On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 07:19:02 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
. com,
" wrote:

George M. Middius wrote:
Arnii, I've taken the liberty of inferring your
preference for the motif of slime over that of feces. I
think I speak for most of the group when I say that
your attempts to hyper-fecalize Usenet have largely
failed, and therefore continuing to associate you with
your preferred tool of the "debating trade" is getting
old. Even though it was principally my observation that
you are composed of 97% pure feces, I feel the time has
come to admit that as ****ty as you are, your sliminess
is a more universally recognized "character" trait. ;-)

Turdy, you are guilty by omission. What you're guilty
of is being a total ****. On the other hand, you've
mitigated your ****fulness by agreeing with the rest
of us that you are very, very slimy. I'll now explain
how you rendered your agreement to this basic tenet of
Kroofulness, and I'll do it using Kroologic. ;-)

Middius, who is this Krooborg character?

Who's asking? ;-)

If you've got any guts at all, you'll post his legal
name.

Once again I have to wonder why you respond so quickly
and so directly whenever people insult you. Showing how
slimy you are has never yet succeeded in lowering the
slime quotient of your posts.


Pot, Kettle, etc.

Otherwise we can safely presume that this is
just another one of your trips down fantasy lane, like
the coneheads and borg that you've posted about so
many times in the past.

Do you get slime all over the sheets when you pork the
Kroobitch?





The way you do with your NAMBLA slut?

Bringing up NAMBLA is a bit like invoking the name if
Hitler, me thinks.

Note that while Jenn picks nits with a NAMBLA comment she remains incapable
of finding any fault with Middius, despite his egregious "pork the
Kroobitch" comment.

Tell me, Arnold, do you think our disapproval will cause George to
modify his comments? Your usual line is that anyone who fails to
condemn a comment must agree with it (a point Mr. Sound raised as
well). I don't buy it. George speaks only for himself, as I speak only
for myself. I don't always like George's comments, but I guess he
knows that and doesn't care. If McKelvy speaks out of turn, do we take
it as coming from you and condemn you outright? We all speak for
ourselves and are individually responsible for what we say. In any
case you're always free to condemn George as much as you like.
Of course it won't make the slightest difference.

paul packer said to SlimeBorg:

you're always free to condemn George as much as you like.

LOL

Of course it won't make the slightest difference.

That's true. Krooger's attempts to trade insults with Normals always
ends up the same way -- with Mr. Slime in tears, holed up in his sound
card torture chamber with nothing but his meters and soldering irons to
play with.




--
A day without Krooger is like a day without arsenic.

"George M. Middius" cmndr [underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote
in message ...


paul packer said to SlimeBorg:

you're always free to condemn George as much as you like.

LOL

Of course it won't make the slightest difference.

That's true. Krooger's attempts to trade insults with Normals

"George speaks only for himself"

ScottW

"paul packer" wrote in message

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 07:19:02 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"Jenn" wrote in message

In article
. com,
" wrote:

George M. Middius wrote:
Arnii, I've taken the liberty of inferring your
preference for the motif of slime over that of feces.
I think I speak for most of the group when I say that
your attempts to hyper-fecalize Usenet have largely
failed, and therefore continuing to associate you with
your preferred tool of the "debating trade" is getting
old. Even though it was principally my observation
that you are composed of 97% pure feces, I feel the
time has come to admit that as ****ty as you are,
your sliminess is a more universally recognized
"character" trait. ;-)

Turdy, you are guilty by omission. What you're
guilty of is being a total ****. On the other hand,
you've mitigated your ****fulness by agreeing with
the rest of us that you are very, very slimy. I'll
now explain how you rendered your agreement to this
basic tenet of Kroofulness, and I'll do it using
Kroologic. ;-)

Middius, who is this Krooborg character?

Who's asking? ;-)

If you've got any guts at all, you'll post his legal
name.

Once again I have to wonder why you respond so quickly
and so directly whenever people insult you. Showing
how slimy you are has never yet succeeded in lowering
the slime quotient of your posts.


Pot, Kettle, etc.

Otherwise we can safely presume that this is
just another one of your trips down fantasy lane,
like the coneheads and borg that you've posted about
so many times in the past.

Do you get slime all over the sheets when you pork the
Kroobitch?





The way you do with your NAMBLA slut?

Bringing up NAMBLA is a bit like invoking the name if
Hitler, me thinks.

Note that while Jenn picks nits with a NAMBLA comment
she remains incapable of finding any fault with Middius,
despite his egregious "pork the Kroobitch" comment.

Tell me, Arnold, do you think our disapproval will cause
George to modify his comments?

Yes. George plays to his public, which includes you Paul.

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:50:08 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


Tell me, Arnold, do you think our disapproval will cause
George to modify his comments?

Yes. George plays to his public, which includes you Paul.

Probably a grain of truth there, Arnold.

Unlike most of your posts.

"paul packer" wrote in message

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:50:08 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


Tell me, Arnold, do you think our disapproval will cause
George to modify his comments?

Yes. George plays to his public, which includes you Paul.

Probably a grain of truth there, Arnold.

Unlike most of your posts.

Interesting Paul, how you're morphing into a foul, Weil-like personna.

On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 07:14:41 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"paul packer" wrote in message

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:50:08 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


Tell me, Arnold, do you think our disapproval will cause
George to modify his comments?

Yes. George plays to his public, which includes you Paul.

Probably a grain of truth there, Arnold.

Unlike most of your posts.

Interesting Paul, how you're morphing into a foul, Weil-like personna.


Weil's is a foul personna? Methinks your perception of the
personalities on RAO is about as accurate as your perception of
reality in general.

"paul packer" wrote in message

On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 07:14:41 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"paul packer" wrote in message

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:50:08 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


Tell me, Arnold, do you think our disapproval will
cause George to modify his comments?

Yes. George plays to his public, which includes you
Paul.

Probably a grain of truth there, Arnold.

Unlike most of your posts.

Interesting Paul, how you're morphing into a foul,
Weil-like personna.

Weil's is a foul personna?

Of course. Much to foul for me to bother with.


Methinks your perception of the
personalities on RAO is about as accurate as your
perception of reality in general.

IOW, it is really pretty accurate. Thanks for finally figuring things out,
Paul.

On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 13:36:44 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Interesting Paul, how you're morphing into a foul,
Weil-like personna.

Weil's is a foul personna?

Of course. Much to foul for me to bother with.

Which is of course why you bothered mentioning me.

To me, a foul personality talking about wiping asses with $1000
checks, outing his wife on newsgroups and publishing her work number
at same newsgroup, and attacking women.

paul packer wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 07:14:41 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"paul packer" wrote in message

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:50:08 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


Tell me, Arnold, do you think our disapproval will cause
George to modify his comments?

Yes. George plays to his public, which includes you Paul.

Probably a grain of truth there, Arnold.

Unlike most of your posts.

Interesting Paul, how you're morphing into a foul, Weil-like personna.


Weil's is a foul personna? Methinks your perception of the
personalities on RAO is about as accurate as your perception of
reality in general.

To describe Weil's personality otherwise, is to deny reality.

On 19 Jun 2006 17:38:44 -0700, "
wrote:


paul packer wrote:
On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 07:14:41 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

"paul packer" wrote in message

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:50:08 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:


Tell me, Arnold, do you think our disapproval will cause
George to modify his comments?

Yes. George plays to his public, which includes you Paul.

Probably a grain of truth there, Arnold.

Unlike most of your posts.

Interesting Paul, how you're morphing into a foul, Weil-like personna.


Weil's is a foul personna? Methinks your perception of the
personalities on RAO is about as accurate as your perception of
reality in general.

To describe Weil's personality otherwise, is to deny reality.

I've obviously completely lost contact with reality in that case.

On 19 Jun 2006 17:38:44 -0700, "
wrote:

Interesting Paul, how you're morphing into a foul, Weil-like personna.


Weil's is a foul personna? Methinks your perception of the
personalities on RAO is about as accurate as your perception of
reality in general.

To describe Weil's personality otherwise, is to deny reality.

Now now Mike, that's not very nice. That's actually, shall we say,
foul?

paul packer said:

Tell me, Arnold, do you think our disapproval will cause
George to modify his comments?

Yes. George plays to his public, which includes you Paul.

Probably a grain of truth there, Arnold.

I beg to disagree. I've never seen a dime in my tip jar from mr. packer.

Unlike most of your posts.

Arnii does have some entertainment value, wouldn't you agree?




--
A day without Krooger is like a day without arsenic.

On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 10:01:52 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:



paul packer said:

Tell me, Arnold, do you think our disapproval will cause
George to modify his comments?

Yes. George plays to his public, which includes you Paul.

Probably a grain of truth there, Arnold.

I beg to disagree. I've never seen a dime in my tip jar from mr. packer.

That's only because of my penury.

Unlike most of your posts.

Arnii does have some entertainment value, wouldn't you agree?

My stomach hurts from laughing right now.

"paul packer" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 19 Jun 2006 10:01:52 -0400, George M. Middius cmndr
[underscore] george [at] comcast [dot] net wrote:



paul packer said:

Tell me, Arnold, do you think our disapproval will cause
George to modify his comments?

Yes. George plays to his public, which includes you Paul.

Probably a grain of truth there, Arnold.

I beg to disagree. I've never seen a dime in my tip jar from mr. packer.

That's only because of my penury.

Unlike most of your posts.

Arnii does have some entertainment value, wouldn't you agree?

My stomach hurts from laughing right now.


He's especially amusing when he has another one of his meltdowns.
He's having a mini one right now.
Let's see if it grows!



--
Posted via NewsDemon.com - Premium Uncensored Newsgroup Service
-------http://www.NewsDemon.com------
Unlimited Access, Anonymous Accounts, Uncensored Broadband Access

On Sun, 18 Jun 2006 20:50:08 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
wrote:

Tell me, Arnold, do you think our disapproval will cause
George to modify his comments?

Yes. George plays to his public, which includes you Paul.

Well, it hasn't worked on YOU, Arnold. You play to the public as well
and yet mounds of disapproval simply fuels your abuse.