Those who do not spank have a message or two for you

On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not spank.

Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and you are trying
to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as per your recent
post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national spelling and
geography contests.

Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never said anything
against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for Dorothy, stupid
dog! :-)

You might also check with a few colleges and universities that have
taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of homeschoolers.

Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach to parenting
is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who have
homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for decades. Some,
that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives.

LOL! And some homescholers do spank.

When are you going to admit you can't answer the question? You know
you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish to debate
Embry right?

The ball is in your court. :-)

Or you could just debate someone else. I never asked you to debate
Embry with me, I simply offered to meet your challenge if you could
meet my reponses to YOUR challenges....The Question, Proof my spanked
status, and Proof you possess the Embry study I have.

Weasel words. :-)

While we are talking proof, here's bit for you and the spanking
compulsives to consider that OTHERS know so very well. It makes me
wonder just how different your fantasy world is.

About the same as the "dream land." :-)

Doan

http://sandradodd.com/s/proof

Kane

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:16:29 -0800, Doan wrote:


On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not spank.

Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and you are
trying
to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as per your
recent
post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national spelling
and
geography contests.

Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never said
anything
against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for Dorothy,
stupid
dog! :-)

Okay, puppy:

From: Doan
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Obsessive behavior in 4 year old
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:59:23 -0800

"
I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called
"unschooling".
The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may
not
be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is
not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I
don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life!

Doan"

Toto is arguing in favor of teaching at home vs what is usually the
public school model. You are claiming that learning under duress is
superior. That is "against homeschooling in the 'unschooling' model."
Or were you confused and supporting the unschoolers? I'll let them
know. That is the often the case in the more successful children..
..they are unschooled and one has to stand back and get out of their
way....they absolutely wring out their parents, and turn THEM into
scholars in the early years, and later they are clammering for more
demanding access to university libraries. I know 10 year olds with
library cards, and lab access. These are doing self directed
learning...and they work their tutors hard.

YOu know nothing factual about homeschooling I'd wager. A failure here
or there because of calling it homeschooling when it isn't, up against
the massive drop out and failure rate of public schools...r r r r
r....

Want to try for yet another brass ring, puppy?

You might also check with a few colleges and universities that have
taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of homeschoolers.

Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach to
parenting
is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who have
homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for decades. Some,
that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives.

LOL! And some homescholers do spank.

Apparently you wish now to pretend I didn't say, "some" or that I did
not differentiate by saying some of us spank. I suppose "some" means
"all" to you when you want it to.

That's a rather rapid evolution of language, isn't it?

Of course some homeschoolers spank, in fact a great many do. I happen
to be around those that don't and I refer to them in this post and
have in others.

When are you going to admit you can't answer the question? You know
you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish to debate
Embry right?

The ball is in your court. :-)

Not hardly pilgrim.

It's on the ground behind you where you dropped it weeks ago.

Please repost where you have answered The Question as asked, resolved
the "never spanked" claim you made, and have proven you have the Embry
study I do?

The last time you tried it with The Questions of your owns about how
it had to exist because it had extremes, was a laugh a minute. I can
go five or I can go fifty on the freeway, but that does not prove
there was a traffic speed control sign there. It could be or it could
not. And if I can't see it then I have to go by a guess...and I could
be very wrong. Often parents that guess are very wrong. Show me the
"speed limit sign"

You have answered a pseudo question ... by the answer "a reasonable
standard." I didn't ask for a "reasonable standard" as it is
unidentifiable as a constant.

It varies according to the bias of the observer. Stop signs, speed
limit signs and written instructions that are specific as to agreed
upon precise measure are what is needed and what I asked for. Your
words will be gold should you actually answer this question. I'd
copyright if I were you. Some of your friends aren't as honest as I
am.

If you cannot supply those to the reader and myself then say so and
quit playing at it. You cannot assure the parent a, other than no
spanking at all, a precise way to not injure their child is some
fashion while spanking.

I will accept your answer as honest if you admit your inability to
answer The Question. You won't be alone.

And all your squirming doesn't convince me or anyone else.

So far I've not seen one of these challenges or counter challenges
met.

I've posted page numbers from the study with relevant text from those
pages. You've posted nothing that couldn't be located from another
source, and in fact I see that in fact they do NOT exist in the study
I have. You refuse to give page references.

That's rather telling. Sounds like someone's citation.

You have not resolved whether or not I have said I was unspanked.
There are no citations from you. It doesn't matter to me. My "spanked"
status isn't important one way or another. YOURS seems to be though.
If you are going to keep saying I'm unspanked I am certainly willing
for you to prove it.

If I was spanked or not I most assuredly have asked you a question you
cannot answer, and called you out on your failure to prove the
criteria of YOUR OWN CHALLENGE...the Embry study.

I'm just not willing to debate someone that relies so much on
artifices as ways to bolt when caught in a lie. And it's my choice,
since you callenged ME to debate Embry by claiming I did not have the
study, and the conditions I will respond under.

Look behind you. The ball is not on my side of the net at all. It's
were you left it.

Or you could just debate someone else. I never asked you to debate
Embry with me, I simply offered to meet your challenge if you could
meet my reponses to YOUR challenges....The Question, Proof my
spanked
status, and Proof you possess the Embry study I have.

Weasel words. :-)

You can't debate someone else? I did ask you to debate Embry? I didn't
offer you a set of conditions before I'd accept your challenge to
debate Embry?

Which is the weasel statement?

In fact it's a weasel statement to claim such. This isn't MY game,
it's yours. Finish if you will or dance. I'm just here to please you,
as long as I don't have to play sans rules. The rules I'll play under
are clear, simple, precise, and up to you to agree to to play.

These were YOUR challenges, not mine, with the exception of The
Question. And you didn't have to take that one at all. YOU stuck your
neck out with your claims.

No, I'm not decieving anyone. I've simply said I won't accept your
challenge to debate until you have met the conditions. If you think
the conditions unfair, or unattainable you may say so.

And then we won't debate. Possibly you'd like to share with others
what you have that you have tried to con folks into thinking is my
Embry study, so feel free.

Or dance. Makes me no nevermind.

You might start by identifying the document by title, give page
references when you make a claim or challenge from the text. Supply
your debating opponent a copy first of course.

You wouldn't want them to try to debate blindly would you? I wouldn't
do that to you, that's why I insisted you find your copy first and
prove you had it....I didn't want you to later claim handicap or
misunderstanding.

Certainly providing a copy and using page references would prove you
have something from the Embry study and not an excerpt.

A chart that gives no reference back to the document proves it's a
chart, nothing else.

I still don't see you serving that ball. There, behind you. Surely in
one of your many spins you saw it there.


While we are talking proof, here's bit for you and the spanking
compulsives to consider that OTHERS know so very well. It makes me
wonder just how different your fantasy world is.

About the same as the "dream land." :-)

Well, interestingly I don't deny that some children survive a
childhood of spanking very well. I have always maintained we are a
tough species. I simply prefer to play the odds.

I have found much harm from the various levels of "spanking" that the
users claims is spanking even when it's out at the drawing blood
extremes.

I have never been able to find any proven harm from not spanking,
despite the wild Dobsonian exclamatory orations of some of you.

Hence, I choose the safe path...not that there wouldn't or couldn't be
a rare "sport" or mutation that was bad, but I've not found them. And
I want the odds as far into the best for the child as possible. I care
about society and my child.

I have found, as I said, ample clearly identified spanking harms.

Would you like a copy of the Embry study that I have. Take care of the
other two issues and you shall have it, and I'll never ask if you lied
about it.

I've already made arrangements to provide it to a third party. I'm
sure forwarding a copy to you on my request wouldn't be refused.

But not until, Droaner. Not until.

You are not to be trusted. So we have to do what we can, no matter how
feeble it might be....R R R R R R R R.... to keep you as honest as is
possible, which ain't much.

Just do as you are told and you get's what you want. A chance to
actually hold and touch the Embry study. And if you are really a good
boy and stop the garbage, possibly a debate...since I promised it.

I don't think you have the guts. and all the running and squirming is
clear evidence of your cowarice. Prove me wrong.

Oh, and the citation I gave, makes clear that I would NOT pretend that
homeschooler don't spank. These say, some of them, that they did and
that others do.

http://sandradodd.com/s/proof

Why do you do this silly lying you are so easily caught at? Misleading
is lying and trying to pretend I said something Ididn't...welllllll.
tsk

Doan

Six days. Wednesday, February 25th. 8 AM.

Kane


http://sandradodd.com/s/proof

Kane

Than you are showing that you are a stupid dog once again. I said
WHAT WORKED FOR ONE MAY NOT WORK FOR OTHERS. It is in favor of
a parental freedom to chose what best for their kids. If you ask
Dorothy, you would have known that I prefer homeschooling over
public education. Do a google search on me on the subject of
unschooling. YOU ARE JUST STUPID!

Doan

On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:16:29 -0800, Doan wrote:


On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not spank.

Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and you are
trying
to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as per your
recent
post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national spelling
and
geography contests.

Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never said
anything
against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for Dorothy,
stupid
dog! :-)

Okay, puppy:

From: Doan
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Obsessive behavior in 4 year old
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:59:23 -0800

"
I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called
"unschooling".
The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may
not
be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is
not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I
don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life!

Doan"

Toto is arguing in favor of teaching at home vs what is usually the
public school model. You are claiming that learning under duress is
superior. That is "against homeschooling in the 'unschooling' model."
Or were you confused and supporting the unschoolers? I'll let them
know. That is the often the case in the more successful children..
.they are unschooled and one has to stand back and get out of their
way....they absolutely wring out their parents, and turn THEM into
scholars in the early years, and later they are clammering for more
demanding access to university libraries. I know 10 year olds with
library cards, and lab access. These are doing self directed
learning...and they work their tutors hard.

YOu know nothing factual about homeschooling I'd wager. A failure here
or there because of calling it homeschooling when it isn't, up against
the massive drop out and failure rate of public schools...r r r r
r....

Want to try for yet another brass ring, puppy?

You might also check with a few colleges and universities that have
taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of homeschoolers.

Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach to
parenting
is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who have
homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for decades. Some,
that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives.

LOL! And some homescholers do spank.

Apparently you wish now to pretend I didn't say, "some" or that I did
not differentiate by saying some of us spank. I suppose "some" means
"all" to you when you want it to.

That's a rather rapid evolution of language, isn't it?

Of course some homeschoolers spank, in fact a great many do. I happen
to be around those that don't and I refer to them in this post and
have in others.

When are you going to admit you can't answer the question? You know
you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish to debate
Embry right?

The ball is in your court. :-)

Not hardly pilgrim.

It's on the ground behind you where you dropped it weeks ago.

Please repost where you have answered The Question as asked, resolved
the "never spanked" claim you made, and have proven you have the Embry
study I do?

The last time you tried it with The Questions of your owns about how
it had to exist because it had extremes, was a laugh a minute. I can
go five or I can go fifty on the freeway, but that does not prove
there was a traffic speed control sign there. It could be or it could
not. And if I can't see it then I have to go by a guess...and I could
be very wrong. Often parents that guess are very wrong. Show me the
"speed limit sign"

You have answered a pseudo question ... by the answer "a reasonable
standard." I didn't ask for a "reasonable standard" as it is
unidentifiable as a constant.

It varies according to the bias of the observer. Stop signs, speed
limit signs and written instructions that are specific as to agreed
upon precise measure are what is needed and what I asked for. Your
words will be gold should you actually answer this question. I'd
copyright if I were you. Some of your friends aren't as honest as I
am.

If you cannot supply those to the reader and myself then say so and
quit playing at it. You cannot assure the parent a, other than no
spanking at all, a precise way to not injure their child is some
fashion while spanking.

I will accept your answer as honest if you admit your inability to
answer The Question. You won't be alone.

And all your squirming doesn't convince me or anyone else.

So far I've not seen one of these challenges or counter challenges
met.

I've posted page numbers from the study with relevant text from those
pages. You've posted nothing that couldn't be located from another
source, and in fact I see that in fact they do NOT exist in the study
I have. You refuse to give page references.

That's rather telling. Sounds like someone's citation.

You have not resolved whether or not I have said I was unspanked.
There are no citations from you. It doesn't matter to me. My "spanked"
status isn't important one way or another. YOURS seems to be though.
If you are going to keep saying I'm unspanked I am certainly willing
for you to prove it.

If I was spanked or not I most assuredly have asked you a question you
cannot answer, and called you out on your failure to prove the
criteria of YOUR OWN CHALLENGE...the Embry study.

I'm just not willing to debate someone that relies so much on
artifices as ways to bolt when caught in a lie. And it's my choice,
since you callenged ME to debate Embry by claiming I did not have the
study, and the conditions I will respond under.

Look behind you. The ball is not on my side of the net at all. It's
were you left it.

Or you could just debate someone else. I never asked you to debate
Embry with me, I simply offered to meet your challenge if you could
meet my reponses to YOUR challenges....The Question, Proof my
spanked
status, and Proof you possess the Embry study I have.

Weasel words. :-)

You can't debate someone else? I did ask you to debate Embry? I didn't
offer you a set of conditions before I'd accept your challenge to
debate Embry?

Which is the weasel statement?

In fact it's a weasel statement to claim such. This isn't MY game,
it's yours. Finish if you will or dance. I'm just here to please you,
as long as I don't have to play sans rules. The rules I'll play under
are clear, simple, precise, and up to you to agree to to play.

These were YOUR challenges, not mine, with the exception of The
Question. And you didn't have to take that one at all. YOU stuck your
neck out with your claims.

No, I'm not decieving anyone. I've simply said I won't accept your
challenge to debate until you have met the conditions. If you think
the conditions unfair, or unattainable you may say so.

And then we won't debate. Possibly you'd like to share with others
what you have that you have tried to con folks into thinking is my
Embry study, so feel free.

Or dance. Makes me no nevermind.

You might start by identifying the document by title, give page
references when you make a claim or challenge from the text. Supply
your debating opponent a copy first of course.

You wouldn't want them to try to debate blindly would you? I wouldn't
do that to you, that's why I insisted you find your copy first and
prove you had it....I didn't want you to later claim handicap or
misunderstanding.

Certainly providing a copy and using page references would prove you
have something from the Embry study and not an excerpt.

A chart that gives no reference back to the document proves it's a
chart, nothing else.

I still don't see you serving that ball. There, behind you. Surely in
one of your many spins you saw it there.


While we are talking proof, here's bit for you and the spanking
compulsives to consider that OTHERS know so very well. It makes me
wonder just how different your fantasy world is.

About the same as the "dream land." :-)

Well, interestingly I don't deny that some children survive a
childhood of spanking very well. I have always maintained we are a
tough species. I simply prefer to play the odds.

I have found much harm from the various levels of "spanking" that the
users claims is spanking even when it's out at the drawing blood
extremes.

I have never been able to find any proven harm from not spanking,
despite the wild Dobsonian exclamatory orations of some of you.

Hence, I choose the safe path...not that there wouldn't or couldn't be
a rare "sport" or mutation that was bad, but I've not found them. And
I want the odds as far into the best for the child as possible. I care
about society and my child.

I have found, as I said, ample clearly identified spanking harms.

Would you like a copy of the Embry study that I have. Take care of the
other two issues and you shall have it, and I'll never ask if you lied
about it.

I've already made arrangements to provide it to a third party. I'm
sure forwarding a copy to you on my request wouldn't be refused.

But not until, Droaner. Not until.

You are not to be trusted. So we have to do what we can, no matter how
feeble it might be....R R R R R R R R.... to keep you as honest as is
possible, which ain't much.

Just do as you are told and you get's what you want. A chance to
actually hold and touch the Embry study. And if you are really a good
boy and stop the garbage, possibly a debate...since I promised it.

I don't think you have the guts. and all the running and squirming is
clear evidence of your cowarice. Prove me wrong.

Oh, and the citation I gave, makes clear that I would NOT pretend that
homeschooler don't spank. These say, some of them, that they did and
that others do.

http://sandradodd.com/s/proof

Why do you do this silly lying you are so easily caught at? Misleading
is lying and trying to pretend I said something Ididn't...welllllll.
tsk

Doan

Six days. Wednesday, February 25th. 8 AM.

Kane


http://sandradodd.com/s/proof

Kane

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 23:05:23 -0800, Doan wrote:

.........his usual babbling lines of nonsense, denial, dodging, weasel
words, and childish acting out attention getting.

Let's start with the beginning. Your claim about unschoolers.

http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1

Perhaps this will help clarify for you how you have once again stuck
your foot in it up to your little child nose:

http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1

Your first sentence suggests unschoolers have a single argument about
what they do......the very essense of "un" schooling says you are full
of it, as in, from the page above:
"What is unschooling?
Have you ever described 'red' to a person who is color blind?
Sometimes, trying to define unschooling is like trying to define red.
Ask 30 unschoolers to define the word and you'll get thirty shades of
red. They'll all be red, but they'll all be different. Generally,
unschoolers are concerned with learning or becoming educated, not with
'doing school.' The focus is upon the choices made by each individual
learner, and those choices can vary according to learning style and
personality type. There is no one way to unschool. Click here for more
definitions."

Reading the whole page and it's referrences will show you as being
clearly a stupid little boy that knows nothing but makes a lot of
attention getting diversionary noise.

Than you are showing that you are a stupid dog once again.

Funny, I thought you once or twice claimed that you only gave back
what the other person was giving to you. I do not see any ad homs from
me in the message you responded to. Are you slipping?

I just did give you tit for tat though. Shall we escalate again? YOU
always DO.

I said
WHAT WORKED FOR ONE MAY NOT WORK FOR OTHERS.

That's nice. That's not what I braced you about. I didn't discuss
that. We can later if you wish, and anyway:

The subject was your little attack on unschooling, as in:

" "
I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called
"unschooling".
The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may
not
be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is
not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I
don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life!

Doan""

And just an aside related to this quote contents: homeschoolings and
unschoolers do not have a single viewpoint on spanking, and they of
all people, know and defend the "what worked for one may not be
working for another" concept...if you understood and knew anything
about homeschooling, generically, you wouldn't make such a stupid
claim against unschoolers as having "an" argument.

So, now we have you claiming you did not say anything against
homeschooling.

But THAT shot at unschoolers was SOMETHING against SOME homeschooling.
You were making the claim that WE are one track "our way or no way
presenters" in the spanking argument. Male bovine excrement, little
boy.

Or are you down to hair splitting again that something isn't
everything so disqualifies your statement as a criticism?

Your usual flight of fancy logic? (which amounts to nothing but
weasely dodging)

It is in favor of
a parental freedom to chose what best for their kids.

Yep. The question here isn't that. In fact you just used the classic
logical fallacy, The Straw Man argument. No one here is suggesting
parents don't have freedom to choose.

The question is what tools are available to the parent for deciding,
rather than guessing. That is the basis for aps, as far as I can
gather, and from the FAQ that you keep trying to rewrite to hide the
facts....that there is a lack of tools and a lot of guessing.

I have never defended forcing parents to not spank, though you twits
ARE tempting me to side with Chris and LaVonne. Your illogic and
stupidy are very very persuasive.

You pretend that tools and resources for decision making are available
in instances where they are clearly NOT.

Tradition and guesses in the hard sciences would have you and I
sending smoke signals and grunting at each other from the hilltops for
this little debate.

A parent must guess, for instance, on the line where a child might be
harmed from CP. And so far you have not admitted that or proven me
wrong...you have not drawn and shown us The Line I refer to in The
Question....you just pretend you have by sophistry and dodges.

If you ask
Dorothy,

Well, I didn't. And I don't care to. It's you that I'm talking to.

you would have known that I prefer homeschooling over
public education.

You may well do so. But there is no proof of that. And it doesn't fit
with your own statements concerning education. You were pushing the
idea that children benefit from doing things they don't like, as
though homeschoolers or unschoolers actually do a "no pain" teaching
program.

Children that are unschooled choose, for themselves...willingly and
eagerly...very difficult and time consuming tasks. They are highly
self challenging and that is a given of Unschooling. Everyone that
does it runs into it. Even the few children that don't appear to be
doing that often turn out to be internal processers .. and work very
hard.

You are an ignorant little arrogant twit, boy. You know nothing about
homeschooling or the children that learn in this way. They tend to be
the most brilliant and creative. And NOT every child can be or should
be unschooled...in families that do unschool one of the givens is that
children will choose to be formally tutored as part of THEIR choice.

In fact many do what I mentioned earlier, as they finally outpace
their parents they go to other teachers..formal settings...but IT IS
BY CHOICE.

Do a google search on me on the subject of
unschooling.

Oh, I did that when you brought the subject up...trust me on that.

YOU ARE JUST STUPID!

"Mirror mirror on the wall, who's the dumbest dumb of all?" R R R R R

You just did it again. I nailed you just yesterday on one of your
infamous shouting dares. And here you are doing it again, child.

Before we go any further I think you should provide the referrances to
your defense of homeschooling, and your "prefer homeschooling please.

When you've done, see if you can refute what I turned up on this
typical dare of yours....the shouting, "I DARE YOU I DOUBLE DARE YOU"
that has sunk you so often recently.

Do you think it intelligent or smart to keep doing the same thing over
and over again when it's not working? Or are you just having fun with
us?

Each time you use this particular ad hom, "STUPID," lately I've had
little trouble in refuting you. Don't you think it's time YOU looked
in the mirror?

You aren't a champion of homeschooling. Or if you are not proven as
yet by your insistence that it's in usenet. Nice to hear you say you
are though. The unspanking unschoolers thank you, I'm sure.

After an exhaustive search with google on usenet, I found this single
instance where you defended parents refusal to have their children
take standardized tests....and it was an anti CPS tirade, not a
defense of homeschooling, or more specifically THE SUBJECT OF YOUR
DERISION IN A RECENT POST...."unschooling."

(Whatever made you think unschoolers have a single viewpoint? How
stupid can you be?)

It's just barely related to homeschooling. And is about testing.

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=au...usc.edu&rnum=1

or http://tinyurl.com/3ev39

Do you see there were you said you have a preferance for
homeschooling?

Possibly you steered me wrong asking me to search on "homeschooling"
and you.

In fact of both permutations of the word, "homeschool" and
"homeschooling" I got nothing from you defending homeschooling or
unschooling and only four hits two of which were repetative of the
above. duplicates.

http://tinyurl.com/2styx

Now here is your challenge to me, word for word:

Do a google search on me on the subject of
unschooling.

Then I tried "unschooling" which WAS the point of what I said you were
being critical of, in open search on the web and usenet:

On a Web wide search on "doan" and unschooling I got a few
hits....none were you. Other "Doan"s and a Doan's Pills....R R R R.
And usenet for the same search:

http://tinyurl.com/3fvxb which simply is the two posts we just
exchanged.

Then I tried your archives and "home school", and got 26 heats, a lot
of them repeaters, and most just hits because someone crossposted to a
"homeschool" ng, and not one, nothing, with a defense by you of
unschooling or homeschooling.

See..... http://tinyurl.com/2asos

So, Droany, are you stupid or are you a liar, or a stupid liar?

Or are you, as is very plain to us all, a stupid little boy trying to
play with the adults and doing silly little boy stunts such as making
faces and monkey noises for bit of attention?

You have made no defense of homeschooling outside that one CPS attack,
and that does not go to our discussion on non-spanking homeschooling
parents.

I think I've figure out the answer to my question...you are a stupid
liar and you are slipping. So many years of it has dulled our brain.

When you constantly and consistently lie, Droany, you don't have to
think or be creative any more and it shows. The errors accumulate
over time. Your brain is accluter with your own lies and trying but
failing to keep them sorted.

There is a normal reaction to this....one sees it in Nearly Normal
Neal's posts over time, and of course, yours. It's a way to not commit
yourself, nor be responsible for what you claim and propose.

You, Droany, and all compulsive liars, tend to endlessly repeat the
same lame one liner shots, and when you try to fill in the gaps you
fall on your asses as you just did again in this post.

You used to appear better at this game of yours. Your writhings were
newer to you and to us back then. Now, it's old, and worn out, and you
have nothing to replace them with, except running off to another
newsgroup and doing your same ol' same ol' tricks and noises on
someone new. Didn't help much, did it? Didn't give you any new tricks,
and certainly no new skills.

Speaking of mirrors, as you so often do...........


Doan

Wednesday, 8:00 am, February 25th.

I'll be there.

Will you be?

Kane



On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:16:29 -0800, Doan wrote:


On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not spank.

Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and you are
trying
to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as per your
recent
post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national
spelling
and
geography contests.

Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never said
anything
against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for Dorothy,
stupid
dog! :-)

Okay, puppy:

From: Doan
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Obsessive behavior in 4 year old
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:59:23 -0800

"
I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called
"unschooling".
The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may
not
be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning
is
not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what
I
don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life!

Doan"

Toto is arguing in favor of teaching at home vs what is usually the
public school model. You are claiming that learning under duress is
superior. That is "against homeschooling in the 'unschooling'
model."
Or were you confused and supporting the unschoolers? I'll let them
know. That is the often the case in the more successful children..
.they are unschooled and one has to stand back and get out of their
way....they absolutely wring out their parents, and turn THEM into
scholars in the early years, and later they are clammering for more
demanding access to university libraries. I know 10 year olds with
library cards, and lab access. These are doing self directed
learning...and they work their tutors hard.

YOu know nothing factual about homeschooling I'd wager. A failure
here
or there because of calling it homeschooling when it isn't, up
against
the massive drop out and failure rate of public schools...r r r r
r....

Want to try for yet another brass ring, puppy?

You might also check with a few colleges and universities that
have
taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of homeschoolers.

Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach to
parenting
is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who have
homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for decades.
Some,
that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives.

LOL! And some homescholers do spank.

Apparently you wish now to pretend I didn't say, "some" or that I
did
not differentiate by saying some of us spank. I suppose "some"
means
"all" to you when you want it to.

That's a rather rapid evolution of language, isn't it?

Of course some homeschoolers spank, in fact a great many do. I
happen
to be around those that don't and I refer to them in this post and
have in others.

When are you going to admit you can't answer the question? You
know
you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish to
debate
Embry right?

The ball is in your court. :-)

Not hardly pilgrim.

It's on the ground behind you where you dropped it weeks ago.

Please repost where you have answered The Question as asked,
resolved
the "never spanked" claim you made, and have proven you have the
Embry
study I do?

The last time you tried it with The Questions of your owns about
how
it had to exist because it had extremes, was a laugh a minute. I
can
go five or I can go fifty on the freeway, but that does not prove
there was a traffic speed control sign there. It could be or it
could
not. And if I can't see it then I have to go by a guess...and I
could
be very wrong. Often parents that guess are very wrong. Show me the
"speed limit sign"

You have answered a pseudo question ... by the answer "a reasonable
standard." I didn't ask for a "reasonable standard" as it is
unidentifiable as a constant.

It varies according to the bias of the observer. Stop signs, speed
limit signs and written instructions that are specific as to agreed
upon precise measure are what is needed and what I asked for. Your
words will be gold should you actually answer this question. I'd
copyright if I were you. Some of your friends aren't as honest as I
am.

If you cannot supply those to the reader and myself then say so and
quit playing at it. You cannot assure the parent a, other than no
spanking at all, a precise way to not injure their child is some
fashion while spanking.

I will accept your answer as honest if you admit your inability to
answer The Question. You won't be alone.

And all your squirming doesn't convince me or anyone else.

So far I've not seen one of these challenges or counter challenges
met.

I've posted page numbers from the study with relevant text from
those
pages. You've posted nothing that couldn't be located from another
source, and in fact I see that in fact they do NOT exist in the
study
I have. You refuse to give page references.

That's rather telling. Sounds like someone's citation.

You have not resolved whether or not I have said I was unspanked.
There are no citations from you. It doesn't matter to me. My
"spanked"
status isn't important one way or another. YOURS seems to be
though.
If you are going to keep saying I'm unspanked I am certainly
willing
for you to prove it.

If I was spanked or not I most assuredly have asked you a question
you
cannot answer, and called you out on your failure to prove the
criteria of YOUR OWN CHALLENGE...the Embry study.

I'm just not willing to debate someone that relies so much on
artifices as ways to bolt when caught in a lie. And it's my choice,
since you callenged ME to debate Embry by claiming I did not have
the
study, and the conditions I will respond under.

Look behind you. The ball is not on my side of the net at all. It's
were you left it.

Or you could just debate someone else. I never asked you to
debate
Embry with me, I simply offered to meet your challenge if you
could
meet my reponses to YOUR challenges....The Question, Proof my
spanked
status, and Proof you possess the Embry study I have.

Weasel words. :-)

You can't debate someone else? I did ask you to debate Embry? I
didn't
offer you a set of conditions before I'd accept your challenge to
debate Embry?

Which is the weasel statement?

In fact it's a weasel statement to claim such. This isn't MY game,
it's yours. Finish if you will or dance. I'm just here to please
you,
as long as I don't have to play sans rules. The rules I'll play
under
are clear, simple, precise, and up to you to agree to to play.

These were YOUR challenges, not mine, with the exception of The
Question. And you didn't have to take that one at all. YOU stuck
your
neck out with your claims.

No, I'm not decieving anyone. I've simply said I won't accept your
challenge to debate until you have met the conditions. If you think
the conditions unfair, or unattainable you may say so.

And then we won't debate. Possibly you'd like to share with others
what you have that you have tried to con folks into thinking is my
Embry study, so feel free.

Or dance. Makes me no nevermind.

You might start by identifying the document by title, give page
references when you make a claim or challenge from the text. Supply
your debating opponent a copy first of course.

You wouldn't want them to try to debate blindly would you? I
wouldn't
do that to you, that's why I insisted you find your copy first and
prove you had it....I didn't want you to later claim handicap or
misunderstanding.

Certainly providing a copy and using page references would prove
you
have something from the Embry study and not an excerpt.

A chart that gives no reference back to the document proves it's a
chart, nothing else.

I still don't see you serving that ball. There, behind you. Surely
in
one of your many spins you saw it there.


While we are talking proof, here's bit for you and the spanking
compulsives to consider that OTHERS know so very well. It makes
me
wonder just how different your fantasy world is.

About the same as the "dream land." :-)

Well, interestingly I don't deny that some children survive a
childhood of spanking very well. I have always maintained we are a
tough species. I simply prefer to play the odds.

I have found much harm from the various levels of "spanking" that
the
users claims is spanking even when it's out at the drawing blood
extremes.

I have never been able to find any proven harm from not spanking,
despite the wild Dobsonian exclamatory orations of some of you.

Hence, I choose the safe path...not that there wouldn't or couldn't
be
a rare "sport" or mutation that was bad, but I've not found them.
And
I want the odds as far into the best for the child as possible. I
care
about society and my child.

I have found, as I said, ample clearly identified spanking harms.

Would you like a copy of the Embry study that I have. Take care of
the
other two issues and you shall have it, and I'll never ask if you
lied
about it.

I've already made arrangements to provide it to a third party. I'm
sure forwarding a copy to you on my request wouldn't be refused.

But not until, Droaner. Not until.

You are not to be trusted. So we have to do what we can, no matter
how
feeble it might be....R R R R R R R R.... to keep you as honest as
is
possible, which ain't much.

Just do as you are told and you get's what you want. A chance to
actually hold and touch the Embry study. And if you are really a
good
boy and stop the garbage, possibly a debate...since I promised it.

I don't think you have the guts. and all the running and squirming
is
clear evidence of your cowarice. Prove me wrong.

Oh, and the citation I gave, makes clear that I would NOT pretend
that
homeschooler don't spank. These say, some of them, that they did
and
that others do.

http://sandradodd.com/s/proof

Why do you do this silly lying you are so easily caught at?
Misleading
is lying and trying to pretend I said something
Ididn't...welllllll.
tsk

Doan

Six days. Wednesday, February 25th. 8 AM.

Kane


http://sandradodd.com/s/proof

Kane

He is just a little dog that the anti-spanking zealotS thought they could
stick on me and I'll go away. They are wrong and now they have a run
away, out of control dog they wish they didn't own. :-)

Doan

On 19 Feb 2004, Fern5827 wrote:

Doan, he drones on.

Whereas you are succinct, reasoned, and have a coherent philosophy to back up
your beliefs, Kane's agenda is to be hostile.

He is the true Dronanator. Ironic, isn't he?

Doan relates:

From: Doan
Date: 2/19/2004 2:05 AM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id:


Than you are showing that you are a stupid dog once again. I said
WHAT WORKED FOR ONE MAY NOT WORK FOR OTHERS. It is in favor of
a parental freedom to chose what best for their kids. If you ask
Dorothy, you would have known that I prefer homeschooling over
public education. Do a google search on me on the subject of
unschooling. YOU ARE JUST STUPID!

Doan

On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:16:29 -0800, Doan wrote:


On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not spank.

Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and you are
trying
to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as per your
recent
post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national spelling
and
geography contests.

Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never said
anything
against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for Dorothy,
stupid
dog! :-)

Okay, puppy:

From: Doan
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Obsessive behavior in 4 year old
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:59:23 -0800

"
I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called
"unschooling".
The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may
not
be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is
not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I
don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life!

Doan"

Toto is arguing in favor of teaching at home vs what is usually the
public school model. You are claiming that learning under duress is
superior. That is "against homeschooling in the 'unschooling' model."
Or were you confused and supporting the unschoolers? I'll let them
know. That is the often the case in the more successful children..
.they are unschooled and one has to stand back and get out of their
way....they absolutely wring out their parents, and turn THEM into
scholars in the early years, and later they are clammering for more
demanding access to university libraries. I know 10 year olds with
library cards, and lab access. These are doing self directed
learning...and they work their tutors hard.

YOu know nothing factual about homeschooling I'd wager. A failure here
or there because of calling it homeschooling when it isn't, up against
the massive drop out and failure rate of public schools...r r r r
r....

Want to try for yet another brass ring, puppy?

You might also check with a few colleges and universities that have
taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of homeschoolers.

Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach to
parenting
is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who have
homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for decades. Some,
that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives.

LOL! And some homescholers do spank.

Apparently you wish now to pretend I didn't say, "some" or that I did
not differentiate by saying some of us spank. I suppose "some" means
"all" to you when you want it to.

That's a rather rapid evolution of language, isn't it?

Of course some homeschoolers spank, in fact a great many do. I happen
to be around those that don't and I refer to them in this post and
have in others.

When are you going to admit you can't answer the question? You know
you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish to debate
Embry right?

The ball is in your court. :-)

Not hardly pilgrim.

It's on the ground behind you where you dropped it weeks ago.

Please repost where you have answered The Question as asked, resolved
the "never spanked" claim you made, and have proven you have the Embry
study I do?

The last time you tried it with The Questions of your owns about how
it had to exist because it had extremes, was a laugh a minute. I can
go five or I can go fifty on the freeway, but that does not prove
there was a traffic speed control sign there. It could be or it could
not. And if I can't see it then I have to go by a guess...and I could
be very wrong. Often parents that guess are very wrong. Show me the
"speed limit sign"

You have answered a pseudo question ... by the answer "a reasonable
standard." I didn't ask for a "reasonable standard" as it is
unidentifiable as a constant.

It varies according to the bias of the observer. Stop signs, speed
limit signs and written instructions that are specific as to agreed
upon precise measure are what is needed and what I asked for. Your
words will be gold should you actually answer this question. I'd
copyright if I were you. Some of your friends aren't as honest as I
am.

If you cannot supply those to the reader and myself then say so and
quit playing at it. You cannot assure the parent a, other than no
spanking at all, a precise way to not injure their child is some
fashion while spanking.

I will accept your answer as honest if you admit your inability to
answer The Question. You won't be alone.

And all your squirming doesn't convince me or anyone else.

So far I've not seen one of these challenges or counter challenges
met.

I've posted page numbers from the study with relevant text from those
pages. You've posted nothing that couldn't be located from another
source, and in fact I see that in fact they do NOT exist in the study
I have. You refuse to give page references.

That's rather telling. Sounds like someone's citation.

snip)

All of this just to prove that you are stupid as a dog again?
Can't find the Straus studies, can't find the Embry study, now
can't even do a decent google search! Here is my old post:

Date: 2000-11-01 01:35:43 PST
"Last year, the kids who got perfect scores on the SAT are homeschooled.
Comparing public schools to homeschools is like comparing public toilets
to private home toilets. If you care about your kids, homeschool if
you can or vote for VOUCHERS!"

Doan

On 19 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 23:05:23 -0800, Doan wrote:

........his usual babbling lines of nonsense, denial, dodging, weasel
words, and childish acting out attention getting.

Let's start with the beginning. Your claim about unschoolers.

http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1

Perhaps this will help clarify for you how you have once again stuck
your foot in it up to your little child nose:

http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1

Your first sentence suggests unschoolers have a single argument about
what they do......the very essense of "un" schooling says you are full
of it, as in, from the page above:
"What is unschooling?
Have you ever described 'red' to a person who is color blind?
Sometimes, trying to define unschooling is like trying to define red.
Ask 30 unschoolers to define the word and you'll get thirty shades of
red. They'll all be red, but they'll all be different. Generally,
unschoolers are concerned with learning or becoming educated, not with
'doing school.' The focus is upon the choices made by each individual
learner, and those choices can vary according to learning style and
personality type. There is no one way to unschool. Click here for more
definitions."

Reading the whole page and it's referrences will show you as being
clearly a stupid little boy that knows nothing but makes a lot of
attention getting diversionary noise.

Than you are showing that you are a stupid dog once again.

Funny, I thought you once or twice claimed that you only gave back
what the other person was giving to you. I do not see any ad homs from
me in the message you responded to. Are you slipping?

I just did give you tit for tat though. Shall we escalate again? YOU
always DO.

I said
WHAT WORKED FOR ONE MAY NOT WORK FOR OTHERS.

That's nice. That's not what I braced you about. I didn't discuss
that. We can later if you wish, and anyway:

The subject was your little attack on unschooling, as in:

" "
I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called
"unschooling".
The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may
not
be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is
not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I
don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life!

Doan""

And just an aside related to this quote contents: homeschoolings and
unschoolers do not have a single viewpoint on spanking, and they of
all people, know and defend the "what worked for one may not be
working for another" concept...if you understood and knew anything
about homeschooling, generically, you wouldn't make such a stupid
claim against unschoolers as having "an" argument.

So, now we have you claiming you did not say anything against
homeschooling.

But THAT shot at unschoolers was SOMETHING against SOME homeschooling.
You were making the claim that WE are one track "our way or no way
presenters" in the spanking argument. Male bovine excrement, little
boy.

Or are you down to hair splitting again that something isn't
everything so disqualifies your statement as a criticism?

Your usual flight of fancy logic? (which amounts to nothing but
weasely dodging)

It is in favor of
a parental freedom to chose what best for their kids.

Yep. The question here isn't that. In fact you just used the classic
logical fallacy, The Straw Man argument. No one here is suggesting
parents don't have freedom to choose.

The question is what tools are available to the parent for deciding,
rather than guessing. That is the basis for aps, as far as I can
gather, and from the FAQ that you keep trying to rewrite to hide the
facts....that there is a lack of tools and a lot of guessing.

I have never defended forcing parents to not spank, though you twits
ARE tempting me to side with Chris and LaVonne. Your illogic and
stupidy are very very persuasive.

You pretend that tools and resources for decision making are available
in instances where they are clearly NOT.

Tradition and guesses in the hard sciences would have you and I
sending smoke signals and grunting at each other from the hilltops for
this little debate.

A parent must guess, for instance, on the line where a child might be
harmed from CP. And so far you have not admitted that or proven me
wrong...you have not drawn and shown us The Line I refer to in The
Question....you just pretend you have by sophistry and dodges.

If you ask
Dorothy,

Well, I didn't. And I don't care to. It's you that I'm talking to.

you would have known that I prefer homeschooling over
public education.

You may well do so. But there is no proof of that. And it doesn't fit
with your own statements concerning education. You were pushing the
idea that children benefit from doing things they don't like, as
though homeschoolers or unschoolers actually do a "no pain" teaching
program.

Children that are unschooled choose, for themselves...willingly and
eagerly...very difficult and time consuming tasks. They are highly
self challenging and that is a given of Unschooling. Everyone that
does it runs into it. Even the few children that don't appear to be
doing that often turn out to be internal processers .. and work very
hard.

You are an ignorant little arrogant twit, boy. You know nothing about
homeschooling or the children that learn in this way. They tend to be
the most brilliant and creative. And NOT every child can be or should
be unschooled...in families that do unschool one of the givens is that
children will choose to be formally tutored as part of THEIR choice.

In fact many do what I mentioned earlier, as they finally outpace
their parents they go to other teachers..formal settings...but IT IS
BY CHOICE.

Do a google search on me on the subject of
unschooling.

Oh, I did that when you brought the subject up...trust me on that.

YOU ARE JUST STUPID!

"Mirror mirror on the wall, who's the dumbest dumb of all?" R R R R R

You just did it again. I nailed you just yesterday on one of your
infamous shouting dares. And here you are doing it again, child.

Before we go any further I think you should provide the referrances to
your defense of homeschooling, and your "prefer homeschooling please.

When you've done, see if you can refute what I turned up on this
typical dare of yours....the shouting, "I DARE YOU I DOUBLE DARE YOU"
that has sunk you so often recently.

Do you think it intelligent or smart to keep doing the same thing over
and over again when it's not working? Or are you just having fun with
us?

Each time you use this particular ad hom, "STUPID," lately I've had
little trouble in refuting you. Don't you think it's time YOU looked
in the mirror?

You aren't a champion of homeschooling. Or if you are not proven as
yet by your insistence that it's in usenet. Nice to hear you say you
are though. The unspanking unschoolers thank you, I'm sure.

After an exhaustive search with google on usenet, I found this single
instance where you defended parents refusal to have their children
take standardized tests....and it was an anti CPS tirade, not a
defense of homeschooling, or more specifically THE SUBJECT OF YOUR
DERISION IN A RECENT POST...."unschooling."

(Whatever made you think unschoolers have a single viewpoint? How
stupid can you be?)

It's just barely related to homeschooling. And is about testing.

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=au...usc.edu&rnum=1

or http://tinyurl.com/3ev39

Do you see there were you said you have a preferance for
homeschooling?

Possibly you steered me wrong asking me to search on "homeschooling"
and you.

In fact of both permutations of the word, "homeschool" and
"homeschooling" I got nothing from you defending homeschooling or
unschooling and only four hits two of which were repetative of the
above. duplicates.

http://tinyurl.com/2styx

Now here is your challenge to me, word for word:

Do a google search on me on the subject of
unschooling.

Then I tried "unschooling" which WAS the point of what I said you were
being critical of, in open search on the web and usenet:

On a Web wide search on "doan" and unschooling I got a few
hits....none were you. Other "Doan"s and a Doan's Pills....R R R R.
And usenet for the same search:

http://tinyurl.com/3fvxb which simply is the two posts we just
exchanged.

Then I tried your archives and "home school", and got 26 heats, a lot
of them repeaters, and most just hits because someone crossposted to a
"homeschool" ng, and not one, nothing, with a defense by you of
unschooling or homeschooling.

See..... http://tinyurl.com/2asos

So, Droany, are you stupid or are you a liar, or a stupid liar?

Or are you, as is very plain to us all, a stupid little boy trying to
play with the adults and doing silly little boy stunts such as making
faces and monkey noises for bit of attention?

You have made no defense of homeschooling outside that one CPS attack,
and that does not go to our discussion on non-spanking homeschooling
parents.

I think I've figure out the answer to my question...you are a stupid
liar and you are slipping. So many years of it has dulled our brain.

When you constantly and consistently lie, Droany, you don't have to
think or be creative any more and it shows. The errors accumulate
over time. Your brain is accluter with your own lies and trying but
failing to keep them sorted.

There is a normal reaction to this....one sees it in Nearly Normal
Neal's posts over time, and of course, yours. It's a way to not commit
yourself, nor be responsible for what you claim and propose.

You, Droany, and all compulsive liars, tend to endlessly repeat the
same lame one liner shots, and when you try to fill in the gaps you
fall on your asses as you just did again in this post.

You used to appear better at this game of yours. Your writhings were
newer to you and to us back then. Now, it's old, and worn out, and you
have nothing to replace them with, except running off to another
newsgroup and doing your same ol' same ol' tricks and noises on
someone new. Didn't help much, did it? Didn't give you any new tricks,
and certainly no new skills.

Speaking of mirrors, as you so often do...........


Doan

Wednesday, 8:00 am, February 25th.

I'll be there.

Will you be?

Kane



On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:16:29 -0800, Doan wrote:


On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not spank.

Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and you are
trying
to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as per your
recent
post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national
spelling
and
geography contests.

Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never said
anything
against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for Dorothy,
stupid
dog! :-)

Okay, puppy:

From: Doan
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Obsessive behavior in 4 year old
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:59:23 -0800

"
I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called
"unschooling".
The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may
not
be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning
is
not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what
I
don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life!

Doan"

Toto is arguing in favor of teaching at home vs what is usually the
public school model. You are claiming that learning under duress is
superior. That is "against homeschooling in the 'unschooling'
model."
Or were you confused and supporting the unschoolers? I'll let them
know. That is the often the case in the more successful children..
.they are unschooled and one has to stand back and get out of their
way....they absolutely wring out their parents, and turn THEM into
scholars in the early years, and later they are clammering for more
demanding access to university libraries. I know 10 year olds with
library cards, and lab access. These are doing self directed
learning...and they work their tutors hard.

YOu know nothing factual about homeschooling I'd wager. A failure
here
or there because of calling it homeschooling when it isn't, up
against
the massive drop out and failure rate of public schools...r r r r
r....

Want to try for yet another brass ring, puppy?

You might also check with a few colleges and universities that
have
taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of homeschoolers.

Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach to
parenting
is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who have
homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for decades.
Some,
that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives.

LOL! And some homescholers do spank.

Apparently you wish now to pretend I didn't say, "some" or that I
did
not differentiate by saying some of us spank. I suppose "some"
means
"all" to you when you want it to.

That's a rather rapid evolution of language, isn't it?

Of course some homeschoolers spank, in fact a great many do. I
happen
to be around those that don't and I refer to them in this post and
have in others.

When are you going to admit you can't answer the question? You
know
you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish to
debate
Embry right?

The ball is in your court. :-)

Not hardly pilgrim.

It's on the ground behind you where you dropped it weeks ago.

Please repost where you have answered The Question as asked,
resolved
the "never spanked" claim you made, and have proven you have the
Embry
study I do?

The last time you tried it with The Questions of your owns about
how
it had to exist because it had extremes, was a laugh a minute. I
can
go five or I can go fifty on the freeway, but that does not prove
there was a traffic speed control sign there. It could be or it
could
not. And if I can't see it then I have to go by a guess...and I
could
be very wrong. Often parents that guess are very wrong. Show me the
"speed limit sign"

You have answered a pseudo question ... by the answer "a reasonable
standard." I didn't ask for a "reasonable standard" as it is
unidentifiable as a constant.

It varies according to the bias of the observer. Stop signs, speed
limit signs and written instructions that are specific as to agreed
upon precise measure are what is needed and what I asked for. Your
words will be gold should you actually answer this question. I'd
copyright if I were you. Some of your friends aren't as honest as I
am.

If you cannot supply those to the reader and myself then say so and
quit playing at it. You cannot assure the parent a, other than no
spanking at all, a precise way to not injure their child is some
fashion while spanking.

I will accept your answer as honest if you admit your inability to
answer The Question. You won't be alone.

And all your squirming doesn't convince me or anyone else.

So far I've not seen one of these challenges or counter challenges
met.

I've posted page numbers from the study with relevant text from
those
pages. You've posted nothing that couldn't be located from another
source, and in fact I see that in fact they do NOT exist in the
study
I have. You refuse to give page references.

That's rather telling. Sounds like someone's citation.

You have not resolved whether or not I have said I was unspanked.
There are no citations from you. It doesn't matter to me. My
"spanked"
status isn't important one way or another. YOURS seems to be
though.
If you are going to keep saying I'm unspanked I am certainly
willing
for you to prove it.

If I was spanked or not I most assuredly have asked you a question
you
cannot answer, and called you out on your failure to prove the
criteria of YOUR OWN CHALLENGE...the Embry study.

I'm just not willing to debate someone that relies so much on
artifices as ways to bolt when caught in a lie. And it's my choice,
since you callenged ME to debate Embry by claiming I did not have
the
study, and the conditions I will respond under.

Look behind you. The ball is not on my side of the net at all. It's
were you left it.

Or you could just debate someone else. I never asked you to
debate
Embry with me, I simply offered to meet your challenge if you
could
meet my reponses to YOUR challenges....The Question, Proof my
spanked
status, and Proof you possess the Embry study I have.

Weasel words. :-)

You can't debate someone else? I did ask you to debate Embry? I
didn't
offer you a set of conditions before I'd accept your challenge to
debate Embry?

Which is the weasel statement?

In fact it's a weasel statement to claim such. This isn't MY game,
it's yours. Finish if you will or dance. I'm just here to please
you,
as long as I don't have to play sans rules. The rules I'll play
under
are clear, simple, precise, and up to you to agree to to play.

These were YOUR challenges, not mine, with the exception of The
Question. And you didn't have to take that one at all. YOU stuck
your
neck out with your claims.

No, I'm not decieving anyone. I've simply said I won't accept your
challenge to debate until you have met the conditions. If you think
the conditions unfair, or unattainable you may say so.

And then we won't debate. Possibly you'd like to share with others
what you have that you have tried to con folks into thinking is my
Embry study, so feel free.

Or dance. Makes me no nevermind.

You might start by identifying the document by title, give page
references when you make a claim or challenge from the text. Supply
your debating opponent a copy first of course.

You wouldn't want them to try to debate blindly would you? I
wouldn't
do that to you, that's why I insisted you find your copy first and
prove you had it....I didn't want you to later claim handicap or
misunderstanding.

Certainly providing a copy and using page references would prove
you
have something from the Embry study and not an excerpt.

A chart that gives no reference back to the document proves it's a
chart, nothing else.

I still don't see you serving that ball. There, behind you. Surely
in
one of your many spins you saw it there.


While we are talking proof, here's bit for you and the spanking
compulsives to consider that OTHERS know so very well. It makes
me
wonder just how different your fantasy world is.

About the same as the "dream land." :-)

Well, interestingly I don't deny that some children survive a
childhood of spanking very well. I have always maintained we are a
tough species. I simply prefer to play the odds.

I have found much harm from the various levels of "spanking" that
the
users claims is spanking even when it's out at the drawing blood
extremes.

I have never been able to find any proven harm from not spanking,
despite the wild Dobsonian exclamatory orations of some of you.

Hence, I choose the safe path...not that there wouldn't or couldn't
be
a rare "sport" or mutation that was bad, but I've not found them.
And
I want the odds as far into the best for the child as possible. I
care
about society and my child.

I have found, as I said, ample clearly identified spanking harms.

Would you like a copy of the Embry study that I have. Take care of
the
other two issues and you shall have it, and I'll never ask if you
lied
about it.

I've already made arrangements to provide it to a third party. I'm
sure forwarding a copy to you on my request wouldn't be refused.

But not until, Droaner. Not until.

You are not to be trusted. So we have to do what we can, no matter
how
feeble it might be....R R R R R R R R.... to keep you as honest as
is
possible, which ain't much.

Just do as you are told and you get's what you want. A chance to
actually hold and touch the Embry study. And if you are really a
good
boy and stop the garbage, possibly a debate...since I promised it.

I don't think you have the guts. and all the running and squirming
is
clear evidence of your cowarice. Prove me wrong.

Oh, and the citation I gave, makes clear that I would NOT pretend
that
homeschooler don't spank. These say, some of them, that they did
and
that others do.

http://sandradodd.com/s/proof

Why do you do this silly lying you are so easily caught at?
Misleading
is lying and trying to pretend I said something
Ididn't...welllllll.
tsk

Doan

Six days. Wednesday, February 25th. 8 AM.

Kane


http://sandradodd.com/s/proof

Kane

On Thu, 19 Feb 2004 15:59:09 -0800, Doan wrote:


He is just a little dog that the anti-spanking zealotS thought they
could
stick on me and I'll go away.

"stick on" you?
R R R R

The frantic anxious bravado of a defeated child.

You are blocking your own way to victory here, and making a monumental
fool of yourself with your all too obvious bluffs.

You could sweep all this away in an instant, one post, and be fully
ready to debate the Embry study I have, but you'll just play, just a
little boy in school yard doing monkey tricks for attention. .

They are wrong and now they have a run
away,

Whose run away? You don't know where they are or what they are doing.

out of control dog they wish they didn't own. :-)

Do I appear "out of control" to you? That could be the stupidest thing
you've said in your entire posting history.

There is only one way you can take control of you away from stupid
little boy, and that is to grow up and go through the only door I left
open for you.

I baited, you bit, you are solidly hooked, and being reeled
in...Wednesday isn't that far away.

Liars and foolish "players" in debate are suckers for the easiest of
debating methods.

I set you up for this about a year ago. I'm a very patient man.

And what I did was lay down an archive of forced responses to me. You
really need to pull up your last 12 months of posts.

And by a month or two ago you were ready. You were SURE you had out
debated everyone...when all you had done was disgust them with your
schoolboy cheating...and not even very clever cheating.

Once you believed you had me, I HAD YOU at the bait.

Remember your response to The Question?

A Jr High school first year debate student wouldn't have bitten on
that.

Clever little Doan...the clever are the ones that always go down to
themselves. The opponent needs only patience.

You have long archive, with ample proof of you childishness. All I did
was draw it out into the open more clearly.....well, force YOU to spew
it out more outrageously. And you did.

And you are stuck with my responses to your challenges and of course,
next Wednesday.

All are going to see you with your pants around your ankles.

You have only Fern and Greg as your supporters. Now THAT's got to be
painful.... R R R R

I haven't even had to hide my tactics...I warned you openly long ago.

Your arrogance and hubris has defeated you, not me. YOU are your very
own worst enemy.

See yah on Wednesday.....because after that time I don't have any
obligation to debate you or even notice you any further. You are done,
Doan, by your Dim.

I will erase you from my list and I know that no one else will post to
you ever again, except newbies that haven't found you out yet. and
they will, trust me on that.

Get honest or get lonesome. If everyone cuts you off it's pretty
obvious that no one has "run away" and your protestestations will be
met with archives or our most recent exchange, and your backing out,
assuming you stay stupid and do.

Three simple criteria and we are on, and your little kid butt is
saved. Don't do them by Feb 25th and watch what happens.

We'll debate Embry and Your input will be ignored. Do you really think
you can play with grownups?

Doan

Gung Ho Fat Choi.

Kane

On 19 Feb 2004, Fern5827 wrote:

Doan, he drones on.

Whereas you are succinct, reasoned, and have a coherent philosophy
to back up
your beliefs, Kane's agenda is to be hostile.

He is the true Dronanator. Ironic, isn't he?

Doan relates:

From: Doan
Date: 2/19/2004 2:05 AM Eastern Standard Time
Message-id:


Than you are showing that you are a stupid dog once again. I said
WHAT WORKED FOR ONE MAY NOT WORK FOR OTHERS. It is in favor of
a parental freedom to chose what best for their kids. If you ask
Dorothy, you would have known that I prefer homeschooling over
public education. Do a google search on me on the subject of
unschooling. YOU ARE JUST STUPID!

Doan

On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:16:29 -0800, Doan wrote:


On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not spank.

Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and you
are
trying
to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as per
your
recent
post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national
spelling
and
geography contests.

Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never said
anything
against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for Dorothy,
stupid
dog! :-)

Okay, puppy:

From: Doan
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Obsessive behavior in 4 year old
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:59:23 -0800

"
I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called
"unschooling".
The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one
may
not
be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that
learning is
not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing
what I
don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life!

Doan"

Toto is arguing in favor of teaching at home vs what is usually
the
public school model. You are claiming that learning under duress
is
superior. That is "against homeschooling in the 'unschooling'
model."
Or were you confused and supporting the unschoolers? I'll let
them
know. That is the often the case in the more successful
children..
.they are unschooled and one has to stand back and get out of
their
way....they absolutely wring out their parents, and turn THEM
into
scholars in the early years, and later they are clammering for
more
demanding access to university libraries. I know 10 year olds
with
library cards, and lab access. These are doing self directed
learning...and they work their tutors hard.

YOu know nothing factual about homeschooling I'd wager. A
failure here
or there because of calling it homeschooling when it isn't, up
against
the massive drop out and failure rate of public schools...r r r
r
r....

Want to try for yet another brass ring, puppy?

You might also check with a few colleges and universities
that have
taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of homeschoolers.

Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach to
parenting
is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who have
homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for decades.
Some,
that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives.

LOL! And some homescholers do spank.

Apparently you wish now to pretend I didn't say, "some" or that
I did
not differentiate by saying some of us spank. I suppose "some"
means
"all" to you when you want it to.

That's a rather rapid evolution of language, isn't it?

Of course some homeschoolers spank, in fact a great many do. I
happen
to be around those that don't and I refer to them in this post
and
have in others.

When are you going to admit you can't answer the question?
You know
you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish to
debate
Embry right?

The ball is in your court. :-)

Not hardly pilgrim.

It's on the ground behind you where you dropped it weeks ago.

Please repost where you have answered The Question as asked,
resolved
the "never spanked" claim you made, and have proven you have the
Embry
study I do?

The last time you tried it with The Questions of your owns about
how
it had to exist because it had extremes, was a laugh a minute. I
can
go five or I can go fifty on the freeway, but that does not
prove
there was a traffic speed control sign there. It could be or it
could
not. And if I can't see it then I have to go by a guess...and I
could
be very wrong. Often parents that guess are very wrong. Show me
the
"speed limit sign"

You have answered a pseudo question ... by the answer "a
reasonable
standard." I didn't ask for a "reasonable standard" as it is
unidentifiable as a constant.

It varies according to the bias of the observer. Stop signs,
speed
limit signs and written instructions that are specific as to
agreed
upon precise measure are what is needed and what I asked for.
Your
words will be gold should you actually answer this question. I'd
copyright if I were you. Some of your friends aren't as honest
as I
am.

If you cannot supply those to the reader and myself then say so
and
quit playing at it. You cannot assure the parent a, other than
no
spanking at all, a precise way to not injure their child is some
fashion while spanking.

I will accept your answer as honest if you admit your inability
to
answer The Question. You won't be alone.

And all your squirming doesn't convince me or anyone else.

So far I've not seen one of these challenges or counter
challenges
met.

I've posted page numbers from the study with relevant text from
those
pages. You've posted nothing that couldn't be located from
another
source, and in fact I see that in fact they do NOT exist in the
study
I have. You refuse to give page references.

That's rather telling. Sounds like someone's citation.

snip)

Doan wrote in message ...
All of this just to prove that you are stupid as a dog again?
Can't find the Straus studies, can't find the Embry study, now
can't even do a decent google search! Here is my old post:

On what grounds do you claim I can't find either study? I can reach
across my desk for them. I simply don't debate lying children. When
you quit lying I will happily engage you.


Date: 2000-11-01 01:35:43 PST
"Last year, the kids who got perfect scores on the SAT are homeschooled.
Comparing public schools to homeschools is like comparing public toilets
to private home toilets. If you care about your kids, homeschool if
you can or vote for VOUCHERS!"

Doan

Gosh Droany, you are right, and I'm so embarrassed that my search
didn't have the words in it that you had in this so could findit, but
then I used them and google just didn't kick it up...

Oh, and you seem to have forgotten something.

The subject was UNSCHOOLING Droaner.

As usual a sly little weasel wiggle on our part to LOOK like you are
debating to the point made, but of course, nothing of the kind.

You said that UNschoolers had an argument you challenged. I responded
to that by pointing out you were being unfairly critical.

I was not saying you didn't like or believe in HOMESCHOOLING....YOU
threw that in. I made no general statement of any kind, but a specific
on direct to YOUR statement.

You seem to go off on these strang twisting byways so often. I'm
starting to worry for you.

Especially in light of the growing tension you are feeling concerning
next Wednesday and that I know you haven't got the Embry study I have.
You gave it away when you quoted what doesn't exist in this study.

I'll be delivering a copy to someone around the time you'll be
providing me with the criteria for debate, so that on the off chance
you meet the other two simple criteria I can have the study sent to
you....if you admit you don't have it.

Droan, the only thing that can ever defeat me is honesty, and you
haven't any. When you reform yourself you'll be able to mop up the
floor with me. A bright lad like you.

But not quite bright enough to see how powerful factual debate can be.

See yah on Wednesday, or not.

After Wednesday ... without the criteria....not, for ever.

And I may not be the only one. Do you like to play alone?

"Go" huh? One of my favorites. I played in Taipei and Kioushung, for
money, with waterfront stevadors and warehousemen. You wouldn't last
five minutes. "Go" or our other games.

I have two words for you. Think about them and their relationship to
each other.

Tactics

Strategy

And I don't even leave word order out of my tactical maneuvers, let
alone my strategy. Not even a mispelling is accidental. Or a grammar
"error." And certainly not a "failure" to google correctly.

I wonder if you though I really didn't that post. And others the
search turned up. I don't think so, and you were so very careful,
unlike me, to post the URL to the message. Could you have not wanted
me to go there for some reason, and see the thread?

You been had, child. In fifty years you'll figure it all out. A bit
here, a bit there. It's zen. And yes, I am.

Kane

On 19 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 23:05:23 -0800, Doan wrote:

........his usual babbling lines of nonsense, denial, dodging, weasel
words, and childish acting out attention getting.

Let's start with the beginning. Your claim about unschoolers.

http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1

Perhaps this will help clarify for you how you have once again stuck
your foot in it up to your little child nose:

http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1

Your first sentence suggests unschoolers have a single argument about
what they do......the very essense of "un" schooling says you are full
of it, as in, from the page above:
"What is unschooling?
Have you ever described 'red' to a person who is color blind?
Sometimes, trying to define unschooling is like trying to define red.
Ask 30 unschoolers to define the word and you'll get thirty shades of
red. They'll all be red, but they'll all be different. Generally,
unschoolers are concerned with learning or becoming educated, not with
'doing school.' The focus is upon the choices made by each individual
learner, and those choices can vary according to learning style and
personality type. There is no one way to unschool. Click here for more
definitions."

Reading the whole page and it's referrences will show you as being
clearly a stupid little boy that knows nothing but makes a lot of
attention getting diversionary noise.

Than you are showing that you are a stupid dog once again.

Funny, I thought you once or twice claimed that you only gave back
what the other person was giving to you. I do not see any ad homs from
me in the message you responded to. Are you slipping?

I just did give you tit for tat though. Shall we escalate again? YOU
always DO.

I said
WHAT WORKED FOR ONE MAY NOT WORK FOR OTHERS.

That's nice. That's not what I braced you about. I didn't discuss
that. We can later if you wish, and anyway:

The subject was your little attack on unschooling, as in:

" "
I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called
"unschooling".
The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may
not
be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is
not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I
don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life!

Doan""

And just an aside related to this quote contents: homeschoolings and
unschoolers do not have a single viewpoint on spanking, and they of
all people, know and defend the "what worked for one may not be
working for another" concept...if you understood and knew anything
about homeschooling, generically, you wouldn't make such a stupid
claim against unschoolers as having "an" argument.

So, now we have you claiming you did not say anything against
homeschooling.

But THAT shot at unschoolers was SOMETHING against SOME homeschooling.
You were making the claim that WE are one track "our way or no way
presenters" in the spanking argument. Male bovine excrement, little
boy.

Or are you down to hair splitting again that something isn't
everything so disqualifies your statement as a criticism?

Your usual flight of fancy logic? (which amounts to nothing but
weasely dodging)

It is in favor of
a parental freedom to chose what best for their kids.

Yep. The question here isn't that. In fact you just used the classic
logical fallacy, The Straw Man argument. No one here is suggesting
parents don't have freedom to choose.

The question is what tools are available to the parent for deciding,
rather than guessing. That is the basis for aps, as far as I can
gather, and from the FAQ that you keep trying to rewrite to hide the
facts....that there is a lack of tools and a lot of guessing.

I have never defended forcing parents to not spank, though you twits
ARE tempting me to side with Chris and LaVonne. Your illogic and
stupidy are very very persuasive.

You pretend that tools and resources for decision making are available
in instances where they are clearly NOT.

Tradition and guesses in the hard sciences would have you and I
sending smoke signals and grunting at each other from the hilltops for
this little debate.

A parent must guess, for instance, on the line where a child might be
harmed from CP. And so far you have not admitted that or proven me
wrong...you have not drawn and shown us The Line I refer to in The
Question....you just pretend you have by sophistry and dodges.

If you ask
Dorothy,

Well, I didn't. And I don't care to. It's you that I'm talking to.

you would have known that I prefer homeschooling over
public education.

You may well do so. But there is no proof of that. And it doesn't fit
with your own statements concerning education. You were pushing the
idea that children benefit from doing things they don't like, as
though homeschoolers or unschoolers actually do a "no pain" teaching
program.

Children that are unschooled choose, for themselves...willingly and
eagerly...very difficult and time consuming tasks. They are highly
self challenging and that is a given of Unschooling. Everyone that
does it runs into it. Even the few children that don't appear to be
doing that often turn out to be internal processers .. and work very
hard.

You are an ignorant little arrogant twit, boy. You know nothing about
homeschooling or the children that learn in this way. They tend to be
the most brilliant and creative. And NOT every child can be or should
be unschooled...in families that do unschool one of the givens is that
children will choose to be formally tutored as part of THEIR choice.

In fact many do what I mentioned earlier, as they finally outpace
their parents they go to other teachers..formal settings...but IT IS
BY CHOICE.

Do a google search on me on the subject of
unschooling.

Oh, I did that when you brought the subject up...trust me on that.

YOU ARE JUST STUPID!

"Mirror mirror on the wall, who's the dumbest dumb of all?" R R R R R

You just did it again. I nailed you just yesterday on one of your
infamous shouting dares. And here you are doing it again, child.

Before we go any further I think you should provide the referrances to
your defense of homeschooling, and your "prefer homeschooling please.

When you've done, see if you can refute what I turned up on this
typical dare of yours....the shouting, "I DARE YOU I DOUBLE DARE YOU"
that has sunk you so often recently.

Do you think it intelligent or smart to keep doing the same thing over
and over again when it's not working? Or are you just having fun with
us?

Each time you use this particular ad hom, "STUPID," lately I've had
little trouble in refuting you. Don't you think it's time YOU looked
in the mirror?

You aren't a champion of homeschooling. Or if you are not proven as
yet by your insistence that it's in usenet. Nice to hear you say you
are though. The unspanking unschoolers thank you, I'm sure.

After an exhaustive search with google on usenet, I found this single
instance where you defended parents refusal to have their children
take standardized tests....and it was an anti CPS tirade, not a
defense of homeschooling, or more specifically THE SUBJECT OF YOUR
DERISION IN A RECENT POST...."unschooling."

(Whatever made you think unschoolers have a single viewpoint? How
stupid can you be?)

It's just barely related to homeschooling. And is about testing.

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=au...usc.edu&rnum=1

or http://tinyurl.com/3ev39

Do you see there were you said you have a preferance for
homeschooling?

Possibly you steered me wrong asking me to search on "homeschooling"
and you.

In fact of both permutations of the word, "homeschool" and
"homeschooling" I got nothing from you defending homeschooling or
unschooling and only four hits two of which were repetative of the
above. duplicates.

http://tinyurl.com/2styx

Now here is your challenge to me, word for word:

Do a google search on me on the subject of
unschooling.

Then I tried "unschooling" which WAS the point of what I said you were
being critical of, in open search on the web and usenet:

On a Web wide search on "doan" and unschooling I got a few
hits....none were you. Other "Doan"s and a Doan's Pills....R R R R.
And usenet for the same search:

http://tinyurl.com/3fvxb which simply is the two posts we just
exchanged.

Then I tried your archives and "home school", and got 26 heats, a lot
of them repeaters, and most just hits because someone crossposted to a
"homeschool" ng, and not one, nothing, with a defense by you of
unschooling or homeschooling.

See..... http://tinyurl.com/2asos

So, Droany, are you stupid or are you a liar, or a stupid liar?

Or are you, as is very plain to us all, a stupid little boy trying to
play with the adults and doing silly little boy stunts such as making
faces and monkey noises for bit of attention?

You have made no defense of homeschooling outside that one CPS attack,
and that does not go to our discussion on non-spanking homeschooling
parents.

I think I've figure out the answer to my question...you are a stupid
liar and you are slipping. So many years of it has dulled our brain.

When you constantly and consistently lie, Droany, you don't have to
think or be creative any more and it shows. The errors accumulate
over time. Your brain is accluter with your own lies and trying but
failing to keep them sorted.

There is a normal reaction to this....one sees it in Nearly Normal
Neal's posts over time, and of course, yours. It's a way to not commit
yourself, nor be responsible for what you claim and propose.

You, Droany, and all compulsive liars, tend to endlessly repeat the
same lame one liner shots, and when you try to fill in the gaps you
fall on your asses as you just did again in this post.

You used to appear better at this game of yours. Your writhings were
newer to you and to us back then. Now, it's old, and worn out, and you
have nothing to replace them with, except running off to another
newsgroup and doing your same ol' same ol' tricks and noises on
someone new. Didn't help much, did it? Didn't give you any new tricks,
and certainly no new skills.

Speaking of mirrors, as you so often do...........


Doan

Wednesday, 8:00 am, February 25th.

I'll be there.

Will you be?

Kane



On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:16:29 -0800, Doan wrote:


On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not spank.

Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and you are
trying
to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as per your
recent
post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national
spelling
and
geography contests.

Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never said
anything
against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for Dorothy,
stupid
dog! :-)

Okay, puppy:

From: Doan
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Obsessive behavior in 4 year old
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:59:23 -0800

"
I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called
"unschooling".
The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may
not
be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning
is
not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what
I
don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life!

Doan"

Toto is arguing in favor of teaching at home vs what is usually the
public school model. You are claiming that learning under duress is
superior. That is "against homeschooling in the 'unschooling'
model."
Or were you confused and supporting the unschoolers? I'll let them
know. That is the often the case in the more successful children..
.they are unschooled and one has to stand back and get out of their
way....they absolutely wring out their parents, and turn THEM into
scholars in the early years, and later they are clammering for more
demanding access to university libraries. I know 10 year olds with
library cards, and lab access. These are doing self directed
learning...and they work their tutors hard.

YOu know nothing factual about homeschooling I'd wager. A failure
here
or there because of calling it homeschooling when it isn't, up
against
the massive drop out and failure rate of public schools...r r r r
r....

Want to try for yet another brass ring, puppy?

You might also check with a few colleges and universities that
have
taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of homeschoolers.

Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach to
parenting
is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who have
homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for decades.
Some,
that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives.

LOL! And some homescholers do spank.

Apparently you wish now to pretend I didn't say, "some" or that I
did
not differentiate by saying some of us spank. I suppose "some"
means
"all" to you when you want it to.

That's a rather rapid evolution of language, isn't it?

Of course some homeschoolers spank, in fact a great many do. I
happen
to be around those that don't and I refer to them in this post and
have in others.

When are you going to admit you can't answer the question? You
know
you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish to
debate
Embry right?

The ball is in your court. :-)

Not hardly pilgrim.

It's on the ground behind you where you dropped it weeks ago.

Please repost where you have answered The Question as asked,
resolved
the "never spanked" claim you made, and have proven you have the
Embry
study I do?

The last time you tried it with The Questions of your owns about
how
it had to exist because it had extremes, was a laugh a minute. I
can
go five or I can go fifty on the freeway, but that does not prove
there was a traffic speed control sign there. It could be or it
could
not. And if I can't see it then I have to go by a guess...and I
could
be very wrong. Often parents that guess are very wrong. Show me the
"speed limit sign"

You have answered a pseudo question ... by the answer "a reasonable
standard." I didn't ask for a "reasonable standard" as it is
unidentifiable as a constant.

It varies according to the bias of the observer. Stop signs, speed
limit signs and written instructions that are specific as to agreed
upon precise measure are what is needed and what I asked for. Your
words will be gold should you actually answer this question. I'd
copyright if I were you. Some of your friends aren't as honest as I
am.

If you cannot supply those to the reader and myself then say so and
quit playing at it. You cannot assure the parent a, other than no
spanking at all, a precise way to not injure their child is some
fashion while spanking.

I will accept your answer as honest if you admit your inability to
answer The Question. You won't be alone.

And all your squirming doesn't convince me or anyone else.

So far I've not seen one of these challenges or counter challenges
met.

I've posted page numbers from the study with relevant text from
those
pages. You've posted nothing that couldn't be located from another
source, and in fact I see that in fact they do NOT exist in the
study
I have. You refuse to give page references.

That's rather telling. Sounds like someone's citation.

You have not resolved whether or not I have said I was unspanked.
There are no citations from you. It doesn't matter to me. My
"spanked"
status isn't important one way or another. YOURS seems to be
though.
If you are going to keep saying I'm unspanked I am certainly
willing
for you to prove it.

If I was spanked or not I most assuredly have asked you a question
you
cannot answer, and called you out on your failure to prove the
criteria of YOUR OWN CHALLENGE...the Embry study.

I'm just not willing to debate someone that relies so much on
artifices as ways to bolt when caught in a lie. And it's my choice,
since you callenged ME to debate Embry by claiming I did not have
the
study, and the conditions I will respond under.

Look behind you. The ball is not on my side of the net at all. It's
were you left it.

Or you could just debate someone else. I never asked you to
debate
Embry with me, I simply offered to meet your challenge if you
could
meet my reponses to YOUR challenges....The Question, Proof my
spanked
status, and Proof you possess the Embry study I have.

Weasel words. :-)

You can't debate someone else? I did ask you to debate Embry? I
didn't
offer you a set of conditions before I'd accept your challenge to
debate Embry?

Which is the weasel statement?

In fact it's a weasel statement to claim such. This isn't MY game,
it's yours. Finish if you will or dance. I'm just here to please
you,
as long as I don't have to play sans rules. The rules I'll play
under
are clear, simple, precise, and up to you to agree to to play.

These were YOUR challenges, not mine, with the exception of The
Question. And you didn't have to take that one at all. YOU stuck
your
neck out with your claims.

No, I'm not decieving anyone. I've simply said I won't accept your
challenge to debate until you have met the conditions. If you think
the conditions unfair, or unattainable you may say so.

And then we won't debate. Possibly you'd like to share with others
what you have that you have tried to con folks into thinking is my
Embry study, so feel free.

Or dance. Makes me no nevermind.

You might start by identifying the document by title, give page
references when you make a claim or challenge from the text. Supply
your debating opponent a copy first of course.

You wouldn't want them to try to debate blindly would you? I
wouldn't
do that to you, that's why I insisted you find your copy first and
prove you had it....I didn't want you to later claim handicap or
misunderstanding.

Certainly providing a copy and using page references would prove
you
have something from the Embry study and not an excerpt.

A chart that gives no reference back to the document proves it's a
chart, nothing else.

I still don't see you serving that ball. There, behind you. Surely
in
one of your many spins you saw it there.


While we are talking proof, here's bit for you and the spanking
compulsives to consider that OTHERS know so very well. It makes
me
wonder just how different your fantasy world is.

About the same as the "dream land." :-)

Well, interestingly I don't deny that some children survive a
childhood of spanking very well. I have always maintained we are a
tough species. I simply prefer to play the odds.

I have found much harm from the various levels of "spanking" that
the
users claims is spanking even when it's out at the drawing blood
extremes.

I have never been able to find any proven harm from not spanking,
despite the wild Dobsonian exclamatory orations of some of you.

Hence, I choose the safe path...not that there wouldn't or couldn't
be
a rare "sport" or mutation that was bad, but I've not found them.
And
I want the odds as far into the best for the child as possible. I
care
about society and my child.

I have found, as I said, ample clearly identified spanking harms.

Would you like a copy of the Embry study that I have. Take care of
the
other two issues and you shall have it, and I'll never ask if you
lied
about it.

I've already made arrangements to provide it to a third party. I'm
sure forwarding a copy to you on my request wouldn't be refused.

But not until, Droaner. Not until.

You are not to be trusted. So we have to do what we can, no matter
how
feeble it might be....R R R R R R R R.... to keep you as honest as
is
possible, which ain't much.

Just do as you are told and you get's what you want. A chance to
actually hold and touch the Embry study. And if you are really a
good
boy and stop the garbage, possibly a debate...since I promised it.

I don't think you have the guts. and all the running and squirming
is
clear evidence of your cowarice. Prove me wrong.

Oh, and the citation I gave, makes clear that I would NOT pretend
that
homeschooler don't spank. These say, some of them, that they did
and
that others do.

http://sandradodd.com/s/proof

Why do you do this silly lying you are so easily caught at?
Misleading
is lying and trying to pretend I said something
Ididn't...welllllll.
tsk

Doan

Six days. Wednesday, February 25th. 8 AM.

Kane


http://sandradodd.com/s/proof

Kane

Kane is showing his stupidity again.

On 19 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

Doan wrote in message ...
All of this just to prove that you are stupid as a dog again?
Can't find the Straus studies, can't find the Embry study, now
can't even do a decent google search! Here is my old post:

On what grounds do you claim I can't find either study? I can reach
across my desk for them. I simply don't debate lying children. When
you quit lying I will happily engage you.

Weasel words. :-)

Doan


Date: 2000-11-01 01:35:43 PST
"Last year, the kids who got perfect scores on the SAT are homeschooled.
Comparing public schools to homeschools is like comparing public toilets
to private home toilets. If you care about your kids, homeschool if
you can or vote for VOUCHERS!"

Doan

Gosh Droany, you are right, and I'm so embarrassed that my search
didn't have the words in it that you had in this so could findit, but
then I used them and google just didn't kick it up...

Oh, and you seem to have forgotten something.

The subject was UNSCHOOLING Droaner.

As usual a sly little weasel wiggle on our part to LOOK like you are
debating to the point made, but of course, nothing of the kind.

You said that UNschoolers had an argument you challenged. I responded
to that by pointing out you were being unfairly critical.

I was not saying you didn't like or believe in HOMESCHOOLING....YOU
threw that in. I made no general statement of any kind, but a specific
on direct to YOUR statement.

You seem to go off on these strang twisting byways so often. I'm
starting to worry for you.

Especially in light of the growing tension you are feeling concerning
next Wednesday and that I know you haven't got the Embry study I have.
You gave it away when you quoted what doesn't exist in this study.

I'll be delivering a copy to someone around the time you'll be
providing me with the criteria for debate, so that on the off chance
you meet the other two simple criteria I can have the study sent to
you....if you admit you don't have it.

Droan, the only thing that can ever defeat me is honesty, and you
haven't any. When you reform yourself you'll be able to mop up the
floor with me. A bright lad like you.

But not quite bright enough to see how powerful factual debate can be.

See yah on Wednesday, or not.

After Wednesday ... without the criteria....not, for ever.

And I may not be the only one. Do you like to play alone?

"Go" huh? One of my favorites. I played in Taipei and Kioushung, for
money, with waterfront stevadors and warehousemen. You wouldn't last
five minutes. "Go" or our other games.

I have two words for you. Think about them and their relationship to
each other.

Tactics

Strategy

And I don't even leave word order out of my tactical maneuvers, let
alone my strategy. Not even a mispelling is accidental. Or a grammar
"error." And certainly not a "failure" to google correctly.

I wonder if you though I really didn't that post. And others the
search turned up. I don't think so, and you were so very careful,
unlike me, to post the URL to the message. Could you have not wanted
me to go there for some reason, and see the thread?

You been had, child. In fifty years you'll figure it all out. A bit
here, a bit there. It's zen. And yes, I am.

Kane

On 19 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 23:05:23 -0800, Doan wrote:

........his usual babbling lines of nonsense, denial, dodging, weasel
words, and childish acting out attention getting.

Let's start with the beginning. Your claim about unschoolers.

http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1

Perhaps this will help clarify for you how you have once again stuck
your foot in it up to your little child nose:

http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1

Your first sentence suggests unschoolers have a single argument about
what they do......the very essense of "un" schooling says you are full
of it, as in, from the page above:
"What is unschooling?
Have you ever described 'red' to a person who is color blind?
Sometimes, trying to define unschooling is like trying to define red.
Ask 30 unschoolers to define the word and you'll get thirty shades of
red. They'll all be red, but they'll all be different. Generally,
unschoolers are concerned with learning or becoming educated, not with
'doing school.' The focus is upon the choices made by each individual
learner, and those choices can vary according to learning style and
personality type. There is no one way to unschool. Click here for more
definitions."

Reading the whole page and it's referrences will show you as being
clearly a stupid little boy that knows nothing but makes a lot of
attention getting diversionary noise.

Than you are showing that you are a stupid dog once again.

Funny, I thought you once or twice claimed that you only gave back
what the other person was giving to you. I do not see any ad homs from
me in the message you responded to. Are you slipping?

I just did give you tit for tat though. Shall we escalate again? YOU
always DO.

I said
WHAT WORKED FOR ONE MAY NOT WORK FOR OTHERS.

That's nice. That's not what I braced you about. I didn't discuss
that. We can later if you wish, and anyway:

The subject was your little attack on unschooling, as in:

" "
I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called
"unschooling".
The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may
not
be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning is
not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what I
don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life!

Doan""

And just an aside related to this quote contents: homeschoolings and
unschoolers do not have a single viewpoint on spanking, and they of
all people, know and defend the "what worked for one may not be
working for another" concept...if you understood and knew anything
about homeschooling, generically, you wouldn't make such a stupid
claim against unschoolers as having "an" argument.

So, now we have you claiming you did not say anything against
homeschooling.

But THAT shot at unschoolers was SOMETHING against SOME homeschooling.
You were making the claim that WE are one track "our way or no way
presenters" in the spanking argument. Male bovine excrement, little
boy.

Or are you down to hair splitting again that something isn't
everything so disqualifies your statement as a criticism?

Your usual flight of fancy logic? (which amounts to nothing but
weasely dodging)

It is in favor of
a parental freedom to chose what best for their kids.

Yep. The question here isn't that. In fact you just used the classic
logical fallacy, The Straw Man argument. No one here is suggesting
parents don't have freedom to choose.

The question is what tools are available to the parent for deciding,
rather than guessing. That is the basis for aps, as far as I can
gather, and from the FAQ that you keep trying to rewrite to hide the
facts....that there is a lack of tools and a lot of guessing.

I have never defended forcing parents to not spank, though you twits
ARE tempting me to side with Chris and LaVonne. Your illogic and
stupidy are very very persuasive.

You pretend that tools and resources for decision making are available
in instances where they are clearly NOT.

Tradition and guesses in the hard sciences would have you and I
sending smoke signals and grunting at each other from the hilltops for
this little debate.

A parent must guess, for instance, on the line where a child might be
harmed from CP. And so far you have not admitted that or proven me
wrong...you have not drawn and shown us The Line I refer to in The
Question....you just pretend you have by sophistry and dodges.

If you ask
Dorothy,

Well, I didn't. And I don't care to. It's you that I'm talking to.

you would have known that I prefer homeschooling over
public education.

You may well do so. But there is no proof of that. And it doesn't fit
with your own statements concerning education. You were pushing the
idea that children benefit from doing things they don't like, as
though homeschoolers or unschoolers actually do a "no pain" teaching
program.

Children that are unschooled choose, for themselves...willingly and
eagerly...very difficult and time consuming tasks. They are highly
self challenging and that is a given of Unschooling. Everyone that
does it runs into it. Even the few children that don't appear to be
doing that often turn out to be internal processers .. and work very
hard.

You are an ignorant little arrogant twit, boy. You know nothing about
homeschooling or the children that learn in this way. They tend to be
the most brilliant and creative. And NOT every child can be or should
be unschooled...in families that do unschool one of the givens is that
children will choose to be formally tutored as part of THEIR choice.

In fact many do what I mentioned earlier, as they finally outpace
their parents they go to other teachers..formal settings...but IT IS
BY CHOICE.

Do a google search on me on the subject of
unschooling.

Oh, I did that when you brought the subject up...trust me on that.

YOU ARE JUST STUPID!

"Mirror mirror on the wall, who's the dumbest dumb of all?" R R R R R

You just did it again. I nailed you just yesterday on one of your
infamous shouting dares. And here you are doing it again, child.

Before we go any further I think you should provide the referrances to
your defense of homeschooling, and your "prefer homeschooling please.

When you've done, see if you can refute what I turned up on this
typical dare of yours....the shouting, "I DARE YOU I DOUBLE DARE YOU"
that has sunk you so often recently.

Do you think it intelligent or smart to keep doing the same thing over
and over again when it's not working? Or are you just having fun with
us?

Each time you use this particular ad hom, "STUPID," lately I've had
little trouble in refuting you. Don't you think it's time YOU looked
in the mirror?

You aren't a champion of homeschooling. Or if you are not proven as
yet by your insistence that it's in usenet. Nice to hear you say you
are though. The unspanking unschoolers thank you, I'm sure.

After an exhaustive search with google on usenet, I found this single
instance where you defended parents refusal to have their children
take standardized tests....and it was an anti CPS tirade, not a
defense of homeschooling, or more specifically THE SUBJECT OF YOUR
DERISION IN A RECENT POST...."unschooling."

(Whatever made you think unschoolers have a single viewpoint? How
stupid can you be?)

It's just barely related to homeschooling. And is about testing.

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=au...usc.edu&rnum=1

or http://tinyurl.com/3ev39

Do you see there were you said you have a preferance for
homeschooling?

Possibly you steered me wrong asking me to search on "homeschooling"
and you.

In fact of both permutations of the word, "homeschool" and
"homeschooling" I got nothing from you defending homeschooling or
unschooling and only four hits two of which were repetative of the
above. duplicates.

http://tinyurl.com/2styx

Now here is your challenge to me, word for word:

Do a google search on me on the subject of
unschooling.

Then I tried "unschooling" which WAS the point of what I said you were
being critical of, in open search on the web and usenet:

On a Web wide search on "doan" and unschooling I got a few
hits....none were you. Other "Doan"s and a Doan's Pills....R R R R.
And usenet for the same search:

http://tinyurl.com/3fvxb which simply is the two posts we just
exchanged.

Then I tried your archives and "home school", and got 26 heats, a lot
of them repeaters, and most just hits because someone crossposted to a
"homeschool" ng, and not one, nothing, with a defense by you of
unschooling or homeschooling.

See..... http://tinyurl.com/2asos

So, Droany, are you stupid or are you a liar, or a stupid liar?

Or are you, as is very plain to us all, a stupid little boy trying to
play with the adults and doing silly little boy stunts such as making
faces and monkey noises for bit of attention?

You have made no defense of homeschooling outside that one CPS attack,
and that does not go to our discussion on non-spanking homeschooling
parents.

I think I've figure out the answer to my question...you are a stupid
liar and you are slipping. So many years of it has dulled our brain.

When you constantly and consistently lie, Droany, you don't have to
think or be creative any more and it shows. The errors accumulate
over time. Your brain is accluter with your own lies and trying but
failing to keep them sorted.

There is a normal reaction to this....one sees it in Nearly Normal
Neal's posts over time, and of course, yours. It's a way to not commit
yourself, nor be responsible for what you claim and propose.

You, Droany, and all compulsive liars, tend to endlessly repeat the
same lame one liner shots, and when you try to fill in the gaps you
fall on your asses as you just did again in this post.

You used to appear better at this game of yours. Your writhings were
newer to you and to us back then. Now, it's old, and worn out, and you
have nothing to replace them with, except running off to another
newsgroup and doing your same ol' same ol' tricks and noises on
someone new. Didn't help much, did it? Didn't give you any new tricks,
and certainly no new skills.

Speaking of mirrors, as you so often do...........


Doan

Wednesday, 8:00 am, February 25th.

I'll be there.

Will you be?

Kane



On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:16:29 -0800, Doan wrote:


On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not spank.

Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and you are
trying
to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as per your
recent
post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national
spelling
and
geography contests.

Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never said
anything
against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for Dorothy,
stupid
dog! :-)

Okay, puppy:

From: Doan
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Obsessive behavior in 4 year old
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:59:23 -0800

"
I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called
"unschooling".
The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for one may
not
be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that learning
is
not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing what
I
don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life!

Doan"

Toto is arguing in favor of teaching at home vs what is usually the
public school model. You are claiming that learning under duress is
superior. That is "against homeschooling in the 'unschooling'
model."
Or were you confused and supporting the unschoolers? I'll let them
know. That is the often the case in the more successful children..
.they are unschooled and one has to stand back and get out of their
way....they absolutely wring out their parents, and turn THEM into
scholars in the early years, and later they are clammering for more
demanding access to university libraries. I know 10 year olds with
library cards, and lab access. These are doing self directed
learning...and they work their tutors hard.

YOu know nothing factual about homeschooling I'd wager. A failure
here
or there because of calling it homeschooling when it isn't, up
against
the massive drop out and failure rate of public schools...r r r r
r....

Want to try for yet another brass ring, puppy?

You might also check with a few colleges and universities that
have
taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of homeschoolers.

Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach to
parenting
is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who have
homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for decades.
Some,
that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives.

LOL! And some homescholers do spank.

Apparently you wish now to pretend I didn't say, "some" or that I
did
not differentiate by saying some of us spank. I suppose "some"
means
"all" to you when you want it to.

That's a rather rapid evolution of language, isn't it?

Of course some homeschoolers spank, in fact a great many do. I
happen
to be around those that don't and I refer to them in this post and
have in others.

When are you going to admit you can't answer the question? You
know
you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish to
debate
Embry right?

The ball is in your court. :-)

Not hardly pilgrim.

It's on the ground behind you where you dropped it weeks ago.

Please repost where you have answered The Question as asked,
resolved
the "never spanked" claim you made, and have proven you have the
Embry
study I do?

The last time you tried it with The Questions of your owns about
how
it had to exist because it had extremes, was a laugh a minute. I
can
go five or I can go fifty on the freeway, but that does not prove
there was a traffic speed control sign there. It could be or it
could
not. And if I can't see it then I have to go by a guess...and I
could
be very wrong. Often parents that guess are very wrong. Show me the
"speed limit sign"

You have answered a pseudo question ... by the answer "a reasonable
standard." I didn't ask for a "reasonable standard" as it is
unidentifiable as a constant.

It varies according to the bias of the observer. Stop signs, speed
limit signs and written instructions that are specific as to agreed
upon precise measure are what is needed and what I asked for. Your
words will be gold should you actually answer this question. I'd
copyright if I were you. Some of your friends aren't as honest as I
am.

If you cannot supply those to the reader and myself then say so and
quit playing at it. You cannot assure the parent a, other than no
spanking at all, a precise way to not injure their child is some
fashion while spanking.

I will accept your answer as honest if you admit your inability to
answer The Question. You won't be alone.

And all your squirming doesn't convince me or anyone else.

So far I've not seen one of these challenges or counter challenges
met.

I've posted page numbers from the study with relevant text from
those
pages. You've posted nothing that couldn't be located from another
source, and in fact I see that in fact they do NOT exist in the
study
I have. You refuse to give page references.

That's rather telling. Sounds like someone's citation.

You have not resolved whether or not I have said I was unspanked.
There are no citations from you. It doesn't matter to me. My
"spanked"
status isn't important one way or another. YOURS seems to be
though.
If you are going to keep saying I'm unspanked I am certainly
willing
for you to prove it.

If I was spanked or not I most assuredly have asked you a question
you
cannot answer, and called you out on your failure to prove the
criteria of YOUR OWN CHALLENGE...the Embry study.

I'm just not willing to debate someone that relies so much on
artifices as ways to bolt when caught in a lie. And it's my choice,
since you callenged ME to debate Embry by claiming I did not have
the
study, and the conditions I will respond under.

Look behind you. The ball is not on my side of the net at all. It's
were you left it.

Or you could just debate someone else. I never asked you to
debate
Embry with me, I simply offered to meet your challenge if you
could
meet my reponses to YOUR challenges....The Question, Proof my
spanked
status, and Proof you possess the Embry study I have.

Weasel words. :-)

You can't debate someone else? I did ask you to debate Embry? I
didn't
offer you a set of conditions before I'd accept your challenge to
debate Embry?

Which is the weasel statement?

In fact it's a weasel statement to claim such. This isn't MY game,
it's yours. Finish if you will or dance. I'm just here to please
you,
as long as I don't have to play sans rules. The rules I'll play
under
are clear, simple, precise, and up to you to agree to to play.

These were YOUR challenges, not mine, with the exception of The
Question. And you didn't have to take that one at all. YOU stuck
your
neck out with your claims.

No, I'm not decieving anyone. I've simply said I won't accept your
challenge to debate until you have met the conditions. If you think
the conditions unfair, or unattainable you may say so.

And then we won't debate. Possibly you'd like to share with others
what you have that you have tried to con folks into thinking is my
Embry study, so feel free.

Or dance. Makes me no nevermind.

You might start by identifying the document by title, give page
references when you make a claim or challenge from the text. Supply
your debating opponent a copy first of course.

You wouldn't want them to try to debate blindly would you? I
wouldn't
do that to you, that's why I insisted you find your copy first and
prove you had it....I didn't want you to later claim handicap or
misunderstanding.

Certainly providing a copy and using page references would prove
you
have something from the Embry study and not an excerpt.

A chart that gives no reference back to the document proves it's a
chart, nothing else.

I still don't see you serving that ball. There, behind you. Surely
in
one of your many spins you saw it there.


While we are talking proof, here's bit for you and the spanking
compulsives to consider that OTHERS know so very well. It makes
me
wonder just how different your fantasy world is.

About the same as the "dream land." :-)

Well, interestingly I don't deny that some children survive a
childhood of spanking very well. I have always maintained we are a
tough species. I simply prefer to play the odds.

I have found much harm from the various levels of "spanking" that
the
users claims is spanking even when it's out at the drawing blood
extremes.

I have never been able to find any proven harm from not spanking,
despite the wild Dobsonian exclamatory orations of some of you.

Hence, I choose the safe path...not that there wouldn't or couldn't
be
a rare "sport" or mutation that was bad, but I've not found them.
And
I want the odds as far into the best for the child as possible. I
care
about society and my child.

I have found, as I said, ample clearly identified spanking harms.

Would you like a copy of the Embry study that I have. Take care of
the
other two issues and you shall have it, and I'll never ask if you
lied
about it.

I've already made arrangements to provide it to a third party. I'm
sure forwarding a copy to you on my request wouldn't be refused.

But not until, Droaner. Not until.

You are not to be trusted. So we have to do what we can, no matter
how
feeble it might be....R R R R R R R R.... to keep you as honest as
is
possible, which ain't much.

Just do as you are told and you get's what you want. A chance to
actually hold and touch the Embry study. And if you are really a
good
boy and stop the garbage, possibly a debate...since I promised it.

I don't think you have the guts. and all the running and squirming
is
clear evidence of your cowarice. Prove me wrong.

Oh, and the citation I gave, makes clear that I would NOT pretend
that
homeschooler don't spank. These say, some of them, that they did
and
that others do.

http://sandradodd.com/s/proof

Why do you do this silly lying you are so easily caught at?
Misleading
is lying and trying to pretend I said something
Ididn't...welllllll.
tsk

Doan

Six days. Wednesday, February 25th. 8 AM.

Kane


http://sandradodd.com/s/proof

Kane

On Fri, 20 Feb 2004 10:55:02 -0800, Doan wrote:


Kane is showing his stupidity again.

Droaner is showing his dishonesty again. This post is a dodge...HE is
NOT answering the challenge....the thread had turned to a shot he took
at "UNschoolers." I called him on it.

He immediately tried claiming is was wrong because he supports
"HOMEschoolers" ignoring of course that UNschoolers are a subset.

He provided ONE, one example of him "supporting" homeschooling, that
was in fact just a slam at public schooling. Used "toilets" for an
analogy...cute.

NO support for unschoolers, the target of his recent gibe.

Kn other words, the weasel is alive and well...

and ALL of this nonsense of his is to cover up a yet bigger
dodge...his inability to give a cogent answer to The Question.

If you are bored I don't blame you. Nothing new here. Different dance,
same music.

Tedium by Bach, Johann Droananator.

On 19 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

Doan wrote in message ...
All of this just to prove that you are stupid as a dog again?
Can't find the Straus studies, can't find the Embry study, now
can't even do a decent google search! Here is my old post:

On what grounds do you claim I can't find either study? I can reach
across my desk for them. I simply don't debate lying children. When
you quit lying I will happily engage you.

Weasel words. :-)

That's not an answer...as usual. NOT answering is just one more form
of weasel.

So, prove you aren't lying...just post me the page numbers of the
information you wish to submit for proof.

And prove I can't find either study. And that I do wish to debate a
lying child.

I dont NEED to weasel, child. This is YOUR show, not mine.

You keep demanding proof from me but producing nothing that is
provable...just quotes. Embry is widely published. You could be taking
that info from anywhere and I already pointed out that what you
offered is NOT in the study I have.

To help you clarify I asked for the page number of the behavior in
time out chart you offered. Nothing. No response except insistence I
prove I have it. I don't, fo course. It isn't the the Embry study I
have. From you? No page number so far. Any reason, beyond fraud?

YOU challenged ME to provide proof I had the study so we could debate.
That is a challenge FROM YOU, and hence when I respond it's up to you
to disprove my offering and the best way is to of course provide proof
YOU have what YOU claim.

I'm just sitting here telling you I'll happily join you in debate if
you prove you have it, and you clear up two other matters. Nothing too
hard for you here is there?

You won't perform on the challenges YOU make, yet YOU claim I'm
weaseling...hmmm...interesting.


Doan.......
............The silly child exposing himself and thinking the attention
is meaningful, beyond the laughter and head shaking from the adults.

Kane




Date: 2000-11-01 01:35:43 PST
"Last year, the kids who got perfect scores on the SAT are
homeschooled.
Comparing public schools to homeschools is like comparing public
toilets
to private home toilets. If you care about your kids, homeschool
if
you can or vote for VOUCHERS!"

Doan

Gosh Droany, you are right, and I'm so embarrassed that my search
didn't have the words in it that you had in this so could findit,
but
then I used them and google just didn't kick it up...

Oh, and you seem to have forgotten something.

The subject was UNSCHOOLING Droaner.

As usual a sly little weasel wiggle on our part to LOOK like you
are
debating to the point made, but of course, nothing of the kind.

You said that UNschoolers had an argument you challenged. I
responded
to that by pointing out you were being unfairly critical.

I was not saying you didn't like or believe in HOMESCHOOLING....YOU
threw that in. I made no general statement of any kind, but a
specific
on direct to YOUR statement.

You seem to go off on these strang twisting byways so often. I'm
starting to worry for you.

Especially in light of the growing tension you are feeling
concerning
next Wednesday and that I know you haven't got the Embry study I
have.
You gave it away when you quoted what doesn't exist in this study.

I'll be delivering a copy to someone around the time you'll be
providing me with the criteria for debate, so that on the off
chance
you meet the other two simple criteria I can have the study sent to
you....if you admit you don't have it.

Droan, the only thing that can ever defeat me is honesty, and you
haven't any. When you reform yourself you'll be able to mop up the
floor with me. A bright lad like you.

But not quite bright enough to see how powerful factual debate can
be.

See yah on Wednesday, or not.

After Wednesday ... without the criteria....not, for ever.

And I may not be the only one. Do you like to play alone?

"Go" huh? One of my favorites. I played in Taipei and Kioushung,
for
money, with waterfront stevadors and warehousemen. You wouldn't
last
five minutes. "Go" or our other games.

I have two words for you. Think about them and their relationship
to
each other.

Tactics

Strategy

And I don't even leave word order out of my tactical maneuvers, let
alone my strategy. Not even a mispelling is accidental. Or a
grammar
"error." And certainly not a "failure" to google correctly.

I wonder if you though I really didn't that post. And others the
search turned up. I don't think so, and you were so very careful,
unlike me, to post the URL to the message. Could you have not
wanted
me to go there for some reason, and see the thread?

You been had, child. In fifty years you'll figure it all out. A bit
here, a bit there. It's zen. And yes, I am.

Kane

On 19 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 23:05:23 -0800, Doan wrote:

........his usual babbling lines of nonsense, denial, dodging,
weasel
words, and childish acting out attention getting.

Let's start with the beginning. Your claim about unschoolers.

http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1

Perhaps this will help clarify for you how you have once again
stuck
your foot in it up to your little child nose:

http://www.unschooling.com/library/faq/index.shtml#1

Your first sentence suggests unschoolers have a single argument
about
what they do......the very essense of "un" schooling says you
are full
of it, as in, from the page above:
"What is unschooling?
Have you ever described 'red' to a person who is color blind?
Sometimes, trying to define unschooling is like trying to
define red.
Ask 30 unschoolers to define the word and you'll get thirty
shades of
red. They'll all be red, but they'll all be different.
Generally,
unschoolers are concerned with learning or becoming educated,
not with
'doing school.' The focus is upon the choices made by each
individual
learner, and those choices can vary according to learning style
and
personality type. There is no one way to unschool. Click here
for more
definitions."

Reading the whole page and it's referrences will show you as
being
clearly a stupid little boy that knows nothing but makes a lot
of
attention getting diversionary noise.

Than you are showing that you are a stupid dog once again.

Funny, I thought you once or twice claimed that you only gave
back
what the other person was giving to you. I do not see any ad
homs from
me in the message you responded to. Are you slipping?

I just did give you tit for tat though. Shall we escalate
again? YOU
always DO.

I said
WHAT WORKED FOR ONE MAY NOT WORK FOR OTHERS.

That's nice. That's not what I braced you about. I didn't
discuss
that. We can later if you wish, and anyway:

The subject was your little attack on unschooling, as in:

" "
I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called
"unschooling".
The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for
one may
not
be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that
learning is
not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes doing
what I
don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life!

Doan""

And just an aside related to this quote contents:
homeschoolings and
unschoolers do not have a single viewpoint on spanking, and
they of
all people, know and defend the "what worked for one may not be
working for another" concept...if you understood and knew
anything
about homeschooling, generically, you wouldn't make such a
stupid
claim against unschoolers as having "an" argument.

So, now we have you claiming you did not say anything against
homeschooling.

But THAT shot at unschoolers was SOMETHING against SOME
homeschooling.
You were making the claim that WE are one track "our way or no
way
presenters" in the spanking argument. Male bovine excrement,
little
boy.

Or are you down to hair splitting again that something isn't
everything so disqualifies your statement as a criticism?

Your usual flight of fancy logic? (which amounts to nothing but
weasely dodging)

It is in favor of
a parental freedom to chose what best for their kids.

Yep. The question here isn't that. In fact you just used the
classic
logical fallacy, The Straw Man argument. No one here is
suggesting
parents don't have freedom to choose.

The question is what tools are available to the parent for
deciding,
rather than guessing. That is the basis for aps, as far as I
can
gather, and from the FAQ that you keep trying to rewrite to
hide the
facts....that there is a lack of tools and a lot of guessing.

I have never defended forcing parents to not spank, though you
twits
ARE tempting me to side with Chris and LaVonne. Your illogic
and
stupidy are very very persuasive.

You pretend that tools and resources for decision making are
available
in instances where they are clearly NOT.

Tradition and guesses in the hard sciences would have you and I
sending smoke signals and grunting at each other from the
hilltops for
this little debate.

A parent must guess, for instance, on the line where a child
might be
harmed from CP. And so far you have not admitted that or proven
me
wrong...you have not drawn and shown us The Line I refer to in
The
Question....you just pretend you have by sophistry and dodges.

If you ask
Dorothy,

Well, I didn't. And I don't care to. It's you that I'm talking
to.

you would have known that I prefer homeschooling over
public education.

You may well do so. But there is no proof of that. And it
doesn't fit
with your own statements concerning education. You were pushing
the
idea that children benefit from doing things they don't like,
as
though homeschoolers or unschoolers actually do a "no pain"
teaching
program.

Children that are unschooled choose, for themselves...willingly
and
eagerly...very difficult and time consuming tasks. They are
highly
self challenging and that is a given of Unschooling. Everyone
that
does it runs into it. Even the few children that don't appear
to be
doing that often turn out to be internal processers .. and work
very
hard.

You are an ignorant little arrogant twit, boy. You know nothing
about
homeschooling or the children that learn in this way. They tend
to be
the most brilliant and creative. And NOT every child can be or
should
be unschooled...in families that do unschool one of the givens
is that
children will choose to be formally tutored as part of THEIR
choice.

In fact many do what I mentioned earlier, as they finally
outpace
their parents they go to other teachers..formal settings...but
IT IS
BY CHOICE.

Do a google search on me on the subject of
unschooling.

Oh, I did that when you brought the subject up...trust me on
that.

YOU ARE JUST STUPID!

"Mirror mirror on the wall, who's the dumbest dumb of all?" R R
R R R

You just did it again. I nailed you just yesterday on one of
your
infamous shouting dares. And here you are doing it again,
child.

Before we go any further I think you should provide the
referrances to
your defense of homeschooling, and your "prefer homeschooling
please.

When you've done, see if you can refute what I turned up on
this
typical dare of yours....the shouting, "I DARE YOU I DOUBLE
DARE YOU"
that has sunk you so often recently.

Do you think it intelligent or smart to keep doing the same
thing over
and over again when it's not working? Or are you just having
fun with
us?

Each time you use this particular ad hom, "STUPID," lately I've
had
little trouble in refuting you. Don't you think it's time YOU
looked
in the mirror?

You aren't a champion of homeschooling. Or if you are not
proven as
yet by your insistence that it's in usenet. Nice to hear you
say you
are though. The unspanking unschoolers thank you, I'm sure.

After an exhaustive search with google on usenet, I found this
single
instance where you defended parents refusal to have their
children
take standardized tests....and it was an anti CPS tirade, not a
defense of homeschooling, or more specifically THE SUBJECT OF
YOUR
DERISION IN A RECENT POST...."unschooling."

(Whatever made you think unschoolers have a single viewpoint?
How
stupid can you be?)

It's just barely related to homeschooling. And is about
testing.

http://groups.google.com/groups?q=au...usc.edu&rnum=1

or http://tinyurl.com/3ev39

Do you see there were you said you have a preferance for
homeschooling?

Possibly you steered me wrong asking me to search on
"homeschooling"
and you.

In fact of both permutations of the word, "homeschool" and
"homeschooling" I got nothing from you defending homeschooling
or
unschooling and only four hits two of which were repetative of
the
above. duplicates.

http://tinyurl.com/2styx

Now here is your challenge to me, word for word:

Do a google search on me on the subject of
unschooling.

Then I tried "unschooling" which WAS the point of what I said
you were
being critical of, in open search on the web and usenet:

On a Web wide search on "doan" and unschooling I got a few
hits....none were you. Other "Doan"s and a Doan's Pills....R R
R R.
And usenet for the same search:

http://tinyurl.com/3fvxb which simply is the two posts we
just
exchanged.

Then I tried your archives and "home school", and got 26 heats,
a lot
of them repeaters, and most just hits because someone
crossposted to a
"homeschool" ng, and not one, nothing, with a defense by you of
unschooling or homeschooling.

See..... http://tinyurl.com/2asos

So, Droany, are you stupid or are you a liar, or a stupid liar?

Or are you, as is very plain to us all, a stupid little boy
trying to
play with the adults and doing silly little boy stunts such as
making
faces and monkey noises for bit of attention?

You have made no defense of homeschooling outside that one CPS
attack,
and that does not go to our discussion on non-spanking
homeschooling
parents.

I think I've figure out the answer to my question...you are a
stupid
liar and you are slipping. So many years of it has dulled our
brain.

When you constantly and consistently lie, Droany, you don't
have to
think or be creative any more and it shows. The errors
accumulate
over time. Your brain is accluter with your own lies and trying
but
failing to keep them sorted.

There is a normal reaction to this....one sees it in Nearly
Normal
Neal's posts over time, and of course, yours. It's a way to not
commit
yourself, nor be responsible for what you claim and propose.

You, Droany, and all compulsive liars, tend to endlessly repeat
the
same lame one liner shots, and when you try to fill in the gaps
you
fall on your asses as you just did again in this post.

You used to appear better at this game of yours. Your writhings
were
newer to you and to us back then. Now, it's old, and worn out,
and you
have nothing to replace them with, except running off to
another
newsgroup and doing your same ol' same ol' tricks and noises on
someone new. Didn't help much, did it? Didn't give you any new
tricks,
and certainly no new skills.

Speaking of mirrors, as you so often do...........


Doan

Wednesday, 8:00 am, February 25th.

I'll be there.

Will you be?

Kane



On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

On Wed, 18 Feb 2004 15:16:29 -0800, Doan
wrote:


On 18 Feb 2004, Kane wrote:

From the pages of a group (homeschoolers) that do not
spank.

Enjoy, Droany, and while you are thinking about it and
you are
trying
to convince people that homeschooling doesn't work, as
per your
recent
post, try to recall who keeps winning all those national
spelling
and
geography contests.

Another lie from the "never-spanked" Kane9. I have never
said
anything
against homeschooling. Perhaps you've mistaken me for
Dorothy,
stupid
dog! :-)

Okay, puppy:

From: Doan
Newsgroups: misc.kids
Subject: Obsessive behavior in 4 year old
Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2004 09:59:23 -0800

"
I heard the same argument from home-schoolers - some called
"unschooling".
The problem is every kid is an individual. What worked for
one may
not
be working for another. For me, my parents taught me that
learning
is
not only doing what I like in school but also sometimes
doing what
I
don't like. This philosophy has helped me alot in life!

Doan"

Toto is arguing in favor of teaching at home vs what is
usually the
public school model. You are claiming that learning under
duress is
superior. That is "against homeschooling in the
'unschooling'
model."
Or were you confused and supporting the unschoolers? I'll
let them
know. That is the often the case in the more successful
children..
.they are unschooled and one has to stand back and get out
of their
way....they absolutely wring out their parents, and turn
THEM into
scholars in the early years, and later they are clammering
for more
demanding access to university libraries. I know 10 year
olds with
library cards, and lab access. These are doing self directed
learning...and they work their tutors hard.

YOu know nothing factual about homeschooling I'd wager. A
failure
here
or there because of calling it homeschooling when it isn't,
up
against
the massive drop out and failure rate of public schools...r
r r r
r....

Want to try for yet another brass ring, puppy?

You might also check with a few colleges and universities
that
have
taken to courting enrollees from the ranks of
homeschoolers.

Your punish them `til they conform neanderthal approach
to
parenting
is being proven more and more to be hogwash. As we who
have
homeschooled and we have do not spank have known for
decades.
Some,
that WERE homeschooled have known for their entire lives.

LOL! And some homescholers do spank.

Apparently you wish now to pretend I didn't say, "some" or
that I
did
not differentiate by saying some of us spank. I suppose
"some"
means
"all" to you when you want it to.

That's a rather rapid evolution of language, isn't it?

Of course some homeschoolers spank, in fact a great many do.
I
happen
to be around those that don't and I refer to them in this
post and
have in others.

When are you going to admit you can't answer the
question? You
know
you are down to just 6 days if you really sincerely wish
to
debate
Embry right?

The ball is in your court. :-)

Not hardly pilgrim.

It's on the ground behind you where you dropped it weeks
ago.

Please repost where you have answered The Question as asked,
resolved
the "never spanked" claim you made, and have proven you have
the
Embry
study I do?

The last time you tried it with The Questions of your owns
about
how
it had to exist because it had extremes, was a laugh a
minute. I
can
go five or I can go fifty on the freeway, but that does not
prove
there was a traffic speed control sign there. It could be or
it
could
not. And if I can't see it then I have to go by a
guess...and I
could
be very wrong. Often parents that guess are very wrong. Show
me the
"speed limit sign"

You have answered a pseudo question ... by the answer "a
reasonable
standard." I didn't ask for a "reasonable standard" as it
is
unidentifiable as a constant.

It varies according to the bias of the observer. Stop signs,
speed
limit signs and written instructions that are specific as to
agreed
upon precise measure are what is needed and what I asked
for. Your
words will be gold should you actually answer this question.
I'd
copyright if I were you. Some of your friends aren't as
honest as I
am.

If you cannot supply those to the reader and myself then say
so and
quit playing at it. You cannot assure the parent a, other
than no
spanking at all, a precise way to not injure their child is
some
fashion while spanking.

I will accept your answer as honest if you admit your
inability to
answer The Question. You won't be alone.

And all your squirming doesn't convince me or anyone else.

So far I've not seen one of these challenges or counter
challenges
met.

I've posted page numbers from the study with relevant text
from
those
pages. You've posted nothing that couldn't be located from
another
source, and in fact I see that in fact they do NOT exist in
the
study
I have. You refuse to give page references.

That's rather telling. Sounds like someone's citation.

You have not resolved whether or not I have said I was
unspanked.
There are no citations from you. It doesn't matter to me. My
"spanked"
status isn't important one way or another. YOURS seems to be
though.
If you are going to keep saying I'm unspanked I am certainly
willing
for you to prove it.

If I was spanked or not I most assuredly have asked you a
question
you
cannot answer, and called you out on your failure to prove
the
criteria of YOUR OWN CHALLENGE...the Embry study.

I'm just not willing to debate someone that relies so much
on
artifices as ways to bolt when caught in a lie. And it's my
choice,
since you callenged ME to debate Embry by claiming I did not
have
the
study, and the conditions I will respond under.

Look behind you. The ball is not on my side of the net at
all. It's
were you left it.

Or you could just debate someone else. I never asked you
to
debate
Embry with me, I simply offered to meet your challenge if
you
could
meet my reponses to YOUR challenges....The Question,
Proof my
spanked
status, and Proof you possess the Embry study I have.

Weasel words. :-)

You can't debate someone else? I did ask you to debate
Embry? I
didn't
offer you a set of conditions before I'd accept your
challenge to
debate Embry?

Which is the weasel statement?

In fact it's a weasel statement to claim such. This isn't MY
game,
it's yours. Finish if you will or dance. I'm just here to
please
you,
as long as I don't have to play sans rules. The rules I'll
play
under
are clear, simple, precise, and up to you to agree to to
play.

These were YOUR challenges, not mine, with the exception of
The
Question. And you didn't have to take that one at all. YOU
stuck
your
neck out with your claims.

No, I'm not decieving anyone. I've simply said I won't
accept your
challenge to debate until you have met the conditions. If
you think
the conditions unfair, or unattainable you may say so.

And then we won't debate. Possibly you'd like to share with
others
what you have that you have tried to con folks into thinking
is my
Embry study, so feel free.

Or dance. Makes me no nevermind.

You might start by identifying the document by title, give
page
references when you make a claim or challenge from the text.
Supply
your debating opponent a copy first of course.

You wouldn't want them to try to debate blindly would you? I
wouldn't
do that to you, that's why I insisted you find your copy
first and
prove you had it....I didn't want you to later claim
handicap or
misunderstanding.

Certainly providing a copy and using page references would
prove
you
have something from the Embry study and not an excerpt.

A chart that gives no reference back to the document proves
it's a
chart, nothing else.

I still don't see you serving that ball. There, behind you.
Surely
in
one of your many spins you saw it there.


While we are talking proof, here's bit for you and the
spanking
compulsives to consider that OTHERS know so very well. It
makes
me
wonder just how different your fantasy world is.

About the same as the "dream land." :-)

Well, interestingly I don't deny that some children survive
a
childhood of spanking very well. I have always maintained we
are a
tough species. I simply prefer to play the odds.

I have found much harm from the various levels of "spanking"
that
the
users claims is spanking even when it's out at the drawing
blood
extremes.

I have never been able to find any proven harm from not
spanking,
despite the wild Dobsonian exclamatory orations of some of
you.

Hence, I choose the safe path...not that there wouldn't or
couldn't
be
a rare "sport" or mutation that was bad, but I've not found
them.
And
I want the odds as far into the best for the child as
possible. I
care
about society and my child.

I have found, as I said, ample clearly identified spanking
harms.

Would you like a copy of the Embry study that I have. Take
care of
the
other two issues and you shall have it, and I'll never ask
if you
lied
about it.

I've already made arrangements to provide it to a third
party. I'm
sure forwarding a copy to you on my request wouldn't be
refused.

But not until, Droaner. Not until.

You are not to be trusted. So we have to do what we can, no
matter
how
feeble it might be....R R R R R R R R.... to keep you as
honest as
is
possible, which ain't much.

Just do as you are told and you get's what you want. A
chance to
actually hold and touch the Embry study. And if you are
really a
good
boy and stop the garbage, possibly a debate...since I
promised it.

I don't think you have the guts. and all the running and
squirming
is
clear evidence of your cowarice. Prove me wrong.

Oh, and the citation I gave, makes clear that I would NOT
pretend
that
homeschooler don't spank. These say, some of them, that they
did
and
that others do.

http://sandradodd.com/s/proof

Why do you do this silly lying you are so easily caught at?
Misleading
is lying and trying to pretend I said something
Ididn't...welllllll.
tsk

Doan

Six days. Wednesday, February 25th. 8 AM.

Kane


http://sandradodd.com/s/proof

Kane