On Mon, 20 Jun 2005 04:42:31 GMT, Dave Heil
wrote:

Leo wrote:

How so? I have neither defended nor attacked Len. I simply refuse to
join you in your obcessive crusade against him.

The word is "obsessive". Jim's treatment of Len isn't.

Thanks, Dave. You are correct - my spelling of the word "obsessive"
was incorrect. Appreciate the help!

With regard to your second point, though - 'obsessive' wouldn't refer
to Jim's 'treatment' of Len - it is in the relentless pursuit of
proving the individual wrong that we would find the true definition of
the word.

Thanks anyway, though!


Dave K8MN

73, Leo