Tam said:
Then address it to john doe,who said anything about registering a letter anyway,you are not talking enough money to worry about registering it. Is this your way of trying to provide another cheap escape path for sh,makes no difference nobody expected he would pay any way................good luck PS damn welching prarie dog,now I have to change my profile signature again
HAY MAKER said:Tam said:
Then address it to john doe,who said anything about registering a letter anyway,you are not talking enough money to worry about registering it. Is this your way of trying to provide another cheap escape path for sh,makes no difference nobody expected he would pay any way................good luck PS damn welching prarie dog,now I have to change my profile signature again
It doesn't matter how much money is involved. If I were SH I would demand to send it registered mail as how is he to prove he paid his debt? If Sandhusker has to sign for it his signature will prove he recieved the cheque.
Tam said:HAY MAKER said:Tam said:
Then address it to john doe,who said anything about registering a letter anyway,you are not talking enough money to worry about registering it. Is this your way of trying to provide another cheap escape path for sh,makes no difference nobody expected he would pay any way................good luck PS damn welching prarie dog,now I have to change my profile signature again
It doesn't matter how much money is involved. If I were SH I would demand to send it registered mail as how is he to prove he paid his debt? If Sandhusker has to sign for it his signature will prove he recieved the cheque.
His returned check will be plenty proof,makes no difference he aint gonna pay anyway,and this will be my last post on this topic................good luck
Sandhusker
Well-known member
Tam, if SH wants to be white and settle the debt he has admitted to owing, he will find a way. (Actually, everything he needs to settle it has been provided.) If he wants to be a welcher, he will find a way to do that as well. None of us can make him do anything. I'm not going to lose any sleep either way. Folks new to this board are getting a good insight to his charachter. Those of us who have been here for a while are getting a refresher.
I don't understand why you choose to side with him. Review the sordid happenings;
1) He made a big crock and bull statement he couldn't back up. (was that lying or deception?)
2) When called on it, he first tried to claim he didn't have to back his statements, even though he continually demands that of others. (healthy dose of hypocracy)
3) He tried to get out of it by proposing a bet he didn't think I'd take. (truth avoidance)
4) He tried to weasel by claiming that Tyson/Cargill meant Tyson OR Cargill - even though the comment that hung him was a response to Kaiser who clearly was talking about Tyson and Cargill both. (back-peddaling)
5) He then offered as "proof" total beef division numbers and slaugher capacity numbers - and not a dang thing on the financials of the three individual plants. (blatant attempt at BSing)
6) With Agman's comments, he realized he was helplessly treed, but then claimed it was only because he didn't disagree to my suggestion of using 2004 (poor comedian)
7) Now he won't pay in the manner I told him I wanted paid when he proposed his stupid bet. SH makes a big production that he only lost because he didn't disagree to using year 2004, but did he disagree to me getting paid via a check made out to R-CALF? (selective reasoning and memory.)
8) He has my mailing address (which he posted for all - no class) and needs nothing else. (welcher grande)
And this is the individual you choose to side with?
I've had about enough of this. Guess we'll all see what happens.
I don't understand why you choose to side with him. Review the sordid happenings;
1) He made a big crock and bull statement he couldn't back up. (was that lying or deception?)
2) When called on it, he first tried to claim he didn't have to back his statements, even though he continually demands that of others. (healthy dose of hypocracy)
3) He tried to get out of it by proposing a bet he didn't think I'd take. (truth avoidance)
4) He tried to weasel by claiming that Tyson/Cargill meant Tyson OR Cargill - even though the comment that hung him was a response to Kaiser who clearly was talking about Tyson and Cargill both. (back-peddaling)
5) He then offered as "proof" total beef division numbers and slaugher capacity numbers - and not a dang thing on the financials of the three individual plants. (blatant attempt at BSing)
6) With Agman's comments, he realized he was helplessly treed, but then claimed it was only because he didn't disagree to my suggestion of using 2004 (poor comedian)
7) Now he won't pay in the manner I told him I wanted paid when he proposed his stupid bet. SH makes a big production that he only lost because he didn't disagree to using year 2004, but did he disagree to me getting paid via a check made out to R-CALF? (selective reasoning and memory.)
8) He has my mailing address (which he posted for all - no class) and needs nothing else. (welcher grande)
And this is the individual you choose to side with?
I've had about enough of this. Guess we'll all see what happens.
A
Anonymous
Guest
What I said was the truth. You have not proven otherwise and you won't. I am far more convinced now than when I first made the bet.
Sandman accuses me of lying after he just said (paraphrasing), "around here when someone who calls someone a liar, they better be able to back it up". Classic "do as I say not as I do" hypocrisy. He didn't bring anything to back his allegation that what I said was a lie yet he demands that of others. He actually lied about me lying because he knew he couldn't prove that I lied. That's the type of coward he is. He was banking on me not being able to prove that I didn't lie.
Sandman's entire MO is to challenge everyone to back any position that he doesn't agree with. That was the entire basis for this bet. I made a statement that he didn't agree with so he challenges me to defend it by calling me a liar instead of proving me wrong. He's the "master illusionist". If he can create the illusion of someone else being wrong with his challenges, it's much easier than having to prove them wrong. Not once has he ever provided contradicting facts to my position in support of his own.
"YOU PULLED THAT OUT OF YOUR BUTT", that's more to his style. Consider that he dedicated an entire post to presenting false information then when corrected on it, he presents false information that Creekstone doesn't buy cattle in the cash market in his false information post. LOL! That's the level of hypocrisy we are dealing with here.
I'll challenge anyone to show me where Sandman presented anything to back his position on this issue regarding the Lakeside, Boise and Pasco plants. Just one supporting fact to back his position. I just listed the 12 points I brought to the debate, none of which he contradicted. He brought nothing but a spineless accusation that I lied.
He debated for days about Pickett without once ever presenting anything to support his position from the standpoint of evidence presented in court. Sandman is a monday morning quarterback extraordinaire.
Hell, he didn't even have a position on this issue. His position was simply questioning my position. Which is exactly why he doesn't want anyone to know who he is. He wants to collect the money on a bet he contributed absolutely nothing to but a spineless challenge without having to leave his name.
SANDMAN NEVER EVEN PROVED ME WRONG, I PROVED MYSELF WRONG! Now he's going to collect $100 on that without batting an eye. He'll get it too. Having something on me means that much to him for good reason.
What more proof does anyone need of the kind of person we are dealing with here?
Hahaha. That makes a lot of sense. I said if I was going to do the research to have to back every chickensh*t challenge Sandman makes it was going to be worth my time. He won the bet without proving me wrong on a single point. WHAT A COUNTRY! I proved myself wrong by agreeing to calendar year 2004.
Anyone can look back to the original bet where I said Tyson and/or Cargill. Anyone can look back and see where you specified Tyson.
The only thing that hung me was my committment to calendar year 2004 and my willingness to admit that I was wrong on that.
You proved me wrong on nothing and you won't!
Sandman was too much of a coward to make a phone call to the Tyson office to confirm my position. That's all it would have taken but he couldn't handle the truth. He was only betting on the fact that I couldn't get a plant breakdown on costs when I didn't need it to prove my point.
Which is an absolute fact.
Sandman doesn't want the world to know who the spineless coward is that is collecting $100 on a bet he provided nothing to but a lie that I lied and now he thinks he's going to tell me how I am to deliver the cash. LOL! The guy's funny you have to give him that.
He likes this because he can create an "illusion" of my welching which is worth the $100 to him because he's that desperate at this point to discredit me. The truth of the matter is that he's too big of a coward to leave his name.
How many Husker fan bankers are there in Cody, NE that drive a little blue pickup and support R-CULT (RS?) ?
How long did you really think it was going to take me to find out your name?
I'll tell you what, you send me your entire name PM and I will send you the cash in a certified letter and you have my word that I will not reveal your full name. I'll let you continue to hide behind your alias because I know that's important to you right now and I understand why.
If you don't send me your entire name PM in the next week, I'll find out who you are FOR SURE and I'll deliver the cash in person because I really want to see you look me in the eye and call me a liar and then I'll put your entire name on the forum.
It's your choice.
Either way, I am going to find out for sure who you are and you're going to get paid because I'm not going to have anyone saying that I welched on a bet.
~SH~
Sandhusker said:MRJ said:
MRJ, I guess this "R-CALF apologist" needs to point out that the original comment that got SH in trouble was a reply to Kaiser's comment that included Tyson AND Cargill. I knew he was joshing because Cargill's numbers are private and not available to the public - he wouldn't know if they made money or not. I let him off on the Cargill issue as that was a fish in a barrel.
I'm not surprised a NCBA member forgot how it all started, since NCBA forgot their original stance on COOL and their 11 point directive. :wink:
Right back at ya!
And even with your usual lack of accuracy! NCBA members decided it was time to support opening the border after the terms in the "points" were achieved to our satisfaction. If you disagree with that, I'm sorry, but at least keep the facts straight.
Re. your "bet" with SH.....and the fine points thereof......that stuff was so boring and repititious I will freely admit to not reading every post. Parsing words, terms, or ideas in order to set little traps for people is just too "Clintonian" for me to enjoy or to learn from the reading of.
MRJ
Sandhusker
Well-known member
Why do I have to prove you wrong? The bet YOU proposed put the burdon of proof on you!
Here's another laugher; You say, "What I said was the truth. You have not proven otherwise and you won't. I am far more convinced now than when I first made the bet." Then you say, "SANDMAN NEVER EVEN PROVED ME WRONG, I PROVED MYSELF WRONG!" Hmmmm, you are convinced you said the truth, but yet you proved youself wrong? How many personalities to you have? :lol:
You think I'm scared to let you know my name? :roll: Stop working yourself into a tizzy about it. Half of your neighbors probably know me - ask them. Pick up a phone book - won't take long to sort it out. You don't need to go thru the expense of a certified letter. You know my name and address - simply send a $100 check made out to R-CALF and I'll let everybody here know you came thru.
Come to think of it, you had a chance to meet me last summer. You were with Soapweed and he was going to introduce you to me, but you asked him not to. Were you afraid I was going to take you down and sit on you? :wink: :lol:
When you deliver the cash in person, are you going to look me in the eye and call me a pathetic deceiver, clone, blamer, master illusionest, (am I forgetting anything)?
Here's another laugher; You say, "What I said was the truth. You have not proven otherwise and you won't. I am far more convinced now than when I first made the bet." Then you say, "SANDMAN NEVER EVEN PROVED ME WRONG, I PROVED MYSELF WRONG!" Hmmmm, you are convinced you said the truth, but yet you proved youself wrong? How many personalities to you have? :lol:
You think I'm scared to let you know my name? :roll: Stop working yourself into a tizzy about it. Half of your neighbors probably know me - ask them. Pick up a phone book - won't take long to sort it out. You don't need to go thru the expense of a certified letter. You know my name and address - simply send a $100 check made out to R-CALF and I'll let everybody here know you came thru.
Come to think of it, you had a chance to meet me last summer. You were with Soapweed and he was going to introduce you to me, but you asked him not to. Were you afraid I was going to take you down and sit on you? :wink: :lol:
When you deliver the cash in person, are you going to look me in the eye and call me a pathetic deceiver, clone, blamer, master illusionest, (am I forgetting anything)?
To which you replied
Now the bet was from him to You so why shouldn't SH have the right to know who you are? You are the one that made the bet not R-CALF, you were the one interested in his money not R-CALF. So it you want the cash tell him your name.
He said
I have done some of my own research and I believe this to be true. You and Randy say it is a crock so prove it or is SH the only one that has to prove anything around here?
You are demanding he prove himself while you accuse him of lieing. He made the statement but you brought nothing to prove him wrong. Where is yours and Randys proof. I was taught in US High School that if you want to debate you have to have facts on both sides so where are yours. I can't judge who won if I don't know your facts (opinions don't count in a true debate.)
How could he get out of it if you took him up on it? I think he knew he had the information to prove the original bet and that is why he made it, but you changed the bet to fit your narrow wishes. That proved to be his down fall which he openly admits to. But where is your proof he is not telling the truth, again you have nothing but OPINIONS?
The original bet was
To which you responsed
to which SH responsed
to which you response was
Now I don't know but it looks like you agreed to the Tyson only when you made the statement "this is simple. How much money did the Tyson plants located in the NW US lose - how much did the Tyson plants located in Canada make during the same time frame." And again you claimed SH is lieing where is your proof.
All I see here is accusations of what SH didn't do but no proof to what you claim is true where are the financials of those three plants to prove he was wrong. Whats wrong Sandhusker can't you get your hands on them either.
What is comicial is how you will take Agman's word to prove SH is treed but any other time Agman doesn't know what he is talking about according to you. Besides didn't Agman say if the time frame was the original time frame of the bet (whole time the border was closed) SH would be right and you would be wrong. The only reason you didn't lose is because SH allowed the change in the time frame. I still don't think of this as a win to you though as you PROVED NOTHING. Where are your facts to prove the US plants didn't lose as much as the Canadian plant made?
You are claiming he is making a big production out of it, what about the production you are making out of giving him your name so he can pay you. The original bet was between you and him, not him and R-CALF. He said "$100 from me to you." To which you response was I'm interested in your money. So if you are so interested in his money tell him who you are so he can send it to YOU. R-CALF wasn't the one that took the bet YOU WERE. Besides again as to the original bet you were interested in, the time frame was "During the period of time when the Canadian border was closed to live cattle exports to the U.S." You narrowed the field to cover just 2004. Then Randy who was a part of the bet put "let's go from Sept. 30, 2003 to July 15, 2005." That no body agreed or disagreed to so what was the really time frame here. And where is your's and Randy's proof SH was lieing I see no proof from either of you.
First of all if you wanted this to be a private bet you should have kept it that way. You bought the rest of us into this sorted affair when we witnessed you negotiating the terms of his original bet on the public forum. Now if he requested you name so he could prove he is not welching on the bet, we should also witness that so we know he did pay his debt and to who. You were the party involved in the bet not R-CALF and he said the money was from him to you. Why are you protesting so must aren't you as interested in SH's money as you were now that you have to give your real name to get it?
Again Sandhusker where is your proof he is not telling the truth? I was taught in school that to have a true winner in a debate both sides have to present their facts, the facts are debated and the one with stronger case wins. If the opposing side has no facts then the winner is declared by default for the reason the loser didn't present his case. Which in this case you are the loser of this debate as you still haven't presented any facts. The way I see it SH owes you nothing as you clearing lost for lack of evidence. But when has a lack of evidence ever mattered to an R-CALFer. :roll:
And I guess we will have to way and see if you ever bring anything to the debate that can truly be debated (in a true debate opinions don't count).
Sandhusker
Well-known member
Where is the proof that he isn't telling the truth? Tam, the bet was that he could prove his statement. Did he? NO. What else do you need?
I proposed we use year 2004 for simplicity purposes. Companies post results in quarters and fiscal years, and they are generally calendar years. If we didn't use a year, quarter, or series of quarters for the time frame of the bet, there would be no financial information available to decide who was correct!
You want to talk opinions? Not long ago, your buddy SH (incorretly) tried to say that Tyson can't break out their financials from individual plants. If he believes that, how could he state that two plants lost more than another made? For him to honestly make that statement, wouldn't Tyson have to break out the individual plants, and then he know what that breakout was?
BTW, SH knows who I am.
I proposed we use year 2004 for simplicity purposes. Companies post results in quarters and fiscal years, and they are generally calendar years. If we didn't use a year, quarter, or series of quarters for the time frame of the bet, there would be no financial information available to decide who was correct!
You want to talk opinions? Not long ago, your buddy SH (incorretly) tried to say that Tyson can't break out their financials from individual plants. If he believes that, how could he state that two plants lost more than another made? For him to honestly make that statement, wouldn't Tyson have to break out the individual plants, and then he know what that breakout was?
BTW, SH knows who I am.
sandhusker,why go back & forth with this moron piece of sh##,nothing he would like better than to drag this out 3 or 4 years,like you said he has every thing he needs to do the right thing.
Who knows you may get lucky enough to meet him.............good luck
Who knows you may get lucky enough to meet him.............good luck
You both proved a point. In the time frame chosen, Sandhusker won. If the bet had been with the other time frame, I believe SH would have won. There are good winners & good losers. I don't believe we have seen either here yet!
Sandhusker, A while back there were names and addresses of ranchers who had fires, or another uncontrollable disaster in their life. Donations were being sent. As you said you were going to donate this money, why not use it to help another rancher directly by sending the check to one of these victims. It is yours to do with as you wish & this is just a suggestion. This nonsense has to end somewhere & that would be a great start.
"Self-respect cannot be hunted. It cannot be purchased. It is never for sale. It cannot be fabricated out of public relations. It comes to us when we are alone, in quiet moments, in quiet places, when we suddenly realize that, knowing the good, we have done it; knowing the beautiful, we have served it; knowing the truth, we have spoken it." WG president, Yale university.
It is said that "every man is a damn fool for at least five minutes every day; wisdom consists in not exceeding the limit!"
I may have just exceeded mine! LOL!
Sandhusker, A while back there were names and addresses of ranchers who had fires, or another uncontrollable disaster in their life. Donations were being sent. As you said you were going to donate this money, why not use it to help another rancher directly by sending the check to one of these victims. It is yours to do with as you wish & this is just a suggestion. This nonsense has to end somewhere & that would be a great start.
"Self-respect cannot be hunted. It cannot be purchased. It is never for sale. It cannot be fabricated out of public relations. It comes to us when we are alone, in quiet moments, in quiet places, when we suddenly realize that, knowing the good, we have done it; knowing the beautiful, we have served it; knowing the truth, we have spoken it." WG president, Yale university.
It is said that "every man is a damn fool for at least five minutes every day; wisdom consists in not exceeding the limit!"
I may have just exceeded mine! LOL!
Sandhusker
Well-known member
Fedup, I am going to send it to a place that is trying to help EVERY rancher in the US: R-CALF.
A
Anonymous
Guest
It's very simple. You said I lied. The burden of proof was on you to prove that I lied. Did you? Of course not because you never proove anything. You accused me of lying then wanted me to prove that I didn't lie. This totally defines who you are.
You said around Cody if someone calls someone a liar they better be able to back it up. Well did you? Of course you didn't! You don't live by the standards you set for others.
Another nice little deceptive spin job.
What you called a lie was the truth. What you called a lie was for the entire period of time when the border was closed. What I proved myself wrong on was only during calendar year 2004 which is the time period I thought the bet was for.
You knew exactly what I meant but you insist on playing your deceptive little games like this thinking you're so cute.
You tell me? I don't know what your hangup is. On one hand you say I can figure out who you are yet you won't give out your name. Doesn't make sense but then you never have. Like I said, I can't send cash to an alias and there is no way in hell R-CULT is getting any money from me so what seems to be the holdup?
I don't think you want anyone here to know who you are and I can certainly understand that considering your arrogance of calling me a liar with nothing to back it.
You think you're so cute don't you? I already told you that R-CALF will never receive a check from me, EVER. I meant it. You will get cash [edit - unless you decide to change the terms of the bet back to my original statement instead of calendar year 2004.].
I had no desire to meet you. I have nothing in common with someone who will knowingly support lies and deception.
If you want me to I sure can. No, I just planned to hand you the money and ask you to call me a liar to my face. Since you claim I know who you are, that won't be necessary.
Wait a minute, are you saying the bet was that I had to prove my statement and not within calendar year 2004? Either the bet was for the entire period of time when the border was closed or it was for calendar year 2004. I was under the impression that it was for calendar year 2004. My statement referred to the entire period of time when the border was closed. NOW WHICH WAY IS IT?????
You keep changing your story.
I thought the bet was that Tyson's Boise and Pasco plants lost more than Tyson's Lakeside plant IN CALENDAR YEAR 2004. If the bet in your mind was that I could prove my statement, then I don't owe you a damn dime. You better decide what the bet was Sandman if you want your $100.
Hahaha! Still playing games huh?
Folks, this is a damn lie! Sandhusker is just trying to set a trap but somebody ran over his trap. I read motive into every statement you make now. I'm on to your deceptive ways.
You wonder why I didn't have any desire to meet you?
I wasn't sure. A friend from Longvalley thought he knew who you were and I didn't want to drag Soap into the middle of this so I didn't ask him. Soap may have said your name but I had forgot. Give me the correct spelling via PM and I'll honor your desire to remain anonymous. On the other hand, if you are convinced that the bet was in regards to my statement which referred to the entire period of time when the border was closed and not calendar year 2004 as you stated above, your name won't be necessary.
You need to decide what the bet was.
~SH~
Sandhusker
Well-known member
Quote:
Sandman: "Not long ago, your buddy SH (incorretly) tried to say that Tyson can't break out their financials from individual plants."
SH, "Hahaha! Still playing games huh? Folks, this is a damn lie! Sandhusker is just trying to set a trap but somebody ran over his trap. I read motive into every statement you make now. I'm on to your deceptive ways."
As much as I hate to, I'm going to have to retract that statement and apologize to you, SH. I looked back in the archives to prove you wrong and ended up proving myself wrong. Following is what I was thnking of;
SH, "Agman presented Tyson's profit figures but there is no breakdown between Canadian and U.S. plants but why would there need to be? Tyson's total profits in their beef plants is what really matters to Tyson."
My reply, "That's rediculous. Not only does Tyson break out Canadian beef operations from US operations, they break out each individual plant and could even tell you information on different shifts."
As if you didn't know, my name is Randy A. Schneider. I'm 6'0", 184 lbs., blue eyes, was brown now mostly grey hair. My fantasies include selling $10,000 show steers and running a 4.7 40 again. My goals are cattlemen uniting to fight for their own profitability and recognizing the packer's agenda is not the best for them. I would also like to perfect a prime rib in my smoker. Do you need any more information?
Sandman: "Not long ago, your buddy SH (incorretly) tried to say that Tyson can't break out their financials from individual plants."
SH, "Hahaha! Still playing games huh? Folks, this is a damn lie! Sandhusker is just trying to set a trap but somebody ran over his trap. I read motive into every statement you make now. I'm on to your deceptive ways."
As much as I hate to, I'm going to have to retract that statement and apologize to you, SH. I looked back in the archives to prove you wrong and ended up proving myself wrong. Following is what I was thnking of;
SH, "Agman presented Tyson's profit figures but there is no breakdown between Canadian and U.S. plants but why would there need to be? Tyson's total profits in their beef plants is what really matters to Tyson."
My reply, "That's rediculous. Not only does Tyson break out Canadian beef operations from US operations, they break out each individual plant and could even tell you information on different shifts."
As if you didn't know, my name is Randy A. Schneider. I'm 6'0", 184 lbs., blue eyes, was brown now mostly grey hair. My fantasies include selling $10,000 show steers and running a 4.7 40 again. My goals are cattlemen uniting to fight for their own profitability and recognizing the packer's agenda is not the best for them. I would also like to perfect a prime rib in my smoker. Do you need any more information?
A
Anonymous
Guest
No problem! Apology accepted!
I'll get your cash in the mail ASAP!
~SH~
Whew, I'm glad that's settled. I was beginning to think that we were going to have to auction something off (maybe a bottle of Canadian Whiskey) and send you both a cheque (from Haymaker, for being high bid), so we could move onto something different!
~SH~ said:
Sandhusker
Just wondering SH what was the bet? :? Were you to prove your original statement that the US plants lost more than the Canadian plants made during th duration of the border being closed or were you to prove what Randy and the other Randy negotiated which was during 2004 or was it Sept 2003 to July 2005. Better find out just what the bet was before you send Him the money. :wink:
Tommy
Well-known member
Tam...Just wondering SH what was the bet? Were you to prove your original statement that the US plants lost more than the Canadian plants made during th duration of the border being closed or were you to prove what Randy and the other Randy negotiated which was during 2004 or was it Sept 2003 to July 2005. Better find out just what the bet was before you send Him the money.
Tam do honestly think Scott would have admitted he was wrong and that he lost the bet unless he really was wrong?
Get real!!
Tam do honestly think Scott would have admitted he was wrong and that he lost the bet unless he really was wrong?
Get real!!