How much would you ne willing to bet that these people voted for Bush and McCain? Let's see who supports their decision to kick the 6 year old out of her home and place her in foster care.

I'll bet you $100 right now that you have no way of knowing by reading the article.

Do we have a deal, big mouth?

#2 | Posted by pUnk bOy at 2009-12-29 04:13 PM | Reply | Flag: Calls women who report rape drug addicted whores, if he respects the accused.

You'd just pUnk out again. But there was never an offer to make a bet. I know reading comprehension is a weakness you have, so let me break down the words into smaller ones, and maybe you can pick up on what was said. I doubt it, but watching you pUnk out is always entertaining.

I asked the reader in general (not just you---you really aren't the center of the universe)--How much would you be willing to bet that these people voted for Bush and McCain? That means the reader should pick a number and state the number---but since it is impossible to determine who "these people" are, it is impossible to make a bet. Not all of the people who want to kick the kid out are on the video--I know you are too stupid to realize that, so I made it plain and simple---simple enough for even you to comprehend I hope. Since the many faces of the people who want the kid gone aren't even known, the question was rhetorical(look it up--I've given you enough education for one post---you should pay if you want more), therefore, there was no offer to bet--simply a question the reader could answer themself. Small enough words for you, stupid?

Just in case you didn't want to click the link, Boob...

#5 | Posted by American1st at 2009-12-29 05:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

Good--now prove he voted for Obama dUmMy---then prove everyone else voted dem also. Then see if you can find where I offered to make a bet. I think the boobish one is yourself. You and pUnk bOy simply can't read.

Mr. Leland Wheeler -- likely does not vote Republican. But I could be wrong.

#16 | Posted by CalifChris at 2009-12-29 08:11 PM | Reply | Flag:

You could be right--who knows---he didn't contribute to Obama---during the primaries, many people said if Hillary wasn't the candidate, they would vote for McCain---no way of telling this guys thoughts---though pUnk bOy and Americalast seem to think they have Kreskin skills.

#20 | Posted by pUnk bOy at 2009-12-29 09:05 PM | Reply | Flag: dUmMy still doesn't get it.

Again--stupid---look up the word "Rhetorical". My post says it is impossible to tell, and simply asks the reader to speculate. What a mporon you are---how many times---how many ways--will I have to state this before you get it? The telling point---was to see who supported the decision on this thread--conservatives or liberals

You are the one who speculated about his party with your "want to bet . . " question, not I. If you don't believe me, find the button labeled "PGUP" on your keyboard and press it (you'll see the screen change) until you get to post #1. Read it.

Hope this helps refresh your failing memory and prevents further lies, bOoB.

#23 | Posted by goatman at 2009-12-29 09:18 PM | Reply | Flag: Calls women who report rape drug addicted whores, if he respects the accused.

I never said "want to bet" what a liar you are---what a true Piece of Shitstain on the Human race.

Again -- I made a challenge to you. Why this is freaking you out is beyond me. LOL

#24 | Posted by goatman at 2009-12-29 09:21 PM | Reply | Flag:

You "challenge" me to something I agree with? Your stupidity is truly amazing.

That's your best answer? That I paraphrase you LOL

#28 | Posted by pUnk bOy at 2009-12-29 09:36 PM | Reply | Flag:

No--my answer is that you lie about what I said. You seem to make lying a habit with almost every post. I make a rhetorical statement, and you try to make it into an offer to bet. That is a lie. That makes you a liar. Liars are pUnk bOys.

Speaking of lies, where's the link that shows that the Piper Alpha burned hotter than the WTC, Mr. "I always provide links when asked"? LOL

#30 | Posted by goatman at 2009-12-29 10:22 PM | Reply | Flag:

Here's your link stupid.

You tell me to look at post 75 on a thread that has 61 posts. Yep, that makes me look real foolish, bOoB. LOL

#33 | Posted by goatman at 2009-12-29 10:51 PM | Reply | Flag:

My mistake--sorry for the typo---try post #57, not #75. Of course, to not be able to figure it out shows your level of intelligence. I would rather have poor typing skills than be so stupid I couldn't figure out a simple typo.

Much like I got tired of schooling Lebron James...

#34 | Posted by ZombieHunter at 2009-12-29 10:53 PM | Reply | Flag:

On what precisely? Math? Geography? Reading? Or is Lebron James superior to you in every way imaginable? Or are you just lying like pUnk bOy? Oh I get it--sarcasm, with no substance to back your loud mouth---as usual. Do you ever make a point? Hint--Rhetorical question.

;-)

Anyway, you answer clearly says you got nothing. You have zero proof that the Piper Alpha burned hotter than the WTC.

How's that cup of STFU taste? LOL

#32 | Posted by goatman at 2009-12-29 10:50 PM | Reply | Flag:

Post 57 clearly shows that Piper Alpha burned hootter than the WTC---your NU UHH response simply doesn't cut it. Try again---use some logic to refute #57 or STFU. Simple isn't it. Hint: NU UHHH won't work.

Waiting on you

;-)

Post 57 is clearly your speculation. WTF are you talking about? Are you implying that your speculation is to be taken as proof? Honestly, that is about the funniest thing you've come up with yet, bOoB. Really.

#41 | Posted by goatman at 2009-12-29 11:38 PM | Reply | Flag:

How about using some logic and refute the post. Show what you think is speculation and why.

Is it speculation that the Piper Alpha was burning in the open air?

Is it speculation that the Piper Alpha fire was fueled by high pressure fuel?

Is it speculation that the Piper Alpha fire was burning directly on the stucture? Is it speculation that there were three explosions on the Piper Alpha?

Is it speculation that the Piper Alpha burned for three hours after the last explosion before the collapse?

Is it speculation that the fire at the WTC was smoky and oxygen starved? Is it speculation that the WTC collapse in little more than an hour?

Is it speculation that the fire at the WTC was not under high pressure?

Is it speculation that the fire was not directed directly at the support beams?

Is it speculation that there was molten steel at the WTC?

Is it speculation that no molten steel was seen at Piper Alpha?

Exactly what speculation are you talking about?

Still no link showing the different temps, huh?

Still waiting on you! %%]{)#$

#47 | Posted by goatman at 2009-12-30 01:25 AM | Reply | Flag:

I guess you are simply incapable of reasonable debate or having a civilized discussion. You simply can not face reality or answer even the most basic questions.

As to the difference in temperature---Do you think a high pressure fire burning in the open air burns hotter than a limited fire in a smoky semi-enclosed area?

Do you think it is reasonable that they would both burn at the same temperature?

Do you think the fire at the WTC was concentrated on the support beams like the fire at Piper Alpha?

Can you give any reasonable answers? Can you answer the simple questions about what you consider speculation? Anything at all?

#50 | Posted by goatman at 2009-12-30 01:40 AM | Reply | Flag:

You are a sad example of a human being. I feel sorry for you. You are no longer worthy of notice.

Thanks Califchris

Unfortunately, your post was wasted. If you look at Goatmans posts, you can easily see he is beyond all reason, and no matter what is posted, he only has one response. Nothing.