D.Duck wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
D.Duck wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
m...
D.Duck wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
m...
D.Duck wrote:
"Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq." wrote
in message ...
Don White wrote:
"John H" wrote in message
...
On Tue, 26 May 2009 00:16:03 -0300, "Don White"
wrote:

"jim7856" wrote in message
...
HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IrV8QPQAhxo
I vote for 9 September 1965, the day Sandy Koufax pitched his
last of
four career no-hitters, and a great one it was.
**** you Krause
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hU9iCANi02o&NR=1
What the #$%$...someone **** in your orange juice?

You just don't get it, do you Donnie?
--

John H
I get that two or three posters contributed their opinions and then
one stinky fellow with a potty mouth comes along spouting filth in
a family newsgroup.
are you talking about Harry's potty mouth or jps's potty mouth?

--
Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq.

This Newsgroup post is a natural product. The slight variations in
spelling and grammar enhance its individual character and beauty and
in no way are to be considered flaws or defects
Those two get a pass. They use it to get someone's attention.
You and your buddy Reggie should chip in and buy yourselves a crowbar,
so you can pry your noses out of the butts of the posters you don't
like.
I'm sure you're a very intelligent person. But you surely don't
enhance you intelligence with the foul language.
I find strong language more honest than "unctuousness." Your buddy
Reggie is the newsgroup embodiment of Uriah Heep.

WOW, I'm impressed.
Yeah, I'm sure you were able to google up old Uriah, right?

I don't know if you were here back then, but in 2000 or 2004 I suggested a
good test for a president wannabe would be to have each nominee stand in
front of an audience, read aloud a page* from Dickens, and then explain
what it means.

Since Dickens was an author most in my generation encountered in junior
high, I figured Bush's inabilities to read aloud and explain such basic
reading would have shown the American public what a doofus he was (and
is). That way, they could have elected the idiot (if they so desired) with
their eyes wide open.


* The page, of course, would be selected randomly and presented to the
candidate at the time of the appearance. My feeling is that if you are not
a good reader, you are not qualified to be POTUS.


Not quite sure what all that has to do with foul language. Diversion?



Already responded to that...and you saw it. That's all you get.