Hmmm...or, McCain/WHO?! '08
 

On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 04:32:20 GMT, wrote:


On 30-Mar-2008, wrote:

No matter who wins, WE LOSE

Oh, goody, another includer...or, um, not...have you got a list of names
as to just who is included in this alleged "we?"

HTH,
R

This should have been an OT post so I apologize for continuing it as normal


You are such a red white and blue good old American boy so I just wanna ask
you how can you believe in the crap the politicians tell you much less

...what you write...

And therein lies the problem as I see it with your posts and responses:
you seem to wish to be taken seriously and thoughtfully, yet you don't
seem to care enough about what you write even to do a cursory
proofreading. Is everything everyone else writes, myself included,
always clear and unambiguous? No, sometimes it happens accidentally,
other times its purposeful, but speaking only for myself, careful
readers who aren't trying to read into responses things that aren't
there do well enough. And again, speaking only for myself, I'm
generally willing to clarify anything (note - "clarify" and "justify"
aren't the same thing...) I've written for those who seemingly have a
legitimate misunderstanding. You seem to assume, like many here, a
number of things about every response and its writer and your
assumptions are often wildly incorrect.

Further, I can't think of a single example of a response of yours that
was anything more than an illogical and/or presumptive rant full of
(hard-to-read) misspellings, etc., generally including or soon followed
by a whine about "off-topic" or sticking to fishing. Generally, you get
what you give, so to speak. If one wishes to engage in reasonable
debate, fair enough - have the courtesy to at least attempt to do so. If
one wishes to respond with ranting nonsense full of unfounded
assumptions and myriad errors, fair enough - you'll get nonsense/shtick
in return, at least from me.

I really do hope this helps,
R

What I really said was that I would rather ponder dog feces than MCain
Lieberman and Iraq
I did not say that i do such things

I cannot believe nor empathize nor understand with how you think??????

Do you think that McLanin Clinton Obama Bush Cheney Hillary

Do they think like you?
Do you think like them?

Do they truly represent and care for you and the American public or are they
just faces all rearranged and given another name?
MCcain has been a retread for 15 yrs already
Hilary is ugly as sin

And Obama
If elected he would be assasinated to deflect the real problem away from a
class war to a race war!
The rich are getting richer
The SuadI family that we support, the Kuwaitis the Abbu Dhabians
They are all wonderful and caring allies - Cmon man wake up!

Do you you try to disparage my political or anti political beliefs by
trying to make fun of me? - i.e, what I believe is bull****?
because you think I am strange or my views are?
Well esp w politcs and with what we do to our planet in my name and tax
monery this enflames me So I am ****ling strange and impassioned

You - you are way off the track.
Going the wrong way!

I think in some way you fear what I have to say and disparage it
But if you are a conscious being you know that Hilary et all is just pure
media crap.
So is American Idol Coca Cola and McCain Potato Chips

Crazy ****in world
That why I fish or at least .
To forget all this and stand in a cleanclear cold river
Catching fiash is nice but really who cares?

We are still in the grip of winter
Perhaos I am goin nuts



Fred

Hmmm...or, McCain/WHO?! '08
 

On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 03:00:07 GMT, wrote:

On Sun, 30 Mar 2008 10:27:25 -0700 (PDT), BJ Conner
wrote:

On Mar 30, 8:44*am, wrote:
McCain/Lieberman

It seems likely that he'll have some role in a...well, the way it
looking, the McCain administration, so...the major downside, it would
seem, would be that with such a team, a continued large-scale
involvement in Iraq seems assured, but OTOH, for some, that's a real big
positive...

Just something to ponder,
R

"A real big positive..." Yeah - A hundred years of Halliburton
selling those $8 hamburgers with those $.50 pickle slices on them.
Makes you little ffascist heart go pitter patter don't it.

And then there's the other side;

In the U.S., "liberalism" is actually extremely
statist, promoting intrusive government intervention in
the economy, and promoting the interests of groups
(racial, ethnic, sexual) over those of individuals.
There's a good reason that "liberal" is a swearword in
the U.S. It's a toxic, freedom-destroying ideology here.

And how is the above "the other side" of a contractor providing services
to the US government, whether overcharging, undercharging, or fairly
pricing? IAC, Halliburton itself has nothing whatsoever to do with
hamburgers or pickle slices, at any price, and further, KBR and other
single-source suppliers have been getting similar "no-bid" contracts
through a long series of US Presidents, Dem and GOP alike (including
Clinton). I'd suggest that it is a bit pointless to put something out
for bid in a market with only one potential bidder...

HTH,
R

Hmmm...or, McCain/WHO?! '08
 

On 31-Mar-2008, Dave LaCourse wrote:

Perhaos I am goin nuts

Perhaps? Uhhhhh, I don't think "perhaps". Could be all that **** you
smoke/ingest.

Do you ever read the mumbo jumbo you write *before* you post it?

IKIWH

Two ****in red blooded American assholes fatboy and rdean
I care not to deabte the war, polrtics or anything else with either of you
blind fools
Keep on reading your neswsapapers drinking yiour scotch abd watching TV
till it comes out your ass
But arguing politics with you two fools is something that I would rather do
with my border coliie
He has more me intelligence than both of you
**** both of you very much
Fred

Hmmm...or, McCain/WHO?! '08
 

On 31-Mar-2008, Dave LaCourse wrote:

Perhaps? Uhhhhh, I don't think "perhaps". Could be all that **** you
smoke/ingest.

Do you ever read the mumbo jumbo you write *before* you post it?

IKIWH

d;o)

Who asked you to come around you old fat ****!

Fred

Hmmm...or, McCain/WHO?! '08
 

On Mar 31, 11:42*am, wrote:

fat ****!

Fat people need love too.

Hmmm...or, McCain/WHO?! '08
 

On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 09:43:57 -0700 (PDT), Wayne Knight
wrote:

Fat people need love too.

BSEG I luv ya, man. 'Course I luv your equipment inventory more.

Dave

Hmmm...or, McCain/WHO?! '08
 

On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:41:47 GMT, wrote:

Two ****in red blooded American assholes fatboy and rdean
I care not to deabte the war, polrtics or anything else with either of you
blind fools
Keep on reading your neswsapapers drinking yiour scotch abd watching TV
till it comes out your ass
But arguing politics with you two fools is something that I would rather do
with my border coliie
He has more me intelligence than both of you
**** both of you very much

Seeee? IKIWH. And you just proved it, thankyouverymuch!

Too much dope will do that to ya, man

Dave aka Fatboy

Hmmm...or, McCain/WHO?! '08
 

On 2008-03-31, wrote:

In the U.S., "liberalism" is actually extremely
statist, promoting intrusive government intervention in
the economy, and promoting the interests of groups
(racial, ethnic, sexual) over those of individuals.
There's a good reason that "liberal" is a swearword in
the U.S. It's a toxic, freedom-destroying ideology here.

As if.

It's a red herring, just like "conservative", tossed out by the power
elite to keep you fighting amongst yourselves. Can you say fascism?

fascism n. a merging of the interests of big corporations and government,
adjoined with a systematic curtailment of civil liberties.

Chew on that, awhile.

nb

Hmmm...or, McCain/WHO?! '08
 

On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 15:41:47 GMT, wrote:



On 31-Mar-2008, Dave LaCourse wrote:

Perhaos I am goin nuts

Perhaps? Uhhhhh, I don't think "perhaps". Could be all that **** you
smoke/ingest.

Do you ever read the mumbo jumbo you write *before* you post it?

IKIWH

Two ****in red blooded American assholes fatboy and rdean

Lessee he

****in' - as much as possible, anyway...
red blooded - from what thankfully little I've seen of it, yep, it's red
American - depends on your definition of "American"
assholes - well, that fat ******* in the G43.5 waders sure
is...apparently, I'm more of a dick - see "****in'," above...

I care not to deabte the war, polrtics or anything else with either of you
blind fools

I can't speak for the fat ****in' asshole, but I'm certain I have
interest in deabteing anything with you, either...BTW, what's
"deabteing"...

Keep on reading your neswsapapers drinking yiour scotch abd watching TV
till it comes out your ass

Um, the nesweapapers, the yiour scotch (is that some of the weird ****
Forty drinks?), or the TV...?

But arguing politics with you two fools is something that I would rather do
with my border coliie

The SPCA has been notified...perhaps you can share a cell with Michael
Vick...

He has more me intelligence than both of you

Hey now, here's an idea... Can he type? Does he flyfish? Can he spell
"border collie?"

**** both of you very much

Now Fred, go back and reread...er, scratch that...have someone else read
this thread. If that person tells you that your replies are okey-dokey,
then it would seem you're good to go. If they offer any, um,
constructive criticism or advice, please post it.

And if they think your replies ARE okey-dokey, would you mind terribly
extending them an invitation to begin posting to ROFF. Just have 'em
put "Fred sent me" in the subject line of their first offering.

HTH & TIA!
R
Fred

Hmmm...or, McCain/WHO?! '08
 

wrote in message
...
On Mon, 31 Mar 2008 04:32:20 GMT, wrote:


On 30-Mar-2008, wrote:

No matter who wins, WE LOSE

Oh, goody, another includer...or, um, not...have you got a list of names
as to just who is included in this alleged "we?"

HTH,
R

This should have been an OT post so I apologize for continuing it as
normal


You are such a red white and blue good old American boy so I just wanna
ask
you how can you believe in the crap the politicians tell you much less

...what you write...

And therein lies the problem as I see it with your posts and responses:
you seem to wish to be taken seriously and thoughtfully, yet you don't
seem to care enough about what you write even to do a cursory
proofreading. Is everything everyone else writes, myself included,
always clear and unambiguous? No, sometimes it happens accidentally,
other times its purposeful, but speaking only for myself, careful
readers who aren't trying to read into responses things that aren't
there do well enough. And again, speaking only for myself, I'm
generally willing to clarify anything (note - "clarify" and "justify"
aren't the same thing...) I've written for those who seemingly have a
legitimate misunderstanding. You seem to assume, like many here, a
number of things about every response and its writer and your
assumptions are often wildly incorrect.

Further, I can't think of a single example of a response of yours that
was anything more than an illogical and/or presumptive rant full of
(hard-to-read) misspellings, etc., generally including or soon followed
by a whine about "off-topic" or sticking to fishing. Generally, you get
what you give, so to speak. If one wishes to engage in reasonable
debate, fair enough - have the courtesy to at least attempt to do so. If
one wishes to respond with ranting nonsense full of unfounded
assumptions and myriad errors, fair enough - you'll get nonsense/shtick
in return, at least from me.

I really do hope this helps,
R

Geez.....can it get any more sublime than this? :)

Wolfgang
who, after a glorious week of chasing birds about the gulf coast, finds
that, as expected, a look at roff makes him smile and say gee but it's great
to be back home.