Tim Crowley wrote:
> T Jr Hardman wrote:
>
>
>
>
>>Actually, the number was 10,474.
>
>
> less than 10%. that's about right. 90% of Americans reject your hate.
> What's funny is you seem to think you did good. You failed. People
> rejected you and your ideas in HUGE numbers.

You keep trying to upset me by repeatedly posting this. I honestly don't
give a crap; it's January and the elections were back in November.
Yesterday the new Delegates were sworn in, and one of the very first new
bills submitted was _exactly_ the one I would have submitted myself. Far
from being upset, I am in fact ECSTATIC. Because what I wanted done, is
done.

I might also add that in Maryland politics, you don't read it on a
per-delegate basis. There were three seats, with six people vying for
it. People decided to vote the straight party ticket in most cases.
Thus, between the three Republican candidates, we got roughly 30% of the
vote, and the Democrat candidates altogether got about 70% of the vote.
Looked at another way, each of the Republicans got about 10% of the vote
and each of the Democrats got around 23% of the vote.

By your logic, the "Americans" voted above 75% against each and every
one of the Democrats.

Once again, that you are an idiot, is amply demonstrated.

Nit Wit!


--
http://thomashardman.com/ Centrist, Moderate, Republican in Maryland
A true Conservative isn't about to let
the enemies of America ruin his streams for Trout.

 
T Jr Hardman wrote:
> Tim Crowley wrote:
> > T Jr Hardman wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >>Actually, the number was 10,474.
> >
> >
> > less than 10%. that's about right. 90% of Americans reject your hate.
> > What's funny is you seem to think you did good. You failed. People
> > rejected you and your ideas in HUGE numbers.
>
> You keep trying to upset me by repeatedly posting this.

I don't want to upset you. I want you to face reality. Yours is a
loosing point of view. It's not accepted by the American People. Don't
get upset. Be a man and accept responsibility for your failure.


>I honestly don't
> give a crap; it's January and the elections were back in November.

Snicker. Yeah, sure - we can tell you don't care. Why lie?


You will never learn. If you run again, you will get even less votes.
I know, why don't you blame someone else.

Hwæt! T Jr Hardman <blockspam_thardman@thomashardman.com>, men ne
cunnon secgan to soðe:

> Carl Nisarel wrote:
>> Hwæt! "Tim Crowley" <timmyturmoil@gmail.com>, men ne cunnon
>> secgan to soðe:
>>
>>
>>>T Jr Hardman wrote:
>>>
>>>>Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>11,000 did vote for me! ;)
>>>
>>>5th in a field of 6. And you will NEVER ever do better. hint:
>>>you're a failure.
>>
>>
>> He'll also get hammered by the print media if he's stupid
>> enough to run again.
>
> "All publicity is good publicity. Just make sure you spell my
> name right."

Yep, TJ is that stupid.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Hwæt! T Jr Hardman <blockspam_thardman@thomashardman.com>, men ne
cunnon secgan to soðe:

> Carl Nisarel wrote:
>> Hwæt! T Jr Hardman <blockspam_thardman@thomashardman.com>, men
>> ne cunnon secgan to soðe:
>>
>>
>>>11,000 did vote for me!
>>
>>
>> No, TJ, you did not receive 11 thousand votes.
>>
>
> I stand corrected. 10,474 votes.

Why did you lie and try to falsely inflate the number of votes you
received?


--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Hwæt! T Jr Hardman <blockspam_thardman@thomashardman.com>, men ne
cunnon secgan to soðe:

> And of COURSE I'll be running again! ;)

Nah, you won't.

You'll run and fold when the media starts calling you and asking
questions about your racist comments written under the sockpuppet
"Tiny Human Ferret"

The Repug party in Maryland will take one look at your record and
ditch you in the gutter.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

As viewed from alt.california, Tim Crowley wrote:

>T Jr Hardman wrote:
>>Tim Crowley wrote:
>>>less than 10%. that's about right. 90% of Americans reject your hate.
>>>What's funny is you seem to think you did good. You failed. People
>>>rejected you and your ideas in HUGE numbers.

>>You keep trying to upset me by repeatedly posting this.

>I don't want to upset you. I want you to face reality. Yours is a
>loosing point of view. It's not accepted by the American People. Don't
>get upset. Be a man and accept responsibility for your failure.

>>I honestly don't give a crap; it's January and the elections were
>>back in November.

>Snicker. Yeah, sure - we can tell you don't care. Why lie?
>
>You will never learn. If you run again, you will get even less votes.
>I know, why don't you blame someone else.

In your rush to personally attack someone whose views you obviously
disagree with, you carefully omit this comment:

>>Yesterday the new Delegates were sworn in, and one of the very
>>first new bills submitted was _exactly_ the one I would have
>>submitted myself. Far from being upset, I am in fact ECSTATIC.
>>Because what I wanted done, is done.

So, how is this "a loosing [sic] point of view"?

Cat got your tongue, Tim? :-D

--
Jafo

Hwæt! T Jr Hardman <blockspam_thardman@thomashardman.com>, men ne
cunnon secgan to soðe:

>> Anyway, as someone else wrote, it's in dispute as to whether or
>> not you received 11,000 votes.
>
> Actually, the number was 10,474.
> http://www.elections.state.md.us/elections/2006/results/general/l
> egislative_district_19.html

IOW, you lied.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

As viewed from alt.california, Rudy Canoza wrote:

>>>Suffice it to say, your opponent will know, and will be
>>>able to prove, that YOU were the one posting as "tiny
>>>human ferret", and he'll certainly find LOTS of
>>>examples of your intemperate speech, as well as nuggets
>>>that s/he will successfully be able to use to paint you
>>>as an anti-Hispanic bigot - a painting that will be
>>>accurate.

>>No, it won't be accurate; it will be political. I've read
>>scores of posts by THF, Rudy, and I've yet to see any "dreck".
>>What I *have* read, in Usenet and on a few of his websites,
>>are some pretty well researched and documented positions.
>>
>>And BTW, if "intemperate speech" like "queer" or "shitbag"
>>is any sort of problem, here's hoping you never run for office
>>yourself... :)

>I already made that choice long ago.

Nov 1, 2008 (AP) - Congressional candidate Rudy Canoza today announced
that if the voters wanted to elect a worthless scumlapping faggot
shitbag to office, they should vote for his opponent.

--
Jafo

 
Jafo wrote:
> As viewed from alt.california, Tim Crowley wrote:
>
> >T Jr Hardman wrote:
> >>Tim Crowley wrote:
> >>>less than 10%. that's about right. 90% of Americans reject your hate.
> >>>What's funny is you seem to think you did good. You failed. People
> >>>rejected you and your ideas in HUGE numbers.
>
> >>You keep trying to upset me by repeatedly posting this.
>
> >I don't want to upset you. I want you to face reality. Yours is a
> >loosing point of view. It's not accepted by the American People. Don't
> >get upset. Be a man and accept responsibility for your failure.
>
> >>I honestly don't give a crap; it's January and the elections were
> >>back in November.
>
> >Snicker. Yeah, sure - we can tell you don't care. Why lie?
> >
> >You will never learn. If you run again, you will get even less votes.
> >I know, why don't you blame someone else.
>
> In your rush to personally attack someone whose views you obviously
> disagree with, you carefully omit this comment:
>
> >>Yesterday the new Delegates were sworn in, and one of the very
> >>first new bills submitted was _exactly_ the one I would have
> >>submitted myself. Far from being upset, I am in fact ECSTATIC.
> >>Because what I wanted done, is done.
>
> So, how is this "a loosing [sic] point of view"?
>
> Cat got your tongue, Tim? :-D

what part of 5th place don't you understand. The FACT is the voters
overwhelming rejected Mr. Hardman. His views are out of the mainstream.
End of story. He lost. Big time. He's still in denial.

Hwæt! Jafo <a@nospam.invalid>, men ne cunnon secgan to soðe:

> 500-odd votes. BFD.

500 votes would have made the difference in dozens of elections last
year.

It also demonstrates that TJ will simply lie when it suits him.

He won't get a Repug nomination in Maryland District 19 next
election.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Jafo wrote:
> As viewed from alt.california, Rudy Canoza wrote:
>
>>>> Suffice it to say, your opponent will know, and will be
>>>> able to prove, that YOU were the one posting as "tiny
>>>> human ferret", and he'll certainly find LOTS of
>>>> examples of your intemperate speech, as well as nuggets
>>>> that s/he will successfully be able to use to paint you
>>>> as an anti-Hispanic bigot - a painting that will be
>>>> accurate.
>
>>> No, it won't be accurate; it will be political. I've read
>>> scores of posts by THF, Rudy, and I've yet to see any "dreck".
>>> What I *have* read, in Usenet and on a few of his websites,
>>> are some pretty well researched and documented positions.
>>>
>>> And BTW, if "intemperate speech" like "queer" or "shitbag"
>>> is any sort of problem, here's hoping you never run for office
>>> yourself... :)
>
>> I already made that choice long ago.
>
> Nov 1, 2008 (AP) - Congressional candidate Rudy Canoza today announced
> that if the voters wanted to elect a worthless scumlapping faggot
> shitbag to office, they should vote for his opponent.

That has a nice ring to it. If I change my mind and
decide to run, how much do you charge for speechwriting?

Hwæt! T Jr Hardman <blockspam_thardman@thomashardman.com>, men ne
cunnon secgan to soðe:

> I don't care by how large a margin I am defeated, or by how slim
> a margin I might win. What's important is that voters have
> actual choices.

You're not a choice, TJ. You're a fuckin' joke.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Hwæt! T Jr Hardman <blockspam_thardman@thomashardman.com>, men ne
cunnon secgan to soðe:

> And what, exactly, are these "views" that are "out of the
> mainstream"?

Repug views, dimwit.

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

Hwæt! T Jr Hardman <blockspam_thardman@thomashardman.com>, men ne
cunnon secgan to soðe:

> And how many times has Karl Rove been elected? Not too many, I
> don't guess. Yet the entire ideological basis of the current
> Administration is his.

And that's why the Repugs were trounced in 2006 and why they'll be
wiped out in 2008

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

As viewed from alt.california, Tim Crowley wrote:

>Jafo wrote:
>>In your rush to personally attack someone whose views you obviously
>>disagree with, you carefully omit this comment:
>>
>>>>Yesterday the new Delegates were sworn in, and one of the very
>>>>first new bills submitted was _exactly_ the one I would have
>>>>submitted myself. Far from being upset, I am in fact ECSTATIC.
>>>>Because what I wanted done, is done.
>>
>>So, how is this "a loosing [sic] point of view"?
>>
>>Cat got your tongue, Tim? :-D

>what part of 5th place don't you understand. The FACT is the voters
>overwhelming rejected Mr. Hardman. His views are out of the mainstream.
>End of story. He lost. Big time. He's still in denial.

You missed the point, Tim: How can his views be "out of the
mainstream" when one of the very first new bills submitted was
_exactly_ the one he would have submitted himself?

--
Jafo

Jafo wrote:
> As viewed from alt.california, Tim Crowley wrote:
>
>> Jafo wrote:
>>> In your rush to personally attack someone whose views you obviously
>>> disagree with, you carefully omit this comment:
>>>
>>>>> Yesterday the new Delegates were sworn in, and one of the very
>>>>> first new bills submitted was _exactly_ the one I would have
>>>>> submitted myself. Far from being upset, I am in fact ECSTATIC.
>>>>> Because what I wanted done, is done.
>>> So, how is this "a loosing [sic] point of view"?
>>>
>>> Cat got your tongue, Tim? :-D
>
>> what part of 5th place don't you understand. The FACT is the voters
>> overwhelming rejected Mr. Hardman. His views are out of the mainstream.
>> End of story. He lost. Big time. He's still in denial.
>
> You missed the point, Tim: How can his views be "out of the
> mainstream" when one of the very first new bills submitted was
> _exactly_ the one he would have submitted himself?

Submitted, but not necessarily passed.

Anyway, your point is well taken: one not need be
elected to office to have influence on the political
process. The LA Times just ran an article about some
really nasty-sounding behind-the-scenes guy in Orange
County who apparently is THE kingmaker in Republican
circles down there. The guy has never been elected to
anything, possibly not even internal positions in the
Republican party, and he's enormously successful.

As viewed from alt.california, Carl Nisarel wrote:

>Hwæt! T Jr Hardman <blockspam_thardman@thomashardman.com>, men ne
>cunnon secgan to soðe:
>
>>> Anyway, as someone else wrote, it's in dispute as to whether or
>>> not you received 11,000 votes.
>>
>> Actually, the number was 10,474.
>> http://www.elections.state.md.us/elections/2006/results/general/l
>> egislative_district_19.html
>
>IOW, you lied.

500-odd votes. BFD. Tell us, loser, is this the best whine that you
can come up with?

--
Jafo

Rudy Canoza wrote:
> T Jr Hardman wrote:
>
>> Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>
>>> T Jr Hardman wrote:
>>>
>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> T Jr Hardman wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> T Jr Hardman wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> <snip snip>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> 11,000 did vote for me! ;)
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Those were 11,000 throws of a dart at the sample ballot - random
>>>>>>> hits.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And thus, by extension, so were the votes for the winners of the
>>>>>> election.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>
>>>>> Anyway, as someone else wrote, it's in dispute as to whether or not
>>>>> you received 11,000 votes.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Actually, the number was 10,474.
>>>> http://www.elections.state.md.us/elections/2006/results/general/legislative_district_19.html
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Which, by the commonly accepted rules of rounding, is closer to
>>> 10,000 than 11,000 - so the "someone else" was right.
>>>
>>> Hey, softman, I just read an excellent article in the latest Atlantic
>>> Monthly called "Why Presidents Lie". One of the topics they touch on
>>> is the electoral exaggeration. I'd say your inflation of your vote
>>> total is of that type.
>>>
>>>
>>>>>> And of COURSE I'll be running again! ;)
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> And you'll be tagged with, and ridiculed for, the "tiny human
>>>>> ferret" dreck.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Which dreck, exactly, was that?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> That will be determined by your opponent, softman. Suffice it to say,
>>> your opponent will know, and will be able to prove, that YOU were the
>>> one posting as "tiny human ferret", and he'll certainly find LOTS of
>>> examples of your intemperate speech, as well as nuggets that s/he
>>> will successfully be able to use to paint you as an anti-Hispanic
>>> bigot - a painting that will be accurate.
>>
>>
>> Still can't find anything, eh?
>
>
> Saw it and identified it long ago. I have no particular reason to dig
> it up again for free.

Still can't provide the evidence.


--
http://thomashardman.com/ Centrist, Moderate, Republican in Maryland
A true Conservative isn't about to let
the enemies of America ruin his streams for Trout.

Tim Crowley wrote:
> T Jr Hardman wrote:
>
>>Tim Crowley wrote:
>>
>>>T Jr Hardman wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>Actually, the number was 10,474.
>>>
>>>
>>>less than 10%. that's about right. 90% of Americans reject your hate.
>>>What's funny is you seem to think you did good. You failed. People
>>>rejected you and your ideas in HUGE numbers.
>>
>>You keep trying to upset me by repeatedly posting this.
>
>
> I don't want to upset you. I want you to face reality. Yours is a
> loosing point of view.

"Loosing"? And what, exactly, is this point of viwe which you attribe to
me, and which you declare Americans reject?

> It's not accepted by the American People. Don't
> get upset. Be a man and accept responsibility for your failure.
>
>
>
>>I honestly don't
>>give a crap; it's January and the elections were back in November.
>
>
> Snicker. Yeah, sure - we can tell you don't care. Why lie?
>
>
> You will never learn. If you run again, you will get even less votes.
> I know, why don't you blame someone else.

I don't care by how large a margin I am defeated, or by how slim a
margin I might win. What's important is that voters have actual choices.



--
http://thomashardman.com/ Centrist, Moderate, Republican in Maryland
A true Conservative isn't about to let
the enemies of America ruin his streams for Trout.

Tim Crowley wrote:
> Jafo wrote:
>
>>As viewed from alt.california, Tim Crowley wrote:
>>
>>
>>>T Jr Hardman wrote:
>>>
>>>>Tim Crowley wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>less than 10%. that's about right. 90% of Americans reject your hate.
>>>>>What's funny is you seem to think you did good. You failed. People
>>>>>rejected you and your ideas in HUGE numbers.
>>
>>>>You keep trying to upset me by repeatedly posting this.
>>
>>>I don't want to upset you. I want you to face reality. Yours is a
>>>loosing point of view. It's not accepted by the American People. Don't
>>>get upset. Be a man and accept responsibility for your failure.
>>
>>>>I honestly don't give a crap; it's January and the elections were
>>>>back in November.
>>
>>>Snicker. Yeah, sure - we can tell you don't care. Why lie?
>>>
>>>You will never learn. If you run again, you will get even less votes.
>>>I know, why don't you blame someone else.
>>
>>In your rush to personally attack someone whose views you obviously
>>disagree with, you carefully omit this comment:
>>
>>
>>>>Yesterday the new Delegates were sworn in, and one of the very
>>>>first new bills submitted was _exactly_ the one I would have
>>>>submitted myself. Far from being upset, I am in fact ECSTATIC.
>>>>Because what I wanted done, is done.
>>
>>So, how is this "a loosing [sic] point of view"?
>>
>>Cat got your tongue, Tim? :-D
>
>
> what part of 5th place don't you understand. The FACT is the voters
> overwhelming rejected Mr. Hardman. His views are out of the mainstream.

And what, exactly, are these "views" that are "out of the mainstream"?

> End of story. He lost. Big time. He's still in denial.

Not at all. However, exactly what I wanted to be voted into office has
been done... by a fellow Republican.

In case you missed it, you can go to http://mlis.state.md.us/ and in the
appropriate little box, type in HB11. That will get you the text of
House Bill 11, which forces the Maryland Motor Vehicle Administration to
deny driver permits to anyone who cannot demonstrate that they are
legally in the USA.




--
http://thomashardman.com/ Centrist, Moderate, Republican in Maryland
A true Conservative isn't about to let
the enemies of America ruin his streams for Trout.

Rudy Canoza wrote:
> Jafo wrote:
>
>> As viewed from alt.california, Tim Crowley wrote:
>>
>>> Jafo wrote:
>>>
>>>> In your rush to personally attack someone whose views you obviously
>>>> disagree with, you carefully omit this comment:
>>>>
>>>>>> Yesterday the new Delegates were sworn in, and one of the very
>>>>>> first new bills submitted was _exactly_ the one I would have
>>>>>> submitted myself. Far from being upset, I am in fact ECSTATIC.
>>>>>> Because what I wanted done, is done.
>>>>
>>>> So, how is this "a loosing [sic] point of view"?
>>>>
>>>> Cat got your tongue, Tim? :-D
>>
>>
>>> what part of 5th place don't you understand. The FACT is the voters
>>> overwhelming rejected Mr. Hardman. His views are out of the mainstream.
>>> End of story. He lost. Big time. He's still in denial.
>>
>>
>> You missed the point, Tim: How can his views be "out of the
>> mainstream" when one of the very first new bills submitted was
>> _exactly_ the one he would have submitted himself?
>
>
> Submitted, but not necessarily passed.
>
> Anyway, your point is well taken: one not need be elected to office to
> have influence on the political process. The LA Times just ran an
> article about some really nasty-sounding behind-the-scenes guy in Orange
> County who apparently is THE kingmaker in Republican circles down
> there. The guy has never been elected to anything, possibly not even
> internal positions in the Republican party, and he's enormously successful.

And how many times has Karl Rove been elected? Not too many, I don't
guess. Yet the entire ideological basis of the current Administration is
his.

I might add, to get back to the discussion of the bill in question, that
Maryland is one of the very few remaining States of the Union that will
in any way or for any reason allow illegal aliens to be issued a driver
permit or State ID. Only 13 of the 50 will do that in any way shape or
form. Thus, the majority of the American people -- presuming that the
will of the people is in fact reflected in the laws of the several
States -- do in fact support the concept of "no driver permits for
illegal aliens" and as that was the main thrust of my platform which was
different from anyone else's, little Timmy remains easily characterised
as a howling delusional barking lies, and barking mad, to boot. It's
extremely mainstream for Americans to demand that illegal aliens not be
given permits to drive the highways of the USA.



--
http://thomashardman.com/ Centrist, Moderate, Republican in Maryland
A true Conservative isn't about to let
the enemies of America ruin his streams for Trout.

Jafo wrote:
> As viewed from alt.california, Carl Nisarel wrote:
>
>
>>Hwæt! T Jr Hardman <blockspam_thardman@thomashardman.com>, men ne
>>cunnon secgan to soðe:
>>
>>
>>>>Anyway, as someone else wrote, it's in dispute as to whether or
>>>>not you received 11,000 votes.
>>>
>>>Actually, the number was 10,474.
>>>http://www.elections.state.md.us/elections/2006/results/general/l
>>>egislative_district_19.html
>>
>>IOW, you lied.
>
>
> 500-odd votes. BFD. Tell us, loser, is this the best whine that you
> can come up with?

Yep.



--
http://thomashardman.com/ Centrist, Moderate, Republican in Maryland
A true Conservative isn't about to let
the enemies of America ruin his streams for Trout.

Carl Nisarel wrote:
> Hwæt! Jafo <a@nospam.invalid>, men ne cunnon secgan to soðe:
>
>
>>500-odd votes. BFD.
>
>
> 500 votes would have made the difference in dozens of elections last
> year.
>
> It also demonstrates that TJ will simply lie when it suits him.
>
> He won't get a Repug nomination in Maryland District 19 next
> election.

I definitely won the Republican primary. As nobody was contesting the
seat, party nomination was not necessary. In the last few elections,
they didn't have enough candidates to run for all three seats in the
district, and were quite happy to have me. ;)




--
http://thomashardman.com/ Centrist, Moderate, Republican in Maryland
A true Conservative isn't about to let
the enemies of America ruin his streams for Trout.

T Jr Hardman wrote:
> Rudy Canoza wrote:
>> T Jr Hardman wrote:
>>
>>> Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>
>>>> T Jr Hardman wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> T Jr Hardman wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Rudy Canoza wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> T Jr Hardman wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> <snip snip>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> 11,000 did vote for me! ;)
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Those were 11,000 throws of a dart at the sample ballot - random
>>>>>>>> hits.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> And thus, by extension, so were the votes for the winners of the
>>>>>>> election.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Nope.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Anyway, as someone else wrote, it's in dispute as to whether or
>>>>>> not you received 11,000 votes.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Actually, the number was 10,474.
>>>>> http://www.elections.state.md.us/elections/2006/results/general/legislative_district_19.html
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Which, by the commonly accepted rules of rounding, is closer to
>>>> 10,000 than 11,000 - so the "someone else" was right.
>>>>
>>>> Hey, softman, I just read an excellent article in the latest
>>>> Atlantic Monthly called "Why Presidents Lie". One of the topics they
>>>> touch on is the electoral exaggeration. I'd say your inflation of
>>>> your vote total is of that type.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>>> And of COURSE I'll be running again! ;)
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> And you'll be tagged with, and ridiculed for, the "tiny human
>>>>>> ferret" dreck.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Which dreck, exactly, was that?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> That will be determined by your opponent, softman. Suffice it to
>>>> say, your opponent will know, and will be able to prove, that YOU
>>>> were the one posting as "tiny human ferret", and he'll certainly
>>>> find LOTS of examples of your intemperate speech, as well as nuggets
>>>> that s/he will successfully be able to use to paint you as an
>>>> anti-Hispanic bigot - a painting that will be accurate.
>>>
>>>
>>> Still can't find anything, eh?
>>
>>
>> Saw it and identified it long ago. I have no particular reason to dig
>> it up again for free.
>
> Still can't provide the evidence.

No, won't. Can, but won't.

Waiving the right to remain silent, Carl Nisarel
<hostlbuddha@postmaster.uk.co> said:

> Hw‘t! T Jr Hardman <blockspam_thardman@thomashardman.com>, men ne
> cunnon secgan to soÐe:
>
>> And how many times has Karl Rove been elected? Not too many, I
>> don't guess. Yet the entire ideological basis of the current
>> Administration is his.
>
> And that's why the Repugs were trounced in 2006 and why they'll be
> wiped out in 2008

You sound as if you've got a rabid Shia vs. Sunni kind of thing going.

And I thought this was America...

--
Larry J. - Remove spamtrap in ALLCAPS to e-mail

"I've come here to enjoy nature. Don't talk to me
about the environment!" - 'Denny Crane'