On 2/13/2014 11:33 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
*That's Eastern Orthodox Christianity, dingbat.*
>
Robin was an Advaita Vedantin, dingbat.
Richard, I've just been reading a book of Mother Meera. She says: It is the law
that the human has to change in order to unite with the Divine. Maybe she
doesn't use an orthodox system but I think she's pretty enlightened! She also
writes a lot about Paramatman. I wonder how that's different fro
That's Eastern Orthodox Christianity, dingbat.
<< Neither Eastern Orthodox nor Western Christianity permit the view that
humans can become ontologically one with God. That remains the "seperative
divide" between Eastern and Western religions. >
What "Eastern Orthodox" philosophy supports the
On 2/9/2014 9:45 AM, Richard J. Williams wrote:
On 2/8/2014 9:21 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
Neither Eastern Orthodox nor Western Christianity permit the view
that humans can become ontologically one with God. That remains the
"seperative divide" between Eastern and Western religions.
>
Wh
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
I am not familiar enough with providers to know if you are able or not able to
access that global.net address. But evidently Ann uses it, so perhaps it is
more accessible than you think. Don't know.
I do? I don't know diddly squat about co
Great. I'm really curious.
I don't normally read NBC.com, but I took a look after I saw some of the
complaints. It's worse than the Slate redesign, which up to now has been the
worst mess I've ever seen. Hard to believe anyone could look at either of them
and think, "Boy, this looks so snapp
Yup. It's run by the gal who's heading up the anti-Neo effort on the
ModsandMembers Yahoo group. She's tireless, but it's kinda sad, because
eventually she's going to have to throw in the towel after all that effort.
<< Before lunch I also had found this blog from a related search. Have you
Before lunch I also had found this blog from a related search. Have you
seen it?
http://modsandmembersblog.wordpress.com/2014/01/
On 02/10/2014 12:46 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
*Tried it just now, no luck. So you're not going to bother searching
the group with Classic? Doesn't matter to
I'll look but I had to go out for a business lunch that I just got back
from and didn't have much of a chance just to try more specific searches
on Google either. I tried one search that landed me in a post a few
month back. I'll try it on my Windows machine which I just fired up.
Have you lo
Tried it just now, no luck. So you're not going to bother searching the group
with Classic? Doesn't matter to me personally, I'm just curious.
<< It's an open group like FFL. You can use Google to search for messages.
Did you try that? >>
On 02/10/2014 11:43 AM, authfriend@... mailto:au
It's an open group like FFL. You can use Google to search for
messages. Did you try that?
On 02/10/2014 11:43 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
*I've been reading the group ModsandMembers, which is a bunch of folks
trying to get Yahoo to ditch Neo and bring back Classic. They are most
likely
The back story on SBC Global where I am was Southern Bell took over
various regional telecoms including PacBell in my area. Then they
changed their name to AT&T through acquisition. But the old sbcglobal
email address are still used. AT&T had Yahoo handle email. I also have
two Yahoo email
You have to have a consumer account with AT&T (e.g., phone) to get an email
address. My cell and landline are both with Verizon, so no dice.
Just to remind you of your gratuitously nasty (and mistaken) post:
<< Richard, Judy, who loves to demean people can't see to figure out how
access t
I've been reading the group ModsandMembers, which is a bunch of folks trying to
get Yahoo to ditch Neo and bring back Classic. They are most likely going to
fail at that. I remember--but can't locate any of the posts via Neo's
search--some talk about AT&T and how the company insisted on staying
I am not familiar enough with providers to know if you are able or not able to
access that global.net address. But evidently Ann uses it, so perhaps it is
more accessible than you think. Don't know.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
And how is that supposed to help those of u
And how is that supposed to help those of us who don't have an s b c g l o b a
l . n e t email address?
<< try again. it is __ @ s b c g l o b a l . n e t
(without the spaces) >>
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
Sure Judy, glad to oblige. I have an e-mail
I've got an sbcglobal.net email address too. I'm wondering if AT&T told
Yahoo to roll out Neo to us last as they have already have enough
support problems. :-D
On 02/10/2014 10:53 AM, steve.sun...@yahoo.com wrote:
Sure Judy, glad to oblige. I have an e-mail that I use at work. It is
-
try again. it is __ @ s b c g l o b a l . n e t (without
the spaces)
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
Sure Judy, glad to oblige. I have an e-mail that I use at work. It is
@
When I am logged in under that e-mail address FFL shows up
Sure Judy, glad to oblige. I have an e-mail that I use at work. It is
@sbcglobal.net.
When I am logged in under that e-mail address FFL shows up under the old
format, and I am able to read posts and use the search engine all as we used to
do.
---In FairfieldLife@yaho
So Stevie, we're all still waiting for you to tell us how to access Groups
Classic and its search feature.
<< Richard, Judy, who loves to demean people can't see to figure out how
access the previous classic format and search feature. >>
On 2/10/2014 6:38 AM, steve.sun...@yahoo.com wrote:
Richard, Judy, who loves to demean people can't see to figure out how
access the previous classic format and search feature.
>
It appears that Judy is still using Yahoo Neo and Yahoo Mail from her
home office. So, yes it must be very demeanin
Fine, so tell us how we Neo victims should all be able to access Classic and
use its search function. We'll try it out and let you know whether it works for
us.
IOW, put up or shut up.
<< No, Judykins,
I did not say you could post using the old format, only that you could access
it,
No, Judykins,
I did not say you could post using the old format, only that you could access
it, and use the search engine. Calm down, and read again what I said. Easy
does it.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
Actually, your saying it's a hoot is the hoot. Some people who ha
Actually, your saying it's a hoot is the hoot. Some people who have been
switched to Neo are still able to access Classic; others are not. There's no
"figuring out" involved for them; it's simply not possible. It has to do with
how Yahoo's servers are set up, and eventually all traces of Classic
Richard, Judy, who loves to demean people can't see to figure out how access
the previous classic format and search feature.
Now, that is a hoot.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
On 2/9/2014 2:07 PM, steve.sundur@... mailto:steve.sundur@... wrote:
You're in high form today
On 2/9/2014 10:29 PM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote:
it's a trick prick foul trap fib - that's what it was. Go figure.
You're just feeling icky, not to mention prickly, that Robin
pulled a fast one on Ricky and not a bit tickled that you ended up
in such a pickle. If you act q
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
On 2/9/2014 3:21 PM, awoelflebater@... mailto:awoelflebater@... wrote:
No one can stop bringing it up and talking about it and trying to use it to
prove Robin actually disliked you and was serious. >
So, nobody is taking Robin seriously when h
On 2/9/2014 8:38 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
Bhagavad-Gita VI:27
>
The yogin who is totally free of passion could attain a blissful state
where the mind is blissful and tranquil all the time, free from the
influence o raja guna. This would hardly describe Robin - at least he
didn't descri
On 2/9/2014 8:47 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Robin said this passage from Science of Being and the Art of Living
> perfectly described his experience of enlightenment:
>
From what I've read, I'd say that Robin experienced samadhi: saguna
Brahman. If Robin had united with God, he would the
On 2/9/2014 2:07 PM, steve.sun...@yahoo.com wrote:
You're in high form today Judy.
>
It looks to me like Judy is working on Sunday again - judging by her
response times she hasn't left her desk since six o'clock this morning.
It looks like Judy is monitoring all of Steve's messages from her ho
On 2/9/2014 3:21 PM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote:
No one can stop bringing it up and talking about it and trying to use
it to prove Robin actually disliked you and was serious.
>
So, nobody is taking Robin seriously when he threw Judy under the bus -
it was just a trap message, a trick postin
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
Actually, Ann, I don't recall anyone having tried to use it to claim Robin was
serious recently except Richard, who's just trolling. Before that, the last
folks to do it, way back when but months after the posts themselves, were
Curtis and Vaj
I think that's the first time I ever said it, actually.
And it's not that they disagree with me, it's that they do so disagreeably and
prickishly. (Not just with me, others as well.)
<< There are far too many disagreeable, dishonest pricks around here these
days, as far as I'm concerned.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
There are far too many disagreeable, dishonest pricks around here these days,
as far as I'm concerned.
You've been saying that forever!
Actually it only takes a few like yourself and Barry and Share and Richard to
ruin a forum like FFL.
There are far too many disagreeable, dishonest pricks around here these days,
as far as I'm concerned. Actually it only takes a few like yourself and Barry
and Share and Richard to ruin a forum like FFL.
<< You're in high form today Judy. Well I suppose you've got something to
hang your hat
You're in high form today Judy. Well I suppose you've got something to hang
your hat on, even it's being a disagreeable person most of the time.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
Oh, didn't know that. Bully for you. Because I knew you weren't capable of
using the Neo search to
Oh, didn't know that. Bully for you. Because I knew you weren't capable of
using the Neo search to find it.
Barry would be happy to help you (or anybody else) out if it meant you could
diss Robin or me or Ann, so it was a logical assumption.
<< What Judy doesn't realize is that I have acc
What Judy doesn't realize is that I have access to the classic format when I
want, with the "classic" search function. I mentioned once already how this
works with me, but evidently she missed it.
On the other hand, this supposed collaboration between Barry and me is a new
twist for her a
Stevie, you have become a shameless liar in addition to a stupid and obnoxious
twerp.
<< Share, Judy's MO has always been the same. When someone upends her supposed
authority about something, as you have done many times, she simply resorts to
personal attacks.
It is called fallacy ad hom
Actually, Ann, I don't recall anyone having tried to use it to claim Robin was
serious recently except Richard, who's just trolling. Before that, the last
folks to do it, way back when but months after the posts themselves, were
Curtis and Vaj (and Curtis surely knew otherwise; he thought he cou
Share, Judy's MO has always been the same. When someone upends her supposed
authority about something, as you have done many times, she simply resorts to
personal attacks.
It is called fallacy ad hominem.
When it comes to fallacies, it looks like she's got the market cornered.
---In
you'll have to come up with something other than, "I am the authority on this
matter" Put your sniffing out skills on this, and see what you can come up
with.
I'll wait
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
Robin has, as I've already pointed out, described all this in his pos
On 2/9/2014 9:38 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
> Um, after suddenly being thrust into what seemed to be Unity
> Consciousness on that mountain, and then having Maharishi apparently
> confirm it, why would Robin need to study the Scriptures? He was
> living them.
>
Because, it's not prudent to
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
It's called "having fun," Richard. The most fun either of us ever had on FFL,
in fact. We had a wonderful time throwing each other under the bus. And then an
even better time laughing privately at the few gullible fools who thought we
were seri
On 2/9/2014 9:44 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
Sharelogic. As hopeless as Barrylogic, Stevielogic, and Rickylogic.
>
Versus your logic that you think Robin believed his enlightenment was a
union with God? Nobody believes that unless they are delusional. Where
exactly, did Robin equate being
I was addressing Share, not you, Richard.
But Eastern Orthodox Christianity, of course, affirms that God became man in
Jesus Christ, just as Western Christianity does.
Your question makes no sense, BTW. Of course Robin didn't get the idea that
man became God in Jesus Christ from Maharishi
On 2/9/2014 9:49 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
It's called "having fun," Richard. The most fun either of us ever had
on FFL, in fact. We had a wonderful time throwing each other under the
bus. And then an even better time laughing privately at the few
gullible fools who thought we were seriou
On 2/9/2014 10:48 AM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
Do you have something to say relevant to what I wrote?
>
The "separative divide" between Eastern and Western orthodox religions
is that the Western orthodox religion teaches that a man became God in
the person of Jesus Christ. Eastern orthodox
On 2/9/2014 10:00 AM, Share Long wrote:
> in the Gita Maharishi writes that at a certain point it is between the
> devotee and God whether they become one or stay two so that there can
> be that flow of devotion.
>
The key word here is "devotion", Share. Robin's main problem may have
been his b
Ann, it was enough of an event to ride the Vancouver buses with all those jolly
people attending the 2010 Olympics!
I'm with you about Neo and the archives so I probably won't be doing any
searches. And in any case, I was replying to what Judy said the the internal
lack of logic with what Robin
Richard, about UC being unity with God: in the Gita Maharishi writes that at a
certain point it is between the devotee and God whether they become one or stay
two so that there can be that flow of devotion. It is from this and many
Maharishi tapes that I got the idea that UC means union with God
Robin has, as I've already pointed out, described all this in his posts. There
was nothing new in the post Stevie misremembered.
And obviously, as I also pointed out, Ann is not going to reveal any
additional specific details of Robin's private life that he may have mentioned
to her but not
The purpose of studying scriptures is to integrate one's experience of
enlightenment more completely. Also to smooth the process which I understand
can be quite jarring.
On Sunday, February 9, 2014 9:38 AM, "authfri...@yahoo.com"
wrote:
Um, after suddenly being thrust into what seeme
It's called "having fun," Richard. The most fun either of us ever had on FFL,
in fact. We had a wonderful time throwing each other under the bus. And then an
even better time laughing privately at the few gullible fools who thought we
were serious.
Do you think it may have run mostly in one
Sharelogic. As hopeless as Barrylogic, Stevielogic, and Rickylogic.
<< Ann, I was responding to what Judy said that Robin said about the nature of
enlightenment. This is a forum about that, among other topics. Judy used the
phrases enlightened days and genuine enlightenment with regards to Rob
On 2/8/2014 9:21 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
Neither Eastern Orthodox nor Western Christianity permit the view that
humans can become ontologically one with God. That remains the
"seperative divide" between Eastern and Western religions.
>
What "Eastern Orthodox" philosophy supports the not
Um, after suddenly being thrust into what seemed to be Unity Consciousness on
that mountain, and then having Maharishi apparently confirm it, why would Robin
need to study the Scriptures? He was living them. (See my post with the SBAL
quote.)
he never appeared interested in learning more - w
Ann, I was responding to what Judy said that Robin said about the nature of
enlightenment. This is a forum about that, among other topics. Judy used the
phrases enlightened days and genuine enlightenment with regards to Robin. Then
she presented Robin's idea that enlightenment, including his, re
Boy, I'll say. Her "logic" and her "sense" had me pegged as a devout Christian,
if you can wrap your mind around that idiocy. And she has yet to acknowledge
that huge goof. She and Stevie are quite a pair, aren't they?
<< Share, do yourself a favor and don't try using logic. In your case, tha
Actually I'm not "adept" at finding stuff via Neo's advanced search feature;
it's horrendously designed and fundamentally crippled. So I'm afraid you can't
count on me to find stuff. I may get lucky, but it's a crapshoot.
I suggested Barry retrieve your long exchange with Robin because he sti
On 2/8/2014 8:26 PM, steve.sun...@yahoo.com wrote:
Do you think it may have run mostly in one direction, though?
>
The "parody" Robin posted about Judy was very revealing - why would
Robin do that if they were such good friends. It's sort of like Robin
throwing Judy under the bus. Go figure.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
On 2/8/2014 12:53 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
Robin's experience was of union with God. He believes it was a delusion. >
So, it looks like we are agreed: Robin's experience of a "union with God' was
delusional. And, Robin d
So, you say I am mistaken about where he might have met with his friend, but
you don't say where the meetings or get togethers might have taken place. For
all we know it was Starbucks.
You say that I am mistaken that it was not a "confessional", but you don't say
what it was.
All you sa
On 2/8/2014 5:20 PM, emptyb...@yahoo.com wrote:
he never appeared interested in learning more - whether about
Catholic/Orthodox Christianity, Yogic Vedanta or Shankara’s Advaita
Vedanta. I attribute this to a lack of genuine humility although he
was constantly espousing a pseudo-humility.
>
C
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
On 2/8/2014 12:32 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
Let me put it this way: He believes all forms of enlightenment, etc., that
entail the experience of union with God are delusionary. His viewpoint is
strictly Judeo-Christian in
On 2/8/2014 2:58 PM, awoelfleba...@yahoo.com wrote:
God knows he said a lot in his time at FFL so you won't lack for
reading material.
>
Can anyone on this forum point out where Robin posted to FFL that he
believed that enlightenment consisted of being "united with God." If he
did, he is delus
On 2/8/2014 1:21 PM, Share Long wrote:
> My point is that Eastern traditions define enlightenment as union with
> God.
>
Actually, no - "union with God" isn't mentioned in the Upanishads and
not in Patanjali's Yoga Sutras. Of the Six Systems of Hinduism, only one
system is theistic. According t
FWIW, Robin said this passage from Science of Being and the Art of Living
perfectly described his experience of enlightenment:
"The Lord speaks through him, the omnipresent cosmic life gains expression in
his activity, the omniscient is expressed in the limitations of the man's
individual pe
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
Judy I'm going by MY OWN sense of what Robin said, and using logic. Thus if he
said that enlightenment per se is a delusion and he was enlightened. Then he is
saying, according to logic, that he was deluded. And I think he went even
further tha
On 2/8/2014 12:53 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
Robin's experience was of union with God. He believes it was a delusion.
>
So, it looks like we are agreed: Robin's experience of a "union with
God' was delusional. And, Robin did not understand the basics of TM or
yoga. Robin was delusional an
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
No, go look up the fallacy of appeal to authority. You don't know what you're
talking about, no surprise.
You are wrong not because Ann is an authority, but because, duh, you got it
wrong, and the evidence is on the record in the posts in th
Bhagavad-Gita VI:27
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
On 2/8/2014 12:32 PM, authfriend@... mailto:authfriend@... wrote:
Let me put it this way: He believes all forms of enlightenment, etc., that
entail the experience of union with God are delusionary. His viewpoint is
strictly J
On 2/8/2014 12:46 PM, Share Long wrote:
> Another question: was Robin saying that he experienced union with God?
>
Apparently, Share, this is what Robin believed - that he had achieved
"union with God", which was delusional. It is delusional in the sense
that he thought it was true, and delusio
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
Anne, you are saying, "Trust me, because I know what is going on. I'm not
going to tell you anything about it, but I'm in the know"
No I'm not. I am saying the post you retrieved from the archives has nothing
to do with your memory of what
On 2/8/2014 12:32 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
Let me put it this way: He believes all forms of enlightenment, etc.,
that entail the experience of union with God are delusionary. His
viewpoint is strictly Judeo-Christian in that regard: God is wholly,
immutably Other; there can be no ontolog
On 2/8/2014 12:15 PM, authfri...@yahoo.com wrote:
> I believe Robin was sincere in what he said
>
Except of course when Robin was posting a "parody". Go figure.
He can't even acknowledge he got it wrong about Robin never having addressed
Ann directly, a matter of facts on the record. What a moral midget. Life must
really be a terrifying experience for him.
<< Yes Judy. Whatever you say Judy. Appeal to Authority is a card you play
everyday here. On
Unfortunately, even if someone were holding a gun to your head, you would be
utterly unable to come up with any "fantasies and delusions" on my part.
<< You are a funny lady Judy. As I said before, I'll let you run with your
fantasies and delusions. It would not be in your best interest, at
Ann and I have both explained to you, several times each, that "YOUR OWN" sense
of what Robin said, and your use of what you call logic, are seriously flawed.
It appears you are intellectually incapable of grasping that explanation. You
haven't addressed it at all, even to disagree with it; you
Yes Judy. Whatever you say Judy. Appeal to Authority is a card you play
everyday here. Only you call it, "Appeal to My Authority". Basically a big
joke.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
No, go look up the fallacy of appeal to authority. You don't know what you're
talking abou
You are a funny lady Judy. As I said before, I'll let you run with your
fantasies and delusions. It would not be in your best interest, at least in
the short term, to disabuse you of them. Everything eventually comes out in
the wash.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
She is in
Judy I'm going by MY OWN sense of what Robin said, and using logic. Thus if he
said that enlightenment per se is a delusion and he was enlightened. Then he is
saying, according to logic, that he was deluded. And I think he went even
further than that, saying he was under the control of outside a
Missed this earlier...
He didn't say his enlightenment was a delusion. He said enlightenment per se,
although very real and genuine, is a delusion. You've been told this now five
or six times between Ann and me, so now when you say it, it's a lie, because
you know otherwise.
You are atta
No, go look up the fallacy of appeal to authority. You don't know what you're
talking about, no surprise.
You are wrong not because Ann is an authority, but because, duh, you got it
wrong, and the evidence is on the record in the posts in this exchange plus
Robin's post from December 2012. N
She is in the know. On this point, as it happens, so am I. Of course neither of
us is going to tell you anything about Robin's private life that he didn't
divulge here; what are you, nuts?
Ironically, though, as I told you before, he'd already written a number of
times about his friend who "
Ah, now this is Anne we've come to know. No worries. Anne, read Robin's post.
Read the various comments I have made about it. Now, what I am gathering is
that you think I am mistaken! Yes, I managed to pick that up.!
Now, I've told you why I came to the conclusions I've come to. And yo
Anne, you are saying, "Trust me, because I know what is going on. I'm not
going to tell you anything about it, but I'm in the know"
Well, I don't operate that way, and I don't know many who do. So as they say,
and I don't mean this in an impolite way, but put up, or shut up. There is
rea
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
Anne, both you and Judy think that I totally missed the mark in my
recollection of Robin's post from several years ago. I don't think I did miss
the mark, at least by much.
Steve, as I said, I don't really care one way or another but you d
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
Anne,
This post was over a year old. In the body of the post at some point by one
of the participants is mentioned "Starbucks". Now if you wish to fault me over
this detail, or any other detail, no problem. But I stand by the my overall
Now you are making me laugh. Yes Judy, yes. That many holes at least. And
you have called me on each of them. Thank God!
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
Wow, has it been that many holes you've dug for yourself and then couldn't get
out of?
<< How many times have you said
Judy, draw whatever conclusions you wish to draw. It is fine with me. If you
feel I missed the point completely, I am okay with that.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
Nowhere near, Stevie baby. Here's what you claimed:
"And then we have his daily confessional with his friend
Anne,
This post was over a year old. In the body of the post at some point by one
of the participants is mentioned "Starbucks". Now if you wish to fault me over
this detail, or any other detail, no problem. But I stand by the my overall
point that Robin had a friend that appeared to call
God bless you Judy. God bless you.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
Think you can get a little more morally smelly, Stevie-boy? Are you in some
kind of competition with Share?
<< Anne, both you and Judy think that I totally missed the mark in my
recollection of Robin's post
Wow, has it been that many holes you've dug for yourself and then couldn't get
out of?
<< How many times have you said such over the past 17 years? I'd say over a
thousand. >>
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
Translation: He can't figure out how to dig himself out of this h
Think you can get a little more morally smelly, Stevie-boy? Are you in some
kind of competition with Share?
<< Anne, both you and Judy think that I totally missed the mark in my
recollection of Robin's post from several years ago. I don't think I did miss
the mark, at least by much.
Bu
you're boring Judy. no one can beat you in this game of yours. and no
sensible person would want to.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
Stevie-poops, you aren't doing yourself any good with this crap. You aren't
clever enough to patronize anybody; you just make yourself look incr
How many times have you said such over the past 17 years? I'd say over a
thousand.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
Translation: He can't figure out how to dig himself out of this hole he's dug
for himself. Standard Stevie.
<< Anne, for the moment, I am content to let my com
Anne, both you and Judy think that I totally missed the mark in my recollection
of Robin's post from several years ago. I don't think I did miss the mark, at
least by much.
But what is wrong with my feeling that Judy had some attachment to Robin? I
mean she said as much, (and I am not goi
He's been well trained by Barry. What do you expect?
Is this where things start to gravitate below the belt? And if so, why Steve?
Is it not possible to engage in a discussion without getting personal and
far-fetched in your unfounded theories?
Judy, you will just have to live with another unfulfilled desire.
---In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, wrote:
Nope, as I said, Stevie-poo (and Ann has said as well), nowhere near. You got
it wrong, that's obvious. Acknowledge it (or not), and move on.
Judy, I don't want to throw cold w
1 - 100 of 188 matches
Mail list logo
