Re: Bill Hughs, YOUR the best!
 

On Sat, 3 Nov 2007 00:31:20 -0800, "L.W. \(Bill\) ------ III"
<LWBill------@------.net> wrote:

> Thanks for the back up. But it may be better for you to work behind the
>scenes, reporting as many as you have time for. Zero in on the foul
>language, as remailers as crossposting will not get them any more, and has
>lead to me to a slackening of etiquette.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

What etiquette, pigs don't have any

Re: Bill Hughs, YOUR the best!
 

On Sat, 3 Nov 2007 00:31:20 -0800, "L.W. \(Bill\) ------ III"
<LWBill------@------.net> wrote:

> Thanks for the back up. But it may be better for you to work behind the
>scenes, reporting as many as you have time for. Zero in on the foul
>language, as remailers as crossposting will not get them any more, and has
>lead to me to a slackening of etiquette.
> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/

What etiquette, pigs don't have any

Re: Bill Hughs, YOUR the best!
 

On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 19:20:41 +0000, Doc.--------- wrote:

> On Sat, 3 Nov 2007 00:31:20 -0800, "L.W. \(Bill\) ------ III"
> <LWBill------@------.net> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the back up. But it may be better for you to work behind the
>>scenes, reporting as many as you have time for. Zero in on the foul
>>language, as remailers as crossposting will not get them any more, and has
>>lead to me to a slackening of etiquette.
>> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>

> What etiquette, pigs don't have any

I love this: >> has lead to me to a slackening of etiquette.

He says that as though he really practiced etiquette at one time.

Even his delusions have delusions......


--
Ode To A Madman

In suffering there is a limit; to fearing, none.

-Francis Bacon, essayist,
philosopher, and statesman
(1561-1626)

Re: Bill Hughs, YOUR the best!
 

On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 19:20:41 +0000, Doc.--------- wrote:

> On Sat, 3 Nov 2007 00:31:20 -0800, "L.W. \(Bill\) ------ III"
> <LWBill------@------.net> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the back up. But it may be better for you to work behind the
>>scenes, reporting as many as you have time for. Zero in on the foul
>>language, as remailers as crossposting will not get them any more, and has
>>lead to me to a slackening of etiquette.
>> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>

> What etiquette, pigs don't have any

I love this: >> has lead to me to a slackening of etiquette.

He says that as though he really practiced etiquette at one time.

Even his delusions have delusions......


--
Ode To A Madman

In suffering there is a limit; to fearing, none.

-Francis Bacon, essayist,
philosopher, and statesman
(1561-1626)

Re: Bill Hughs, YOUR the best!
 

On Sat, 03 Nov 2007 19:20:41 +0000, Doc.--------- wrote:

> On Sat, 3 Nov 2007 00:31:20 -0800, "L.W. \(Bill\) ------ III"
> <LWBill------@------.net> wrote:
>
>> Thanks for the back up. But it may be better for you to work behind the
>>scenes, reporting as many as you have time for. Zero in on the foul
>>language, as remailers as crossposting will not get them any more, and has
>>lead to me to a slackening of etiquette.
>> God Bless America, Bill O|||||||O
>>mailto:-------------------- http://www.----------.com/
>

> What etiquette, pigs don't have any

I love this: >> has lead to me to a slackening of etiquette.

He says that as though he really practiced etiquette at one time.

Even his delusions have delusions......


--
Ode To A Madman

In suffering there is a limit; to fearing, none.

-Francis Bacon, essayist,
philosopher, and statesman
(1561-1626)

Re: Bill Hughs, YOUR the best!
 

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> wrote in
> news:Xns99DD7EC1BE5Cstillnolawsuitedmo@207.14.116. 130:
>
>> "L.W. \(Bill\) ------ III" <LWBill------@------.net> wrote in
>> news:472c17f2$0$26424$88260bb3@free.teranews.com:
>>
>>> Thanks for the back up. But it may be better for you to work
>>> behind the
>>> scenes, reporting as many as you have time for. Zero in on the foul
>>> language, as remailers as crossposting will not get them any more, and
>>> has lead to me to a slackening of etiquette.
>> Can you get any more incoherent, you slobbering putz?
>>
>
> I have faith in him.
>
>
> Bertie

Is it just me, or did anyone else notice that Bill's lone supporter
(like Bill himself) can't tell the difference between "your" and
"you're"? Could this be Bill socking up to support himself?

Re: Bill Hughs, YOUR the best!
 

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> wrote in
> news:Xns99DD7EC1BE5Cstillnolawsuitedmo@207.14.116. 130:
>
>> "L.W. \(Bill\) ------ III" <LWBill------@------.net> wrote in
>> news:472c17f2$0$26424$88260bb3@free.teranews.com:
>>
>>> Thanks for the back up. But it may be better for you to work
>>> behind the
>>> scenes, reporting as many as you have time for. Zero in on the foul
>>> language, as remailers as crossposting will not get them any more, and
>>> has lead to me to a slackening of etiquette.
>> Can you get any more incoherent, you slobbering putz?
>>
>
> I have faith in him.
>
>
> Bertie

Is it just me, or did anyone else notice that Bill's lone supporter
(like Bill himself) can't tell the difference between "your" and
"you're"? Could this be Bill socking up to support himself?

Re: Bill Hughs, YOUR the best!
 

Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
> Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> wrote in
> news:Xns99DD7EC1BE5Cstillnolawsuitedmo@207.14.116. 130:
>
>> "L.W. \(Bill\) ------ III" <LWBill------@------.net> wrote in
>> news:472c17f2$0$26424$88260bb3@free.teranews.com:
>>
>>> Thanks for the back up. But it may be better for you to work
>>> behind the
>>> scenes, reporting as many as you have time for. Zero in on the foul
>>> language, as remailers as crossposting will not get them any more, and
>>> has lead to me to a slackening of etiquette.
>> Can you get any more incoherent, you slobbering putz?
>>
>
> I have faith in him.
>
>
> Bertie

Is it just me, or did anyone else notice that Bill's lone supporter
(like Bill himself) can't tell the difference between "your" and
"you're"? Could this be Bill socking up to support himself?

Re: Bill Hughs, YOUR the best!
 

Cassandra Incognito <a@b.invalid> wrote:

>Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> wrote in
>> news:Xns99DD7EC1BE5Cstillnolawsuitedmo@207.14.116. 130:
>>
>>> "L.W. \(Bill\) ------ III" <LWBill------@------.net> wrote in
>>> news:472c17f2$0$26424$88260bb3@free.teranews.com:
>>>
>>>> Thanks for the back up. But it may be better for you to work
>>>> behind the
>>>> scenes, reporting as many as you have time for. Zero in on the foul
>>>> language, as remailers as crossposting will not get them any more, and
>>>> has lead to me to a slackening of etiquette.
>>> Can you get any more incoherent, you slobbering putz?
>>>
>>
>> I have faith in him.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
>Is it just me, or did anyone else notice that Bill's lone supporter
>(like Bill himself) can't tell the difference between "your" and
>"you're"? Could this be Bill socking up to support himself?

Bertie's not a supporter of Bill. I think he saying that he has faith
that Silly Bill -can- and -will- get more incoherent.

Re: Bill Hughs, YOUR the best!
 

Cassandra Incognito <a@b.invalid> wrote:

>Bertie the Bunyip wrote:
>> Cujo DeSockpuppet <cujo@petitmorte.net> wrote in
>> news:Xns99DD7EC1BE5Cstillnolawsuitedmo@207.14.116. 130:
>>
>>> "L.W. \(Bill\) ------ III" <LWBill------@------.net> wrote in
>>> news:472c17f2$0$26424$88260bb3@free.teranews.com:
>>>
>>>> Thanks for the back up. But it may be better for you to work
>>>> behind the
>>>> scenes, reporting as many as you have time for. Zero in on the foul
>>>> language, as remailers as crossposting will not get them any more, and
>>>> has lead to me to a slackening of etiquette.
>>> Can you get any more incoherent, you slobbering putz?
>>>
>>
>> I have faith in him.
>>
>>
>> Bertie
>
>Is it just me, or did anyone else notice that Bill's lone supporter
>(like Bill himself) can't tell the difference between "your" and
>"you're"? Could this be Bill socking up to support himself?

Bertie's not a supporter of Bill. I think he saying that he has faith
that Silly Bill -can- and -will- get more incoherent.