Pickens throws the gaunlet down

[TastesLikeChicken]

Umm, yeah. So Bush didn't really say he wanted to shoot his eardrums out.

Typical of the kind of garbage that gets spread by the BDSers and instantly becomes some sort of twisted conventional wisdom, adopted as fact, and spread with uninhibited glee.

As far as checking the box, the military tells you that it it's not a guarantee that one won't be stationed overseas. It's simply a preference. It seems you haven't served in the military yourself or you would know this already.

Oh, and as far as ommisions and evidence, you already pretty much debunked your own claims. Thanks. A little more due diligence on your part next time would do wonders for your credibility.

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
We're not there yet. Considering you're the only right winger to even claim this, I don't believe it. You're the same person who claimed to have sex with 2 bisexual males then denied it and read a book that was not released. You have no credibility so point me towards a credible source

Actually, I didn't claim I had sex with 2 bisexual males. But that's the type of dishonesty you engage in in this forum and that's why I return it to you in kind. You and your 8th grade education don't deserve anything more. That's not to mention your obvious rampant homophobia, all while pretending to be enlightened.

If you want the answer about Bush then google "bush palace alert."

How am I being homophobic and when did I claim to be enlightened? Besides, your statement made it very clear you had sex with two bisexual males so everything you say now is just a lie. This is a question about your credibility, not your confirmed sexual deviancy. It's like with Bill Clinton! You're like a gay republican version of bill clinton but not from idaho!

Anyway, you couldn't possibly be serious about that source

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
It seems you haven't served in the military yourself or you would know this already.

Is this a way of saying you've served in the military?

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
We're not there yet. Considering you're the only right winger to even claim this, I don't believe it. You're the same person who claimed to have sex with 2 bisexual males then denied it and read a book that was not released. You have no credibility so point me towards a credible source

Actually, I didn't claim I had sex with 2 bisexual males. But that's the type of dishonesty you engage in in this forum and that's why I return it to you in kind. You and your 8th grade education don't deserve anything more. That's not to mention your obvious rampant homophobia, all while pretending to be enlightened.

If you want the answer about Bush then google "bush palace alert."

How am I being homophobic and when did I claim to be enlightened? Besides, your statement made it very clear you had sex with two bisexual males so everything you say now is just a lie. This is a question about your credibility, not your confirmed sexual deviancy. It's like with Bill Clinton! You're like a gay republican version of bill clinton but not from idaho!

Anyway, you couldn't possibly be serious about that source

Here's the thread with the original statement I made:

Text:

I did it one time in my life back in the mid-80s. The girl was an absolute raging nympho and was up for trying anything and everything. Unfortunately she wanted to bonk incessantly and when the next day came around your johnson would feel like a 500 lb kitten just finished using it as a scratching post. Anyway, after I get done with the anal deed she says to me "That was fun. The only other time I've done it was during a wild night with two bi-sexual guys I met in Boston last year."

Needless to say I've never had the urge to peruse the poop chute since.

Wow. Don't you look stupid now you pathetic little troll? It's a perfect of example of how you run with part of a story and get it all wrong too. Perfectly typical of your behavior in this forum.

 

[JD50]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
We're not there yet. Considering you're the only right winger to even claim this, I don't believe it. You're the same person who claimed to have sex with 2 bisexual males then denied it and read a book that was not released. You have no credibility so point me towards a credible source

Actually, I didn't claim I had sex with 2 bisexual males. But that's the type of dishonesty you engage in in this forum and that's why I return it to you in kind. You and your 8th grade education don't deserve anything more. That's not to mention your obvious rampant homophobia, all while pretending to be enlightened.

If you want the answer about Bush then google "bush palace alert."

How am I being homophobic and when did I claim to be enlightened? Besides, your statement made it very clear you had sex with two bisexual males so everything you say now is just a lie. This is a question about your credibility, not your confirmed sexual deviancy. It's like with Bill Clinton! You're like a gay republican version of bill clinton but not from idaho!

Anyway, you couldn't possibly be serious about that source

Here's the thread with the original statement I made:

Text:

I did it one time in my life back in the mid-80s. The girl was an absolute raging nympho and was up for trying anything and everything. Unfortunately she wanted to bonk incessantly and when the next day came around your johnson would feel like a 500 lb kitten just finished using it as a scratching post. Anyway, after I get done with the anal deed she says to me "That was fun. The only other time I've done it was during a wild night with two bi-sexual guys I met in Boston last year."

Needless to say I've never had the urge to peruse the poop chute since.

Wow. Don't you look stupid now you pathetic little troll? It's a perfect of example of how you run with part of a story and get it all wrong too. Perfectly typical of your behavior in this forum.

This should be nominated for ownage of the year. TLC, I didn't think it was possible, but you just made Stoneburner look even stupider.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: JD50
This should be nominated for ownage of the year. TLC, I didn't think it was possible, but you just made Stoneburner look even stupider.

I can't take the credit for it. It was complete self-ownage on Stoner's part, and his penchant for looking at only part of a story. Yet he spews on and on about how others in here are dishonest. How's that for a daily dose of irony?

 

[Stoneburner]

Dishonest? I missed the quotation marks. Don't accuse me of dishonesty, yee who reads books that are unreleased and has sex with bisexual males! Watch, I'll admit I made a mistake and move on!


I misread!

See? I won't run through hoops trying to bullshit out of this You could learn from this instead of misreading a wikipedia article and pretending as though you read an unreleased book and then pretending as though you made an "honest" mistake. Now, about Bush's poop chute, you are the only person that claims bush actually vvanted to go to vietnam but couldn't. Because it was so hard to keep people out of vietnam! You had to beat back young rich white children with a stick to keep them from indochina!

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Umm, yeah. So Bush didn't really say he wanted to shoot his eardrums out.

Typical of the kind of garbage that gets spread by the BDSers and instantly becomes some sort of twisted conventional wisdom, adopted as fact, and spread with uninhibited glee.

As far as checking the box, the military tells you that it it's not a guarantee that one won't be stationed overseas. It's simply a preference. It seems you haven't served in the military yourself or you would know this already.

Oh, and as far as ommisions and evidence, you already pretty much debunked your own claims. Thanks. A little more due diligence on your part next time would do wonders for your credibility.

You're not going to be honest, misrepresenting what was said, so it's a waste of time going back and forth.

I never said Bush *wanted* to blow his eardrums out, in fact, I specifically said he didn't want to, and that he saw the National Guard as preferable. So you lied about that.

Your comment on the box you check is also misleading. I never said it guaranteed you wouldn't serve oversees; I said that if Bush had wanted to serve in Vietnam, he should have checked it 'yes', and not only did you get that wrong, but you left out how I allowed that there is *some* gray area about other reasons he might have left it unchecked; and not only did you get that wrong, but you yet again failed to answer my challenge to reconcile his *admission* he was looking for how not to go to Viet Nam with the gray area evidence if you want to interpret it to mean that he really was wanting to serve in Viet Nam - you can't and haven't answered, you just ignore the question and dodge.

You claim I debunked my own claims, when the only debunking is of your nonsense. But maybe if you repeat it enough you can convince someone.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Dishonest? I missed the quotation marks. Don't accuse me of dishonesty, yee who reads books that are unreleased and has sex with bisexual males!

What the hell does his having sex with men have to do with the issue? Using it as an attack against him implies there's something wrong with gay and bi-sexual men.

What's up with your comments in that area?

 

[OokiiNeko]

Sen. John Kerry, whose 2004 presidential campaign was torpedoed by critics of his Vietnam War record

Ha, Kerry threw the election, that`s why he lost.

Watch clips of him before and after the election and compare them to how he spoke during the campaign. Some serious downgrade in articulation while in the run for Prez.

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Dishonest? I missed the quotation marks. Don't accuse me of dishonesty, yee who reads books that are unreleased and has sex with bisexual males!

What the hell does his having sex with men have to do with the issue? Using it as an attack against him implies there's something wrong with gay and bi-sexual men.

What's up with your comments in that area?

I'm just being a jackass. I read that thing he quoted in marlin's sig and I misunderstood. I can admit when I make mistakes unlike some people. It's natural to make mistakes, why do you think jeebus invented abortions?

Chicken, on the other hand, will stubbornly dig in when he's proven to be wrong and use every flimsy bit of b.s. to support his non position. I ask him for a source and he says "google bush palace alert." I tried it and I think the first article is written by a bush friend and provides information contrary to everything even bush's staunches defenders have said. SO of course chickenboy accepts this as gospel instead of saying "it's possible bush wanted to go to war."

The only credible looking article was from the washington post and that pretty much says bush was MIA.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: dahunan
Publicity stunt from which Slim Pickens will waffle and flip flop his way out of

Who knew the name T. Boone Pickens before he presented his fake challenge?

T Boone ain't no Slim (may he rest in peace)

This is Slim Pickens as Major Kong from Dr. Strangelove and as Taggert in Blazing Saddles

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Dishonest? I missed the quotation marks. Don't accuse me of dishonesty, yee who reads books that are unreleased and has sex with bisexual males! Watch, I'll admit I made a mistake and move on!


I misread!

See? I won't run through hoops trying to bullshit out of this You could learn from this instead of misreading a wikipedia article and pretending as though you read an unreleased book and then pretending as though you made an "honest" mistake. Now, about Bush's poop chute, you are the only person that claims bush actually vvanted to go to vietnam but couldn't. Because it was so hard to keep people out of vietnam! You had to beat back young rich white children with a stick to keep them from indochina!

I do read books that are unreleased, on occassion. Plame's was one of them. In the early 90s I owned and ran a publishing company and I still have contacts in the publishing industry. So once again you make assumptions that you know nothing about.

As far as Bush, I claimed he volunteered to go to Vietnam. He did volunteer. He didn't end up going and they may not have wanted to send him anyway since his father was influential. That's how things work. Deal with it and stop pretending you're somehow the final word on what is and what is not credible in this wolrd.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Umm, yeah. So Bush didn't really say he wanted to shoot his eardrums out.

Typical of the kind of garbage that gets spread by the BDSers and instantly becomes some sort of twisted conventional wisdom, adopted as fact, and spread with uninhibited glee.

As far as checking the box, the military tells you that it it's not a guarantee that one won't be stationed overseas. It's simply a preference. It seems you haven't served in the military yourself or you would know this already.

Oh, and as far as ommisions and evidence, you already pretty much debunked your own claims. Thanks. A little more due diligence on your part next time would do wonders for your credibility.

You're not going to be honest, misrepresenting what was said, so it's a waste of time going back and forth.

I never said Bush *wanted* to blow his eardrums out, in fact, I specifically said he didn't want to, and that he saw the National Guard as preferable. So you lied about that.

Your comment on the box you check is also misleading. I never said it guaranteed you wouldn't serve oversees; I said that if Bush had wanted to serve in Vietnam, he should have checked it 'yes', and not only did you get that wrong, but you left out how I allowed that there is *some* gray area about other reasons he might have left it unchecked; and not only did you get that wrong, but you yet again failed to answer my challenge to reconcile his *admission* he was looking for how not to go to Viet Nam with the gray area evidence if you want to interpret it to mean that he really was wanting to serve in Viet Nam - you can't and haven't answered, you just ignore the question and dodge.

You claim I debunked my own claims, when the only debunking is of your nonsense. But maybe if you repeat it enough you can convince someone.

Here's what you said:

The *fact* is, that Bush himself admitted in an interview in the 90's that he had been determined not to go to combat in Viet Nam; he listed ways he considered not going, from going to Canada to blowing out his eardrum with a shotgun blast near it. He explained that he finally decided to 'better himself' and learn to fly a plane - and he had his father's political influence abused to put him ahead of a waiting list of hundreds for a spot in the Texas National Guard 'champagne' air unit.

That's NOT what Bush said. Bush said ""I was not prepared to shoot my eardrum out with a shotgun in order to get a deferment. Nor was I willing to go to Canada."

You plainly misrepresented his statement. I'm not the one being misleading in this case and you debunked your own claim by posting the relevant portion of the interview.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Dishonest? I missed the quotation marks. Don't accuse me of dishonesty, yee who reads books that are unreleased and has sex with bisexual males! Watch, I'll admit I made a mistake and move on!


I misread!

See? I won't run through hoops trying to bullshit out of this You could learn from this instead of misreading a wikipedia article and pretending as though you read an unreleased book and then pretending as though you made an "honest" mistake. Now, about Bush's poop chute, you are the only person that claims bush actually vvanted to go to vietnam but couldn't. Because it was so hard to keep people out of vietnam! You had to beat back young rich white children with a stick to keep them from indochina!

I do read books that are unreleased, on occassion. Plame's was one of them. In the early 90s I owned and ran a publishing company and I still have contacts in the publishing industry. So once again you make assumptions that you know nothing about.

As far as Bush, I claimed he volunteered to go to Vietnam. He did volunteer. He didn't end up going and they may not have wanted to send him anyway

since his father was influential. That's how things work. Deal with it and stop pretending you're somehow the final word on what is and what is not credible in this wolrd.

As far as Bush, I claimed he volunteered to go to Vietnam. He did volunteer. He didn't end up going and they may not have wanted to send him anyway

Did you type this while laughing, Chickie?

You have lowered the bar on credibility

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Dishonest? I missed the quotation marks. Don't accuse me of dishonesty, yee who reads books that are unreleased and has sex with bisexual males! Watch, I'll admit I made a mistake and move on!


I misread!

See? I won't run through hoops trying to bullshit out of this You could learn from this instead of misreading a wikipedia article and pretending as though you read an unreleased book and then pretending as though you made an "honest" mistake. Now, about Bush's poop chute, you are the only person that claims bush actually vvanted to go to vietnam but couldn't. Because it was so hard to keep people out of vietnam! You had to beat back young rich white children with a stick to keep them from indochina!

I do read books that are unreleased, on occassion. Plame's was one of them. In the early 90s I owned and ran a publishing company and I still have contacts in the publishing industry. So once again you make assumptions that you know nothing about.

As far as Bush, I claimed he volunteered to go to Vietnam. He did volunteer. He didn't end up going and they may not have wanted to send him anyway

since his father was influential. That's how things work. Deal with it and stop pretending you're somehow the final word on what is and what is not credible in this wolrd.

As far as Bush, I claimed he volunteered to go to Vietnam. He did volunteer. He didn't end up going and they may not have wanted to send him anyway

Did you type this while laughing, Chickie?

You have lowered the bar on credibility

Do you have proof he didn't try to sign up for Palace Alert?

If so, please present it.

 

[heyheybooboo]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

As far as Bush, I claimed he volunteered to go to Vietnam. He did volunteer. He didn't end up going and they may not have wanted to send him anyway

Did you type this while laughing, Chickie?

You have lowered the bar on credibility

Do you have proof he didn't try to sign up for Palace Alert?

If so, please present it.

Hey, Chickie . . .

Palace Alert required 500 hours of flight experience - which Bush did not have. And besides,
Palace Alert was stopped before Bush would have been eligible.

You don't know shit about Vietnam so STFU. Take your troll crap and revisionist history somewhere else.

And by the way, your 'talking point' query implies you expect me to prove a negative.

Nice bravado, Chickie . . .

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

I do read books that are unreleased, on occassion. Plame's was one of them. In the early 90s I owned and ran a publishing company and I still have contacts in the publishing industry. So once again you make assumptions that you know nothing about.

[/quote]

Really? Then where in the book does it say what you said it said? You still insist on continuing that lie? And if you read Plame's book, why would you still insist she "recommended" her when she explains the entire thing in detail? Or did you only read the redacted bits

See, you continue to lie and b.s. even when it's obvious. Now you first help continue the outright lies about john kerry and you defend bush's nonservice? You are saying "bush, an appropriately aged male with no physical defects despite a drinking problem, could not go to vietnam even though he wanted to, at a time when the u.s. govt was trying to throw as many bodies there as possible."

Nope, doesn't pass the laugh test. But I'm guessing that won't stop you from claiming one of your publishing industry friends has provided you bush's post office memoirs already

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

As far as Bush, I claimed he volunteered to go to Vietnam. He did volunteer. He didn't end up going and they may not have wanted to send him anyway

Did you type this while laughing, Chickie?

You have lowered the bar on credibility

Do you have proof he didn't try to sign up for Palace Alert?

If so, please present it.

Hey, Chickie . . .

Palace Alert required 500 hours of flight experience - which Bush did not have. And besides,
Palace Alert was stopped before Bush would have been eligible.

You don't know shit about Vietnam so STFU. Take your troll crap and revisionist history somewhere else.

And by the way, your 'talking point' query implies you expect me to prove a negative.

Nice bravado, Chickie . . .

Hey Boobie,

I'm aware that Palace Alert required 500 hours of flight experience and that the program was ended shortly after Bush finished flight training. Do you have proof that Bush knew those requirements in advance of requesting admission to the program? You seem to imply it, so let's see your proof.

As far as what I know of Vietnam...you have no idea what I know so STFU yourself and stop making assumption after assumption and then assuming those aswsumptions are some sort of valid argument.

As far as proving a negative, it IS possible in this case if Bush never actually made such a request so your own evasion talking point doesn't really fly.

Seems your own bravado is failing you, Boobie.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken
Umm, yeah. So Bush didn't really say he wanted to shoot his eardrums out.

Typical of the kind of garbage that gets spread by the BDSers and instantly becomes some sort of twisted conventional wisdom, adopted as fact, and spread with uninhibited glee.

As far as checking the box, the military tells you that it it's not a guarantee that one won't be stationed overseas. It's simply a preference. It seems you haven't served in the military yourself or you would know this already.

Oh, and as far as ommisions and evidence, you already pretty much debunked your own claims. Thanks. A little more due diligence on your part next time would do wonders for your credibility.

You're not going to be honest, misrepresenting what was said, so it's a waste of time going back and forth.

I never said Bush *wanted* to blow his eardrums out, in fact, I specifically said he didn't want to, and that he saw the National Guard as preferable. So you lied about that.

Your comment on the box you check is also misleading. I never said it guaranteed you wouldn't serve oversees; I said that if Bush had wanted to serve in Vietnam, he should have checked it 'yes', and not only did you get that wrong, but you left out how I allowed that there is *some* gray area about other reasons he might have left it unchecked; and not only did you get that wrong, but you yet again failed to answer my challenge to reconcile his *admission* he was looking for how not to go to Viet Nam with the gray area evidence if you want to interpret it to mean that he really was wanting to serve in Viet Nam - you can't and haven't answered, you just ignore the question and dodge.

You claim I debunked my own claims, when the only debunking is of your nonsense. But maybe if you repeat it enough you can convince someone.

Here's what you said:

The *fact* is, that Bush himself admitted in an interview in the 90's that he had been determined not to go to combat in Viet Nam; he listed ways he considered not going, from going to Canada to blowing out his eardrum with a shotgun blast near it. He explained that he finally decided to 'better himself' and learn to fly a plane - and he had his father's political influence abused to put him ahead of a waiting list of hundreds for a spot in the Texas National Guard 'champagne' air unit.

That's NOT what Bush said. Bush said ""I was not prepared to shoot my eardrum out with a shotgun in order to get a deferment. Nor was I willing to go to Canada."

You plainly misrepresented his statement. I'm not the one being misleading in this case and you debunked your own claim by posting the relevant portion of the interview.

I guess the bright light outside my window debunks the claim the sun is in the sky, then.

When he says a number of ways to get deferments he was not prepared to do, leading to the way to get the deferment he was willing to do, what is he saying?

He's saying he was not willing to do the other ways - which implies he thought of them and did not want to do them, which is 'considering them' and deciding against them.

The point - besides my statements being confirmed by the quote - is that he was looking for ways *not* to go to Vietnam, and picked one after considering several.

The statement was not his being determined to go to Vietnam, and considering the army navy and air force; it was him determined to find a deferment and considering how to do it.

Any evaluation of the ambiguous evidence about his intentions on wanting to go to combat in Viet Nam, or not want to, needs to consider the context his admission gives us.

What I said was right. What you said was wrong. And you did not ever yet answer the questions I asked or address many of the points I made.

 

[TastesLikeChicken]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

I do read books that are unreleased, on occassion. Plame's was one of them. In the early 90s I owned and ran a publishing company and I still have contacts in the publishing industry. So once again you make assumptions that you know nothing about.

Really? Then where in the book does it say what you said it said? You still insist on continuing that lie? And if you read Plame's book, why would you still insist she "recommended" her when she explains the entire thing in detail? Or did you only read the redacted bits

See, you continue to lie and b.s. even when it's obvious. Now you first help continue the outright lies about john kerry and you defend bush's nonservice? You are saying "bush, an appropriately aged male with no physical defects despite a drinking problem, could not go to vietnam even though he wanted to, at a time when the u.s. govt was trying to throw as many bodies there as possible."

Nope, doesn't pass the laugh test. But I'm guessing that won't stop you from claiming one of your publishing industry friends has provided you bush's post office memoirs already

What? Try formulating a sentence that makes proper sense you fumbling fool.

And since you've already clearly demonstrated that you can't properly read and comprehend sentences (Let alone write one.), try reading again what I wrote initially. I NEVER said it was IN the book. I was alluding to the title of the book and Rove's reply, idiot.

Sheesh, replying to you is like dealing with a 12 year-old.

 

[RightIsWrong]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo

As far as Bush, I claimed he volunteered to go to Vietnam. He did volunteer. He didn't end up going and they may not have wanted to send him anyway

Did you type this while laughing, Chickie?

You have lowered the bar on credibility

Do you have proof he didn't try to sign up for Palace Alert?

If so, please present it.

Hey, Chickie . . .

Palace Alert required 500 hours of flight experience - which Bush did not have. And besides,
Palace Alert was stopped before Bush would have been eligible.

You don't know shit about Vietnam so STFU. Take your troll crap and revisionist history somewhere else.

And by the way, your 'talking point' query implies you expect me to prove a negative.

Nice bravado, Chickie . . .

Hey Boobie,

I'm aware that Palace Alert required 500 hours of flight experience and that the program was ended shortly after Bush finished flight training. Do you have proof that Bush knew those requirements in advance of requesting admission to the program? You seem to imply it, so let's see your proof.

As far as what I know of Vietnam...you have no idea what I know so STFU yourself and stop making assumption after assumption and then assuming those aswsumptions are some sort of valid argument.

As far as proving a negative, it IS possible in this case if Bush never actually made such a request so your own evasion talking point doesn't really fly.

Seems your own bravado is failing you, Boobie.

Uh....minor detail that kind of clashes with your theory.....Bush never completed flight training/service.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken

I do read books that are unreleased, on occassion. Plame's was one of them. In the early 90s I owned and ran a publishing company and I still have contacts in the publishing industry. So once again you make assumptions that you know nothing about.

Does my memory serve me correctly when I seem to recall you previously explaining that incident by saying you had made a mistake when you claimed to have read the book?

I never made an issue of this, since it appeared to just be an honest mistake. This whole 'you really did have a pre-release you read' claim appears new and to contradict yourself.

If that's the case, we'll see if you answer Soneburner's question on the book not saying what you claimed it said.

Of course, if our other exchanges are any indication, you will just make it up - you would probably say the Harry Potter books contain proof Bush volunteered for Vietnam.

As far as Bush, I claimed he volunteered to go to Vietnam. He did volunteer. He didn't end up going and they may not have wanted to send him anyway since his father was influential. That's how things work. Deal with it and stop pretending you're somehow the final word on what is and what is not credible in this wolrd.

Do you have any evidence besides Bush's word that he made a real effort to volunteer, and how do you reconcile your claim he volunteered to go with all the actual evidence, including his own admission, that he was searching for - and found - a way not to go, not to mention the elaborate abuse of his father's power to get him a spot in the naitonal guard which Bush himself listed as the way he found to get a deferment rather than going to Canada or blowing out his eardum, which he did not want to do?

 

[Stoneburner]

Originally posted by: TastesLikeChicken





"Sheesh, replying to you is like dealing with a 12 year-old."

We aren't talking about your sex life any more, mr collostomy. First, if you read marlin's sig, you'd know exactly why somebody would misunderstand. Second, you can't criticize somebody's reading comprehension when you can't understand simple sentences. Maybe you can point out where you got lost and I'll give you some guidance. It just looks like you're avoiding the issue of your stupidity once again.

And, you shiftless liar, you said, "If you read valerie plame's book you would know karl rove never said blah blah blah"

See? You insist on lying STILL. Now, show some maturity and admit your mistake, move on. Otherwise, people won't believe you.

And for the record, I'd like to know what publishing company you ran. I'd also like some evidence you read Plame's book. I notice you didn't respond to my request for plame's explanation of the niger trip. Don't bother googling, i'll figure it out again. Show you've actually read the book you lying twit.

I also remember you claiming you never heard of politico.com despite referencing it several times previously Maybe you're just senile?

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Stoneburner

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Stoneburner
Dishonest? I missed the quotation marks. Don't accuse me of dishonesty, yee who reads books that are unreleased and has sex with bisexual males!

What the hell does his having sex with men have to do with the issue? Using it as an attack against him implies there's something wrong with gay and bi-sexual men.

What's up with your comments in that area?

I'm just being a jackass. I read that thing he quoted in marlin's sig and I misunderstood. I can admit when I make mistakes unlike some people. It's natural to make mistakes, why do you think jeebus invented abortions?

Chicken, on the other hand, will stubbornly dig in when he's proven to be wrong and use every flimsy bit of b.s. to support his non position. I ask him for a source and he says "google bush palace alert." I tried it and I think the first article is written by a bush friend and provides information contrary to everything even bush's staunches defenders have said. SO of course chickenboy accepts this as gospel instead of saying "it's possible bush wanted to go to war."

The only credible looking article was from the washington post and that pretty much says bush was MIA.

Thanks for the explanation. I just hate to see homosexuality used as an insult, because I imagine it makes gay people feel pretty unwelcome to see it used along with 'liar' and such.