XPost: can.general, can.politics, ott.general
From: nospam@thanksalot.com
Canuck57 wrote:
> On 11/07/2011 11:24 PM, merlin! wrote:
>> John Fleming wrote:
>>> On Sun, 10 Jul 2011 20:39:04 -0700, while chained to a desk
>>> in the scriptorium "merlin!" wrote:
>>>> $John Fleming wrote:
>>>> $> On Sun, 10 Jul 2011 13:40:50 -0700, while chained to a desk
>>>> $> in the scriptorium "merlin!" wrote:
>>>> $>> $John Fleming wrote:
>>>> $>> $> On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 21:59:55 -0700, while chained to a desk
>>>> $>> $> in the scriptorium "merlin!"
>>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> $>> $>> $So, you have absolutely no comprehension of what it's
>>>> like to $>> $>> suddenly be $plunged into unmanageable debt,
>>>> having done nothing $>> $>> wrong. But you insist $that this
>>>> only happens to welshers, $>> losers, $>> irresponsible
>>>> deadbeats etc. $You are a clueless twit, $>> badly in need $>>
>>>> of an education. $>> $>
>>>> $>> $> I'm sure your ex would disagree on the "done nothing
>>>> wrong" $>> $> part. If you hadn't done something wrong, she
>>>> wouldn't have $>> $> divorced you, right?
>>>> $>> $
>>>> $>> $She didn't mention anything like that.
>>>> $>
>>>> $> Oh, I'm sure she didn't. But I'm sure she didn't divorce
>>>> $> you on a lark either. No, there were serious problems
>>>> $> festering in your relationship, and you were as guitly as
>>>> $> sin as far as she was concerned.
>>>> $
>>>> $In later years, she admitted that she had been "a real bitch". I
>>>> am not $suggesting that I was a perfect husband, nobody is.
>>>> However, I certainly $did not deserve what the lawyers and judges
>>>> dish out. I suspect that only $1 in 1000 men do deserve that, but
>>>> they get it anyhow.
>>>
>>> What she admitted she was is immaterial. It's what she
>>> thought you were that counts.
>>
>> She thought I was married to "a real bitch".
>>
>>
>>> If she dumped you, she came to the conclusion you weren't as
>>> hot a catch as she originally thought.
>>
>> I guess you are right. You have amazing insight into the female
>> psyche!
>>
>>
>>>> $>> $>> $>>> Nope. Just have my eyes open and a good grip of
>>>> reality. $>> $>> $>>
>>>> $>> $>> $>> From what you have written here, it is clear to
>>>> me that your $>> $>> $>> conception of reality is extremely
>>>> narrow and limited. $>> $>> $>
>>>> $>> $>> $> Reality and truth are often very limited and exact.
>>>> $>> $>> $
>>>> $>> $>> $And your ignorance knows no bounds.
>>>> $>> $>> $
>>>> $>> $>> $
>>>> $>> $>> $>>> Funny, of all the friends I knew as kids that
>>>> smoked dope, $>> not $>> a one $>>> amounted to anything. Not
>>>> a one. But the ones $>> that $>> didn't toke $>>> most became
>>>> something. Go figure. $>> $>> $>>
>>>> $>> $>> $>> Corelation is not causation.
>>>> $>> $>> $>
>>>> $>> $>> $> True. But can be. My experience suggests in this
>>>> case it is. $>> $>> $
>>>> $>> $>> $You said you have no experience of such matters. You
>>>> deny the $>> $>> existence of $such things. You might be wise to
>>>> admit ignorance, $>> $>> rather than dispensing $judgment.
>>>> $>> $>
>>>> $>> $> Face it merlin. It costs money to support a drug habit.
>>>> How $>> $> long does it take a man to drain his bank account to
>>>> feed a $>> $> cocaine addiction? And if you are spending your
>>>> money on $>> $> drugs, you aren't spending it improving your
>>>> education and $>> $> training. Nor are you spending it on
>>>> keeping your patner $>> $> happy.
>>>> $>> $>
>>>> $>> $> And you you spend half your life in a drug induced haze,
>>>> $>> $> you're not giving your girl the attention she wants and
>>>> $>> $> needs either. Nor are you giving your job the attention
>>>> and $>> $> due dilligence your boss expects you to give it.
>>>> $>> $>
>>>> $>> $> OK, you can argue a drug habit doesn't turn you into a
>>>> $>> $> failure. Heck, lots of rock and pop musicians pop pills
>>>> by $>> $> the handful and still sell lots of records. But, on
>>>> the $>> $> balance, if a drug problem doesn't cause failure, it
>>>> sure $>> $> indicative of a deeper problem that does cause
>>>> failure. $>> $
>>>> $>> $It's none of my business if someone wants to take drugs, or
>>>> spend $>> every $dime they have on drugs, or whatever it is that
>>>> turns their $>> crank. I'm $pretty sure that it's none of your
>>>> damn business either. $>
>>>> $> It is everybody's business when they are breaking into homes
>>>> $> to steal money to support a drug habit.
>>>> $
>>>> $Stealing is my business. Taking drugs is not. See the difference?
>>>> $
>>>> $> It's everybody's
>>>> $> business if they use hospital services to treat an overdoes.
>>>> $
>>>> $It is, but that is easily remedied by reforming the idiotic
>>>> tax-funded $hospital system. Harming drug addicts (more they they
>>>> already harm $themselves) because people like you have their
>>>> "universal healthcare" $heads up their asses, really does not seem
>>>> rasonable or fair. $
>>>> $> It is everybody's business if they get behind the wheel of a
>>>> $> car while high on drugs.
>>>> $
>>>> $Public saftey issues are my business. Using drugs is not. See the
>>>> $difference?
>>>
>>> You are tyring to tell me that operating a motor vehicle
>>> while high on drugs isn't a public saftey issue? Give your
>>> head a shake man.
>>
>> I said exactly the opposite. Give your glasses a good cleaning and
>> cut down on the booze.
>
> So you drove her to drink.... ahhaha....
Oh... so that's it. You and KKKaren share the same bottle problem.
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
