you have on YOUR side, the ones that wish women would be raped by a pack of wild dogs, and the ones that think that animal rape videos are no big deal.RichClem » 17 Jan 2015 5:04 pm » wrote: Blah, blah, and babble baloney.![]()
I have on my side liberal Time, liberal Newsweek, the liberal New Republic, all the networks at the time, every business publication I've ever seen, most historians most of whom are liberal, National Review, American Spectator, Weekly Standard, Human Events, etc, etc.
You have on your side your own psychotic analysis and accompanying delusions.
Yeah, I know how painful reality is for you.Cannonpointer » 17 Jan 2015 5:11 pm » wrote: That's not an improvement, Lisa. Every time I think you can;t sink lower, you do.
Okay, ****. I made specific claims. Refute one of them. Use Time - sorry, I mean LIBERAL Time - the one that hates Walll Street which owbs it. Use LIBER\AL Time to debunk ANYTHING I HAVE SAID IN THIS THREADRichClem » 17 Jan 2015 7:19 pm » wrote: I have on my side liberal Time, bla bla bla etc, etc.
You have on your side a delicious penis that I love to suck, which is why I lied just now about Time being on my side.
I have, but you respond with lies, bulls*** and your usual psychotic idiocy.Cannonpointer » 17 Jan 2015 11:16 pm » wrote: Okay, ****. I made specific claims. Refute one of them.
That's what I thought, you little *******.RichClem » 18 Jan 2015 6:45 am » wrote:
I have, but you wah wah wah wah My mother's a whore. I love ****. Waaahhh!!!
YOU made the claim and YOU were challenged to back it up and YOU started bleeding from your butt instead. So **** off, you bring-nothing, bluffasaurus ****. Go stalk someone else, you little *******. I will not **** your mouth, so stop begging me. THIS DICK IS FOR CHICKS, YOU FREAK.Cannonpointer » 17 Jan 2015 11:16 pm » wrote:
Okay, ****. I made specific claims. Refute one of them. Use Time - sorry, I mean LIBERAL Time - the one that hates Walll Street which owns it. Use LIBER\AL Time to debunk ANYTHING I HAVE SAID IN THIS THREAD
I'm gonna wait right here while you show that you didn't tell a "clem" when you said Time Magazine - sorry, LIBERAL Time Magazine - was on your side.
GO!
I'm ****' awestruck at your virtuosity, sonny.crimsongulf » 18 Jan 2015 6:48 pm » wrote:I just know that history disproves your thread topic.
you should be in awe. Hey, I have never stooped to the sok strategy.Cannonpointer » 18 Jan 2015 6:57 pm » wrote:I'm ****' awestruck at your virtuosity, sonny.
Boy, that post BROUGHT it! Your source is unimpeachable: "History." And your link to it - inside the cavern of your mind. Amazing!
**** amazing. The years you've been posting have given you amazing chops, buddy. You really BRING it! I'm standing in a veritable PUDDLE of refutation.
Edited for clarity, sonny.. You don't get any praise for not sokking, son. You SHOULDN'T **** with a sok until you do SOMETHING wortth a **** with the screen name you're currenty underserving, ya podunk *** hat. Littlehawk has more business sokking than you do. Every once in a while he does more than bluff.crimsongulf » 18 Jan 2015 6:59 pm » wrote:
you should be in awe. Hey, I have never stooped to the sok HAVING A strategy.
Sour grapes, kid. You're a jealous ******* because I jave colorfful soks and you can barely manage the level of lameness we're seeing in your repsonses here.crimsongulf » 18 Jan 2015 6:59 pm » wrote: you should be in awe. Hey, I have never stooped to the sok strategy.
I ain't got a dawg in dis fite, but you is a jealous *******.crimsongulf » 18 Jan 2015 6:59 pm » wrote:
you should be in awe. Hey, I have never stooped to the sok strategy.
In the Muslim community, I would be stoned for pointing out that you are a jealous *******.crimsongulf » 18 Jan 2015 6:59 pm » wrote: you should be in awe. Hey, I have never stooped to the sok strategy.
Me thinkum maybeum, you-um jealousum *******.crimsongulf » 18 Jan 2015 6:59 pm » wrote: you should be in awe. Hey, I have never stooped to the sok strategy.
I consider EVERY voter one of my potential voters - even jealous *******.crimsongulf » 18 Jan 2015 6:59 pm » wrote:
you should be in awe. Hey, I have never stooped to the sok strategy.
Mmmm.crimsongulf » 18 Jan 2015 6:59 pm » wrote:
you should be in awe. Hey, I have never stooped to the sok strategy.
I have only been in this stable for a few days - I was forcibly requisitioned from a homosexual named gooey. My name was shamed to project no innocence. But even I know a jealous ******* when I see one.crimsongulf » 18 Jan 2015 6:59 pm » wrote: you should be in awe. Hey, I have never stooped to the sok strategy.
I certainly respect them, but I also occasionally respect arguments that don't craft any into them. I see that as a weakness, but not always a fatal weakness.Silverfox » 17 Feb 2014 2:58 pm » wrote:Oh. My. God.
It looks as if only logical fallacies earn respect in some quarters.
.Cannonpointer » 18 Jan 2015 6:46 pm » wrote: That's what I thought, you little *******.
You have chased me around the board like a ****, INSISTING that Time Magazine agrees with you and disagrees with me. I've ignored you, becuase I knew it was a bluff. I finally get tired of your spamming that over and over and over and over - and I call your bluff. Okay, I say: refute one claim with the source you claim refutes me.
"I DID," you bluff again, "but my ****** hurts and I need a dick in my mouth! Waaaaahhh!!!"
**** you, turd. You bring jack ****, you little **** chasing ape.
Here is the post you responded to, WITHOUT MEETING THE CHALLENGE, YOU COWARDLY ****:
YOU made the claim and YOU were challenged to back it up and YOU started bleeding from your butt instead. So **** off, you bring-nothing, bluffasaurus ****. Go stalk someone else, you little *******. I will not **** your mouth, so stop begging me. THIS DICK IS FOR CHICKS, YOU FREAK.
Now, say some more stupid ****, to signify that your mom is a whore and that your dad molested you with anal rape and that you molest children regularly. Seriously, if you molest boys by licking their asses, keep posting in this thread, you bring-nothing little ***.
Prove you're a child molester! GO!
Users browsing this forum: activeketoavis, Beekeeper, Bill Gates [Bot], Bob, Buck Naked, Buffalo, ConsRule, Dirty Harry, FJB, Goodgrief, Google [Bot], Google Adsense [Bot], Google Feedfetcher, Jantje_Smit, jerra b, Justin Sane, Kobia2, MackTheFinger, Majik, Mrkelly, nefarious101, Neo, neue regel, PhiloBeddo, PoliticalPopUp, razoo, RebelGator, roadkill, ROG62, SJConspirator, Skans, SouthernFried, Squatchman, Sumela, sunburn, Yandex [Bot], Z09, Zeets2 and 1 guest