On Fri, 15 May 2009 20:43:47 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

For every post I make, you call 10 people assholes, dick heads etc and
as you agreed you are crude because they are dumb and need to be slap
upside the head, but that is just you doing you civic duty. Is that
correct?

You don't post anything that isn't a buttsniff.

You're like a dog that's only mission in life is to annoy other dogs
by cramming your nose into their anus for a good whiff.

Is that your civic duty?

jps wrote:

You've been outed as a **** hauler. I've been outed as what?
A huge asshole.

Carry on...

On that basis, I'm a piker compared to you.

You are a scum bag who uses poster's candid personal information
against them.

Low, scummy, piece 'o crap.

I do? When and where, asshole?

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 00:23:01 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

jps wrote:

Carry on...
On that basis, I'm a piker compared to you.

You are a scum bag who uses poster's candid personal information
against them.

Low, scummy, piece 'o crap.
I missed the start of this thread, but are you talking about Harry again?

No, DicK has been after Don about his son. It's low, poor
sportsmanship and consistent with the penile cranium which is DK.

Don posted that he has a lazy son. What's the big secret, skippy?

wrote:
On May 15, 12:43 am, jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 00:23:01 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."

wrote:
jps wrote:
Carry on...
On that basis, I'm a piker compared to you.
You are a scum bag who uses poster's candid personal information
against them.
Low, scummy, piece 'o crap.
I missed the start of this thread, but are you talking about Harry again?
No, DicK has been after Don about his son. It's low, poor
sportsmanship and consistent with the penile cranium which is DK.

DK has said nothing about Don's son that Don himself hasn't said.

That's true.

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 13:22:32 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 07:57:48 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 00:23:01 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

jps wrote:

Carry on...
On that basis, I'm a piker compared to you.

You are a scum bag who uses poster's candid personal information
against them.

Low, scummy, piece 'o crap.
I missed the start of this thread, but are you talking about Harry again?
No, DicK has been after Don about his son. It's low, poor
sportsmanship and consistent with the penile cranium which is DK.
Sorry, my bad. It does sound like your believe anyone who uses candid
personal information against them is a low life, scummy piece of crap
dick head. Is that correct?
Now I know who you are.
Yes, I am Reggie, but you didn't answer my question.

You may call yourself Reggie but you're not the same Reggie.

A little pattern recognition goes a long way.

Try headers, dumbass.

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 16:30:52 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 13:22:32 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 07:57:48 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 00:23:01 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

jps wrote:

Carry on...
On that basis, I'm a piker compared to you.

You are a scum bag who uses poster's candid personal information
against them.

Low, scummy, piece 'o crap.
I missed the start of this thread, but are you talking about Harry again?
No, DicK has been after Don about his son. It's low, poor
sportsmanship and consistent with the penile cranium which is DK.
Sorry, my bad. It does sound like your believe anyone who uses candid
personal information against them is a low life, scummy piece of crap
dick head. Is that correct?
Now I know who you are.
Yes, I am Reggie, but you didn't answer my question.
You may call yourself Reggie but you're not the same Reggie.

A little pattern recognition goes a long way.
jps,

Sorry to screw up your theory, but except for two "Reggie" posts made by
a jovial impostor about two weeks ago, you will see that I am using the
exact same IP as Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq. has been using for years.

Nope, I am me, and ..... "I am he as you are he as you are me and we are
all together.
See how they run like pigs from a gun, see how they fly." .....

But back to the original question: It does sound like your believe
anyone who uses candid
personal information against them is a low life, scummy piece of crap
dick head. Is that correct?

Sorry "Reggie", not buying.

So you are incapable of reading headers?

You people...

On Fri, 15 May 2009 21:41:18 -0400, DK
wrote:

wrote:
On May 15, 12:43 am, jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 00:23:01 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."

wrote:
jps wrote:
Carry on...
On that basis, I'm a piker compared to you.
You are a scum bag who uses poster's candid personal information
against them.
Low, scummy, piece 'o crap.
I missed the start of this thread, but are you talking about Harry again?
No, DicK has been after Don about his son. It's low, poor
sportsmanship and consistent with the penile cranium which is DK.

DK has said nothing about Don's son that Don himself hasn't said.

That's true.

It's a low scumbag that uses family trouble as a way to poke fun.

That'd be you.

On Fri, 15 May 2009 21:42:29 -0400, DK
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 13:22:32 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 07:57:48 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 00:23:01 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

jps wrote:

Carry on...
On that basis, I'm a piker compared to you.

You are a scum bag who uses poster's candid personal information
against them.

Low, scummy, piece 'o crap.
I missed the start of this thread, but are you talking about Harry again?
No, DicK has been after Don about his son. It's low, poor
sportsmanship and consistent with the penile cranium which is DK.
Sorry, my bad. It does sound like your believe anyone who uses candid
personal information against them is a low life, scummy piece of crap
dick head. Is that correct?
Now I know who you are.
Yes, I am Reggie, but you didn't answer my question.

You may call yourself Reggie but you're not the same Reggie.

A little pattern recognition goes a long way.

Try headers, dumbass.

Headers don't confirm anything you silly dick.

"jps" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 15 May 2009 21:41:18 -0400, DK
wrote:

wrote:
On May 15, 12:43 am, jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 00:23:01 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."

wrote:
jps wrote:
Carry on...
On that basis, I'm a piker compared to you.
You are a scum bag who uses poster's candid personal information
against them.
Low, scummy, piece 'o crap.
I missed the start of this thread, but are you talking about Harry
again?
No, DicK has been after Don about his son. It's low, poor
sportsmanship and consistent with the penile cranium which is DK.

DK has said nothing about Don's son that Don himself hasn't said.

That's true.

It's a low scumbag that uses family trouble as a way to poke fun.

That'd be you.

Now there's a real Deliverance style pair...LooneyTunes and Dingy Dan.
Bet they get together for some 'shine & banjo pickin' on Looneys porch.

jps wrote:
On Fri, 15 May 2009 20:43:47 -0400, "Reginald P. Smithers III, Esq."
wrote:

For every post I make, you call 10 people assholes, dick heads etc and
as you agreed you are crude because they are dumb and need to be slap
upside the head, but that is just you doing you civic duty. Is that
correct?

You don't post anything that isn't a buttsniff.

You're like a dog that's only mission in life is to annoy other dogs
by cramming your nose into their anus for a good whiff.

Is that your civic duty?

No, I have been asking you a simple question, you seem to be the one
sniffing very strongly behind me. Would it be better if I did nothing
but hurl 5th grade expletives towards anyone I disagree with, and ignore
the obnoxious behavior of those I agree with?

--
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