On 11/29/2015 8:08 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015 18:01:56 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 11/28/15 4:13 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015 16:02:28 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 11/28/2015 3:01 PM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 27 Nov 2015 19:11:21 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 11/27/2015 6:55 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/27/15 5:38 PM, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 22:44:25 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/26/2015 9:40 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/26/15 9:03 PM, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 10:12:37 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/26/2015 10:00 AM, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 11:33:11 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/25/2015 10:25 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 10:15 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/25/2015 10:13 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 10:10 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/25/2015 10:03 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 7:41 AM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 18:08:32 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

Will coverage of cop the killing a teen in Chicago be
another 24/7 story?
Can they manage two 24/7 stories?
We'll see.

The video definitely makes the cop appear in the wrong. But,
a first
degree murder
charge has been filed. What more do the marchers want. Is
this an
excuse to begin
looting and burning in Chicago?
--

You probably didn't understand the civil rights demonstrations
and
marches of the 1960s, either.



Point to ponder:

In the 400 days since this cop committed this obvious
murder, 396
blacks
were shot and killed by another black in the Chicago area.

Do they not understand the civil rights demonstrations and
marches of
the 1960s or that Black Lives Matter either?


You don't "get it," either, eh?


Yes Harry, I "get it". Probably better than you do.



I don't think so. The 1960's demonstrations/marches were mostly
against
institutional racism and violence. The Chicago demonstration, such
as it
was, was also against institutional racism and violence. Police
murder
of blacks seems to be endemic these days. Institutional violence.

We have, what, 30,000+ "deaths by gun" and mostly involving
non-police
individuals in this country each year. Peculiarly 'Merican, eh?


How many by suicide?
How many black on black?
How many while a crime was being committed?
How many with drug involvement?
How many accidental?
How many by illegal immigrants?

If you have a point to make, make it.
Otherwise admit that you are just parroting a statistic without
having a
clue as to what it implies.
Am I right, O' clueless one?

That one's probably way too hard for Krause to answer.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


He's afraid of what I might say in response to his answer. The
questions
asked are easily answered with a little digging.

When he's obviously put in a corner, he keeps his mouth shut. Most of
the time he
doesn't realize he was in a corner, opens his mouth, and looks even
more stupid.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


Apparently you right wing trashmeisters can't read. I've often stated I
don't read FlaJim's posts firsthand and I usually ignore them when they
get reposted, and I usually don't respond when another right wing
trashmeister like you tries, and tries, and tries, et cetera.


I really find that hard to believe, Harry.

Only 'cause it's unbelievable.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!



99.9% of FlaJim's comments here are totally devoid of content, which is
one reason of many not to bother with them.


Just the other day you said you only saw a miniscule number of his posts
and only when they are quoted by others. Now you say that 99.9%
of his posts are totally devoid of content.

How do you know that if you only see a small fraction of them?


Great minds, etc.

Should have read the posts out of sequence, but this way Krause can answer twice.
It'll be interesting to see if the answers are the same.

He already answered my question. Somehow reading .1% of what Jim posts
allows him to deduce that the other 99.1% posts are complete devoid of
content.

Not many have that profound ability.

Omniscience is hard to come by.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


I've seen enough of Flatulent Jim's posts over the years to know that
he's a low information voter on current events, that he has nothing of
significance to post on topic, that he's a coward who insults while
trying to hide behind anonymity, that he's somewhat of a racist, and
that he's repetitive. In other words, there nothing there of interest.

In other words, he's a lot like you, but even dumber. Why would I want
to read posts from a Herring semi-clone, eh?

Actually, Krause, there are a few people here who can see right through you. Jim is
one of them. Oh, now he's a racist too? Well, as that was said by a liar, he deserves
a pat on the back for the compliment.

He's a coward hiding behind anonymity? No more than you, fool. You know who he is, I
know, and most others here know who he is. And, as I've said, let me know what you
need to know about him, and I'll be glad to tell you.

You are a f'ing joke. And a liar.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Let's not go overboard now. ;-) Harry doesn't NEED for anything. He has
someone's roof over his head. He has his guns. He has long standing deep
pocket clients providing him pocket change. He apparently gets enough to
eat; otherwise he wouldn't have garbage to throw out in his yard for the
vermin.

On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 09:58:53 -0500, Justan Olphart wrote:

On 11/29/2015 8:08 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015 18:01:56 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 11/28/15 4:13 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015 16:02:28 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 11/28/2015 3:01 PM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 27 Nov 2015 19:11:21 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 11/27/2015 6:55 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/27/15 5:38 PM, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 22:44:25 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/26/2015 9:40 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/26/15 9:03 PM, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 10:12:37 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/26/2015 10:00 AM, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 11:33:11 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/25/2015 10:25 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 10:15 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/25/2015 10:13 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 10:10 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/25/2015 10:03 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 7:41 AM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 18:08:32 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

Will coverage of cop the killing a teen in Chicago be
another 24/7 story?
Can they manage two 24/7 stories?
We'll see.

The video definitely makes the cop appear in the wrong. But,
a first
degree murder
charge has been filed. What more do the marchers want. Is
this an
excuse to begin
looting and burning in Chicago?
--

You probably didn't understand the civil rights demonstrations
and
marches of the 1960s, either.



Point to ponder:

In the 400 days since this cop committed this obvious
murder, 396
blacks
were shot and killed by another black in the Chicago area.

Do they not understand the civil rights demonstrations and
marches of
the 1960s or that Black Lives Matter either?


You don't "get it," either, eh?


Yes Harry, I "get it". Probably better than you do.



I don't think so. The 1960's demonstrations/marches were mostly
against
institutional racism and violence. The Chicago demonstration, such
as it
was, was also against institutional racism and violence. Police
murder
of blacks seems to be endemic these days. Institutional violence.

We have, what, 30,000+ "deaths by gun" and mostly involving
non-police
individuals in this country each year. Peculiarly 'Merican, eh?


How many by suicide?
How many black on black?
How many while a crime was being committed?
How many with drug involvement?
How many accidental?
How many by illegal immigrants?

If you have a point to make, make it.
Otherwise admit that you are just parroting a statistic without
having a
clue as to what it implies.
Am I right, O' clueless one?

That one's probably way too hard for Krause to answer.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


He's afraid of what I might say in response to his answer. The
questions
asked are easily answered with a little digging.

When he's obviously put in a corner, he keeps his mouth shut. Most of
the time he
doesn't realize he was in a corner, opens his mouth, and looks even
more stupid.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


Apparently you right wing trashmeisters can't read. I've often stated I
don't read FlaJim's posts firsthand and I usually ignore them when they
get reposted, and I usually don't respond when another right wing
trashmeister like you tries, and tries, and tries, et cetera.


I really find that hard to believe, Harry.

Only 'cause it's unbelievable.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!



99.9% of FlaJim's comments here are totally devoid of content, which is
one reason of many not to bother with them.


Just the other day you said you only saw a miniscule number of his posts
and only when they are quoted by others. Now you say that 99.9%
of his posts are totally devoid of content.

How do you know that if you only see a small fraction of them?


Great minds, etc.

Should have read the posts out of sequence, but this way Krause can answer twice.
It'll be interesting to see if the answers are the same.

He already answered my question. Somehow reading .1% of what Jim posts
allows him to deduce that the other 99.1% posts are complete devoid of
content.

Not many have that profound ability.

Omniscience is hard to come by.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


I've seen enough of Flatulent Jim's posts over the years to know that
he's a low information voter on current events, that he has nothing of
significance to post on topic, that he's a coward who insults while
trying to hide behind anonymity, that he's somewhat of a racist, and
that he's repetitive. In other words, there nothing there of interest.

In other words, he's a lot like you, but even dumber. Why would I want
to read posts from a Herring semi-clone, eh?

Actually, Krause, there are a few people here who can see right through you. Jim is
one of them. Oh, now he's a racist too? Well, as that was said by a liar, he deserves
a pat on the back for the compliment.

He's a coward hiding behind anonymity? No more than you, fool. You know who he is, I
know, and most others here know who he is. And, as I've said, let me know what you
need to know about him, and I'll be glad to tell you.

You are a f'ing joke. And a liar.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Let's not go overboard now. ;-) Harry doesn't NEED for anything. He has
someone's roof over his head. He has his guns. He has long standing deep
pocket clients providing him pocket change. He apparently gets enough to
eat; otherwise he wouldn't have garbage to throw out in his yard for the
vermin.

Gosh, you caught the key word, 'need'. He's never been able to identify any 'needs'
about your 'anonymity' so he's not gotten any information. Poor guy.

I do like the way you turned that response into something boating related.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

On 11/29/15 10:04 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 09:58:53 -0500, Justan Olphart wrote:

On 11/29/2015 8:08 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015 18:01:56 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 11/28/15 4:13 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015 16:02:28 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 11/28/2015 3:01 PM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 27 Nov 2015 19:11:21 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 11/27/2015 6:55 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/27/15 5:38 PM, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 22:44:25 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/26/2015 9:40 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/26/15 9:03 PM, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 10:12:37 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/26/2015 10:00 AM, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 11:33:11 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/25/2015 10:25 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 10:15 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/25/2015 10:13 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 10:10 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/25/2015 10:03 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 7:41 AM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 18:08:32 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

Will coverage of cop the killing a teen in Chicago be
another 24/7 story?
Can they manage two 24/7 stories?
We'll see.

The video definitely makes the cop appear in the wrong. But,
a first
degree murder
charge has been filed. What more do the marchers want. Is
this an
excuse to begin
looting and burning in Chicago?
--

You probably didn't understand the civil rights demonstrations
and
marches of the 1960s, either.



Point to ponder:

In the 400 days since this cop committed this obvious
murder, 396
blacks
were shot and killed by another black in the Chicago area.

Do they not understand the civil rights demonstrations and
marches of
the 1960s or that Black Lives Matter either?


You don't "get it," either, eh?


Yes Harry, I "get it". Probably better than you do.



I don't think so. The 1960's demonstrations/marches were mostly
against
institutional racism and violence. The Chicago demonstration, such
as it
was, was also against institutional racism and violence. Police
murder
of blacks seems to be endemic these days. Institutional violence.

We have, what, 30,000+ "deaths by gun" and mostly involving
non-police
individuals in this country each year. Peculiarly 'Merican, eh?


How many by suicide?
How many black on black?
How many while a crime was being committed?
How many with drug involvement?
How many accidental?
How many by illegal immigrants?

If you have a point to make, make it.
Otherwise admit that you are just parroting a statistic without
having a
clue as to what it implies.
Am I right, O' clueless one?

That one's probably way too hard for Krause to answer.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


He's afraid of what I might say in response to his answer. The
questions
asked are easily answered with a little digging.

When he's obviously put in a corner, he keeps his mouth shut. Most of
the time he
doesn't realize he was in a corner, opens his mouth, and looks even
more stupid.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


Apparently you right wing trashmeisters can't read. I've often stated I
don't read FlaJim's posts firsthand and I usually ignore them when they
get reposted, and I usually don't respond when another right wing
trashmeister like you tries, and tries, and tries, et cetera.


I really find that hard to believe, Harry.

Only 'cause it's unbelievable.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!



99.9% of FlaJim's comments here are totally devoid of content, which is
one reason of many not to bother with them.


Just the other day you said you only saw a miniscule number of his posts
and only when they are quoted by others. Now you say that 99.9%
of his posts are totally devoid of content.

How do you know that if you only see a small fraction of them?


Great minds, etc.

Should have read the posts out of sequence, but this way Krause can answer twice.
It'll be interesting to see if the answers are the same.

He already answered my question. Somehow reading .1% of what Jim posts
allows him to deduce that the other 99.1% posts are complete devoid of
content.

Not many have that profound ability.

Omniscience is hard to come by.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


I've seen enough of Flatulent Jim's posts over the years to know that
he's a low information voter on current events, that he has nothing of
significance to post on topic, that he's a coward who insults while
trying to hide behind anonymity, that he's somewhat of a racist, and
that he's repetitive. In other words, there nothing there of interest.

In other words, he's a lot like you, but even dumber. Why would I want
to read posts from a Herring semi-clone, eh?

Actually, Krause, there are a few people here who can see right through you. Jim is
one of them. Oh, now he's a racist too? Well, as that was said by a liar, he deserves
a pat on the back for the compliment.

He's a coward hiding behind anonymity? No more than you, fool. You know who he is, I
know, and most others here know who he is. And, as I've said, let me know what you
need to know about him, and I'll be glad to tell you.

You are a f'ing joke. And a liar.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Let's not go overboard now. ;-) Harry doesn't NEED for anything. He has
someone's roof over his head. He has his guns. He has long standing deep
pocket clients providing him pocket change. He apparently gets enough to
eat; otherwise he wouldn't have garbage to throw out in his yard for the
vermin.

Gosh, you caught the key word, 'need'. He's never been able to identify any 'needs'
about your 'anonymity' so he's not gotten any information. Poor guy.

I do like the way you turned that response into something boating related.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!



Your buttbuddy FlaJim is the ranking coward of .wrecked.bloats.

On 11/29/2015 10:04 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 09:58:53 -0500, Justan Olphart wrote:

On 11/29/2015 8:08 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015 18:01:56 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 11/28/15 4:13 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015 16:02:28 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 11/28/2015 3:01 PM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 27 Nov 2015 19:11:21 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 11/27/2015 6:55 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/27/15 5:38 PM, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 22:44:25 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/26/2015 9:40 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/26/15 9:03 PM, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 10:12:37 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/26/2015 10:00 AM, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 11:33:11 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/25/2015 10:25 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 10:15 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/25/2015 10:13 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 10:10 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/25/2015 10:03 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 7:41 AM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 18:08:32 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

Will coverage of cop the killing a teen in Chicago be
another 24/7 story?
Can they manage two 24/7 stories?
We'll see.

The video definitely makes the cop appear in the wrong. But,
a first
degree murder
charge has been filed. What more do the marchers want. Is
this an
excuse to begin
looting and burning in Chicago?
--

You probably didn't understand the civil rights demonstrations
and
marches of the 1960s, either.



Point to ponder:

In the 400 days since this cop committed this obvious
murder, 396
blacks
were shot and killed by another black in the Chicago area.

Do they not understand the civil rights demonstrations and
marches of
the 1960s or that Black Lives Matter either?


You don't "get it," either, eh?


Yes Harry, I "get it". Probably better than you do.



I don't think so. The 1960's demonstrations/marches were mostly
against
institutional racism and violence. The Chicago demonstration, such
as it
was, was also against institutional racism and violence. Police
murder
of blacks seems to be endemic these days. Institutional violence.

We have, what, 30,000+ "deaths by gun" and mostly involving
non-police
individuals in this country each year. Peculiarly 'Merican, eh?


How many by suicide?
How many black on black?
How many while a crime was being committed?
How many with drug involvement?
How many accidental?
How many by illegal immigrants?

If you have a point to make, make it.
Otherwise admit that you are just parroting a statistic without
having a
clue as to what it implies.
Am I right, O' clueless one?

That one's probably way too hard for Krause to answer.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


He's afraid of what I might say in response to his answer. The
questions
asked are easily answered with a little digging.

When he's obviously put in a corner, he keeps his mouth shut. Most of
the time he
doesn't realize he was in a corner, opens his mouth, and looks even
more stupid.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


Apparently you right wing trashmeisters can't read. I've often stated I
don't read FlaJim's posts firsthand and I usually ignore them when they
get reposted, and I usually don't respond when another right wing
trashmeister like you tries, and tries, and tries, et cetera.


I really find that hard to believe, Harry.

Only 'cause it's unbelievable.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!



99.9% of FlaJim's comments here are totally devoid of content, which is
one reason of many not to bother with them.


Just the other day you said you only saw a miniscule number of his posts
and only when they are quoted by others. Now you say that 99.9%
of his posts are totally devoid of content.

How do you know that if you only see a small fraction of them?


Great minds, etc.

Should have read the posts out of sequence, but this way Krause can answer twice.
It'll be interesting to see if the answers are the same.

He already answered my question. Somehow reading .1% of what Jim posts
allows him to deduce that the other 99.1% posts are complete devoid of
content.

Not many have that profound ability.

Omniscience is hard to come by.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


I've seen enough of Flatulent Jim's posts over the years to know that
he's a low information voter on current events, that he has nothing of
significance to post on topic, that he's a coward who insults while
trying to hide behind anonymity, that he's somewhat of a racist, and
that he's repetitive. In other words, there nothing there of interest.

In other words, he's a lot like you, but even dumber. Why would I want
to read posts from a Herring semi-clone, eh?

Actually, Krause, there are a few people here who can see right through you. Jim is
one of them. Oh, now he's a racist too? Well, as that was said by a liar, he deserves
a pat on the back for the compliment.

He's a coward hiding behind anonymity? No more than you, fool. You know who he is, I
know, and most others here know who he is. And, as I've said, let me know what you
need to know about him, and I'll be glad to tell you.

You are a f'ing joke. And a liar.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Let's not go overboard now. ;-) Harry doesn't NEED for anything. He has
someone's roof over his head. He has his guns. He has long standing deep
pocket clients providing him pocket change. He apparently gets enough to
eat; otherwise he wouldn't have garbage to throw out in his yard for the
vermin.

Gosh, you caught the key word, 'need'. He's never been able to identify any 'needs'
about your 'anonymity' so he's not gotten any information. Poor guy.

I do like the way you turned that response into something boating related.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

:-)

On 11/29/2015 10:12 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/29/15 10:04 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 09:58:53 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/29/2015 8:08 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015 18:01:56 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 11/28/15 4:13 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015 16:02:28 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/28/2015 3:01 PM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 27 Nov 2015 19:11:21 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/27/2015 6:55 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/27/15 5:38 PM, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 22:44:25 -0500, Justan Olphart

wrote:

On 11/26/2015 9:40 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/26/15 9:03 PM, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 10:12:37 -0500, Justan Olphart

wrote:

On 11/26/2015 10:00 AM, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 11:33:11 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/25/2015 10:25 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 10:15 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/25/2015 10:13 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 10:10 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/25/2015 10:03 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 7:41 AM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 18:08:32 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

Will coverage of cop the killing a teen in
Chicago be
another 24/7 story?
Can they manage two 24/7 stories?
We'll see.

The video definitely makes the cop appear in the
wrong. But,
a first
degree murder
charge has been filed. What more do the marchers
want. Is
this an
excuse to begin
looting and burning in Chicago?
--

You probably didn't understand the civil rights
demonstrations
and
marches of the 1960s, either.



Point to ponder:

In the 400 days since this cop committed this obvious
murder, 396
blacks
were shot and killed by another black in the
Chicago area.

Do they not understand the civil rights
demonstrations and
marches of
the 1960s or that Black Lives Matter either?


You don't "get it," either, eh?


Yes Harry, I "get it". Probably better than you do.



I don't think so. The 1960's demonstrations/marches
were mostly
against
institutional racism and violence. The Chicago
demonstration, such
as it
was, was also against institutional racism and
violence. Police
murder
of blacks seems to be endemic these days.
Institutional violence.

We have, what, 30,000+ "deaths by gun" and mostly
involving
non-police
individuals in this country each year. Peculiarly
'Merican, eh?


How many by suicide?
How many black on black?
How many while a crime was being committed?
How many with drug involvement?
How many accidental?
How many by illegal immigrants?

If you have a point to make, make it.
Otherwise admit that you are just parroting a statistic
without
having a
clue as to what it implies.
Am I right, O' clueless one?

That one's probably way too hard for Krause to answer.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


He's afraid of what I might say in response to his
answer. The
questions
asked are easily answered with a little digging.

When he's obviously put in a corner, he keeps his mouth
shut. Most of
the time he
doesn't realize he was in a corner, opens his mouth, and
looks even
more stupid.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


Apparently you right wing trashmeisters can't read. I've
often stated I
don't read FlaJim's posts firsthand and I usually ignore
them when they
get reposted, and I usually don't respond when another
right wing
trashmeister like you tries, and tries, and tries, et cetera.


I really find that hard to believe, Harry.

Only 'cause it's unbelievable.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!



99.9% of FlaJim's comments here are totally devoid of content,
which is
one reason of many not to bother with them.


Just the other day you said you only saw a miniscule number of
his posts
and only when they are quoted by others. Now you say that 99.9%
of his posts are totally devoid of content.

How do you know that if you only see a small fraction of them?


Great minds, etc.

Should have read the posts out of sequence, but this way Krause
can answer twice.
It'll be interesting to see if the answers are the same.

He already answered my question. Somehow reading .1% of what Jim
posts
allows him to deduce that the other 99.1% posts are complete
devoid of
content.

Not many have that profound ability.

Omniscience is hard to come by.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


I've seen enough of Flatulent Jim's posts over the years to know that
he's a low information voter on current events, that he has nothing of
significance to post on topic, that he's a coward who insults while
trying to hide behind anonymity, that he's somewhat of a racist, and
that he's repetitive. In other words, there nothing there of interest.

In other words, he's a lot like you, but even dumber. Why would I want
to read posts from a Herring semi-clone, eh?

Actually, Krause, there are a few people here who can see right
through you. Jim is
one of them. Oh, now he's a racist too? Well, as that was said by a
liar, he deserves
a pat on the back for the compliment.

He's a coward hiding behind anonymity? No more than you, fool. You
know who he is, I
know, and most others here know who he is. And, as I've said, let me
know what you
need to know about him, and I'll be glad to tell you.

You are a f'ing joke. And a liar.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Let's not go overboard now. ;-) Harry doesn't NEED for anything. He has
someone's roof over his head. He has his guns. He has long standing deep
pocket clients providing him pocket change. He apparently gets enough to
eat; otherwise he wouldn't have garbage to throw out in his yard for the
vermin.

Gosh, you caught the key word, 'need'. He's never been able to
identify any 'needs'
about your 'anonymity' so he's not gotten any information. Poor guy.

I do like the way you turned that response into something boating
related.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!



Your buttbuddy FlaJim is the ranking coward of .wrecked.bloats.

That's rich coming from the draft dodger hiding behind the skirts of
school marms.

On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 10:12:25 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 11/29/15 10:04 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 09:58:53 -0500, Justan Olphart wrote:

On 11/29/2015 8:08 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015 18:01:56 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 11/28/15 4:13 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015 16:02:28 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 11/28/2015 3:01 PM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 27 Nov 2015 19:11:21 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 11/27/2015 6:55 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/27/15 5:38 PM, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 22:44:25 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/26/2015 9:40 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/26/15 9:03 PM, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 10:12:37 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/26/2015 10:00 AM, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 11:33:11 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/25/2015 10:25 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 10:15 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/25/2015 10:13 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 10:10 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/25/2015 10:03 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 7:41 AM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 18:08:32 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

Will coverage of cop the killing a teen in Chicago be
another 24/7 story?
Can they manage two 24/7 stories?
We'll see.

The video definitely makes the cop appear in the wrong. But,
a first
degree murder
charge has been filed. What more do the marchers want. Is
this an
excuse to begin
looting and burning in Chicago?
--

You probably didn't understand the civil rights demonstrations
and
marches of the 1960s, either.



Point to ponder:

In the 400 days since this cop committed this obvious
murder, 396
blacks
were shot and killed by another black in the Chicago area.

Do they not understand the civil rights demonstrations and
marches of
the 1960s or that Black Lives Matter either?


You don't "get it," either, eh?


Yes Harry, I "get it". Probably better than you do.



I don't think so. The 1960's demonstrations/marches were mostly
against
institutional racism and violence. The Chicago demonstration, such
as it
was, was also against institutional racism and violence. Police
murder
of blacks seems to be endemic these days. Institutional violence.

We have, what, 30,000+ "deaths by gun" and mostly involving
non-police
individuals in this country each year. Peculiarly 'Merican, eh?


How many by suicide?
How many black on black?
How many while a crime was being committed?
How many with drug involvement?
How many accidental?
How many by illegal immigrants?

If you have a point to make, make it.
Otherwise admit that you are just parroting a statistic without
having a
clue as to what it implies.
Am I right, O' clueless one?

That one's probably way too hard for Krause to answer.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


He's afraid of what I might say in response to his answer. The
questions
asked are easily answered with a little digging.

When he's obviously put in a corner, he keeps his mouth shut. Most of
the time he
doesn't realize he was in a corner, opens his mouth, and looks even
more stupid.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


Apparently you right wing trashmeisters can't read. I've often stated I
don't read FlaJim's posts firsthand and I usually ignore them when they
get reposted, and I usually don't respond when another right wing
trashmeister like you tries, and tries, and tries, et cetera.


I really find that hard to believe, Harry.

Only 'cause it's unbelievable.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!



99.9% of FlaJim's comments here are totally devoid of content, which is
one reason of many not to bother with them.


Just the other day you said you only saw a miniscule number of his posts
and only when they are quoted by others. Now you say that 99.9%
of his posts are totally devoid of content.

How do you know that if you only see a small fraction of them?


Great minds, etc.

Should have read the posts out of sequence, but this way Krause can answer twice.
It'll be interesting to see if the answers are the same.

He already answered my question. Somehow reading .1% of what Jim posts
allows him to deduce that the other 99.1% posts are complete devoid of
content.

Not many have that profound ability.

Omniscience is hard to come by.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


I've seen enough of Flatulent Jim's posts over the years to know that
he's a low information voter on current events, that he has nothing of
significance to post on topic, that he's a coward who insults while
trying to hide behind anonymity, that he's somewhat of a racist, and
that he's repetitive. In other words, there nothing there of interest.

In other words, he's a lot like you, but even dumber. Why would I want
to read posts from a Herring semi-clone, eh?

Actually, Krause, there are a few people here who can see right through you. Jim is
one of them. Oh, now he's a racist too? Well, as that was said by a liar, he deserves
a pat on the back for the compliment.

He's a coward hiding behind anonymity? No more than you, fool. You know who he is, I
know, and most others here know who he is. And, as I've said, let me know what you
need to know about him, and I'll be glad to tell you.

You are a f'ing joke. And a liar.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Let's not go overboard now. ;-) Harry doesn't NEED for anything. He has
someone's roof over his head. He has his guns. He has long standing deep
pocket clients providing him pocket change. He apparently gets enough to
eat; otherwise he wouldn't have garbage to throw out in his yard for the
vermin.

Gosh, you caught the key word, 'need'. He's never been able to identify any 'needs'
about your 'anonymity' so he's not gotten any information. Poor guy.

I do like the way you turned that response into something boating related.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!



Your buttbuddy FlaJim is the ranking coward of .wrecked.bloats.

You lie about your service to the country and call others a 'coward'.

You're afraid to answer questions about your lies, but call others a 'coward'.

You're a ****ing joke, Krause, and a liar.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 10:22:39 -0500, Justan Olphart wrote:

On 11/29/2015 10:12 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/29/15 10:04 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 09:58:53 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/29/2015 8:08 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015 18:01:56 -0500, Keyser Söze wrote:

On 11/28/15 4:13 PM, John H. wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015 16:02:28 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/28/2015 3:01 PM, John H. wrote:
On Fri, 27 Nov 2015 19:11:21 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/27/2015 6:55 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/27/15 5:38 PM, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 22:44:25 -0500, Justan Olphart

wrote:

On 11/26/2015 9:40 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/26/15 9:03 PM, John H. wrote:
On Thu, 26 Nov 2015 10:12:37 -0500, Justan Olphart

wrote:

On 11/26/2015 10:00 AM, John H. wrote:
On Wed, 25 Nov 2015 11:33:11 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/25/2015 10:25 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 10:15 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/25/2015 10:13 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 10:10 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 11/25/2015 10:03 AM, Keyser Söze wrote:
On 11/25/15 7:41 AM, John H. wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2015 18:08:32 -0600, Boating All Out
wrote:

Will coverage of cop the killing a teen in
Chicago be
another 24/7 story?
Can they manage two 24/7 stories?
We'll see.

The video definitely makes the cop appear in the
wrong. But,
a first
degree murder
charge has been filed. What more do the marchers
want. Is
this an
excuse to begin
looting and burning in Chicago?
--

You probably didn't understand the civil rights
demonstrations
and
marches of the 1960s, either.



Point to ponder:

In the 400 days since this cop committed this obvious
murder, 396
blacks
were shot and killed by another black in the
Chicago area.

Do they not understand the civil rights
demonstrations and
marches of
the 1960s or that Black Lives Matter either?


You don't "get it," either, eh?


Yes Harry, I "get it". Probably better than you do.



I don't think so. The 1960's demonstrations/marches
were mostly
against
institutional racism and violence. The Chicago
demonstration, such
as it
was, was also against institutional racism and
violence. Police
murder
of blacks seems to be endemic these days.
Institutional violence.

We have, what, 30,000+ "deaths by gun" and mostly
involving
non-police
individuals in this country each year. Peculiarly
'Merican, eh?


How many by suicide?
How many black on black?
How many while a crime was being committed?
How many with drug involvement?
How many accidental?
How many by illegal immigrants?

If you have a point to make, make it.
Otherwise admit that you are just parroting a statistic
without
having a
clue as to what it implies.
Am I right, O' clueless one?

That one's probably way too hard for Krause to answer.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


He's afraid of what I might say in response to his
answer. The
questions
asked are easily answered with a little digging.

When he's obviously put in a corner, he keeps his mouth
shut. Most of
the time he
doesn't realize he was in a corner, opens his mouth, and
looks even
more stupid.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


Apparently you right wing trashmeisters can't read. I've
often stated I
don't read FlaJim's posts firsthand and I usually ignore
them when they
get reposted, and I usually don't respond when another
right wing
trashmeister like you tries, and tries, and tries, et cetera.


I really find that hard to believe, Harry.

Only 'cause it's unbelievable.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!



99.9% of FlaJim's comments here are totally devoid of content,
which is
one reason of many not to bother with them.


Just the other day you said you only saw a miniscule number of
his posts
and only when they are quoted by others. Now you say that 99.9%
of his posts are totally devoid of content.

How do you know that if you only see a small fraction of them?


Great minds, etc.

Should have read the posts out of sequence, but this way Krause
can answer twice.
It'll be interesting to see if the answers are the same.

He already answered my question. Somehow reading .1% of what Jim
posts
allows him to deduce that the other 99.1% posts are complete
devoid of
content.

Not many have that profound ability.

Omniscience is hard to come by.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!


I've seen enough of Flatulent Jim's posts over the years to know that
he's a low information voter on current events, that he has nothing of
significance to post on topic, that he's a coward who insults while
trying to hide behind anonymity, that he's somewhat of a racist, and
that he's repetitive. In other words, there nothing there of interest.

In other words, he's a lot like you, but even dumber. Why would I want
to read posts from a Herring semi-clone, eh?

Actually, Krause, there are a few people here who can see right
through you. Jim is
one of them. Oh, now he's a racist too? Well, as that was said by a
liar, he deserves
a pat on the back for the compliment.

He's a coward hiding behind anonymity? No more than you, fool. You
know who he is, I
know, and most others here know who he is. And, as I've said, let me
know what you
need to know about him, and I'll be glad to tell you.

You are a f'ing joke. And a liar.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

Let's not go overboard now. ;-) Harry doesn't NEED for anything. He has
someone's roof over his head. He has his guns. He has long standing deep
pocket clients providing him pocket change. He apparently gets enough to
eat; otherwise he wouldn't have garbage to throw out in his yard for the
vermin.

Gosh, you caught the key word, 'need'. He's never been able to
identify any 'needs'
about your 'anonymity' so he's not gotten any information. Poor guy.

I do like the way you turned that response into something boating
related.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!



Your buttbuddy FlaJim is the ranking coward of .wrecked.bloats.

That's rich coming from the draft dodger hiding behind the skirts of
school marms.

No ****.
--

Ban idiots, not guns!

On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 08:14:48 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/29/2015 8:04 AM, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 05:02:23 -0500, "Mr. Luddite" wrote:

On 11/29/2015 1:28 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015 19:45:49 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/28/2015 7:24 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 11/28/2015 6:01 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:

I've seen enough of Flatulent Jim's posts over the years to know that
he's a low information voter on current events, that he has nothing of
significance to post on topic, that he's a coward who insults while
trying to hide behind anonymity, that he's somewhat of a racist, and
that he's repetitive. In other words, there nothing there of interest.

In other words, he's a lot like you, but even dumber. Why would I want
to read posts from a Herring semi-clone, eh?


I can remember the days when rec.boats was about boats and Jim often
contributed with sage advice regarding out-drives and winterization
issues of inboards. You often defended his contributions when Skipper
would go on one of his rants on the subjects. Times sure have changed.

That was then, when Jim had something relevant to say.
Now, I have no problem ignoring his posts, and it's a rare
event when I even open one. Why would Harry look?
You're a loyal friend of his, that's all.



You're right. Jim is a friend and I am very loyal to my friends.
I have another friend ... a lawyer ... who makes Harry look like Barry
Goldwater politically. We have had some "interesting" discussions but
remain good friends. One thing that we don't do though is making our
differences personal or insulting.

Jim and I don't always agree on things but I know him in a different
light than he likes to represent here ... and if you notice most of
it is regarding Harry. Jim would be horrified if the word got out
that he's actually a really decent guy. It would ruin his rec.boats
persona with Harry. :-)

One thing that would probably make a lot of people gasp ... I am
probably closer to being a liberal Democrat than a modern day
Republican. The Republican party I knew doesn't seem to exist anymore.



I guess I need to buy a program. Who is Jim?
Everyone here but Wayne and me seems to have several aliases.


"Justan Olphart" ... also known as "FLJim" and a couple of other aliases.


Oh. Shame on you for outing him! :)

I figured everyone knew who Justan Olphart is. Well, apparently
everyone but Greg, but then again he is still using DOS on a Win 95
computer. :-)



XP but I see your point. To talk to my W/98 machine, you need to FAX
me. (an anachronism in itself but the construction and insurance
business is stuck in the 80s).

On Sun, 29 Nov 2015 09:45:44 -0500, Justan Olphart
wrote:

On 11/29/2015 1:28 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015 19:45:49 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 11/28/2015 7:24 PM, Boating All Out wrote:
In article ,
says...

On 11/28/2015 6:01 PM, Keyser Söze wrote:

I've seen enough of Flatulent Jim's posts over the years to know that
he's a low information voter on current events, that he has nothing of
significance to post on topic, that he's a coward who insults while
trying to hide behind anonymity, that he's somewhat of a racist, and
that he's repetitive. In other words, there nothing there of interest.

In other words, he's a lot like you, but even dumber. Why would I want
to read posts from a Herring semi-clone, eh?


I can remember the days when rec.boats was about boats and Jim often
contributed with sage advice regarding out-drives and winterization
issues of inboards. You often defended his contributions when Skipper
would go on one of his rants on the subjects. Times sure have changed.

That was then, when Jim had something relevant to say.
Now, I have no problem ignoring his posts, and it's a rare
event when I even open one. Why would Harry look?
You're a loyal friend of his, that's all.



You're right. Jim is a friend and I am very loyal to my friends.
I have another friend ... a lawyer ... who makes Harry look like Barry
Goldwater politically. We have had some "interesting" discussions but
remain good friends. One thing that we don't do though is making our
differences personal or insulting.

Jim and I don't always agree on things but I know him in a different
light than he likes to represent here ... and if you notice most of
it is regarding Harry. Jim would be horrified if the word got out
that he's actually a really decent guy. It would ruin his rec.boats
persona with Harry. :-)

One thing that would probably make a lot of people gasp ... I am
probably closer to being a liberal Democrat than a modern day
Republican. The Republican party I knew doesn't seem to exist anymore.

I guess I need to buy a program. Who is Jim?
Everyone here but Wayne and me seems to have several aliases.

You can call me Justan

I "Justen" got that joke. I don't pay much attention to screen names
and I assumed it was "Justen ame" of a character in a movie I didn't
watch or something.

On 11/29/2015 5:46 AM, Tim wrote:
On Sat, 28 Nov 2015 19:45:49 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:
- show quoted text -
I guess I need to buy a program. Who is Jim?
Everyone here but Wayne and me seems to have several aliases.
...........

Well, then there's me....


Good to see you back. You sure did give us a scare.
----

Glad to be around. Man this place is boring. But I'm glad it's here!