DC Tom Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Nice straw man you stuck out there.So inferring that Lynch was drinking that night from his past behavior on Chippewa is the same as believeing he's the Easter Bunny? Face the facts, "logic" would dictate that Lynch was acting that night on Chippewa as he has other nights, drinking and not tipping. Oh my God...you mean that not only did he run down a woman and leave her for dead, but he doesn't tip???? That's it. What a piece of sh--. I hope Tedy Bruschi takes out his knees, the bastard... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted June 25, 2008 Author Share Posted June 25, 2008 Nice straw man you stuck out there.So inferring that Lynch was drinking that night from his past behavior on Chippewa is the same as believeing he's the Easter Bunny? Face the facts, "logic" would dictate that Lynch was acting that night on Chippewa as he has other nights, drinking and not tipping. LOL! So because Lynch has taken his own alcohol into bars in the past, this means he was "obviously" driving drunk that night, based on inference? Are you for real? If you want to talk about "past behavior," try whipping out something that actually happened, like him having been seen drunk, driving drunk, and/or charged with such. You are so far on the other side of the Lynch apologist side, you're irrational. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 LOL! So because Lynch has taken his own alcohol into bars in the past, this means he was "obviously" driving drunk that night, based on inference? Are you for real? If you want to talk about "past behavior," try whipping out something that actually happened, like him having been seen drunk, driving drunk, and/or charged with such. You are so far on the other side of the Lynch apologist side, you're irrational. In that case I didn't SEE OJ kill Nicole so I guess he's innocent! Look around, drunk driving is running rampant in the NFL. Do you really think Lynch would be at Chippewa at 330 am sober? Chippewa is !@#$ing HORRIBLE when your sober, try it sometime, you won't make it past 11pm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkAF43 Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 In that case I didn't SEE OJ kill Nicole so I guess he's innocent! Look around, drunk driving is running rampant in the NFL. Do you really think Lynch would be at Chippewa at 330 am sober? Chippewa is !@#$ing HORRIBLE when your sober, try it sometime, you won't make it past 11pm. Been there many times and who the hell actually goes down there before 11?????????? oh wait, i know the kind, and it fits you to a T Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Been there many times and who the hell actually goes down there before 11??????????oh wait, i know the kind, and it fits you to a T Who goes down there before eleven? People who can afford to buy more than 5 drinks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Who goes down there before eleven? People who can afford to buy more than 5 drinks. So in other words, you are always drinking and driving when you leave Chippewa? No one goes there not to drink. And you know what it is always like before 11 and after 3:30. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 So in other words, you are always drinking and driving when you leave Chippewa? No one goes there not to drink. Yes but I'm one of the few people whose dexterity and reaction time INCREASES with alcohol consumption! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Yes but I'm one of the few people whose dexterity and reaction time INCREASES with alcohol consumption! I feel much safer now. Thanks. You sure are quick to respond and act drunk while you're posting here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkAF43 Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Yes but I'm one of the few people whose dexterity and reaction time INCREASES with alcohol consumption! with that statement you have confirmed to everyone reading this you are a moron Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted June 25, 2008 Author Share Posted June 25, 2008 In that case I didn't SEE OJ kill Nicole so I guess he's innocent! Look around, drunk driving is running rampant in the NFL. Do you really think Lynch would be at Chippewa at 330 am sober? Chippewa is !@#$ing HORRIBLE when your sober, try it sometime, you won't make it past 11pm. Well then, "everyone cheats on their taxes." Since you haven't said you don't, I'm calling the IRS and reporting you. Have fun with the audit. Oh and OJ had a history of slapping around his first wife Marguerite, as well as Nicole. That's real "past behavior." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 with that statement you have confirmed to everyone reading this you are a moron I've got no comeback for that! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Well then, "everyone cheats on their taxes." Since you haven't said you don't, I'm calling the IRS and reporting you. Have fun with the audit. Oh and OJ had a history of slapping around his first wife Marguerite, as well as Nicole. That's real "past behavior." Was OJ ever found guilty of spousal abuse? Hmmmm, no he pleaded no contest. Was he found guilty of murder? Hmmmm, actually no! And what's with those Goldmans? Why are they trying to suck money out of a man like OJ! It seems as though you've made a judgement on OJ based on about the same information I'm using to judge Lynch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Do you really think Lynch would be at Chippewa at 330 am sober? So since you're spending your time making assumptions and using them as fact, we can assume the women that was hit was drunk, too, right? I mean, do you really think that chick would be at Chippewa at 3:30 a.m. sober? In fact, EVERYONE at Chippewa at 3:30 a.m. must be hammered. So how can we trust any of the eyewitnesses? In fact, based on your flawless reasoning, it's pretty clear that Lynch is likely not at fault at ALL. Genius. Sheer genius. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 So since you're spending your time making assumptions and using them as fact, we can assume the women that was hit was drunk, too, right? I mean, do you really think that chick would be at Chippewa at 3:30 a.m. sober? In fact, EVERYONE at Chippewa at 3:30 a.m. must be hammered. So how can we trust any of the eyewitnesses? In fact, based on your flawless reasoning, it's pretty clear that Lynch is likely not at fault at ALL. Genius. Sheer genius. I'm sure she was drunk, but you cannot dispute the physical evidence!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted June 25, 2008 Author Share Posted June 25, 2008 Was OJ ever found guilty of spousal abuse? Hmmmm, no he pleaded no contest. Was he found guilty of murder? Hmmmm, actually no! And what's with those Goldmans? Why are they trying to suck money out of a man like OJ! It seems as though you've made a judgement on OJ based on about the same information I'm using to judge Lynch. OJ is guilty. And he had a habit of slapping around his wives and there was photographic evidence of it. Just because we never heard about it beforehand doesn't mean it didn't happen. Without any evidence that Lynch gets drunk, much less drives while drunk, it's nothing but supposition. But it was a different era back then. Do you think that alcohol and DUI's have suddenly become an epidemic in the NFL? Like players just discovered alcohol? Nope, this stuff was covered-up pretty well back in the day. With the internet and personal recording devices though, little is allowed to escape the public eye. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 I'm sure she was drunk, but you cannot dispute the physical evidence!!!!! But if everyone is drunk, then who can be trusted to prove that whatever physical evidence you're dreaming about actually took place at that particular place and time. No one. Why? Because you're not on Chippewa at 3:30 unless you're drunk. The judgement of drunk people is impaired. What they see is not credible. Ergo, Lynch should be free. FREE LYNCH!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VOR Posted June 25, 2008 Author Share Posted June 25, 2008 So since you're spending your time making assumptions and using them as fact, we can assume the women that was hit was drunk, too, right? I mean, do you really think that chick would be at Chippewa at 3:30 a.m. sober? In fact, EVERYONE at Chippewa at 3:30 a.m. must be hammered. So how can we trust any of the eyewitnesses? In fact, based on your flawless reasoning, it's pretty clear that Lynch is likely not at fault at ALL. Genius. Sheer genius. Given she hit the side of the car, it's possible she wasn't in the path of the car, but fell into it because she was so drunk. Which would make it more a case of "stumble into and run." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 But if everyone is drunk, then who can be trusted to prove that whatever physical evidence you're dreaming about actually took place at that particular place and time. No one. Why? Because you're not on Chippewa at 3:30 unless you're drunk. The judgement of drunk people is impaired. What they see is not credible. Ergo, Lynch should be free. FREE LYNCH!!! So I'm dreaming of the damage to Lynch's SUV and the woman's injuries? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elegantelliotoffen Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 Given she hit the side of the car, it's possible she wasn't in the path of the car, but fell into it because she was so drunk. Which would make it more a case of "stumble into and run." I see that you deleted your response to my OJ Simpson post, I assume because it completely contradicted your stance on Lynch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted June 25, 2008 Share Posted June 25, 2008 So I'm dreaming of the damage to Lynch's SUV and the woman's injuries? No, but prove that it took place that night on Chippewa. You can't. Why? Because according to you, everyone was !@#$ing hammered, which removes any chance that they are credible witnesses. No witnesses, no case. Hakuna Retatta, BF. You're genius shines through like an elbow macaroni shines through the water its been boiling in for the past 90 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts