right,
has a consequence. Every single decision kenny.

In this case you had a decision to make, abide by the rules that kane wished
or not. No one was twisting your arm, no one was threatening your life,
family, or home town, the only consequences that there were to the decision
was either he would debate you or he wouldn't. Simple, 'eh?

Obviously you didn't want to have to deal with rules (somehow I see that as
a main theme in your life). Fine by everyone here, no one said you had to.
And if you had left it at that there would have been no further
consequences. You just couldn't do that. Some personality flaw forced you
to make a big ****ing stink about the fact that kane wanted to debate the
subject with you but insisted on some boundaries. Boundaries that you felt
were unacceptable for some reason. And you could have left it at that, but
instead you decided to react like a 5 year old and obviously continue to do
so even to this post.

Having raised more than a few children in my time, I have seen this behavior
many times. Typically from a child of 5 to 6 years of age. My reaction to
this would normally be either a "time out" or a denial of privileges
depending on just how stuck the child is on himself. Infantile behavior
deserves nothing less.

In any case I cant impose a consequence on you, I can only make a decision
on how I am going to deal with you. SO, if you insist on acting like a 5
year old then I will choose to treat you like one. The other consequences
you are having to pay I have nothing to do with. Consequences like, a
totally trashed credibility (if its possible for you to have trashed your
own credibility any more than you already have), looking like a fool here
and in every news group that you post to, etc. Its time to grow up kenny,
and stop acting like a child. Your picture looks like an adult, you say you
run a business which is an adult activity, but here you let yourself devolve
to acting like a child. Imagine what the reaction will be of the client
that sees how you choose to behave here. I imagine they wont be a client
for long.

Grow the **** up kenny, its time.

Ron

Have you at your "consequences", Ron? ;-)
Odd, I thought he said, "In any case I cant impose a consequence on you."

Are you now claiming he said he was going to impose a consequence on you?

Keep exposing your STUPIDITY, Kane! ;-)
Can't answer the question, Liar?

Hihihi! Already did, STUPID! Or are you going to claim that I am
harassing you! ;-)
So, then where is the answer you claim you gave to this question: "Are
you now claiming he said he was going to impose a consequence on you?"

And why are you running from the fact that that ken is an admitted liar,
just like you?

The only PROVEN liar here is you, Kane!
Still can't answer the question, Liar and coward?

The proven liar here is you and a STUPID one at that! ;-)
Nope. You do it in every post now. Lie and lie and lie. How sad. Are you
mentally ill, Doan?

And that he's a coward just like you that refuses to debate on the
facts, just like you?
The coward here is once again, YOU! You don't even have the nerve to
use your own name!
Go tell it to observer, fern, and the host of other butt buddies of
yours, dummy.

Hihihi! I don't know them!
Yes?

So they were cowards?

I know you are!

Doan

No, Doan, the only consequences to morally and ethically compromised
folks such as you is the exposure you create for yourselves nearly every
time you post.

Hihhi! Everytime I post, I EXPOSED you STUPID LIES!
Yeah, like claiming Straus ONLY said Baumrind's presentation represented
"excellent" research. R R R R R
Hahaha! More lies! Where did I said "ONLY"? I said Straus said that
her study is "excellent", which is the truth that you denied! You are
either TOO STUPID to understand that or a bad liar. Which is it?
Nope. I didn't say you didn't say "excellent." I said you said it while
avoiding the rest of his comment.

More STUPID LIES!

You are even more plainly lying now.

Another LIE!

Or even stupider or crazier than I thought.

Hihihi! The STUPID LIAR is YOU!

Your contextual lies are becoming famous...or will, when I get through
with you.

Hihihi! If you want to know about quoting things out of context, ask Ron!
Well, he did a number on you when he caught you quoting again out of
context on the issue of foster parents being reported for abuse, and I
just recycled that for you to take another look at, just to remind you
of your lack of ethics.

Go ahead, Kane. It will give me another chance to expose Ron's quoting
out of context, with proof of course. Hihihi!
Sure, let's see if he misconstrued the meaning, as you did.

Yes, he did!

That's the criteria you tried to sell when he caught you...that you had
not changed the meaning of my claim ... that people were being lied to,
when you quoted only the portion you did.

You are STUPID!

I just showed you the rest of that portion of the report. YOUR context,
by isolating that and asking 'who is the liar here,' of course
pretending I was, is exposed simply by reading what I put INTO the
context that was correct.

You are the PROVEN LIAR!

Some have argued that indeed the rate of abuse in foster homes indicates
a rate that is comparably higher than in bio homes.

This article points to the facts as I have stated them in the
past...that indeed foster's are both held to a higher standard and live
in a fishbowl, where they are much more easily caught, than the general
population....hence such claims, in the face of evidence, are lies.

The liar is YOU!

Just as they lie, you lie, by avoidance of context. Reality.

And you are STUPID too! ;-0

Like it? Or are you going to defend posting other's comments out of
context as a valid and ethical debating tactic?
I don't quote things out of context, Kane!
Liar. I just put up two examples of you doing exactly that.

No, you didn't. You LIED!

You did it again in this post.

Proving that you are a LIAR!

I caught Ron doing it and
he is still fuming at me.
Ron laughs 'til he fumes?

RR R R RR

I might be accused of that as well, lying coward.

The proven liar, and stupid, is YOU!

You are damned funny from some perspectives.

Just as long as no one is too unfamiliar with your history of lies here
and might fail to notice you are lying in almost every post.

Another baseles lie!

Say hello to Aline for us. She still, after all this time, has never
surfaced on Usenet again. I hope...R RRRR R R R "she's" okay.

Is she in Mexico? ;-)



Doan

Or, you can dodge again, like you just tried to do, coward.

The coward and STUPID LIAR is YOU!

And proven times and times that Kane is a STUPID LIAR!

I am truly sorry about your delusions, and that you are exposing
yourself in public, Doan.

I figured it was a risk to push you. And that you might go over the
edge. You are even worse at lying today than you were just a few days ago.

Pity.

Well, maybe now you'll go get some help.


Doan

On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Ron wrote:

" krp" wrote in message
news:nq2sh.4674$AG6.2874@trnddc06...
"Ron" wrote in message
...

Whose rules Ron? Kane's THE GREAT GOD? Yours? Are you the Usenet
police?
You two do NOT get to dictate the rules. PERIOD! No matter HOW impressed
you two are with yourselves.
Kane told you the terms under which he would debate the subject with you.
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh! POOR BABY!



Compared to you ken, I am quite impressed with myself.
Apparently!!!
Life is made up of consequences kenny. Good and bad. Every decision you
make in life, tea or coffee, hot or cold cereal, turn left or turn right,
has a consequence. Every single decision kenny.

In this case you had a decision to make, abide by the rules that kane wished
or not. No one was twisting your arm, no one was threatening your life,
family, or home town, the only consequences that there were to the decision
was either he would debate you or he wouldn't. Simple, 'eh?

Obviously you didn't want to have to deal with rules (somehow I see that as
a main theme in your life). Fine by everyone here, no one said you had to.
And if you had left it at that there would have been no further
consequences. You just couldn't do that. Some personality flaw forced you
to make a big ****ing stink about the fact that kane wanted to debate the
subject with you but insisted on some boundaries. Boundaries that you felt
were unacceptable for some reason. And you could have left it at that, but
instead you decided to react like a 5 year old and obviously continue to do
so even to this post.

Having raised more than a few children in my time, I have seen this behavior
many times. Typically from a child of 5 to 6 years of age. My reaction to
this would normally be either a "time out" or a denial of privileges
depending on just how stuck the child is on himself. Infantile behavior
deserves nothing less.

In any case I cant impose a consequence on you, I can only make a decision
on how I am going to deal with you. SO, if you insist on acting like a 5
year old then I will choose to treat you like one. The other consequences
you are having to pay I have nothing to do with. Consequences like, a
totally trashed credibility (if its possible for you to have trashed your
own credibility any more than you already have), looking like a fool here
and in every news group that you post to, etc. Its time to grow up kenny,
and stop acting like a child. Your picture looks like an adult, you say you
run a business which is an adult activity, but here you let yourself devolve
to acting like a child. Imagine what the reaction will be of the client
that sees how you choose to behave here. I imagine they wont be a client
for long.

Grow the **** up kenny, its time.

Ron

Have you at your "consequences", Ron? ;-)
Odd, I thought he said, "In any case I cant impose a consequence on you."

Are you now claiming he said he was going to impose a consequence on you?

Keep exposing your STUPIDITY, Kane! ;-)
Can't answer the question, Liar?

Hihihi! Already did, STUPID! Or are you going to claim that I am
harassing you! ;-)
So, then where is the answer you claim you gave to this question: "Are
you now claiming he said he was going to impose a consequence on you?"

And why are you running from the fact that that ken is an admitted liar,
just like you?

The only PROVEN liar here is you, Kane!
Still can't answer the question, Liar and coward?

The proven liar here is you and a STUPID one at that! ;-)
Nope. You do it in every post now. Lie and lie and lie. How sad. Are you
mentally ill, Doan?

And that he's a coward just like you that refuses to debate on the
facts, just like you?
The coward here is once again, YOU! You don't even have the nerve to
use your own name!
Go tell it to observer, fern, and the host of other butt buddies of
yours, dummy.

Hihihi! I don't know them!
Yes?

So they were cowards?

I know you are!

Doan

No, Doan, the only consequences to morally and ethically compromised
folks such as you is the exposure you create for yourselves nearly every
time you post.

Hihhi! Everytime I post, I EXPOSED you STUPID LIES!
Yeah, like claiming Straus ONLY said Baumrind's presentation represented
"excellent" research. R R R R R
Hahaha! More lies! Where did I said "ONLY"? I said Straus said that
her study is "excellent", which is the truth that you denied! You are
either TOO STUPID to understand that or a bad liar. Which is it?
Nope. I didn't say you didn't say "excellent." I said you said it while
avoiding the rest of his comment.

More STUPID LIES!

You are even more plainly lying now.

Another LIE!

Or even stupider or crazier than I thought.

Hihihi! The STUPID LIAR is YOU!

Your contextual lies are becoming famous...or will, when I get through
with you.

Hihihi! If you want to know about quoting things out of context, ask Ron!
Well, he did a number on you when he caught you quoting again out of
context on the issue of foster parents being reported for abuse, and I
just recycled that for you to take another look at, just to remind you
of your lack of ethics.

Go ahead, Kane. It will give me another chance to expose Ron's quoting
out of context, with proof of course. Hihihi!
Sure, let's see if he misconstrued the meaning, as you did.

Yes, he did!

That's the criteria you tried to sell when he caught you...that you had
not changed the meaning of my claim ... that people were being lied to,
when you quoted only the portion you did.

You are STUPID!

I just showed you the rest of that portion of the report. YOUR context,
by isolating that and asking 'who is the liar here,' of course
pretending I was, is exposed simply by reading what I put INTO the
context that was correct.

You are the PROVEN LIAR!

Some have argued that indeed the rate of abuse in foster homes indicates
a rate that is comparably higher than in bio homes.

This article points to the facts as I have stated them in the
past...that indeed foster's are both held to a higher standard and live
in a fishbowl, where they are much more easily caught, than the general
population....hence such claims, in the face of evidence, are lies.

The liar is YOU!

Just as they lie, you lie, by avoidance of context. Reality.

And you are STUPID too! ;-0

Like it? Or are you going to defend posting other's comments out of
context as a valid and ethical debating tactic?
I don't quote things out of context, Kane!
Liar. I just put up two examples of you doing exactly that.

No, you didn't. You LIED!

You did it again in this post.

Proving that you are a LIAR!

I caught Ron doing it and
he is still fuming at me.
Ron laughs 'til he fumes?

RR R R RR

I might be accused of that as well, lying coward.

The proven liar, and stupid, is YOU!

You are damned funny from some perspectives.

Just as long as no one is too unfamiliar with your history of lies here
and might fail to notice you are lying in almost every post.

Another baseles lie!

Say hello to Aline for us. She still, after all this time, has never
surfaced on Usenet again. I hope...R RRRR R R R "she's" okay.

Is she in Mexico? ;-)



Doan

Or, you can dodge again, like you just tried to do, coward.

The coward and STUPID LIAR is YOU!

And proven times and times that Kane is a STUPID LIAR!

I am truly sorry about your delusions, and that you are exposing
yourself in public, Doan.

You are the one that is delusional, Kane. I have proven that you
are a STUPID LIAR many times now!

I figured it was a risk to push you. And that you might go over the
edge. You are even worse at lying today than you were just a few days ago.

More baseless lies from Kane!

Pity.

You should pity yourself! ;-)

Well, maybe now you'll go get some help.

I don't need help exposing your STUPID LIES! I am having fun doing so.
Come back with that "I am a published researcher" LIE! I laugh so
hard. ;-)

Doan

"Doan" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Ron wrote:

" krp" wrote in message
news:nq2sh.4674$AG6.2874@trnddc06...
"Ron" wrote in message
...

Whose rules Ron? Kane's THE GREAT GOD? Yours? Are you the Usenet
police?
You two do NOT get to dictate the rules. PERIOD! No matter HOW
impressed
you two are with yourselves.
Kane told you the terms under which he would debate the subject
with you.
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh! POOR BABY!



Compared to you ken, I am quite impressed with myself.
Apparently!!!
Life is made up of consequences kenny. Good and bad. Every
decision you
make in life, tea or coffee, hot or cold cereal, turn left or turn
right,
has a consequence. Every single decision kenny.

In this case you had a decision to make, abide by the rules that
kane wished
or not. No one was twisting your arm, no one was threatening your
life,
family, or home town, the only consequences that there were to the
decision
was either he would debate you or he wouldn't. Simple, 'eh?

Obviously you didn't want to have to deal with rules (somehow I see
that as
a main theme in your life). Fine by everyone here, no one said you
had to.
And if you had left it at that there would have been no further
consequences. You just couldn't do that. Some personality flaw
forced you
to make a big ****ing stink about the fact that kane wanted to
debate the
subject with you but insisted on some boundaries. Boundaries that
you felt
were unacceptable for some reason. And you could have left it at
that, but
instead you decided to react like a 5 year old and obviously
continue to do
so even to this post.

Having raised more than a few children in my time, I have seen this
behavior
many times. Typically from a child of 5 to 6 years of age. My
reaction to
this would normally be either a "time out" or a denial of privileges
depending on just how stuck the child is on himself. Infantile
behavior
deserves nothing less.

In any case I cant impose a consequence on you, I can only make a
decision
on how I am going to deal with you. SO, if you insist on acting
like a 5
year old then I will choose to treat you like one. The other
consequences
you are having to pay I have nothing to do with. Consequences like,
a
totally trashed credibility (if its possible for you to have trashed
your
own credibility any more than you already have), looking like a fool
here
and in every news group that you post to, etc. Its time to grow up
kenny,
and stop acting like a child. Your picture looks like an adult, you
say you
run a business which is an adult activity, but here you let yourself
devolve
to acting like a child. Imagine what the reaction will be of the
client
that sees how you choose to behave here. I imagine they wont be a
client
for long.

Grow the **** up kenny, its time.

Ron

Have you at your "consequences", Ron? ;-)
Odd, I thought he said, "In any case I cant impose a consequence on
you."

Are you now claiming he said he was going to impose a consequence on
you?

Keep exposing your STUPIDITY, Kane! ;-)

Can't answer the question, Liar?

Hihihi! Already did, STUPID! Or are you going to claim that I am
harassing you! ;-)

And why are you running from the fact that that ken is an admitted
liar,
just like you?

The only PROVEN liar here is you, Kane!

Still can't answer the question, Liar and coward?

The proven liar here is you and a STUPID one at that! ;-)

And that he's a coward just like you that refuses to debate on the
facts, just like you?

The coward here is once again, YOU! You don't even have the nerve to
use your own name!

Go tell it to observer, fern, and the host of other butt buddies of
yours, dummy.

Hihihi! I don't know them!

Doan

No, Doan, the only consequences to morally and ethically compromised
folks such as you is the exposure you create for yourselves nearly
every
time you post.

Hihhi! Everytime I post, I EXPOSED you STUPID LIES!

Yeah, like claiming Straus ONLY said Baumrind's presentation represented
"excellent" research. R R R R R

Hahaha! More lies! Where did I said "ONLY"? I said Straus said that
her study is "excellent", which is the truth that you denied! You are
either TOO STUPID to understand that or a bad liar. Which is it?


Your contextual lies are becoming famous...or will, when I get through
with you.

Hihihi! If you want to know about quoting things out of context, ask
Ron!

Well, he did a number on you when he caught you quoting again out of
context on the issue of foster parents being reported for abuse, and I
just recycled that for you to take another look at, just to remind you
of your lack of ethics.

Go ahead, Kane. It will give me another chance to expose Ron's quoting
out of context, with proof of course. Hihihi!

Like it? Or are you going to defend posting other's comments out of
context as a valid and ethical debating tactic?

I don't quote things out of context, Kane! I caught Ron doing it and
he is still fuming at me.

It looks to me doan that you do little but quote out of context. But of
course you will never admit to doing that, so.....

Ron

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, 0:- wrote:

Doan wrote:
On Fri, 19 Jan 2007, Ron wrote:

" krp" wrote in message
news:nq2sh.4674$AG6.2874@trnddc06...
"Ron" wrote in message
...

Whose rules Ron? Kane's THE GREAT GOD? Yours? Are you the Usenet
police?
You two do NOT get to dictate the rules. PERIOD! No matter HOW impressed
you two are with yourselves.
Kane told you the terms under which he would debate the subject with you.
Waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahhhhh! POOR BABY!



Compared to you ken, I am quite impressed with myself.
Apparently!!!
Life is made up of consequences kenny. Good and bad. Every decision you
make in life, tea or coffee, hot or cold cereal, turn left or turn right,
has a consequence. Every single decision kenny.

In this case you had a decision to make, abide by the rules that kane wished
or not. No one was twisting your arm, no one was threatening your life,
family, or home town, the only consequences that there were to the decision
was either he would debate you or he wouldn't. Simple, 'eh?

Obviously you didn't want to have to deal with rules (somehow I see that as
a main theme in your life). Fine by everyone here, no one said you had to.
And if you had left it at that there would have been no further
consequences. You just couldn't do that. Some personality flaw forced you
to make a big ****ing stink about the fact that kane wanted to debate the
subject with you but insisted on some boundaries. Boundaries that you felt
were unacceptable for some reason. And you could have left it at that, but
instead you decided to react like a 5 year old and obviously continue to do
so even to this post.

Having raised more than a few children in my time, I have seen this behavior
many times. Typically from a child of 5 to 6 years of age. My reaction to
this would normally be either a "time out" or a denial of privileges
depending on just how stuck the child is on himself. Infantile behavior
deserves nothing less.

In any case I cant impose a consequence on you, I can only make a decision
on how I am going to deal with you. SO, if you insist on acting like a 5
year old then I will choose to treat you like one. The other consequences
you are having to pay I have nothing to do with. Consequences like, a
totally trashed credibility (if its possible for you to have trashed your
own credibility any more than you already have), looking like a fool here
and in every news group that you post to, etc. Its time to grow up kenny,
and stop acting like a child. Your picture looks like an adult, you say you
run a business which is an adult activity, but here you let yourself devolve
to acting like a child. Imagine what the reaction will be of the client
that sees how you choose to behave here. I imagine they wont be a client
for long.

Grow the **** up kenny, its time.

Ron

Have you at your "consequences", Ron? ;-)
Odd, I thought he said, "In any case I cant impose a consequence on you."

Are you now claiming he said he was going to impose a consequence on you?

Keep exposing your STUPIDITY, Kane! ;-)
Can't answer the question, Liar?

Hihihi! Already did, STUPID! Or are you going to claim that I am
harassing you! ;-)
So, then where is the answer you claim you gave to this question: "Are
you now claiming he said he was going to impose a consequence on you?"

And why are you running from the fact that that ken is an admitted liar,
just like you?

The only PROVEN liar here is you, Kane!
Still can't answer the question, Liar and coward?

The proven liar here is you and a STUPID one at that! ;-)
Nope. You do it in every post now. Lie and lie and lie. How sad. Are you
mentally ill, Doan?

And that he's a coward just like you that refuses to debate on the
facts, just like you?
The coward here is once again, YOU! You don't even have the nerve to
use your own name!
Go tell it to observer, fern, and the host of other butt buddies of
yours, dummy.

Hihihi! I don't know them!
Yes?

So they were cowards?

I know you are!

Doan

No, Doan, the only consequences to morally and ethically compromised
folks such as you is the exposure you create for yourselves nearly every
time you post.

Hihhi! Everytime I post, I EXPOSED you STUPID LIES!
Yeah, like claiming Straus ONLY said Baumrind's presentation represented
"excellent" research. R R R R R
Hahaha! More lies! Where did I said "ONLY"? I said Straus said that
her study is "excellent", which is the truth that you denied! You are
either TOO STUPID to understand that or a bad liar. Which is it?
Nope. I didn't say you didn't say "excellent." I said you said it while
avoiding the rest of his comment.

More STUPID LIES!

You are even more plainly lying now.

Another LIE!

Or even stupider or crazier than I thought.

Hihihi! The STUPID LIAR is YOU!

Your contextual lies are becoming famous...or will, when I get through
with you.

Hihihi! If you want to know about quoting things out of context, ask Ron!
Well, he did a number on you when he caught you quoting again out of
context on the issue of foster parents being reported for abuse, and I
just recycled that for you to take another look at, just to remind you
of your lack of ethics.

Go ahead, Kane. It will give me another chance to expose Ron's quoting
out of context, with proof of course. Hihihi!
Sure, let's see if he misconstrued the meaning, as you did.

Yes, he did!

That's the criteria you tried to sell when he caught you...that you had
not changed the meaning of my claim ... that people were being lied to,
when you quoted only the portion you did.

You are STUPID!

I just showed you the rest of that portion of the report. YOUR context,
by isolating that and asking 'who is the liar here,' of course
pretending I was, is exposed simply by reading what I put INTO the
context that was correct.

You are the PROVEN LIAR!

Some have argued that indeed the rate of abuse in foster homes indicates
a rate that is comparably higher than in bio homes.

This article points to the facts as I have stated them in the
past...that indeed foster's are both held to a higher standard and live
in a fishbowl, where they are much more easily caught, than the general
population....hence such claims, in the face of evidence, are lies.

The liar is YOU!

Just as they lie, you lie, by avoidance of context. Reality.
And you are STUPID too! ;-0

Like it? Or are you going to defend posting other's comments out of
context as a valid and ethical debating tactic?
I don't quote things out of context, Kane!
Liar. I just put up two examples of you doing exactly that.

No, you didn't. You LIED!

You did it again in this post.

Proving that you are a LIAR!

I caught Ron doing it and
he is still fuming at me.
Ron laughs 'til he fumes?

RR R R RR

I might be accused of that as well, lying coward.

The proven liar, and stupid, is YOU!

You are damned funny from some perspectives.

Just as long as no one is too unfamiliar with your history of lies here
and might fail to notice you are lying in almost every post.

Another baseles lie!

Say hello to Aline for us. She still, after all this time, has never
surfaced on Usenet again. I hope...R RRRR R R R "she's" okay.

Is she in Mexico? ;-)


Doan

Or, you can dodge again, like you just tried to do, coward.

The coward and STUPID LIAR is YOU!

And proven times and times that Kane is a STUPID LIAR!
I am truly sorry about your delusions, and that you are exposing
yourself in public, Doan.

You are the one that is delusional, Kane. I have proven that you
are a STUPID LIAR many times now!

I figured it was a risk to push you. And that you might go over the
edge. You are even worse at lying today than you were just a few days ago.

More baseless lies from Kane!

Pity.

You should pity yourself! ;-)

Well, maybe now you'll go get some help.

I don't need help exposing your STUPID LIES! I am having fun doing so.
Come back with that "I am a published researcher" LIE! I laugh so
hard. ;-)

The best you can do is refuse to answer my question?

So, did you think I was saying I was a peer reviewed publishing researcher?

If so, where did you get that idea?

I am a researcher. I am published.

The two aren't mutually inclusive, by any means.

I am a racing driver.

Do I race cars, or do I race trotters and pacers?

We KNOW I drive a car.

But do I RACE a car?

You made the same logical error (I kindly cover for you 0:-) time and
again.

Could you be doing it on purpose? hihihi?

Doan

I notice your English goes to hell when you lie, Doan.

Haven't you noticed that?

Tell you what. Try to convince people in this newsgroup, that aren't one
of your clown buddies, that you are telling the truth.


0:-

Kane is the most published anonymous twit on earth, if you count
newsgroups.

Greegor wrote:
Kane is the most published anonymous twit on earth, if you count
newsgroups.

Still with the original flame terms, I see. How creative, you ****ant.

Going to preempt that one too, are yah?

No, I'm not widely published. The professional field I've published to
is unique, very limited, and highly specialized.

I'm just published. Nothing special.

0:-