That was great! Wasn't it? IIRC wasn't it you that tried to out Sammy's ID?
Maybe Mayhem with all of his Las Vegas connections could secure a nicely comped room for you two to share. Being the gambling men that you are.
What If Mitt And Jeb Really Do Go At It, Hammer And Tongs?
- Thread starter Mayhem
- Start date
That was great! Wasn't it? IIRC wasn't it you that tried to out Sammy's ID?
Maybe Mayhem with all of his Las Vegas connections could secure a nicely comped room for you two to share. Being the gambling men that you are.
xfire
New Twitter/X @cxffreeman
I never tried to out Mitch, he outed himself. Of course he's removed all traces of himself from the internet so it really doesn't matter.
Sounds like you are staying on top of his world wide web status. Interesting considering that he no longer posts here and it was all a self inflicted wound on his part. Are you sure he doesn't have to worry about you showing up on his doorstep in a burrito fueled rage?
xfire
New Twitter/X @cxffreeman
Not really "staying on top" of anything, more liek trolling for lulz, and that he removed all traces of himself was breaking news about a year and a half ago. I've got better uses of my time than making bets on politics and showing up on a doorstep hundreds of miles away.
Why would you be trolling for as you call it "lulz"? The dude is gone and obviously You Miss the "lulz" he provided for you and you decided to search for him. Interesting. I was away for a year, I never searched for any of you fuckers.
xfire
New Twitter/X @cxffreeman
He hadn't been gone long when I looked and I haven't thought about that idiot since he tried to sneak back in under a sock puppet account, and I don't even remember how long that's been, a while to say the least. And as far as you being gone for a year and not looking for anyone, funny, you're back, you must have missed us.
Mayhem
Banned
First of all, let's point out that everything was going fine around here without you. And sure as hell, no one started any threads about how the place blows without you.
And you admitted to mixing your pain meds with alcohol during a time when you made threats of physical violence involving the use of pliers.
And I did take a time out, for approx. 6+ months. I popped in now and again, read what was here, and popped back out. So once again, you making/taking eveything personal around here is what's making you a fool. And being wrong with everything you write certainly isn't helping.
And I'm not here for the popularity contest. And I don't need to be. Just like you insisted on dragging Sammy back into it, you felt the need to mention "rep" recently. No one mentions rep. Only you. But look at your post count/rep count, now look at mine. Less posts, no time in the Member section trading rep for post count congrats, majority of my time spent here, and I'm not exactly feeling the hate.
And the "one in particular". I'm betting it was Jagger. And no, the pacifier is staying where it's at, firmly lodged up your ass. Jagger had the balls and integrity to tell me directly how he felt, and I let him know how I felt. If I'm wrong and it was someone else, your words have remarkably less impact. But it's priceless that you climb on your high horse about "confidentiality". Absolutely priceless.
So now, I admitted to having a couple of scotches with prescribed meds while I was suffering with pain after back surgery I took a leave of absence from work never drove and was in my own home.. Yeah, that translates into BC admitting he is a junkie! You were beating your chest over that one too and it was a lie. And guess what! I hadn't posted in almost a year when you said that crap! I will have to search your posts but it was before I was banned that you were responding and boasting about all the rep you were receiving because you were absolutely annihilating everyone with your infinite wisdom. Yep you did it! I will see if I can find it. And that is the reason oh mystic sage that I even mentioned the rep because it was so important for you to point out a while back. You honestly don't even realize that you cause most of the comments directed at you because of your self aggrandizing presence here.
So let's recap.
You said I admitted to being a junkie-lie
Someone that you think is your BFF (not Jagger) thinks you are a troll.
You mentioned rep before I ever did, but somehow I am hung up on it.
As for me being liked, I don't really feel the need for affirmation from anyone as I could care less who likes me when I am doing my job either. I take a certain pride in being known as a bastard in my professional circle and it gets me a ton of work. That's how I can afford to make "foolish bets" with people that can't do anything but run off at the mouth about politics without one ounce of substance to back up their claims.
I have already picked apart your claim that Obama isn't using EO's to circumvent the legislative process, which the evidence shows he has.
Quite frankly, I'd have a harder time cross examining a sock puppet.
So let's recap.
You said I admitted to being a junkie-lie
Someone that you think is your BFF (not Jagger) thinks you are a troll.
You mentioned rep before I ever did, but somehow I am hung up on it.
As for me being liked, I don't really feel the need for affirmation from anyone as I could care less who likes me when I am doing my job either. I take a certain pride in being known as a bastard in my professional circle and it gets me a ton of work. That's how I can afford to make "foolish bets" with people that can't do anything but run off at the mouth about politics without one ounce of substance to back up their claims.
I have already picked apart your claim that Obama isn't using EO's to circumvent the legislative process, which the evidence shows he has.
Quite frankly, I'd have a harder time cross examining a sock puppet.
I missed some of you and arguments like this.
To me, they seem very similar : Both are moderate republicans, both are very rich, both are counting on huge corporate money to finance their campaign...
That said, I think Bush's biggest threat in the primary will be Romney (and Romney's biggest threat will be bush) 'cause if oe of them do not quit early, there's a high possibility that he will cost money and votes to the other, allowing a more "radical" candidate (like Mike Huckabe, Rick Perry or Ben Carson for example) to win the primaries...
That said, I think Bush's biggest threat in the primary will be Romney (and Romney's biggest threat will be bush) 'cause if oe of them do not quit early, there's a high possibility that he will cost money and votes to the other, allowing a more "radical" candidate (like Mike Huckabe, Rick Perry or Ben Carson for example) to win the primaries...
Mayhem
Banned
Yes, let's recap. You get permabanned because you were a drug addled psycho, you begged your way back in by promising to behave yourself, and you resort back to type by making everything personal and being whiny and disagreeable when someone posts something you don't like. You don't stick to the topic, you make bullshit accusations without offering any proof, you idiotically claim a lack of conviction towards people who won't take an even more idiotic $1000 bet from someone who is best kept at arms length, and you are reduced to pointing out without pointing out that someone on this board doesn't like me. And to top it all, you're going to dig through years of my posts to find one that you claim I made, and if you find it, it will prove that I'm obsessed by rep.
What argument do you think you're winning right now?
lol @ "radical" . The only politician that has ran for president in my lifetime that could be classified as 'radical" is the current occupant of the White House. The laundry list of radical associations he has made during his lifetime would make Angela Davis jealous.
Wasn't Ronald Reagan radical? I think that meant something else in the 80's though.
Like I said before, I am not discussing why I was banned but I can assure you it was not you that caused it and I have already discredited your claim of an admission of me being addicted to drugs or alcohol. One 3 week period of post op pain and my way of dealing with it does not a junkie make. If you want clarification as to the reason for my ban PM an admin and maybe they will release the details to you. I would assume there are conditions for anyone that is reinstated after a lengthy ban. Knowing you and your busy body hall monitor mentality, you were probably PM'ing the admins as soon as I returned complaining about that too.
But yeah, I agreed to be a good boy. I don't think challenging you on the numerous threads you start about conservatives or republicans in general is a violation of any board rules or even offering a wager about the outcome of an election is either. You are welcome to paint me in any light you want, but one period of time that I reacted admittedly in a completely over the top manner while dealing with chronic pain does not take away from the rest of my time here when I have participated without stirring shit. I have noticed that most conservatives on this board will not engage the liberals here, I am one of the few that does. There are a couple of others and we know who they are but we don't need each other to fight our battles for us as it seems you and your main tag team partner do. Now go back and look at the threads of a political nature I have started since I have returned and compare them to yours. I'd venture to say that not one of my threads were started with the intention to incite or inflame anyone. You, on the other hand, it's your M.O.
This all started with one simple comment. $1000 dollars. Now who is the one that is getting their panties in a wad?
Go get yourself a woman or something.
Yeah, Obama is radical. A radical kenyan muslim communist. Even thought one cannot be both communist and muslim since communism is anti-religion. Anyways...
But what about Mike Huckabee ? Isn't he a radical, an extremist ? Always talking about how the US as a nation, the congress and the president should base their decisions on christian faith ? Pretending that the US is an anti-christian atheistic theocracy (even thought an "atheistic theocracy" is as contradictory as "capitalistic communism" would be).
I don't know about France, but Christianity still is the predominate faith in this country. Until the day it is the minority faith, it will not be considered radical. Did you even listen to what Huckabee said?
Mayhem
Banned
No, I didn't say a word to anyone about your return. As a matter of fact, since digging through my post history is your new hobby, how about finding the posts I made in your support, when you were gone? Go on. Fetch.
On the first 2 pages of thread titles, there are a grand total of 5 threads that I started. 2 of those thread titles were the headlines of the news sources I cited (which accounts for the majority of the threads I start here), one thread was about the SC calling a gun law unconstitutional (which I approve of) and 2 threads ended with "...even though we voted for Obama". On the same 2 pages you have 8 threads. So what? Do you see me or anyone else complaining? This is a political forum. I not only didn't ask for the admins to create it, I was one of two people that argued against it. But here it is. Let me say this again, so 2 years from now you don't have to review all my posts to find it: I was against the very creation of this subsection.
So what doesn't get your panties in a bunch?
And me and Xfire do not have any agreement or arrangement. We tend to agree on many things and neither of us denies that we are Liberals (which for him, as a resident of Texas, takes more balls than a Nevadian who is a former Pacific Northwester). And I don't have "arrangements" with anyone else. revidffum is a good example. He and I either tend to agree full throttle, or disagree full throttle (and we've had some doozys). But we say our piece and we fuckin' get over it. Me and Sabrina got into it recently, we said our piece, and we both fuckin' got over it.
You made the accusation that I am "impressed with myself". Dude, read what you're writing. You are way more impressed with me than I am. This much is obvious because you are the only one here that can't get over it.
And as for the $1000 bet that you are still going on about, the answer is no. Just like it was the first time. Not get the fuck over it.
I haven't mentioned any poster by name other than you and one other only to clarify that it wasn't the person I was alluding to. Anyway, there are some new ground rules as far as my previous banning, the reason(s) for it won't be discussed ever. The person or persons that lead to my behavior that caused it don't exist nor would they be responded to if they happened to make a comment to me. We've had some good exchanges since I returned and these past two days haven't been so pleasant. That is the way the discussion of politics go. As for my behavior towards you a year or so ago that was over the top, I have apologized, been warned and even was issued a 3 day ban for that incident. To the best of my knowledge I haven't reacted in that way since then.
I do take exception to your characterization of me as someone with a drug problem. perhaps the incident that you keep bringing up could give that impression but I could see it more if it happened over and over again. I would not be able to remain in my profession if that were the case, not necessarily from a legal standpoint but simply in the ability to do my job. I actually have a family member that struggles with addiction and it has taken it's toll on us and it is a sensitive topic with me.
Sometimes, the comments I make are said tongue in cheek but it seems to get lost on a message board. I don't have any personal animosity towards you or anyone here actually. But, I also am going to defend my positions, call bullshit as I perceive it and generally disagree with anyone that comes from the liberal slant. I anticipate and expect the same from you but my attitude probably changed a little once I read your comment on another thread that was made while I was banned . My offer of the wager was to prove a point. You didn't accept and I am over it. But I will probably remind you of it from time to time when the doom and gloom predictions about the GOP start up again. You have your finger on the pulse of democratic politics and mine is on republican politics. We both think we are right, but there is one thing I can guarantee, I will NEVER make predictions about the outcome of an election although I will offer things like wagers if I think someone is just making commentary that is baseless just because they want it to be true.
I do take exception to your characterization of me as someone with a drug problem. perhaps the incident that you keep bringing up could give that impression but I could see it more if it happened over and over again. I would not be able to remain in my profession if that were the case, not necessarily from a legal standpoint but simply in the ability to do my job. I actually have a family member that struggles with addiction and it has taken it's toll on us and it is a sensitive topic with me.
Sometimes, the comments I make are said tongue in cheek but it seems to get lost on a message board. I don't have any personal animosity towards you or anyone here actually. But, I also am going to defend my positions, call bullshit as I perceive it and generally disagree with anyone that comes from the liberal slant. I anticipate and expect the same from you but my attitude probably changed a little once I read your comment on another thread that was made while I was banned . My offer of the wager was to prove a point. You didn't accept and I am over it. But I will probably remind you of it from time to time when the doom and gloom predictions about the GOP start up again. You have your finger on the pulse of democratic politics and mine is on republican politics. We both think we are right, but there is one thing I can guarantee, I will NEVER make predictions about the outcome of an election although I will offer things like wagers if I think someone is just making commentary that is baseless just because they want it to be true.
xfire
New Twitter/X @cxffreeman
And all the bravado it implied. You don't get to shut other people up by throwing out wagers. Like I already asked, what's next, double dog dares?
And yeah, this week I'm "constantly" tag-teaming with Mayhem, and next week whoever else just happens to be around and chimes in will be the one that's "constantly" "tag-teaming" with Mayhem. Or with me, or whatever. You just rehash the same attacks, accusations, and complaints and direct them at whoever "constantly" happens to be on your radar at any given time, just like ol' Failbert tended to do. Here's an idea, why don't you try attacking other people's arguments instead of making personal attacks, You Might be able to avoid "constantly" being attacked by whoever you happen to be disagreeing with at the moment.
You haven't been paying attention xman.
I attack their positions all the time, and am quite successful in making my case. I don't do the drive by mode or post a lot of funny pictures and I rarely pile on when someone that I may agree with is in the middle of an argument. I don't know if you are aware of this or not but a significant amount of time is spent in law school arguing and defending your positions or interpretation of law. In fact it is encouraged. You seem to have a mother hen complex or something, always telling me how I should behave, how I should react. With all due respect, I don't need your advice or admonishment. I am a little different conservative as such that I believe in giving the liberal nasty playbook right back to them. It doesn't make me popular but it sure makes for interesting conversation. In the future, when you see me behaving in a manner that you don't like, report it if you think it is over the line. I am tired of the snarky above the fray holier than thou routine. Arguing is what I do, it's in my DNA . When you make those comments to me it is only to try and diminish a point that you don't agree with.
ETA: And to address one other thing in your post. I really didn't offer a wager to shut people up, if I didn't have silly liberals like you to argue with, life just wouldn't be any fun. The wager was offered to see how firmly you believe your own bullshit. It was established and it didn't cost me a cent.
Similar threads
