Poco Loco wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote:

. . .the Fisherman, retired.

http://tinyurl.com/kvpwwbt

Found these gems in the back of my closet. Provenance indicates they
were worn 2000 years ago by a fellow fishing next to the Sea of Galilee,
but that provenance may be a hoax.

Thinking of selling them on eBay for about $100,000. They're broken in,
they've been in several oceans, they're holy, and they have an original,
never-duplicated aroma.

Why start the ****, Harry?

Wow, talk about sensitive...

Why go out of your way to look for trouble?

On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:37:01 -0800, thumper wrote:

Poco Loco wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote:

. . .the Fisherman, retired.

http://tinyurl.com/kvpwwbt

Found these gems in the back of my closet. Provenance indicates they
were worn 2000 years ago by a fellow fishing next to the Sea of Galilee,
but that provenance may be a hoax.

Thinking of selling them on eBay for about $100,000. They're broken in,
they've been in several oceans, they're holy, and they have an original,
never-duplicated aroma.

Why start the ****, Harry?

Wow, talk about sensitive...

Why go out of your way to look for trouble?

Keep reading, Thumper. I suppose Harry's thinly disguised religious sarcasm, part of his 'war on
religion' (in his own words), went over your head.
--

Hope you're day is spectacular!

On 1/11/14, 8:49 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:37:01 -0800, thumper wrote:

Poco Loco wrote:
"F.O.A.D." wrote:

. . .the Fisherman, retired.

http://tinyurl.com/kvpwwbt

Found these gems in the back of my closet. Provenance indicates they
were worn 2000 years ago by a fellow fishing next to the Sea of Galilee,
but that provenance may be a hoax.

Thinking of selling them on eBay for about $100,000. They're broken in,
they've been in several oceans, they're holy, and they have an original,
never-duplicated aroma.

Why start the ****, Harry?

Wow, talk about sensitive...

Why go out of your way to look for trouble?

Keep reading, Thumper. I suppose Harry's thinly disguised religious sarcasm, part of his 'war on
religion' (in his own words), went over your head.
--

Hope you're day is spectacular!


I've got those shoes up for sale in a post on FB, and so far, I've
received six bids, with the highest, as of last night, at a quarter.

It is possible, but not likely, they were worn by a 2000-year-old man.

http://www.youtube.com/results?searc...r+old+man&sm=1

On 1/11/2014 5:49 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:37:01 -0800, thumper wrote:
Poco Loco wrote:

Why start the ****, Harry?

Wow, talk about sensitive...

Why go out of your way to look for trouble?

Keep reading, Thumper. I suppose Harry's thinly disguised religious sarcasm, part of his 'war on
religion' (in his own words), went over your head.

More evident is your hyper-sensitivity, how about giving it a break.

On 1/11/14, 1:23 PM, thumper wrote:
On 1/11/2014 5:49 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:37:01 -0800, thumper wrote:
Poco Loco wrote:

Why start the ****, Harry?

Wow, talk about sensitive...

Why go out of your way to look for trouble?

Keep reading, Thumper. I suppose Harry's thinly disguised religious
sarcasm, part of his 'war on
religion' (in his own words), went over your head.

More evident is your hyper-sensitivity, how about giving it a break.


I don't think it is snarky to point out that it apparently is "ok" with
some of the "hypersensitive," as you call them, if their buddies behave
badly in here and "go after" other posters. As far as I can tell, so far
this year, it is only the posters on the rightwing side of the political
spectrum who are exhibiting that sort of behavior. What is ironic is
that when some of those same posters complain about the behavior of
others here, they tend not to include their own examples of what they
consider bad behavior, or those of their fellow rightwingers.

Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi, as the saying goes.

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 14:55:21 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 1/11/14, 1:23 PM, thumper wrote:
On 1/11/2014 5:49 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:37:01 -0800, thumper wrote:
Poco Loco wrote:

Why start the ****, Harry?

Wow, talk about sensitive...

Why go out of your way to look for trouble?

Keep reading, Thumper. I suppose Harry's thinly disguised religious
sarcasm, part of his 'war on
religion' (in his own words), went over your head.

More evident is your hyper-sensitivity, how about giving it a break.


I don't think it is snarky to point out that it apparently is "ok" with
some of the "hypersensitive," as you call them, if their buddies behave
badly in here and "go after" other posters. As far as I can tell, so far
this year, it is only the posters on the rightwing side of the political
spectrum who are exhibiting that sort of behavior. What is ironic is
that when some of those same posters complain about the behavior of
others here, they tend not to include their own examples of what they
consider bad behavior, or those of their fellow rightwingers.

Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi, as the saying goes.

You should really spend some more time reading the posts.

If one were to be 'snarky', one might consider you're little anti-religious sarcasm to be somewhat
inappropriate, no?
--

Hope you're having a spectacular day!

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 15:35:59 -0500, Poco Loco wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 14:55:21 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 1/11/14, 1:23 PM, thumper wrote:
On 1/11/2014 5:49 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:37:01 -0800, thumper wrote:
Poco Loco wrote:

Why start the ****, Harry?

Wow, talk about sensitive...

Why go out of your way to look for trouble?

Keep reading, Thumper. I suppose Harry's thinly disguised religious
sarcasm, part of his 'war on
religion' (in his own words), went over your head.

More evident is your hyper-sensitivity, how about giving it a break.


I don't think it is snarky to point out that it apparently is "ok" with
some of the "hypersensitive," as you call them, if their buddies behave
badly in here and "go after" other posters. As far as I can tell, so far
this year, it is only the posters on the rightwing side of the political
spectrum who are exhibiting that sort of behavior. What is ironic is
that when some of those same posters complain about the behavior of
others here, they tend not to include their own examples of what they
consider bad behavior, or those of their fellow rightwingers.

Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi, as the saying goes.

You should really spend some more time reading the posts.

If one were to be 'snarky', one might consider you're little anti-religious sarcasm to be somewhat
inappropriate, no?

'your'
--

Hope you're having a spectacular day!

On 1/11/14, 3:55 PM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 15:35:59 -0500, Poco Loco wrote:

On Sat, 11 Jan 2014 14:55:21 -0500, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 1/11/14, 1:23 PM, thumper wrote:
On 1/11/2014 5:49 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Fri, 10 Jan 2014 19:37:01 -0800, thumper wrote:
Poco Loco wrote:

Why start the ****, Harry?

Wow, talk about sensitive...

Why go out of your way to look for trouble?

Keep reading, Thumper. I suppose Harry's thinly disguised religious
sarcasm, part of his 'war on
religion' (in his own words), went over your head.

More evident is your hyper-sensitivity, how about giving it a break.


I don't think it is snarky to point out that it apparently is "ok" with
some of the "hypersensitive," as you call them, if their buddies behave
badly in here and "go after" other posters. As far as I can tell, so far
this year, it is only the posters on the rightwing side of the political
spectrum who are exhibiting that sort of behavior. What is ironic is
that when some of those same posters complain about the behavior of
others here, they tend not to include their own examples of what they
consider bad behavior, or those of their fellow rightwingers.

Benghazi, Benghazi, Benghazi, as the saying goes.

You should really spend some more time reading the posts.

If one were to be 'snarky', one might consider you're little anti-religious sarcasm to be somewhat
inappropriate, no?

'your'
--

Hope you're having a spectacular day!