On Aug 24, 4:15*pm, Wayne B wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 06:14:09 -0400, John H
wrote:

You're right about Harry's left wing bull****. However, I don't post right wing bull****. In fact,
'right wing bull****' is, in itself, an oxymoron.

==================

I have no doubt that you believe that but it just isn't so. *All
political BS qualifies. *To think otherwise makes you part of the
problem instead of the solution. * Lead by example.

Wayne, I'd almost agree with you,but the way i see it, is that all
politics "qualifies as BS."

?;^ )

On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:10:41 -0400, Wayne B wrote:

On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 17:50:38 -0400, John H
wrote:

On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 17:15:57 -0400, Wayne B wrote:

On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 06:14:09 -0400, John H
wrote:

You're right about Harry's left wing bull****. However, I don't post right wing bull****. In fact,
'right wing bull****' is, in itself, an oxymoron.

==================

I have no doubt that you believe that but it just isn't so. All
political BS qualifies. To think otherwise makes you part of the
problem instead of the solution. Lead by example.

OK, but that's a two-way street, right?

======

Just forget the political and religious content, all of it, doesn't
matter who started what. Don't get sucked in. You're certainly
experienced (old) enough, and intelligent enough, to avoid that.

I'm sure most of us would like to hear more about your boating and
fishing however. If they don't, too bad for them.

....and you will refrain from your ****in' contests with Harold, yes?

On 8/25/11 8:21 AM, John H wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:10:41 -0400, Wayne wrote:

On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 17:50:38 -0400, John
wrote:

On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 17:15:57 -0400, Wayne wrote:

On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 06:14:09 -0400, John
wrote:

You're right about Harry's left wing bull****. However, I don't post right wing bull****. In fact,
'right wing bull****' is, in itself, an oxymoron.

==================

I have no doubt that you believe that but it just isn't so. All
political BS qualifies. To think otherwise makes you part of the
problem instead of the solution. Lead by example.

OK, but that's a two-way street, right?

======

Just forget the political and religious content, all of it, doesn't
matter who started what. Don't get sucked in. You're certainly
experienced (old) enough, and intelligent enough, to avoid that.

I'm sure most of us would like to hear more about your boating and
fishing however. If they don't, too bad for them.

...and you will refrain from your ****in' contests with Harold, yes?

You righties, you're always looking for a quid pro quo. Can't you take
responsibility for your own behavior, Herring, without making it
conditional upon what others do?




--
Don't forget to leave a bit of beef for rec.boat's right-wing
conservatrashers and ID spoofers to feed upon. The more they feed, the
quicker rec.boats will fall into the black hole of cyberspace and disappear.

On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 14:55:39 -0700 (PDT), "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"
wrote:

On Aug 24, 5:50*pm, John H wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 17:15:57 -0400, Wayne B wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 06:14:09 -0400, John H
wrote:

You're right about Harry's left wing bull****. However, I don't post right wing bull****. In fact,
'right wing bull****' is, in itself, an oxymoron.

==================

I have no doubt that you believe that but it just isn't so. *All
political BS qualifies. *To think otherwise makes you part of the
problem instead of the solution. * Lead by example.

OK, but that's a two-way street, right?

For **** sake... How many frekin' posters you would normally consider
"on your side" here need to tell you to get the hell off your high
horse before you get it?

You want to join in this little agreement between Wayne and me? I assume that's why you interjected
your opinion.

On Aug 25, 9:25*am, John H wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 14:55:39 -0700 (PDT), "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"
wrote:





On Aug 24, 5:50 pm, John H wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 17:15:57 -0400, Wayne B wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 06:14:09 -0400, John H
wrote:

You're right about Harry's left wing bull****. However, I don't post right wing bull****. In fact,
'right wing bull****' is, in itself, an oxymoron.

==================

I have no doubt that you believe that but it just isn't so. All
political BS qualifies. To think otherwise makes you part of the
problem instead of the solution. Lead by example.

OK, but that's a two-way street, right?

For **** sake... How many frekin' posters you would normally consider
"on your side" here need to tell you to get the hell off your high
horse before you get it?

You want to join in this little agreement between Wayne and me? I assume that's why you interjected
your opinion.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Oh my!

Looks like the Doper Army is suffering the same situation as Libya and
other middle east countries.
No one respects authority anymore.

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 17:15:57 -0400, Wayne B wrote:

On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 06:14:09 -0400, John H
wrote:

You're right about Harry's left wing bull****. However, I don't post right wing bull****. In fact,
'right wing bull****' is, in itself, an oxymoron.

==================

I have no doubt that you believe that but it just isn't so. All
political BS qualifies. To think otherwise makes you part of the
problem instead of the solution. Lead by example.

OK, but that's a two-way street, right?

Lead by example.

In article 7f3db3db-8626-4bb9-a669-935411075523@
18g2000yqu.googlegroups.com, says...

On Aug 25, 9:25*am, John H wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 14:55:39 -0700 (PDT), "JustWaitAFrekinMinute!"
wrote:





On Aug 24, 5:50 pm, John H wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 17:15:57 -0400, Wayne B wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 06:14:09 -0400, John H
wrote:

You're right about Harry's left wing bull****. However, I don't post right wing bull****. In fact,
'right wing bull****' is, in itself, an oxymoron.

==================

I have no doubt that you believe that but it just isn't so. All
political BS qualifies. To think otherwise makes you part of the
problem instead of the solution. Lead by example.

OK, but that's a two-way street, right?

For **** sake... How many frekin' posters you would normally consider
"on your side" here need to tell you to get the hell off your high
horse before you get it?

You want to join in this little agreement between Wayne and me? I assume that's why you interjected
your opinion.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Oh my!

Looks like the Doper Army is suffering the same situation as Libya and
other middle east countries.
No one respects authority anymore.

Look, it's part two of the Cowardly Duo. Where's your leader, Robin?

In article ,
says...

On 8/25/11 8:21 AM, John H wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:10:41 -0400, Wayne wrote:

On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 17:50:38 -0400, John
wrote:

On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 17:15:57 -0400, Wayne wrote:

On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 06:14:09 -0400, John
wrote:

You're right about Harry's left wing bull****. However, I don't post right wing bull****. In fact,
'right wing bull****' is, in itself, an oxymoron.

==================

I have no doubt that you believe that but it just isn't so. All
political BS qualifies. To think otherwise makes you part of the
problem instead of the solution. Lead by example.

OK, but that's a two-way street, right?

======

Just forget the political and religious content, all of it, doesn't
matter who started what. Don't get sucked in. You're certainly
experienced (old) enough, and intelligent enough, to avoid that.

I'm sure most of us would like to hear more about your boating and
fishing however. If they don't, too bad for them.

...and you will refrain from your ****in' contests with Harold, yes?

You righties, you're always looking for a quid pro quo. Can't you take
responsibility for your own behavior, Herring, without making it
conditional upon what others do?

Look, it's the leader of the Cowardly Duo!

On 8/25/11 8:23 AM, X ~ Man wrote:
On 8/25/11 8:21 AM, John H wrote:
On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 19:10:41 -0400, Wayne
wrote:

On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 17:50:38 -0400, John
wrote:

On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 17:15:57 -0400, Wayne
wrote:

On Wed, 24 Aug 2011 06:14:09 -0400, John
wrote:

You're right about Harry's left wing bull****. However, I don't
post right wing bull****. In fact,
'right wing bull****' is, in itself, an oxymoron.

==================

I have no doubt that you believe that but it just isn't so. All
political BS qualifies. To think otherwise makes you part of the
problem instead of the solution. Lead by example.

OK, but that's a two-way street, right?

======

Just forget the political and religious content, all of it, doesn't
matter who started what. Don't get sucked in. You're certainly
experienced (old) enough, and intelligent enough, to avoid that.

I'm sure most of us would like to hear more about your boating and
fishing however. If they don't, too bad for them.

...and you will refrain from your ****in' contests with Harold, yes?

You righties, you're always looking for a quid pro quo. Can't you take
responsibility for your own behavior, Herring, without making it
conditional upon what others do?

Righties, don't bother to quote from all of my previous posts about my
behavior is always based upon how people respond to my posts. I have
recently changed my mind and decided I can treat everyone like an
asshole no matter how they respond to my post. Quid pro quo can suck a
green weenie.


--
Don't forget to leave a bit of beef for rec.boat's right-wing
conservatrashers and ID spoofers to feed upon. The more they feed, the
quicker rec.boats will fall into the black hole of cyberspace and
disappear.

On Thu, 25 Aug 2011 08:21:58 -0400, John H
wrote:

Just forget the political and religious content, all of it, doesn't
matter who started what. Don't get sucked in. You're certainly
experienced (old) enough, and intelligent enough, to avoid that.

I'm sure most of us would like to hear more about your boating and
fishing however. If they don't, too bad for them.

...and you will refrain from your ****in' contests with Harold, yes?

====

With all due respect there has never been anything close to a
"contest" with the aforementioned individual.