Doananism - publically was We Doan Need No Steenkin' CPS
 

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 08:03:36 -0800, Doan wrote:

On 17 Jan 2004, Kane wrote:

Discipline (a parent decided somewhat imprecisely where "spanking"
ends and "abuse" begins). Doan could have helped him discover the
"reasonable standard" measure, but somehow didn't come forward in
time....Doan? Doan? Where are you Doan?

LOL! Still showing everyone that you are still stupid?

LOL! No, just letting you show how stupid you are.

Missed the recent Canadian court finding on "reasonable" didn't you?
They can't figure it out and admit it. So they have cut the right to
spank to the barest of minimums, leaving a great many how have come
here and "made up their own minds" very much in the lurch.

They can't do, in Canada, legally what your buddies here claim is
okay.

Too lazy to
call your local DA or CPS on what is "reasonable"???

They don't know and neither do you. The question isn't, by the way,
what is "reasonable" but what is abusive. And you still haven't
provided the marker that would tell people where that boundary is, now
have you?

Studying up on the Embry study? Remember, you have a little chore
to
do before I'll discuss it with you.

Oops! Still talking about the Embry study, Kane?

Yet another public exhibition of Doanism, eh?

You brought up The Embry study out of the blue with NO prompting from
me for the express purpose of dodging The Question.

You, in your usual stupidity, challenged me to produce the study. And
then claimed you have the study yourself.

I recently asked you to name what was on a certain page, and you are
noticably unable to.

Any particular reason?

No punishment, right?

No, no punishment, though Embry used the word to describe a "sit and
watch" time out.

Now let's see if you really have the study and can tell me why I say
with confidence there was no proven use of punishment by any of the
participants.

That would assure everyone you aren't BSing.

I notice, by the way, either no one took you up on your offer to send
them a copy of the study (RRRR, it doesn't even exist in electronic
form, smartass - though I may, as a favor key it in as such one day)
via e-mail reply.

Or you're are practicing more of your public Doanism.

Doan, you've never had anything but bluff and lies since you first
posted here to the present. It's ALL smoke and mirrors with you and
you do it in public much to your embarrassment.

;-)

Nothing to offer eh? No measure for when spanking becomes abuse. No
proof one way or another if I ever claimed I was unspanked. No proof
you have the Embry Study.

Nothing by whackin' off publically....that's all yah got. Even Canada
is against yah....R R R R R

Doan

Poor Doanator.

{:-]

Kane

Doananism - publically was We Doan Need No Steenkin' CPS
 

On 31 Jan 2004, Kane wrote:

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 08:03:36 -0800, Doan wrote:

On 17 Jan 2004, Kane wrote:

Discipline (a parent decided somewhat imprecisely where "spanking"
ends and "abuse" begins). Doan could have helped him discover the
"reasonable standard" measure, but somehow didn't come forward in
time....Doan? Doan? Where are you Doan?

LOL! Still showing everyone that you are still stupid?

LOL! No, just letting you show how stupid you are.

Missed the recent Canadian court finding on "reasonable" didn't you?
They can't figure it out and admit it. So they have cut the right to
spank to the barest of minimums, leaving a great many how have come
here and "made up their own minds" very much in the lurch.

They can't do, in Canada, legally what your buddies here claim is
okay.

Too lazy to
call your local DA or CPS on what is "reasonable"???

They don't know and neither do you. The question isn't, by the way,
what is "reasonable" but what is abusive. And you still haven't
provided the marker that would tell people where that boundary is, now
have you?

Using that logic, you can't talk to your child neither since you CAN'T
PROVIDED THE MARKER THAT WOULD TELL PEOPLE WHERE THAT BOUNDARY IS between
plain talking and verbal abuse! Logic and the anti-spanking zealotS,
are they mutually exclusive? ;-)

Doan

Doananism - publically was We Doan Need No Steenkin' CPS
 

Doan wrote in message ...
On 31 Jan 2004, Kane wrote:

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 08:03:36 -0800, Doan wrote:

On 17 Jan 2004, Kane wrote:

Discipline (a parent decided somewhat imprecisely where "spanking"
ends and "abuse" begins). Doan could have helped him discover the
"reasonable standard" measure, but somehow didn't come forward in
time....Doan? Doan? Where are you Doan?

LOL! Still showing everyone that you are still stupid?

LOL! No, just letting you show how stupid you are.

Missed the recent Canadian court finding on "reasonable" didn't you?
They can't figure it out and admit it. So they have cut the right to
spank to the barest of minimums, leaving a great many how have come
here and "made up their own minds" very much in the lurch.

They can't do, in Canada, legally what your buddies here claim is
okay.

Too lazy to
call your local DA or CPS on what is "reasonable"???

They don't know and neither do you. The question isn't, by the way,
what is "reasonable" but what is abusive. And you still haven't
provided the marker that would tell people where that boundary is, now
have you?

Using that logic, you can't talk to your child neither since you CAN'T
PROVIDED THE MARKER THAT WOULD TELL PEOPLE WHERE THAT BOUNDARY IS between
plain talking and verbal abuse! Logic and the anti-spanking zealotS,
are they mutually exclusive? ;-)

Speaking of "logic" R R R R R.......

That's got to be one of your sorriest.

There's little controversy about verbal abuse of children but there
should be....it certainly does exist,so YES, stupid little one, that
TOO deserves a marker and neither you or anyone else can tell where
that is for any given child.

So shall we expand, my brilliant Doananator, our discussion to include
verbal abuse vs verbal discussion of unwanted behavior?

Damn but you are stupid. And a fake of years standing.

So Doananator. The Question now has two parts before I'll debate Embry
with you. And remember you keep bringing this on your self by bobbing
and weaving and pretending you are here for a debate.

So Answer The Question, dogfaced boy. Where is line, precisely,
between actual discipline and abuse when using either spanking or
verbal correction, eh?

Did I mention your stupidity yet? Hope so. Wouldn't want you to miss
it.

Doan..

....anism if ever I saw it.

R R R R R

Kane

Doananism - publically was We Doan Need No Steenkin' CPS
 

Doananism - publically was We Doan Need No Steenkin' CPS
 

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&i...=strip+ip+host

Every wondered why certain posters here seem to have no posting host
in their header?

Why, because they can purchase, unless they are the domain service
admin themselves, a forwarding service that anonomyses them...in fact
they can make their header pretty much be anything they want,
including their name as sender be anything, like , or
various other puppet names.

Feelin' lucky, are yah, Leakin' Deakin'?

You don't have any affiliation with CPSWatch IL any longer, do you?
Admit it. They canned your ass for your stupidity and the bad PR you
represent by your public image. Or you ran when the fearless leader
got into more trouble then she could get out of, eh?

No?

Tell us some more about not being able to post for so long because of
some inability to pay for your account...like that'LL fly. If you were
lying I wonder why.

Stay Free....like who would pay? Can't even stay on as a volunteer.
Groovy.

{:-] R R R R R

Kane

Doananism - publically was We Doan Need No Steenkin' CPS
 

Kane9 Kan't - publically was We Doan Need No Steenkin' CPS
 

On 31 Jan 2004, Kane wrote:

Doan wrote in message ...
On 31 Jan 2004, Kane wrote:

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 08:03:36 -0800, Doan wrote:

On 17 Jan 2004, Kane wrote:

Discipline (a parent decided somewhat imprecisely where "spanking"
ends and "abuse" begins). Doan could have helped him discover the
"reasonable standard" measure, but somehow didn't come forward in
time....Doan? Doan? Where are you Doan?

LOL! Still showing everyone that you are still stupid?

LOL! No, just letting you show how stupid you are.

Missed the recent Canadian court finding on "reasonable" didn't you?
They can't figure it out and admit it. So they have cut the right to
spank to the barest of minimums, leaving a great many how have come
here and "made up their own minds" very much in the lurch.

They can't do, in Canada, legally what your buddies here claim is
okay.

Too lazy to
call your local DA or CPS on what is "reasonable"???

They don't know and neither do you. The question isn't, by the way,
what is "reasonable" but what is abusive. And you still haven't
provided the marker that would tell people where that boundary is, now
have you?

Using that logic, you can't talk to your child neither since you CAN'T
PROVIDED THE MARKER THAT WOULD TELL PEOPLE WHERE THAT BOUNDARY IS between
plain talking and verbal abuse! Logic and the anti-spanking zealotS,
are they mutually exclusive? ;-)

Speaking of "logic" R R R R R.......

That's got to be one of your sorriest.

There's little controversy about verbal abuse of children but there
should be....it certainly does exist,so YES, stupid little one, that
TOO deserves a marker and neither you or anyone else can tell where
that is for any given child.

So just like with spanking, you should NEVER talk to you child???
Logic and the anti-spanking zealotS, are they mutually exclusive? ;-)

So shall we expand, my brilliant Doananator, our discussion to include
verbal abuse vs verbal discussion of unwanted behavior?

Yup! :-)

Damn but you are stupid. And a fake of years standing.

Looking in the mirror again, Kane9? :-0

So Doananator. The Question now has two parts before I'll debate Embry
with you. And remember you keep bringing this on your self by bobbing
and weaving and pretending you are here for a debate.

Still doing the Kane9 Kan't dance? :-)

So Answer The Question, dogfaced boy. Where is line, precisely,
between actual discipline and abuse when using either spanking or
verbal correction, eh?

Dogfaced??? Are you talking to your mom? :-0

Did I mention your stupidity yet? Hope so. Wouldn't want you to miss
it.

You admitted to being stupid! An inherited trait? :-0

Doan..

...anism if ever I saw it.

R R R R R

Kane

9 Kan't!!! :-)

Doan

Kane9 Kan't - publically was We Doan Need No Steenkin' CPS
 

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 21:25:39 -0800, Doan wrote:


On 31 Jan 2004, Kane wrote:

snip................

There's little controversy about verbal abuse of children but there
should be....it certainly does exist,so YES, stupid little one,
that
TOO deserves a marker and neither you or anyone else can tell where
that is for any given child.

So just like with spanking, you should NEVER talk to you child???

Did I say that? No, I don't think so, but it points up your poor
understanding of logic and language.

What I did say, though it's sad I have to spell it out so carefully
for you, is that spanking has the potential for harm, and so does
"talk to your child" if it entails name calling, blaming, shaming, and
distrupting their healthy normal developmental tasks.

The problem isn't the talking or hitting, it's the intent as
translates into severity. AND YOU STILL can't point out a
demarcation.

Logic and the anti-spanking zealotS, are they mutually exclusive? ;-)

Unnn....Doananator...I hate to point this out, but YOURS was the
failure in logic there, old masturbater.

So shall we expand, my brilliant Doananator, our discussion to
include
verbal abuse vs verbal discussion of unwanted behavior?

Yup! :-)

Anything to get away from your failure to answer The Question
satifactorily....even another "Question" if it will provide you a
dodge, eh?

Okay, tell us the line of demarcation between what is talk and what is
verbal abuse. And please, repeat the Canadian solution....even THEY
don't know what "reasonable" is except to curtail CP to the point of
it being virtually nothing at all.

Spanking is doomed, Flakey One, and verbal abuse may well be next.

Damn but you are stupid. And a fake of years standing.

Looking in the mirror again, Kane9? :-0

No, not at all. Point out where I have been stupid or faking please.

I JUST pointed out your stupidity and lack of logic, and your faking
it by trying to accuse others when it was YOU that lacked the logic.

So Doananator. The Question now has two parts before I'll debate
Embry
with you. And remember you keep bringing this on your self by
bobbing
and weaving and pretending you are here for a debate.

Still doing the Kane9 Kan't dance? :-)

Which dance would that be?

The one where I invite you to clarify the challenges YOU brought up
while dodging The Question: Embry, "never-spanked" neither of which
you have been able, or willing (I wonder why..RRRRR) to deal with?

So Answer The Question, dogfaced boy. Where is line, precisely,
between actual discipline and abuse when using either spanking or
verbal correction, eh?

Dogfaced??? Are you talking to your mom? :-0

I've never confused your mother with mine.

Did I mention your stupidity yet? Hope so. Wouldn't want you to
miss
it.

You admitted to being stupid! An inherited trait? :-0

Everyone is stupid sometime or another. Those who deny it really
reveal their own stupidity and mental abberations.

Doan..

...anism if ever I saw it.

R R R R R

Kane

9 Kan't!!! :-)

Sorry, just did, R R R R

Doan

........and not cleaning up after himself.

Notice how nothing, nothing at all was answered by Doananation in this
post. Just more babble.

Invitations from me to clear up the claims he makes, yet nothing but
dancing and dodging and weaving, while waving his little pecker about
Doananating all over everyone. Tsk, nasty little boy, tsk.

bingo bango bongo,

Stoneman

Doananism - publically was We Doan Need No Steenkin' CPS
 

On 31 Jan 2004, Kane wrote:

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 08:03:36 -0800, Doan wrote:

On 17 Jan 2004, Kane wrote:

Discipline (a parent decided somewhat imprecisely where "spanking"
ends and "abuse" begins). Doan could have helped him discover the
"reasonable standard" measure, but somehow didn't come forward in
time....Doan? Doan? Where are you Doan?

LOL! Still showing everyone that you are still stupid?

LOL! No, just letting you show how stupid you are.

LOL! And you succeeded as showing your own! :-0

Missed the recent Canadian court finding on "reasonable" didn't you?
They can't figure it out and admit it. So they have cut the right to
spank to the barest of minimums, leaving a great many how have come
here and "made up their own minds" very much in the lurch.

They didn't outlaw spanking!

They can't do, in Canada, legally what your buddies here claim is
okay.

You meant they can't vote for BUSH? ;-)

Too lazy to
call your local DA or CPS on what is "reasonable"???

They don't know and neither do you. The question isn't, by the way,
what is "reasonable" but what is abusive. And you still haven't
provided the marker that would tell people where that boundary is, now
have you?

Ah! Showing your stupidity again. You can't know what is abusive without
knowing what is "reasonble"! If you want to know what reasonable is, call
your local DA or CPS.

Studying up on the Embry study? Remember, you have a little chore
to
do before I'll discuss it with you.

Oops! Still talking about the Embry study, Kane?

Yet another public exhibition of Doanism, eh?

You brought up The Embry study out of the blue with NO prompting from
me for the express purpose of dodging The Question.

Still dodging the sample size of the Embry study, Kane7? ;-)

You, in your usual stupidity, challenged me to produce the study. And
then claimed you have the study yourself.

So produce the study, if you dare. ;-)

I recently asked you to name what was on a certain page, and you are
noticably unable to.

And I asked you about the sample size! ;--0

Any particular reason?

Could it be I just having fun playing with a little dog like you? ;-)

No punishment, right?

No, no punishment, though Embry used the word to describe a "sit and
watch" time out.

Lying again. He did use the work PUNISHMENT, did he not?

Now let's see if you really have the study and can tell me why I say
with confidence there was no proven use of punishment by any of the
participants.

Just tell them the sample size, Kane6. :-0

That would assure everyone you aren't BSing.

Same can be said about you! :-)

I notice, by the way, either no one took you up on your offer to send
them a copy of the study (RRRR, it doesn't even exist in electronic
form, smartass - though I may, as a favor key it in as such one day)
via e-mail reply.

You would never know! The emails to me are private. You see unlike
stupid dogs like you, I don't divulge who emailed me. Ask LaVonne! ;-)

Or you're are practicing more of your public Doanism.

And you are doing the Kane9 Kan't dance! :-)

Doan, you've never had anything but bluff and lies since you first
posted here to the present. It's ALL smoke and mirrors with you and
you do it in public much to your embarrassment.

Nobody called me McBragg! ;-)

;-)

Nothing to offer eh? No measure for when spanking becomes abuse. No
proof one way or another if I ever claimed I was unspanked. No proof
you have the Embry Study.

And the Kane9 Kan't dance continues... ;-)

Nothing by whackin' off publically....that's all yah got. Even Canada
is against yah....R R R R R

Talking like a "never-spanked" boy again. Do your mother approve? ;-)
They outlawed spanking in Canada? In fact, they uphold Sec. 43!
Who you gonna appeal to next? :-)

Doan

Poor Doanator.

Sad Kane5! ;-0

{:-]

Kane4 - 5 less than a Kane9!

Doan

Doananism - publically was We Doan Need No Steenkin' CPS
 

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004, Doan wrote:

On 31 Jan 2004, Kane wrote:

On Sat, 31 Jan 2004 08:03:36 -0800, Doan wrote:

On 17 Jan 2004, Kane wrote:

Discipline (a parent decided somewhat imprecisely where "spanking"
ends and "abuse" begins). Doan could have helped him discover the
"reasonable standard" measure, but somehow didn't come forward in
time....Doan? Doan? Where are you Doan?

LOL! Still showing everyone that you are still stupid?

LOL! No, just letting you show how stupid you are.

Missed the recent Canadian court finding on "reasonable" didn't you?
They can't figure it out and admit it. So they have cut the right to
spank to the barest of minimums, leaving a great many how have come
here and "made up their own minds" very much in the lurch.

They can't do, in Canada, legally what your buddies here claim is
okay.

Too lazy to
call your local DA or CPS on what is "reasonable"???

They don't know and neither do you. The question isn't, by the way,
what is "reasonable" but what is abusive. And you still haven't
provided the marker that would tell people where that boundary is, now
have you?

Using that logic, you can't talk to your child neither since you CAN'T
PROVIDED THE MARKER THAT WOULD TELL PEOPLE WHERE THAT BOUNDARY IS between
plain talking and verbal abuse! Logic and the anti-spanking zealotS,
are they mutually exclusive? ;-)

Doan


Hey, Kane4! I missed your reply to this one. :-)

Doan