"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
ink.net...
> SuckHard wrote:
>
> > "Dutch" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >
> >>SuckHard > wrote in message
> .. .
> >>
> >>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> thlink.net...
> >>>
> >>>>Impotence wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>>>"Jonathan Ball" > wrote in message
> >>>
> >>>news:wnQZb.4022>
> >>>
> >>>>>>I hope this helps.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>>No it doesn't.
> >>>>
> >>>>It does. You're too stupid and hate-filled to get it
> >>>>and acknowledge it.
> >>>
> >>>**** off ball, you ****ing evil baldy dwarf.
> >>>
> >>>All you done tonight is attack and harangue and be self congratulatory
> >>
> >>with
> >>
> >>>your cohort texmex, and you post this shit, and expect it to be taken
> >>>seriously. LOL, you stupid ****.
> >>
> >>Aside from your dislike for the author, what specifically do you
disagree
> >>with about the proposition?
> >
> >
> > It's SHIT.
>
> That's not specific at all. What is it with which you
> disagree? Actually, we all know already that it's

Who's "we all"?

> merely the fact that I wrote it; you didn't really read it.

I read enough to determine it was shit, just like I don't need a full
laboratory report to know when I tread in dog shit.

Anyway, I'm not going to kick shit about until I loose it, particularly
dwarf droppings.

>