From: Hachiroku ハチロク on
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/tea-party


From: matrixxx09 on
On Sep 12, 6:08 pm, Hachiroku $B%O%A%m%/(B <Tru...(a)e86.GTS> wrote:
> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/tea-party

The other one wasn't real? In what sense? They weren't 'men'?
There weren't a million of them? It wasn't a march?

There are many interpretations of your title, and I'm just curious.

From: matrixxx09 on
On Sep 12, 6:53 pm, Conscience <nobama@göv.com> wrote:
> On 2009-09-12 15:08:27 -0700, Hachiroku ハチロク <Tru...(a)e86.GTS> said:
>
> >http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/tea-party
>
> As opposed to the first, which had nothing close to 200,000?

You sure about that? Or do you just want that to be true and so, to
you, it is?

From: matrixxx09 on
On Sep 12, 7:11 pm, Conscience <nobama@göv.com> wrote:
> On 2009-09-12 16:06:06 -0700, matrixxx09 <matrixx...(a)gmail.com> said:
>
> > On Sep 12, 6:53 pm, Conscience <nobama@göv.com> wrote:
> >> On 2009-09-12 15:08:27 -0700, Hachiroku ムムロã‚
> > ¯ <Tru...(a)e86.GTS> said:
>
> >>>http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/tea-party
>
> >> As opposed to the first, which had nothing close to 200,000?
>
> > You sure about that?  Or do you just want that to be true and so, to
> > you, it is?
>
> Initial reports had that number.  A Google check puts it at a
> computer-scanned 650,000.
>
> Take your pick.  Either way it wasn't a million-man march.

650,000.

Well, you're right, that is "nothing close to 200,000".

From: JoeSpareBedroom on
"Conscience" <nobama@g�v.com> wrote in message
news:h8h8pq$oc$4(a)news.albasani.net...
> On 2009-09-12 15:08:27 -0700, Hachiroku ???? <Trueno(a)e86.GTS> said:
>
>> http://www.huffingtonpost.com/news/tea-party
>
> As opposed to the first, which had nothing close to 200,000?
>
> Good show.
>


Good show. Carry on. You need to stop trying to be a British WWI general, or
brush up on your Monty Python routine.


 |  Next  |  Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4
Prev: seat belt warranty
Next: {BS} Hachi, see the fox on Fox