"Dan Pressnell" <dan_pressnell@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
news:j3CDb.83215$%h4.70850@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "eepeep" <me@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> news:Xns9452D9CE7919Eabc123unme@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> "Dan Pressnell" <dan_pressnell@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in
>> news:dWtDb.79820$b01.1697558@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> > Under the shadowy pretense of removing servitude,
>> > He will himself usurp the people and city:
>> > He will do worse because of the deceit of the young prostitute,
>> > Delivered in the field reading the false poem.
>> >
>> > That prediction is that Abraham Lincoln would be involved in a ***
>> > scandal in Iowa.
>>
>> Why do you think that would apply to Abraham Lincoln? Just because
>> of the first line? It wasn't a pretense of removing servitude, he
>> really did remove servitude. There are plenty of other instances
>> throughout history that would fit it better, even down to a personal
>> level.
>
> Oh yeah? I'm just playing the same game yoiu Nosty-lovers play.
>
> If Lincoln had been involed in a *** scandal, then that prediction
> would be a hit, right?
>
> So, he wasn't involved in a *** scandal, and that makes it a miss.
>
> Get it? You twist your interpretations so that you find hits out of
> vague crap. Now allow me the same, okay?
>
> Dan
Ah, I see, you're just a troll. Since no one had posted in this group
for a while, it seemed like a good way to get people talking anyways.
But since you're just a Nosty-hater, I can see we won't get any rational
discourse out of you. *plonk*
EepEep
|
