"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:00:10 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:

What is *this* supposed to mean?

It means I didn't find an op-ed and say, "I'll bet this will **** off
Dave
Weil. It was something might cause many people to think.

Then why was it so important that I didn't comment on it?

Where did I say it was?

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 11:18:12 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:00:10 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:

What is *this* supposed to mean?

It means I didn't find an op-ed and say, "I'll bet this will **** off
Dave
Weil. It was something might cause many people to think.

Then why was it so important that I didn't comment on it?

Where did I say it was?

When you noted that I hadn't commented on it. Why did you bother to
challenge me on it in the first place if it wasn't important?

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 11:18:12 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:00:10 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:

What is *this* supposed to mean?

It means I didn't find an op-ed and say, "I'll bet this will **** off
Dave
Weil. It was something might cause many people to think.

Then why was it so important that I didn't comment on it?

Where did I say it was?

When you noted that I hadn't commented on it. Why did you bother to
challenge me on it in the first place if it wasn't important?

I didn't.

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:00:57 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 11:18:12 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:00:10 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:

What is *this* supposed to mean?

It means I didn't find an op-ed and say, "I'll bet this will **** off
Dave
Weil. It was something might cause many people to think.

Then why was it so important that I didn't comment on it?

Where did I say it was?

When you noted that I hadn't commented on it. Why did you bother to
challenge me on it in the first place if it wasn't important?

I didn't.

Sure you did.

Let me remind you:

"It was no secret that it came from the LA Daily News, those who have
reading difficulty like Weil could have easily found if they wanted
to. I do notice he had no comment at all on the substance of the
piece".

Spin *that* one.

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:00:57 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 11:18:12 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:00:10 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:

What is *this* supposed to mean?

It means I didn't find an op-ed and say, "I'll bet this will ****
off
Dave
Weil. It was something might cause many people to think.

Then why was it so important that I didn't comment on it?

Where did I say it was?

When you noted that I hadn't commented on it. Why did you bother to
challenge me on it in the first place if it wasn't important?

I didn't.

Sure you did.

Let me remind you:

"It was no secret that it came from the LA Daily News, those who have
reading difficulty like Weil could have easily found if they wanted
to. I do notice he had no comment at all on the substance of the
piece".

Spin *that* one.

You've already done a god job. That wasn't a challenge it was simply a
comment on the fact that you always complain when I post things from other
sources.

Would you like another chair for your ego?

On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:26:51 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:00:57 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 11:18:12 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:00:10 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:

What is *this* supposed to mean?

It means I didn't find an op-ed and say, "I'll bet this will ****
off
Dave
Weil. It was something might cause many people to think.

Then why was it so important that I didn't comment on it?

Where did I say it was?

When you noted that I hadn't commented on it. Why did you bother to
challenge me on it in the first place if it wasn't important?

I didn't.

Sure you did.

Let me remind you:

"It was no secret that it came from the LA Daily News, those who have
reading difficulty like Weil could have easily found if they wanted
to. I do notice he had no comment at all on the substance of the
piece".

Spin *that* one.

You've already done a god job. That wasn't a challenge it was simply a
comment on the fact that you always complain when I post things from other
sources.

Would you like another chair for your ego?

I don't need one, since apparently I'm your god.

"dave weil" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:26:51 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 12:00:57 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 11:18:12 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:


"dave weil" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 10 Nov 2003 10:00:10 -0800, "Michael Mckelvy"
wrote:

What is *this* supposed to mean?

It means I didn't find an op-ed and say, "I'll bet this will
****
off
Dave
Weil. It was something might cause many people to think.

Then why was it so important that I didn't comment on it?

Where did I say it was?

When you noted that I hadn't commented on it. Why did you bother to
challenge me on it in the first place if it wasn't important?

I didn't.

Sure you did.

Let me remind you:

"It was no secret that it came from the LA Daily News, those who have
reading difficulty like Weil could have easily found if they wanted
to. I do notice he had no comment at all on the substance of the
piece".

Spin *that* one.

You've already done a god job. That wasn't a challenge it was simply a
comment on the fact that you always complain when I post things from
other
sources.

Would you like another chair for your ego?

I don't need one, since apparently I'm your god.

Delusions of grandeur noted.