Richard Clark wrote:
On Mon, 06 Oct 2008 19:13:27 -0700, John Smith
wrote:

Richard Clark wrote:
And you have something intelligent to say? It would have to improve
over your gumming through
NEC engine (at least the one I use and have the source code to),
it does have a bit of what you call "voodoo science"
Voodoo science exists within the NEC code
Sorry Brett, gumming repetition does not prove an idea you already
allowed as being a dead and embraceable disgust. You clearly don't
have any idea how to progress beyond incantation of trolling
prosodies.

To your credit, no one expects originality from you. After all, that
is the point of your (self-supposed) anonymity (an ironic joke I
enjoy). You could as easily be Sara luxuriating in the flush of your
TV debate victory (complete with your aw-shucksisms)!
Well, let me see here, I mean, I want to give you all due respect, and
all that ...

No you don't. This maudlin appeal is weak tea, save it for Authur who
shares your disability in lack of originality.

I do applaud the parade of the lame and lazy excuses you two manage to
bluff up in the guise of outrage. What a hoot! Insisting others to
prove your claims has to rank up there on the honor roll of welfare
queens. If the Congress had a bailout for ineptitude (and it has been
fairly proven they do), they would have granted you earmarks for your
mutual admiration society diary entries. You guys scribble out those
tear stained pages like they earn tax credits. Weep on! The election
cycle still has 30 days of promises to be made to the technically
indigent.

73's
Richard Clark, KB7QHC

OK. I have been kind, actually. Really? You just don't matter ... I
have suggested it in my text to you, consider my text summarized with
the simple statement.

Besides, you are a long-winded-blow-hard ... you remind me of the guy
who I just walk away from my rig, come back ten minutes later, with a
cup of coffee, and wait a long time for him to finish ... a long wait,
most likely ... :-(

Regards,
JS