--- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 
wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], "geezerfreak" <geezerfreak@> 
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <jflanegi@> 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@> 
wrote:
> > > > And then they actually expect us to believe that they're
> > > > enlightened.
> > > what are you smoking? This is a foolish and incorrect 
statement.:-)
> > >
> > 
> > Love your and Rory's little smiley face sign off after insulting 
> someone. Is the smiley face a 
> > secret code signal for the, um, "enlightened" Jimbo?
> >
> Yep!:-)
>
Seriously, Barry can insult me or create a hugely erroneous 
impression and I'm supposed to "play by the rules"? And what *are* 
the rules anyway? 

The other comment that occurs to me is, if I am enlightened, then as 
we've established ad nauseum here, there is no way for anyone else 
to tell (except for the incorporation of UC into BC, and you need 
the t-shirt for that one ;-)), so it is pretty funny for you to be 
apparently taking me to task for my behavior, not because I am 
Jimbo, but because I am enlightened- do you see how whatever point 
you are making, pointing out the supposed contrast between my 
behavior, and the behavior of an enlightened man, has no substance? 
Once again, enlightenment cannot be discerned by a person's outward 
behavior (except for the incorporation of UC into BC, but we already 
covered that). 

Anyway, you possibly think I am a blankety blank or something as a 
person, and that is an entirely different issue, but trying to get 
me to wake up to my behavior because it does not comport with the 
actions of an enlightened man is I am sorry, rubbish.:-)

Reply via email to