In Reply to: Everyone look: WEASELING WEASELING WEASELING! nt posted by clarkjohnsen on January 8, 2006 at 08:43:14:
Y'all made a couple of elementary mistakes, and now y'all accuse me of weaselling.
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- Y'all certainly are, Clark - Silver Eared John 13:49:18 01/09/06 (14)
- STILL WON'T ADDRESS QUESTION. SHOULD BE ASHAMED OF SELF. BUT ISN'T. STOP. nt - clarkjohnsen 23:32:40 01/09/06 (13)
- Well, as a sensible question, slick - Silver Eared John 23:38:33 01/09/06 (12)
- Now we may add boldfaced lying, to your miserable weaseling and your rudeness. The question plainly stated: - clarkjohnsen 00:12:57 01/10/06 (11)
- There's no question in that post, slick... - Silver Eared John 16:28:30 01/10/06 (10)
- Re: "There's no question in that post, slick." None anyway that you can answer. IN FACT THERE WERE FOUR. - clarkjohnsen 17:17:25 01/10/06 (9)
- Yeah, yeah... - Silver Eared John 19:58:03 01/10/06 (8)
- Re: No… - $orabji! 15:58:49 01/12/06 (7)
- Please, no substance! No direct answers! ;-) - markrohr 11:53:43 01/13/06 (6)
- Shame y'all couldn't google for 10 seconds... - Silver Eared John 13:15:08 01/13/06 (5)
- When you're interested in conversing rather than preening get back to me. nt - markrohr 15:10:29 01/13/06 (4)
- When y'all interested in real discussion, y'all get back to me. - Silver Eared John 17:42:10 01/13/06 (3)
- Re: When y'all interested in real discussion, y'all get back to me. - markrohr 07:49:16 01/14/06 (2)
- Also... - Silver Eared John 20:52:58 01/14/06 (0)
- Let me explain... - Silver Eared John 20:50:35 01/14/06 (0)