Jackie our girl Condalisa

HFC you're too wordy LOL Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

My posts, here, are quick and easy reads. My replies here are nothing compared to the replies I've posted elsewhere. These were 75+ MS Word pages long replies on this other message board. I went back to re-read what I posted, as a result of MT Cranial Cavity going way out in left field when it comes to what I said. It didn't take me long to read through my reply.

In fact, in the last decade, someone attempted to "shorten" my post, in their own reply, to demonstrate that I "was too wordy". The result did not come anywhere close to communicating what I wanted to communicate. I demonstrated that by asking a few questions, of which I had many, whose answers were included in the post that they attempted to "shorten".

The length of my rebuttals is directly related to how full of shit the opposition is, and on how willing they are to peddle their shit. As I argued earlier in this thread, there is a purpose behind every word, sentence, paragraph that I use in my replies. MT Cranial Cavity's latest reply continues the trend, that I see, where his "understanding" of what I said continues to drift further away from what I actually said.

HFC you're too wordy LOL Originally Posted by dilbert firestorm

My posts, here, are quick and easy reads. My replies here are nothing compared to the replies I've posted elsewhere. These were 75+ MS Word pages long replies on this other message board. I went back to re-read what I posted, as a result of MT Cranial Cavity going way out in left field when it comes to what I said. It didn't take me long to read through my reply.

In fact, in the last decade, someone attempted to "shorten" my post, in their own reply, to demonstrate that I "was too wordy". The result did not come anywhere close to communicating what I wanted to communicate. I demonstrated that by asking a few questions, of which I had many, whose answers were included in the post that they attempted to "shorten".

The length of my rebuttals is directly related to how full of shit the opposition is, and on how willing they are to peddle their shit. As I argued earlier in this thread, there is a purpose behind every word, sentence, paragraph that I use in my replies. MT Cranial Cavity's latest reply continues the trend, that I see, where his "understanding" of what I said continues to drift further away from what I actually said. Originally Posted by herfacechair

@ Dilbert. What he's trying to say is he has a formula.

His response on the average are 17 words to 1. I think he may have taken a debate class that taught him that if you overwhelm people with inanities they will get tired of trying to follow your train of thought. ( In this case an aggregation of useless points of how he is superior) You have to look over all the self
adoration. It is like a tick with him.. Anytime he feels inferior he tends to try and fit as many of what he thinks are "humblebrags" in as he can. Do you notice that even when you are not at odds with him, he seems to always try to impress you with what an amazing person he is? He wants you to respond to each of the comments he makes then he will take each of your comments and break them into smaller comments then you have to reply to each one of the micro comments until you just get tired of it. And then he calls it a win. If you notice very few folks here talk about themselves. They stick to what they have seen or know. He bases all of his comments on how has fought so many battle of wit with scores of folks and always comes out the victor. Sorry this is a bit long winded I guess he is rubbing off on me. LOL!

Anytime he feels inferior he tends to try and fit as many of what he thinks are "humblebrags" in as he can. Originally Posted by MT Pockets

Lol! You imagine HFC or anyone on this board actually "feels inferior" to YOU? Seriously? Your replies are so immature and amateurish I am surprised HFC even stoops to answer them. You should feel flattered and grateful someone pays that much attention to you.

Scat Boy: @ Dilbert. What he's trying to say is he has a formula.

That's one of the many things that I pointed out in the post that you quoted. This is the only thing that you said that comes remotely close to being true. But, not for what you are trying to imply. The fact that I kept telling you that there is a purpose behind every word, sentence, and paragraph that I use in my replies should give you a hint of what I'm saying and doing. This "formula" is based on the fact that I have your people categorized into psychological profiles that you guys keep refining every time you guys reply. This "formula" involves crafting a reply that not only forces you guys to see that you guys are wrong, but also causes you guys to react a certain way. The strategy worked with you as well as with others.

Scat Boy: His response on the average are 17 words to 1.

Presenting a fact-based, reasoned argument takes more than just a few words. There is a structure to that. However, you only need a minimal amount of words to spew BS. Given that I also provide a purpose to every word that I use, that is intended to get the opposition to react a certain way, that also contributes to the maximum post. But, as I said in my previous reply, the more your arguments are full of crap, the better the chances that the reply would be "longer".

Scat Boy: I think he may have taken a debate class

I've never taken a debate class. The debate tactics that I use, on here, are learned from "hands on" experience. They're also learned from refining my tactics. Even you should know that when it comes to engaging in something that you consider fun, not only would you repeat it, you would learn and refine from what you did before to do that activity even better. For me, destroying you people in argument is one of these "fun time activities" that I engage in. Like any fun time activity, I simply get better at it in order to maximize the fun and effectiveness.

Scat Boy: that taught him that if you overwhelm people with inanities they will get tired of trying to follow your train of thought. (DEFLECTION OF OWN TRAITS ONTO OPPOSITION)

In order to dismiss any of my posts as "inanities", or to dismiss anything that I say as "inanities", you have to actually advance an argument countering what you feel are "inanities". You consistently failed to do that in this thread. In fact, you have consistently been in a retreat mode. Not only did you fail to defend your original position, you failed to defend the positions that you escaped to, and you failed to defend your strawman and red herring points.

One of the descriptions, of your debate tactics here, is "shoot and retreat". You did nothing to prove that anything that I said was "inane".

Like the others that I have debated, you find that it is easier to dismiss a fact-based, logical, reasoned argument as "inane" or as "just an opinion", then it is to actually attempt to "prove" me "wrong", or to prove your position "right".

No, there is no "getting tired to follow one's train of thought". All you had to do was take the time to read my replies, with the intention of understanding what it is that I was saying. You didn't do that. You got too emotional, and rushed to provide an emotional, fact deficient, reply... One that was deficient in fact, reason, and logic.

What you're really doing is getting tired of trying to be "creative" regarding your "shoot and retreat" tactics. It's much easier to argue from the facts, which are not on your side.

Scat Boy: ( In this case an aggregation of useless points of how he is superior) (DEFLECTION OF OWN TRAITS ONTO OPPOSITION)

Nowhere, in any of these posts, do I claim to be superior to anybody. When applicable, I do identify myself as having an advantage, relative to the people that I am arguing. My doing this isn't a declaration of "self-superiority". It's simply an example of my naming an advantage that I have where it is applicable in the argument.

These aren't "useless points". Every single word, sentence, and paragraph that I use, in these replies, have a purpose. They support the main idea, and supporting ideas, of my argument. Again, it's easier for you to dismiss as "useless points", a fact-based, reasoned, logical argument that you find impossible to engage without advancing strawman or red herring arguments.

Scat Boy: You have to look over all the self adoration. (DEFLECTION OF OWN TRAITS ONTO OPPOSITION)

If you want to take a good look at "self-adoration", just look at your commentary about your "pee pee". You've also advanced other commentary where you engage in self-adoration.

Nothing, in any of my posts, constitutes "self-adoration". Again, there is a purpose to everything that I say here. For example, one of the reasons to why I tell people like you that I will keep replying is that I know that the people that have replied to me beyond their third time replying are doing the very same things that you are accusing me of doing. This includes you.

Scat Boy: It is like a tick with him..

Yes, when it comes to these debates, I will stick to the opposition's arguments like a tick and consistently dismantle their arguments.

Scat Boy: Anytime he feels inferior

BWAAHAAAAAHAAAA! Baghdad Bob? Is this you?

False, at no time, either on this thread or on the other threads, did I "feel inferior". In fact, if you were to read the criteria that would be needed, for me to reply to the opposition, you would know that those criteria guarantee that I have a position of superiority over the opposition before even jumping into the debate.

I treat these debates like a combat operation. I will not jump into a firefight without fire superiority over the opposition. This is fire superiority when it comes to having the facts on my side when it is blatantly obvious that the opposition is wrong.

Scat Boy: he tends to try and fit as many of what he thinks are "humblebrags" in as he can.

Wrong. This is more proof that you have problems understanding English generated in a way that a fifth grader would be able to understand it. What part of the following statement did you not understand?

"As I argued earlier in this thread, there is a purpose behind every word, sentence, paragraph that I use in my replies." -- herfacechair

Again, I have you people categorized under certain psychological profiles. I didn't state anything here that constitutes a "brag" in any way, shape, or form. You are utilizing tactics that others, like you, have used before. Like the other people that I argued against, you are employing certain BS, in your arguments, with a certain objective that you would hope to be accomplished. In this case, hoping that I would stop hammering your BS.

If I say something, that names an advantage that I have, relative to the one that I'm arguing with, it has everything to do with what is being argued, and has nothing to do with "bragging". Whether that is the fact that I have a vantage point in what we are arguing, or to remind you that I've seen your tricks before. Consider these as "aids" or "hints" to help you exercise proper judgment in these arguments.

Scat Boy: Do you notice that even when you are not at odds with him, he seems to always try to impress you with what an amazing person he is?

You do you realize that I was disagreeing with him in that post, do you? Also, my response to him was more intended for you than it was for him. You should easily understand this given that your reply to him was mainly directed at me. Yes, I addressed his post, but turned around and let you know what you are up against given the tricks that you are employing to attempt to get me to stop hammering you.

You're not the first one to employ the nonsense that you employed in this thread. I've seen that very "playbook" in action on other threads and on other message boards. I've even seen it on Facebook. One of your goals, with the type of replies you've spewed here, is to attempt to exhaust the opposition. I'm letting you know that what may have happened in your previous arguments, with regards to exhausting the opposition, will not work with me. That pisses you off, like it pissed those that I argued with before you off.

Scat Boy: He wants you to respond to each of the comments he makes then he will take each of your comments and break them into smaller comments then you have to reply to each one of the micro comments until you just get tired of it.

Wrong. That's nowhere close to what I intend with my replies. Again, since you have problems with reading comprehension. The more BS that you spew, the longer my replies. The more you are persistent with spreading your BS, the longer my replies generally will be.

I've stated, in this thread, what I wanted you to do. One of them involves you reacting to my posts the way you have been reacting. Then, when you insisted that I stop hammering you, I explained to you what you had to do instead. Nothing, in my explanations of what I "wanted" you to do, involved doing what you say I wanted you to do.

Another thing, that I wanted you to do, was to purge your narcissism driven emotions when you read my replies. Of course, the fact that you wouldn't do that was a good indication that I got you good, as your responses consistently showed that narcissism driven emotion drives your responses.

Scat Boy: And then he calls it a win. (DEFLECTION OF OWN TRAITS ONTO OPPOSITION)

You actually proved the fact that I was spot-on regarding the psychological profile that I have you slotted into:

"Replying gives you a false sense of 'victory' as well as a false sense of control." -- herfacechair

"This bothers you, doesn't it? My doing that denies you even a false sense of victory. You're attempting to slide your BS into the equation without it getting stomped and splattered onto your face. I've lost count of how many times other liberals have advanced this same complaint, without recognizing the fact that they're repeating themselves." -- herfacechair

What I actually called "a win":

"You lost the argument the moment I jumped into it, you've retreated from your original argument, as well as from your follow-on red herring and strawman arguments." - herfacechair

"The onus is on the opposition to consider that reality before arguing a debate that they've lost the moment that I've jumped in." -- herfacechair

Scat Boy: If you notice very few folks here talk about themselves.

False on two main counts.

First, my mentioning my advantages is not me "talking about myself" for the simple sake of "talking about myself". My mentioning my advantages has everything to do with what I am replying to and nothing to do with bragging.

Second, I notice other people here, including you, "talking about themselves". You guys do this frequently. I didn't see you complain about people "talking about themselves" when Private Luke_Wyatt consistently "talked about himself" regarding his phony or embellished military service.

Scat Boy: They stick to what they have seen or know.

That's exactly one of the things that I am doing here. What you state here captures two of the criteria that I use to jump into an argument. "Seen" in terms of "first-hand experience". "Know" in terms of studied/researched experiences. Yes, I'm sticking to what I have seen in known. The other people are doing what you are accusing me of doing, this includes you.

Scat Boy: He bases all of his comments on how has fought so many battle of wit with scores of folks and always comes out the victor. (DEFLECTION OF OWN TRAITS ONTO OPPOSITION)

What I've actually said:

"I present a fact based, reasoned, logical arguments against your drivel, as well as that of your liberal allies." -- herfacechair

I've said this to you and to others, and presented this to you numerous times. But my arguments are based on the facts, not on "fighting any battles of wit". This is indicated by the criteria that I use before jumping into a debate:

I don't argue just any topic under the sun. There are certain conditions that have to be met before I would argue a topic.

1. I have to have more knowledge, on the topic being argued, then the opposition. This knowledge has to be based on first-hand experience, studied/research experience, or a combination of them.

2. The opposition, that I intend to argue against, that I will continue to argue against, have to clearly be wrong.

Anybody, with reading comprehension abilities, would see what I meant by coming out as a victor in these debates. A person wins an argument by advancing the facts, logic, and a reasoned argument against an opposition that's not able to defend their own position or who are unable to argue against the other argument.

Then I said this:

"Your meltdown, here, is no different from the meltdown I've seen from others like you over the past 13 years that I have debated online. You probably think that you are the only one, that is pulling the tricks that you have been pulling here. If so, you're mistaken. Others have also tried that, I recognized your antics, throughout this thread, and anticipated what you would do next.

"One of the reasons why I previously mentioned the X/Y comment, and relationship, is that I knew it would come down to you having a severe meltdown over how I conduct my side of the argument in response to you. Lustylad even jumped on here and tried to warn you what would happen. You didn't listen to him, and you didn't listen to the hints that I dropped earlier in the thread." -- herfacechair

I said, what I said earlier in this thread regarding what I'll do, knowing full well that you were going to pull the stunts here that you actually pulled. Others have tried those stunts, thinking the same that you were thinking. They ultimately did what they should've done earlier in those respective threads, like what you should've done earlier in this thread.

Again, just think about this. Had you NOT made your first post against me, on this thread, this specific argument wouldn't be taking place. You should've listened to lustylad and simply moved on from this thread instead of volunteering to be my debate "punching bag".

But, the fact that you'd say that speaks volumes that your narcissism is having a harder time rejecting the message that you're realizing is reality with each passing day... That none of your antics are going to stop me from hammering you. This is further proof that you see, your continued participation in an argument you've lost, as a "form of victory", what I describe as giving you a false sense of victory. Again, you proved that I was accurate regarding the psychological profile that I've slotted you into.

Scat Boy: Sorry this is a bit long winded I guess he is rubbing off on me. LOL!

Take it away MT Pockets:

"If you were as witty as you claim you would not have to LOL." -- MT Pockets

But no, you're not being "long winded" because "my style" is "rubbing off" on you. You're "long winded" in the sense that you're emotional and pissed, and are responding accordingly. You're frustrated over the fact that none of your tricks, that you deployed on this thread to get me to stop hammering you, are working, and that I'm still hammering you.

The only thing that you're sorry for is for your allowing your emotions and narcissism to get the best of you and to heavily influence your actions on this thread.

Lol! You imagine HFC or anyone on this board actually "feels inferior" to YOU? Seriously? Your replies are so immature and amateurish I am surprised HFC even stoops to answer them. You should feel flattered and grateful someone pays that much attention to you. Originally Posted by lustylad

That was a feeble attempt, on MT Pocket's part, to "psychoanalyze" me in a way that fit his narcissism's world view. He failed miserably. However, his assumptions of someone "feeling inferior", as well as his immature/amateurish replies, remind me of Private Luke_Wyatt and his tricks. MT Cranial Cavity utilizes immaturity and other tricks to try to get people to stop hammering his BS. Not working on my end, I hammer him anyway.

Here's Private Luke_Wyatt enjoying his vacation:

Here's Private Luke_Wyatt enjoying his vacation:

Originally Posted by herfacechair

Is he vacationing at the fat farm? How did he lose so much weight?

That was a feeble attempt, on MT Pocket's part, to "psychoanalyze" me in a way that fit his narcissism's world view. He failed miserably. However, his assumptions of someone "feeling inferior", as well as his immature/amateurish replies, remind me of Private Luke_Wyatt and his tricks. MT Cranial Cavity utilizes immaturity and other tricks to try to get people to stop hammering his BS. Not working on my end, I hammer him anyway.

Here's Private Luke_Wyatt enjoying his vacation:

Originally Posted by herfacechair

The only thing getting hammered is your false teeth. We all know you feel inferior or else you would not be into getting "Queened".
Seems like you are running out of bullshit to spread. You say the same shit in every post about anyone that you square off with.
I am going to nickname you Morris.
So tell me, do you write these fables for the "thrill" , or the "smell of a fresh kill".
I bet that nose of yours is been some places that an ordinary man would have trouble contemplating. I hope your "medulla oblongata" is holding up with all the pressure that has surely parted the waters of it.

Lol! You imagine HFC or anyone on this board actually "feels inferior" to YOU? Seriously? Your replies are so immature and amateurish I am surprised HFC even stoops to answer them. You should feel flattered and grateful someone pays that much attention to you. Originally Posted by lustylad

I just noticed this reply. Funny you seem to hang on every word I say. And pretty much every time you run your mouth someone has to take up for you. I would imagine anyone that thinks HFC has any eminence, (the king of queening) has a pretty low self esteem. So yes I would imagine him and a few such as yourself would feel inferior to me. I bet it pisses you off when you see us guys that have the ability to make our own opinions, while you are tied to the spin of the day with all the other trumpanzees. Just pray that when the Trump wagon rolls out of DC on fire, that we do not seek exile for you lemmings. I do understand at this point you are all in so keep on running your pie hole. I am amused that you see HFC as a wordsmith. I bet your hero is Jubal Sackett. LOL!

Scat Boy: The only thing getting hammered is your false teeth.

False.

First, if you want to look at what is false, between us in this argument, look no further than your argument on this thread, your false perception of who you are, and your false perception of how you are performing on this thread.

Second, unlike you, I don't have false teeth. I still have all my teeth, with no trend in the horizon that would require false teeth/dentures. It appears that not only have you exercised piss poor judgment when it comes to online arguments, you also exercised piss poor judgments regarding your face-to-face arguments. Got your teeth busted out in the resulting fight, didn't you?

Third, the fact remains that I have consistently hammered you, like I have hammered others like you on this thread and elsewhere on this message board and in the Internet.

Scat Boy: We all know you feel inferior (PROJECTING ONE'S OWN TRAIT THE OPPOSITION)

Wrong, as usual!

First, you do not speak for everybody else here. You only speak for yourself. Do not embarrass the other people here by associating them with your substandard line of argument, conduct, and judgment. You only speak for yourself, and you are consistently wrong.

Second, no, not once during our exchange, nor during any of the arguments that I have had this message board or elsewhere, have I felt "inferior". The conditions that I said, for me to jump into an argument like this, are such that I come in with a delicious advantage against the opposition. I jump into an argument with a knowledge and experience superiority over the opposition. Again, the facts, being on my side, is my superior firepower over you, and others like you, in arguments like this.

Third, unlike you, I've done things with my life. You, on the other hand, demonstrate the profile of somebody that is unable to hold down a job, unable to sustain a career, who goes through life living as a loser.

Which one of us is on the verge of being retired from the military, who is also working on his doctorate degree? Think of that the next time you think I "feel inferior".

Now get back in the corner and put your dunce hat on Baghdad Bob.

Scat Boy: or else you would not be into getting "Queened".

That has absolutely nothing to do with "feeling inferior" and has everything to do with having a specific interest in a specific sexual activity. This has everything to do with the pleasure and sensation that this experience provides.

Scat Boy: Seems like you are running out of bullshit to spread. (PROJECTING ONE'S OWN TRAIT THE OPPOSITION)

False.

First, don't dismiss a fact-based, logical, reasoned argument as "bullshit", as if it was the same thing as your arguments. There's a colossal difference between my arguments, which are fact-based, logical, and reasoned, and your arguments, which are nothing but bullshit. I have the facts on my side, and I've been hammering you with a fact-based, logical, reasoned argument. You, on the other hand, have nothing but BS, and that is what you have been pounding into the table on this thread.

Second, no, I'm not running out of argument. Since you are too dense to figure this out, my arguments, how I craft my response, is influenced by the BS that you spew. The more BS that you are willing to throw, the more fact checking responses I'm willing to throw back. I'm not running out of argument in any way, shape, or form. You, on the other hand, are not only running out of BS to spew, but your arguments are getting weaker and weaker, demonstrating that fact that you've gone from melting down to fading away.

You lost this argument the moment I rebutted you, I've been destroying your credibility throughout this thread this whole time, I've gotten you to the point where even you have to realize that you are arguing a lost cause. Yet, your narcissism drives you to keep coming back to receive additional hammering's.

Scat Boy: You say the same shit in every post about anyone that you square off with.

First, this isn't even a "squaring off". This has been a "one-sided" affair where I have destroyed you, and those on your side of the argument, thoroughly in debate. You guys immediately execute "evasive maneuvers" while utilizing the "shoot and retreat" tactics. That is not a squaring off, when one side is in a constant retreat and in constant defense mode.

Second, given the conditions that are required for me to jump into a debate in the first place, and to continue it, it takes the same or similar characteristics for someone to keep coming back arguing from a position of defeat. Again, in order for me to jump into a debate, the following have to be met:

1. I have to have extensive experience, either through first-hand experience, studied/researched experience, or both, compared to the opposition's lack of it.

2. The opposition clearly has to be in error. In other words, you guys have to blatantly be wrong.

Let these two criteria sink in a minute. If you guys keep arguing, given these criteria, you guys demonstrate piss poor judgment. Most people, with a level head, would disengage and refuse to argue a losing position. It requires poor judgment to argue against my position when it's clear that the opposition is wrong.

This is driven by control, anger, and narcissism issues. Again, I've been accurate in applying these concepts to people I have argued with on a stolen valor website. On two different threads, the wives of the phony/embellisher that I was hammering jumped into the thread and verified the psychological profile I had these individuals in.

You guys engage in this piss poor judgement outside this message board as well. My doing this is no different from my identifying a duck as a duck on the account that it quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, and looks like a duck. The next bird that comes along that meets these same characteristics is more than likely going to also be identified as a duck.

Scat Boy: I am going to nickname you Morris.

Your ability to insult is a lot weaker than your ability to argue. That is just more proof that I destroyed you so hard in this debate that you're left just "jabbing into the air".

Scat Boy: So tell me, do you write

Who says anything about writing these? Even when provided with the facts, you still make erroneous assumptions. Again, I use speech to text to generate my replies.

Scat Boy: these fables

Your subconscious gives you away again. In your attempt to dismiss a fact based, logical, reasoned argument, you end up using a label that suggests that your subconscious is seeing the value of the lesson that you'd get, from both my response and the butt kicking that you're getting.

Your attempt to dismiss my arguments as "fables" is nothing more than you attempting to place equal validity between my arguments and yours, despite the fact that there aren't any.

If you look a basic definition of a fable, you'd see something different from what you implied. I've read fables, and they involve animal characters in a story that presents a lesson learned, usually moral. As much as your narcissism wants to dismiss my fact based, logical, reasoned arguments, your intellect is recognizing them for what they are... valid information that you could learn from if your narcissism were to get out of the way.

Understand that in order to dismiss my fact based, logical, reasoned arguments, you have to actually advance a valid counter argument. You've failed to do this.

Scat Boy: for the "thrill" ,

Again, I take sadistic pleasure in destroying arguments like yours, and watching you people's reactions to my reply. Then, I take advantage of what I know about the psychological profile of the person that I'm debating, then craft my replies to not only destroy their arguments, but to get them to react a certain way. It has worked nicely with you, just as it has worked nicely with others.

Scat Boy: or the "smell of a fresh kill".

If by smell, you mean the fact that your arguments are nothing but BS, then you'd be onto something. This is your subconscious telling you that you're full of shit, and that you're spewing it all over the place on this thread, and elsewhere. Each of your new replies represents "a fresh new batch of BS" with their own fresh new stink.

What's the difference between dog shit and your arguments? Dog shit stops stinking after a while.

Scat Boy: I bet that nose of yours is been some places that an ordinary man would have trouble contemplating.

My eyes see no real evidence of a combination of critical thought, common sense, logic, or fact, with your replies. The aroma that I experience, right before and right after I live up to my username, has a better smell than the BS that you spew on these threads.

One difference, between my username and my reading your posts? Your arguments actually radiate shit and stink. A woman's ass makes up in the intelligence department where your head lacks in intelligence. Meaning, based on what you spew here, your living up to my username would actually put some intelligence on your head.

Why did the dog lick its ass? To get the taste of MT Pockets out of its mouth.

Scat Boy: I hope your "medulla oblongata" is holding up with all the pressure that has surely parted the waters of it.

You're jealous of the fact that I have a brain, as opposed to you having an MT cranial cavity with a toy monkey inside of it banging cymbals.

There's a strong similarity between your arguments and the commentaries made in this video:

Scat Boy: @ Dilbert. What he's trying to say is he has a formula.

That's one of the many things that I pointed out in the post that you quoted. This is the only thing that you said that comes remotely close to being true. But, not for what you are trying to imply. The fact that I kept telling you that there is a purpose behind every word, sentence, and paragraph that I use in my replies should give you a hint of what I'm saying and doing. This "formula" is based on the fact that I have your people categorized into psychological profiles that you guys keep refining every time you guys reply. This "formula" involves crafting a reply that not only forces you guys to see that you guys are wrong, but also causes you guys to react a certain way. The strategy worked with you as well as with others.

Scat Boy: His response on the average are 17 words to 1.

Presenting a fact-based, reasoned argument takes more than just a few words. There is a structure to that. However, you only need a minimal amount of words to spew BS. Given that I also provide a purpose to every word that I use, that is intended to get the opposition to react a certain way, that also contributes to the maximum post. But, as I said in my previous reply, the more your arguments are full of crap, the better the chances that the reply would be "longer".

Scat Boy: I think he may have taken a debate class

I've never taken a debate class. The debate tactics that I use, on here, are learned from "hands on" experience. They're also learned from refining my tactics. Even you should know that when it comes to engaging in something that you consider fun, not only would you repeat it, you would learn and refine from what you did before to do that activity even better. For me, destroying you people in argument is one of these "fun time activities" that I engage in. Like any fun time activity, I simply get better at it in order to maximize the fun and effectiveness.

Scat Boy: that taught him that if you overwhelm people with inanities they will get tired of trying to follow your train of thought. (DEFLECTION OF OWN TRAITS ONTO OPPOSITION)

In order to dismiss any of my posts as "inanities", or to dismiss anything that I say as "inanities", you have to actually advance an argument countering what you feel are "inanities". You consistently failed to do that in this thread. In fact, you have consistently been in a retreat mode. Not only did you fail to defend your original position, you failed to defend the positions that you escaped to, and you failed to defend your strawman and red herring points.

One of the descriptions, of your debate tactics here, is "shoot and retreat". You did nothing to prove that anything that I said was "inane".

Like the others that I have debated, you find that it is easier to dismiss a fact-based, logical, reasoned argument as "inane" or as "just an opinion", then it is to actually attempt to "prove" me "wrong", or to prove your position "right".

No, there is no "getting tired to follow one's train of thought". All you had to do was take the time to read my replies, with the intention of understanding what it is that I was saying. You didn't do that. You got too emotional, and rushed to provide an emotional, fact deficient, reply... One that was deficient in fact, reason, and logic.

What you're really doing is getting tired of trying to be "creative" regarding your "shoot and retreat" tactics. It's much easier to argue from the facts, which are not on your side.

Scat Boy: ( In this case an aggregation of useless points of how he is superior) (DEFLECTION OF OWN TRAITS ONTO OPPOSITION)

Nowhere, in any of these posts, do I claim to be superior to anybody. When applicable, I do identify myself as having an advantage, relative to the people that I am arguing. My doing this isn't a declaration of "self-superiority". It's simply an example of my naming an advantage that I have where it is applicable in the argument.

These aren't "useless points". Every single word, sentence, and paragraph that I use, in these replies, have a purpose. They support the main idea, and supporting ideas, of my argument. Again, it's easier for you to dismiss as "useless points", a fact-based, reasoned, logical argument that you find impossible to engage without advancing strawman or red herring arguments.

Scat Boy: You have to look over all the self adoration. (DEFLECTION OF OWN TRAITS ONTO OPPOSITION)

If you want to take a good look at "self-adoration", just look at your commentary about your "pee pee". You've also advanced other commentary where you engage in self-adoration.

Nothing, in any of my posts, constitutes "self-adoration". Again, there is a purpose to everything that I say here. For example, one of the reasons to why I tell people like you that I will keep replying is that I know that the people that have replied to me beyond their third time replying are doing the very same things that you are accusing me of doing. This includes you.

Scat Boy: It is like a tick with him..

Yes, when it comes to these debates, I will stick to the opposition's arguments like a tick and consistently dismantle their arguments.

Scat Boy: Anytime he feels inferior

BWAAHAAAAAHAAAA! Baghdad Bob? Is this you?

False, at no time, either on this thread or on the other threads, did I "feel inferior". In fact, if you were to read the criteria that would be needed, for me to reply to the opposition, you would know that those criteria guarantee that I have a position of superiority over the opposition before even jumping into the debate.

I treat these debates like a combat operation. I will not jump into a firefight without fire superiority over the opposition. This is fire superiority when it comes to having the facts on my side when it is blatantly obvious that the opposition is wrong.

Scat Boy: he tends to try and fit as many of what he thinks are "humblebrags" in as he can.

Wrong. This is more proof that you have problems understanding English generated in a way that a fifth grader would be able to understand it. What part of the following statement did you not understand?

"As I argued earlier in this thread, there is a purpose behind every word, sentence, paragraph that I use in my replies." -- herfacechair

Again, I have you people categorized under certain psychological profiles. I didn't state anything here that constitutes a "brag" in any way, shape, or form. You are utilizing tactics that others, like you, have used before. Like the other people that I argued against, you are employing certain BS, in your arguments, with a certain objective that you would hope to be accomplished. In this case, hoping that I would stop hammering your BS.

If I say something, that names an advantage that I have, relative to the one that I'm arguing with, it has everything to do with what is being argued, and has nothing to do with "bragging". Whether that is the fact that I have a vantage point in what we are arguing, or to remind you that I've seen your tricks before. Consider these as "aids" or "hints" to help you exercise proper judgment in these arguments.

Scat Boy: Do you notice that even when you are not at odds with him, he seems to always try to impress you with what an amazing person he is?

You do you realize that I was disagreeing with him in that post, do you? Also, my response to him was more intended for you than it was for him. You should easily understand this given that your reply to him was mainly directed at me. Yes, I addressed his post, but turned around and let you know what you are up against given the tricks that you are employing to attempt to get me to stop hammering you.

You're not the first one to employ the nonsense that you employed in this thread. I've seen that very "playbook" in action on other threads and on other message boards. I've even seen it on Facebook. One of your goals, with the type of replies you've spewed here, is to attempt to exhaust the opposition. I'm letting you know that what may have happened in your previous arguments, with regards to exhausting the opposition, will not work with me. That pisses you off, like it pissed those that I argued with before you off.

Scat Boy: He wants you to respond to each of the comments he makes then he will take each of your comments and break them into smaller comments then you have to reply to each one of the micro comments until you just get tired of it.

Wrong. That's nowhere close to what I intend with my replies. Again, since you have problems with reading comprehension. The more BS that you spew, the longer my replies. The more you are persistent with spreading your BS, the longer my replies generally will be.

I've stated, in this thread, what I wanted you to do. One of them involves you reacting to my posts the way you have been reacting. Then, when you insisted that I stop hammering you, I explained to you what you had to do instead. Nothing, in my explanations of what I "wanted" you to do, involved doing what you say I wanted you to do.

Another thing, that I wanted you to do, was to purge your narcissism driven emotions when you read my replies. Of course, the fact that you wouldn't do that was a good indication that I got you good, as your responses consistently showed that narcissism driven emotion drives your responses.

Scat Boy: And then he calls it a win. (DEFLECTION OF OWN TRAITS ONTO OPPOSITION)

You actually proved the fact that I was spot-on regarding the psychological profile that I have you slotted into:

"Replying gives you a false sense of 'victory' as well as a false sense of control." -- herfacechair

"This bothers you, doesn't it? My doing that denies you even a false sense of victory. You're attempting to slide your BS into the equation without it getting stomped and splattered onto your face. I've lost count of how many times other liberals have advanced this same complaint, without recognizing the fact that they're repeating themselves." -- herfacechair

What I actually called "a win":

"You lost the argument the moment I jumped into it, you've retreated from your original argument, as well as from your follow-on red herring and strawman arguments." - herfacechair

"The onus is on the opposition to consider that reality before arguing a debate that they've lost the moment that I've jumped in." -- herfacechair

Scat Boy: If you notice very few folks here talk about themselves.

False on two main counts.

First, my mentioning my advantages is not me "talking about myself" for the simple sake of "talking about myself". My mentioning my advantages has everything to do with what I am replying to and nothing to do with bragging.

Second, I notice other people here, including you, "talking about themselves". You guys do this frequently. I didn't see you complain about people "talking about themselves" when Private Luke_Wyatt consistently "talked about himself" regarding his phony or embellished military service.

Scat Boy: They stick to what they have seen or know.

That's exactly one of the things that I am doing here. What you state here captures two of the criteria that I use to jump into an argument. "Seen" in terms of "first-hand experience". "Know" in terms of studied/researched experiences. Yes, I'm sticking to what I have seen in known. The other people are doing what you are accusing me of doing, this includes you.

Scat Boy: He bases all of his comments on how has fought so many battle of wit with scores of folks and always comes out the victor. (DEFLECTION OF OWN TRAITS ONTO OPPOSITION)

What I've actually said:

"I present a fact based, reasoned, logical arguments against your drivel, as well as that of your liberal allies." -- herfacechair

I've said this to you and to others, and presented this to you numerous times. But my arguments are based on the facts, not on "fighting any battles of wit". This is indicated by the criteria that I use before jumping into a debate:

I don't argue just any topic under the sun. There are certain conditions that have to be met before I would argue a topic.

1. I have to have more knowledge, on the topic being argued, then the opposition. This knowledge has to be based on first-hand experience, studied/research experience, or a combination of them.

2. The opposition, that I intend to argue against, that I will continue to argue against, have to clearly be wrong.

Anybody, with reading comprehension abilities, would see what I meant by coming out as a victor in these debates. A person wins an argument by advancing the facts, logic, and a reasoned argument against an opposition that's not able to defend their own position or who are unable to argue against the other argument.

Then I said this:

"Your meltdown, here, is no different from the meltdown I've seen from others like you over the past 13 years that I have debated online. You probably think that you are the only one, that is pulling the tricks that you have been pulling here. If so, you're mistaken. Others have also tried that, I recognized your antics, throughout this thread, and anticipated what you would do next.

"One of the reasons why I previously mentioned the X/Y comment, and relationship, is that I knew it would come down to you having a severe meltdown over how I conduct my side of the argument in response to you. Lustylad even jumped on here and tried to warn you what would happen. You didn't listen to him, and you didn't listen to the hints that I dropped earlier in the thread." -- herfacechair

I said, what I said earlier in this thread regarding what I'll do, knowing full well that you were going to pull the stunts here that you actually pulled. Others have tried those stunts, thinking the same that you were thinking. They ultimately did what they should've done earlier in those respective threads, like what you should've done earlier in this thread.

Again, just think about this. Had you NOT made your first post against me, on this thread, this specific argument wouldn't be taking place. You should've listened to lustylad and simply moved on from this thread instead of volunteering to be my debate "punching bag".

But, the fact that you'd say that speaks volumes that your narcissism is having a harder time rejecting the message that you're realizing is reality with each passing day... That none of your antics are going to stop me from hammering you. This is further proof that you see, your continued participation in an argument you've lost, as a "form of victory", what I describe as giving you a false sense of victory. Again, you proved that I was accurate regarding the psychological profile that I've slotted you into.

Scat Boy: Sorry this is a bit long winded I guess he is rubbing off on me. LOL!

Take it away MT Pockets:

"If you were as witty as you claim you would not have to LOL." -- MT Pockets

But no, you're not being "long winded" because "my style" is "rubbing off" on you. You're "long winded" in the sense that you're emotional and pissed, and are responding accordingly. You're frustrated over the fact that none of your tricks, that you deployed on this thread to get me to stop hammering you, are working, and that I'm still hammering you.

The only thing that you're sorry for is for your allowing your emotions and narcissism to get the best of you and to heavily influence your actions on this thread. Originally Posted by herfacechair

Dam! you responded to me talking about how you go on and on and not really saying anything with a record breaking rant that was not even to a post addressed to you. And all the while confirming what I said about you. That you filibuster everything in your path. You once you said you did use speech to text. I may have to concede that you are a good little butt licker. Do you have the girls sit on your face while you concoct these masterpieces of Narcissistic fodder? Your post proved every point I made. You basically ordain yourself at every turn. I am amused. I have met some pretty arrogant folks in my day but you are by far the most delusional. You remember in the movie K-pax when the guy said he could time travel. It makes me think of you.

Lol! You imagine HFC or anyone on this board actually "feels inferior" to YOU? Seriously? Your replies are so immature and amateurish I am surprised HFC even stoops to answer them. You should feel flattered and grateful someone pays that much attention to you. Originally Posted by lustylad

Mebbe that's why he WK'd for LUBE so much, since LUBE would pay some attention to him !

Mebbe that's why he WK'd for LUBE so much, since LUBE would pay some attention to him ! Originally Posted by Rey Lengua

Rey! You need help "lube" is not coming back to you and if you are trying to court Lusty, don't ever mention your past lover. It is a real turn off, just like with us straight folks. LOL! Good luck! I hope you find happiness.

Rey! You need help "lube" is not coming back to you and if you are trying to court Lusty, don't ever mention your past lover. It is a real turn off, just like with us straight folks. LOL! Good luck! I hope you find happiness. Originally Posted by MT Pockets

We all know how YOU WK'd for him here MT Fluffer and how heart broken YOU are about his self-inflicted vacation ". So do YOU think that YOU have to " carry the torch " of his and YOUR idiot ways even more now that YOUR hero and butt buddy is gone ? And, BTW, all of us that YOUR hero had on his lsit to get banned by him....well, damn it, WE ARE ALL STILL HERE !!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
And keep lying to YOURSELF about being STRAIGHT, LUBE LOVER !!!!!! We ALL KNOW BETTER, FLUFFER

I just noticed this reply. Funny you seem to hang on every word I say. And pretty much every time you run your mouth someone has to take up for you. I would imagine anyone that thinks HFC has any eminence, (the king of queening) has a pretty low self esteem. So yes I would imagine him and a few such as yourself would feel inferior to me. I bet it pisses you off when you see us guys that have the ability to make our own opinions, while you are tied to the spin of the day with all the other trumpanzees. Just pray that when the Trump wagon rolls out of DC on fire, that we do not seek exile for you lemmings. I do understand at this point you are all in so keep on running your pie hole. I am amused that you see HFC as a wordsmith. I bet your hero is Jubal Sackett. LOL! Originally Posted by MT Pockets

Hahahaha.... you think I "hang on every word" you say? Your narcissism is running amok again. You put up quite a front trying to hide your deep-seated inferiority complex. Everyone can see you are getting hammered word for word, point by point, in this thread. The fact that you can't rebut anything HFC says - word for word, or point by point - is pitifully clear. So you bitch and moan about his style while getting killed on substance. And you keep coming back for more! It appears that masochism goes hand in glove with your narcissistic personality disorder.

Your mindless babbling about trumpanzees and Trump wagons is deflection and delusion. You're still so clueless you think anyone who pushes back against libtard hysteria is a blind Trump supporter. The sheeple are on your side of the fence, not ours. You and your fellow libtard monsters like James Hodgkinson are your own worst enemies. The more you foam at the mouth, scream like banzees, smash windows and shoot Republicans, the more counties turn red.

We all know how YOU WK'd for him here MT Fluffer and how heart broken YOU are about his self-inflicted vacation ". So do YOU think that YOU have to " carry the torch " of his and YOUR idiot ways even more now that YOUR hero and butt buddy is gone ? And, BTW, all of us that YOUR hero had on his lsit to get banned by him....well, damn it, WE ARE ALL STILL HERE !!!! HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
And keep lying to YOURSELF about being STRAIGHT, LUBE LOVER !!!!!! We ALL KNOW BETTER, FLUFFER Originally Posted by Rey Lengua

Hey Gey Rey! When was the last time I mentioned him besides in response to one of your plea's for him to come back to you. I do notice you mention him in dam near every post. You even go in to other threads and inject him in the conversation. I promise if I speak to him I will tell him you are pining for him. Now the banned deal I have nothing to do with. I know he did get a few banned and himself but that is between you and him. So why you are throwing it in my face I have no idea. I only got involved because of the fat jokes by your whole " congress' at the same time. Again lets see where I have brought him up somewhere. Or even defended him.