Man arrested for refusing to leave the bedside of his sick partner

[Jim in Anchorage]

 

 

Personally id get rid of heterosexual marriage.

 

Us grease balls spend too much money on this ****.

Christ the one spaghetti snapper here finds that remark.

[We Come In Peace]

Your entire premise is: if they were married, then this wouldn't be happening. Those are your words.

Nope. Never said that or implied that.

 

I said if they were married there would be no STORY. Even someone with as stunted an intellect as yours can discern the difference between your incorrect inference and what I actually said.

 

Thank you for showing everyone you are indeed a moron. The rest of your post is moot since it's all revolving around this incorrect starting point.

 

Do you see why?

 

That's exactly what I did.

No, what you did was make a false inference (and I'm being kind calling it that) and extrapolate a bunch of nonsense in response to a position you imagined me having in your head.

 

In reality, as we learned above, you were completely wrong from the outset. No amount of emoticons or blathering will change that.

 

You still don't see it do you?

Oh, I certainly see it. Sadly, you don't. Which is hilarious considering how incredibly pompous you are despite being consistently wrong in an overwhelming majority of things you say.

 

Tell us again how wrong Nate Silver was about the '12 election please. Or about how you're chasing a super hot piece of ass at the gym. Better yet, wait on that one. Tell us about the restraining order when she files it instead.

 

Well, I have no more time for this idiocy. Go back and re-read your own posts in this thread,

Apparently, idiocy is all you have time for. It's your first language.

 

Now ask yourself: where in those posts do you account for the possibility that:

1. The guy is an a-hole, before he is gay, straight or anything?

2. The other guy's family are a-holes, before they are anti-gay?

3. The family is perfectly fine with their son's lifestyle choices, they just hate this particular guy?

4. anything other than the guy being gay, might be the #1 driver of this situation.

First, I'd like to point out for a guy who says he doesn't have time for idiocy, you continue to excel in perpetrating it.

 

Second, in multiple posts I not only volunteered all of those possibilities could be true but I also said the entire story could have been invented by the left or pro-gay marriage advocates.

 

This is why reading is important if you want to have an cogent conversation with someone.

 

But you don't care about having an honest conversation with anyone. You just want to transcribe the drivel pouring out of whichever of the multiple personalities inside your head are in command of your typing fingers at the moment. You've got at least three in there, maybe four.

 

You stated, mutliple times, that the driver is gayness here.

Nope. Never said that either.

 

You're not very good at this.

 

I took all your words, as I just did above, and applied case logic to them. (well, I got lazy and just sorted lumped the rest under #4, because that's the point anyway)

 

So, now I just did. "And, yet"? This is the first time you've asked for this. Unlike you, who still can't answer a question when asked 5 times in another thread, I have no problem responding immediately. Of course it's a lot easier for me because I know I'm right, and you're an unmitigated moron.

 

Keep talking...I have to go, but the last thing I want is for you to stop. It's working nicely so far, just keep running your idiocy, as I'm fairly certain I know where this is headed, and it'll be quite funny, for me, when I am done with you.

 

And again, since you were proven to be 100% wrong (again) with everything you've said so far in this thread regarding my posts and your interpretation of them. Perhaps what you should be saying here is, "Oops, I'm sorry for wasting everyone's time. I'm an enormous asshat."

 

Oh, wait, I'll put it in a language you'll understand:

 

<-----------OC

[OCinBuffalo]

Nope. Never said that or implied that.

 

I said if they were married there would be no STORY. Even someone with as stunted an intellect as yours can discern the difference between your incorrect inference and what I actually said.

 

Thank you for showing everyone you are indeed a moron. The rest of your post is moot since it's all revolving around this incorrect starting point.

 

Do you see why?

 

 

No, what you did was make a false inference (and I'm being kind calling it that) and extrapolate a bunch of nonsense in response to a position you imagined me having in your head.

 

In reality, as we learned above, you were completely wrong from the outset. No amount of emoticons or blathering will change that.

 

 

Oh, I certainly see it. Sadly, you don't. Which is hilarious considering how incredibly pompous you are despite being consistently wrong in an overwhelming majority of things you say.

 

Tell us again how wrong Nate Silver was about the '12 election please. Or about how you're chasing a super hot piece of ass at the gym. Better yet, wait on that one. Tell us about the restraining order when she files it instead.

 

 

Apparently, idiocy is all you have time for. It's your first language.

 

 

First, I'd like to point out for a guy who says he doesn't have time for idiocy, you continue to excel in perpetrating it.

 

Second, in multiple posts I not only volunteered all of those possibilities could be true but I also said the entire story could have been invented by the left or pro-gay marriage advocates.

 

This is why reading is important if you want to have an cogent conversation with someone.

 

But you don't care about having an honest conversation with anyone. You just want to transcribe the drivel pouring out of whichever of the multiple personalities inside your head are in command of your typing fingers at the moment. You've got at least three in there, maybe four.

 

 

Nope. Never said that either.

 

You're not very good at this.

 

 

 

And again, since you were proven to be 100% wrong (again) with everything you've said so far in this thread regarding my posts and your interpretation of them. Perhaps what you should be saying here is, "Oops, I'm sorry for wasting everyone's time. I'm an enormous asshat."

 

Oh, wait, I'll put it in a language you'll understand:

 

<-----------OC

Soo...all of that...and you still won't admit that you got caught being stupid initially? Please. Now 3, 2, 1 pages later you are telling us "oh I know that all of those thigns could be true as well". Yeah, that's not what you said to begin with.

 

I am done with this. My point has been made, you are backpedaling now(as evidence by tiresome word parsing), and therefore my objective has been met.

Edited April 19, 2013 by OCinBuffalo

[We Come In Peace]

Soo...all of that...and you still won't admit that you got caught being stupid initially? Please.

That's one interpretation of it. It's wrong, but I guess it's on par with the rest of your reasoning.

 

Your entire premise is: if they were married, then this wouldn't be happening. Those are your words.

Oops. Those weren't my words. Ever. Nor were they my intent but I'm the one backing away from being stupid? That's more hilarious than you claiming over and over again how wrong Nate Silver was. Maybe if you break it down in a pie chart you can explain it better.

 

If you're going to be an asshat at least be an honest asshat.

 

Now 3, 2, 1 pages later you are telling us "oh I know that all of those thigns could be true as well". Yeah, that's not what you said to begin with.

 

I'm not telling you those things three pages later, I said them up front. Which is the point. You're wrong. Again. Over and over in this thread and in life.

 

You're horrible at this.

 

I am done with this. My point has been made, you are backpedaling now(as evidence by tiresome word parsing), and therefore my objective has been met.

If your point was to show what a ginormous toolbag you are and how completely disingenuous you are then yes, yes you did meet your objective quite successfully.

 

you are backpedaling now(as evidence by tiresome word parsing), and therefore my objective has been met.

Backpedaling is what you're doing. You got eviscerated in this thread and are still digging a hole.

[Just Jack]

Two drunk girls discuss gay marriage....

 

[3rdnlng]

Two drunk girls discuss gay marriage....

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-1kwIbVIXn4&feature=player_embedded

 

OK Jack, you're a moderator. We know you can find out. Which one of those two is "John Adams"?

[We Come In Peace]

OK Jack, you're a moderator. We know you can find out. Which one of those two is "John Adams"?

I'm no expert, but I'm guessing it's the one with the adam's apple and huge c*&k on the right.

[Just Jack]

OK Jack, you're a moderator. We know you can find out. Which one of those two is "John Adams"?

 

I'll send Poojer to find out.

[We Come In Peace]

I'll send Poojer to find out.

:lol:

[Nanker]

Thank you Jack for sharing that eloquent discussion on the topic. Kudos to the Cheap Smokes Production crew for bringing this to life. Haven't seen Eva Braun look so well in years, but Fred Gwynne in drag simply stole the show.