Replies

You have not gotten a substantive response to your alleged to inquiries because you are personally unworthy of a response and the quality of your statements is unworthy of the readers' attention:

1) you have not withdrawn your charge.

2) instead you have taken refuge in semantics-you say you did not make a "charge" but you certainly made an insinuation. And an insinuation of fraud and deceit!

3) after making such an insinuation and hiding childishly behind semantics when you were called on the boorishnish of your conduct, you then accuse me of not behaving "like a man."

4) in doing so you behaved cowardly and repeated your original offense ad hominem.

5) then, you compound it with this remark: "Another chance to drop the fuscia tutu and put your "biggy boy" pants back on"

6) two or three times now you have led the reader to believe that the following is a quote taken somewhere from one of my posts. I have no recollection of such a statement being made by me. I have posted well over 5000 times, perhaps 10,000 times, on this forum so it is quite possible that those are my words but a decent man would provide a citation. Perhaps the quotation belongs to Dark wolf 377? I'm entitled to the context so that I can write a response if I choose to, which is unlikely in view of your conduct.

7) in leaving the reader with the impression that I have made the statement you quote, you have possibly misled the reader, you've certainly confused me. You do not debate in a decent and honorable fashion because you do not provide context or citation.

8) repeating your points in bold type does not make them cogent it makes them annoying, they remain what they have always been, bluster.

You have not helped the reputation of this forum and you have certainly not advanced the cause of Sarah Palen and you never will do either until you learn to behave decently.

"A substantive response to my alleged to inquiries?"

My God. Are you drinking, or sniffing glue?

At least learn how to spell "Palin" if you want to be taken seriously. It does no good to pull on those "biggy boy" pants to try and impress the FReepers if they just keep falling around your ankles and tripping you up.

The puffed-up, self-absorbed poppinjays who post tomish, massive-paragraphed non-sequitirs obviously cut-and-pasted from someone else's work (without attribution!) in a blowhard attempt to avoid addressing a rebuttal wherein their original assertion was "PWNED!" is disgusting, lame-assed and transparent.

And what's with always posting the oval photo of that old fag under all your ridiculous blather? Is that supposed to make you seem serious or believable? Because it doesn't... it just looks limp and frisky.

Take a hike, Lubo.

;^\

Oh, and I did a little research. See, I knew that you were just cutting-and-pasting when you posted that huge vomitous fake article in reply to my annhialating your non-point.

You have been re-hashing that stupid garbage in response to unsuspecting FReepers since at least October, 2006. As proven on this thread here, post # 29.:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1711516/posts

Any time someone overreacts so vehemently to a simple prank line, it's a clue as to their having something to hide... some devious deception they don't want exposed, as it would make them look not like the honorable victim that they are pretending to be, rather it would confirm that they themselves are possessed of the lack of integrity they are trying to pin on another with their vile subterfuge.

You've been "outed." Now leave me alone, phony.

;^\