D.Duck wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
. ..
Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
news Eisboch wrote:
"hk" wrote in message
...

Eisboch wrote:
Here we have a perfect example of Harry being Harry. Wayne's post
was informative to the OP's question, and had absolutely no reference
to Harry. Yet, Harry is compelled to respond with a snarky comment.
Why?

Eisboch
Next time W'hine responds to a post of mine that has nothing to do
with him, ask W'hine that. Go ahead...make my day.
Virtually every ****ing contest going on in rec.boats is a series of
prompts/responses to some original comment, likely made years ago that
nobody can remember.

I used to scold my kids when they were 4 or 5 years old to stop doing
this.

Eisboch

The point is, you are quick to jump on my comments, but I don't see you
jumping on W'hine's "snarky" comments aimed in my direction, nor have I
noticed you jumping on similar comments from "The Seven," or from your
buddy SW.


Have you ever considered what is the common denominator?

Eisboch

Sure. There are a dozen or so "righties" who don't like my political
views, and they try to "bash" me at every opportunity.


Did you ever stop to consider the way you present your political vews? How
about the tone and choice of words when you try to discredit the leadership
that you don't agree with?

In my book dissent is fine if presented in a civil manner. Wishing
leadership dead on one hand and then promoting social reform on the other
just doesn't wash.


I wish Bush a long, happy inebriated retirement. I wish he'd start
tomorrow. It is true, though, that I hope Cheney drops dead the day
after he leaves office. Natural causes. Lack of heart.