It’s too bad that stupidity isn’t painful…

December 29, 2006

I was just over at reading an article covering an AP/AOL “News” poll. The main point of the article was to highlight the fact that President Bush was voted both Hero of the Year, as well as, Villain of the Year. Somehow it puzzles me that he can be voted both, but that really is not the point.

According to the article when asked the villain who first came to mind, President Bush beat out even Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein by what was called a landslide. I hate to say it but it seems that the majority of Americans have forgotten what terrible atrocities these two have sponsored and committed themselves.

I think all the Americans who no longer support our President to the point of saying he is worse than the terrorists should get a special prize. I think maybe an all expenses paid vacation to one of the newest resorts, somewhere like Afghanistan or Iraq. Maybe they would reconsider their poll choices, but maybe I’m wrong. It is possible that vacationing with a terrorist cell may be a treat, they might be great hosts. Some of the vacation activities would include assisting with the execution and beheading of local citizens, seminars on proper placement of IEDs in order to cause maximum damage to a HMMWV, and proper instruction on proper use of suicide vests in order to kill the most civilians possible.


50 Responses to “It’s too bad that stupidity isn’t painful…”

  1. Nephi on December 29th, 2006 4:07 pm


    The problem with your opinion here is that most of the world agrees that Bush is the Villain of the Year - maybe even the Century.

    Notwithstanding, I personally cannot think of a single reason why Bush should not wear that moniker. He has screwed up this planet more than any other person, alive or dead. Sad thing is that we Americans still let the criminal Bush get away with it.

    “Bush is fear, and without fear, Bush is nothing.”

  2. john davidson on December 29th, 2006 4:31 pm

    You’re on your own pal. Good luck. I’m glad I’m not you.

  3. Anthony on December 29th, 2006 7:30 pm

    Really Nephi? I really don’t think you could find a single person who would honestly say Bush is the villain of the century. If you can please let me know and put them in touch with me.

  4. Nephi on December 29th, 2006 9:30 pm


    I should clarify my definition of “century.” I meant from the start of the 21st century, or from the year 2000. I’ll reserve villain of the past one hundred years for Stalin or Hitler; albeit in the minds of many throughout the world, Bush is not far behind.

    As for others who feel this way, I suspect certain of the individuals polled recently by the Military Times - over 40% of whom disagree with Bush’s decision to go to Iraq and his subsequent handling of the war - would fall in the category of agreeing that Bush truly is Villain of the Century.

    Let’s ask CJ and Cpl.M over at ASP, about a year from now, what they think. Their upcoming follow-up tours of duty in Iraq are sure to afford them new perspectives somewhat different from their current perspectives re the thousands that have been slaughtered following Bush’s cowboy neo-con philosophy.

  5. on December 29th, 2006 10:04 pm

    Nephi, I don’t need a new perspective that my upcoming deployment will afford me. I send people into combat almost daily. I also process soldiers returning from combat almost daily. I KNOW what’s going on over there and I don’t need the media to tell me, unlike you and your friends. In just the past two weeks, I’ve spoken to no less than nine Soldiers returning from Iraq and not one of them feel the same way you do. These aren’t support soldiers either. These are door-kickers, MPs, MI, and infantry.

    So, who do you think I should believe about the realities in Iraq? You and your Bush-hating rants and kool-aid stained news print, or the people who are physically there? I’ll pick the troops, thanks. You can’t change what I’ve seen with my own eyes, heard with my own ears, and smelled with my own mouth.

  6. on December 29th, 2006 10:05 pm

    Anthony, this is your site, but I urge you to use caution in expending too much energy on Nephi and his “tribal” buddies.

  7. Anthony [ASM] on December 29th, 2006 11:08 pm


    I understand that you are only referring to the 21st century, but I’d like to dive a bit further into the subject. Since we have only experienced 7% of the 21st century it really doesn’t seem fair to judge someone for all of a century that 93% of hasn’t occurred. I’ve noticed you seem to like percentages and other quantifiable facts so I’ll ensure I stick to them.

    Lets just take a look back at the last 100 years. Adolf Hitler and the Nazi regime took the lives of around 11 million innocent people. Approximately 1.5 million of those innocent were children, how much of a threat could they have been? Just another example is Saddam Hussein using chemical weapons against thousands of his own people.

    Last time I checked President Bush has not issued and orders to U.S. troops to start killing innocent civilians, or shoot every Jew seen on the street. I haven’t received any orders lately to go kill everyone in my apartment complex who doesn’t support the war.

    This argument could continue for days, and I could continue quoting specific Human Rights Violations and atrocities against innocent people, but I understand that will not lead anywhere. If you would like more information on these topics, please proceed to

    The bottom line is the United States Military is a volunteer force. Every man or woman serving raised their right hand and either swore to god or affirmed that they would serve their country to the death if need be. This country is full of strong minded/willed individuals who will always volunteer to serve their country and fellow man to ensure our ways of freedom are protected.

    Reply - \r\n\r\nThe bottom line is the United States Military is a volunteer force. Every man or woman serving raised their right hand and either swore to god or affirmed that they would serve their country to the death if need be. This country is full of strong minded\/willed individuals who will always volunteer to serve their country and fellow man to ensure our ways of freedom are protected.’); return false;”>Quote
  8. Nephi on December 30th, 2006 12:25 pm


    Let me clear on one thing upfront: I have every respect for the soldiers who serve this country, it is their boss - George Bush - for whom I despise.

    Some of us were horrified with the invasion of Iraq and argued vehemently aginst proceeding with such an absurd idea. Some of us were equally horrified to hear cowboy bravado comments such as “bring em on” being uttered by Bush. And now we have to watch Bush looking all solemn with his circle of advisors in Crawford standing behind him looking equally as solemn, all trying to figure out how to stop the madness we created.

    Great, we got Saddam and this minor puppet of a dictator is now dead. And it only cost three thousand American soldiers their lives and countless others serious injury that the American taxpayer will pay for generations to treat.

    This war was about one thing - revenge. And thousands of our bravest are paying the ultimate sacrifice as a means to that end. And to me, that makes Bush a villain like no other.

    I thank you for your service and wish you, along with your ASM and ASP colleagues, the best.

  9. downhomegirl on December 30th, 2006 12:50 pm

    Anthony thanks so much for your site. A voice of reason among so many that aren’t. Wow, I am so glad to see that the ONE THING this war has been about has changed from Oil, to Revenge. Makes a little more sense but is still way off base, but that’s a liberal for ya!!

    I thank God every day for men like you Anthony, who are willing to do the right thing and stand on the wall for all of us. I am eternally grateful to you and all those like you who do serve and protect our country.

    I find it pathetic that people speak so badly of not only the President, but of our country and the men and women who make extreme sacrifices to defend it. Arm chair quarterbacks are seldom useful, and are most often harmful. Lucky for them your sweat goes into protecting their rights to say the horrible things they do.

    Again, thanks.

  10. Nephi on December 30th, 2006 2:21 pm


    Actually, liberals are quite supportive of the troops, and my comments on this site are no different in this regard. Yes, I can support the troops and despise the president for what he has done to our country. These are not mutually exclusive positions.

    Moreover, your note about shifting from oil to revenge raises the equally shifting positions of the Bush administration - from possession of WMD, to involvement with 9/11, to involvement with Osama to, etc., and, finally, to being generally good guys and ridding a hapless people of a bad guy dictator. If only I had a nickle for everytime Bush shifted his reasons for invading Iraq …

  11. Terri on December 30th, 2006 5:50 pm

    Ya know Nephi, you’re quick to quote the poll from Military Times, but what I find interesting is that their disclaimer is 40% OF THE SOLDIERS POLLED. That brings several questions to my mind, like: What percentage of the US Military actually participated in this poll? Were these troops hand selected in advance, because they knew they disapproved? How was this poll conducted? How many US Military Troops were actually polled? How indicitive of the entire US Military, are the troops that were polled?

  12. Nephi on December 30th, 2006 6:23 pm


    I can’t answer the questions you pose. These questions typify all polls, which necessarily include a statistical margin of error and are subject to garbage in/garbage out.

    Having said that, I would note that the poll does evidence a trend that Bush is fast losing support of the military for (a) the decision to go to war and (b) prosecution of the war following that decision. The exact number of military members who disagree with Bush on these topics is open for debate, but I don’t think we can simply discount the trend that the poll evidences.

    Finally, it should not go without suggestion that if the poll results were the same as last year - i.e., approx. 60% approval rating - then those results would be viewed with a whole lot less criticism re accuracy by Bush supporters making a case for support by military personnel.

    At any rate, just some thoughts in response to your post. And my best wishes to you for the New Year!

  13. downhomegirl on December 30th, 2006 6:29 pm


    Bush has said all along that there was an involvement with 9/11, that Al Quaida was present in Iraq, which they were whether you and your liberal buddies want to believe it or not. Even the 9/11 commission found that. His position hasn’t changed. New information has come to light and perhaps he has shared more of his reasons with us. Who knows. We are not privy to what goes on in the oval office. (I wish we didn’t know so much of what transpired in the Clinton oval office. Just disgusting.) As for the the rest of it, well I will consider the source. And one only has to look to the floor of the congress and senate to see the shifting (running) of the democrats from one position to the other (Reed, Kennedy, Pelosi, Clinton, Biden, and all the rest of them.) on the very same issues. So your hatred of Bush for these things and condoning and support and cheering of THEIR new found control is totally laughable. Let me remind you of how often the Clinton Administration changed its mind on important issues. One only had to stick their finger in their mouth and hold it up to the wind for that to have happened. And I will guarantee we will be in for more of the same if Hillary gets (God forbid) elected. You really are gonna burst a blood vessel in your brain or something with this stuff. Got jello????

  14. downhomegirl on December 30th, 2006 6:36 pm


    So we are totally discounting the amazing numbers of Soldiers and Marines who are reenlisting as a no confidence vote in the President and the War, and the job they are doing? Is that what you are saying? What is the trend an indication of there?

  15. Nephi on December 30th, 2006 6:42 pm


    Well, let’s dissect this a bit, shall we? If Bush has been saying all along there is a connection between Saddam and 9/11 and Saddam and al Quaida, then it should not be terribly difficult to identify those connections, should it?

    Just what were those connections, pre 2001, that argue for a credible and supportable conclusion that Saddam played some material part in 9/11? Or is that secret information?

  16. Cliff on December 30th, 2006 6:48 pm


    Would it be safe to say you don’t want it to be true that the poll is true? God forbid the poll had been conducted by Moveon or the ACLU.

    But it wasn’t. It was the Military Times. Boo hoo. If you posessed a shred of intergrity you would clap the trap and deal with it.

    Ha Ha

  17. downhomegirl on December 30th, 2006 6:49 pm

    well why dont you go look it up on wikipedia?

  18. Nephi on December 30th, 2006 6:51 pm

    Wikipedia? You are directing me to a source of information that is laughed at over at ASP? Why don’t you just tell me?

  19. downhomegirl on December 30th, 2006 6:54 pm

    Well perhaps I would like you to exercise your mind a little. Oh and I see you conveniently dismissed the info on re-enlistments.

  20. Nephi on December 30th, 2006 7:05 pm


    Ok. I will go and see what I can find on Wikipedia.

    As to the re-enlistment issue, I can dispense with that argument (or at least call your premise into question) be referring you to the very questions (or similar questions) raised by Terri re the Military Times poll.

    I do not refute the fact that folks are re-enlisting. But that fact begs the questions (among many others) of how many and what kind of incentives are being offered to encourage re-enlistment? We should discuss these questions before drawing a conclusion that because certain military members are re-enlisting, then the poll is inaccurate or support for Bush among the military is not fading.

  21. Nephi on December 30th, 2006 7:11 pm


    Thank you for sending me to Wikipedia. The following is a direct quote from the wiki entitled: “Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda.”

    “The consensus of intelligence experts has been that these contacts never led to an operational relationship, and that consensus is backed up by reports from the independent 9/11 Commission as well as by the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, whose 2006 report of Phase II of its investigation into prewar intelligence reports concluded that there was no evidence of Saddam Hussein ties to al-Qaeda.”

    Care to take another shot at this issue?

  22. downhomegirl on December 30th, 2006 7:29 pm

    Ok, now that you have proved my point about “wiki” try this one.

    And I don’t find it at all strange that you would dismiss my question. You seem to have a real problem with someone telling you something and you can’t dispute it.

  23. Terri on December 30th, 2006 7:40 pm

    Nephi, think I can probably answer some of your question about incentives. Incentives, ie reenlistment bonuses aren’t given to everyone. There are several factors that determine if you’re elgible for one of them. One being, the length of time you already have in-service. For instance, my significant other, whom you know as SNAFU on ASP, reenlisted this summer and he didn’t receive any reenlistment bonuses or any other kind of incentive, because of the length of time that he’s already had in the military. Other factors that weigh into bonuses and incentives, are the MOS (job) that you’re in. Some have reenlistment bonuses, some don’t. Another factor is, are you willing to be retrained in an MOS that is short staffed. Your job performance, in your chosen MOS. Those are just a few of the factors that affect if a person will get a bonus or not to reenlist. So, that isn’t necessarily the reason that people are reenlisting, Nephi, because not everyone qualifies for those bonuses. Which brings me to this…. wonder what other reasons a soldier might have to reenlist?

  24. Nephi on December 30th, 2006 7:49 pm


    Ok. First, let me wish you a Happy New Year, and I truly hope that salutation is not lost amidst the crossfire.

    Second, what “point” do you refer about the “wiki”? You seem to suggest that you were using me to prove your point - what is your “point”?

    Third, notwithstanding your response to the former question, you provided me and this blog with a source of information to support an assertion - that links between Saddam and al Qaeda and 9/11 existed prior to 9/11 and were material to the to the 9/11 operation. Your own recommended source proved your premise, assertion and conclusion to be false.

    Fourth, the source you now site relies completely on former Iraqi military personnel. Are you saying to me and this blog that you put more faith in former Iraqi military officers than you do in the independent 9/11 commission and the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence? I’ll bet the US military readers on this blog appreciate that!

    And finally, you dig a pretty deep hole for yourself, DHG, but I am always willing to be convinced otherwise. Go for it! Convince me.

    PS Just for your info, Saddam and Osama hated one another. Exercise your mind a little and investigate that assertion.

  25. Nephi on December 30th, 2006 7:57 pm


    Thanks for the info on incentives and re-enlistment. I didn’t know this info and it is helpful.

    I don’t know the answer to your question. I suppose that many in the military enjoy what they are doing and re-enlist for that purpose (I never suggested that such could not be the case). Or maybe it is the only job they know.

    My only point was to suggest that the Military Times poll provides evidence of a trend by the military against Bush. Your own knowledge of statistics must certainly allow that possibility, notwithstanding statistics that might move one to an opposite conclusion.

  26. Terri on December 30th, 2006 8:27 pm

    I tend to mistrustful of polls that fail to give you the number of people that were actually polled. I think that would go a long way in answering as to how representative that poll really is, of the feelings of our military personnel as a whole. It tends to make me suspect that maybe they only polled a very small percentage of them, which to me, would not indicate the mindset of the entire military.

  27. Nephi on December 30th, 2006 8:51 pm


    Cliff over at has a post entitled “Large Majority of US Troops Disaprove (sic) of Bush ‘The Decider’” that contains posts to and with some pertinent information.

    After now reviewing this information myself, I will concede that the number of respondents is smaller than I originally thought but, then again, political polls on a national level are remarkably accurate based on a surprisingly small number of respondents.

    Again, my point is only to suggest that the poll evidences wanning numbers of supporters. Only time will tell.

    Good chattin’. Gotta run home and get some sleep for the real deal tomorrow.

  28. Terri on December 30th, 2006 8:59 pm

    Yes Nephi, I’ve read Cliff’s post and the articles he referred to. And my point was and still is, that I don’t see this polls as being indicitive of the mindset of the entire military, but instead of only the few that were polled. Is that representative of the mindset of the entire military? We really don’t have any way of knowing, because we don’t know what types of controls they had in place when they conducted that poll/study. I believe that I’ve said before, that I would really like to see the results of a study conducted of every enlisted member of the military, as to their mindset concerning these matters. I can say honestly, that this poll does not represent what I’m hearing on a daily basis in my job on Fort Hood.

  29. downhomegirl on December 30th, 2006 9:19 pm

    Well I can see you find no humor in being told to use such garbage as a resource(as a rhetorical response). I also see that you are totally incapable of looking anything up for yourself and refuse to accept the fact that there could be connections to anything.

    Are you denying the existence of Salman Pak? Do you not find it too much of a coincidence that the terrorists who were training there were using an airplane just like the ones that were hijacked on 9/11?

    Are you perhaps denying now that there were no chemical plants for WMD in Iraq?

    There are many other resources, exercise your own mind and go look them up for yourself. And quite frankly I don’t care if YOU believe me or not, I consider the source.

    You and your “lies and pooh pooh theory” are not going to make us any safer. And you can argue all you want about that Bush made us less safe. But if that is so, why has America lulled itself into complacency again? Think about that one. We have a very short attention span as a nation. And the farther from the incident, the more lax we become. I am not willing to risk my family’s life on that one for you.

    And I hope you have a good New Year too.

  30. downhomegirl on December 30th, 2006 11:21 pm

    a correction.

    it should say are you now denying there were chemical plants. Just so we are clear.

  31. Anthony [ASM] on December 31st, 2006 10:29 am


    It appears that both of you have the exact same IP address,, and are the exact same person. Please do not post as two people anymore, your opinion is just as well received as one person. If I see this again I will be forced to ban your IP. If you have any questions or comments about this subject please send me an email, the link is at the top of the page.

  32. One Utah » Blog Archive » Freeper Ladies Re-Write History on December 31st, 2006 10:52 am

    [...] There WAS a connection between Saddam and 9/11. DownhomeGirl December 30, 2006 6:29 pm says, (You’ll have to scroll down as this site does not link to specific comments) [...]

  33. Terri on December 31st, 2006 11:02 am

    Be careful Anthony, those folks at OneUtah don’t like being called on their charades. ;-) Next thing ya know, they’ll be using your blog as the subject of their posts on their site. Welcome to the club! LMAO!

  34. downhomegirl on December 31st, 2006 11:46 am

    awwww, Nephi you naughty naughty boy!!!

  35. Cliff on December 31st, 2006 12:19 pm

    I am not Nephi. CJ can confirm that Nephi posts from another IP often. Additionally, most networks show as one IP.

    Funny thing is, everyone here (including you) is essentially anonymous EXCEPT ME!

    You know my full name, what I look like, and it ain’t too hard to find out pretty much everything you want to know about me.

    How American of you to suggest that people who no longer support Bush should leave the country. Is it because they are traitors for changing their minds?

    What about those of us who hated Bush the minute we discovered he is a rich frat boy preppy with a fake Texas accent?

    Should we leave the country too? Cuz if your buying, I’m in.

  36. Anthony [ASM] on December 31st, 2006 1:40 pm


    I would have to ask that you stop defending U.S. Service Members. You continually seem to take the point of view that we need your defense, that the President has wronged us. I will refer back to my previous where I stated that we all VOLUNTEERED. Nobody forced us to raise our right hands, and we can leave if we want to. So please stop defending us, we don’t need your help.

  37. downhomegirl on December 31st, 2006 3:57 pm

    One Utah, that was so nice of y’all to post that. But ya know what, y’all either don’t know what a Freeper is or a big assumption has been made, mistakenly, for which I will be rather generous and forgive you. Y’all shouldn’t go makin generalizations bout people you are attacking hon. It’s just not nice.

    Now, as for Nephi, darlin, you seem to be having a bad day now aren’t ya hon?? So I’ll be nice and give you a little something to make your work easier for ya.

    How’s that headache now darlin? Better I hope?? Hope y’all have a fabulous New Year!!

  38. Cliff on December 31st, 2006 4:38 pm

    Hi Anthony,

    Interesting concept Sir. Are you suggesting that you are the sole defender of our troops and that my support is unwelcome?

    How do you reconcile this position with the accusation that Americans who do not support this war or Bush therefore do not support the troops?

    Is is possible that your position was similarly responsible for causing people to spit on returning Viet Nam Vets?

    What if I can name a dozen or say 100 Iraq Vets who endorse me as their ‘defender’. Would that ease your concern?

    Thank you for your thoughtful consideration.

    Best Wishes for the New Year.

  39. Cliff on December 31st, 2006 4:41 pm

    Dear Downhomegirl,

    You are right. I have no idea what a ‘Freeper’ is. I feel like such a heel.

    Please accept my apology. I would sincerely appreciate learning from you; what IS a ‘Freeper’?

    Best Wishes for a Peaceful New Year

    Your Humbled Student,


  40. Cliff on December 31st, 2006 4:44 pm


    BTW, Nephi has just arrived at my home after a day skiing. He will likely be posting here before heading to his own home (with your permission).

    I must go pick up my parents at the airport and will not return until, well who knows. Its New Years.

    Really, we are not the same person.


  41. Terri on December 31st, 2006 5:00 pm

    Funny Cliff but I’m not anonymous. I use my real name and also have a link to my page, where anyone, if they wishes can see exactly what I look like, what I do for a living and pretty much anything you want to know about me. I know several of the others who post here and they’ve taken no pains to hide who they are either. So, your observation that EVERYONE here is anonymous except you is a bit off base.

  42. Anthony [ASM] on December 31st, 2006 5:01 pm


    That is wonderful that I know your name and have your picture. I couldn’t give two shits who you are and what you look like. In my opinion your just another coward with a computer and a blog.

    I will have to ask that you keep your comments to a bit more of a minimum. You posted 3 comments within 5 minutes of each other. Please take all your thoughts and compile them into one coherent comment. Maybe you should start outlining, you seem to have allot to say.

    Your stupidity continues to astound me. I have no idea what point you are trying to convey anymore. It seems your ideas jump all over the board, are you high?

    I’m sick of this discussion and must end it now. I have plenty of beer to drink and very little time. Happy New Year to all!

    P.S. - I used to have my entire bio posted here, but because of comments I’ve received from wackos like yourself I had to remove it.  Don’t need you or Nephi showing up at my door.

  43. downhomegirl on December 31st, 2006 5:12 pm


    Because you have been such a sweetheart and apologized so nicely I will accept it, graciously, as a lady should. Now,if y’all would like to go on over to Urban Dictionary at this link,

    I’m sure you will find what a freeper is. And I can assure you hon, that that is certainly not me. Not in any sense of the word. I let no man give me my opinions. I do not need a man for anything hon, especially not to help me make up my mind. I am after all a woman through and through and we like to be free to change our minds and men just like to nail you down.

    Ok, now I explained that to you, so maybe you could explain that nasty little thing you put in that post down below about someone leaving the country. Did I miss something?

    Thanks hon, you have a very Happy New Year.

  44. Nephi on December 31st, 2006 5:12 pm


    Thank you once again for pointing to me to a source of information that, at least in your mind, proves that a material connection, pre-9/11, existed between Saddam and Al Qaeda, or that Saddam played a material role in carrying out the attacks. Now, I refer you to the following passage that appears at the bottom of the article:

    “Not all of this information may be accurate, but it is compelling. Hayes even admits that it does not necessarily prove that Iraq and al Qaeda worked together to plan and conduct the 9/11 attacks.”

    Care to take another shot? You are batting 0 in 3 at this point.

  45. Terri on December 31st, 2006 5:16 pm

    Yes but Nephi, that same sentence at the end could ALSO mean that downhomegirl is correct. So I’d say on that one, if anything, no one won and it’s a draw!

  46. downhomegirl on December 31st, 2006 5:27 pm


    If I were being told to only use one name on a blog and trying to make people look and feel stupid, which you didn’t do to me by the way because from reading your posts here you have no real interest in anything anyone has to say, I think I would be a little more humble hon!! But that’s just me. I have manners. You seem to like to be vicious and attack people. I feel bad for you hon. Really I do. I wish you really knew who you were so that we could have a nice reasonable discussion. But since you don’t well, I guess that accounts for your really bad mood. You go have your self a little bubbly hon and have yourself a real good time. Maybe you will be able to figure out who y’all are in the morning.

  47. Nephi on December 31st, 2006 5:36 pm


    I agree. This one leads to a wash. But we are still without definitive proof that any such connection being advocated by DHGirl existed.

  48. Cliff on December 31st, 2006 10:03 pm

    Sir Anthony,

    I’ve been called stupid before I must admit, but never by someone who spells ‘a lot’ allot. But hey, no biggy right? Spelling is not a prerequisite (a test you must pass) before they give ya live ammo.

    Truth is, if’n yer too smart, they try to keep ya outta the meat grinder. You know, friendly fire being what it is’n all.

  49. Anthony [ASM] on January 1st, 2007 9:44 am


    Thanks for the spelling correction, I knew you’d be good for something. Maybe you should follow me around, be my personal proofer.

    I am done with this conversation, and no longer can accept your opinion as valid. Neither you or your alter ego Nephi seem to put together any valid arguments any longer, just a bunch of whining.

  50. Nephi on January 1st, 2007 2:42 pm


    I take exception to the “whinning” remark. Maybe you can point out to me the precise moment when the discussion ended and the whinning commenced. That way, I will be certain not to repeat the whine.

Got something to say?