🚀 go-pugleaf

Kent Wills wrote:
> On Tue, 25 Apr 2006 14:42:56 GMT, samurai <sam@rai.ki> wrote:
> 
>> Kent Wills wrote:
>>> On Mon, 24 Apr 2006 22:59:02 GMT, samurai <sam@rai.ki> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> 	Huh? I don't even see anything even remotely Bob related here.
>>>>> Odd that you seem to.
>>>> Odd that Bob lives in Az. and YOU are now posting here, instead of your 
>>>> usual gig in AFBL.
>>>>
>>> 	Odd that I'm reading and posting from ia.talk.misc.  I don't
>>> check AFBL all that much anymore.  Once a week is the norm, unless
>>> something exciting catches me.
>> Odd that so MANY of your posts are there:
> 
> 	Odd that you dishonestly failed to mention that the bulk were
> cross posts from misc.legal.  In fact, when one clicks on my name, one
> finds only ONE post that wasn't made from misc.legal in the first
> list. 

I don;t care how many OTHER groups were on the x-post list, you were 
primarily posting about BOB!

> 	The next most recent AFBL post listed is for Feb. 4.
> 	Now quite what one would expect for an obsessed person.

Squirm worm, it's your record on display:

>> http://groups.google.com/group/alt.fan.bob-larson/about?hl=en
>>
>> This month's top posters
>> 65 	  	for...@it.com
>> 63 	  	compu...@gmail.com (kent)
>>
>> All time top posters
>> 7597 	  	jacob...@pacbell.net
>> 5505 	  	Range...@concentric.net
>> 5109 	  	j...@thecodezone.com
>> 2895 	  	compu...@gmail.com (kent)
>>
>>>>>> your opinions have proven to be little more 
>>>>>> than revisionist slime from the get go.
>>>>> 	I post the truth.  You don't have to like it, but you do have
>>>>> to accept it.
>>>> You wouldn't know the truth if it walked up and bit you in the ass.
>>> 	Projection transference noted.
>> Psychobabble bullshit noted.
> 
> 	It's called truth.  

You have none to offer, never do.

>>>>> 	And what do you have against LEGAL immigration?
>>>> Nothing at all.
>>>>
>>> 	You must,
>> You lie again, as per always.
> 
> 	You took a contrary position to Just Cocky, and his position
> has consistently been PRO legal immigration.

Mine is not against it either.

>>> since you have taken a position contrary to Just
>>> Cocky and me.  We are very much PRO legal immigration.
>> Of course you are, it's how YOU got here isn't it?
> 
> 	It's how *I* got here.  I don't know the circumstances of Just
> Cocky.  He may have been born in the U.S.

And we need more responsive quotas and standards - that's my position.

What say you?

> 
>>>>> The tone of
>>>>> your posts gives me the impression that you are against it.  If I have
>>>>> your position wrong, I apologize.  If I have it correct, please
>>>>> explain why LEGAL immigration is bad.
>>>> LEGAL immigration could be better if we had a more responsive quota 
>>>> allocation based on real world skills needs in the US.
>>> 	Since legal immigration is what Just Cocky has been promoting,
>>> please explain the beef you have with him.
>> Since I just explained my position, explain what beef YOU have with it!
> 
> 	As I've stated, I'm very much PRO legal immigration.  I
> encourage anyone who wishes to come here to do so, but to do so
> LEGALLY.  Just Cocky has taken the same position.  As such, I can not
> have a beef with his position.

I don't want just "anyone".

I want people whose work skills and desires make them GOOD candidates.