On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 13:11:20 -0400, Justan Olphat wrote:

On 8/16/2015 11:52 AM, amdx wrote:
On 8/16/2015 10:40 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
amdx wrote:
On 8/15/2015 2:27 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 8/15/15 2:47 PM, amdx wrote:
On 8/14/2015 8:46 AM, Boating All Out wrote:

I thought it was a case of temporary insanity, but
Mika is REALLY against HRC.
She gives no quarter and hasn't since it was revealed
HRC had used a "personal" server at State.
That has absolutely disqualified HRC. It's done.
HRC can not be President.
It's like watching Fox News, and she is just as
transparent in her hatred for HRC. Almost as bad as
Luddite.
Look for some fireworks ahead. You can't be insane
and have Democrat party guests. Doesn't mix well.
She just may move to Fox.

Why would she move to Fox? Just because she sees all the shenanigans
that Hillary is trying to get away with and she's honest enough to
call
her on it?
Fox has enough honest reporters, she can stay at MSNBC, maybe
it's the
start of an MSNBC turn around.


She's become as hard to watch as Rachel Maddow.

Ain't nobody as hard to watch as Rachel Maddow!

Mikek





Hahahahah...you're a pistol, Mikey.

Rachel is hard for you to watch because, well, you'll figure it out or
someone will tell you.

Could it be the views she communicates, the manner in which she
communicates them and the glee she gets communicating them. (often
sarcastic)
Ya, that's it. I didn't need any help figuring it out.
What did you think it is that makes it hard to watch her?

Mikek

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

You picked those reasons for your inability to comprehend. I had another
reason for you in mind.


At least when Rachel says something the subject is clear.
You write but there is no subject, it's like you are keeping a secret.
When someone asks, you have no response.
Mikek


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus


The mind is a terrible thing to waste; especially on a douchebag like
KKKrause,

A few folks haven't got the word yet.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

On 8/17/2015 4:28 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 10:52:10 -0500, amdx wrote:

On 8/16/2015 10:40 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
amdx wrote:
On 8/15/2015 2:27 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 8/15/15 2:47 PM, amdx wrote:
On 8/14/2015 8:46 AM, Boating All Out wrote:

I thought it was a case of temporary insanity, but
Mika is REALLY against HRC.
She gives no quarter and hasn't since it was revealed
HRC had used a "personal" server at State.
That has absolutely disqualified HRC. It's done.
HRC can not be President.
It's like watching Fox News, and she is just as
transparent in her hatred for HRC. Almost as bad as
Luddite.
Look for some fireworks ahead. You can't be insane
and have Democrat party guests. Doesn't mix well.
She just may move to Fox.

Why would she move to Fox? Just because she sees all the shenanigans
that Hillary is trying to get away with and she's honest enough to call
her on it?
Fox has enough honest reporters, she can stay at MSNBC, maybe it's the
start of an MSNBC turn around.


She's become as hard to watch as Rachel Maddow.

Ain't nobody as hard to watch as Rachel Maddow!

Mikek





Hahahahah...you're a pistol, Mikey.

Rachel is hard for you to watch because, well, you'll figure it out or
someone will tell you.

Could it be the views she communicates, the manner in which she
communicates them and the glee she gets communicating them. (often sarcastic)
Ya, that's it. I didn't need any help figuring it out.
What did you think it is that makes it hard to watch her?

Mikek

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

You picked those reasons for your inability to comprehend. I had another
reason for you in mind.


At least when Rachel says something the subject is clear.
You write but there is no subject, it's like you are keeping a secret.
When someone asks, you have no response.
Mikek


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Ah, you noticed. He provides no response any time the questions get him backed into a
corner or prove he's a liar.

Ask him for what organization he was collecting bodies in Vietnam. So far, no one has
been 'entitled' to an answer.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

He did say that he worked directly *under* a General. I suppose that
could be interpreted a few different ways.


--

Respectfully submitted by Justan

Laugh of the day from Krause

"I'm not to blame anymore for the atmosphere in here.
I've been "born again" as a nice guy."

On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 18:12:38 -0400, Justan Olphat wrote:

On 8/17/2015 4:28 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 10:52:10 -0500, amdx wrote:

On 8/16/2015 10:40 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
amdx wrote:
On 8/15/2015 2:27 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 8/15/15 2:47 PM, amdx wrote:
On 8/14/2015 8:46 AM, Boating All Out wrote:

I thought it was a case of temporary insanity, but
Mika is REALLY against HRC.
She gives no quarter and hasn't since it was revealed
HRC had used a "personal" server at State.
That has absolutely disqualified HRC. It's done.
HRC can not be President.
It's like watching Fox News, and she is just as
transparent in her hatred for HRC. Almost as bad as
Luddite.
Look for some fireworks ahead. You can't be insane
and have Democrat party guests. Doesn't mix well.
She just may move to Fox.

Why would she move to Fox? Just because she sees all the shenanigans
that Hillary is trying to get away with and she's honest enough to call
her on it?
Fox has enough honest reporters, she can stay at MSNBC, maybe it's the
start of an MSNBC turn around.


She's become as hard to watch as Rachel Maddow.

Ain't nobody as hard to watch as Rachel Maddow!

Mikek





Hahahahah...you're a pistol, Mikey.

Rachel is hard for you to watch because, well, you'll figure it out or
someone will tell you.

Could it be the views she communicates, the manner in which she
communicates them and the glee she gets communicating them. (often sarcastic)
Ya, that's it. I didn't need any help figuring it out.
What did you think it is that makes it hard to watch her?

Mikek

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

You picked those reasons for your inability to comprehend. I had another
reason for you in mind.


At least when Rachel says something the subject is clear.
You write but there is no subject, it's like you are keeping a secret.
When someone asks, you have no response.
Mikek


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Ah, you noticed. He provides no response any time the questions get him backed into a
corner or prove he's a liar.

Ask him for what organization he was collecting bodies in Vietnam. So far, no one has
been 'entitled' to an answer.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

He did say that he worked directly *under* a General. I suppose that
could be interpreted a few different ways.

I think he's lying about the whole Vietnam thing. But, you're right about the
different interpretations.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 5:02:22 AM UTC-7, John H. wrote:
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 18:12:38 -0400, Justan Olphat wrote:

On 8/17/2015 4:28 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 10:52:10 -0500, amdx wrote:

On 8/16/2015 10:40 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
amdx wrote:
On 8/15/2015 2:27 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 8/15/15 2:47 PM, amdx wrote:
On 8/14/2015 8:46 AM, Boating All Out wrote:

I thought it was a case of temporary insanity, but
Mika is REALLY against HRC.
She gives no quarter and hasn't since it was revealed
HRC had used a "personal" server at State.
That has absolutely disqualified HRC. It's done.
HRC can not be President.
It's like watching Fox News, and she is just as
transparent in her hatred for HRC. Almost as bad as
Luddite.
Look for some fireworks ahead. You can't be insane
and have Democrat party guests. Doesn't mix well.
She just may move to Fox.

Why would she move to Fox? Just because she sees all the shenanigans
that Hillary is trying to get away with and she's honest enough to call
her on it?
Fox has enough honest reporters, she can stay at MSNBC, maybe it's the
start of an MSNBC turn around.


She's become as hard to watch as Rachel Maddow.

Ain't nobody as hard to watch as Rachel Maddow!

Mikek





Hahahahah...you're a pistol, Mikey.

Rachel is hard for you to watch because, well, you'll figure it out or
someone will tell you.

Could it be the views she communicates, the manner in which she
communicates them and the glee she gets communicating them. (often sarcastic)
Ya, that's it. I didn't need any help figuring it out.
What did you think it is that makes it hard to watch her?

Mikek

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software..
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

You picked those reasons for your inability to comprehend. I had another
reason for you in mind.


At least when Rachel says something the subject is clear.
You write but there is no subject, it's like you are keeping a secret..
When someone asks, you have no response.
Mikek


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Ah, you noticed. He provides no response any time the questions get him backed into a
corner or prove he's a liar.

Ask him for what organization he was collecting bodies in Vietnam. So far, no one has
been 'entitled' to an answer.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

He did say that he worked directly *under* a General. I suppose that
could be interpreted a few different ways.

I know he's lying about the whole Vietnam thing. But, you're right about the
different interpretations.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!
Fixed

2:38
- show quoted text -
I know he's lying about the whole Vietnam thing. But, you're right about the
different interpretations.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!
"Fixed"



Too bad you couldn't fix The JohnnyMop's attitude as easily.

On 8/18/15 1:53 PM, True North wrote:

2:38
- show quoted text -
I know he's lying about the whole Vietnam thing. But, you're right about the
different interpretations.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!
"Fixed"



Too bad you couldn't fix The JohnnyMop's attitude as easily.



We're really not on this earth long enough to waste time worrying about
****ty people like John Herring and his good buddies here.

On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 10:38:47 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On Tuesday, August 18, 2015 at 5:02:22 AM UTC-7, John H. wrote:
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 18:12:38 -0400, Justan Olphat wrote:

On 8/17/2015 4:28 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 16 Aug 2015 10:52:10 -0500, amdx wrote:

On 8/16/2015 10:40 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
amdx wrote:
On 8/15/2015 2:27 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 8/15/15 2:47 PM, amdx wrote:
On 8/14/2015 8:46 AM, Boating All Out wrote:

I thought it was a case of temporary insanity, but
Mika is REALLY against HRC.
She gives no quarter and hasn't since it was revealed
HRC had used a "personal" server at State.
That has absolutely disqualified HRC. It's done.
HRC can not be President.
It's like watching Fox News, and she is just as
transparent in her hatred for HRC. Almost as bad as
Luddite.
Look for some fireworks ahead. You can't be insane
and have Democrat party guests. Doesn't mix well.
She just may move to Fox.

Why would she move to Fox? Just because she sees all the shenanigans
that Hillary is trying to get away with and she's honest enough to call
her on it?
Fox has enough honest reporters, she can stay at MSNBC, maybe it's the
start of an MSNBC turn around.


She's become as hard to watch as Rachel Maddow.

Ain't nobody as hard to watch as Rachel Maddow!

Mikek





Hahahahah...you're a pistol, Mikey.

Rachel is hard for you to watch because, well, you'll figure it out or
someone will tell you.

Could it be the views she communicates, the manner in which she
communicates them and the glee she gets communicating them. (often sarcastic)
Ya, that's it. I didn't need any help figuring it out.
What did you think it is that makes it hard to watch her?

Mikek

---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

You picked those reasons for your inability to comprehend. I had another
reason for you in mind.


At least when Rachel says something the subject is clear.
You write but there is no subject, it's like you are keeping a secret.
When someone asks, you have no response.
Mikek


---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus

Ah, you noticed. He provides no response any time the questions get him backed into a
corner or prove he's a liar.

Ask him for what organization he was collecting bodies in Vietnam. So far, no one has
been 'entitled' to an answer.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

He did say that he worked directly *under* a General. I suppose that
could be interpreted a few different ways.

I know he's lying about the whole Vietnam thing. But, you're right about the
different interpretations.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!
Fixed

??
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 10:53:23 -0700 (PDT), True North wrote:


2:38
- show quoted text -
I know he's lying about the whole Vietnam thing. But, you're right about the
different interpretations.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!
"Fixed"



Too bad you couldn't fix The JohnnyMop's attitude as easily.

Didn't you ever wonder why Harry couldn't name the organization for which he
'collected bodies' in Vietnam?

Or do you just accept as 'gospel' everything he says?

How much sewage do you reckon those recreational boaters are dumping into Halifax
harbor, Donne?
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

On 8/18/15 2:00 PM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 10:53:23 -0700 (PDT), True North wrote:


2:38
- show quoted text -
I know he's lying about the whole Vietnam thing. But, you're right about the
different interpretations.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!
"Fixed"



Too bad you couldn't fix The JohnnyMop's attitude as easily.

Didn't you ever wonder why Harry couldn't name the organization for which he
'collected bodies' in Vietnam?

Or do you just accept as 'gospel' everything he says?



Not much for language usage, hey, Johnny?

Your *claim* that I "couldn't" name the organization is just another
example of your bull**** spreading.

Of course I could name the organization.

The word you wanted was "wouldn't."

Your sense of entitlement here is mind-boggling.

On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 13:57:07 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

We're really not on this earth long enough to waste time worrying about
****ty people like John Herring and his good buddies here.

It makes inquiring minds wonder why you are here.
You seem to thrive on it.