Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > General Interest > The Sandbox - National
test
The Sandbox - National The Sandbox is a collection of off-topic discussions. Humorous threads, Sports talk, and a wide variety of other topics can be found here.

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 650
MoneyManMatt 490
Jon Bon 406
Still Looking 399
samcruz 399
Harley Diablo 377
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
Starscream66 285
nicemusic 285
You&Me 281
George Spelvin 273
sharkman29 256
Top Posters
DallasRain70869
biomed164180
Yssup Rider61765
gman4453562
LexusLover51038
offshoredrilling48943
WTF48267
pyramider46370
bambino43221
The_Waco_Kid37760
CryptKicker37280
Mokoa36497
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
Mojojo33117

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 05-01-2013, 03:40 AM   #106
CJ7
Valued Poster
 
CJ7's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 9, 2010
Location: Here
Posts: 14,191
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NiceGuy53 View Post
Is this guy for real?!!!! I thought CBJ7, Eva and Little Stevie were the dunces of this board. But this guy is in a class all by himself. LMFAO!
theres your basic problem ... you thought
CJ7 is offline   Quote
Old 05-01-2013, 03:44 AM   #107
NiceGuy53
Valued Poster
 
NiceGuy53's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 6, 2010
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 1,948
Encounters: 34
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CJ7 View Post
theres your basic problem ... you thought
Hey Buddy. I was giving you a compliment. You are not the dumbest poster on this board. There is someone even dumber than you. LOL.
NiceGuy53 is offline   Quote
Old 05-01-2013, 06:43 AM   #108
Guest040616
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Dec 23, 2009
Location: Central Texas
Posts: 15,047
Encounters: 8
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn View Post
A late aside for WTF; I served, I went to war twice, you cannot call me a chickenhawk you little piece of shit.
JD, I also served and went to war but I did not take WTF's "chickenhawk" remark as a slap. I took it as a reference to the Bush Administration's response to 9/11, especially as it relates to Iraq.

I am sure he will correct me if I'm wrong!
Guest040616 is offline   Quote
Old 05-01-2013, 02:52 PM   #109
JD Barleycorn
Valued Poster
 
JD Barleycorn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 12, 2011
Location: Olathe
Posts: 16,815
Encounters: 54
Default

I think you're missing the shit that WTF puts in most of his posts.
JD Barleycorn is offline   Quote
Old 05-01-2013, 03:53 PM   #110
WTF
Lifetime Premium Access
 
WTF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 1, 2010
Location: houston
Posts: 48,267
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn View Post
A late aside for WTF; I served, I went to war twice, you cannot call me a chickenhawk you little piece of shit.
I can and I did. If you were for sending troops to Iraq but did not go, chickenhawk. Bush connected 9/11 with Saddam and you fell for it.
WTF is offline   Quote
Old 05-01-2013, 05:09 PM   #111
I B Hankering
Valued Poster
 
I B Hankering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: South of Chicago
Posts: 31,214
Encounters: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flghtr65 View Post
It's amazing how IBH and others will defend Bush or give Bush and his adminstration a free pass.

Again Both were GUN RUNNING PROGRAMS.
There were differences, so the programs are not identical, but according to Websters definition of same, Operation Wide Receiver and Fast and Furious can be considered the same. IBH asked how are they the same. I provided an explanation.
Boy are you looking at the world through Kool Aid colored glasses! How is declaiming a FAILED Bush program a "defense" of Bush? The Bush program FAILED! There, it's posted again for your edification!

You're the zombie who wants to champion Odumbo's lie that "Fast and Furious" started under Bush! You're the one who WRONGLY argued that the Bush program and Odumbo's "Fast and Furious" were the SAME program -- and that is a demonstrable, bald face distortion of the truth.

Further, your new tack of arguing the two programs are "similar", while a noticeable retreat from your earlier stance that they were the "same" program, is a very weak concession that you were proved wrong. Nevertheless, you still persist in championing Odumbo's dumb-ass. Just a note, no matter how you twist your "current" argument, you cannot explain away or justify the idiocy behind the Odumbo administration's decision to reconstitute a program based on a moribund, FAILED Bush program!?!

Just an FYI, the two DIFFERENT programs are as alike as a 1968 Ford Mustang compared to a 2009 Kia: the Bush program ENDED before any Americans were killed and BEFORE Odumbo was even elected!
I B Hankering is offline   Quote
Old 05-01-2013, 05:16 PM   #112
Yssup Rider
Valued Poster
 
Yssup Rider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: Clarksville
Posts: 61,765
Encounters: 67
Default

Are you sure Roosevent didn't have anything to do with this?

And, ladies and gentlemen, back from his tour of the High Colonic... CORPY!

Poopy boy!
Yssup Rider is offline   Quote
Old 05-01-2013, 08:11 PM   #113
flghtr65
Valued Poster
 
flghtr65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 15, 2010
Location: Greenfield, WI
Posts: 2,163
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NiceGuy53 View Post
The definition of the word "same" as taken from Merriam-Webster:

1
a: resembling in every relevant respect
b: conforming in every respect —used with as

2
a: being one without addition, change, or discontinuance : identical
b: being the one under discussion or already referred to

3
: corresponding so closely as to be indistinguishable

4
: equal in size, shape, value, or importance —usually used with the or a demonstrative (as that, those) in all senses



You left out the other definitions: 1b; 2a; 2b; 3; 4. Instead, you thought you would try your luck by cherry picking 1a as your defintion of the word "same". Well guess what, you are still shit out of luck. The 2 programs are not "resembling in every relevant respect". There were major differences between the 2 programs as has been pointed out in previous posts. You yourself have again referenced some of the differences. You need to go back to the drawing board chump.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/same
NG53, you left out the definition of resemblence - Point of likeness, similiarty. So the two programs are resembling in every relevant respect, just not identical. Back to the drawing board for you chump.
flghtr65 is offline   Quote
Old 05-01-2013, 08:24 PM   #114
i'va biggen
Account Disabled
 
Join Date: Jan 20, 2011
Location: kansas
Posts: 28,773
Encounters: 17
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NiceGuy53 View Post
Hey Buddy. I was giving you a compliment. You are not the dumbest poster on this board. There is someone even dumber than you. LOL.


Yes there is fuckface you lmao
i'va biggen is offline   Quote
Old 05-01-2013, 08:41 PM   #115
NiceGuy53
Valued Poster
 
NiceGuy53's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 6, 2010
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 1,948
Encounters: 34
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flghtr65 View Post
NG53, you left out the definition of resemblence - Point of likeness, similiarty. So the two programs are resembling in every relevant respect, just not identical. Back to the drawing board for you chump.
Damn son. Quit doubling down on your ignorance. The 2 programs are not resembling in every relevant respect. In your idiotic post #101, you said "there were differences, so the programs are not identical" before you went on to conclude that based on definition 1a, the 2 progams "can be considered the same". If there were major differences, which you yourself have acknowledged, the programs are not the same. Quit embarrassing yourself!
NiceGuy53 is offline   Quote
Old 05-01-2013, 08:48 PM   #116
NiceGuy53
Valued Poster
 
NiceGuy53's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 6, 2010
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 1,948
Encounters: 34
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by i'va biggen View Post
Yes there is fuckface you lmao
You used to be one of the dumbest fuckers on this board. But I think this other guy has even you beat. You should be proud of yourself, Eva. You are moving on up!
NiceGuy53 is offline   Quote
Old 05-01-2013, 08:54 PM   #117
flghtr65
Valued Poster
 
flghtr65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 15, 2010
Location: Greenfield, WI
Posts: 2,163
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by NiceGuy53 View Post
Damn son. Quit doubling down on your ignorance. The 2 programs are not resembling in every relevant respect. In your idiotic post #101, you said "there were differences, so the programs are not identical" before you went on to conclude that based on definition 1a, the 2 progams "can be considered the same". If there were major differences, which you yourself have acknowledged, the programs are not the same. Quit embarrassing yourself!
NG53, do you have trouble comprehending the word resemblence? - Point of likeness similiarity. You can have differences and and still be similiar. I never wrote the word major in any post. One more time if you go by Websters and the definition of same and resemblence, the programs are the same despite having differences. Your problem is you won't accept the definiton of resemblence.
flghtr65 is offline   Quote
Old 05-01-2013, 09:06 PM   #118
flghtr65
Valued Poster
 
flghtr65's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 15, 2010
Location: Greenfield, WI
Posts: 2,163
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by I B Hankering View Post
!

You're the zombie who wants to champion Odumbo's lie that "Fast and Furious" started under Bush! You're the one who WRONGLY argued that the Bush program and Odumbo's "Fast and Furious" were the SAME program -- and that is a demonstrable, bald face distortion of the truth.

Further, your new tack of arguing the two programs are "similar", while a noticeable retreat from your earlier stance that they were the "same" program, is a very weak concession that you were proved wrong. Nevertheless, you still persist in championing Odumbo's dumb-ass. Just a note, no matter how you twist your "current" argument, you cannot explain away or justify the idiocy behind the Odumbo administration's decision to reconstitute a program based on a moribund, FAILED Bush program!?!

Just an FYI, the two DIFFERENT programs are as alike as a 1968 Ford Mustang compared to a 2009 Kia: the Bush program ENDED before any Americans were killed and BEFORE Odumbo was even elected!
The programs are the same like a BMW330I and BMW530I. If you can't accept Websters definitions of words same and resemblence, then I can't help you. Why the ATF agents in the Phoenix field office wanted to try Fast and Furious, you will have to ask them. One last time the concept of "Gun Running" started under Bush!
flghtr65 is offline   Quote
Old 05-01-2013, 09:09 PM   #119
NiceGuy53
Valued Poster
 
NiceGuy53's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 6, 2010
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 1,948
Encounters: 34
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flghtr65 View Post
NG53, do you have trouble comprehending the word resemblence? - Point of likeness similiarity. You can have differences and and still be similiar. I never wrote the word major in any post. One more time if you go by Websters and the definition of same and resemblence, the programs are the same despite having differences. Your problem is you won't accept the definiton of resemblence.
So now you are arguing that they are not the same but just similiar? LOL. Yes there were some similiarities (which I have said all along).

And I don't think I have to tell you what "your problem" is.
NiceGuy53 is offline   Quote
Old 05-01-2013, 10:13 PM   #120
I B Hankering
Valued Poster
 
I B Hankering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 3, 2010
Location: South of Chicago
Posts: 31,214
Encounters: 9
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by flghtr65 View Post
The programs are the same like a BMW330I and BMW530I. If you can't accept Websters definitions of words same and resemblence, then I can't help you. Why the ATF agents in the Phoenix field office wanted to try Fast and Furious, you will have to ask them. One last time the concept of "Gun Running" started under Bush!
You've already admitted the Bush policy was a stupid, failed project. The fact that you continue to try to justify the Odumbo administration's subsequent double-down attempt on stupid and failed -- with the enhanced stupidity of not using tracking devices -- is incredible. The net sum of your argument is that Odumbo was somehow entitled to be more stupid than Bush. While you're correct in your argument that Odumbo was MORE stupid, it's wrong of you to argue that he had a "right" to be more stupid: Americans died.
I B Hankering is offline   Quote
Reply



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved