Re: Welcome to the Big Time, Bourdais

"Mike P" <privacy@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:64a457F2atirmU1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
> "." <.@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
news:5APDj.32258$yk5.14864@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > "Mike P" <privacy@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote in message
> > news:649d76F2a86dlU1@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> >> <big snip to make this more readable
> >>
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I suspect you will counter that by saying that Seabass never
beat
> >> >> > anyone
> >> >> > good in Champcar... which is just the same as AGR in the IRL
> >> >> >
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Mike P
> >> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Wow, what a truly pathetic attempt at a rebuttal, and it
> >> > only took two attempts and at least an hour and forty
> >> > six minutes at that. Btw, I don't remember Wendlinger
> >> > being all that fat or whining (the one thing that chumps
> >> > truly are champions at).
> >>
> >> Unlike you Mr Dot, I have a life outside usenet, hence it took me so
long
> > to
> >> reply.
> >
> > That's of course total crap and meant as a dodge, you're
> > an exceptionally egregious and failed bull**** artist. The
> > "big snip" was of course a pathetic attempt to conceal
> > that glaringly conspicuous fact, which of course also
> > miserably failed.
> >
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.s****t.cart/msg/c716dcd1694d8211
> >
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.s****t.cart/msg/fc65106c44eb3e93
> > You know goddamned good and well that you had
> > already responded to that post and that it took you
> > nearly two hours to conceive and compose even
> > more of your inimitable (then again, who'd want to
> > copy it) brand of deception in another reply.about
> > it. Just who in the hell do you think you're kidding?
>
>
> Oddly, I have no idea what the **** you are on about.

I don't find it at all odd that someone who doesn't know what
the **** he's talking about has a reading comprehension problem.

>23:04 UK time, I
>went
> to bed shortly after. With my wife. You know, a woman!! Have you seen
> one?ever? 8:35am UK time, I'm having breakfast, and just decided to see
what
> ****e you had come up with. The usual repetetive toss by the looks of
> things.
>
> As far as I can see, the snip was to make it easier to read. My
newsreader
> keeps things in threads, I just got sick of reading down it.

Really?! That unable to read and accurately interpret the
spoonfed google links I provided are you?

The earlier:
Mon, 17 Mar 2008 15:05:19 -0600
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.s****t.cart/msg/32b5cdeda0f74b97

Your reply:
Mon, 17 Mar 2008 21:18:04 -0000
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.s****t.cart/msg/c716dcd1694d8211

Your next reply nearly two hours later to the very same
post with absolutely nothing whatsoever newly appended,
prepended or in any manner edited by me or anyone else
in the interim:
Mon, 17 Mar 2008 23:04:52 -0000
http://groups.google.com/group/rec.autos.s****t.cart/msg/fc65106c44eb3e93

> If you are so
> sad as to still use google groups, that's not my problem.

If you could successfully read and interpret headers, you'd
realize that I don't use google groups either for reading or
replying to posts. Now see if you can go and figure out
that which wouldn't begin to flummox a retarded 10 year
old in a hurry.

There, is that now sufficient spoonfeeding or will baby
bull**** artist require even more (that he won't receive)?

Again, just who in the hell is it that you think you're kidding?