meow
in [Toyota]
|
Prev: Receiver for the car?
Next: Camry EGR Valve, Code P0401
From: david hillstrom on 15 Apr 2010 16:29 On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 14:57:02 -0400, Rebecca Ore <macogoense(a)gmail.com> wrote: >In article <d9vcs594gv3eq4gs5q474cc3npgh9peh0p(a)4ax.com>, > david hillstrom <dave(a)meow.org> wrote: > >> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 22:39:33 -0400, Rebecca Ore <macogoense(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >In article <0nlcs51qrf47mkotku1rdjpfrpgbiop0s3(a)4ax.com>, >> > The 2-Belo <the2belo(a)msd.bigREMOVETHISlobe.ne.jp> wrote: >> > >> ><Something> >> > >> >He knew better than to click on the links. >> >> the 2-belo sucks goats. > >He shoots nice photographs, just not of drag queens. Takes pictures of >baseball players. It's all colorful humans either way. but he sucks goats. -- dave hillstrom zrbj mhm15x4
From: Rebecca Ore on 15 Apr 2010 17:51 In article <rotes5938gk968e2db8v1ttegqm05onb1c(a)4ax.com>, david hillstrom <dave(a)meow.org> wrote: > On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 14:57:02 -0400, Rebecca Ore <macogoense(a)gmail.com> > wrote: > > >In article <d9vcs594gv3eq4gs5q474cc3npgh9peh0p(a)4ax.com>, > > david hillstrom <dave(a)meow.org> wrote: > > > >> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 22:39:33 -0400, Rebecca Ore <macogoense(a)gmail.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >> >In article <0nlcs51qrf47mkotku1rdjpfrpgbiop0s3(a)4ax.com>, > >> > The 2-Belo <the2belo(a)msd.bigREMOVETHISlobe.ne.jp> wrote: > >> > > >> ><Something> > >> > > >> >He knew better than to click on the links. > >> > >> the 2-belo sucks goats. > > > >He shoots nice photographs, just not of drag queens. Takes pictures of > >baseball players. It's all colorful humans either way. > > but he sucks goats. Post proof.
From: david hillstrom on 15 Apr 2010 18:08 On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 17:51:47 -0400, Rebecca Ore <macogoense(a)gmail.com> wrote: >In article <rotes5938gk968e2db8v1ttegqm05onb1c(a)4ax.com>, > david hillstrom <dave(a)meow.org> wrote: > >> On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 14:57:02 -0400, Rebecca Ore <macogoense(a)gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >> >In article <d9vcs594gv3eq4gs5q474cc3npgh9peh0p(a)4ax.com>, >> > david hillstrom <dave(a)meow.org> wrote: >> > >> >> On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 22:39:33 -0400, Rebecca Ore <macogoense(a)gmail.com> >> >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >In article <0nlcs51qrf47mkotku1rdjpfrpgbiop0s3(a)4ax.com>, >> >> > The 2-Belo <the2belo(a)msd.bigREMOVETHISlobe.ne.jp> wrote: >> >> > >> >> ><Something> >> >> > >> >> >He knew better than to click on the links. >> >> >> >> the 2-belo sucks goats. >> > >> >He shoots nice photographs, just not of drag queens. Takes pictures of >> >baseball players. It's all colorful humans either way. >> >> but he sucks goats. > >Post proof. its obvious to the most casual of observers. him and that avoid normal situations. -- dave hillstrom zrbj mhm15x4
From: pandora on 15 Apr 2010 18:44 On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 18:43:51 -0400, Hachiroku ハチロク wrote: > On Wed, 14 Apr 2010 12:27:28 -0500, pandora wrote: > >>> But I DON'T prefer the 'insane' way! I would just as soon have no >>> aggression at ALL! >>> >> Now I'm confused. You did say, didn't you, that you were upset with >> Obama because (to you) it sounded like he was being wimpy about >> retaliation for slights? > > You're confused because you're listening to Aratzio's twist on what I > said. No, that seems to be exactly what you said. > I said, you don't go around telling people what you're going to do to > retaliate against attacks on your home country. THAT is what I said. Hmmm, sounds like what I wrote above. I > have NEVER advocated the use of nukes, EVER. Even IF we were attacked > with dirty bombs. ALL I said was that by saying what Obama said shows > weakness. I never meant, said, or even implied retaliation with nukes > was a source of strength. And I quite simply disagree. > What you say is sometimes as important as what you do. > > I never thought I'd see Jimmy Carter in the White House again. And yet, > here we are.
From: Hachiroku ハチロク on 15 Apr 2010 19:12
On Thu, 15 Apr 2010 07:28:24 +0000, Veronica Karlsson wrote: >> Um, let's see. I have PAN. I can filter or unfilter at will. I think I >> explained that. > > To plonk somebody means to ignore them, to not speak to them, to not even > read what they write. It's perfectly OK to ignore somebody and still read > what they write. Nobody can know what you read or don't read as long as > reading is all you do, just like there's no way to know how many lurkers > there are reading but not taking part in the discussion. But, to > publically declare that you have plonked somebody and then, just a few > minutes later, fall for the temptation to respond makes you look silly. Oh, well. I just can't resist seeing what the Daily Stupid is printing today. |