"John H" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 13:14:42 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


Things will get back to the "normal" mud-slinging and insult hurling after
election day.

Eisboch


Do you really believe Harry's attitude is due to the 'uniqueness' of this
election? When you get right down to it, there is no change - election or
no election. I was surprised you said nothing to him when he began calling
Tom, with whom I assume you are somewhat friendly, names.


Tom doesn't need any help in defending himself.

Eisboch

Eisboch wrote:
"John H" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 13:14:42 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

Things will get back to the "normal" mud-slinging and insult hurling after
election day.

Eisboch

Do you really believe Harry's attitude is due to the 'uniqueness' of this
election? When you get right down to it, there is no change - election or
no election. I was surprised you said nothing to him when he began calling
Tom, with whom I assume you are somewhat friendly, names.


Tom doesn't need any help in defending himself.

Eisboch




Heheheh...Herring stirs the pot, and you ladle out a spoonful and
swallow it.

On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 17:38:38 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


"John H" wrote in message
.. .

On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 13:14:42 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:


Things will get back to the "normal" mud-slinging and insult hurling after
election day.

Eisboch


Do you really believe Harry's attitude is due to the 'uniqueness' of this
election? When you get right down to it, there is no change - election or
no election. I was surprised you said nothing to him when he began calling
Tom, with whom I assume you are somewhat friendly, names.


Tom doesn't need any help in defending himself.

Eisboch


Tom didn't need defending at all.

Harry needed to be reprimanded by someone he 'respected'.

John H wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 17:38:38 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 13:14:42 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

Things will get back to the "normal" mud-slinging and insult hurling after
election day.

Eisboch

Do you really believe Harry's attitude is due to the 'uniqueness' of this
election? When you get right down to it, there is no change - election or
no election. I was surprised you said nothing to him when he began calling
Tom, with whom I assume you are somewhat friendly, names.

Tom doesn't need any help in defending himself.

Eisboch


Tom didn't need defending at all.

Harry needed to be reprimanded by someone he 'respected'.


You're projecting. Why would I give a rat's ass about "respect" from
someone I don't know and will never meet? I merely gave him the same
courtesy he gave me. He has unilaterally decided to became one of the
nasty ****s here, in other words, someone like you. It matters not to me.

hk wrote:
John H wrote:
On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 17:38:38 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

"John H" wrote in message
...

On Thu, 4 Sep 2008 13:14:42 -0400, "Eisboch" wrote:

Things will get back to the "normal" mud-slinging and insult
hurling after
election day.

Eisboch

Do you really believe Harry's attitude is due to the 'uniqueness' of
this
election? When you get right down to it, there is no change -
election or
no election. I was surprised you said nothing to him when he began
calling
Tom, with whom I assume you are somewhat friendly, names.

Tom doesn't need any help in defending himself.

Eisboch

Tom didn't need defending at all.

Harry needed to be reprimanded by someone he 'respected'.


You're projecting. Why would I give a rat's ass about "respect" from
someone I don't know and will never meet? I merely gave him the same
courtesy he gave me. He has unilaterally decided to became one of the
nasty ****s here, in other words, someone like you. It matters not to me.

I thought Eisboch and SWS were righteous righties? What happened?

On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 19:43:09 -0400, hk wrote:

You're projecting. Why would I give a rat's ass about "respect" from
someone I don't know and will never meet? I merely gave him the same
courtesy he gave me. He has unilaterally decided to became one of the
nasty ****s here, in other words, someone like you. It matters not to me.

That statement speaks volumes regarding your ongoing personality
deterioration and your need to get professional assistance with it.
Do it for your own good.

Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 19:43:09 -0400, hk wrote:

You're projecting. Why would I give a rat's ass about "respect" from
someone I don't know and will never meet? I merely gave him the same
courtesy he gave me. He has unilaterally decided to became one of the
nasty ****s here, in other words, someone like you. It matters not to me.

That statement speaks volumes regarding your ongoing personality
deterioration and your need to get professional assistance with it.
Do it for your own good.


Seriously, what scares me, is this guy owns a gun.

On Fri, 05 Sep 2008 00:18:21 -0400, "Earl of Warwich, Duke of
Cornwall, Marquies of Anglesea, Sir Reginald P. Smithers III Esq. LLC,
STP. " wrote:

That statement speaks volumes regarding your ongoing personality
deterioration and your need to get professional assistance with it.
Do it for your own good.


Seriously, what scares me, is this guy owns a gun.

Maybe.

Even if so, he only shoots tree stumps which have threatened him
first.

Earl of Warwich, Duke of Cornwall, Marquies of Anglesea, Sir Reginald P.
Smithers III Esq. LLC, STP. wrote:
Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 19:43:09 -0400, hk wrote:

You're projecting. Why would I give a rat's ass about "respect" from
someone I don't know and will never meet? I merely gave him the same
courtesy he gave me. He has unilaterally decided to became one of the
nasty ****s here, in other words, someone like you. It matters not to
me.

That statement speaks volumes regarding your ongoing personality
deterioration and your need to get professional assistance with it.
Do it for your own good.


Seriously, what scares me, is this guy owns a gun.

There should be a law that the mentally Ill be prohibited from owning
any type of firearm.

jim wrote:
Earl of Warwich, Duke of Cornwall, Marquies of Anglesea, Sir Reginald P.
Smithers III Esq. LLC, STP. wrote:
Wayne.B wrote:
On Thu, 04 Sep 2008 19:43:09 -0400, hk wrote:

You're projecting. Why would I give a rat's ass about "respect" from
someone I don't know and will never meet? I merely gave him the same
courtesy he gave me. He has unilaterally decided to became one of
the nasty ****s here, in other words, someone like you. It matters
not to me.

That statement speaks volumes regarding your ongoing personality
deterioration and your need to get professional assistance with it.
Do it for your own good.


Seriously, what scares me, is this guy owns a gun.

There should be a law that the mentally Ill be prohibited from owning
any type of firearm.

There is. He slipped under the radar.