the Constitution under assault and they will never stop

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

There you go with your straw man argument about post count, Old-Twerp. What's the matter, Old-Twerp, did you kill to many brain cells with your 80 proof to think of a new straw man argument?

No need for new ones. The old, basic ones are still true and still appropriate. In case you haven't noticed ed, the more you post the higher your post count goes! I know, that is "higher math" for a lit major, but trust me, it works that way.

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by JCM800

Hey IB ...what happened?

Aren't you the punctuation & grammar asshole in here.

What happened is that he screwed up. Again. And when you caught him he went directly into INDeceit mode. Intentionally misquoted you. Denies that he made an error. Just yells his insults louder and louder. You know, predictable IB tactics.

[Yssup Rider]

Naw, your game. You play it. Im trying to ascertain the border between your bullshit and just nonsense.


And when you're not committing spelling and grammatical errors, you're lying through your government funded false tooth.

Why not come clean and tell us which college you graduated.p, and in which "course of study."

I contend you're a fucking high school dropout who got embarrassed by other low life's outperforming him down at the mine shaft. Still seeking self esteem, our shit wallowing sociopath turned to memorizing the dictionary as a means of promoting an online facade that allowed him to escape the strum and drank of menial labor, socialmrejection and sexual death.

Sound about right to you or have you been Funk and Wagnalls? Youn really ARE that miserable, aren't you?

[JCM800]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

What's the matter, Old-Twerp, did you kill to many brain cells with your 80 proof to think of a new straw man argument?

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Read it again, the verb is there!

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

Then prove you know what the verb is and explain what the button is telling you

IB the "punctuation & grammar asshole" of the board is now teaching English.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Old-T

No need for new ones. The old, basic ones are still true and still appropriate. In case you haven't noticed ed, the more you post the higher your post count goes! I know, that is "higher math" for a lit major, but trust me, it works that way.

That does nothing to change the fact that it's a straw man argument from you, Old-Twerp.

Originally Posted by Old-T

What happened is that he screwed up. Again. And when you caught him he went directly into INDeceit mode. Intentionally misquoted you. Denies that he made an error. Just yells his insults louder and louder. You know, predictable IB tactics.

While Old-Twerp lets the bottle do his talking for him.

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Naw, your game. You play it. Im trying to ascertain the border between your bullshit and just nonsense.

And when you're not committing spelling and grammatical errors, you're lying through your government funded false tooth.

Why not come clean and tell us which college you graduated.p, and in which "course of study."

I contend you're a fucking high school dropout who got embarrassed by other low life's outperforming him down at the mine shaft. Still seeking self esteem, our shit wallowing sociopath turned to memorizing the dictionary as a means of promoting an online facade that allowed him to escape the strum and drank of menial labor, socialmrejection and sexual death.

Sound about right to you or have you been Funk and Wagnalls? Youn really ARE that miserable, aren't you?

You never did explain what the button is telling you, you lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM.

Originally Posted by JCM800

IB the "punctuation & grammar asshole" of the board is now teaching English.

When you've mastered shoelaces, you lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM, then you can talk about learning English.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You're the one IDIOTICALLY bitching about the law suit to do just that, Speedy.

I may disagree with the lawsuit but I support the process that the lawsuit is following. IDIOT.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

I may disagree with the lawsuit but I support the process that the lawsuit is following. IDIOT.

You're still bitching about the process because the suit is counter to your ignorant POV, Speedy.

[Yssup Rider]

Merriam-Webster wanker is stroking it again. You're correction is in error. Look it up. I suggest GEDforDipshits.com.

My fists are probably getting as tired of punching you as your wrists are getting tired of wanking.

But press on. Melt down. It's for a good cause.

After all. "the Constitution under attack and they will never stop"

Good cause indeed.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Yssup Rider

Merriam-Webster wanker is stroking it again. You're correction is in error. Look it up. I suggest GEDforDipshits.com.

My fists are probably getting as tired of punching you as your wrists are getting tired of wanking.

But press on. Melt down. It's for a good cause.

After all. "the Constitution under attack and they will never stop"

Good cause indeed.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

Keep choking on your IUD, you lying, hypocritical, racist, cum-gobbling golem fucktard, HDDB, DEM.

[Old-T]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

That does nothing to change the fact that it's a straw man argument from you, Old-Twerp.



While Old-Twerp lets the bottle do his talking for him.

IB is Sooooooooo predictable.

A simple comment based upon simple data--your number of posts and your fixation on other people's typos--is, in your very closed mind, a "straw man argument". Let's examine that:
--To accurately be a straw man argument I would have to have claimed YOUR post was invalid BECAUSE you post so often. I did no such thing. I did not consider your points worth the effort to refute, so I did not. To me the more insidious topic on this thread is your continued bad behavior, so I commented on that. And you volume of posts that infect this place like a plague of locusts, devouring reasoned ideas of others and leaving desolate dead brain cells in their place. I chose to let others decide if your OP was worth refuting or not.

So no, once again you rant, you rave, you belch noxious fumes into the air--but when all is said and done you are WRONG. Once more. As usual.

Sorry, find some other lie to spin today.

In reality, it was you who in the strictest sense of the term, used a straw man argument:
--I said you post a lot (a blatantly obvious truth)
--YOU try to argue that is not so, BECAUSE I live in a bottle.
--See the difference: while I ignored your original position, YOU try (vainly) to refute mine
--And you do so by setting up a completely specious argument that has nothing to do with your number of posts.

Go look up "straw man argument". You nailed it. Well done irony boy.

PS: Instead of my pointing out your 10,000+ posts, would you rather I point out that--besides having a diaper fetish--you now seem to also have acquired a bottle fetish? Somehow, even though it was YOU that started talking about bottles I am sure you will find a way to turn it around and claim it points out something about me. Not true of course, but truth has never mattered to you, has it? To go along with your diaper and ass fetishes, I assume the ideal bottle you fantasize about has a nipple on it.

I can almost see it: IB in a diaper, sucking down on a bottle of rancid milk.

Oh the horror! What kind of mental image have I accidentally created! How do I expunge it from my brain!:laughin g1:

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Old-T

IB is Sooooooooo predictable.

A simple comment based upon simple data--your number of posts and your fixation on other people's typos--is, in your very closed mind, a "straw man argument". Let's examine that:
--To accurately be a straw man argument I would have to have claimed YOUR post was invalid BECAUSE you post so often. I did no such thing. I did not consider your points worth the effort to refute, so I did not. To me the more insidious topic on this thread is your continued bad behavior, so I commented on that. And you volume of posts that infect this place like a plague of locusts, devouring reasoned ideas of others and leaving desolate dead brain cells in their place. I chose to let others decide if your OP was worth refuting or not.

So no, once again you rant, you rave, you belch noxious fumes into the air--but when all is said and done you are WRONG. Once more. As usual.

Sorry, find some other lie to spin today.

In reality, it was you who in the strictest sense of the term, used a straw man argument:
--I said you post a lot (a blatantly obvious truth)
--YOU try to argue that is not so, BECAUSE I live in a bottle.
--See the difference: while I ignored your original position, YOU try (vainly) to refute mine
--And you do so by setting up a completely specious argument that has nothing to do with your number of posts.

Go look up "straw man argument". You nailed it. Well done irony boy.

PS: Instead of my pointing out your 10,000+ posts, would you rather I point out that--besides having a diaper fetish--you now seem to also have acquired a bottle fetish? Somehow, even though it was YOU that started talking about bottles I am sure you will find a way to turn it around and claim it points out something about me. Not true of course, but truth has never mattered to you, has it? To go along with your diaper and ass fetishes, I assume the ideal bottle you fantasize about has a nipple on it.

I can almost see it: IB in a diaper, sucking down on a bottle of rancid milk.

Oh the horror! What kind of mental image have I accidentally created! How do I expunge it from my brain!:laughin g1:

You have nothing but a straw man argument, Old-Twerp, and just like the straw man in the land of Oz, you need to be looking for a brain and not another bottle.

[Old-T]

Oh how clever!

Too bad your post just emphasizes how little you comprehend the words you try to use.

Poor IB.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by Old-T

Oh how clever!

Too bad your post just emphasizes how little you comprehend the words you try to use.

Poor IB.

So, Old-Twerp, you found another bottle to drown your sorrows with and suspended your search for a brain. Maybe you'll have better self-discipline tomorrow, Old-Twerp.

[SpeedRacerXXX]

Originally Posted by I B Hankering

You're still bitching about the process because the suit is counter to your ignorant POV, Speedy.

Has SCOTUS even agreed to hear the suit yet? NO. IDIOT. When Scotus rules that CHLs are not required to carry concealed handguns, your POV will be correct. Until that time, MY POV is correct. IDIOT.

[I B Hankering]

Originally Posted by SpeedRacerXXX

Has SCOTUS even agreed to hear the suit yet? NO. IDIOT. When Scotus rules that CHLs are not required to carry concealed handguns, your POV will be correct. Until that time, MY POV is correct. IDIOT.

Since Heller, every Court of Appeal but one has ruled contrary to your ignorant POV, Speedy. Quake in your sneakers, Speedy.