Re:William takes Judy to the "woodshed"
Date:3/17/2004 9:23:45 AM Eastern Standard Time
From:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Reply-to:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
To:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent from the Internet
AMEN BILL! At the time of this mailing I haven't read Judy's response but, why do I think that I and, perhaps others can anticipate both the content and tone forthcoming? PS-Judy: Bill's really offered you an Olive Branch in his communication so, why not accept it with thanks? Lance.From: Wm. Taylor
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: March 17, 2004 09:08
Subject: Re: Re: [TruthTalk] tough being a Christian
Judy wrote > You, Lance, and John appear to be immersed in a mixture of philosophy and theology with some scripture and this combination seems to draw DavidM but is not what I am about.
You make a lot of assumptions here. One might think we (the-three-of-us-and-David-sometimes) were joined at the hips. I don't know much about John, for instance, other than we struck a cord via our common escape from the legalisms and lashings of the c of C. Why not stay away from blanket attachments. If you don't like us; that's one thing. Be honest
GENTS & JUDY,
NOW THAT IS WHAT I CALL A GOOD HEADLINE----PUNCHY, SUCCINCT, ON-MESSAGE, ALL WITH WHAT THE AD-BOYS AND DAVID MILLER CALL "SEASONED WITH SALT"!! I AM SURE THAT JUDY PREFERS BEING PUT ON FAIR NOTICE. WE WILL SEE IF SHE GETS SO ENAMORED OF HER NAME IN THE HEADLINE THAT SHE JUST MELTS INTO WARM FUZZIES RE A RESPONSE---IF ONE AT ALL. EXCELLENT--ANY NEWSPAPER WOULD HIRE YOU FOR THE CITY DESK TO WRITE HEADERS.
---JIM ELSMAN
