Here is the post again:<quoted text>
WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! I had my fingers crossed!
WAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH! fingers crossed!
~stomp stomp stomp~
No one person thought you would keep your word.
Britished out of a bet.
"You either cite your sources like an adult, or don't and show to all the world that you are a dishonest, spineless, lying coward who never cites his sources, then lies about their origin when backed into a corner.
I am not going to stop posting just because an immature manchild wants me to. This is like my four year-old cousin saying she will only eat her peas if she gets ice cream for dessert.
You, without doubt, have the mentality of a four year-old. That is very, very sad. "
Where is the agreement, manchild?
Like the one I made about a Facebook link being the Encyclo-<quoted text>
I'd bet you double or nothing, SuperFAG, but- well, you British your way out of bets you make here.
- whoops, that was the bet -you- welshed out from.
Nope, as per usual you cherry-picked, ignored the rest, and tried desperately to change the question that I asked you.<quoted text>
I've already quoted exactly the whole thing, parts, and applicable parts.
Wipe your chin.
Now go away.
Then you made up a story about a bet.
Now, because you have no arguments about Britain being a monarchy, you persist with this strawman.
Do you so happen to be a creationist?
I forgot that people do not have to back up their claims if their name is Barefoot and have the mental age of six year-olds. The golden rule of internet debate.<quoted text>
You keep thinking that you get to make demands.
The world still awaits for the quote where I agreed to a bet.<quoted text>
All I have to do is quote you- which I did, and pull down your pants and kick you in your grapes.
Done and done.
I proved you wrong.
The world is also waiting for you to define democracy...
... and explain why things within an umbrella term are the same...
... and why things can only be defined by one word...
... and what the Weimar Republic was if it was not a democracy...
... and why you cannot admit that universities do indeed give out politics degrees...
... and why for a supposedly powerful monarchy, Parliament has not had a bill refused by the royals in over 300 years...
... and why a Constitutional monarchy "is a monarchy", but absolute and electives are "kinds"...
... and why a Constitutional monarchy requires one physical Constitution to be defined as such...
... and why, quite simply, everybody and everything else - academia, history, reality - simply ridicules your inane argument about Britain not being a democracy.
For a guy who stresses the importance of quotes and pasting as many source as he can, it sure is funny how you never really seem to answer anything.
So says the manchild who calls his opponents fags and can only argue against strawmen.<quoted text>
I don't have to make you admit you are wrong- you are a conceited, fimicolous git.