Nancy Pelosi's husband mug shot released...

[Canon Shooter]

I don't think you understand what "obsessing" means.

Oh, but I do.

I looked up "obsessive" in Webster's and your picture was there...

 

[westwall]

Oh, but I do.

I looked up "obsessive" in Webster's and your picture was there...

And yet here you are flailing around. Based on word count alone in this thread, you are OCD to the max.

 

[Canon Shooter]

And yet here you are flailing around. Based on word count alone in this thread, you are OCD to the max.

I'm commenting on the idiocy of your posting

You're obsessing over Pelosi as if you think an equal application of the law will amount to something more than a nominal fine and some DUI classes...

 

[westwall]

I'm commenting on the idiocy of your posting

You're obsessing over Pelosi as if you think an equal application of the law will amount to something more than a nominal fine and some DUI classes...

I obsess over nothing, you are trying to deflect from your defense of driving drunk and derailing the thread.

Now, piss off, douchebag.

Back to the thread, has anyone seen anything about the arrest?

 

[Canon Shooter]

I obsess over nothing, you are trying to deflect from your defense of driving drunk and derailing the thread.

Now, piss off, douchebag.

Back to the thread, has anyone seen anything about the arrest?

I haven't defended it, you stupid fuck...

 

[HenryBHough]

Probable that if, while drunk, he had struck and killed a white male not only would there be no prosecution Xiden would throw a rose garden ceremony to pin a medal on him. In fairness Sleepy Joe wouldn't have any idea what the medal was for but would understand that his masters would take away his diapers if he didn't do it.

 

[Canon Shooter]

More likely he’s not lying. Not everybody is as obviously irresponsible as you’re making yourself out to be.

Eat a dick, asswipe.

I've not defended drunk driving as he insists.

He's lying.

You're a dick...

 

[lantern2814]

Eat a dick, asswipe.

I've not defended drunk driving as he insists.

He's lying.

You're a dick...

Yeah you did fuckwad. Keep your gay fantasies to yourself. He is not lying. You’re irresponsible and think that means everybody else must be. We’re not. So not driving drunk makes a person a dick. Tells us a lot about you.....

 

[Canon Shooter]

Yeah you did fuckwad. Keep your gay fantasies to yourself. He is not lying. You’re irresponsible and think that means everybody else must be. We’re not.

Okay, dipshit, where did I "defend" drunk driving? Where did I ever come out and say it's okay to drive drunk because (fill in the blank)?

Your turn to fail, dumbass. Where did I do that?

So not driving drunk makes a person a dick. Tells us a lot about you.....

Oh, no. You're wrong. There are so many other reasons he's a dick.

Dipshits like the two of you gt your panties in a knot when someone doesn't come right out and agree with you. You guys talk about how the law must be applied equally and then, when you learn what the real penalties are, you get all whiny because someone named "Pelosi" isn't going to prison.

I don't give two fucks about Paul Pelosi. I certainly never defended him, or his choice to drive drunk.

You're just too goddamn ignorant to comprehend that...

 

[westwall]

I haven't defended it, you stupid fuck...

Yeah, you did. I understand the English language. Apparently you don't.

Once again trying to redirect back to the OP, has anyone seen an update on the charges?

 

[Canon Shooter]

Yeah, you did. I understand the English language. Apparently you don't.

Once again trying to redirect back to the OP, has anyone seen an update on the charges?

Hey, shitstain, where did I "defend" drunk driving? Where did I ever come out and say it's okay to drive drunk because (fill in the blank)?

Your turn to fail, dipshit. Where did I do that?

 

[westwall]

Hey, shitstain, where did I "defend" drunk driving? Where did I ever come out and say it's okay to drive drunk because (fill in the blank)?

Your turn to fail, dipshit. Where did I do that?

Post number 14. Dumbass.

Now stop derailing this thread. Start a troll thread in the FZ.

 

[Canon Shooter]

Post number 14. Dumbass.

Now stop derailing this thread. Start a troll thread in the FZ.

Once again for the retards in the thread:

You've never had a little too much to drink and then decided to navigate your way home?

This was asked simply because it's actually pretty common. Now, if I were defending it, as you stupidly insist, I would be saying that he should be let off the hook. I didn't do that, and I didn't do that because drunk driving is wrong. My question was more rhetorical than anything else, and was merely an acknowledgement that people often making shitty decisions...

You know, maybe he didn't plan on drinking at all but, after a couple, felt he was okay to drive.

This, too, is something which is common. Of course it's wrong and irresponsible. It's also very common for someone who's drunk to believe he's okay to drive. I've never stated that it's right or should be ignored, which is what I'd be saying if I was defending drunk driving...

He certainly doesn't appear inebriated, or even drunk, for that matter.

That's merely a comment on his appearance. I don't think the guy looks drunk. That's neither here nor there. I don't see how commenting on his appearance could even be remotely construed as defending drunk driving...

Hell, I know a woman who got popped for a DUI in San Diego after having two glasses of wine with dinner...

This comment was made simply because some people don't realize that it can take very little alcohol for them to be "drunk", and that they should be more aware of their condition if they've been drinking.

Now, a person would have to be a complete retard to read the above and conclude that I would ever defend drunk driving. I don't, nor would I ever.

It's wrong.

Now, is there anything else you're unclear about?

 

[lantern2814]

Okay, dipshit, where did I "defend" drunk driving? Where did I ever come out and say it's okay to drive drunk because (fill in the blank)?

Your turn to fail, dumbass. Where did I do that?


Oh, no. You're wrong. There are so many other reasons he's a dick.

Dipshits like the two of you gt your panties in a knot when someone doesn't come right out and agree with you. You guys talk about how the law must be applied equally and then, when you learn what the real penalties are, you get all whiny because someone named "Pelosi" isn't going to prison.

I don't give two fucks about Paul Pelosi. I certainly never defended him, or his choice to drive drunk.

You're just too goddamn ignorant to comprehend that...

Throwing a tantrum because you defend driving drunk by claiming the “you’ve never gotten behind the wheel after having a few?” Your words. You stupid fuck, you claimed that a man saying he has not driven drunk was a liar. Now trying to deflect. Hey asshole, if this is not a first offense, Pelosi should be in prison. He was obviously WAY over the legal limit when he hit that car. Not everybody drives after drinking. Obviously you’re too much of a flaming retarded asswipe to realize that.

 

[westwall]

Throwing a tantrum because you defend driving drunk by claiming the “you’ve never gotten behind the wheel after having a few?” Your words. You stupid fuck, you claimed that a man saying he has not driven drunk was a liar. Now trying to deflect. Hey asshole, if this is not a first offense, Pelosi should be in prison. He was obviously WAY over the legal limit when he hit that car. Not everybody drives after drinking. Obviously you’re too much of a flaming retarded asswipe to realize that.

Well said.

 

[Canon Shooter]

Throwing a tantrum because you defend driving drunk by claiming the “you’ve never gotten behind the wheel after having a few?” Your words.

It's funny that you think not agreeing without question is "throwing a tantrum".

You're obviously too fucking stupid to comprehend a simple explanation.

"You’ve never gotten behind the wheel after having a few?” wasn't a "claim" of anything, you ignorant simp, it was a rhetorical question, and I explained why it was rhetorical.

You're just too stupid to understand it...

Hey asshole, if this is not a first offense,

There's no indication, whatsoever, that he's had a DUI in the past...

Pelosi should be in prison.

Really?

For how long?

He was obviously WAY over the legal limit when he hit that car.

Oh, no doubt. But there's nothing in the California penal code which allows for someone to be charged with being "WAY over the legal limit"...

Not everybody drives after drinking. Obviously you’re too much of a flaming retarded asswipe to realize that.

Well, Westall has already admitted to drinking and driving.

Or did you miss that part?

 

[westwall]

Says the dipshit who just admitted to counting the number of words each of us has typed.

Seriously, man, you can't make this shit up...

No, but you do walls of text, while I tend to do single line responses.

DURRRRRR

 

[Canon Shooter]

No, but you do walls of text, while I tend to do single line responses.

You mean like this?

Dude, just stop. You are a fucking retard. I bolded the critical parts, dumbass.

"When you see those blue and red flashing lights in your rearview mirror and hear the whoop of the police siren, you know the officer is pulling you over. Your heart may be pounding, especially if the scent of alcohol is still on your breath. You just know the officer is going to ask you to take a Breathalyzer test to determine if your body’s blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is above the legal limit. You may wonder if you can refuse to take the test at all. The answer is yes, but be warned that there are immediate consequences to refusing the test in California.


Like many states, California has adopted what are called “implied consent laws,” which make it mandatory for any driver in the state to submit to a test to determine if alcohol or drugs are in their body if they have been lawfully arrested for suspicion of driving under the influence (DUI). Implied consent laws are in place with the reasoning that driving is a privilege and not a right, and if you refuse to take the test, your driving privilege should be revoked for a serious period of time.

In California, actually, the police officer is supposed to ask you if you want to take a breath test or a blood test; and if a blood test is needed but can’t be taken, it’s also implied you have given your consent for a urine test.

The law says that if you refuse to take the required breath, blood or urine test, your driver’s license will be immediately suspended for one year. If you refuse the test and are later convicted of DUI, there will be a mandatory fine and jail time as well as the penalties for the offense itself. If your refusal happens within 10 years of a separate DUI violation, your license will be suspended for two years; and if it’s within 10 years of two or more other DUIs, the suspension will be three years"

DURRRRRR

Again, that's the most intelligent thing you've belched up all morning...

 

[westwall]

You mean like this?

Dude, just stop. You are a fucking retard. I bolded the critical parts, dumbass.

"When you see those blue and red flashing lights in your rearview mirror and hear the whoop of the police siren, you know the officer is pulling you over. Your heart may be pounding, especially if the scent of alcohol is still on your breath. You just know the officer is going to ask you to take a Breathalyzer test to determine if your body’s blood alcohol concentration (BAC) is above the legal limit. You may wonder if you can refuse to take the test at all. The answer is yes, but be warned that there are immediate consequences to refusing the test in California.


Like many states, California has adopted what are called “implied consent laws,” which make it mandatory for any driver in the state to submit to a test to determine if alcohol or drugs are in their body if they have been lawfully arrested for suspicion of driving under the influence (DUI). Implied consent laws are in place with the reasoning that driving is a privilege and not a right, and if you refuse to take the test, your driving privilege should be revoked for a serious period of time.

In California, actually, the police officer is supposed to ask you if you want to take a breath test or a blood test; and if a blood test is needed but can’t be taken, it’s also implied you have given your consent for a urine test.

The law says that if you refuse to take the required breath, blood or urine test, your driver’s license will be immediately suspended for one year. If you refuse the test and are later convicted of DUI, there will be a mandatory fine and jail time as well as the penalties for the offense itself. If your refusal happens within 10 years of a separate DUI violation, your license will be suspended for two years; and if it’s within 10 years of two or more other DUIs, the suspension will be three years"



Again, that's the most intelligent thing you've belched up all morning...

That is a link to a law firm, and THEIR legal opinion on whether you can refuse a breathalyzer.

I figured you're so obtuse I had to use something you couldn't deny, and yet even when bitch slapped with that you still refused to agree that you were WRONG.

In other words, troll boi.

You are flailing away trying to deflect away from the fact that yiu defended pelousi's drunk driving.

Dumbass.

 

[Canon Shooter]

That is a link to a law firm, and THEIR legal opinion on whether you can refuse a breathalyzer.

I figured you're so obtuse I had to use something you couldn't deny, and yet even when bitch slapped with that you still refused to agree that you were WRONG.

In other words, troll boi.

You are flailing away trying to deflect away from the fact that yiu defended pelousi's drunk driving.

Dumbass.

I marvel at the fact that you can read my explanation and still conclude that I'm defending Pelosi.

You truly are intellectually bankrupt.

Let me put this in the proper perspective for you, scumbag:

I lost my wife to a drunk driver 15 years ago. It was a guy who acted stupidly. He blew a .08; right at the low limit for DUI. He made a bad choice, getting behind the wheel because he believed he could drive, and a horrible price was paid. For years I wanted that fucker dead, and I was more than willing to take care of that myself.

But my anger and my hate almost killed me.

It took me a long time to come to grips with the reality that people just do stupid shit. It doesn't mean they're bad and it doesn't mean they're evil. It means they're stupid, just like Paul Pelosi. Regardless your ignorant claims to the contrary, I don't defend them or the act of driving drunk, but that doesn't mean I have to damn them, either. Unfortunately, in this discussion, that seems to be exactly what you're looking for. You won't get that from me. Not now. You'd have gotten it in 2007, though.

I pray you never get that knock on your door. As big a scumbag as I believe you are, I hope that never happens...