wrote in message
news
On Tue, 04 May 2004 16:09:22 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 04 May 2004 15:13:26 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:


wrote in message
.. .
On Tue, 04 May 2004 13:13:13 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 03 May 2004 15:55:19 GMT, "Doug Kanter"
wrote:

"Dave Hall" wrote in message
.. .


You watch courtroom dramas on television. That's already too
much.

I watch televised ACTUAL court cases. A far different thing
than
a
"drama".

Dave

Do you suppose there might be certain types of cases that such
programs
would NEVER show on TV?

I suppose so. But how does that effect the ones that they do
show?

Are you attempting more negative logic?

Dave

Dave....thiMk. Do you suppose a TV producer's legal staff might
explain
to
him that there are laws which permit activities that the audience
would
be
better off not knowing about, and that the show would be better off
not
televising cases which expose those laws? I mean, let's face it: An
audience
which gets its legal advice from television is, without question,
an
audience of idiots.


Doug... thiMk yourself. Who but an idiot would endlessly respond to
someone like Dave, as if they thought they had a chance of educating
him. You are becoming as big an idiot by association at this point.
Spit the hook and move on with your life.

BB

I thiMk you may be right. But....it's so easy, and so much fun to see
what
he'll say next. :-)


To onlookers, it's become impossible to tell which of you is the
nitwit. He's basically playing you like a fiddle. Are you really this
lonely?

BB

Silly boy. I work out of a one man office. I type around 90 words per
minute. Why not make the most of it when things are quiet?


So I was correct when I surmised you were very lonely. Sorry.

BB

1) What have you achieved by surmising this?
2) If this thread bothers you so much, don't look. Do you need some quick
instructions as to how to not look?