When would you support impeachment?

Back to the OP. We now have Lois Lerner trying to start an audit investigation of a sitting United States senator for something that she knew he didn't do. (he never accepted the invitation that Lerner took to mean something nefarious) Like investigating someone for robbing bank when they never even showed up at the non existent crime scene.

Are you already trying to back away from the only bet I offered and that you previously accepted? The bet offer follows:




Shall we say $500.00? Originally Posted by bigtex

His approval rating isn't worth a shit now, what's going to make it go up?



Jim

The record clearly demonstrates that on June 26 at 7:48 AM, BT made the following offer not knowing whether anyone would accept the bet request:

And I'm willing to bet that Obama's approvals when he leaves office will be higher than the Shrub's exit approvals too. Any takers? Originally Posted by bigtex

31 short minutes later, Trendy responded with the following:

I'll take that bet! Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Again......

The quoted conversation found above clearly demonstrates that Trendy accepted the bet request. No one forced him to accept. He did so under his own free will, with no pressure from outside sources to do so.

With Trendy's acceptance clearly established, we have entered the specific amount phase of the betting process. We started with a simple $500 offer followed by a $450 or $550 counteroffer. Thus far, none have been to Trendy's liking.

Ok, let's push the envelope further, shall we?

Since Trendy has yet to say whether he prefers the acceptable amount to be lower or higher. I will counteroffer $250 or $750.

Once again it is Trendy's choice! Which would you prefer?

Note to Trendy: in the unlikely event that you have changed your mind and prefer one of the previous offers. They are still on the table, as well.

In fact I will take it a step further and say any dollar amount between the $250 - $750 range will work for me.

Trendy, feel free to pick your poison, errrrr the final amount.

If nothing else, I have lots of patience!

BigTitsLiar:

The record clearly demonstrates that on June 26 at 7:48 AM, BT made the following offer not knowing whether anyone would accept the bet request:

Quote:
Originally Posted by bigtex View Post
And I'm willing to bet that Obama's approvals when he leaves office will be higher than the Shrub's exit approvals too. Any takers?

.

So you didn't bet it would be 60% approvals or higher?

Just for the "record" #1: on what day do you claim Bush2 "exited" and #2 on that day what do you claim is "approvals" rating to be?

Date____________,2009
Rating___________%

Yep............

See Post #8 Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Not quite Saying "might" is not the same as saying it will.
Predict:( tr; may take a clause as object ) to state or make a declaration about in advance, esp on a reasoned basis; foretell

That is actually a counteroffer, changing the terms of the deal. It's not binding until terms are agreed. They have a bet, but have not agreed on the terms of the wager. Kinda looks to me like BigAssTucks is the one trying to back out. Figures. Gutless bastard. Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Of course it looks that way to you. How is he backing out of a bet whirly accepted but refuses to name terms?
He isn't. Nice try IBSog.

You're wrong Tampon. Taking the bet is not the same thing as figuring out the terms of the bet. That being the wager itself. He accepted the bet but he had a counter offer for the wager. You're backing out....unless you can come up with a fool proof way of transferring the money that you want to throw away. Without a way of transferring the money you might as well bet a gazillion, million dollars just like a kid. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Standard jdouche-bag post. A lie, a misrepresentation, and a misunderstanding of the subject being discussed.
And backing his side with a blind allegiance and disregard for the truth and the facts.

Back to the OP. We now have Lois Lerner trying to start an audit investigation of a sitting United States senator for something that she knew he didn't do. (he never accepted the invitation that Lerner took to mean something nefarious) Like investigating someone for robbing bank when they never even showed up at the non existent crime scene. Originally Posted by JD Barleycorn

Then comes the attempt to cover your spoor as if it was even possible. A pitiful try of subject change.

First off, you're a flaming asshole. Yeah, you jdouche-bag.

Whirly said, " I'll take that bet! He won't !!!!!!!!!!!!!". Not some bet, or any bet, or a bet. He took "that" bet. The only one mentioned.
Bigtex offered terms for the bet whirly accepted. Whirly said he wouldn't wager money. He never did say what he would. Whirly didn't counter-offer anything. At that point, whirly tried to modify the bet itself.

Bigtex said, " Are you already trying to back away from the only bet I offered and that you previously accepted?"
He should have known better than to ask a question with such an obvious answer

Whirly's reply, " I don't blame you for backing out......you were on the losing end." You know, "I know you are but what am I?"
An obvious attempt to distance himself from the original bet and a cry for help from others willing to lie or mis-represent things enough to help him try and escape.

Bigtex gave him another chance to salvage some small shred of honor.
Which whirly used to say. " Hey, BigTex, take me up on my bet!

You win, I disable my account for 6 months, I win you disable your account for same."
His bet being, " If Obama Approval rating isn't higher than 60% on January 1, 2017, you disable your account (BigTex and all other handles) for six months. If Obama's Approval rating is above 60% on that date, then I will disable my account/handle for six months."
No surprise sog and jd would see not accepting a new bet as the same as backing out of the first bet. They're assholes.

No surprise accepting a bet, refusing an offer of terms without any counter-offer and trying to cover your blunder with different bet is no big deal in Kansas/Missouri. Same piece of land except it's cut in half by a river.

Which display was the most sickening? Whirly's renege or sog and jdouche-bag banging heads trying to suck whirly's dick?
We see both events on a regular basis.

And the biggest irony?

Originally Posted by Whirlaway
Like I said before......I will be happy to make the bet with you...but I won't wager money over the internet with a person who is anonymous and can easily welch on the bet....especially with someone who is trying to spin his way out of his own boasting....

Too Fucking Funny

BigTitsLiar: .

So you didn't bet it would be 60% approvals or higher?

Just for the "record" #1: on what day do you claim Bush2 "exited" and #2 on that day what do you claim is "approvals" rating to be?

Date____________,2009
Rating___________% Originally Posted by LexusLover

Another asshole.
You ask questions about a bet that only exists between whirly and Bigtex.
Questions whirly himself doesn't ask. A bet accepted and then reneged on by whirly.

Stop trying to lend whirly backbone. You lack a spine of your own. How typical you see 3 on 1 and you leap on the 3 side pile because you think you have a slight chance at winning.
Guess again bitch.

Airborne

Another asshole.
You ask questions about a bet that only exists between whirly and Bigtex.
Questions whirly himself doesn't ask. A bet accepted and then reneged on by whirly.

Stop trying to lend whirly backbone. You lack a spine of your own. How typical you see 3 on 1 and you leap on the 3 side pile because you think you have a slight chance at winning.
Guess again bitch.

Airborne Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Apparently, BigTitsLiar (your mentor) doesn't want to make a bet using specific information .... so in order to avoid one of these pissing contests in 2017 to determine who the "bet winner" is and avoid the current state of confusion (to which you injected your lame-ass bullshit and putrid attitude) I MERELY inquired about the specifics ....

historically BigTitsLiar (and now apparently you) avoids committing to a specific set of facts upon which he desires to make a point so he can ...

"HEDGE HIS BETS"!!!!

And then later on repetitively and obsessively makes a factually wrong statement in order to bolster his "appearance" of correction ... and of course a "duffus" like you jumps on his bandwagon because ...... "AIRBORNE"?

Using your spurious analysis of a "contract" on a bet ... here's what I want you to do ..... go over to the new car dealer of your choice and sign a piece of paper agreeing to "BUY A CAR ON August 1, 2014" ... that's all on the paper:

"I, Munch, AGREE TO BUY A CAR FROM XYZ COMPANY ON August 1, 2014"

The next day ... you get a call and the salesman lets you know you need to bring $500,000 to the XYZ Company on August 1, 2014, when you get your car (which you haven't seen yet or know even the year or model)!

Go fuck yourself, MunchOnBigTitsAirBorne, ..

...... after you tell me "that's different"! Different because of "Airborne"?

Whirly doesn't need any "back bone" ... And for your lame-ass know-nothing business I was "entertaining" the idea of making BigTitsLiar a bet of my own .... but I am not a dumbass like you and actually believe that someone saying "I bet you" and another responding "I accept that bet" is a "contract" without specifics on what the bet is, how the winner will be determined, and how much is at risk....not to mention how the fuck anyone is going to pay off on an anonymous HOOKER BOARD!

"AIRBORNE"!

"AIRBORNE"?

Different because of "Airborne"?

"AIRBORNE"! Originally Posted by LexusLover

LLIdiot is wannabee AIRBORNE (excellent choice, I might add) just as LLIdiot's wannabe USMC.

Rumor has it, he was too 'skeered' to be either!

But he brags about being "born in the USMC."

(As if that should give him credentials).

AIRBORNE!

Hey Trendy, about the revised bet offer?

How does the $250 - $750 (or any amount in between) sound?

Not quite Saying "might" is not the same as saying it will.
Predict:( tr; may take a clause as object ) to state or make a declaration about in advance, esp on a reasoned basis; foretell

Of course it looks that way to you. How is he backing out of a bet whirly accepted but refuses to name terms?
He isn't. Nice try IBSog.


Standard jdouche-bag post. A lie, a misrepresentation, and a misunderstanding of the subject being discussed.
And backing his side with a blind allegiance and disregard for the truth and the facts.


Then comes the attempt to cover your spoor as if it was even possible. A pitiful try of subject change.

First off, you're a flaming asshole. Yeah, you jdouche-bag.

Whirly said, " I'll take that bet! He won't !!!!!!!!!!!!!". Not some bet, or any bet, or a bet. He took "that" bet. The only one mentioned.
Bigtex offered terms for the bet whirly accepted. Whirly said he wouldn't wager money. He never did say what he would. Whirly didn't counter-offer anything. At that point, whirly tried to modify the bet itself.

Bigtex said, " Are you already trying to back away from the only bet I offered and that you previously accepted?"
He should have known better than to ask a question with such an obvious answer

Whirly's reply, " I don't blame you for backing out......you were on the losing end." You know, "I know you are but what am I?"
An obvious attempt to distance himself from the original bet and a cry for help from others willing to lie or mis-represent things enough to help him try and escape.

Bigtex gave him another chance to salvage some small shred of honor.
Which whirly used to say. " Hey, BigTex, take me up on my bet!

You win, I disable my account for 6 months, I win you disable your account for same."
His bet being, " If Obama Approval rating isn't higher than 60% on January 1, 2017, you disable your account (BigTex and all other handles) for six months. If Obama's Approval rating is above 60% on that date, then I will disable my account/handle for six months."
No surprise sog and jd would see not accepting a new bet as the same as backing out of the first bet. They're assholes.

No surprise accepting a bet, refusing an offer of terms without any counter-offer and trying to cover your blunder with different bet is no big deal in Kansas/Missouri. Same piece of land except it's cut in half by a river.

Which display was the most sickening? Whirly's renege or sog and jdouche-bag banging heads trying to suck whirly's dick?
We see both events on a regular basis.

And the biggest irony?

Originally Posted by Whirlaway
Like I said before......I will be happy to make the bet with you...but I won't wager money over the internet with a person who is anonymous and can easily welch on the bet....especially with someone who is trying to spin his way out of his own boasting....

Too Fucking Funny


Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Those guys never had a "meeting of the minds" so why don't we forget about it?

Those guys never had a "meeting of the minds" so why don't we forget about it? Originally Posted by Jewish Lawyer

Now that we have heard from the defecting side of the Idiot Family, we can (as the Idiot Family Patriarch would say) "carry on."

Whirly said, " I'll take that bet! He won't !!!!!!!!!!!!!". Not some bet, or any bet, or a bet. He took "that" bet. The only one mentioned.
Bigtex offered terms for the bet whirly accepted. Whirly said he wouldn't wager money. He never did say what he would. Whirly didn't counter-offer anything. At that point, whirly tried to modify the bet itself.

Bigtex said, " Are you already trying to back away from the only bet I offered and that you previously accepted?"
He should have known better than to ask a question with such an obvious answer

Whirly's reply, " I don't blame you for backing out......you were on the losing end." You know, "I know you are but what am I?"
An obvious attempt to distance himself from the original bet and a cry for help from others willing to lie or mis-represent things enough to help him try and escape.

Bigtex gave him another chance to salvage some small shred of honor.
Which whirly used to say. " Hey, BigTex, take me up on my bet!

You win, I disable my account for 6 months, I win you disable your account for same."
His bet being, " If Obama Approval rating isn't higher than 60% on January 1, 2017, you disable your account (BigTex and all other handles) for six months. If Obama's Approval rating is above 60% on that date, then I will disable my account/handle for six months."
No surprise sog and jd would see not accepting a new bet as the same as backing out of the first bet. They're assholes.
Not quite Saying "might" is not the same as saying it will.
Predict:( tr; may take a clause as object ) to state or make a declaration about in advance, esp on a reasoned basis; foretell

Of course it looks that way to you. How is he backing out of a bet whirly accepted but refuses to name terms?
He isn't. Nice try IBSog.





Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Good summation.

FYI it's true, "farts" are "airborne".

Hey Trendy, how about the revised bet offer?

How does the $250 - $750 (or any amount in between) sound?

AIRBORNE!

Again for you "Airborne" numbskulls.................it is very simple. No need to offer paragraphs of meaningless and asinine analysis:

Like I said before......I will be happy to make the bet with you...but I won't wager money over the internet with a person who is anonymous and can easily welch on the bet....especially with someone who is trying to spin his way out of his own boasting....

So if you are seriously convinced that Obama's approval numbers will go back over 60% before he leaves office, then by all means take me up on my bet.


You won't. You are a weasel who likes to boast but can't put up.


My offer still stands:

You win, I disable my account for 6 months, I win you disable your account for same.

__________________ Originally Posted by Whirlaway

Impeach Holder, and Odumbo will fold like the dirty, threadbare rag he is.