Catch and Release

[rw]

Just when you thought it couldn't get more ****ed up:

BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraqi security forces caught the most wanted man
in the country last year, but released him because they didn't know who
he was, the Iraqi deputy minister of interior said Thursday.

Hussain Kamal confirmed that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi -- the al Qaeda in
Iraq leader who has a $25 million bounty on his head -- was in custody
at some point last year but he wouldn't provide further details.

A U.S. official couldn't confirm the report, but said he wouldn't
dismiss it.

"It is plausible," he said.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

[Frank Church]

rw > wrote in news:43a2449c$0$28489
:

> Just when you thought it couldn't get more ****ed up:
>
> BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraqi security forces caught the most wanted man
> in the country last year, but released him because they didn't know who
> he was, the Iraqi deputy minister of interior said Thursday.
....snip...


.....and this is the best you can do after what took place yesterday in
Iraq? What a ****ing putz!

Frank Sr.

[[email protected]]

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 13:18:25 GMT, Frank Church
> wrote:

>rw > wrote in news:43a2449c$0$28489
:
>
>> Just when you thought it couldn't get more ****ed up:
>>
>> BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraqi security forces caught the most wanted man
>> in the country last year, but released him because they didn't know who
>> he was, the Iraqi deputy minister of interior said Thursday.
>...snip...
>
>
>....and this is the best you can do after what took place yesterday in
>Iraq? What a ****ing putz!
>
>Frank Sr.

Aw, he's just in a snit because his boy Billy hisownself passed on a
gift-wrapped bin Laden...

And today folks, the ROFFian Little Theater presents a selected snippet
from "Omar and Elvis: Together Again"

SCENE - The White House, Oval Office, late 1990s, two men lying around
on couches in their underwear while porn plays largely unnoticed on a
big screen on the wall. Empty chicken buckets and Big Mac cartons are
strewn about.

al-Bashir: "He is very bad man, Elvis...very bad man..."

Clinton: "Aw, Omar, I don't have time to mess with that...Hillary is
raggin', Monica is raggin', Gennifer is raggin', and now, Chelsea is
raggin,' for Crissake...I'm goin' to Hooters for some wings..."

al-Bashir: "But Elvis, we deliver...and not just him - with two, you get
extra kissra...I make you real deal - just tip boy well..."

Clinton: "Man, Omar, I just don't feel like dealin' with it...go bother
Berger or something, will ya...Hooters, here I come..."

al-Bashir: "Aw, **** it...let's go get some American poon..."

Clinton "Now yer talkin' sense....ya want another cigar?"

An-n-n-n-d SCENE....

[Ken Fortenberry]

wrote:
> Frank Church wrote:
>>rw > wrote:
>>>Just when you thought it couldn't get more ****ed up:
>>
>>....and this is the best you can do ...
>
> Aw, he's just in a snit because his boy Billy hisownself ...

****in' hilarious. The right-wingers all have the same
whine when you pull their strings, It's Clinton's fault.

--
Ken Fortenberry

[[email protected]]

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 14:46:31 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
> wrote:

wrote:
>> Frank Church wrote:
>>>rw > wrote:
>>>>Just when you thought it couldn't get more ****ed up:
>>>
>>>....and this is the best you can do ...
>>
>> Aw, he's just in a snit because his boy Billy hisownself ...
>
>****in' hilarious. The right-wingers all have the same
>whine when you pull their strings, It's Clinton's fault.

****in' hilarious. The left-wingers all have the same whine when you
pull their strings, "The right-wingers all have the same whine when you
pull their strings, It's Clinton's fault."

Fa-la-la-la-la, la-la-la-L-A-A-A-A-A....,
R

[Wayne Knight]

wrote:

>
> ****in' hilarious. The left-wingers all have the same whine when you
> pull their strings, "The right-wingers all have the same whine when you
> pull their strings, It's Clinton's fault."
>
> Fa-la-la-la-la, la-la-la-L-A-A-A-A-A....,

Well technically you did bring it up. Funny I've never heard you
mention Reagan arming and help to train those bozos in the first place.
Besides Bin Laden has to do with Afghanistan, not Iraq.

[[email protected]]

On Thu, 15 Dec 2005 21:46:55 -0700, rw >
wrote:

>Just when you thought it couldn't get more ****ed up:
>
>BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraqi security forces caught the most wanted man
>in the country last year, but released him because they didn't know who
>he was, the Iraqi deputy minister of interior said Thursday.
>
>Hussain Kamal confirmed that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi -- the al Qaeda in
>Iraq leader who has a $25 million bounty on his head -- was in custody
>at some point last year but he wouldn't provide further details.
>
>A U.S. official couldn't confirm the report, but said he wouldn't
>dismiss it.
>
>"It is plausible," he said.

O-o-o-o-h...Catch _AND_ Release...thank the good Lord you straightened
out all the confusion...

[[email protected]]

On 16 Dec 2005 07:03:33 -0800, "Wayne Knight" >
wrote:

>
wrote:
>
>>
>> ****in' hilarious. The left-wingers all have the same whine when you
>> pull their strings, "The right-wingers all have the same whine when you
>> pull their strings, It's Clinton's fault."
>>
>> Fa-la-la-la-la, la-la-la-L-A-A-A-A-A....,
>
>Well technically you did bring it up. Funny I've never heard you
>mention Reagan arming and help to train those bozos in the first place.
>Besides Bin Laden has to do with Afghanistan, not Iraq.

Oh, yeah? Well, Harrison (William Henry, not wayno) sold guns and
rotgut to the Indians..well, wait - wayno may well have done so, too,
but if so, that's beside the point at hand...IAC, which in a series of
events, helped cause the US Civi...er, War of Northern Aggression...

Deck the malls with bowls of money,
R

[rw]

Frank Church wrote:
> rw > wrote in news:43a2449c$0$28489
> :
>
>
>>Just when you thought it couldn't get more ****ed up:
>>
>>BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraqi security forces caught the most wanted man
>>in the country last year, but released him because they didn't know who
>>he was, the Iraqi deputy minister of interior said Thursday.
>
> ...snip...
>
>
> ....and this is the best you can do after what took place yesterday in
> Iraq? What a ****ing putz!
>
> Frank Sr.

What happened yesterday? Did they find the WMDs?

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

[Wayne Knight]

wrote:
>
> Oh, yeah? Well, Harrison...[snip]the US Civi...er, War of Northern Aggression...
>

The Civil War, Harrison's and Clinton administrations are history, get
over it. The current issues happened on someone else's watch.

> Deck the malls with bowls of money,

They still have malls in southern MS? The Red Cross must have found
somewhere to invest their billions.

[Scott Seidman]

rw > wrote in news:43a2e120$0$28458
:

> What happened yesterday? Did they find the WMDs?
>

Yesterday began the process by which the US can cut and run-- oops, I
meant "the process by which the Iraqis stood up so the US could stand down"



--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

[rw]

Scott Seidman wrote:
> rw > wrote in news:43a2e120$0$28458
> :
>
>
>>What happened yesterday? Did they find the WMDs?
>>
>
>
> Yesterday began the process by which the US can cut and run-- oops, I
> meant "the process by which the Iraqis stood up so the US could stand down"

Oh, Frank was referring to the election! Of course! How stupid of me to
forget about that. Now the insurgency will end and Iraq will become a
beacon of freedom and peace in the Middle East. The Shiites and the
Kurds and the Sunni will put aside their little differences and create a
secular democracy, without interference from Iran. And, most
importantly, we can get the **** out of the country that we never should
have invaded to begin with. I just have one question, though. When do we
get our half-trillion dollars back?

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

[Tom Nakashima]

>> Deck the malls with bowls of money,
>

Just a thought; if you put "T H E" and the " I. R. S." together it spells:

T H E I R S
-tom

[[email protected]]

On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 09:50:35 -0800, "Tom Nakashima"
> wrote:

>>> Deck the malls with bowls of money,
>>
>
>Just a thought; if you put "T H E" and the " I. R. S." together it spells:
>
> T H E I R S
>-tom
>

And have you heard about the new incarnation of Windows? They're taken
what they've learned from CE, ME, and NT...yeah, uh-huh, I know what
you're thinking...nope...

....it's code name is BLU-NIX...(see their website for the goofy geek
pronunciation - it's "blauz-NERKSES" or something, and they are touchy
about it...)

TC,
R

[Tom Nakashima]

> wrote in message
...
> On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 09:50:35 -0800, "Tom Nakashima"
> > wrote:
>
>>>> Deck the malls with bowls of money,
>>>
>>
>>Just a thought; if you put "T H E" and the " I. R. S." together it
>>spells:
>>
>> T H E I R S
>>-tom
>>
>
> And have you heard about the new incarnation of Windows? They're taken
> what they've learned from CE, ME, and NT...yeah, uh-huh, I know what
> you're thinking...nope...
>

^
Carnac the Magnificent
-tom

[Eric]

rw wrote:
> Just when you thought it couldn't get more ****ed up:
>
> BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraqi security forces caught the most wanted man
> in the country last year, but released him because they didn't know who
> he was, the Iraqi deputy minister of interior said Thursday.
>
> Hussain Kamal confirmed that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi -- the al Qaeda in
> Iraq leader who has a $25 million bounty on his head -- was in custody
> at some point last year but he wouldn't provide further details.
>
> A U.S. official couldn't confirm the report, but said he wouldn't
> dismiss it.
>
> "It is plausible," he said.
>
Damn... and I finally thought i found a post on FISHING in a FISHING
newsgroup.

[opie]

"Eric" > wrote in message
...

> Damn... and I finally thought i found a post on FISHING in a FISHING
> newsgroup.

POST A FISHING RELATED TOPIC, AND THEY WILL COME....

Op

[rw]

Eric wrote:

> Damn... and I finally thought i found a post on FISHING in a FISHING
> newsgroup.

Hey Eric. We've covered catch and release fishing pretty thoroughly,
years ago. I don't think there's much else to be said about it, unless,
of course, YOU have something new to add.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

[Wolfgang]

"Eric" > wrote in message
...


> Damn... and I finally thought i found a post on FISHING in a FISHING
> newsgroup.

Congratulations! You've passed the first test on the road to membership in
a not so exclusive club here in ROFF. Now, let's see if you can follow it
up with the next obvious step. :)

Wolfgang
bets, anyone?

[David Snedeker]

"Wayne Knight" > wrote in message
ps.com...
>
> wrote:
>
> >
> > ****in' hilarious. The left-wingers all have the same whine when you
> > pull their strings, "The right-wingers all have the same whine when you
> > pull their strings, It's Clinton's fault."
> >
> > Fa-la-la-la-la, la-la-la-L-A-A-A-A-A....,
>
> Well technically you did bring it up. Funny I've never heard you
> mention Reagan arming and help to train those bozos in the first place.
> Besides Bin Laden has to do with Afghanistan, not Iraq.
>

And you never will because Dean's politics have about as much to do with
protection of the liberties afforded us by the Constitution, the common
good, freedom, or Democracy as the 111/2 eagles he claims. By his own words
he is a Feudalist, who has "interests," not a set of Democratic political
principles. Check out where the Dean empire buys its political influence via
the net, and you will see a flow of money to virtually every backward,
right-wing cause and fathead bribable politician in Congress. Amazing also
is that virtually every major Dean executive gives to the this set of
scoundrels, often in the same amounts. Surprise. Surprise.

So never expect someone like Dean to ever own up to Reagan's role in funding
Bin Ladin, the Salvadoreanian death squads that murdered peasants and even
American nuns at so much a head, or their culpability in creating MS-13, the
USAs most vicious organized crime group, or the funding of the past and
current murder of populists around the World.

These folks love the "left-right" rhetoric because it divides the American
people and takes attention off the culture of corruption, bribery and
violation of the Constitution that their interests depend on to survive.
Face it: there was a Right-wing revolution in the US, and the Fascists won.

There has long been a Fascist "Fifth Column" in the US intelligence
services, and over a dozen related CIA funded fascist national groups in
Europe. During both the Nixon administration and the Reagun/Bush
administration these groups unleashed violent terrorist bombing and
assassination campaigns in Western Europe, using CIA funding under the guise
of "anticommunism" but particularly directed against populist and socialist
domestic political groups.

During US Democrat administrations this network mostly laid low, and were
believed to rely on American Fascists for money. (I personally believe that
eventually some of this funding will be tied to American fascist foundations
such as the Olin and Coors family foundations. I also believe that some
Democrat politicians were fully aware of the Fascist nature of these
operations.)

A key to understanding how we got to the present is in the cryptic word
"GLADIO." Gladio is the name of the CIA funded Italian Fascist terrorist
group. Americans are by and large ignorant of this emerging history, and I
recognize how bizarre some of this may sound. However, with the end of the
Cold War and the aging of many of the key players, there is considerable
light being shed on this era, and the tracery of connections to current
events and people still active in current fascism. So, if you want a real
look at how the right-wing in the USA has funded terror, check out the word
"gladio" via google for an example of how your tax money was used to pay
Fascists to set off bombs in crowded public spaces in Italy. Then, if you
can, try to think of how the murder of these people made any contribution
what-so-ever to the preservation of our American Democracy or freedom.

Dave
Ideology still sucks

[Wolfgang]

"David Snedeker" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> ...By his own words
> he is a Feudalist, who has "interests," not a set of Democratic political
> principles....

WHAT!? He has no ideology!?

Well, THAT sucks.

Wolfgang
um......does anybody know how to wipe spittle off the inside of a computer
monitor screen? :(

[riverman]

Wolfie said:
"Congratulations! You've passed the first test on the road to
membership in
a not so exclusive club here in ROFF. Now, let's see if you can follow
it
up with the next obvious step."

1 SNN says within 24 hours.

--riverman
(ObOP: did they cold-anesthetize Zarquawi before he was C&R'd?)

[Eric]

opie wrote:
> "Eric" > wrote in message
> ...
>
>
>>Damn... and I finally thought i found a post on FISHING in a FISHING
>>newsgroup.
>
>
> POST A FISHING RELATED TOPIC, AND THEY WILL COME....
>
> Op
>
>
a fishing related topic? like "catch and release"?

[Thomas Littleton]

"David Snedeker" > wrote in message

>Check out where the Dean empire buys its political influence via
> the net, and you will see a flow of money to virtually every backward,
> right-wing cause and fathead bribable politician in Congress. Amazing also
> is that virtually every major Dean executive gives to the this set of
> scoundrels, often in the same amounts. Surprise. Surprise.

why don't you save us the bother, and provide the links if you are going to
personally slander people, Dave? Highlight especially where Rick himself is
involved. Otherwise, intelligent people might have an inkling that you don't
really have a ****ing clue what you are talking about, and would prefer to
color your facts with your own uninformed ideology......which, as they say,
would suck.
Tom
p.s. Rick, send more breakfast sausages, we are running low up here
and, it's the holiday season and all<g>

[[email protected]]

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 15:37:10 GMT, "Thomas Littleton"
> wrote:

>
>"David Snedeker" > wrote in message
>
>>Check out where the Dean empire buys its political influence via
>> the net, and you will see a flow of money to virtually every backward,
>> right-wing cause and fathead bribable politician in Congress. Amazing also
>> is that virtually every major Dean executive gives to the this set of
>> scoundrels, often in the same amounts. Surprise. Surprise.
>
>why don't you save us the bother, and provide the links if you are going to
>personally slander people, Dave? Highlight especially where Rick himself is
>involved. Otherwise, intelligent people might have an inkling that you don't
>really have a ****ing clue what you are talking about, and would prefer to
>color your facts with your own uninformed ideology......which, as they say,
>would suck.
> Tom
>p.s. Rick, send more breakfast sausages, we are running low up here
> and, it's the holiday season and all<g>

Aw, let him go...assuming he is serious - I don't care either way
because either way, it's highly amusing - if anyone actually believes
any of that, I'm not too worried about it or them...besides, whether
it's "fathead <OR> bribable" or "fathead <AND> bribable," given my vast
array of connections, I'll just have his phones tapped and his luggage
"accidentally" sent to Mongolia...or Newark...BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!

TC,
R

[David Snedeker]

"Thomas Littleton" > wrote in message
news:GgWof.3228$vJ4.2770@trnddc07...
>
> "David Snedeker" > wrote in message
>
> >Check out where the Dean empire buys its political influence via
> > the net, and you will see a flow of money to virtually every backward,
> > right-wing cause and fathead bribable politician in Congress. Amazing
also
> > is that virtually every major Dean executive gives to the this set of
> > scoundrels, often in the same amounts. Surprise. Surprise.
>
> why don't you save us the bother, and provide the links if you are going
to
> personally slander people, Dave? Highlight especially where Rick himself
is
> involved. Otherwise, intelligent people might have an inkling that you
don't
> really have a ****ing clue what you are talking about, and would prefer to
> color your facts with your own uninformed ideology......which, as they
say,
> would suck.
> Tom
> p.s. Rick, send more breakfast sausages, we are running low up here
> and, it's the holiday season and all<g>
>


Hummmmmm

Seems like a few past reactions.

In the past Ive spoken out early on a few things that you and some others
found bizarre and hard to digest. Things like Enron and the conspiracy to
rig Westcoast wholesale electric prices , the Neocon/Trotskyite link and
faked Iraq intelligence, espionage in the executive branch linked to
right-wing Zionists, bribery linked to lobbyists and indentured servitude in
the Pacific Trust Territories, a plane based in Portland tied to secret
torture flites, right-wing shakedowns of technology companies (Microsoft),
etc..

The veracity of each of these has proofed up in quick time. Some folks have
even been indicted. Surprise.

As to Dean, you can wade thru the sketchy public info on contributions and
not be able to get a clear picture of his specific contributions. However,
put a hour in on the scale, scope and direction of the extended Dean
Empire's contributions, and you might begin to get the picture. Deano is
pretty good at obscuring links, but not perfect. Here is a place for a start
if you are serious. http://www.campaignmoney.com/ Im afraid you will have
to do your own reading because Ive found that if folks do some of the work
themselves, they are more inclined to value, rather than resent, the
sometimes unpleasant things they learn.

As to Deans personal involvement, you may have forgotten his on-site claims
during the original Miami chad riots, and you may not be following the story
around the re-building of the Mississippi casinos, and you may actually
believe that all those Dean executives actually contribute their own money.
I don't. But then I have been following the involvement of highly organized
corporate and family foundations and PACs against democracy and freedom for
the last 25 years and have a pretty good idea of the damage they do and the
increasingly international reach of privately funded Fascism.

Think what you will, and when what Ive said becomes the stuff of the 6
o'clock news, and Doonesbury cartoons I'll not expect you to remember once
again that you said I was clueless. Enjoy your "sausage." :-)

Dave
Ideology still sucks

[David Snedeker]

> wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 15:37:10 GMT, "Thomas Littleton"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"David Snedeker" > wrote in message
> >
> >>Check out where the Dean empire buys its political influence via
> >> the net, and you will see a flow of money to virtually every backward,
> >> right-wing cause and fathead bribable politician in Congress. Amazing
also
> >> is that virtually every major Dean executive gives to the this set of
> >> scoundrels, often in the same amounts. Surprise. Surprise.
> >
> >why don't you save us the bother, and provide the links if you are going
to
> >personally slander people, Dave? Highlight especially where Rick himself
is
> >involved. Otherwise, intelligent people might have an inkling that you
don't
> >really have a ****ing clue what you are talking about, and would prefer
to
> >color your facts with your own uninformed ideology......which, as they
say,
> >would suck.
> > Tom
> >p.s. Rick, send more breakfast sausages, we are running low up here
> > and, it's the holiday season and all<g>
>
> Aw, let him go...assuming he is serious - I don't care either way
> because either way, it's highly amusing - if anyone actually believes
> any of that, I'm not too worried about it or them...besides, whether
> it's "fathead <OR> bribable" or "fathead <AND> bribable," given my vast
> array of connections, I'll just have his phones tapped and his luggage
> "accidentally" sent to Mongolia...or Newark...BWAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!
>
> TC,
> R

You know I am right on target.

Dave

[Mike Connor]

"David Snedeker" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
. ..
<SNIP>
> Think what you will, and when what Ive said becomes the stuff of the 6
> o'clock news, and Doonesbury cartoons I'll not expect you to remember once
> again that you said I was clueless. Enjoy your "sausage." :-)
>
> Dave
> Ideology still sucks
>

There is little point in spending time and effort on making enemies, or
indeed on attempting to plague the ones you already have.

I don´t particularly care for Mr.Dean, for my own reasons, but it is quite
another thing to attack him like this. I rather think you may well be on
dangerous ground in this case. He often behaves like a total pratt on here,
but he has never attempted to screw anybody as far as I know, indeed, I
believe he is often trying to be helpful in his own way. If he has lied or
blustered, as some seem to think, then that is no big deal, he has not done
any ROFFIAN any obvious harm, he is not lining his pockets at our expense,
or attempting with all his might and an unhealthy portion of bull****, to
sell us anything, or to corrupt our thinking, or using us to further his own
aims, even were he capable of such, which I doubt.

For these reasons, I think your remarks are uncalled for here.

Even assuming you were indeed correct, what is to be achieved by carrying
out this sort of personal and political attack on a fly-fishing newsgroup?

If he was trying to sell us cow**** as floatant, or snake oil as sinkant, or
showering us with spam, or was obviously as crazy as a coot and suffering
from delusions of grandeur, then I would say he was free game, but he is not
doing any of those things. His political beliefs and leanings are his own
affair, as are yours to you, and should not be subjected to this sort of
attack.

Challenging something he says on here, and refuting it, or arguing against
it is also fair enough, but you are impinging on his personal freedom with
this sort of attack, and although you may not be entirely aware of it, the
only person who will eventually suffer, is you.

Should he have done something illegal, which you are aware of and can prove,
then use the normal channels open to you. You will not influence a single
person on here with this sort of crap.

There just is no bloody point to this David. You will also upset other
people with it, to no good purpose.

TL
MC

[Wayne Harrison]

"David Snedeker" > wrote

(snip)

if i were your civil trial lawyer, and i clearly am not, i would advise you
to consider the fact that richard dean is not likely to be considered a
public figure.

fwiw.

yfitons
wayno

[[email protected]]

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 15:37:50 -0500, "Wayne Harrison"
> wrote:

>
>"David Snedeker" > wrote
>
>(snip)
>
>if i were your civil trial lawyer, and i clearly am not, i would advise you
>to consider the fact that richard dean is not likely to be considered a
>public figure.
>
>fwiw.
>
>yfitons
>wayno

Guys, guys, guys...when it comes to stuff like Sarge has posted thus
far, if he actually does believe it, his posting it does me absolutely
no harm because no one whose opinion I even kinda-sorta value would do
anything other than what I've done - gotten a kick out of. As to
wasting time pursuing him for publicly broadcasting those beliefs, he
would already have plenty enough problems. If he's just doin' some
shtick, well, hell, basically, the same things apply. And even assuming
he believes it and further, that he's right, such an individual would
hardly worry or care about what some guy posts on a FFing group.
Whatever the case, I certainly don't bear him (or anyone else here) any
ill-will.

TC,
R

[[email protected]]

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 15:03:09 -0600, wrote:

>On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 15:37:50 -0500, "Wayne Harrison"
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"David Snedeker" > wrote
>>
>>(snip)
>>
>>if i were your civil trial lawyer, and i clearly am not, i would advise you
>>to consider the fact that richard dean is not likely to be considered a
>>public figure.
>>
>>fwiw.
>>
>>yfitons
>>wayno
>
>Guys, guys, guys...when it comes to stuff like Sarge has posted thus
>far, if he actually does believe it, his posting it does me absolutely
>no harm because no one whose opinion I even kinda-sorta value would do
>anything other than what I've done - gotten a kick out of. As to
>wasting time pursuing him for publicly broadcasting those beliefs, he
>would already have plenty enough problems. If he's just doin' some
>shtick, well, hell, basically, the same things apply. And even assuming
>he believes it and further, that he's right, such an individual would
>hardly worry or care about what some guy posts on a FFing group.
>Whatever the case, I certainly don't bear him (or anyone else here) any
>ill-will.
>
Actually, I'm going to rephrase one thing:

....because no one outside of ROFF whose attention was called to it and
whose opinion I even kinda-sorta value would do anything other than what
I've done - gotten a kick out of. I'd hope ROFFians would do the same,
but, hey, like always, YMMV...

TC,
R

[[email protected]]

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 12:15:30 -0800, "David Snedeker"
> wrote:


>You know I am right on target.
>
>Dave

BOOGITY-BOOGITY BOOOO!!!

We neither confirm or deny,
R

[rw]

wrote:
>
> Actually, I'm going to rephrase one thing:

I'd be willing to reconsider my disbelief in a just, personal God if
merely you'd spontaneously combust.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

[Mike Connor]

Amazing that people who congregate here purportedly as a result of a common
interest, can be so nasty to each other. Case of "familiarity breeding
contempt" perhaps?

OK who´s for golf?

TL
MC

[Ken Fortenberry]

Mike Connor wrote:
> "David Snedeker" wrote:
> <SNIP>
>>Think what you will, and when what Ive said becomes the stuff of the 6
>>o'clock news, and Doonesbury cartoons I'll not expect you to remember once
>>again that you said I was clueless. Enjoy your "sausage." :-)
>
> <snip>
> ... I rather think you may well be on
> dangerous ground in this case.

Actually David is spot on. In addition to his postings
here Mr. Dean has phoned several of us and rambled on
at length giving some of us a glimpse into his family
business. Hint: It ain't Jimmy Dean sausage. ;-)

> There just is no bloody point to this David. You will also upset other
> people with it, to no good purpose.

Yeah, I'll agree with that at any rate.

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Wolfgang]

"Mike Connor" > wrote in message
...
> Amazing that people who congregate here purportedly as a result of a
> common interest, can be so nasty to each other. Case of "familiarity
> breeding contempt" perhaps?

Not really. Contemptibility breeds contempt. Dicklet begs for
abuse......as do various others. Who are we to deny them their simple
pleasures?

> OK who´s for golf?

Ah! You want to see some REAL nastiness! :)

Wolfgang

[Thomas Littleton]

"David Snedeker" > wrote in message

well, I really never voiced an opinion either way on the conspiracy type
stuff. I would say it struck me as a bit of truth, mixed with a
bit of tin-foil-hat thinking. Still, I will gladly wait to see if the truth
does come out.
The key place in your post where you come up(suprisingly?) small is the
claims you made re: RDean. You produce no facts, no links, and in fact,
start to backpeddle with "they are good at obscuring"...etc. So, one is left
to conclude that you are but a sleazy liar, willing to smear others behind
your little keyboard that you wouldn't have the stones to probably even
speak to in person. All I asked for was one shred of evidence to support the
claim that made up half of the post I responded to. Nothing. Nada. Zip. What
a big man.

Tom
p.s. I must admit, though, the Potentate of Pork Products has it
right, it IS pretty damned funny, in a pathetic sort of way.

[Thomas Littleton]

"Wayne Harrison" > wrote in message
> if i were your civil trial lawyer, and i clearly am not, i would advise
you
> to consider the fact that richard dean is not likely to be considered a
> public figure.
>
> fwiw.
>
> yfitons
> wayno

ok, so I tried to make the same point with sarcasm, but you had to go get
all legal on us<g>
Tom

[Wolfgang]

"Ken Fortenberry" > wrote in message
. com...
> Mike Connor wrote:
>> "David Snedeker" wrote:
>> <SNIP>
>>>Think what you will, and when what Ive said becomes the stuff of the 6
>>>o'clock news, and Doonesbury cartoons I'll not expect you to remember
>>>once
>>>again that you said I was clueless. Enjoy your "sausage." :-)
>>
>> <snip>
>> ... I rather think you may well be on dangerous ground in this case.
>
> Actually David is spot on. In addition to his postings
> here Mr. Dean has phoned several of us and rambled on
> at length giving some of us a glimpse into his family
> business. Hint: It ain't Jimmy Dean sausage. ;-)

And the odds are that he has a pretty good dossier on everybody here.
That's what double-naught El Mysteriosos do. Not that it matters much to
me.......I don't have any children.

>> There just is no bloody point to this David. You will also upset other
>> people with it, to no good purpose.
>
> Yeah, I'll agree with that at any rate.

Well, you're both wrong about that. It isn't the critics of the killers,
the thieves, the liars, the immoral, the psychopathic, the sociopathic, and
the just plain unpleasant that you need to take issue with. If everyone
were to give clear, frequent, and unequivocal voice to their objections to
the object of the critics scorn there would be considerably less need for
the critics.

Wolfgang

[Mike Connor]

"Wolfgang" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
<SNIP>
> Well, you're both wrong about that. It isn't the critics of the killers,
> the thieves, the liars, the immoral, the psychopathic, the sociopathic,
> and the just plain unpleasant that you need to take issue with. If
> everyone were to give clear, frequent, and unequivocal voice to their
> objections to the object of the critics scorn there would be considerably
> less need for the critics.
>
> Wolfgang

Possibly. Although this is not apparent, and has never been so. One must be
far more critical of the critics, for their critique may be more critical
than the actions of the objects of their criticism.

Were one to take issue merely with plain unpleasantness, quite apart from
the rest of the list you presented, one would not have sufficient time to
earn one´s daily bread, let alone go fishing.

Ah well. One occasionally feels obliged to give voice on something or other,
only afterwards does one realise how absolutely pointless it all was, and
has a beer.

TL
MC

[Wolfgang]

"Mike Connor" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Wolfgang" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> ...
> <SNIP>
>> Well, you're both wrong about that. It isn't the critics of the killers,
>> the thieves, the liars, the immoral, the psychopathic, the sociopathic,
>> and the just plain unpleasant that you need to take issue with. If
>> everyone were to give clear, frequent, and unequivocal voice to their
>> objections to the object of the critics scorn there would be considerably
>> less need for the critics.
>>
>> Wolfgang
>
> Possibly. Although this is not apparent, and has never been so. One must
> be far more critical of the critics, for their critique may be more
> critical than the actions of the objects of their criticism.

I don't believe that for a minute.....and I'm not so sure you do either.
Europe is an interesting place, I'm told.......I haven't been there since I
was a very small child. But I've read a bit of the history of the place.
Ignoring.....or silencing.....critics has a long and fascinating history
there. The results are hardly a secret.

> Were one to take issue merely with plain unpleasantness, quite apart from
> the rest of the list you presented, one would not have sufficient time to
> earn one´s daily bread, let alone go fishing.

I manage to do both. I have time left for a number of other pursuits.

> Ah well. One occasionally feels obliged to give voice on something or
> other,

Much like a critic.

> only afterwards does one realise how absolutely pointless it all was, and
> has a beer.

Well, I'd be happy to join you in a beer or two, but I'm not much of a fan
of pointlessness......I rarely indulge.

Wolfgang

[Willi]

Wolfgang wrote:

>
> Well, I'd be happy to join you in a beer or two, but I'm not much of a fan
> of pointlessness......I rarely indulge.


IMO, the below is as pointless as it gets........


Wolfgang wrote:

> well, you're stupid; it wouldn't do you any good.


> you are a fool


> Stupid. Stupid beyond description.


> That's because you are stupid.


> those who already espouse the view you put forward, are congenitally
> stupid


> Stupid.
>
>> Just plain stupid.


> Stupid.
>
>> Just plain stupid.


> you are an abject fool


> Stupid.
>
>> Just plain stupid.


> Stupid.
>
>> Just plain stupid.


> Good God, you are stupid


> God you are dumber than Janik.


> I'll reserve the right to
> remind him that his ass sucks wind


> a necrophiliac, an idiot, and
>
>> unsavory to boot


> you are an
> idiot


> advice is lost on one as deranged as you



> he
> IS an idiot.....but he is nowhere near as stupid and self deluded as
> yourself.


> Yeah, but you're an idiot.


> Stupid. Just plain stupid.


> ****in moron


> You are a pathetic ****ing moron,


> Fool


> come on you
> piece of **** moron..


> Dang, you really are dumb.


> YOU DUMB ****!


> you are an abject fool


> You're a liar


> This makes you a liar as well as an idiot.


> you are a liar


> And you are a liar


> Well, yeah, but you're a liar.


> Hm......liar or idiot?


> Well, you're a liar....


> you insufferable moron


> Liar.


> dumb as he
> is


> You may well be the most disgusting human being I've ever
> met



Willi

[Wayne Harrison]

"rw" > wrote

> I'd be willing to reconsider my disbelief in a just, personal God if
> merely you'd spontaneously combust.

hilarious, without regardless of whom might be the subject of the post;
even if it were myownself, which it most certainly might have been at one
point in my life, but hopefully would no longer be; although around this
****ing madhouse, who knows?

yfitons
wayno(merry christmas? ho, ho ho.)

[Ken Fortenberry]

Wayne Harrison wrote:
> "David Snedeker" > wrote
> (snip)
>
> if i were your civil trial lawyer, and i clearly am not, i would advise you
> to consider the fact that richard dean is not likely to be considered a
> public figure.
>
> fwiw.

Ominous, vaguely threatening lawyer babble. Is it any
wonder we hate the mother****ers so ?

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Wolfgang]

"Willi" > wrote in message
...
> Wolfgang wrote:
>
>>
>> Well, I'd be happy to join you in a beer or two, but I'm not much of a
>> fan of pointlessness......I rarely indulge.
>
>
> IMO, the below is as pointless as it gets........
>
>
> Wolfgang wrote:
>
> > well, you're stupid; it wouldn't do you any good.
>
>
> > you are a fool
>
>
> > Stupid. Stupid beyond description.
>
>
> > That's because you are stupid.
>
>
> > those who already espouse the view you put forward, are congenitally
> > stupid
>
>
> > Stupid.
> >
> >> Just plain stupid.
>
>
> > Stupid.
> >
> >> Just plain stupid.
>
>
> > you are an abject fool
>
>
> > Stupid.
> >
> >> Just plain stupid.
>
>
> > Stupid.
> >
> >> Just plain stupid.
>
>
> > Good God, you are stupid
>
>
> > God you are dumber than Janik.
>
>
> > I'll reserve the right to
> > remind him that his ass sucks wind
>
>
> > a necrophiliac, an idiot, and
> >
> >> unsavory to boot
>
>
> > you are an
> > idiot
>
>
> > advice is lost on one as deranged as you
>
>
>
> > he
> > IS an idiot.....but he is nowhere near as stupid and self deluded as
> > yourself.
>
>
> > Yeah, but you're an idiot.
>
>
> > Stupid. Just plain stupid.
>
>
> > ****in moron
>
>
> > You are a pathetic ****ing moron,
>
>
> > Fool
>
>
> > come on you
> > piece of **** moron..
>
>
> > Dang, you really are dumb.
>
>
> > YOU DUMB ****!
>
>
> > you are an abject fool
>
>
> > You're a liar
>
>
> > This makes you a liar as well as an idiot.
>
>
> > you are a liar
>
>
> > And you are a liar
>
>
> > Well, yeah, but you're a liar.
>
>
> > Hm......liar or idiot?
>
>
> > Well, you're a liar....
>
>
> > you insufferable moron
>
>
> > Liar.
>
>
> > dumb as he
> > is
>
>
> > You may well be the most disgusting human being I've ever
> > met

Ain't it grand? You get to have (and express) whatever opinion you wish.
Is the price too high?

Wolfgang
you should see what it costs NOT to have that right.

[David Snedeker]

"Wayne Harrison" > wrote in message
...
>
> "David Snedeker" > wrote
>
> (snip)
>
> if i were your civil trial lawyer, and i clearly am not, i would advise
you
> to consider the fact that richard dean is not likely to be considered a
> public figure.
>
> fwiw.
>
> yfitons
> wayno
>

Wayne, before you get too far out on the limb I suggest you re-read para 1
of my post. Everything attributed to Dean is from one of his posts. (Be
happy that I didn't access his posts from some of the other beings he
channels.)

My opinions on the political contributions from the extended "Dean Empire"
to right-wing pols and causes is my opinion based on publicly available
listings on the website I cited that Tom is too lazy to consult. If you see
legal slander there you might need a bar refresher before you take on civil.
:-)

The day Americans cannot take on Fascism is the day they have to rip from my
cold dead hands the knish. Think about it.

Dave

[David Snedeker]

> wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 15:37:50 -0500, "Wayne Harrison"
> > wrote:
>
> >
> >"David Snedeker" > wrote
> >
> >(snip)
> >
> >if i were your civil trial lawyer, and i clearly am not, i would advise
you
> >to consider the fact that richard dean is not likely to be considered a
> >public figure.
> >
> >fwiw.
> >
> >yfitons
> >wayno
>
> Guys, guys, guys...when it comes to stuff like Sarge has posted thus
> far, if he actually does believe it, his posting it does me absolutely
> no harm because no one whose opinion I even kinda-sorta value would do
> anything other than what I've done - gotten a kick out of. As to
> wasting time pursuing him for publicly broadcasting those beliefs, he
> would already have plenty enough problems. If he's just doin' some
> shtick, well, hell, basically, the same things apply. And even assuming
> he believes it and further, that he's right, such an individual would
> hardly worry or care about what some guy posts on a FFing group.
> Whatever the case, I certainly don't bear him (or anyone else here) any
> ill-will.
>
> TC,
> R

Yeah, sure you do.

Dave

[David Snedeker]

"Ken Fortenberry" > wrote in message
. net...
> Wayne Harrison wrote:
> > "David Snedeker" > wrote
> > (snip)
> >
> > if i were your civil trial lawyer, and i clearly am not, i would advise
you
> > to consider the fact that richard dean is not likely to be considered a
> > public figure.
> >
> > fwiw.
>
> Ominous, vaguely threatening lawyer babble. Is it any
> wonder we hate the mother****ers so ?
>
> --
> Ken Fortenberry

Ah, you know the feeling. Vague bull**** letters, so much a page. I
recommend responding immediately and in person. Suddenly, no problema.

Hey, but who can blame em. If a two year apprenticeship prepares one as an
expert on so many aspects of life, commercial and civil intercourse, that a
mere pronouncement by one so prepared can induce fear and obedience, well,
is it any wonder that mere citizens would want to pay for such advice and
protections from ones own foolish pronouncements?
Not.

Dave
Who values counselors who along with experience, have a sense of humor

[David Snedeker]

"Thomas Littleton" > wrote in message
news:Em1pf.5290$CL.2483@trnddc04...
>
> "David Snedeker" > wrote in message
>
> well, I really never voiced an opinion either way on the conspiracy type
> stuff. I would say it struck me as a bit of truth, mixed with a
> bit of tin-foil-hat thinking. Still, I will gladly wait to see if the
truth
> does come out.
> The key place in your post where you come up(suprisingly?) small is the
> claims you made re: RDean. You produce no facts, no links, and in fact,
> start to backpeddle with "they are good at obscuring"...etc. So, one is
left
> to conclude that you are but a sleazy liar, willing to smear others behind
> your little keyboard that you wouldn't have the stones to probably even
> speak to in person. All I asked for was one shred of evidence to support
the
> claim that made up half of the post I responded to. Nothing. Nada. Zip.
What
> a big man.
>
> Tom
> p.s. I must admit, though, the Potentate of Pork Products has it
> right, it IS pretty damned funny, in a pathetic sort of way.
>

What conspiracy stuff? Don't you read the papers.

Before you continue this half flip-out I suggest you re-read the first para
of the original post and then if you want, point out the sleazy lie. Let me
note that everything attributed to Dean is from one of his posts. (Be happy
that I didn't access his posts from some of the other beings he channels or
some of his racist rants.)

My opinions on the political contributions from the extended "Dean Empire"
to right-wing pols and causes is my opinion based on publicly available
listings on the website I cited that you apparently are too lazy to consult.
You apparently feel you have some special knowledge of Dean's business
connections but don't care to share it in your defense of this noble
creature. Isn't that special.

The day Americans cannot take on Fascism is the day they have to rip from my
cold dead hands the knish. Think about it.

Dave
Red Cross anyone?

[David Snedeker]

"Mike Connor" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Wolfgang" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> ...
> <SNIP>
> > Well, you're both wrong about that. It isn't the critics of the
killers,
> > the thieves, the liars, the immoral, the psychopathic, the sociopathic,
> > and the just plain unpleasant that you need to take issue with. If
> > everyone were to give clear, frequent, and unequivocal voice to their
> > objections to the object of the critics scorn there would be
considerably
> > less need for the critics.
> >
> > Wolfgang
>
> Possibly. Although this is not apparent, and has never been so. One must
be
> far more critical of the critics, for their critique may be more critical
> than the actions of the objects of their criticism.
>
> Were one to take issue merely with plain unpleasantness, quite apart from
> the rest of the list you presented, one would not have sufficient time to
> earn one´s daily bread, let alone go fishing.
>
> Ah well. One occasionally feels obliged to give voice on something or
other,
> only afterwards does one realise how absolutely pointless it all was, and
> has a beer.
>
> TL
> MC
>

And Mike that is exactly why there is a place called Canada. But Im an
American and we had a Fascist Revolution in the US and the Fascists won. And
I will never accept that. There is a great deal of turmoil here and today
the President announced that he does not have to obey the law or the
Constitution. Have a nice day.

Dave

[David Snedeker]

"rw" > wrote in message
m...
> Frank Church wrote:
> > rw > wrote in news:43a2449c$0$28489
> > :
> >
> >
> >>Just when you thought it couldn't get more ****ed up:
> >>
> >>BAGHDAD, Iraq (CNN) -- Iraqi security forces caught the most wanted man
> >>in the country last year, but released him because they didn't know who
> >>he was, the Iraqi deputy minister of interior said Thursday.
> >
> > ...snip...
> >
> >
> > ....and this is the best you can do after what took place yesterday in
> > Iraq? What a ****ing putz!
> >
> > Frank Sr.
>
> What happened yesterday? Did they find the WMDs?
>

Don't you just love the smell of Fascists squirming in the morning?

Dave

[Mike Connor]

"Wolfgang" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
<SNIP>
> I don't believe that for a minute.....and I'm not so sure you do either.
> Europe is an interesting place, I'm told.......I haven't been there since
> I was a very small child. But I've read a bit of the history of the
> place. Ignoring.....or silencing.....critics has a long and fascinating
> history there. The results are hardly a secret.
>
>> Were one to take issue merely with plain unpleasantness, quite apart from
>> the rest of the list you presented, one would not have sufficient time to
>> earn one´s daily bread, let alone go fishing.
>
> I manage to do both. I have time left for a number of other pursuits.
>
>> Ah well. One occasionally feels obliged to give voice on something or
>> other,
>
> Much like a critic.
>
>> only afterwards does one realise how absolutely pointless it all was, and
>> has a beer.
>
> Well, I'd be happy to join you in a beer or two, but I'm not much of a fan
> of pointlessness......I rarely indulge.
>
> Wolfgang

Critics, especially the less scrupulous types, often cause a very great deal
of damage.

Let us assume Mr.Snedeker is correct. Just how has that changed anything
here, or anywhere else?

There are ways and means of pursuing political ends, or of combating
political adversaries. As far as I am aware, posting to ROFF is not
generally accepted as one of the most effective.

Anyway, I should keep out of politics here. It seems there is so much
confusion in America that nobody knows what the hell is going on. But you
still vote for the scum that scam you.

TL
MC

[Wolfgang]

"Mike Connor" > wrote in message
...

> Critics, especially the less scrupulous types, often cause a very great
> deal of damage.

To be sure......but few of them rank among the great monsters of history.

> Let us assume Mr.Snedeker is correct.

A more than generous assumption......the boy IS crazy, after all.

> Just how has that changed anything here, or anywhere else?

Hard to say. It's not exactly a controlled experiment. If we had a
parallel universe without Snedeker.....or one in which he wasn't a foaming
at the mouth lunatic....we could do a comparison. As things stand, we
simply have to accept that he does exist, he is crazy, and all we can do
about it is provide occasional reminders for the benefit of those who are
prone to be oblivious to a piano falling on their heads. Meanwhile, if he
in turn manages to penetrate his own personal fog sufficiently to identify
other twisted human simulacra, how can we count that as anything other than
a blessing.....albeit an infinitely mysterious one?

> There are ways and means of pursuing political ends, or of combating
> political adversaries. As far as I am aware, posting to ROFF is not
> generally accepted as one of the most effective.

True, ROFF is hardly in the vanguard of worldwide political consciousness.
We work with what we have. Columbia St. Mary's Hospital of Ozaukee County
is not among the leading surgical centers of the world. Should all the
doctors there give up their practice?

> Anyway, I should keep out of politics here.

That's a purely personal decision. I disagree but......

> It seems there is so much confusion in America that nobody knows what the
> hell is going on.

See, there's a perfectly valid (if somewhat overstated, for effect)
observation.

> But you still vote for the scum that scam you.

It's inherent in the nature of democracy. In a monarchy they BREED the scum
that scam them. Obviously, there are many other ways to elevate scum. The
trick is to explore avenues for keeping them in check regardless of their
origins or the mechanisms by which they rise. It's a sisyphean task.

Wolfgang

[Mike Connor]

"Wolfgang" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
<SNIP>
> It's inherent in the nature of democracy. In a monarchy they BREED the
> scum that scam them. Obviously, there are many other ways to elevate
> scum. The trick is to explore avenues for keeping them in check
> regardless of their origins or the mechanisms by which they rise. It's a
> sisyphean task.
>
> Wolfgang
>

I don´t think it is inherent in democracy, or indeed in any other form of
society, but in human nature, and as such, inevitable.

Only certain types of people rise to positions of power "on their own
merits" as it were, many inherit them, or find themselves otherwise
bestowed. However this may be, once in such a position, the person involved
invariably misuses that power in some way. Many misuse it continually in
order to rise to ever more power in the first place, and often merely in
order to extend and or continue wielding that power. Indeed, it appears that
some lose sight of all else. Apparently such power, even in relatively petty
doses, is like a drug.

Wealth automatically bestows power, and I have never yet met a wealthy
person who did not misuse it in some way. I like to think that I would not
misuse such power or wealth, were I to possess it, but who really knows?
Certainly, one of the reasons I never made any money was because I was
apparently somewhat overburdened with scruples and pricinples, and never had
much interest in any case. Enough was always enough for me.

However al this may be, one of the main causes of nastiness on this board is
political "discussion", and related subjects. So I will do my very best to
stay out of it in future.

TL
MC

[Wolfgang]

"Mike Connor" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Wolfgang" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> ...
> <SNIP>
>> It's inherent in the nature of democracy. In a monarchy they BREED the
>> scum that scam them. Obviously, there are many other ways to elevate
>> scum. The trick is to explore avenues for keeping them in check
>> regardless of their origins or the mechanisms by which they rise. It's a
>> sisyphean task.
>>
>> Wolfgang
>>
>
> I don´t think it is inherent in democracy, or indeed in any other form of
> society, but in human nature, and as such, inevitable.

Well, if it's human nature then it is inherent in any and every human
institution. Effect follows cause. But it's easy enough to demonstrate
that there are benign institutions. Unfortunately, political institutions
are not among them. Political institutions are never benign; they rest on
the principle of power brokerage.

> Only certain types of people rise to positions of power "on their own
> merits" as it were, many inherit them, or find themselves otherwise
> bestowed. However this may be, once in such a position, the person
> involved invariably misuses that power in some way. Many misuse it
> continually in order to rise to ever more power in the first place, and
> often merely in order to extend and or continue wielding that power.
> Indeed, it appears that some lose sight of all else. Apparently such
> power, even in relatively petty doses, is like a drug.

Nothing to argue with there. As a matter of fact, all of it.....and
especially the first phrase......appears to be a direct contravention of
what you said above.

> Wealth automatically bestows power, and I have never yet met a wealthy
> person who did not misuse it in some way. I like to think that I would not
> misuse such power or wealth, were I to possess it, but who really knows?

Well, if history and your own observations are any guide....... :)

> Certainly, one of the reasons I never made any money was because I was
> apparently somewhat overburdened with scruples and pricinples, and never
> had much interest in any case. Enough was always enough for me.
>
> However al this may be, one of the main causes of nastiness on this board
> is political "discussion", and related subjects.

We just disagree on this. What passes for political discussion here (in
fact, it generally bears little resemblance to discussion and it's mainly
poorly expressed advocacy for one hack, or group of hacks, versus
another.....personalities, not politics) is only a secondary proximate
cause. The main and ultimate cause is simply nasty people. They show no
signs of reticence or difficulty in finding other topics upon which to
express themselves.

> So I will do my very best to stay out of it in future.

Good luck. :)

Wolfgang

[Mike Connor]

"Wolfgang" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
<SNIP>
>> However al this may be, one of the main causes of nastiness on this board
>> is political "discussion", and related subjects.
>
> We just disagree on this. What passes for political discussion here (in
> fact, it generally bears little resemblance to discussion and it's mainly
> poorly expressed advocacy for one hack, or group of hacks, versus
> another.....personalities, not politics) is only a secondary proximate
> cause. The main and ultimate cause is simply nasty people. They show no
> signs of reticence or difficulty in finding other topics upon which to
> express themselves.
>
>> So I will do my very best to stay out of it in future.
>
> Good luck. :)
>
> Wolfgang

We don´t disagree, I used the inverted commas advisedly.

TL
MC

[Thomas Littleton]

"David Snedeker" > wrote in message

> The day Americans cannot take on Fascism is the day they have to rip from
my
> cold dead hands the knish. Think about it.

I have. The day we call everything that opposes our point of view fascism,
is the day we completely trivialize the word.
Tom

[Thomas Littleton]

"David Snedeker" > wrote in message
> My opinions on the political contributions from the extended "Dean Empire"
> to right-wing pols and causes is my opinion based on publicly available
> listings on the website I cited that you apparently are too lazy to
consult.
> You apparently feel you have some special knowledge of Dean's business
> connections but don't care to share it in your defense of this noble
> creature. Isn't that special.

you are a humorous nitwit. Now, what you pronounced as fact, with proof and
all are "my opinions"?? I don't have a freaking insight whatsover into
RDeans business dealings, nor do I feel it of any real interest to me. As
for "defending" him, let's look at my record here over the past decade or
so......I rarely go on these rants, but do, when I feel a line has been
crossed into public slander. IIRC, I have likewise "defended" wayno,
LaCourse, Forty and, post-mortem, Gherke. Kind of a diverse group, wouldn't
you say?

Tom

[Thomas Littleton]

"David Snedeker" > wrote in message
> Don't you just love the smell of Fascists squirming in the morning?
>


thank you for illustrating my point re: trivialization of fascism.

Tom

[Thomas Littleton]

"David Snedeker" > wrote in message

>we had a Fascist Revolution in the US and the Fascists won. And
> I will never accept that.


trivialization example number two. I am hardly enamored of the excesses of
the administration, but we still can change it via the ballot
boxes......should the Dems actually find an original idea or two. I am
really starting to despair on that last one, which saddens me.

Tom

[Jeff Miller]

David Snedeker wrote:

> Wayne, before you get too far out on the limb I suggest you re-read para 1
> of my post. Everything attributed to Dean is from one of his posts. (Be
> happy that I didn't access his posts from some of the other beings he
> channels.)
>
> My opinions on the political contributions from the extended "Dean Empire"
> to right-wing pols and causes is my opinion based on publicly available
> listings on the website I cited that Tom is too lazy to consult. If you see
> legal slander there you might need a bar refresher before you take on civil.
> :-)
>
> The day Americans cannot take on Fascism is the day they have to rip from my
> cold dead hands the knish. Think about it.
>
> Dave
>
>

few political or personal opinions change or even seem to evolve in this
group, though some might say they do appear to erode from time to
time... truth may never be out of fashion, and it's certainly an
absolute defense to claims of defamation, but...sometimes...in order to
get it through the door and on the runway for consideration and
appreciation, it needs to be clothed properly.

because of my own intellectual and personal inadequacies, i frequently
struggle to understand the vitriolic statements, arguments, and
disagreements expressed here... still, i am relatively sure of one
thing...you made no progress against a single fascist by your rant
toward rdean. one must be cautious about attempts to emulate revere or
paine lest you be perceived as an ichabod crane...

jeff (and, um, it's "libel", not "slander"... honest <g>)

[Thomas Littleton]

"Jeff Miller" > wrote in message

> jeff (and, um, it's "libel", not "slander"... honest <g>)


I stand corrected, counselor, my bad....I might have brought the word up,
not Dave S.
Tom

[Ken Fortenberry]

Thomas Littleton wrote:
> <snip>
> so......I rarely go on these rants, but do, when I feel a line has been
> crossed into public slander. IIRC, I have likewise "defended" wayno,
> LaCourse, Forty and, post-mortem, Gherke. Kind of a diverse group, wouldn't
> you say?

Diverse ? I don't know that I'd call a small collection
of English speaking, white, male smartasses diverse but
thank you for your support.

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Thomas Littleton]

"Ken Fortenberry" > wrote in message
>
> Diverse ? I don't know that I'd call a small collection
> of English speaking, white, male smartasses diverse but
> thank you for your support.


I DID say "kind of" diverse, but point well taken<g>

Tom

[opie]

"Eric" > wrote in message
...
> opie wrote:
>> "Eric" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>
>>
>>>Damn... and I finally thought i found a post on FISHING in a FISHING
>>>newsgroup.
>>
>>
>> POST A FISHING RELATED TOPIC, AND THEY WILL COME....
>>
>> Op
> a fishing related topic? like "catch and release"?

Are you so dense that you don't understand the concept of double entendre?

Post a flyfishing story, question, or whatever, and someone is very likely
to respond back to you in kind. If you have no flyfishing stories,
questions, or whatever of your own, ask someone to relate one of their
questions, stories, or whatever; so, that you can respond to them. Really,
it's quite simple!

HTH

Op --no questions, stories, or whatever here--

[Frank Church]

"Thomas Littleton" > wrote in news:0repf.10653
$l25.9727@trnddc03:

>
> "David Snedeker" > wrote in message
>> Don't you just love the smell of Fascists squirming in the morning?

...my God, it must be awful to have to live your life, a conspiracy around
every corner (and probably under your bed too, if you weren't afraid to
look) I suggest you trash your tinfoil hat, keep a low profile and keep
your lights out at nite, lest the men in black helicopters come for your
sorry ass. BTW, I don't squirm in the morning...I get up, take a ****, get
dressed and contemplate how lucky I am to be a Fascist instead of a limp-
wristed whiny-assed dip**** such as you.

Frank the Fascist
...lessee, my last title was bestowed on me by MC's buddy, Gehrke. ;-)
Swap Nazi, yeah, that's it, a Fascist Swap Nazi.

[Mike Connor]

"Frank Church" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
9.11...
<SNIP>
> ..lessee, my last title was bestowed on me by MC's buddy, Gehrke. ;-)

I resemble that remark!

TL
MC

[Mike Connor]

It seems that some here fish with worms,
or are here to see a Fascist´s squirms,
but usually end up high and dry,
as the others simply twitch a fly!

Right wing authoritarians expound,
and the ideologists then resound,
with rhetoric and loud protest,
which is no different from the rest.

It matters not who takes the floor,
it seems that some can only bore,
hurling virtual sticks and stones,
political blurb, and senseless moans.

And? What of these things when hurled?
will they help to save the world?
if you wish such plots to spoil,
then wear a hat of good tinfoil.

Then noone can control your thinking,
though they may think that you´ve been drinking!
or are simply crazy as a loon,
perhaps even jealous of the "silver spoon"?

Wealth and power, or poverty and pride,
there are those who each would chide,
expound forever their objections and ideas,
in point of fact, chew off your ears!

Should you wish to save your brain,
you must ignore them, in the main,
even though they soemtimes may be right,
beware, their motive could be spite.

Of course we all want free discussion,
but preferably with no repercussion,
not arguments and silly personal spats,
from loonies wearing aluminium hats.

TL
MC

[[email protected]]

On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 09:36:02 -0500, Jeff Miller
> wrote:

>David Snedeker wrote:
>
>> Wayne, before you get too far out on the limb I suggest you re-read para 1
>> of my post. Everything attributed to Dean is from one of his posts. (Be
>> happy that I didn't access his posts from some of the other beings he
>> channels.)
>>
>> My opinions on the political contributions from the extended "Dean Empire"
>> to right-wing pols and causes is my opinion based on publicly available
>> listings on the website I cited that Tom is too lazy to consult. If you see
>> legal slander there you might need a bar refresher before you take on civil.
>> :-)
>>
>> The day Americans cannot take on Fascism is the day they have to rip from my
>> cold dead hands the knish. Think about it.
>>
>> Dave
>>
>>
>
>few political or personal opinions change or even seem to evolve in this
>group,

Au contraire, mon frere - for example, at first, my opinion was that
Sarge's stuff was mildly amusing whereas now, I've changed that
opinion...it's pretty flockin' funny...

In fact, since he's earned it, it's promotion time...hmm...what rank,
what rank...AHA! Colonel!

> though some might say they do appear to erode from time to
>time... truth may never be out of fashion, and it's certainly an
>absolute defense to claims of defamation, but...sometimes...in order to
>get it through the door and on the runway for consideration and
>appreciation, it needs to be clothed properly.

Well, sure...maybe Golfwang will make him a nice satan gown...heck, pair
that with some Ho Chi Minh sandals, a babushka's scarf, and a
India...er, Native American headfeather, and our boy will be stylin' old
school...

>because of my own intellectual and personal inadequacies, i frequently
>struggle to understand the vitriolic statements, arguments, and
>disagreements expressed here... still, i am relatively sure of one
>thing...you made no progress against a single fascist by your rant
>toward rdean. one must be cautious about attempts to emulate revere or
>paine lest you be perceived as an ichabod crane...
>
>jeff (and, um, it's "libel", not "slander"... honest <g>)

Don't trust him, Sarg...er, oops, I mean_Colonel_ Flagg - he's one of
them there lawyers...probably went to law school and everything...

Wreck the bowels with howls of folly,
R

[David Snedeker]

"Thomas Littleton" > wrote in message
news:etepf.10654$l25.1649@trnddc03...
>
> "David Snedeker" > wrote in message
>
> >we had a Fascist Revolution in the US and the Fascists won. And
> > I will never accept that.
>
>
> trivialization example number two. I am hardly enamored of the excesses of
> the administration, but we still can change it via the ballot
> boxes......should the Dems actually find an original idea or two. I am
> really starting to despair on that last one, which saddens me.
>
> Tom
>

I guess you don't find it original to get the hell out of Iraq, get on with
the business of hunting down Bin Ladin, or eliminating the deficit. You
remind me of all those excuse makers who never quite get around to fighting
Fascism in this country.

RD doesn't hide his hatred of democracy, doesn't muffle his slurs, and likes
to brag on the influence his money buys. He walks, talks and acts like a
duck. When he flies over the blind, spouting his wingnut you shouldn't get
all prissy that he gets a load of shot in his ass. You know, I think it may
even tickle some need in his dark psyche.

Some may get off on RD's snotty regurgitation of Rush the Drug Addicts daily
blurbs but I don't. I asked you to point out the sleazy lie; you slid off
that one like an ass kisser, and went right back on message.

Now you can respond again, confusing hyperbole with "trivialization,"
implying "slander," and still not looking beyond the sausage.

Dave

[[email protected]]

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 22:04:15 -0800, "David Snedeker"
> wrote:

>The day Americans cannot take on Fascism is the day they have to rip from my
>cold dead hands the knish. Think about it.

Wow, Colonel, you sound just like Charlton Hestonstein!

[Thomas Littleton]

"David Snedeker" > wrote in message
> I guess you don't find it original to get the hell out of Iraq, get on
with
> the business of hunting down Bin Ladin, or eliminating the deficit.

If you could find me a majority of elected Democrats who could actually
agree and provide a concrete plan to do above, I would send them oodles of
money. What I see is a bunch of poll-checking hypocrites, who, despite being
presented with the opportunity of a lifetime(Bush, et al), still can't get
any consensus plan together.


>You
> remind me of all those excuse makers who never quite get around to
fighting
> Fascism in this country.

I frankly couldn't give a rat's ass what I remind you of. The fascism thing
is a bit loony, though, you might want to give it a rest.

>I asked you to point out the sleazy lie; you slid off
> that one like an ass kisser, and went right back on message.

Sorry again, O Titan of Tinfoil, I clearly stated the lie was when you
stated that Dean gave money to several named groups and that you could prove
it. You still haven't come close, so I called Bull****.

> Now you can respond again, confusing hyperbole with "trivialization,"

hyperbole?? Whatever, Dave. All I know is that I have been, for all my
life, considered a "progessive", "liberal", or the like. It gives me gastric
distress to think that such terms and ideals are sullied by the likes of
dimwitted morons such as yourself, who cannot separate social conservatism
from fascism, look for unexplained conspiracies to account for readily
obvious political operations, and basically alienate every thinking person
with a brain from even considering the types of changes which really need to
be addressed in this nation. RDean and I generally are poles apart on
politics, but at least the man has a brain, and sense of humor, and knows
how to apply both.
Perhaps, instead of looking for conspiracies, you could try and search for
an intellect. Yeesh!
Tom

[David Snedeker]

"Frank Church" > wrote in message
9.11...
> "Thomas Littleton" > wrote in news:0repf.10653
> $l25.9727@trnddc03:
>
> >
> > "David Snedeker" > wrote in message
> >> Don't you just love the smell of Fascists squirming in the morning?
>
> ..my God, it must be awful to have to live your life, a conspiracy around
> every corner (and probably under your bed too, if you weren't afraid to
> look) I suggest you trash your tinfoil hat, keep a low profile and keep
> your lights out at nite, lest the men in black helicopters come for your
> sorry ass. BTW, I don't squirm in the morning...I get up, take a ****, get
> dressed and contemplate how lucky I am to be a Fascist instead of a limp-
> wristed whiny-assed dip**** such as you.
>
> Frank the Fascist
> ..lessee, my last title was bestowed on me by MC's buddy, Gehrke. ;-)
> Swap Nazi, yeah, that's it, a Fascist Swap Nazi.

Good post Frank. You seem focused on this "limp-wrist whiny-assed" thing and
seem to embrace the Fascist thing. Not that there is anything wrong with
being gay and certainly there were and are many prominent Fascist gays from
Ernst Rohm, head of the Brownshirts, thru Edgar Hoover, Roy Cohn, down to
the present Whitehouse staff, as Mr Gannon the gay prostitute with the
Whitehouse pass suggests. But I just want to let you know that homey don't
swing that way.

Dave

[[email protected]]

On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 11:46:48 -0800, "David Snedeker"
> wrote:

> But I just want to let you know that homey don't swing that way.

And now, the Joe McCarthy Playhouse presents, "Boyz In Da Hoodz,"
featuring Colonel Flagg, fresh from his role in "The Planet of
Absolutely Heterosexual Apes," in the role of Sally, The Straight (no,
really, he is, REALLY!) Bad MoFo Nigga Gangsta...and Nathan Lane as his
bitch-hoe, Butch...

Dezzle the hazzle with bozzles of hozzle,
R

[Mu Young Lee]

On Sun, 18 Dec 2005, Mike Connor wrote:

> Amazing that people who congregate here purportedly as a result of a common
> interest, can be so nasty to each other. Case of "familiarity breeding
> contempt" perhaps?
>
> OK who´s for golf?

That'd be Timbone Walker, self-proclaimed upstream & dry golfer.

Mu

[David Snedeker]

> wrote in message
...
> On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 22:04:15 -0800, "David Snedeker"
> > wrote:
>
> >The day Americans cannot take on Fascism is the day they have to rip from
my
> >cold dead hands the knish. Think about it.
>
> Wow, Colonel, you sound just like Charlton Hestonstein!

Finally, a promotion from "Sarge" to "Colonel." One more step on the road to
Generalissimo. Venceremos.

Dave

[Mu Young Lee]

On Sun, 18 Dec 2005, Wolfgang wrote:
>
> It's inherent in the nature of democracy. In a monarchy they BREED the scum
> that scam them. Obviously, there are many other ways to elevate scum. The
> trick is to explore avenues for keeping them in check regardless of their
> origins or the mechanisms by which they rise. It's a sisyphean task.

So true.

Mu

[Mike Connor]

"David Snedeker" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
. ..

Your anger is unfocussed, and too generalised, it is doing no good here.

By the way, it might be politically correct to say "Not that there is
anything wrong with being gay", but there is you know, it is an unnatural
perversity, simultaneously a symptom and a result of a sick and corrupt
society. As is the political and other corruption, and the general moral
decay.

Being angry at it, mainly because one is totally sickened and frustrated by
much of it, will not change it. Indeed, it is probably quite impossible to
change it. It will run its course, as this modern, money driven, pleasure
and dissipation dependent society, decays even further, perhaps even to the
point of its own destruction.

You getting uncontrollably angry and frustrated enough to have another heart
attack, will not do anybody any good, least of all yourself.

Focus your anger and frustration on a specific thing that you can change,
channel it, control it, direct it with the precision and purpose of an
expertly wielded scalpel, and use it to change that thing for the better.

Anger can be a very valuable commodity, but only when used correctly and
with purpose. Do not waste it in futile and aimless ranting. This merely
costs energy, causes even more frustration, and has no positive results.

TL
MC

[David Snedeker]

"Thomas Littleton" > wrote in message
news:tkepf.10649$l25.512@trnddc03...
>
> "David Snedeker" > wrote in message
>
> > The day Americans cannot take on Fascism is the day they have to rip
from
> my
> > cold dead hands the knish. Think about it.
>
> I have. The day we call everything that opposes our point of view fascism,
> is the day we completely trivialize the word.
> Tom
>
>

You might want to read a bit about the ideology of Fascism, with particular
reference to the role of syndicates, sometimes called cammeras, the linkage
(vs separation) of the (executive, judiciary, and legislative) branches,
the primacy of the executive, etc.. the glorification of warrior culture,
the use of the threat of torture, the national security state etc.. and the
melding of anti-democratic corporatist interests with the State.
Specifically look at Fascist Italy, Fascist Spain, and the Postwar
infiltration of "EX" Fascists and Nazis into the American Right-wing and
defense/intelligence establishment. President Eisenhower warned of the
danger of these developments to our democracy and freedoms.

Im opposed to many things which are not Fascist in character, and most
conservatives and Republicans are not Fascist. I don't know how old you are
or your fields of expertise, but I think you are confusing the slang
colloquial use of the word Fascist with the word's more exact meaning and
context in history.

Dave
And Eisenhower was a flyfisher who swore by the H&L fly.

[Ken Fortenberry]

Mike Connor wrote:
> <snip>
> By the way, it might be politically correct to say "Not that there is
> anything wrong with being gay", but there is you know, it is an unnatural
> perversity, simultaneously a symptom and a result of a sick and corrupt
> society. ...

Holy ****, Mike. I'd have never imagined you were so
ridiculously uninformed. You sound like one of our TV
preachers.

--
Ken Fortenberry

[David Snedeker]

"David Snedeker" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Wayne Harrison" > wrote in message
> ...
> >
> > (snip)
> Wayne, before you get too far out on the limb I suggest you re-read para 1
> of my post. Everything attributed to Dean is from one of his posts. (Be
> happy that I didn't access his posts from some of the other beings he
> channels.)
>
> My opinions on the political contributions from the extended "Dean Empire"
> to right-wing pols and causes is my opinion based on publicly available
> listings on the website I cited that Tom is too lazy to consult. If you
see
> legal slander there you might need a bar refresher before you take on
civil.
> :-)
>
> The day Americans cannot take on Fascism is the day they have to rip from
my
> cold dead hands the knish. Think about it.
>
> Dave
>

Correction: You never said "slander," you implied liable, I think. My error.

Dave

[David Snedeker]

"Thomas Littleton" > wrote in message
news:0Lipf.28268$Ht4.1088@trnddc08...
>
> "David Snedeker" > wrote in message
> > I guess you don't find it original to get the hell out of Iraq, get on
> with
> > the business of hunting down Bin Ladin, or eliminating the deficit.
>
> If you could find me a majority of elected Democrats who could actually
> agree and provide a concrete plan to do above, I would send them oodles of
> money. What I see is a bunch of poll-checking hypocrites, who, despite
being
> presented with the opportunity of a lifetime(Bush, et al), still can't get
> any consensus plan together.
>
>
> >You
> > remind me of all those excuse makers who never quite get around to
> fighting
> > Fascism in this country.
>
> I frankly couldn't give a rat's ass what I remind you of. The fascism
thing
> is a bit loony, though, you might want to give it a rest.
>
> >I asked you to point out the sleazy lie; you slid off
> > that one like an ass kisser, and went right back on message.
>
> Sorry again, O Titan of Tinfoil, I clearly stated the lie was when you
> stated that Dean gave money to several named groups and that you could
prove
> it. You still haven't come close, so I called Bull****.
>
> > Now you can respond again, confusing hyperbole with "trivialization,"
>
> hyperbole?? Whatever, Dave. All I know is that I have been, for all my
> life, considered a "progessive", "liberal", or the like. It gives me
gastric
> distress to think that such terms and ideals are sullied by the likes of
> dimwitted morons such as yourself, who cannot separate social conservatism
> from fascism, look for unexplained conspiracies to account for readily
> obvious political operations, and basically alienate every thinking person
> with a brain from even considering the types of changes which really need
to
> be addressed in this nation. RDean and I generally are poles apart on
> politics, but at least the man has a brain, and sense of humor, and knows
> how to apply both.
> Perhaps, instead of looking for conspiracies, you could try and search for
> an intellect. Yeesh!
> Tom


You know the more I read your stuff the more I wonder if you read the paper.
You keep talking about conspiracies. And all the non-Dean stuff I spoke to
as I recall was stuff on which there have been indictments and even a few
confessions. Or maybe you haven't heard about Libby, Scanlon, Abramoff,
DeLay, the spies (Franklin, Weissman, and Rosen), the bribed Congressmen,
and a number of others?

And then we have this beauty . . .

> Sorry again, O Titan of Tinfoil, I clearly stated the lie was when you
> stated that Dean gave money to several named groups and that you could
prove
> it. You still haven't come close, so I called Bull****.

Which only clearly demonstrates that you are reading-challenged. Clue:
compare what you say I stated with the original posts.

Dave

[Mike Connor]

"Ken Fortenberry" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
. com...
> Mike Connor wrote:
>> <snip> By the way, it might be politically correct to say "Not that there
>> is anything wrong with being gay", but there is you know, it is an
>> unnatural perversity, simultaneously a symptom and a result of a sick and
>> corrupt society. ...
>
> Holy ****, Mike. I'd have never imagined you were so
> ridiculously uninformed. You sound like one of our TV
> preachers.
>
> --
> Ken Fortenberry

Oh I am not uninformed at all. I do not discriminate against anybody on such
grounds. That does not mean I have to endorse or agree with what they do. I
am getting a bit sick of all this smarmy "political correctness" as well.

Ask a lot of gays, and many will tell you they would rather not be gay, and
feel very bad about it. Quite apart from being ostracised and held in
contempt by many, including the politically correct.

TL
MC

[David Snedeker]

> wrote in message
...
> On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 11:46:48 -0800, "David Snedeker"
> > wrote:
>
> > But I just want to let you know that homey don't swing that way.
>
> And now, the Joe McCarthy Playhouse presents, "Boyz In Da Hoodz,"
> featuring Colonel Flagg, fresh from his role in "The Planet of
> Absolutely Heterosexual Apes," in the role of Sally, The Straight (no,
> really, he is, REALLY!) Bad MoFo Nigga Gangsta...and Nathan Lane as his
> bitch-hoe, Butch...
>
> Dezzle the hazzle with bozzles of hozzle,
> R
>

Gosh, sorry.
How could I forget the need for Black imagery in your Saddo-homoerotic
fantasies. I understand that quantities of burnt cork were found in Ernst
Rohm's effects.

Dave

[Ken Fortenberry]

Mike Connor wrote:
> "Ken Fortenberry" wrote:
>>Mike Connor wrote:
>>><snip> By the way, it might be politically correct to say "Not that there
>>>is anything wrong with being gay", but there is you know, it is an
>>>unnatural perversity, simultaneously a symptom and a result of a sick and
>>>corrupt society. ...
>>
>>Holy ****, Mike. I'd have never imagined you were so
>>ridiculously uninformed. You sound like one of our TV
>>preachers.
>
> Oh I am not uninformed at all.

Yes, you certainly are. There is nothing unnatural or perverse
about homosexuality and homosexuality has nothing whatsoever
to do with a sick and corrupt society. Those who are born gay
have no more choice over what makes them horny than they have
over their hair color or eye color.

> I do not discriminate against anybody on such
> grounds. That does not mean I have to endorse or agree with what they do. I
> am getting a bit sick of all this smarmy "political correctness" as well.

It doesn't have anything to do with "politcal correctness"
it's about being a kind, decent, accepting human being and
until this very moment I had always assumed you were such a
human being.

> Ask a lot of gays, and many will tell you they would rather not be gay, and
> feel very bad about it. Quite apart from being ostracised and held in
> contempt by many, including the politically correct.

Yeah, you lost me there. I'm truly shocked. I consider myself
a fairly good judge of character and fairly adept at reading
clues to character from Usenet posts. I ****ed up big time in
your case Mike.

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Thomas Littleton]

"David Snedeker" > wrote in message
> You know the more I read your stuff the more I wonder if you read the
paper.
> You keep talking about conspiracies. And all the non-Dean stuff I spoke
to
> as I recall was stuff on which there have been indictments and even a few
> confessions. Or maybe you haven't heard about Libby, Scanlon, Abramoff,
> DeLay, the spies (Franklin, Weissman, and Rosen), the bribed Congressmen,
> and a number of others?


I am perfectly well aware of them, and disgusted by one and all. As I
stated(pretty clearly, I thought) the Dems have the easiest material to work
with that could be possibly asked for.....and they have done what with it??
Go back and read what I challenged you on. It was limited to smearing RDean
as some sort of fascist cash contributor. Facts about which you have none,
knowledge of which you have none, a clue about which you have none. None of
the other political stuff was really debated by me, although I might nitpick
a few details, and chose not to.


> And then we have this beauty . . .
> <snipped>
> compare what you say I stated with the original posts.

I quoted your original post in my first response. You stated clearly that
Dean and his "relatives" gave money to various groups. You have and had no
knowledge of who he gives money to. That is uncalled-for bull****.

I stand by the fact that nitwits like you give liberals a bad name. BTW, I
am 50 years old, read 6 newspapers a day, and am perfectly capable of seeing
the wrongs going on, and have, at times railed against them here. There is
no need to reach to loony extremes, the realities will suffice. Still, show
me one show of any cohesive plan put forth by any elected political party in
the US to:
1)get us out of Iraq without an immediate disaster being left behind
......BTW, I stated here a couple years back that going there in the
first place was a massive ****up. That is past, this is now.
2)balance the budget, let alone reduce the debt.
3)deal with the increasing divide between rich and poor in the nation
If you cannot come up with one, perhaps you should be more concerned about
that than who RDean gives his money or support to. Maybe you should be more
concerned about that than goofy fears of imminent fascism around the shadowy
edges, when the problems front and center are so significant.
Tom

[Thomas Littleton]

"Ken Fortenberry" > wrote in message
news:9Vlpf.31076

> I'm truly shocked. I consider myself
> a fairly good judge of character and fairly adept at reading
> clues to character from Usenet posts. I ****ed up big time in
> your case Mike.

I, too, was a bit surprised by Mike's statements re:perversity and
permissive cultures, but I am less willing to doubt his character. I may be
wrong, but see no hatred or ill-will, but will agree with you about a
complete ignorance regarding sexual choice. Mike, might I remind you that
merely because society shunned a group for centuries, that group is not
"perverse", especially when they are following their natural inclinations.
The fact that modern, civilized peoples now are at least somewhat more
tolerant of homosexuals does not indicate a decline, but an elevation in
civilization.
Tom

[[email protected]]

Mike Connor wrote:
> Wealth automatically bestows power, and I have never yet met a wealthy
> person who did not misuse it in some way. I like to think that I would not
> misuse such power or wealth, were I to possess it, but who really knows?
> Certainly, one of the reasons I never made any money was because I was
> apparently somewhat overburdened with scruples and pricinples, and never had
> much interest in any case. Enough was always enough for me.

Look for the new issue of 'Time' magazine which will be coming out in a
couple days. Interesting article on Bill and Malinda Gates and Bona.
Might lift your spirits during the holiday season.

[Mike Connor]

"Ken Fortenberry" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
om...
> I ****ed up big time in
> your case Mike.
>
> --
> Ken Fortenberry

Possibly. Not much to be done about it.

TL
MC

[Mike Connor]

"Thomas Littleton" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:O5mpf.23293$eI5.358@trnddc05...
<SNIP>
> I, too, was a bit surprised by Mike's statements re:perversity and
> permissive cultures, but I am less willing to doubt his character. I may
> be
> wrong, but see no hatred or ill-will, but will agree with you about a
> complete ignorance regarding sexual choice. Mike, might I remind you that
> merely because society shunned a group for centuries, that group is not
> "perverse", especially when they are following their natural inclinations.
> The fact that modern, civilized peoples now are at least somewhat more
> tolerant of homosexuals does not indicate a decline, but an elevation in
> civilization.
> Tom
>
>

It is not normally a "natural" inclination. Often indeed a result of misuse,
or various psychological factors in childhood. I have nothing at all against
people doing whatever they wish to do, quite the reverse, nor do I hate any
such group or persuasion. I merely do not endorse or recommend their
actions. There is no reason why I should.

"Tolerance" is not the same as "acceptance". Indeed, I accept that
homosexuals are merely following their inclinations, and I do not decry them
for it. I do however decry the conditions and problems which cause many to
turn to homosexuality as their only release. In much the same way that I
decry poverty and its terrible effects.

Lastly, I do not believe that anybody is born "gay". There may be quite a
few people who are confused about their sexual orientation, I accept this
too, and I feel sorry for them, but that is also no reason to see their
actions as laudable.

TL
MC

[Ken Fortenberry]

Mike Connor wrote:
> <snip>
> Lastly, I do not believe that anybody is born "gay".

You're wrong.

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Mike Connor]

"Ken Fortenberry" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
om...
> Mike Connor wrote:
>> <snip> Lastly, I do not believe that anybody is born "gay".
>
> You're wrong.
>
> --
> Ken Fortenberry

Prove it.

TL
MC

[[email protected]]

On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 14:56:44 -0800, "David Snedeker"
> wrote:

>
> wrote in message
...
>> On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 11:46:48 -0800, "David Snedeker"
>> > wrote:
>>
>> > But I just want to let you know that homey don't swing that way.
>>
>> And now, the Joe McCarthy Playhouse presents, "Boyz In Da Hoodz,"
>> featuring Colonel Flagg, fresh from his role in "The Planet of
>> Absolutely Heterosexual Apes," in the role of Sally, The Straight (no,
>> really, he is, REALLY!) Bad MoFo Nigga Gangsta...and Nathan Lane as his
>> bitch-hoe, Butch...
>>
>> Dezzle the hazzle with bozzles of hozzle,
>> R
>>
>
>Gosh, sorry.
>How could I forget the need for Black imagery

O-o-o-o-h, you used "homey" in the classical Greek/Milesian sense, as in
"Anaximander expounded on his homey Thales' water theories," not in
black imagery sense, "homey don't swing that way."

>in your Saddo-homoerotic fantasies.

Or in your wildest dreams. apparently.

>I understand that quantities of burnt cork were found in Ernst
>Rohm's effects.

Aw, he was probably just experimenting with rod handle repair
techniques...

Knock the balls with dowels of poly,
R
....and obROFF, "burnt" cork actually is used for rod handles...

[Thomas Littleton]

"Mike Connor" > wrote in message

> Lastly, I do not believe that anybody is born "gay". There may be quite a
> few people who are confused about their sexual orientation, I accept this
> too, and I feel sorry for them, but that is also no reason to see their
> actions as laudable.
>
there is the crux of my difference. I do believe homosexuals, with some
small exceptions, are born with that orientation. Recent research would
indicate that to be the case, as well.
Tom

[Ken Fortenberry]

Mike Connor wrote:
> "Ken Fortenberry" wrote:
>>Mike Connor wrote:
>>><snip> Lastly, I do not believe that anybody is born "gay".
>>
>>You're wrong.
>
> Prove it.

If you're going to accuse people of "political correctness"
and state categorically that there is something wrong with
being gay I would think the burden of proof would be on you.

But here's this at any rate.

http://www.webmd.com/content/article/100/105486.htm

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Mike Connor]

"Thomas Littleton" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
news:cTmpf.28558$Ht4.18395@trnddc08...
<SNIP>
> there is the crux of my difference. I do believe homosexuals, with some
> small exceptions, are born with that orientation. Recent research would
> indicate that to be the case, as well.
> Tom
>

Perhaps, I really don´t know. What I do know is that most of the gays I have
met, except under artificial circumstances, have been quite sad at their
orientation, and many suffer considerably as a result of their leanings.

I wonder why there are no other homosexual animals? Might it possibly have
something to do with the fact that it would be well nigh impossible to pass
on ones genes? Or are you now going to tell me that being bisexual, or
multisexual, or screwing sheep, or house bricks, is perfectly normal?

TL
MC

[[email protected]]

On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 23:03:33 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
> wrote:

> I consider myself
>a fairly good judge of character and fairly adept at reading
>clues to character from Usenet posts.

I suspect that many of the things at which you consider yourself fairly
adept are the result of misplaced judgment...

Stack the boules with piles of hooey,
R
....yeah, yeah, yeah...sure, it was a slow pitch, but it was just sorta
hangin' out there...

[Mike Connor]

"Ken Fortenberry" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
. com...
<SNIP>
> If you're going to accuse people of "political correctness"
> and state categorically that there is something wrong with
> being gay I would think the burden of proof would be on you.
>
> But here's this at any rate.
>
> http://www.webmd.com/content/article/100/105486.htm
>
> --
> Ken Fortenberry

I did not accuse anybody of political correctness, I merely remarked that I
was sick of it.

"Something wrong", depends on one´s definition of "Something wrong". I did
not say it was "Wrong", I said it was an "unnatural perversion", perhaps I
should have said a "natural perversion", or simply a "perversion". It does
not necessarily follow that I think it is wrong. As it happens, I don´t
think it is wrong, merely a perversion of the normal sex drive, whatever the
cause may happen to be. Genetic or environmental.

This follows as the logical conclusion from the simple fact that there can
be no offspring from such a union, it merely serves to provide sexual and
presumably emotional satisfaction for those involved. While I realise that
these particular criteria could now well be applied to heterosexual
relations in many cases, it still follows that practically speaking, such
relations could at least result in progeny, while others simply can not do
so.

That is research, and seemingly without any concrete conclusions.

Whatever, as somebody recently quite unnecessarily informed me, there is
little reasonable or differentiated discussion on here, and I might just as
well **** in the wind as to try to explain my thoughts on this particular
matter. Most particularly to people who fondly imagine that they can carry
out a complete and first class character analysis based on a single
statement.

TL
MC

[Thomas Littleton]

"Mike Connor" > wrote in message
>What I do know is that most of the gays I have
> met, except under artificial circumstances, have been quite sad at their
> orientation, and many suffer considerably as a result of their leanings.

no doubt. Society is still a bit rough in that regard. My experience would
be somewhat similar.

> I wonder why there are no other homosexual animals? Might it possibly
have
> something to do with the fact that it would be well nigh impossible to
pass
> on ones genes?

sexual orientation in any species is not really well understood, or even
much studied.



Or are you now going to tell me that being bisexual, or
> multisexual, or screwing sheep, or house bricks, is perfectly normal?
>

I've always regard "normal" as a VERY suspect word. The thing with house
bricks sounds painful, however..........

Tom

[Wolfgang]

"Mike Connor" > wrote in message
...
>
> ...as somebody recently quite unnecessarily informed me, there is little
> reasonable or differentiated discussion on here

Hm......

Actually, what someone recently informed you of (unnecessarily or otherwise)
was a difference of opinion on the root cause of nastiness in this
newsgroup.

> , and I might just as well **** in the wind as to try to explain my
> thoughts on this particular matter.

Whether this matter or any other, there are people here willing to listen to
any reasonable explanation......and perhaps even a few capable of
understanding.

> Most particularly to people who fondly imagine that they can carry out a
> complete and first class character analysis based on a single statement.

Yep, single statements, it would appear, are subject to
misunderstanding......even clear ones.

Wolfgang

[Wolfgang]

"Mike Connor" > wrote in message
...
>
> ...I wonder why there are no other homosexual animals?...

There are. Many. "Dr. Tatiana's Sex Advice to All Creation", by Olivia
Judson, is a marvelous, entertaining, and painless introduction to the
bewildering (and not a little beautiful) world of sexuality.

Wolfgang

[Stan Gula]

Mike Connor wrote:
> I wonder why there are no other homosexual animals?

Maybe this article about our closest relatives would be enlightening:
http://songweaver.com/info/bonobos.html
--
Stan Gula
http://gula.org/roffswaps

[Wolfgang]

"Thomas Littleton" > wrote in message
news:D2opf.7665$CL.7481@trnddc04...
>
> ...orientation in any species is not really well understood, or even
> much studied....

There's enough literature to keep a body busy for a lifetime or two......and
it's growing faster than advances in gerontology.

Good luck! :)

Wolfgang

[Thomas Littleton]

"Wolfgang" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Thomas Littleton" > wrote in message
> news:D2opf.7665$CL.7481@trnddc04...
> >
> > ...orientation in any species is not really well understood, or even
> > much studied....
>
> There's enough literature to keep a body busy for a lifetime or
two......and
> it's growing faster than advances in gerontology.
>
> Good luck! :)
>
> Wolfgang
>
>

I have no doubt you are right, at this stage, but the same could be said,
and in many cases by an order of magnitude more, for a host of topics in
reproductive biology. Scientific literature is in no short supply, although
some papers I have encountered were slow enough to seemingly take a lifetime
to slog through by themselves.<g>
Tom

[rw]

Ken Fortenberry wrote:
> Mike Connor wrote:
>
>> "Ken Fortenberry" wrote:
>>
>>> Mike Connor wrote:
>>>
>>>> <snip> By the way, it might be politically correct to say "Not that
>>>> there is anything wrong with being gay", but there is you know, it
>>>> is an unnatural perversity, simultaneously a symptom and a result of
>>>> a sick and corrupt society. ...
>>>
>>>
>>> Holy ****, Mike. I'd have never imagined you were so
>>> ridiculously uninformed. You sound like one of our TV
>>> preachers.
>>
>>
>> Oh I am not uninformed at all.
>
>
> Yes, you certainly are. There is nothing unnatural or perverse
> about homosexuality and homosexuality has nothing whatsoever
> to do with a sick and corrupt society. Those who are born gay
> have no more choice over what makes them horny than they have
> over their hair color or eye color.

Aren't you the same guy who used to try (unsuccessfully) to insult me by
calling me gay?

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

[rw]

Mike Connor wrote:
>
> I wonder why there are no other homosexual animals?

There are many examples of homosexuality in non-human animals -- most
prominently bonobos. See, for example,

http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html

I'm telling you, though, that this gay marriage thing is a serious
threat to traditional man/woman marriage. Just think about it. If gay
marriage is legal the gays will book all the banquet halls, and then
we'll be in a real fix.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

[Ken Fortenberry]

rw wrote:
> Aren't you the same guy who used to try (unsuccessfully) to insult me by
> calling me gay?

Nope, I'm the guy who pointed out that you were an
effeminate putz pretending to be a wild west he-man.

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Wolfgang]

"Thomas Littleton" > wrote in message
news:8Zopf.29062$Ht4.18812@trnddc08...
>
> "Wolfgang" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Thomas Littleton" > wrote in message
>> news:D2opf.7665$CL.7481@trnddc04...
>> >
>> > ...orientation in any species is not really well understood, or even
>> > much studied....
>>
>> There's enough literature to keep a body busy for a lifetime or
> two......and
>> it's growing faster than advances in gerontology.
>>
>> Good luck! :)
>>
>> Wolfgang
>>
>>
>
> I have no doubt you are right, at this stage, but the same could be said,
> and in many cases by an order of magnitude more, for a host of topics in
> reproductive biology. Scientific literature is in no short supply,
> although
> some papers I have encountered were slow enough to seemingly take a
> lifetime
> to slog through by themselves.<g>

Sometime within the last year I got a proof of a paper, just after it had
been accepted for publication, that I coauthored while in transplant
surgery......a department I left over four years ago. :)

There are many things that are much studied.....and well understood......and
a complete mystery to the general public. The vast majority of them are
also complete mysteries to most specialists in allied fields. In our lab we
do journal club in lieu of the regularly scheduled lab meeting on the third
Tuesday of each month. The sole purpose of this exercise is for us to help
one another keep abreast of what's new and/or important in our own narrow
and closely related areas of research. We have five principle investigators
(an amalgam of MDs, PhDs, and MD/PhDs) six fulltime techs, usually one
resident on a six month rotation, and often a med-student and/or an
undergrad doing an internship......say, something like twelve or so people
altogether, on average. It is impossible for us to keep up on everything
published in our specialty.

Wolfgang

[David Snedeker]

"Thomas Littleton" > wrote in message
news:xXlpf.23102$eI5.13456@trnddc05...
>
This is so typical of the reading-challenged. Here you quote me . . .
"relatives".... Maybe you could identify the post where this word you are
quoting was used by me? Otherwise I might start making up quotes for you.

> I quoted your original post in my first response. You stated clearly that
> Dean and his "relatives" gave money to various groups. You have and had no
> knowledge of who he gives money to.

You haven't done the reading yet? Have you?

> I stand by the fact that nitwits like you give liberals a bad name. BTW, I
> am 50 years old, read 6 newspapers a day, and am perfectly capable of
seeing
> the wrongs going on, and have, at times railed against them here.

You may be a liberal, but I most certainly am not.

You read 6 papers a day and you played out your tin hat and conspiracies
riff? You can't have it both ways. If you read the papers you know that the
non-directly Dean stuff I said is not from the conspiracy theory vat, so you
were just saying that stuff to confuse things. I prefer to believe you were
at least sincere and speaking in defense of an individual, but ignorant of
the rest.

As to your other stuff . . .

1. You may not have heard but Iraq is already an immediate disaster. We
gave it a go, "Helped" them as much as we could and now its time to come
home. If you want to go over there and contribute your liberal skills maybe
Haliburton can find a place for you.

Here is a lesson: You do not build a ground Army for combat, then **** them
away in a long drawn out police action. Airforce folks can bomb from afar
over and over with little opposition and little loss of morale. Navy folk
can stand off, blast away and sleep clean and warm every nite. But the Army,
Marines and some of the CIA fight their war steeped in the sweat of fear,
dirt, puke, and burnt flesh. Right now we are wasting our most precious
defense resource pinned down in an desert ********. We did our share and
now its time for the Iraqis to earn their own democracy.

> 2)balance the budget, let alone reduce the debt.

You are kidding right? Never heard of living within ones means? If you can't
pay for it don't buy it? That means if you spend it you must tax for it, or
you eventually go broke. Clue: He was President before Bush and his last
name started with a "C" and he liked poontang and cigars.

Dave
Jeez, which part of ******** don't they understand

[David Snedeker]

"Ken Fortenberry" > wrote in message
om...
> Mike Connor wrote:
> > "Ken Fortenberry" wrote:


Not to pull a Tom but. . .

Being one of the instigators of this turn in the thread, let me say don't
read too much into his comment. Not that I agree with him but remember that
lots of us older citizens are less evolved on some of these issues than folk
just a few annum younger. So we tend to stumble into politically incorrect
boxes. Doesn't mean we are totally retrograde (except maybe Frank). It might
mean simply that we don't look good in a bra and panties.

Dave

[Cyli]

On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 01:22:43 +0100, "Mike Connor"
> wrote:

>
>"Thomas Littleton" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>news:cTmpf.28558$Ht4.18395@trnddc08...
><SNIP>
>> there is the crux of my difference. I do believe homosexuals, with some
>> small exceptions, are born with that orientation. Recent research would
>> indicate that to be the case, as well.
>> Tom
>>
>
>Perhaps, I really don?t know. What I do know is that most of the gays I have
>met, except under artificial circumstances, have been quite sad at their
>orientation, and many suffer considerably as a result of their leanings.

I know I would be sad and suffering if most of humanity regarded me as
an upsetting and disgusting pervert. Hell, even if a sizeable
fraction of it did, I'd suffer, emotionally or by whatever means they
thought up to support their opinions.
>
>I wonder why there are no other homosexual animals? Might it possibly have
>something to do with the fact that it would be well nigh impossible to pass
>on ones genes? Or are you now going to tell me that being bisexual, or
>multisexual, or screwing sheep, or house bricks, is perfectly normal?

Are you sure there aren't any homosexual animals? Really sure? I've
read some studies, since sex has been open to discussion (in my youth
it wasn't, much) that have shown field animals exhibiting homosexual
behaviours. Mostly it was decided that it was an exhibition of power
by the more active partner in the act. But that was an opinion
offered by the person studying the behaviour. No one asked the
domestic animals. Then there are the bonobos, who seem to do anything
sexual possible as much of the time as possible. They seem to be
breeding just fine.

As for wild animals, there has been, except for the bonobos, almost
nothing in print on their sexuality. I'm sure any observer who saw
something 'unnatural' simply left it off the record, or mentioned it
only to the people he was out with around the fire at night. So no
one really knows much about that.

The fact that the animals continue to breed does indicate that they
are, in general, mostly heterosexual most of the time. Other than
that, I've seen nothing that I'd regard as definitive.

Until recently, most following and studying of wild animals has been
for the purpose of killing them for food or trophies, with a side
group capturing them for sale to zoos. This does not lead to much in
the way of the studies of their sexual behaviour. If a hunter found
a couple of male animals who weren't in the rut season hanging out
together, he'd assume they were just good friends, 'cause you know how
guys tend to buddy up. Yes, there have been naturalists on and off
throughout history and more in the last hundred years, but how many of
them mentioned even heterosexual behaviours?

I'd assume that homosexuality and cross species dating (bestiality,
but when both are beasts, what can one call it?) are rare in the wild
(the latter more rare, as it tends to be dangerous for some species to
be near others), but our assumptions on it are just that, assumptions.
And the information from naturalists, even now, would be biased by
their own social prejudices and proclivities. Not to mention how
little they'd like to be unpublished or vilified if they the did get
on to unpopular ground.

Natural may not be all the same all the time for all species.

Switching to another urge and keeping in mind the female lioness who
had a strong mothering urge and no cubs. She kept kidnapping baby
antelopes and trying to raise them. Not successfully, as every time
she left to hunt, some other predator would chow down on her recent
adoptee. Was she natural? Were the baby antelopes natural for
accepting the mothering? Were the predators who ate the baby
antelopes more natural? Personally, I was kind of po'd that the
observers didn't capture the lioness and antelope, keep them safe, and
observe them for a while. But that's just personal.




Cyli
r.bc: vixen. Minnow goddess. Speaker to squirrels.
Often taunted by trout. Almost entirely harmless.

http://www.visi.com/~cyli
email: (strip the .invalid to email)

[David Snedeker]

"Wolfgang" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Thomas Littleton" > wrote in message
> news:8Zopf.29062$Ht4.18812@trnddc08...
> >
> > "Wolfgang" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >>
SNIP SNIP
.. . . undergrad doing an internship......say, something like twelve or so
people
> altogether, on average. It is impossible for us to keep up on everything
> published in our specialty.
>
> Wolfgang
>
.. . . much less have the time to blow one another more than once, although
it would be perfectly normal to blow one another multiple times.

By the way I have noticed that you have been very cranky since your weekend
at the Ramrod. Is that normal? How about in the animal world?

Dave

[Scott Seidman]

"Mike Connor" > wrote in news:do4vg9$5o3$02$1
@news.t-online.com:

> I wonder why there are no other homosexual animals?

At least I can save you the time you spend wondering.
http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2004/07/0722_040722_gayanimal.html

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

[Dave LaCourse]

On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 02:59:03 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
> wrote:

>rw wrote:
>> Aren't you the same guy who used to try (unsuccessfully) to insult me by
>> calling me gay?
>
>Nope, I'm the guy who pointed out that you were an
>effeminate putz pretending to be a wild west he-man.

<SPLORK>

Ain't life grand, sitting back and watching the liberals trash each
other. Why, it's a regular daisy chain of "perversion", but fun
nonetheless. d;o)

[Frank Church]

"David Snedeker" > wrote in
:

> Being one of the instigators of this turn in the thread, let me say
> don't read too much into his comment. Not that I agree with him but
> remember that lots of us older citizens are less evolved on some of
> these issues than folk just a few annum younger. So we tend to stumble
> into politically incorrect boxes. Doesn't mean we are totally
> retrograde (except maybe Frank). It might mean simply that we don't
> look good in a bra and panties.

.....in your case getting older has not given you more common sense or
wisdom, but an abundance of weird **** running through that mind of
yours.
I repeat, what a wonderful feeling to know that I don't have to suffer
the disease of the mind that you and other tin hat wearers have to deal
with.
I'm not one to Google up someone's posts on here, but it seems to me that
over the years that you have been infesting this group with your
confrontational style there have been pitifully few posts that relate to
flyfishing or anything even remotely associatied with said activity. At
least Gherke, who was taken to task many times over his outrageous
behavior here, did post some good advice, stories, etc. having to do with
flyfishing. You, on the other hand seem to exist here to regale us with
your ****ed up tin hat rantings, and of course someone almost always
challenges your tripe. That leads to being "snedekered", helluva legacy
to have your name turned into a verb connoting the sort of treatment you
hand out. This thread is over for me, an absolute waste of time to deal
with your ranting.

Frank Sr.
*PLONK*

[Conan The Librarian]

wrote:

> On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 14:56:44 -0800, "David Snedeker"
> > wrote:
>
>>I understand that quantities of burnt cork were found in Ernst
>>Rohm's effects.
>
> Aw, he was probably just experimenting with rod handle repair
> techniques...

Now *that* was funny. :-)


Chuck Vance

[Wolfgang]

"David Snedeker" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Wolfgang" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "Thomas Littleton" > wrote in message
>> news:8Zopf.29062$Ht4.18812@trnddc08...
>> >
>> > "Wolfgang" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> >>
> SNIP SNIP
> . . . undergrad doing an internship......say, something like twelve or so
> people
>> altogether, on average. It is impossible for us to keep up on everything
>> published in our specialty.
>>
>> Wolfgang
>>
> . . . much less have the time to blow one another more than once, although
> it would be perfectly normal to blow one another multiple times.
>
> By the way I have noticed that you have been very cranky since your
> weekend
> at the Ramrod. Is that normal? How about in the animal world?

Hm.....

Well, as has been pointed out elsewhere, I'm no authority on current events
but, as I stated above, I DO try to keep up with what's hot in the
scientific literature. As yet, I've discovered no credible evidence of
widespread Homo Immuno Virus or Hebrew Immuno Virus in the Pacific Northwest
of the U.S. Moreover, rumors of spread by casual contact appear (for the
moment at least) to be just that and nothing more. Still, you're right, I
think, a boy can't be too careful.

Always remember, boys (especially) and girls, thorough and frequent hand
washing with plenty of soap and hot water is still the single best
prophylaxis against the spread of communicable diseases.......but do watch
out for flying spittle as well. :)

Wolfgang
who hastens to add that to date authorities are by no means unanimous in a
definition of "casual".

[Ken Fortenberry]

David Snedeker wrote:
> "Ken Fortenberry" wrote:
>>Mike Connor wrote:
>
> ... Not that I agree with him but remember that
> lots of us older citizens are less evolved on some of these issues than folk
> just a few annum younger. So we tend to stumble into politically incorrect
> boxes. Doesn't mean we are totally retrograde ...

Is that what you call it, "retrograde" ?

At the the risk of "smarmy political correctness" I'd
suggest that "retrograde" opinions about Jews, blacks
and homosexuals should be kept to oneself and not posted
here. This suggestion applies especially to those posting
here from Germany. Know what I mean ?

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Charlie Choc]

On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 16:43:38 GMT, Ken Fortenberry >
wrote:

> This suggestion applies especially to those posting
>here from Germany. Know what I mean ?

Why don't you just say it, 40?
--
Charlie...
http://www.chocphoto.com

[Daniel-San]

"Ken Fortenberry" wrote ...

>. This suggestion applies especially to those posting
> here from Germany. Know what I mean ?
>
> --
> Ken Fortenberry

C'mon Ken.

You're smarter than to invoke Godwin's Law. I figured someone would go there
eventually, but I didn't think it's be you.

Dan

[Wolfgang]

"Ken Fortenberry" > wrote in message
om...
> David Snedeker wrote:
>> "Ken Fortenberry" wrote:
>>>Mike Connor wrote:
>>
>> ... Not that I agree with him but remember that
>> lots of us older citizens are less evolved on some of these issues than
>> folk
>> just a few annum younger. So we tend to stumble into politically
>> incorrect
>> boxes. Doesn't mean we are totally retrograde ...
>
> Is that what you call it, "retrograde" ?
>
> At the the risk of "smarmy political correctness" I'd
> suggest that "retrograde" opinions about Jews, blacks
> and homosexuals should be kept to oneself and not posted
> here. This suggestion applies especially to those posting
> here from Germany.

Oh? The Krauts STILL haven't managed to scrub out that troublesome stain?
Tsk, tsk.....and they're such a neat and orderly people!

> Know what I mean ?

We're beginning to think so.

Wo.....um.....

Bill

[Scott Seidman]

Dave LaCourse > wrote in
:

> Ain't life grand, sitting back and watching the liberals trash each
> other. Why, it's a regular daisy chain of "perversion", but fun
> nonetheless. d;o)
>
>
>

Unlike the lock-step right, liberals have no qualms about pointing out
differences of opinion within the party. This is probably the biggest
reason for the current state of Congress and the Admin.

--
Scott
Reverse name to reply

[Wolfgang]

"Scott Seidman" > wrote in message
. 1.4...
> Dave LaCourse > wrote in
> :
>
>> Ain't life grand, sitting back and watching the liberals trash each
>> other. Why, it's a regular daisy chain of "perversion", but fun
>> nonetheless. d;o)
>>
>>
>>
>
> Unlike the lock-step right, liberals have no qualms about pointing out
> differences of opinion within the party. This is probably the biggest
> reason for the current state of Congress and the Admin.

Still, as hobbies go, deriving a certain pleasure from watching perversions
seems harmless enough. I mean, what the hell, people are going to kill one
another regardless......where's the harm in enjoying the spectacle?

Wolfgang

[David Snedeker]

"Dave LaCourse" > wrote in message
...
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 02:59:03 GMT, Ken Fortenberry
> > wrote:
>
> >rw wrote:
> >> Aren't you the same guy who used to try (unsuccessfully) to insult me
by
> >> calling me gay?
> >
> >Nope, I'm the guy who pointed out that you were an
> >effeminate putz pretending to be a wild west he-man.
>
> <SPLORK>
>
> Ain't life grand, sitting back and watching the liberals trash each
> other. Why, it's a regular daisy chain of "perversion", but fun
> nonetheless. d;o)
>
>

Yeah I agree Dave. So disorganized. So out. Why can't they be more tweedy,
like the Log Cabin Republicans?

Dave
Navy guys are so butch

[Ken Fortenberry]

Charlie Choc wrote:
> Ken Fortenberry wrote:
>>This suggestion applies especially to those posting
>>here from Germany. Know what I mean ?
>
> Why don't you just say it, 40?

OK. It.

I said exactly what I wanted to say, no more, no less.

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Ken Fortenberry]

Daniel-San wrote:
> "Ken Fortenberry" wrote ...
>>This suggestion applies especially to those posting
>>here from Germany. Know what I mean ?
>
> C'mon Ken.
>
> You're smarter than to invoke Godwin's Law. ...

Technically the post must contain either Hitler or Nazi
to invoke Godwin's Law. But all technicalities aside
the reference was both deliberate and apt. And hopefully
we'll be spared Mr. Connor's "retrograde" spew in the
future.

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Charlie Choc]

On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 18:01:19 GMT, Ken Fortenberry >
wrote:

>Charlie Choc wrote:
>> Ken Fortenberry wrote:
>>>This suggestion applies especially to those posting
>>>here from Germany. Know what I mean ?
>>
>> Why don't you just say it, 40?
>
>OK. It.
>
>I said exactly what I wanted to say, no more, no less.

How manly of you.
--
Charlie...
http://www.chocphoto.com

[Dave LaCourse]

On 19 Dec 2005 17:06:22 GMT, Scott Seidman
> wrote:

>Dave LaCourse > wrote in
:
>
>> Ain't life grand, sitting back and watching the liberals trash each
>> other. Why, it's a regular daisy chain of "perversion", but fun
>> nonetheless. d;o)
>>


>>
>>
>
>Unlike the lock-step right, liberals have no qualms about pointing out
>differences of opinion within the party. This is probably the biggest
>reason for the current state of Congress and the Admin.

And who is a lock-step right, or a neo con ftm?

I'm just one of those dastardly Republicans neither locking nor neo,
but still havin' fun watching almost all the liberals on roff self
destruct.

What the hell has happened to roff. I can understand youse guys
dissing me because of my views on Kerry, et al, but everyone is taking
potshots at everyone else. Ken is shooting Wolfgang, who's shooting
everyone, rw pops up insisting he's not gay, MC is ganged up on
because he thinks homosexuality is wrong, Choc is bashing Ken,
Snedeker is foaming at the mouth about everyone/thing, level headed
Littleton is in for a pound, and entering stage right is Richard Dean
waving his dick at you and having a great time of it.

wayno calls this place a nuthouse, and with good cause.

I think everyone needs to take a step back and look at these folks who
were once your friends and stop the cheap **** attacks.

Just a thought.

Dave (aanpfw)

[Dave LaCourse]

On Sat, 17 Dec 2005 18:19:04 -0700, Willi >
wrote:

>Wolfgang wrote:
>
>>
>> Well, I'd be happy to join you in a beer or two, but I'm not much of a fan
>> of pointlessness......I rarely indulge.
>
>
>IMO, the below is as pointless as it gets........
>
>
>Wolfgang wrote:
>
> > well, you're stupid; it wouldn't do you any good.
>
>
> > you are a fool
>
>
> > Stupid. Stupid beyond description.
>
>
> > That's because you are stupid.
>
>
> > those who already espouse the view you put forward, are congenitally
> > stupid
>
>
> > Stupid.
> >
> >> Just plain stupid.
>
>
> > Stupid.
> >
> >> Just plain stupid.
>
>
> > you are an abject fool
>
>
> > Stupid.
> >
> >> Just plain stupid.
>
>
> > Stupid.
> >
> >> Just plain stupid.
>
>
> > Good God, you are stupid
>
>
> > God you are dumber than Janik.
>
>
> > I'll reserve the right to
> > remind him that his ass sucks wind
>
>
> > a necrophiliac, an idiot, and
> >
> >> unsavory to boot
>
>
> > you are an
> > idiot
>
>
> > advice is lost on one as deranged as you
>
>
>
> > he
> > IS an idiot.....but he is nowhere near as stupid and self deluded as
> > yourself.
>
>
> > Yeah, but you're an idiot.
>
>
> > Stupid. Just plain stupid.
>
>
> > ****in moron
>
>
> > You are a pathetic ****ing moron,
>
>
> > Fool
>
>
> > come on you
> > piece of **** moron..
>
>
> > Dang, you really are dumb.
>
>
> > YOU DUMB ****!
>
>
> > you are an abject fool
>
>
> > You're a liar
>
>
> > This makes you a liar as well as an idiot.
>
>
> > you are a liar
>
>
> > And you are a liar
>
>
> > Well, yeah, but you're a liar.
>
>
> > Hm......liar or idiot?
>
>
> > Well, you're a liar....
>
>
> > you insufferable moron
>
>
> > Liar.
>
>
> > dumb as he
> > is
>
>
> > You may well be the most disgusting human being I've ever
> > met
>
>
>
>Willi

>

The best post in the history of roff.

[rw]

Dave LaCourse wrote:
>
> rw pops up insisting he's not gay,

You completely missed the point, as usual. I couldn't care less if
someone thinks I'm gay. I was only pointing out Fortenberry's monumental
hypocrisy.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

[Charlie Choc]

On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 13:59:50 -0500, Dave LaCourse >
wrote:

> Choc is bashing Ken,

?
--
Charlie...
http://www.chocphoto.com

[Wolfgang]

"Dave LaCourse" > wrote in message
...

> The best post in the history of roff.

Has anyone ever told you that you've got a magnificent flair for
understatement? :)

Wolfgang
good god, the boy is dim. :(

[Ken Fortenberry]

Dave LaCourse wrote:
>
> ... MC is ganged up on
> because he thinks homosexuality is wrong, ...

MC went a lot further than "wrong". He called it
unnatural, perverse and the result of a sick and
corrupt society. He deserves a good and thorough
Usenet bitch slapping and I for one am proud of
this place for having delivered it.

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Mike Connor]

"Ken Fortenberry" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
. com...
> Dave LaCourse wrote:
>>
>> ... MC is ganged up on
>> because he thinks homosexuality is wrong, ...
>
> MC went a lot further than "wrong". He called it
> unnatural, perverse and the result of a sick and
> corrupt society. He deserves a good and thorough
> Usenet bitch slapping and I for one am proud of
> this place for having delivered it.
>
> --
> Ken Fortenberry

Dont be silly. You got incensed at something I said and made a song and
dance about it. Just like many of the most aggressive homosexuals, nobody
would mind at all if they did what ever they do in private, like any normal
person, but they have to make a song and dance about it, and upset others
with their publically offensive behaviour.

Your veiled remarks referring to Germany are also extremely offensive. First
of all, I am English. Secondly, there are more homosexuals here per capita
than practically anywhere else, you can not go into a bar in a city without
some friggin pervert touching your arse. Now you may well enjoy that, but I
don´t, and the next one that does it to me is not going to have any sexual
problems for quite a while.

As for "Usenet bitch slapping", that is just pathetic.

MC

[Wolfgang]

"Ken Fortenberry" > wrote in message
. com...
> Charlie Choc wrote:
>> Ken Fortenberry wrote:
>>>This suggestion applies especially to those posting
>>>here from Germany. Know what I mean ?
>>
>> Why don't you just say it, 40?
>
> OK. It.
>
> I said exactly what I wanted to say, no more, no less.

And yet, you somehow managed to say a whole lot more......and less......than
you think.

Wolfgang

[Dave LaCourse]

On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 19:05:37 GMT, rw >
wrote:

>Dave LaCourse wrote:
>>
>> rw pops up insisting he's not gay,
>
>You completely missed the point, as usual. I couldn't care less if
>someone thinks I'm gay. I was only pointing out Fortenberry's monumental
>hypocrisy.

I didn't miss "the point", Barnard.

Sheeeesh, you are so easy to get to.

d;op

[Ken Fortenberry]

Wolfgang wrote:
> "Ken Fortenberry" wrote:
>>Charlie Choc wrote:
>>>Why don't you just say it, 40?
>>
>>OK. It.
>>
>>I said exactly what I wanted to say, no more, no less.
>
> And yet, you somehow managed to say a whole lot more......and less......than
> you think.

That's the beauty of it, eh ?

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Charlie Choc]

On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 19:47:49 GMT, Ken Fortenberry >
wrote:

> He deserves a good and thorough
>Usenet bitch slapping and I for one am proud of
>this place for having delivered it.

Whatever he deserved, what he got was at best a swooning Usenet hissy fit.
--
Charlie...
http://www.chocphoto.com

[Ken Fortenberry]

Mike Connor wrote:
> "Ken Fortenberry" wrote:
>>
>>MC went a lot further than "wrong". He called it
>>unnatural, perverse and the result of a sick and
>>corrupt society. He deserves a good and thorough
>>Usenet bitch slapping and I for one am proud of
>>this place for having delivered it.
>
> Dont be silly. You got incensed at something I said and made a song and
> dance about it.

You're goddamn right I did. Your remarks disgusted me and
crap like that should be answered with indignation.

> <snip>
> Your veiled remarks referring to Germany are also extremely offensive. First
> of all, I am English. Secondly, there are more homosexuals here per capita
> than practically anywhere else, you can not go into a bar in a city without
> some friggin pervert touching your arse. Now you may well enjoy that, but I
> don´t, and the next one that does it to me is not going to have any sexual
> problems for quite a while.
>
> As for "Usenet bitch slapping", that is just pathetic.

No Mike, your bigotry is pathetic. If I were a better man
I'd pity you, but I'm just an asshole and all I can muster
up is contempt. I think my suggestion was a good one, that
is if you have ignorant and offensive views it's a good
idea to keep them to yourself. Or refrain from posting them
here at any rate.

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Willi]

Wolfgang wrote:

> Wolfgang
> good god, the boy is dim. :(
>
>

Wolfgang wrote:


> Good Lord but you are dim
>
> Good Lord, you are dim!
>
> Good God, you are dim.
>
> good god, but the boy is dim
>
> is dim-witted
>
> could ANYONE be so dim
>
> who is honestly too ****ing dim

> Good Lord, you are dim!


Willi

[Mike Connor]

"Ken Fortenberry" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
<SNIP>
> No Mike, your bigotry is pathetic. If I were a better man
> I'd pity you, but I'm just an asshole and all I can muster
> up is contempt. I think my suggestion was a good one, that
> is if you have ignorant and offensive views it's a good
> idea to keep them to yourself. Or refrain from posting them
> here at any rate.
>
> --
> Ken Fortenberry

"Physician, heal thyself"

TL
MC

[rw]

Dave LaCourse wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2005 19:05:37 GMT, rw >
> wrote:
>
>
>>Dave LaCourse wrote:
>>
>>>rw pops up insisting he's not gay,
>>
>>You completely missed the point, as usual. I couldn't care less if
>>someone thinks I'm gay. I was only pointing out Fortenberry's monumental
>>hypocrisy.
>
>
> I didn't miss "the point", Barnard.

Yes you did.

BTW, munging attribution lines is juvenile.

--
Cut "to the chase" for my email address.

[Wolfgang]

"Willi" > wrote in message
...
> Wolfgang wrote:
>
>> Wolfgang
>> good god, the boy is dim. :(
>
> Wolfgang wrote:
>
>
>> Good Lord but you are dim
>>
>> Good Lord, you are dim!
>>
>> Good God, you are dim.
>>
>> good god, but the boy is dim
>>
>> is dim-witted
>>
>> could ANYONE be so dim
>>
>> who is honestly too ****ing dim
>
>> Good Lord, you are dim!

Come on, Willi.....fess up. Even you must have had a good snicker over
Gilligan calling that "The best post in the history of roff." :)

Wolfgang
it's o.k.......we don't have to tell him.

[Mike Connor]

"Ken Fortenberry" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
...
<SNIP>
> No Mike, your bigotry is pathetic. If I were a better man
> I'd pity you, but I'm just an asshole and all I can muster
> up is contempt. I think my suggestion was a good one, that
> is if you have ignorant and offensive views it's a good
> idea to keep them to yourself. Or refrain from posting them
> here at any rate.
>
> --
> Ken Fortenberry

Oh yes, and I don´t quite see how protesting about offensive public
behaviour, and the massive song and dance many of these people make about
their particular obsessions, leanings, perversions,or whatever else you want
to call them, makes me a bigot.

Not that it particularly worries me.

MC

[Wolfgang]

"Ken Fortenberry" > wrote in message
...
> Mike Connor wrote:
>> "Ken Fortenberry" wrote:

>> Your veiled remarks referring to Germany are also extremely offensive....

> ...your bigotry is pathetic.....

Hee, hee, hee.

Wol.....um.......

John

[Wolfgang]

"Ken Fortenberry" > wrote in message
...
> Wolfgang wrote:
>> "Ken Fortenberry" wrote:
>>>Charlie Choc wrote:
>>>>Why don't you just say it, 40?
>>>
>>>OK. It.
>>>
>>>I said exactly what I wanted to say, no more, no less.
>>
>> And yet, you somehow managed to say a whole lot more......and
>> less......than you think.
>
> That's the beauty of it, eh ?

Hm......

No, there's a certain symmetry to be seen in a bigot habitually calling
other people bigots.....and one who can't distinguish between residency and
nationality at that.....but no beauty. The beauty of it is that it is now,
and for the foreseeable future, a matter of public record.

Wolfgang

[Ken Fortenberry]

Mike Connor wrote:
> "Ken Fortenberry" wrote:
>>... I think my suggestion was a good one, that
>>is if you have ignorant and offensive views it's a good
>>idea to keep them to yourself. Or refrain from posting them
>>here at any rate.
>
> Oh yes, and I don´t quite see how protesting about offensive public
> behaviour, and the massive song and dance many of these people make about
> their particular obsessions, leanings, perversions,or whatever else you want
> to call them, makes me a bigot.

Of course you don't. And you don't quite see how
ranting about homosexuality being the result of a
sick society makes you a bigot either. Society is
not sick Mike, you are.

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Mike Connor]

"Ken Fortenberry" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
om...
> Mike Connor wrote:
>> "Ken Fortenberry" wrote:
>>>... I think my suggestion was a good one, that
>>>is if you have ignorant and offensive views it's a good
>>>idea to keep them to yourself. Or refrain from posting them
>>>here at any rate.
>>
>> Oh yes, and I don´t quite see how protesting about offensive public
>> behaviour, and the massive song and dance many of these people make about
>> their particular obsessions, leanings, perversions,or whatever else you
>> want to call them, makes me a bigot.
>
> Of course you don't. And you don't quite see how
> ranting about homosexuality being the result of a
> sick society makes you a bigot either. Society is
> not sick Mike, you are.
>
> --
> Ken Fortenberry

I did not rant. I merely made a few comments.

You ought to try to run the gauntlet of homosexual prostitutes at a German
city terminal sometime, Hamburg would be an excellent choice, although it
seems to be much the same everywhere, it might be an education for you. Or
of course it might not.

You might also care to take a look at the criminal sump generated by this
whole sub-culture, drugs violence, disease and misery. But of course for you
that presumably means that society is not sick, indeed perfectly normal, and
one has to tolerate or accept everything.

My views are neither ignorant nor offensive, nor are they bigoted, they are
merely sensible.

To reiterate, as you seem remarkably obtuse in this regard. I have nothing
against homosexuals per se, as long as they behave like normal and
responsible members of society. A very large proportion do not, and I have a
problem with that, and not only I. That you and others are apparently
completely blind to this, and stick to your politically correct nonsense
whatever occurs, is not my problem.

Have a nice day.

MC

[Ken Fortenberry]

Mike Connor wrote:
> "Ken Fortenberry" wrote:
>>... And you don't quite see how
>>ranting about homosexuality being the result of a
>>sick society makes you a bigot either. Society is
>>not sick Mike, you are.
>
> I did not rant. I merely made a few comments.

A few ignorant, offensive and bigoted comments.

Keep that crap to yourself please, it has nothing
to do with fly fishing and it will cause unnecessary
bad feelings here.

--
Ken Fortenberry

[Mike Connor]

"Ken Fortenberry" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
om...

<SNIP>
> Keep that crap to yourself please, it has nothing
> to do with fly fishing and it will cause unnecessary
> bad feelings here.
>
> --
> Ken Fortenberry

It will cause bad feelings!!!! HERE !!!!!!!! I can´t imagine it!!!!!!!

SHOCKING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

My dear old geranium, ( or is that petunia?), whatever, a Fortenberry by any
other name would doubtless smell as sweet, I do hope you eventually recover
your inimitable aplomb, and once more commence dispensing the sweetness and
light for which you are rightly famous.

Bye bye flowerpot.

MC

[Thomas Littleton]

"Mike Connor" > wrote in message
> I have nothing
> against homosexuals per se, as long as they behave like normal and
> responsible members of society. A very large proportion do not, and I have
a
> problem with that, and not only I.


Mike, when in a hole, you may want to stop digging.......this is some pretty
ignorant stuff right here, I have to say. I don't know where you have spent
your time, but I have, in the course of my life encountered a fair number of
gay people, male and female. The huge majority were extremely responsible,
contributory and salutory members of society. Where you would come up with
the ideas you state here is beyond me.
Tom

[David Snedeker]

"Conan The Librarian" > wrote in message
...
> wrote:
>
> > On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 14:56:44 -0800, "David Snedeker"
> > > wrote:
> >
> >>I understand that quantities of burnt cork were found in Ernst
> >>Rohm's effects.
> >
> > Aw, he was probably just experimenting with rod handle repair
> > techniques...
>
> Now *that* was funny. :-)
>
>
> Chuck Vance

And you may be only one of the three people to get it.

Dave

[David Snedeker]

"Frank Church" > wrote in message
9.11...
> "David Snedeker" > wrote in
> :
>
> > Being one of the instigators of this turn in the thread, let me say
> > don't read too much into his comment. Not that I agree with him but
> > remember that lots of us older citizens are less evolved on some of
> > these issues than folk just a few annum younger. So we tend to stumble
> > into politically incorrect boxes. Doesn't mean we are totally
> > retrograde (except maybe Frank). It might mean simply that we don't
> > look good in a bra and panties.
>
> ....in your case getting older has not given you more common sense or
> wisdom, but an abundance of weird **** running through that mind of
> yours.
> I repeat, what a wonderful feeling to know that I don't have to suffer
> the disease of the mind that you and other tin hat wearers have to deal
> with.
> I'm not one to Google up someone's posts on here, but it seems to me that
> over the years that you have been infesting this group with your
> confrontational style there have been pitifully few posts that relate to
> flyfishing or anything even remotely associatied with said activity. At
> least Gherke, who was taken to task many times over his outrageous
> behavior here, did post some good advice, stories, etc. having to do with
> flyfishing. You, on the other hand seem to exist here to regale us with
> your ****ed up tin hat rantings, and of course someone almost always
> challenges your tripe. That leads to being "snedekered", helluva legacy
> to have your name turned into a verb connoting the sort of treatment you
> hand out. This thread is over for me, an absolute waste of time to deal
> with your ranting.
>
> Frank Sr.
> *PLONK*

Flyfishing. And here's to you, you limp wristed whiny assed old sissy
quitter. Ill miss you.

OK already, Im sorry. Flyfishing. When I said that maybe old guys just
didn't look good in a bra and panties, I didn't mean that ALL old guys or
that you wouldn't look OK in a bra and panties. Its the thought that
counts. Flyfishing.

Dave
Old guys in bra and panties is perfectly normal

[David Snedeker]

"Ken Fortenberry" > wrote in message
om...
SNIPSNIPPYSNIPSNIP

> At the the risk of "smarmy political correctness" I'd
> suggest that "retrograde" opinions SNIP SNIP SNIP should be kept to
oneself and not posted here. This suggestion applies especially to those
posting here from SNIPSNIP. Know what I mean ?
>
> --

Ja. Zo, Aber wann Dieter die schwul konservative sprechen, "Sie touch meina
monkee, Zuckermauschen? "
Ich spreche . . . was?
Bitte?
Kein problem?
Donnerstag?
Spater?

Oder. . .
"Hat jemand gefurzt? Auf Weidersehen Schnuckel."

Dave

[David Snedeker]

"Wolfgang" > wrote in message
...
>
> "Willi" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Wolfgang wrote:
> >
> Come on, Willi.....fess up. Even you must have had a good snicker over
> Gilligan calling that "The best post in the history of roff." :)
>
> Wolfgang
> it's o.k.......we don't have to tell him.
>

Was that Gilligan? Here on ROFF? ****, I missed him. Gilligan dammit and I
missed him.

Dave

[Wolfgang]

"David Snedeker" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Conan The Librarian" > wrote in message
> ...
>> wrote:
>>
>> > On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 14:56:44 -0800, "David Snedeker"
>> > > wrote:
>> >
>> >>I understand that quantities of burnt cork were found in Ernst
>> >>Rohm's effects.
>> >
>> > Aw, he was probably just experimenting with rod handle repair
>> > techniques...
>>
>> Now *that* was funny. :-)
>>
>>
>> Chuck Vance
>
> And you may be only one of the three people to get it.

Three? Big deal. Most of my wryly humorous historical references are so
obscure that even I don't get them.

Hah!.....like to see him top THAT!

Wolfgang
brought to you as a public service by the "let's subtly congratulate
ourselves on our singular perspicacity" bureau.
p.s. while i have never actually met chuck, i'd be willing to risk a shiny
new nickel on the proposition that he is IN FACT only one......no maybe
about it.

[Conan The Librarian]

Wolfgang wrote:

> "David Snedeker" > wrote in message
> . ..
>
>>And you may be only one of the three people to get it.
>
> Three? Big deal. Most of my wryly humorous historical references are so
> obscure that even I don't get them.
>
> Hah!.....like to see him top THAT!
>
> Wolfgang
> brought to you as a public service by the "let's subtly congratulate
> ourselves on our singular perspicacity" bureau.
> p.s. while i have never actually met chuck, i'd be willing to risk a shiny
> new nickel on the proposition that he is IN FACT only one......no maybe
> about it.

I dunno ... according to Richard I'm somewhere in New Jersey and my
name is Bob. And though I think I'm currently in Texas and my name is
Chuck, I'm starting to have doubts. ...


Chuck Vance (because we all know Richard is never wrong ... and
he never lies)

[David Snedeker]

"Wolfgang" > wrote in message
...
>
> "David Snedeker" > wrote in message
> . ..
> >
> > "Conan The Librarian" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >> > On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 14:56:44 -0800, "David Snedeker"
> >> > > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>I understand that quantities of burnt cork were found in Ernst
> >> >>Rohm's effects.
> >> >
> >> > Aw, he was probably just experimenting with rod handle repair
> >> > techniques...
> >>
> >> Now *that* was funny. :-)
> >>
> >>
> >> Chuck Vance
> >
> > And you may be only one of the three people to get it.

Correction: ". . . only one of four people. . . . "

>
> Three? Big deal. Most of my wryly humorous historical references are so
> obscure that even I don't get them.
>
> Hah!.....like to see him top THAT!
>

Fine. Well Ill bet you don't tell yourself Czech carp fishing jokes in your
sleep that you don't remember in the morning?

Dave
Prosim

[opie]

"Thomas Littleton" > wrote in message
news:aYJpf.5169$vJ4.1692@trnddc07...
>
> "Mike Connor" > wrote in message
>> I have nothing
>> against homosexuals per se, as long as they behave like normal and
>> responsible members of society. A very large proportion do not, and I
>> have
> a
>> problem with that, and not only I.
>
>
> Mike, when in a hole, you may want to stop digging.......this is some
> pretty
> ignorant stuff right here, I have to say. I don't know where you have
> spent
> your time, but I have, in the course of my life encountered a fair number
> of
> gay people, male and female. The huge majority were extremely responsible,
> contributory and salutory members of society. Where you would come up
> with
> the ideas you state here is beyond me.
> Tom
>

Tom, is it possible that it is a geographical thing? Maybe gays in Germany
(Europe is a much more liberal country than our own, according to some) are
simply much less inhibited than the gays in our part of the world? Maybe
this super uninhibited group of gays has finally upset the generally easy
goin' European liberals? Maybe Europeans are becoming afflicted with the
God-gene, and will amass as a super-Christian force willing to take on the
decadent counterfeit Christians in the good 'ol US of A?

MAYBE KENNY AND MIKE WILL KISS AND MAKE-UP, AND ALL WILL BE RIGHT IN THE
WORLD AGAIN?

NAH! Gays will simply attempt to horde WMDs and heat seekin' dildos, and
the rest of the world will have to go **** itself!

Op

[Wolfgang]

"David Snedeker" > wrote in message
. ..
>
> "Wolfgang" > wrote in message
> ...
>>
>> "David Snedeker" > wrote in message
>> . ..
>> >
>> > "Conan The Librarian" > wrote in message
>> > ...
>> >> wrote:
>> >>
>> >> > On Sun, 18 Dec 2005 14:56:44 -0800, "David Snedeker"
>> >> > > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>I understand that quantities of burnt cork were found in Ernst
>> >> >>Rohm's effects.
>> >> >
>> >> > Aw, he was probably just experimenting with rod handle repair
>> >> > techniques...
>> >>
>> >> Now *that* was funny. :-)
>> >>
>> >>
>> >> Chuck Vance
>> >
>> > And you may be only one of the three people to get it.
>
> Correction: ". . . only one of four people. . . . "
>
>>
>> Three? Big deal. Most of my wryly humorous historical references are
>> so
>> obscure that even I don't get them.
>>
>> Hah!.....like to see him top THAT!
>>
>
> Fine. Well Ill bet you don't tell yourself Czech carp fishing jokes in
> your
> sleep that you don't remember in the morning?

Don't remember.

Wolfgang

[[email protected]]

Mike Connor wrote:
> "Ken Fortenberry" > schrieb im Newsbeitrag
> om...
> > Mike Connor wrote:

> You ought to try to run the gauntlet of homosexual prostitutes at a German
> city terminal sometime, Hamburg would be an excellent choice, although it
> seems to be much the same everywhere, it might be an education for you. Or
> of course it might not. ....

If perverse behavior was a criteria for the acceptability of sexual
practices, heterosexuality would have been banned a long time ago.

[Frank Reid]

>Doesn't mean we are totally retrograde (except maybe Frank).

What you talkin' 'bout Willis?

> It might mean simply that we don't look good in a bra and panties.

And I repeat...

Frank Reid