Cultcow Russell Greer / Mr. Green / @ just_some_dude_named_russell29 / A Safer Nevada PAC - Swift-Obsessed Sex Pest, Convicted of E-Stalking, "Eggshell Skull Plaintiff" Pro Se Litigant, Homeless, aspiring brothel owner

[MG 620]

Don't forget that overlooked B-side gem "Muh Disability".

The deluxe edition has a piano version of "Why are you so bias? (The rejection song)".

 

[Rabbit Bones]

https://soundcloud.com/russellgreer25/win-a-date-with-kylie-jenner
More terrible Russhole music. Google is telling me Kylie Jenner is knocked up by some rapper at the moment? I thought whores who let black dicks get stuck in them were below his standards?

The lyrics are amazing. He pretty much asks her not to call him a creep and that agents have turned him down for five years.

 

[DrJonesHat]

He doesn't get that the "Win a Date" things ARE publicity stunts. He thinks they're real, actual dates and he has a chance with them. That's why he lost his shit when Farrah Abraham didn't go out with him.

 

[RP 520]

https://soundcloud.com/russellgreer25/win-a-date-with-kylie-jenner
More terrible Russhole music. Google is telling me Kylie Jenner is knocked up by some rapper at the moment? I thought whores who let black dicks get stuck in them were below his standards?

The lyrics are amazing. He pretty much asks her not to call him a creep and that agents have turned him down for five years.

I wouldn't wish Greer on anyone, not even a Kardashian.

 

[The Dude]

I'm very much looking forward to seeing Liver Lips Greer continue to descend into insanity and failure in 2018. What new celebrity will he fixate on and harass next? What new lolsuits will he file? Will someone take HIM to court for a change of pace? Will he finally have law enforcement get involved with his criminal behavior? Will someone finally get fed up with his bullshit and kick him in his crusty slacks?
Only time will tell, but I have a good feeling that 2018 is going to be even worse for Dildo Saggins.

2016 and 2017 saw him become a lauging stock because of his Taylor Swift lawsuit, saw him lose his access to paid sex by being such a creepy bastard (can you imagine being too much of a creep that brothels won't let you in?) that he got himself banned from ever coming back, saw him lose the support of the meagre number of friends and family he had and is now only followed by people who want to laugh at the train wreck, saw his reputation as a vexatious litigant who makes frivolous lawsuits firmly cemented with the Grande trial, saw him lose any chance at having a successful career dashed upon the rocks and lose job after job, and saw him get kicked out of several places to live (again, because he's a creepy loser).

In summary, the Year of Our Lord Two-Thousand and Eighteen may well completely break Russhole.

 

[gREEEEEEEEEr]

He doesn't get that the "Win a Date" things ARE publicity stunts. He thinks they're real, actual dates and he has a chance with them. That's why he lost his shit when Farrah Abraham didn't go out with him.

Are they? I mean, they are, but a real, actual date has to be involved, right? Granted, the winner is going to be chosen by who's good publicity, and a helping of "hot celebrity can stand to spend an hour with him without being totally creeped out".

Slackface's problem is that he's such an all-around shitty person that they wouldn't pick him if he was the last man alive. They wouldn't encourage his stalkerish behavior. He of course would blubber and sputter "muh disability" and act like they had entered a binding legal contract with him personally just by holding the contest. Plus if he's the only dude alive then he'll feel that much more entitled to having his pick of the hotties.

 

[downloads]

Russ provides us with an example of his legal work.

Loving By the Dozens: The Argument for Polygamy

June 26, 2015 was a historic day: the United States Supreme Court ruled 5-4 that Same Sex Marriage was indeed a legal right, saying: “The Constitution promises liberty to all within its reach, a liberty that includes certain specific rights that allow persons, within a lawful realm, to define and express their identity….The court now holds that same-sex couples may exercise the fundamental right to marry. No longer may this liberty be denied to them.” Obergefell v. Hodges, 2015 U.S. LEXIS 4250, *11 (2015).

Soon after the court’s proclamation, the internet was ablaze with stories on the triumphant ruling. Social networking sites created special hashtags for the momentous occasion, and many businesses created specialized logos and products for the ruling such as Ben & Jerry’s ice cream flavor “I Dough, I Dough.” Same-Sex Marriage: How Companies Responded to Supreme Court's Decision. ABC News. (2015). It wasn’t all rice and confetti though. Many conservative leaders decried the ruling. Republican Presidential contender Ted Cruz described the court ruling as “some of the darkest 24 hours in our nation’s history.” Ted Cruz on Supreme Court Rulings: “Some of the Nation’s Darkest Hours.” Daily Caller. (2015).

A week later, despite the ruling creating a so called “dark and depressing” feeling for some, a polled 59% of Americans said that they supported the Same Sex Marriage ruling with independents and democrats supporting the ruling more so than republicans. Poll: Majorities Back Supreme Court Rulings on Marriage, Obamacare. CNN. (2015).
Shortly after the ruling, Nathan Collier of Helena, Montana, applied with his two wives to apply for marriage licenses as a polygamous couple at the Yellowstone. Montana Man Seeks License For Second Wife. CBS News. (2015). “It's about marriage equality," Collier told The Associated Press Wednesday. "You can't have this without polygamy." Id. Mr. Collier says that he was a Mormon, but was excommunicated for polygamy and now belongs to no religion. He married his second wife in a private wedding, but did not apply for a marriage license to avoid being prosecuted for bigamy. Id. Between his two wives, they have raised a “happy and strong family” that has 13 children. Id. Also applying for polygamy rights was a Christian Pastor in Michigan, Neil Patrick Carrick, who filed a lawsuit against his state challenging Michigan Statute that prohibits a pastor from marrying any other couples not named in the statute’s chapter. The name on the docket for that case is Carrick v. Synder. Minister Sues Michigan For Right to Marry Same-Sex Couples. Detroit News. (2015).

As society progresses and becomes more open, many people are seeking rights to be granted through the judicial system. “...Each right, no matter how fundamental or basic it may appear to be, must be balanced against the rights of others, including the rights of the public generally.” Preterm Cleveland v. Voinovich, 89 Ohio App.3d 684 (Oh. 1993). The 9th Amendment of the Constitution of the United States guarantees that “the enumeration...of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people.” Amendment IX. United States Constitution. 1787. This amendment was implemented during the drafting of the Constitution with the reasoning, from mostly Federalists, that a Bill of Rights could not possibly list every single right that people could enjoy so thus they created a catch-all net for the judiciary to determine whether certain rights are “unenumerated”. Ninth Amendment - Unenumerated Rights. FindLaw. (2015).

Being so broad, Constitutional Law seems to have many ins and outs to it with some amendments contradicting others. While the ninth amendment allows for unenumerated rights to be determined and allowed, and not taken from the people, the tenth amendment clearly states: “The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.” Amendment X. United States Constitution. 1787. One could not possibly write a short thesis on all of the areas of Constitutional Law as there are literally volumes of books and journals covering different aspects of Constitutional Law. Instead, it would be appropriate to take a look at one aspect of Constitutional Law: equal protection and see if it could be applied to polygamy in the same way same sex marriage was legalized.

Brief History of Marriage

From a Biblical standpoint, marriage has existed since Adam and Eve when God told them to go forth and “multiply and replenish the earth” and had a purpose of producing children. Genesis 1:28. King James Bible. From a historical and secular point of view, monogamy has been recorded in many ancient civilizations including: Mesopotamia, Egypt, Aztec Mexico, Inca Peru, India and China. "Sex, succession, and stratification in the first six civilizations: How powerful men reproduced, passed power on to their sons, and used power to defend their wealth, women, and children.” Social Stratification and socioeconomic inequality Vol. 1. Westport CT: Praeger. pp. 37–74. (1993).

In Greece and Rome, during the highpoint of the Roman Empire, married man could only have one wife and were not allowed to see any other woman nor partake in fornication. The purpose of marriage was to create a loving bond between one another and to create loyalty. Marriage was a contract that was to be honored. Monogamy and polygyny in Greece, Rome, and world history. Princeton/Stanford Working Papers in Classics (200. Marriage being viewed as a contract was followed through the centuries. In many recorded historical instances, there was recorded homosexual marriages such as Nero, emperor of Rome, marrying his slave. Roman Homosexuality: Second Edition. Oxford University Press. (2009).

In Victorian England, two women living together was termed a “Boston Marriage”. Another form of marriage was Polygamy. Polygamy was practiced in many Biblical instances and was brought to attention in America when Joseph Smith relayed a vision that he had in which God gave him the right to practice polygamy. Doctrine and Covenants 132. In Reynolds, the United States Supreme Court upheld the criminal conviction of George Reynolds, a polygamist in the Territory of Utah. Reynolds v. United States, 98 U.S. 145 (187. Not only did the Court quash each defense Reynolds gave which consisted of defenses to technical errors, the Court also vilified polygamy as having “…evil consequences that…flow from plural marriages.” Id. at *44.

It wasn’t until Windsor, when DOMA (Defense of Marriage Act) was found to be unconstitutional, that other forms of marriage – mostly Homosexual Marriage – were considered to be valid even though several states since then had legalized gay marriage with Massachusetts being the first state to do so in 2004. Windsor v. United States, 133 S. Ct. 2884 (2013).

Case-or-Controversy

For a case to considered by a court, it must have controversy as found in Article III of the United States Constitution. Article III, Constitution of the United States of America. “…Plaintiff must have suffered an ‘injury in fact’ — an invasion of a legally protected interest which is (a) concrete and particularized, and (b) ‘actual or imminent, not “conjectural or hypothetical.” ’ Second, there must be a causal connection between the injury and the conduct complained of—the injury has to be ‘fairly [***18] . . . trace[able] to the challenged action of the defendant, and not . . . th[e] result [of] the independent action of some third party not before the court.’ Third, it must be ‘likely,’ as opposed to merely ‘speculative,’ that the injury will be ‘redressed by a favorable decision.” United States v. Windsor, 133 S. Ct. 2675, 2685-2686 (U.S. 2013).

Windsor and Obergefell both were cases of controversy as they had been denied marriage benefits (Windsor) and the right to be married (Obergefell). The controversy had reached ripeness, and in popular opinion the case was bound to have a favorable decision as the nation’s acceptance of homosexuality was growing. Windsor was ruled 5-4 and had become a precursor to the legalization of Gay Marriage as Lawrence had been to Goodridge and the gay marriage debate; Grizwold had been to Roe; etc.

Equal Protection

The Treatise on Constitutional Law-Substance & Procedure reads: “The equal protection clause guarantees that similar individuals will be dealt with in a similar manner by the government…the equal protection guarantee has nothing to do with the determination of whether a specific individual is properly placed within a classification.” Treatise on Constitutional Law-Substance & Procedure. Chapter 18: Equal Protection. Ronald D. Rotunda. (2015). The Supreme court followed this reasoning by writing: “The nature of injustice is that we may not always see it in our own times. The generations that wrote and ratified the Bill of Rights and the Fourteenth Amendment did not presume to know the extent of freedom in all of its dimensions, and so they entrusted to future generations a charter protecting the right of all persons to enjoy liberty as we learn its meaning. When new insight reveals discord between the Constitution’s central protections and a received legal stricture, a claim to liberty must be addressed.” Obergefell v. Hodges, 2015 U.S. LEXIS 4250 (2015).

Marriage has been held to be protected under the Equal Protection clause in the 14th amendment as found with interracial couples marrying (Loving v. Virginia); prison inmates having the right to marry (Turner v. Safley); marriage in general has been ruled “a Fundamental right” since 1923 when ruled in Meyer. Meyer v. Nebraska, 262 U.S. 390, 399, 43 S. Ct. 625, 67 L. Ed. 1042 (1923). With all of these different classifications and groups being able to marry, why can’t polygamous couples have the right to marry? The opinion’s author, Justice Kennedy, even cited Goodridge in that case’s flamboyant wording: “Choices about marriage shape an individual’s destiny…because it fulfils yearnings for security, safe haven, and connection that express our common humanity. Civil marriage is an esteemed institution, and the decision whether and whom to marry is among life’s momentous acts of self-definition.” Goodridge v. Dep't of Pub. Health, 440 Mass. 309 (2004).

Justice Chief John Roberts does not believe that there is no reason to stop plural marriages from happening. In Chief John Roberts’ dissent, he wrote that the States do not have compelling reasons now to only keep marriage as defined between two people. “It is striking how much of the majority’s reasoning would apply with equal force to the claim of a fundamental right to plural marriage. If “[t]here is dignity in the bond between two men or two women who seek to marry and in their autonomy to make such profound choices,” ante, at 13, why would there be any less dignity in the bond between three people who, in exercising their autonomy, seek to make the profound choice to marry? If a same-sex couple has the constitutional right to marry because their children would otherwise “suffer the stigma of knowing their families are somehow lesser,” ante, at 15, why wouldn’t the same reasoning apply to a family of three or more persons raising children? If not having the opportunity to marry “serves to disrespect and subordinate” gay and lesbian couples, why wouldn’t the same “imposition of this disability,” ante, at 22, serve to disrespect and subordinate people who find fulfillment in polyamorous relationships? See Bennett, Polyamory: The Next Sexual Revolution? Newsweek, July 28, 2009 (estimating 500,000 [*81] polyamorous families in the United States); Li, Married Lesbian “Throuple” Expecting First Child, N. Y. Post, Apr. 23, 2014; Otter, Three May Not Be a Crowd: The Case for a Constitutional Right to Plural Marriage, 64 Emory L. J. 1977 (2015).” Obergefell v. Hodges, 2015 U.S. LEXIS 4250, 80-81 (2015).

As stated above concerning case precedents, there is a precedent for plural marriage. In 2013, a Utah Federal District Judge ruled that the state’s cohabitation bans were unconstitutional. Citing Lawrence, he quoted: “the State cannot demean their existence or control their destiny by making their private sexual conduct a crime. Their right to liberty under the Due Process Clause gives them the full right to engage in their conduct without intervention of the government.” And so it was with cohabitation. Brown v. Buhman, 947 F. Supp. 2d 1170 (2013).

In the realms of Constitutional Law, rights are encouraged to be protected. While the courts are willing to grant rights that have been rooted through American history, they would rather see those rights be furthered through legislative action and public dialogue. When all such talks and actions have failed, the Court is willing to take action to determine whether a right is a “fundamental right.” Id. at *81. It is my hope that the Supreme Court takes up the plural marriage question as it is a fundamental right as it could be legalized with the same wording that was used in Obergefell. While public opinion is getting comfortable with plural marriage, legislative action will always be moot on the subject. If the argument for Gay Marriage is “love”, then there is no reason to restrict polygamy. In the words of Justice Kennedy in Obergefell: “These considerations lead to the conclusion that the right [*42] to marry is a fundamental right inherent in the liberty of the person, and under the Due Process and Equal Protection Clauses of the Fourteenth Amendment.”

 

[The Dude]

Are they? I mean, they are, but a real, actual date has to be involved, right? Granted, the winner is going to be chosen by who's good publicity, and a helping of "hot celebrity can stand to spend an hour with him without being totally creeped out".

Slackface's problem is that he's such an all-around shitty person that they wouldn't pick him if he was the last man alive. They wouldn't encourage his stalkerish behavior. He of course would blubber and sputter "muh disability" and act like they had entered a binding legal contract with him personally just by holding the contest. Plus if he's the only dude alive then he'll feel that much more entitled to having his pick of the hotties.

He would automatically be disqualified from winning any of those "Win a Date With (insert attractive female celebrity)" due to being an extreme security risk. All of these actresses and poo starlets have huge security teams working day and night to keep their client safe. From armed ex-special forces bodyguards doing the grunt work to tech specialists looking into the backgrounds and web presence of everyone the client meets with to people screening the client's mail for bombs and Anthrax, their only job is keeping people like Russ from harming the client in any way. Every applicant in one of those Win a Date publicity stunts is thoroughly vetted by professionals to ensure they aren't a threat to the client. Russ would be red-flagged faster than you can say "rejected".

 

[RustyNail(her)]

2016 and 2017 saw him become a lauging stock because of his Taylor Swift lawsuit, saw him lose his access to paid sex by being such a creepy bastard (can you imagine being too much of a creep that brothels won't let you in?) that he got himself banned from ever coming back, saw him lose the support of the meagre number of friends and family he had and is now only followed by people who want to laugh at the train wreck, saw his reputation as a vexatious litigant who makes frivolous lawsuits firmly cemented with the Grande trial, saw him lose any chance at having a successful career dashed upon the rocks and lose job after job, and saw him get kicked out of several places to live (again, because he's a creepy loser).

And every single one of those things are a direct result of his own actions. He has to blame celebrities that his terrible decisions are their fault because look what they made him do. He can't be accountable for his outbursts.

Also seeing pictures of old Russ (even with Grande) is pretty crazy versus what he looks like today. He looks so gaunt now. I know it's the malnutrition but damn.

 

[CWCissey]

Jesus Fucking Christ. I cannot unsee that shit. I had nightmares about dealing with him in person, but this added another level of terror.

Merry Christmas!

 

[SwiftlyRuiningRussell]

Looks like thread potential, if you can get an email or a username then this person almost definitely will have some suspect posts on other sites. Yahoo answers and Quora tend to have these people in droves.

Also this guy is like the perfect blend of Russell except instead of lolsuits he does the numbers thing like that other cow.

For real if you're interested in making a thread, you should look into this guy.


EDIT: I went and looked up his YouTube channel and he believes in 'God's Gemstones' and that the Bible has religious numerology that shows their birthdates revealing that they are destined to be together.

Quite the find.

I'm not interested in making a thread for this guy but I'm perfectly fine if someone else wants to!

 

[DrJonesHat]

Are they? I mean, they are, but a real, actual date has to be involved, right?

I mean, there's no chance of a relationship developing, unless the guy happens to be really charming and they click. I guess it's happened, but most likely, you go on the date, take some pictures, and you never see her again.

 

[gREEEEEEEEEr]

He would automatically be disqualified from winning any of those "Win a Date With (insert attractive female celebrity)" due to being an extreme security risk.

Yes. Any adult fan would be heavily scrutinized and probably disqualified merely for entering. Pop starlets are going to consider young kids, not grown-ass adult who's her own age. It's good publicity to be seen with one of her fans; the kid gets the experience of his life and a photo to treasure. An adult would only have a shot if her security detail thought he was totally harmless, and likable. Russ is out on both counts.

I mean, there's no chance of a relationship developing, unless the guy happens to be really charming and they click. I guess it's happened, but most likely, you go on the date, take some pictures, and you never see her again.

Pretty much. It's A DATE, not "dating". Anyone exceptional enough to think otherwise -- that he's destined to be with her and this is his "in" -- would be automatically disqualified, for many very good reasons.

 

[Cilleystring]

Of course Rus would plagiarize his papers. Imagine how pissed he would be if someone made a comment about that on his facebook, and then asked if he is faking his disability as well.

Sorry to those who dislike the Rus poetry. I wrote this when procrastinating for finals and sent it to a few buddies who also love the antics of Moebius Lipschitz. It's autistic in length, but I figure it's a good post for Christmas Eve.

Spoiler: A Visit From Taylor Swift

Twas the night before Christmas, and all through the house
Russell Greer was upset, he did not have a spouse.
The stockings were hung, by the chimney with care
They belonged to Miss Swift, which she used to wear.
With penis in hand, Rus nestled in bed,
while visions of Taylor danced in his head.


Though mama ain't there, rus never forgot her.
She gave Shitlips away, but held onto her daughter.
When out on the lawn there arose such a clatter!
Rus somersaulted up to see what was the matter!
Away to the window, he did a front flip.
He opened the shutters, but could not close his lip.
The moon on the breast of a woman below,
aroused little Russell, and caused him to grow.
When, what to his lifeless eyes should appear,
Eight figures came forth, each one with a sneer.
She had read his letters, and received his gift
He knew in that moment, it must be Taylor Swift!

More rapid than amtrak, his enemies came
Taylor whistled and shouted, and called them by name.
"Now Skordas! Now Calvin! Now Grande and Borchetta!
On Herbert! On Farrah! On Starr and Sharshorita!
There is our enemy! As ugly as fabled!
Let Russell Greer know we don't like the disabled!"
Rus took the high ground, and climbed onto the roof.
He'll take down these bigots, and expose the real truth!

So up to the house-top, his haters they flew.
Rus pushed them too far, their patience was through.
Drool fell from his mouth, and froze to the shingles.
When Taylor is around, his groin always tingles.
She needed to hear him, he needed to scold her.
Skordas approached, Rus gave him a cold shoulder.
Rachel Starr messaged Russell, but he didn't respond.
His head turned to find Taylor, that beautiful blonde.

Kids heard the commotion, and gathered around.
Ariana slipped on drool, and fell to the ground.
Just then the trolls came, Rus sees them and hurls.
With Molotov cocktails, they burned boys and burned girls.
Instead of getting the trolls, it was Rus she'd assault
Those children had died- it was Ariana's fault.
Rus sprang into action, with his permanent frown.
He used the anthrax, to take his enemies down.
Their screams filled the air, Rus smiled with glee.
He would snag some children, and return them for a fee.
Before he could get down, he heard someone behind.
Taylor Swift stabbed his heart, and he fell from cloud nine.

Down from the roof, and into the snow.
Rus got himself up, and climbed through the window.
As he fell in the house, from the chimney came a sound.
Sweet Taylor was coming, and Rus would have her bound.
She was dressed in all fur, from her head to her foot,
looking oh so sexy, all covered in soot.
A bundle of toys, Rus had in his pack.
He took out a gun, and pointed it at her back.
"I've got you now Taylor!" He said with a smile.
"Better sit down, you'll be here for a while"

Her eyes - How they twinkled! Her dimples, how merry!
Her cheeks were like roses, her nose like a cherry.
His little drool mouth was drawn up like a bow.
His pecker would rise, and Taylor would blow.
"I can't wait to play footsies with you, under the table.
Put on that red dress, I'll show you I'm able!"
A wink of an eye, and a twist of his head,
let poor Taylor know there was much to be dread.
He spoke not a word, but went straight to his work.
And fill'd all the stockings, then turn'd with a jerk.

His warm up was done, he turned to his prize.
When just then, something strange appeared in his eyes.
It was a little baby boy, and a beautiful lady.
They had an aura about them, something seemed shady.
"Who? Who are you?" He yelled out to the yard.
"My name is Bailee" she said "this is my little Charlie Gard".
Russell couldn't believe it, this couldn't be real.
The ghosts of his past, interrupting his meal!
Panic engulfed him, it felt like a stroke.
As spit filled his mouth, he started to choke.
He gasped for air, as he fell to the floor.
As benevolent spirits, untied Russell's whore.
Taylor stood over him, his face turning blue.
She whispered in his ear "I will never love you".
The face of his obsession, was Russell's last sight.
Merry Christmas to all, and to all a good night!



Note to Rus should he read this and spaz out: Your death was used in this for dramatic effect, similar to the majority of things in your ridiculous book. Nobody is after you and wants you dead you paranoid android.

 

[Ido]

Every time I see someone editing a poem/song to fit Russ I die on the inside.

Other than being crigey it just clogs the thread imo.

 

[Pony Horn]

lol.

eta whoops I didn't disable my blue light filter

After spending a couple of months reading Russell's abusive comments towards women I'm happy to see that he has lived down to my expectations and is spending this holiday season whining about how his life has been shattered.

Even better, I'm glad he still has unrealistic expectations for the path he has decided to take in life. While I feel bad for any woman he runs across, I feel good knowing that I'm going to have a new year of laughs, cringes, and face palms at his expense. Thanks, Russ!

 

[The Dude]

Do you think the Greers have invited Russ over for Christmas, or do you think he will be spending it alone in his rented room, fuming over the "haters and trolls" and angrily masturbating to Taylor Swift look-a-like porn stars?

 

[Viridian]

Do you think the Greers have invited Russ over for Christmas, or do you think he will be spending it alone in his rented room, fuming over the "haters and trolls" and angrily masturbating to Taylor Swift look-a-like porn stars?

I think they may have, but between the distance he'd be required to travel/find a ride for (I think his parents are still in Wyoming?) and them probably telling him he's not allowed to talk about his lolsuits at dinner, Strokey the Snowflake might not go even if he was invited.

 

[Tommy Wiseau Kin]

He would automatically be disqualified from winning any of those "Win a Date With (insert attractive female celebrity)" due to being an extreme security risk. All of these actresses and poo starlets have huge security teams working day and night to keep their client safe. From armed ex-special forces bodyguards doing the grunt work to tech specialists looking into the backgrounds and web presence of everyone the client meets with to people screening the client's mail for bombs and Anthrax, their only job is keeping people like Russ from harming the client in any way. Every applicant in one of those Win a Date publicity stunts is thoroughly vetted by professionals to ensure they aren't a threat to the client. Russ would be red-flagged faster than you can say "rejected".

He actually thinks he can win when the top two results upon googling his name is his ED page and this thread.

 

[Kugelsak Kastengrus 6th]

Do you think the Greers have invited Russ over for Christmas, or do you think he will be spending it alone in his rented room, fuming over the "haters and trolls" and angrily masturbating to Taylor Swift look-a-like porn stars?

I'm pretty sure he gets a courtesy invite with the stipulation that he behaves himself. At this point, he probably does behave himself around family since they are practically his only lifeline. As fucked up as he is, even Rusty is aware that he shouldn't alienate his family.