lap dog: Blah, Blah, Blah
Those three words say the same thing that you've said throughout this thread.
lap dog: The only thing your advancing is the fact that you can be led by your nose.
Wrong. I've proven what I've said I've proven in this thread, from the topic dealing with the original post, to the bullshit that people pulled out of their asses... to the gibberish that you're yapping.
Claiming that you're "leading me by the nose," quotations used strongly, is nothing but you massaging your ego. My replying to you is as guaranteed as day following night. Claiming that I'm replying to you, because of some grand plan of yours, reeks dishonesty and narcissism.
lap dog: Since you have no concept of what a "combat operation" is this might be difficult for you.
Really? A washed up store owner, who more than likely never has deployed before, telling an infantryman, who has combat deployed to Iraq, that he doesn't have a concept of what a combat operation is? Do you want to know how ridiculous you'd sound to someone reading your comment, who isn't biased to either of our sides?
Again, since you've consistently ran from my challenges like a coward, you don't have a leg to stand on when doubting the fact that I've been involved with combat operations.
There's another thing that you could do to verify me, and you'd have to have military experience to do it. This is where you’d ask me questions, about deployment life, that only someone that has deployed would be able to answer. If you don't have military experience, then maybe someone here, who has deployed, could ask me those questions via PM.
THAT would be the responsible, intellectual, and civilized, way to verify my statements of being in the military, and of combat deploying.
Intellectually, you know that that your assumptions, about my "not" combat deploying, wouldn't stand up to intellectual scrutiny.
The concept is the same, between what I'm doing here, and what'd be done downrange. Your not having any military experience painfully shows with this part of your post.
lap dog: There is no contest
REPEAT POINT
There's a contest taking place between us. If this weren't a contest, you wouldn't be replying to me. It's that simple. How about matching your comments with actions? The latter betrays the former.
lap dog: because as you obviously have not figured out on your own,
REPEEAT POINT
Do you honest to God believe the crap that you're spewing here?
Again, I've said on this thread:
"What you're doing is attempting to redefine the debate to something that it isn't, in a futile attempt to achieve a victory… got news for you, others tried this game over the past few years, and they failed… you'll fare the same way they did." - herfacechair
"I've noticed a lot of things about the opposition, from debating them for almost 8 years. I've got you guys profiled, categorized and analyzed. You guys argue many of the same talking points, follow the same pattern throughout a debate, and think that you'll succeed where your predecessors have failed. But the result end up the same." - herfacechair
What part of that statement don't you understand?
You're no different from the others that I've debated with over the past, almost, 8 years. You're following the same patterns many have followed in the past.
lap dog: I am not advancing an alternative political view point,
RED HERRING
What part of opposition don't you understand?
What you said:
"Anyone who would support her is way to far to the right for me to even listen too." - dirty dog
That's you staking a position on the debate taking place based on this thread's first post. You said that in opposition to what I was saying. You need two opposing sides to continue a debate/argument. In fact, answer these questions:
Does an argument/debate have two, opposing, sides? YES [ ] NO [ ]
Are you agreeing with most of what I'm saying here? YES [ ] NO [ ]
Copy that answer, along with the answers, and post it to your reply. Place an "X" in the box that represents your response.
It's obvious that we've been in opposition on this thread, on more than one topic.
It behooves you to answer those questions, as I'll be tempted to keep asking those questions when you claim that there's "no" opposition here.
lap dog: rather I am just getting you to bark on command.
BIG FAT LIE
If I didn't believe the others that have said that to me in the past, what makes you think I'd believe you? Why don't you be honest about why you're really here? It's not to expand volumes of your time to do what you claim you're doing.
You claiming that you're making me "bark on command," is as idiotic as someone claiming that they make the sun "rise on command." Let me remind you of what I've said to the opposition, which describes my actions here:
"…my concept of time and time length isn't the same as yours, or anybody else on this message board. I don't care how long I have to debate a topic… as long as someone continues to debate me, that topic is relevant, in my eyes, until the opposition gives up" - herfacechair
I'm doing what I set out to do, independent of what you think you're doing.
Again, dismount from your high horse.
lap dog: What deployment, you may have a career in politics because it common these days to advance the idea that you have been in combat, but remember the truth comes to light.
What deployment? The one that you'd get verification for if you didn't believe in running from a challenge like a coward. You talk a big game about the truth coming to light… well? What are you waiting for? My challenge still stands, and you still haven't accepted it.
You're sitting here implying that I'm "making things up," but you know very well that if you accepted my challenge, your assumptions about me would fall flat on their faces… on this thread… with an independent member coming here verifying my statement.
You don't have a leg to stand on when claiming that "the truth will come out," when you refuse to accept my challenges.
Remember, if you accept the challenge that I've issued you, the truth will come to light… FOR YOU. But your ego doesn't want to acknowledge that the challenge would prove me right and you wrong.
lap dog: Are you really this stupid,
Stupid describes what you're doing in this fight. Stupid is telling an infantryman that he doesn't know what a combat operation is. Stupid is refusing to accept a challenge, but continuing to harp the very thing that'd get proven wrong if one accepted that challenge. Oh, and get this, stupid is claiming that there's no "opposition" on this thread when it's obvious that we're disagreeing with each other.
lap dog: having an anonymous person on the internet "verify" your claims is not a "fact check"
WRONG. My offering to show a third person, not involved with our debate, documentation proving that I am who I say I am, and that I've done what I've said I've done, is a fact check. Having someone, from another message board, who has seen me face to face, vouch for the documents that I'd show him is a way to disband your "defense lawyer" brush offs of this fact.
lap dog: I have explained that but your trying to hold on to a little tiny thread of dignity by pressing this point.
The only thing that you've done was huffed and puffed, defense lawyer style, in an attempt to cast doubt on a valid procedure. This is a procedure that'd prove you wrong if you had the integrity to accept it. If you had integrity, you'd either accept the challenge, or drop your assumptions that the challenge would prove wrong.
The fact that you're pulling this stunt shows that you're on the ropes in this fight. Your arrogance doesn't want to admit that fact. Do understand that I've never changed my mind based on what the opposition has said or explained. Facts do that, and so far, the opposition has failed to deliver.
lap dog: I never said they were the same person, but now that you "point" that out, I have to wonder.
BIG FAT LIE
Let's take a trip down memory lane… when I introduced Aylee's comment proving that I'm in the military:
"What, this is suppose to prove something, a post from an unknown person,
hell I am sure you posted it yourself." - dirty dog
Claiming that I posted that "myself" is equivalent to saying that Aylee and I are the same person.
lap dog: What they probably are, are idiots that have listened to your BS and believe it.
WRONG.
Toxic66 is a veteran, who has combat deployed to Iraq. He read my posts, and noticed that I said things that only someone, who has deployed to Iraq, would say. This was applicable down to the mundane.
Many posers get busted by real veterans, because, as another person said on that 69 page thread, "You can't fake firsthand experience."
Aylee is another Army Veteran, who met me face to face, and has seen my documentations proving that I am who I say I am, and that I've done what I say I've done.
Kenrug, from Mistress Destiny's Femdom Forum, has also seen me face to face, and has seen proof that I am who I say I am.
The only idiot that I'm seeing is the one that pushes an extremely week assumption while refusing to accept a challenge that'd destroy that assumption.
lap dog: Not the same thing as providing verification.
I don't know what planet you're from, but on Earth, bringing other people in, who've seen me, and proof of what I've done, is a very valid verification process.
lap dog: And again, dumber than dirt,
Don't dismiss someone advancing a valid verification process as being "dumber than dirt." Hate to break this out to you, Skippy, but agreement with your warped sense of reality doesn't constitute someone displaying common sense.
lap dog: how do I know who this person is, this is the internet,
Again, my challenge is simple.
1. I show the Virginia moderator my ERB, as well as my Iraq War Related citation. I include a scanned copy of my Military ID Card.
2. I bring Kenrug in, who'd send an Email to the Virginia Moderator verifying that I am, in fact, the person that's on the military ID card. This is based on the fact that we've met each other face to face.
You're not willing to accept the fact that they're real people, because they're part of a verification process that'd prove you wrong.
lap dog: you know, you have all people should know that what you see and read can be very far from the truth, remember your last two computer dates, you didnt know they had penises until you were in the room, so just because they have a profile that says female does not make it so LOL.
RED HERRING + SMOKE SCREEN
And what does this have to do with the fact that I'm wiling to bring people in that I've seen? That's the point that you keep missing, a point that you're trying to set smoke screens up against.
Instead of having the integrity to accept the challenge… or having the integrity to move on from the opinion that's being challenged if you don't want to accept the challenge… you belly ache about people that you haven't meet, even implied that this was a conspiracy to lie, or that I was posting with more than one profiles on the other board.
We're talking about two different things. Your comment shows that you're very desperate in this debate.
Also, unlike you, I've never got the transvestite surprise when it comes to meeting women online. Your wife told me how your loser ass got ass fucked by a transvestite that you thought was going to be the woman you were going to ass fuck.
She said that this turned out to be a pleasant surprise for you.
lap dog: See all of the above.
And see my reply to the above.
lap dog: The only thing you have done is stink up the room with your bull shit.
It doesn't surprise me that you think that the facts stink. That's your ego talking, try listening to your intellect, which is trying to tell you something different.
lap dog: So tell me what color is my wife's hair these days, or the color of her eyes.
You know as well as I do that you're not supposed to gaze at your wife's face, as you're not worthy to treat yourself to the appearance of a goddess. You're just a loser cockhold. You're not even supposed to know what she looks like.
Now go back to scrubbing the toilet bowl, and remember to keep your head down, staring at the floor in front of you, when you walk pass your wife.
lap dog: You know just because you can name that rubber doll anything you want does not make it reality. You need to make sure that you clean that doll really good, that rubber can be a breeding ground for bacteria.
Your wife will be happy to learn that you know how to take care of your rubber doll. You're reciting her instructions to you word for word. 
You said that with experience. I respect your experience with having sex with blow up dolls, the sight of you getting into it with your blowup doll amuses your wife. You should be honored by her calling you "Pathetic".
lap dog: You already have enough trouble with the herpe's.
Nah, not herpes, but your wife's makeup. She put a bunch of makeup on her pussy to prevent you from getting near her. It worked, for only a dummy would fall for the trick. You fell hook, line and sinker.
This is fun!
Originally Posted by kcbigpapa
