TR and More...

Mr Opus McDopus wrote:


Really, Bear's whole mission in life is to be beside me, no matter where I
go or how difficult or dangerous it may be to get to where I am--water be
damned. Miller has seen him in action, he'a a nut--Bear not Miller. What's
really funny to me is that Bear has to be next to me on the stream, but as
soon as we get out of the water and hit the trail he races off up the trail
and acts like any normal hound.



an excellent fishing and camping dog...bear too. it's always interesting
to watch how dogs deal with trout streams and their humans. yours and
rw's are amazing...though i'll admit i've not seen that many dogs on
trout streams. some years ago...i thought it was on a trip with
you...there was a guy camping and fishing on upper accompanied by a
white german shephard. that dog acted a lot like bear, but not as friendly.

jeff

On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 06:51:06 -0400, Dave LaCourse
wrote:

On Tue, 09 Sep 2008 22:45:24 -0400, daytripper
wrote:

Here's some help: 12 years ago would be 1996, and you pulled your public
hissyfit meltdown in 2000 - at least four years after your surgery. Ok?

What the hell does Wally's clave have to do with it? You were in
Maine with me two to three years before that. You said that your dad
died less than two years after he had the nerve saving cure, and were
skeptical of my chances of survival. That was 97. I beat your
estimation, kid. I'm alive and well and still fishing better than you
ever will. d;o)

Davey


Um, no. You're still getting the dates wrong, to better fit your *original*
bull**** story - where I supposedly told you you "were going to die in two
years".

The truth is, I never, ever fished with you before 1999. The first time I ever
even *saw* you was the last week of September, 1998 - when you were floating
well above me in the wing dam pool on the Rapid during my moose encounter. We
never got close enough to even exchange greetings, never mind have a
conversation.

When you responded to a roff post I made relating that bit of adventure, that
marked the first point I even knew you existed. The first time we actually met
was when I fished with you on one early June day in 1999, but the subject of
your health never came up. Nor did it come up the other time I fished with you
and Peter up there near the end of June.

The conversation actually happened on the ride down to the Spring Fling in May
of 2000, which is why I mentioned that outing. That was four years after your
surgery, and I remember everything that happened on *that* trip quite well,
thanks to you.

As you word it *this* time, it's closer to what I actually had to say on the
matter: that my dad died two years after his surgery, that the surgeon had
said "we got all of it", and that as a result of that optimism he never had
radiation or chemo - which left me feeling that the surgery alone was no
guarantee.

And that's a long way from what you originally claimed I said - and you know
it. That was just another shameful lie, and you ought to feel like an even
bigger piece of crap for making it...

/daytripper

http://tinyurl.com/4dopvw

Note the date...

On Sep 12, 5:08*am, daytripper wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/4dopvw

Note the date...

Something I´ve noticed quite a lot here, which observation may or may
not be of any use to you. Some people simply have no respect at all
for the truth, and it makes absolutely no difference to them when you
prove that they are lying, or that you are telling the truth. You
might just as well **** into the wind for all the effect it has.

This basically means that those with no respect for the truth are not
worth bothering with at all. I assume that others notice these
discrepancies and merely decline to comment, some don´t care at all
anyway.

The only person to whom the truth on any matter is of paramount
importance is yourself, and if you know you are telling the truth,
then it doesn´t really matter what others say anyway. Proving them
liars is actually just a waste of your time.

Surprisingly enough, it took me quite a long time to finally fathom
that out. Not least because I just couldn´t figure out why people
would lie like that for either no, no apparent, or at least seemingly
quite venial reason. In the meantime I am bound to conclude that in a
number of cases such people are pathological liars and lie because it
is in their nature to do so, others think that denigrating or lying
about others makes them look better than they are, and in a number of
cases they merely wish to make you look bad as the result of some
assumed or even actual slight, and consider any means to do so as fair
game.

It´s a matter of character, some have good characters, and some don´t.

Presumably you already know this, but just in
case.........................

TL
MC

On Sep 11, 8:41*pm, wrote:


Ok
Lets see:

Ahhh Grasshopper.
You progress!
You glimpse the onee's truth.
Another paw step closer to the Priesthood
Do follow this path to wisdom, Grasshopper.
OK?

And post your good FF stuff,
ignore the kabitzers,
and keep to yourself befuddled judgements,
borne of ignorance of the basic American preference for the anarchic.
I imagine Italians and Australians frustrate your order Jones even
more.

On Thu, 11 Sep 2008 23:08:58 -0400, daytripper
wrote:

http://tinyurl.com/4dopvw

Note the date...

Yep, and we fished together in 99, two+ years after my surgery. We
sat on the porch and had a discussion about the nerve saving surgery.
You informed me that they have to cut into the organ to save the
nerves (they are part of the organ) and there is a risk of the cancer
spreading because of the surgery. You scared me, David. You scared
the **** out of me whether you meant to or not.

I can only hope that you never have cancer, especially prostate. It
is a scarey thing to go through and survive. The friend that I went
to Labrador two years ago just died from it. He survived 12 years
after his surgery, fighting cancer the whole time. His doc is in camp
now. He remarked to me last night that I am very fortunate to have
survived with a Gleason Score of 9 AND have the nerve saving procedure
done successfully. He put me in the 10 percentile of men who survive
with that score and type of surgery. So, I was off by a year. Big
deal. Bottom line is you scared the hell out of me on the porch that
afternoon. Deliverately? I hope not, but you mentioned survival from
the nerve saving technique and I had thought we (Jo and I) had made
the wrong decision. Like I said, I hope you never have to go through
it.

Dave

Oh shut up, Michael, you verbose nincompoop.

Went fishing yesterday (in fact, been fishing for a week) and caught a
magnificent land locked salmon on a size 18 soft hackle swung in the
current. What did YOU do yesterday?

wrote in message
...
On Sep 12, 5:08 am, daytripper wrote:
http://tinyurl.com/4dopvw

Note the date...

Something I´ve noticed quite a lot here, which observation may or may
not be of any use to you. Some people simply have no respect at all
for the truth, and it makes absolutely no difference to them when you
prove that they are lying, or that you are telling the truth. You
might just as well **** into the wind for all the effect it has.

This basically means that those with no respect for the truth are not
worth bothering with at all. I assume that others notice these
discrepancies and merely decline to comment, some don´t care at all
anyway.

The only person to whom the truth on any matter is of paramount
importance is yourself, and if you know you are telling the truth,
then it doesn´t really matter what others say anyway. Proving them
liars is actually just a waste of your time.

Surprisingly enough, it took me quite a long time to finally fathom
that out. Not least because I just couldn´t figure out why people
would lie like that for either no, no apparent, or at least seemingly
quite venial reason. In the meantime I am bound to conclude that in a
number of cases such people are pathological liars and lie because it
is in their nature to do so, others think that denigrating or lying
about others makes them look better than they are, and in a number of
cases they merely wish to make you look bad as the result of some
assumed or even actual slight, and consider any means to do so as fair
game.

It´s a matter of character, some have good characters, and some don´t.

Presumably you already know this, but just in
case.........................

Hm.......

So, would using anonymous socket-puppets as a phantom army of supporters and
then denying it be something like an example of what you decry above?

Wolfgang

You told a despicable lie, you got caught, and now you're trying to play the
sympathy card. Pretty pathetic - even for you.

I suggest you get a man check. Maybe you're missing a couple of things...

http://tinyurl.com/4dpsl6

As always, it's all about you...

On Sun, 14 Sep 2008 21:34:26 -0400, daytripper
wrote:

You told a despicable lie, you got caught, and now you're trying to play the
sympathy card. Pretty pathetic - even for you.

Wrong. You scared me. You were successful at it. You said that
having the nerve saving technique is probably what killed your dad and
if it was you, you would never have selected it. And why? Because
they had to cut into the organ to save the nerves necessary to get and
maintain an erection, and to stop incontinence. It wasn't until I saw
my urologist soon afterward that I was at ease. I waited scared twice
a year for PSA results. Thanks for scaring the **** out of me, and
thanks for the slanerist remarks you've made about me and are now
being used by your buddy the nut in Germany. I was not convinced you
did it on purpose, but now? You suck, David. You truly suck.


I suggest you get a man check. Maybe you're missing a couple of things...

http://tinyurl.com/4dpsl6

Again you miss the whole thing, David. Snedeker and I are
*survivors*. I was kidding him as he has kidded me. We have passed
e-mails to each other about the cancer - what to expect, how to help
the curing process, etc. We have supported one another only as
survivors can. You wouldn't understand, nor would you even try to.
Note the talk about fish.

You're a pathetic cheap shot cheater, David. I suggest you have a DRE
yearly along with a psa test at least once a year. And pray that you
don't get it until you are a very old man when it won't matter. The
operation nowadays is a lot easier than it was 11 or 12 years ago.
You will have a pretty good chance of not being incontinent and
maintaing your ability to get and keep an erection (if you haven't
already lost it). And, no, you do not have to ejaculate to have an
orgasm. No more wet spots. Cool! The only good this about this kind
of cancer.