Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
CalifBill wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
. ..
wrote:
On Apr 23, 5:49 pm, HK wrote:
D-unit wrote:
"HK" wrote in
messagenews:dY6dnQ9YUOgINJLVnZ2dnUVZWhednZ2d@comca st.com...
...I was mightily impressed by Hillary Clinton's 10-point victory
yesterday in the Pennsylvania Democratic primary. The woman is
tough and
resilient, tough enough to beat the crap out of the
Republicans this fall.
I like Barack Obama, but I don't think he is tough enough to
take on the
Republican smear machine that will be out in full force and,
in fact,
already is, based upon some dirty ads I've seen.
The Indiana primary is one I am going to watch closely.
The Clinton's can smear with the best of them my friend.
Including attacks on B. Obama.
Its the way things work around here.
db
Indeed. That's part of being "tough" in the current realpolitic...

I expect the Republicans to throw whatever they can, real or
made-up,
against the Democratic nominee. In fact, they're already tossing
crap
against Obama in North Carolina. Whoever the Democratic nominee
is, he
or she damn well better be ready to throw it back and more.-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -
Yeah, and Billary can't tell the truth to save their lives.. Now
he is
saying Obama used the race card.. they have him on tape. The next
day
he denied it, also on tape... sniper fire indeed. But I know, is,
is.... Don't you even care Harry?

What I care about is that on inauguration day in January, a
Democrat is sworn in as POTUS.

Vote McCain, he sucks less. If Obama could accomplish anything,
why would Chicago be more dangerous than Iraq?



McCain=McBush. No thanks.

I thought you said many hundred of times, that you thought McCain was
an intelligent man, with strong principles, and while you might not
agree with all of his beliefs, you thought he was a first class
individual.



So?

That I think McCain a decent guy doesn't mean I want to see him as
POTUS. You don't do much abstract thinking, do you?

I was not commenting about you not wanting to see him president, which I
would not expect you to. I was commenting on your statement McCain is
the same as Bush, who you stated is an idiot, a failure in life, a
drunk, who got us into a war for personal financial reasons and the list
goes on and on. I can comprehend abstract thinking, but I do have
doubts about your ability.


I was discussing "policy," crap-for-brains. Because of the similarities
in policy between Bush and McCain, McCain is being referred to as McBush.

Why don't you crawl back up your ass, where you belong, and go off and
haunt some newsgroup where full-time snarkiness is appreciated?

HK wrote:


I was discussing "policy," crap-for-brains. Because of the similarities
in policy between Bush and McCain, McCain is being referred to as McBush.

Why don't you crawl back up your ass, where you belong, and go off and
haunt some newsgroup where full-time snarkiness is appreciated?

Your reply is not conducive to reasonable discourse. I thought you
believed in reasonable discourse, and preferred a NG without flames,
where discussion could be civil. Even if you disagreed with my post, it
definitely was reasonable discourse and was not a flame.

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:


I was discussing "policy," crap-for-brains. Because of the
similarities in policy between Bush and McCain, McCain is being
referred to as McBush.

Why don't you crawl back up your ass, where you belong, and go off and
haunt some newsgroup where full-time snarkiness is appreciated?

Your reply is not conducive to reasonable discourse. I thought you
believed in reasonable discourse, and preferred a NG without flames,
where discussion could be civil. Even if you disagreed with my post, it
definitely was reasonable discourse and was not a flame.


Go pee up a rope, Reggie. Your years of crappy behavior here disqualify
you from participating in "reasonable discourse."

On Apr 24, 8:08*am, HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:

HK wrote:

I was discussing "policy," crap-for-brains. Because of the
similarities in policy between Bush and McCain, McCain is being
referred to as McBush.

Why don't you crawl back up your ass, where you belong, and go off and
haunt some newsgroup where full-time snarkiness is appreciated?

Your reply is not conducive to reasonable discourse. *I thought you
believed in reasonable discourse, and preferred a NG without flames,
where discussion could be civil. *Even if you disagreed with my post, it
definitely was reasonable discourse and was not a flame.

Go pee up a rope, Reggie. Your years of crappy behavior here disqualify
you from participating in "reasonable discourse."

Now THERE is the pot calling the kettle black!!!!!
Harry has been the most unpleasant person here for years.

"HK" wrote in message
...
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:


I was discussing "policy," crap-for-brains. Because of the similarities
in policy between Bush and McCain, McCain is being referred to as
McBush.

Why don't you crawl back up your ass, where you belong, and go off and
haunt some newsgroup where full-time snarkiness is appreciated?

Your reply is not conducive to reasonable discourse. I thought you
believed in reasonable discourse, and preferred a NG without flames,
where discussion could be civil. Even if you disagreed with my post, it
definitely was reasonable discourse and was not a flame.


Go pee up a rope, Reggie. Your years of crappy behavior here disqualify
you from participating in "reasonable discourse."

Is that the best a Yale graduate can do? Did you and GWB attend the same
communications classes?

Jim wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:


I was discussing "policy," crap-for-brains. Because of the
similarities in policy between Bush and McCain, McCain is being
referred to as McBush.

Why don't you crawl back up your ass, where you belong, and go off
and haunt some newsgroup where full-time snarkiness is appreciated?

Your reply is not conducive to reasonable discourse. I thought you
believed in reasonable discourse, and preferred a NG without flames,
where discussion could be civil. Even if you disagreed with my post,
it definitely was reasonable discourse and was not a flame.


Go pee up a rope, Reggie. Your years of crappy behavior here
disqualify you from participating in "reasonable discourse."

Is that the best a Yale graduate can do? Did you and GWB attend the same
communications classes?


"reggie," aka crap-for-brains, gets the treatment from me he deserves,
as do you, cyst-breath. If you don't like it, you are welcome to come up
here and try to punch me in the nose.

"HK" wrote in message
. ..
Jim wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:


I was discussing "policy," crap-for-brains. Because of the
similarities in policy between Bush and McCain, McCain is being
referred to as McBush.

Why don't you crawl back up your ass, where you belong, and go off and
haunt some newsgroup where full-time snarkiness is appreciated?

Your reply is not conducive to reasonable discourse. I thought you
believed in reasonable discourse, and preferred a NG without flames,
where discussion could be civil. Even if you disagreed with my post,
it definitely was reasonable discourse and was not a flame.


Go pee up a rope, Reggie. Your years of crappy behavior here disqualify
you from participating in "reasonable discourse."

Is that the best a Yale graduate can do? Did you and GWB attend the same
communications classes?


"reggie," aka crap-for-brains, gets the treatment from me he deserves, as
do you, cyst-breath. If you don't like it, you are welcome to come up here
and try to punch me in the nose.

Another juvenile remark from a supposed Yale attendee. Grow up Harry. Set an
example that you would like the rest of us to emulate.

Jim wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
. ..
Jim wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:


I was discussing "policy," crap-for-brains. Because of the
similarities in policy between Bush and McCain, McCain is being
referred to as McBush.

Why don't you crawl back up your ass, where you belong, and go off
and haunt some newsgroup where full-time snarkiness is appreciated?

Your reply is not conducive to reasonable discourse. I thought you
believed in reasonable discourse, and preferred a NG without
flames, where discussion could be civil. Even if you disagreed
with my post, it definitely was reasonable discourse and was not a
flame.


Go pee up a rope, Reggie. Your years of crappy behavior here
disqualify you from participating in "reasonable discourse."

Is that the best a Yale graduate can do? Did you and GWB attend the
same communications classes?


"reggie," aka crap-for-brains, gets the treatment from me he deserves,
as do you, cyst-breath. If you don't like it, you are welcome to come
up here and try to punch me in the nose.

Another juvenile remark from a supposed Yale attendee. Grow up Harry.
Set an example that you would like the rest of us to emulate.


GPUAR, pus-breath.

"HK" wrote in message
. ..
Jim wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:


I was discussing "policy," crap-for-brains. Because of the
similarities in policy between Bush and McCain, McCain is being
referred to as McBush.

Why don't you crawl back up your ass, where you belong, and go off and
haunt some newsgroup where full-time snarkiness is appreciated?

Your reply is not conducive to reasonable discourse. I thought you
believed in reasonable discourse, and preferred a NG without flames,
where discussion could be civil. Even if you disagreed with my post,
it definitely was reasonable discourse and was not a flame.


Go pee up a rope, Reggie. Your years of crappy behavior here disqualify
you from participating in "reasonable discourse."

Is that the best a Yale graduate can do? Did you and GWB attend the same
communications classes?


"reggie," aka crap-for-brains, gets the treatment from me he deserves, as
do you, cyst-breath. If you don't like it, you are welcome to come up here
and try to punch me in the nose.


Fla Jim is a lot more cocky lately now that he has one acknowledged
'friend'.

Jim wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:


I was discussing "policy," crap-for-brains. Because of the
similarities in policy between Bush and McCain, McCain is being
referred to as McBush.

Why don't you crawl back up your ass, where you belong, and go off
and haunt some newsgroup where full-time snarkiness is appreciated?

Your reply is not conducive to reasonable discourse. I thought you
believed in reasonable discourse, and preferred a NG without flames,
where discussion could be civil. Even if you disagreed with my post,
it definitely was reasonable discourse and was not a flame.


Go pee up a rope, Reggie. Your years of crappy behavior here
disqualify you from participating in "reasonable discourse."

Is that the best a Yale graduate can do? Did you and GWB attend the same
communications classes?

I am ignoring Harry, so I missed his comment. I hope he takes the hint
and stops trying to talk to me because I am ignoring him.