On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 21:20:56 -0400, Lil Abner wrote:

On 3/26/2011 2:26 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 09:04:24 -0400, John
wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:36:14 -0400, Lil wrote:

On 3/25/2011 7:14 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:57:06 -0400, Lil wrote:

On 3/25/2011 12:46 AM, TopBassDog wrote:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0...?ref=fb&src=sp

NATO Agrees To Take Over Command Of Libya No-Fly Zone, U.S. Likely To
Remain In Charge Of Brunt Of Combat

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The United States welcomed a partial handover for
the Libyan air campaign to NATO on Thursday, but the allies apparently
balked at assuming full control and the U.S. military was left in
charge of the brunt of combat.

NATO agreed to take over command of the newly established no-fly zone
over Libya, protective flights meant to deter Libyan strongman Moammar
Gadhafi from putting warplanes in the air. That leaves the U.S. with
responsibility for attacks on Gadhafi's ground forces and other
targets, which are the toughest and most controversial portion of the
operation....

It is certain that NATO wishes the United states all the grief, while
the United Nations shares the glory within itself. This is nothing
new. The United Nations prefers to hate the U.S. while it's leaders
try to appease the UN by bending forward before it, and giving the
American cheque payer the bill.

You should really vote in different politicians.
If our Military handled it fine. if Washington State Department and
White House try to drive $#@%!@#$#%

Drive what? The military, in this country anyway, answers to the
political infrastructure.
The Military hasn't been allowed to fulfill, it's implied mission, victory.
Defeat was snatched from the jaws of victory, in Viet Nam thanks to
Kerry, Fonda and Fifth Columnists efforts here.
We have wasted lives and money in Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan, etc.
We have no mission goal in Libya although we assume we want to win???
something.
The goal should be American independent of what the UN or anyone else
declares. If we are going to expend our Money and risk our Military then
let's win. Let's go deliberately about getting rid of Qaddafi's forces
right now.
Let's not let alQuaeda or other hostiles take charge, of what we won.
We on it lets make sure Libyans, friendly, to the US and dedicated to
running Libya not exporting terror run the Country. to all the idiots
that scream imperialism or other junk are not our friends and we really
don't give a hoot what they say.
It's about time US Leaders did a little succeeding. Let our Military do
it's job. Ask the Professionals what they need and let them get the job
done. It will be cheaper by far, in the long run, and we get something done.
no more half assing in Washington.

Sounds great. Only one little question...how do we 'make sure Libyans, friendly
to the US' take charge?

We don't even know who the rebels are, and we're not invading the country with a
few tank divisions.

How about we let them decide who they like or don't like and who's in
charge based on actions rather than words? Oh wait, you don't really
care about democracy unless you're in charge.
Whose democracy? What you said was nonsense.
We risk our troops and expend our resources for what: alQuaeda or the
Islamic Brotherhood?
It is foolish to play the crusading avenger for our enemies benefits.
We do still have resources don't we? Find the friendlies and let them
lead. Or would you rather we had liberated Europe and let the Fascist
regain control. Do you remember that we had constant problems from
Hitler's boys until 1948 at least.
Damned straight we better look out for our interests and the People
freed from under QDaffi.

Like I said before, you're loony.

On 3/27/2011 1:19 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 21:20:56 -0400, Lil wrote:

On 3/26/2011 2:26 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 09:04:24 -0400, John
wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:36:14 -0400, Lil wrote:

On 3/25/2011 7:14 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:57:06 -0400, Lil wrote:

On 3/25/2011 12:46 AM, TopBassDog wrote:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0...?ref=fb&src=sp

NATO Agrees To Take Over Command Of Libya No-Fly Zone, U.S. Likely To
Remain In Charge Of Brunt Of Combat

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The United States welcomed a partial handover for
the Libyan air campaign to NATO on Thursday, but the allies apparently
balked at assuming full control and the U.S. military was left in
charge of the brunt of combat.

NATO agreed to take over command of the newly established no-fly zone
over Libya, protective flights meant to deter Libyan strongman Moammar
Gadhafi from putting warplanes in the air. That leaves the U.S. with
responsibility for attacks on Gadhafi's ground forces and other
targets, which are the toughest and most controversial portion of the
operation....

It is certain that NATO wishes the United states all the grief, while
the United Nations shares the glory within itself. This is nothing
new. The United Nations prefers to hate the U.S. while it's leaders
try to appease the UN by bending forward before it, and giving the
American cheque payer the bill.

You should really vote in different politicians.
If our Military handled it fine. if Washington State Department and
White House try to drive $#@%!@#$#%

Drive what? The military, in this country anyway, answers to the
political infrastructure.
The Military hasn't been allowed to fulfill, it's implied mission, victory.
Defeat was snatched from the jaws of victory, in Viet Nam thanks to
Kerry, Fonda and Fifth Columnists efforts here.
We have wasted lives and money in Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan, etc.
We have no mission goal in Libya although we assume we want to win???
something.
The goal should be American independent of what the UN or anyone else
declares. If we are going to expend our Money and risk our Military then
let's win. Let's go deliberately about getting rid of Qaddafi's forces
right now.
Let's not let alQuaeda or other hostiles take charge, of what we won.
We on it lets make sure Libyans, friendly, to the US and dedicated to
running Libya not exporting terror run the Country. to all the idiots
that scream imperialism or other junk are not our friends and we really
don't give a hoot what they say.
It's about time US Leaders did a little succeeding. Let our Military do
it's job. Ask the Professionals what they need and let them get the job
done. It will be cheaper by far, in the long run, and we get something done.
no more half assing in Washington.

Sounds great. Only one little question...how do we 'make sure Libyans, friendly
to the US' take charge?

We don't even know who the rebels are, and we're not invading the country with a
few tank divisions.

How about we let them decide who they like or don't like and who's in
charge based on actions rather than words? Oh wait, you don't really
care about democracy unless you're in charge.
Whose democracy? What you said was nonsense.
We risk our troops and expend our resources for what: alQuaeda or the
Islamic Brotherhood?
It is foolish to play the crusading avenger for our enemies benefits.
We do still have resources don't we? Find the friendlies and let them
lead. Or would you rather we had liberated Europe and let the Fascist
regain control. Do you remember that we had constant problems from
Hitler's boys until 1948 at least.
Damned straight we better look out for our interests and the People
freed from under QDaffi.

Like I said before, you're loony.
They left you unsupervised again?

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 21:20:56 -0400, Lil Abner wrote:

On 3/26/2011 2:26 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 09:04:24 -0400, John
wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:36:14 -0400, Lil wrote:

On 3/25/2011 7:14 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:57:06 -0400, Lil wrote:

On 3/25/2011 12:46 AM, TopBassDog wrote:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0...?ref=fb&src=sp

NATO Agrees To Take Over Command Of Libya No-Fly Zone, U.S. Likely To
Remain In Charge Of Brunt Of Combat

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The United States welcomed a partial handover for
the Libyan air campaign to NATO on Thursday, but the allies apparently
balked at assuming full control and the U.S. military was left in
charge of the brunt of combat.

NATO agreed to take over command of the newly established no-fly zone
over Libya, protective flights meant to deter Libyan strongman Moammar
Gadhafi from putting warplanes in the air. That leaves the U.S. with
responsibility for attacks on Gadhafi's ground forces and other
targets, which are the toughest and most controversial portion of the
operation....

It is certain that NATO wishes the United states all the grief, while
the United Nations shares the glory within itself. This is nothing
new. The United Nations prefers to hate the U.S. while it's leaders
try to appease the UN by bending forward before it, and giving the
American cheque payer the bill.

You should really vote in different politicians.
If our Military handled it fine. if Washington State Department and
White House try to drive $#@%!@#$#%

Drive what? The military, in this country anyway, answers to the
political infrastructure.
The Military hasn't been allowed to fulfill, it's implied mission, victory.
Defeat was snatched from the jaws of victory, in Viet Nam thanks to
Kerry, Fonda and Fifth Columnists efforts here.
We have wasted lives and money in Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan, etc.
We have no mission goal in Libya although we assume we want to win???
something.
The goal should be American independent of what the UN or anyone else
declares. If we are going to expend our Money and risk our Military then
let's win. Let's go deliberately about getting rid of Qaddafi's forces
right now.
Let's not let alQuaeda or other hostiles take charge, of what we won.
We on it lets make sure Libyans, friendly, to the US and dedicated to
running Libya not exporting terror run the Country. to all the idiots
that scream imperialism or other junk are not our friends and we really
don't give a hoot what they say.
It's about time US Leaders did a little succeeding. Let our Military do
it's job. Ask the Professionals what they need and let them get the job
done. It will be cheaper by far, in the long run, and we get something done.
no more half assing in Washington.

Sounds great. Only one little question...how do we 'make sure Libyans, friendly
to the US' take charge?

We don't even know who the rebels are, and we're not invading the country with a
few tank divisions.

How about we let them decide who they like or don't like and who's in
charge based on actions rather than words? Oh wait, you don't really
care about democracy unless you're in charge.
Whose democracy? What you said was nonsense.
We risk our troops and expend our resources for what: alQuaeda or the
Islamic Brotherhood?
It is foolish to play the crusading avenger for our enemies benefits.
We do still have resources don't we? Find the friendlies and let them
lead. Or would you rather we had liberated Europe and let the Fascist
regain control. Do you remember that we had constant problems from
Hitler's boys until 1948 at least.
Damned straight we better look out for our interests and the People
freed from under QDaffi.

It's hard to believe depoop provided that response to my post instead of the
preceding post.

Jeees.

On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 09:24:22 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 21:20:56 -0400, Lil Abner wrote:

On 3/26/2011 2:26 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 09:04:24 -0400, John
wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:36:14 -0400, Lil wrote:

On 3/25/2011 7:14 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:57:06 -0400, Lil wrote:

On 3/25/2011 12:46 AM, TopBassDog wrote:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0...?ref=fb&src=sp

NATO Agrees To Take Over Command Of Libya No-Fly Zone, U.S. Likely To
Remain In Charge Of Brunt Of Combat

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The United States welcomed a partial handover for
the Libyan air campaign to NATO on Thursday, but the allies apparently
balked at assuming full control and the U.S. military was left in
charge of the brunt of combat.

NATO agreed to take over command of the newly established no-fly zone
over Libya, protective flights meant to deter Libyan strongman Moammar
Gadhafi from putting warplanes in the air. That leaves the U.S. with
responsibility for attacks on Gadhafi's ground forces and other
targets, which are the toughest and most controversial portion of the
operation....

It is certain that NATO wishes the United states all the grief, while
the United Nations shares the glory within itself. This is nothing
new. The United Nations prefers to hate the U.S. while it's leaders
try to appease the UN by bending forward before it, and giving the
American cheque payer the bill.

You should really vote in different politicians.
If our Military handled it fine. if Washington State Department and
White House try to drive $#@%!@#$#%

Drive what? The military, in this country anyway, answers to the
political infrastructure.
The Military hasn't been allowed to fulfill, it's implied mission, victory.
Defeat was snatched from the jaws of victory, in Viet Nam thanks to
Kerry, Fonda and Fifth Columnists efforts here.
We have wasted lives and money in Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan, etc.
We have no mission goal in Libya although we assume we want to win???
something.
The goal should be American independent of what the UN or anyone else
declares. If we are going to expend our Money and risk our Military then
let's win. Let's go deliberately about getting rid of Qaddafi's forces
right now.
Let's not let alQuaeda or other hostiles take charge, of what we won.
We on it lets make sure Libyans, friendly, to the US and dedicated to
running Libya not exporting terror run the Country. to all the idiots
that scream imperialism or other junk are not our friends and we really
don't give a hoot what they say.
It's about time US Leaders did a little succeeding. Let our Military do
it's job. Ask the Professionals what they need and let them get the job
done. It will be cheaper by far, in the long run, and we get something done.
no more half assing in Washington.

Sounds great. Only one little question...how do we 'make sure Libyans, friendly
to the US' take charge?

We don't even know who the rebels are, and we're not invading the country with a
few tank divisions.

How about we let them decide who they like or don't like and who's in
charge based on actions rather than words? Oh wait, you don't really
care about democracy unless you're in charge.
Whose democracy? What you said was nonsense.
We risk our troops and expend our resources for what: alQuaeda or the
Islamic Brotherhood?
It is foolish to play the crusading avenger for our enemies benefits.
We do still have resources don't we? Find the friendlies and let them
lead. Or would you rather we had liberated Europe and let the Fascist
regain control. Do you remember that we had constant problems from
Hitler's boys until 1948 at least.
Damned straight we better look out for our interests and the People
freed from under QDaffi.

It's hard to believe depoop provided that response to my post instead of the
preceding post.

Jeees.

You're self-importance is undeserved. Unlike the stalkers here I
really don't follow what you say all that closely.

wrote:
On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 09:24:22 -0400, John
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 21:20:56 -0400, Lil wrote:

On 3/26/2011 2:26 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 09:04:24 -0400, John
wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:36:14 -0400, Lil wrote:

On 3/25/2011 7:14 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:57:06 -0400, Lil wrote:

On 3/25/2011 12:46 AM, TopBassDog wrote:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0...?ref=fb&src=sp

NATO Agrees To Take Over Command Of Libya No-Fly Zone, U.S. Likely To
Remain In Charge Of Brunt Of Combat

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The United States welcomed a partial handover for
the Libyan air campaign to NATO on Thursday, but the allies apparently
balked at assuming full control and the U.S. military was left in
charge of the brunt of combat.

NATO agreed to take over command of the newly established no-fly zone
over Libya, protective flights meant to deter Libyan strongman Moammar
Gadhafi from putting warplanes in the air. That leaves the U.S. with
responsibility for attacks on Gadhafi's ground forces and other
targets, which are the toughest and most controversial portion of the
operation....

It is certain that NATO wishes the United states all the grief, while
the United Nations shares the glory within itself. This is nothing
new. The United Nations prefers to hate the U.S. while it's leaders
try to appease the UN by bending forward before it, and giving the
American cheque payer the bill.

You should really vote in different politicians.
If our Military handled it fine. if Washington State Department and
White House try to drive $#@%!@#$#%
Drive what? The military, in this country anyway, answers to the
political infrastructure.
The Military hasn't been allowed to fulfill, it's implied mission, victory.
Defeat was snatched from the jaws of victory, in Viet Nam thanks to
Kerry, Fonda and Fifth Columnists efforts here.
We have wasted lives and money in Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan, etc.
We have no mission goal in Libya although we assume we want to win???
something.
The goal should be American independent of what the UN or anyone else
declares. If we are going to expend our Money and risk our Military then
let's win. Let's go deliberately about getting rid of Qaddafi's forces
right now.
Let's not let alQuaeda or other hostiles take charge, of what we won.
We on it lets make sure Libyans, friendly, to the US and dedicated to
running Libya not exporting terror run the Country. to all the idiots
that scream imperialism or other junk are not our friends and we really
don't give a hoot what they say.
It's about time US Leaders did a little succeeding. Let our Military do
it's job. Ask the Professionals what they need and let them get the job
done. It will be cheaper by far, in the long run, and we get something done.
no more half assing in Washington.
Sounds great. Only one little question...how do we 'make sure Libyans, friendly
to the US' take charge?

We don't even know who the rebels are, and we're not invading the country with a
few tank divisions.
How about we let them decide who they like or don't like and who's in
charge based on actions rather than words? Oh wait, you don't really
care about democracy unless you're in charge.
Whose democracy? What you said was nonsense.
We risk our troops and expend our resources for what: alQuaeda or the
Islamic Brotherhood?
It is foolish to play the crusading avenger for our enemies benefits.
We do still have resources don't we? Find the friendlies and let them
lead. Or would you rather we had liberated Europe and let the Fascist
regain control. Do you remember that we had constant problems from
Hitler's boys until 1948 at least.
Damned straight we better look out for our interests and the People
freed from under QDaffi.
It's hard to believe depoop provided that response to my post instead of the
preceding post.

Jeees.

You're self-importance is undeserved. Unlike the stalkers here I
really don't follow what you say all that closely.

No one else does, either. He's a burned-out, bitter old man.

On 27/03/2011 11:34 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 09:24:22 -0400, John
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 21:20:56 -0400, Lil wrote:

On 3/26/2011 2:26 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 09:04:24 -0400, John
wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:36:14 -0400, Lil wrote:

On 3/25/2011 7:14 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:57:06 -0400, Lil wrote:

On 3/25/2011 12:46 AM, TopBassDog wrote:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0...?ref=fb&src=sp

NATO Agrees To Take Over Command Of Libya No-Fly Zone, U.S. Likely To
Remain In Charge Of Brunt Of Combat

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The United States welcomed a partial handover for
the Libyan air campaign to NATO on Thursday, but the allies apparently
balked at assuming full control and the U.S. military was left in
charge of the brunt of combat.

NATO agreed to take over command of the newly established no-fly zone
over Libya, protective flights meant to deter Libyan strongman Moammar
Gadhafi from putting warplanes in the air. That leaves the U.S. with
responsibility for attacks on Gadhafi's ground forces and other
targets, which are the toughest and most controversial portion of the
operation....

It is certain that NATO wishes the United states all the grief, while
the United Nations shares the glory within itself. This is nothing
new. The United Nations prefers to hate the U.S. while it's leaders
try to appease the UN by bending forward before it, and giving the
American cheque payer the bill.

You should really vote in different politicians.
If our Military handled it fine. if Washington State Department and
White House try to drive $#@%!@#$#%

Drive what? The military, in this country anyway, answers to the
political infrastructure.
The Military hasn't been allowed to fulfill, it's implied mission, victory.
Defeat was snatched from the jaws of victory, in Viet Nam thanks to
Kerry, Fonda and Fifth Columnists efforts here.
We have wasted lives and money in Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan, etc.
We have no mission goal in Libya although we assume we want to win???
something.
The goal should be American independent of what the UN or anyone else
declares. If we are going to expend our Money and risk our Military then
let's win. Let's go deliberately about getting rid of Qaddafi's forces
right now.
Let's not let alQuaeda or other hostiles take charge, of what we won.
We on it lets make sure Libyans, friendly, to the US and dedicated to
running Libya not exporting terror run the Country. to all the idiots
that scream imperialism or other junk are not our friends and we really
don't give a hoot what they say.
It's about time US Leaders did a little succeeding. Let our Military do
it's job. Ask the Professionals what they need and let them get the job
done. It will be cheaper by far, in the long run, and we get something done.
no more half assing in Washington.

Sounds great. Only one little question...how do we 'make sure Libyans, friendly
to the US' take charge?

We don't even know who the rebels are, and we're not invading the country with a
few tank divisions.

How about we let them decide who they like or don't like and who's in
charge based on actions rather than words? Oh wait, you don't really
care about democracy unless you're in charge.
Whose democracy? What you said was nonsense.
We risk our troops and expend our resources for what: alQuaeda or the
Islamic Brotherhood?
It is foolish to play the crusading avenger for our enemies benefits.
We do still have resources don't we? Find the friendlies and let them
lead. Or would you rather we had liberated Europe and let the Fascist
regain control. Do you remember that we had constant problems from
Hitler's boys until 1948 at least.
Damned straight we better look out for our interests and the People
freed from under QDaffi.

It's hard to believe depoop provided that response to my post instead of the
preceding post.

Jeees.

You're self-importance is undeserved. Unlike the stalkers here I
really don't follow what you say all that closely.

Don't worry depoop, we knew you were confused as usual.

On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 13:03:23 -0600, Canuck57 wrote:

On 27/03/2011 11:34 AM, wrote:
On Sun, 27 Mar 2011 09:24:22 -0400, John
wrote:

On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 21:20:56 -0400, Lil wrote:

On 3/26/2011 2:26 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 26 Mar 2011 09:04:24 -0400, John
wrote:

On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 19:36:14 -0400, Lil wrote:

On 3/25/2011 7:14 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 25 Mar 2011 18:57:06 -0400, Lil wrote:

On 3/25/2011 12:46 AM, TopBassDog wrote:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/0...?ref=fb&src=sp

NATO Agrees To Take Over Command Of Libya No-Fly Zone, U.S. Likely To
Remain In Charge Of Brunt Of Combat

WASHINGTON (AP) -- The United States welcomed a partial handover for
the Libyan air campaign to NATO on Thursday, but the allies apparently
balked at assuming full control and the U.S. military was left in
charge of the brunt of combat.

NATO agreed to take over command of the newly established no-fly zone
over Libya, protective flights meant to deter Libyan strongman Moammar
Gadhafi from putting warplanes in the air. That leaves the U.S. with
responsibility for attacks on Gadhafi's ground forces and other
targets, which are the toughest and most controversial portion of the
operation....

It is certain that NATO wishes the United states all the grief, while
the United Nations shares the glory within itself. This is nothing
new. The United Nations prefers to hate the U.S. while it's leaders
try to appease the UN by bending forward before it, and giving the
American cheque payer the bill.

You should really vote in different politicians.
If our Military handled it fine. if Washington State Department and
White House try to drive $#@%!@#$#%

Drive what? The military, in this country anyway, answers to the
political infrastructure.
The Military hasn't been allowed to fulfill, it's implied mission, victory.
Defeat was snatched from the jaws of victory, in Viet Nam thanks to
Kerry, Fonda and Fifth Columnists efforts here.
We have wasted lives and money in Lebanon, Iraq and Afghanistan, etc.
We have no mission goal in Libya although we assume we want to win???
something.
The goal should be American independent of what the UN or anyone else
declares. If we are going to expend our Money and risk our Military then
let's win. Let's go deliberately about getting rid of Qaddafi's forces
right now.
Let's not let alQuaeda or other hostiles take charge, of what we won.
We on it lets make sure Libyans, friendly, to the US and dedicated to
running Libya not exporting terror run the Country. to all the idiots
that scream imperialism or other junk are not our friends and we really
don't give a hoot what they say.
It's about time US Leaders did a little succeeding. Let our Military do
it's job. Ask the Professionals what they need and let them get the job
done. It will be cheaper by far, in the long run, and we get something done.
no more half assing in Washington.

Sounds great. Only one little question...how do we 'make sure Libyans, friendly
to the US' take charge?

We don't even know who the rebels are, and we're not invading the country with a
few tank divisions.

How about we let them decide who they like or don't like and who's in
charge based on actions rather than words? Oh wait, you don't really
care about democracy unless you're in charge.
Whose democracy? What you said was nonsense.
We risk our troops and expend our resources for what: alQuaeda or the
Islamic Brotherhood?
It is foolish to play the crusading avenger for our enemies benefits.
We do still have resources don't we? Find the friendlies and let them
lead. Or would you rather we had liberated Europe and let the Fascist
regain control. Do you remember that we had constant problems from
Hitler's boys until 1948 at least.
Damned straight we better look out for our interests and the People
freed from under QDaffi.

It's hard to believe depoop provided that response to my post instead of the
preceding post.

Jeees.

You're self-importance is undeserved. Unlike the stalkers here I
really don't follow what you say all that closely.

Don't worry depoop, we knew you were confused as usual.

She doesn't follow what I say all that closely. Yet her ill-prepared response
was to my post, rather than to the post presenting the situation she didn't
like.

She should take the little quiz: http://tinyurl.com/o42at

WAFDS

John H wrote:

She doesn't follow what I say all that closely.


Uh...John...no one follows what you say all that closely. I'll bet your
nice wife tunes you out, too.