> I will only go if Yoko smelly snatch is wide open for the roaches to slip into.

Honest to God, all expenses paid, I doubt there's any event on earth that would draw me to a concert venue. I don't mind a crowd - as long as I'm not a part of it. It would be nice to be in a helicopter filming a concert stampede from above, then later playing it back in slo mo to study each victim's face and the various expressions the employed before slipping out of the race with their faces roughly ground into the pavement as loud speakers continue to blare/blend their idol's music into their own trending screams - a fantastic fusion of furious sounds. Very new age but caveman too. This is my kind of music.

On Friday, December 31, 2021 at 6:30:59 PM UTC-5, jazee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I will only go if Yoko smelly snatch is wide open for the roaches to slip into.
>
>
> Honest to God, all expenses paid, I doubt there's any event on earth that would draw me to a concert venue. I don't mind a crowd - as long as I'm not a part of it. It would be nice to be in a helicopter filming a concert stampede from above, then later playing it back in slo mo to study each victim's face and the various expressions the employed before slipping out of the race with their faces roughly ground into the pavement as loud speakers continue to blare/blend their idol's music into their own trending screams - a fantastic fusion of furious sounds. Very new age but caveman too. This is my kind of music.

This is the sound Yoko and John was going for. How old is Yoko? She needs to die.

> This is the sound Yoko and John was going for. How old is Yoko? She needs to die.

They were going for it but they never made it. Number one, John died. Number two, a lot of people don't know this but John and Yoko were on the outs around the time of his death. In fact, as is often the case with celebrity death, their partnership is forever enduring because of his death. He died before a public separation could take place, kind of the way James Dean died before he had a chance to wind up on TV and stink it up even worse than he did in the movies.

Dying young can sap a dude
Take away his manly seed
But a big celeb in the prime of life
Sometimes death is what they need

He was famous before
But he's more famous now
Even 6 feet under
As earth grub chow

"And his fame shall blossom even in death......." - Gandhi, 1923

On Saturday, January 1, 2022 at 12:08:10 AM UTC-5, jazee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > This is the sound Yoko and John was going for. How old is Yoko? She needs to die.
> They were going for it but they never made it. Number one, John died. Number two, a lot of people don't know this but John and Yoko were on the outs around the time of his death. In fact, as is often the case with celebrity death, their partnership is forever enduring because of his death. He died before a public separation could take place, kind of the way James Dean died before he had a chance to wind up on TV and stink it up even worse than he did in the movies.
>
> Dying young can sap a dude
> Take away his manly seed
> But a big celeb in the prime of life
> Sometimes death is what they need
>
> He was famous before
> But he's more famous now
> Even 6 feet under
> As earth grub chow
>
> "And his fame shall blossom even in death......." - Gandhi, 1923

it is all about timing. Yoko promisChapman her slant pussy if he took out John. She reneged on the deal.

> it is all about timing. Yoko promisChapman her slant pussy if he took out John. She reneged on the deal.

Chapman and Hinkley had a lot in common. With 'da Hink it was all about Jodie Foster, with 'da Chap Man it was all about Yoko. Both so-called man men were actually lovers at heart. They were smitten. Highly sensitive individuals dedicated to the women they cherished they acted in ways we ordinary humans cannot begin to understand. They killed for their ladies. For that I can't exactly give them credit because I am opposed to murder. But I do respect them, same as I do all honest people. 'Da Hink and 'Da Chap Man - yep, they both had it - that deep love commitment most of us oh so sadly lack in this cold cruel world.

On Sunday, January 2, 2022 at 3:23:36 PM UTC-5, jazee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > it is all about timing. Yoko promisChapman her slant pussy if he took out John. She reneged on the deal.
> Chapman and Hinkley had a lot in common. With 'da Hink it was all about Jodie Foster, with 'da Chap Man it was all about Yoko. Both so-called man men were actually lovers at heart. They were smitten. Highly sensitive individuals dedicated to the women they cherished they acted in ways we ordinary humans cannot begin to understand. They killed for their ladies. For that I can't exactly give them credit because I am opposed to murder. But I do respect them, same as I do all honest people. 'Da Hink and 'Da Chap Man - yep, they both had it - that deep love commitment most of us oh so sadly lack in this cold cruel world.

Love is the main cause of hate.

> Love is the main cause of hate.

I don't have enough passion to hate anyone to the point of killing them. I lack passion. Do you know anyone who can restore me to my former self so I can just cut loose and kill a few people, strictly out of love of course.

I have been sick for some time of hearing the word hate tossed around in the media, the hate crime thing, as if hating some thing or some one is a crime. I guess anything can be against the law. There's a lot of phonies out there claiming to be for all inclusiveness and so forth, opposed to bigotry and oppression and so forth. A lot of them. If they were really against bigotry and oppression, based strictly on their numbers, bigotry and oppression would not exist in the first place. So obviously when it comes to being tolerant and all accepting somebody's lying.

On Tuesday, January 4, 2022 at 3:24:12 PM UTC-5, jazee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > Love is the main cause of hate.
> I don't have enough passion to hate anyone to the point of killing them. I lack passion. Do you know anyone who can restore me to my former self so I can just cut loose and kill a few people, strictly out of love of course.
>
> I have been sick for some time of hearing the word hate tossed around in the media, the hate crime thing, as if hating some thing or some one is a crime. I guess anything can be against the law. There's a lot of phonies out there claiming to be for all inclusiveness and so forth, opposed to bigotry and oppression and so forth. A lot of them. If they were really against bigotry and oppression, based strictly on their numbers, bigotry and oppression would not exist in the first place. So obviously when it comes to being tolerant and all accepting somebody's lying.

The leftist commies control the news. It is all horseshit. The hyperbole is off the charts. What is odd is real smart and real dumb people see it.

> The leftist commies control the news. It is all horseshit. The hyperbole is off the charts. What is odd is real smart and real dumb people see it.

I have never been a grammar freak. I never demanded it or cared about a few mistakes here and there. But I've never seen it as bad as now. I am not exaggerating, I'd bet money on it. Hand the paper to someone and bet them they can't read an article without encountering some kind of major foul up, words in the wrong place or whatever. But you're talking about content, not format - and I agree. It is mostly a bunch of people trying to make themselves look more liberal than they really are. It is so fucking obvious it makes me sick.

Now, back to the techno thing, almost. I have been reading the newspaper for 50+ years and only in the past few years have I seen them get as audacious as now. Reporters will put comments into their reports that at one time would have been against journalist rules. For example, they might quote something from someone they don't like and add to the words, "Which is obviously false", and so forth. Putting their own words into the report. God, I wish I could think of better examples. I see them every day. Their audience is dumber than ever. Even the smart ones you mention are dumb in a deep down dumb way, smart only on the surface. The dumber the audience the more they can get away with. I see that Twitter has banned the female Georgia politician who is against the vaccines. That is fine with me, it's their rules. There rule is not, "No talking about the vaccine", it's, "No saying the wrong thing about the vaccine." I don't care that they banned the bitch. People who use those platforms deserve whatever they get. Banned from Twitter. Big deal. I was banned from every establishment I ever hung in.. It was a badge of honor, sort of. Anyway, I don't read the newspaper for the news. There was a time not long ago when I considered it the cheapest magazine around. There were enough non political articles on the back pages that on a good day I'd have enough stuff to create a decent sized magazine worth reading. Anyway, swear to God, I'm totally immune to it, but by and large I am not into the news and man am I ever glad.

On Wednesday, January 5, 2022 at 5:55:15 PM UTC-5, jazee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > The leftist commies control the news. It is all horseshit. The hyperbole is off the charts. What is odd is real smart and real dumb people see it.
> I have never been a grammar freak. I never demanded it or cared about a few mistakes here and there. But I've never seen it as bad as now. I am not exaggerating, I'd bet money on it. Hand the paper to someone and bet them they can't read an article without encountering some kind of major foul up, words in the wrong place or whatever. But you're talking about content, not format - and I agree. It is mostly a bunch of people trying to make themselves look more liberal than they really are. It is so fucking obvious it makes me sick.
>
> Now, back to the techno thing, almost. I have been reading the newspaper for 50+ years and only in the past few years have I seen them get as audacious as now. Reporters will put comments into their reports that at one time would have been against journalist rules. For example, they might quote something from someone they don't like and add to the words, "Which is obviously false", and so forth. Putting their own words into the report. God, I wish I could think of better examples. I see them every day. Their audience is dumber than ever. Even the smart ones you mention are dumb in a deep down dumb way, smart only on the surface. The dumber the audience the more they can get away with. I see that Twitter has banned the female Georgia politician who is against the vaccines. That is fine with me, it's their rules. There rule is not, "No talking about the vaccine", it's, "No saying the wrong thing about the vaccine." I don't care that they banned the bitch. People who use those platforms deserve whatever they get. Banned from Twitter. Big deal. I was banned from every establishment I ever hung in. It was a badge of honor, sort of. Anyway, I don't read the newspaper for the news. There was a time not long ago when I considered it the cheapest magazine around.. There were enough non political articles on the back pages that on a good day I'd have enough stuff to create a decent sized magazine worth reading. Anyway, swear to God, I'm totally immune to it, but by and large I am not into the news and man am I ever glad.

You will know them by whom they ban. Those sites are like the 'cool kids' in school. They are not cool but snobs and bullies.

> You will know them by whom they ban. Those sites are like the 'cool kids' in school. They are not cool but snobs and bullies.

Oh believe me I know. Everything that existed yesterday exists today on a grander scale, and that includes bullying, which today is nearly the exclusive domain of the anti bullying crowd. Everybody's got a pulpit today and they are delusional enough to think the whole world is listening. So they speak. They talk about how tolerant and caring and open and liberal of mind they are, believing that their words alone are enough to prove it. These people have mastered lying at a higher level - the worst kind of lying, where it is done by groups and no one ever admits to it. Today is the same stage as yesterday but the costumes are different. I don't care who gets booted from this or that social media outpost. You are right of course, you can tell who the sites are for by who they are against, and ultimately who they ban. In some ways I suppose it is a badge of honor to be booted from some of these groups as there are always other groups that will accept them.. Like the Georgia female politician who was booted from Twitter who is now commenting on her expulsion from another pulpit, the name of which I can't recall because I didn't have space for it in my brain. I want no part of any of it.

On Friday, January 7, 2022 at 12:08:28 AM UTC-5, jazee...@gmail.com wrote:
> > You will know them by whom they ban. Those sites are like the 'cool kids' in school. They are not cool but snobs and bullies.
> Oh believe me I know. Everything that existed yesterday exists today on a grander scale, and that includes bullying, which today is nearly the exclusive domain of the anti bullying crowd. Everybody's got a pulpit today and they are delusional enough to think the whole world is listening. So they speak. They talk about how tolerant and caring and open and liberal of mind they are, believing that their words alone are enough to prove it. These people have mastered lying at a higher level - the worst kind of lying, where it is done by groups and no one ever admits to it. Today is the same stage as yesterday but the costumes are different. I don't care who gets booted from this or that social media outpost. You are right of course, you can tell who the sites are for by who they are against, and ultimately who they ban. In some ways I suppose it is a badge of honor to be booted from some of these groups as there are always other groups that will accept them. Like the Georgia female politician who was booted from Twitter who is now commenting on her expulsion from another pulpit, the name of which I can't recall because I didn't have space for it in my brain. I want no part of any of it.

I followed the herd when it all started. Got the Facebook, Twitter accounts. I was hoping it would be like a chat group thing but it was different. Weird to me. I felt uncomfortable with it right away. It was the formats more than anything else. Then it was all about having followers. That was a red flag to me.

On Saturday, January 8, 2022 at 9:33:16 AM UTC-5, OllieN...@aol.com wrote:

> I followed the herd when it all started. Got the Facebook, Twitter accounts. I was hoping it would be like a chat group thing but it was different. Weird to me. I felt uncomfortable with it right away. It was the formats more than anything else. Then it was all about having followers. That was a red flag to me.

Wow, very refreshing to hear you admit it. I might have done the same had I had a computer at the time. I don't know. I do know that, same as you, I saw it as ugly and stupid from the start. I never liked the instant messenger thing either. At least that one I can understand why people might like it. I like the laid-back approach of the newsgroups, especially back in the day when the 9 hour wait to see responses rule was in effect. There was something nice about it. Not that I'd lobby for it's return, but I see now a certain freedom to it. Yeah, the terminology sucks, doesn't it 'followers', 'unfriending', and so forth. They come out with words and people just start using them like they've been around forever. If all the people who use those media forms regularly were to line up all at the same time it would be frightening to see how many there are.

"Uh oh, here they come again."

"Who?"

"The Majority............. Watch out!"

On Fri, 31 Dec 2021 21:08:09 -0800 (PST), Thomas Joseph
<jazeev1234@gmail.com> wrote:

>
>> This is the sound Yoko and John was going for. How old is Yoko? She needs to die.
>
>They were going for it but they never made it. Number one, John died. Number two, a lot of people don't know this but John and Yoko were on the outs around the time of his death. In fact, as is often the case with celebrity death, their partnership is forever enduring because of his death. He died before a public separation could take place, kind of the way James Dean died before he had a chance to wind up on TV and stink it up even worse than he did in the movies.

The fact of the matter is Yoko discovered John's affair with my Aunt
Fanny (the one who died and had all those cats in the house). It seems
my aunt wasn't a bad looking woman for an Orthodox Jew. Rumor has it
that he visited her at her parents apartment every day while they were
at work. Their love-making would get so loud at times that neighbors
called the police. We'll never know what Mr. Lennon's true intentions
were with my aunt. What we do know is John was going to tell Yoko that
evening that their relationship was over!

>
>Dying young can sap a dude
>Take away his manly seed
>But a big celeb in the prime of life
>Sometimes death is what they need
>
>He was famous before
>But he's more famous now
>Even 6 feet under
>As earth grub chow
>
>"And his fame shall blossom even in death......." - Gandhi, 1923
>
>

Judith Latham wrote:

> The fact of the matter is Yoko discovered John's affair with my Aunt
> Fanny (the one who died and had all those cats in the house). It seems
> my aunt wasn't a bad looking woman for an Orthodox Jew. Rumor has it
> that he visited her at her parents apartment every day while they were
> at work. Their love-making would get so loud at times that neighbors
> called the police. We'll never know what Mr. Lennon's true intentions
> were with my aunt. What we do know is John was going to tell Yoko that
> evening that their relationship was over!

Not bad looking for an Orthodox Jew you say. Well, John Lennon was no prize either, and he could dress any way he wanted. I guess it's true that religious attire has a certain dampening effect on the sex drive of onlookers. At least with me. I can see a nun with a good looking face, but it ends there. Of course when I was a real young kid I don't think the nun habit would have deterred me. Mostly it's the higher ups in all religions who wear the creepiest and most non-sexual attire of all - like the Pope with the high hat and the higher up nuns with the big old school headdress. Anyway, Lennon was a pretty ugly dude. But of course most women don't see him that way because he was in a rock band and he had money. I imagine with his clothes off he would be a horrid sight. Add Yoko to the mix and it's time to bring out the vomit bag. Add your Aunt Fanny (and yourself) to the mix and it's time to bring out the whole package. That would be a good TV show if kept short - "Famous People Fucking", sort of like Seinfeld's "People Having Coffee" thing. All of them would be pretty ugly with the clothes off, and that includes John F. Kennedy who was considered good looking by women but who would have been snubbed by most if sitting infamous in a bar. Then for most women it would be, "Ewww, look at that one, what a creep!" Even worse for the Right Honorable Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King. They'd look at him and go, "Ewwww, a predator. Stay away from that one, girls."

On 1/9/2022 1:34 PM, Thomas Joseph wrote:
> Judith Latham wrote:
>
>> The fact of the matter is Yoko discovered John's affair with my Aunt
>> Fanny (the one who died and had all those cats in the house). It seems
>> my aunt wasn't a bad looking woman for an Orthodox Jew. Rumor has it
>> that he visited her at her parents apartment every day while they were
>> at work. Their love-making would get so loud at times that neighbors
>> called the police. We'll never know what Mr. Lennon's true intentions
>> were with my aunt. What we do know is John was going to tell Yoko that
>> evening that their relationship was over!
>
>
> Not bad looking for an Orthodox Jew you say. Well, John Lennon was no prize either, and he could dress any way he wanted. I guess it's true that religious attire has a certain dampening effect on the sex drive of onlookers. At least with me. I can see a nun with a good looking face, but it ends there. Of course when I was a real young kid I don't think the nun habit would have deterred me. Mostly it's the higher ups in all religions who wear the creepiest and most non-sexual attire of all - like the Pope with the high hat and the higher up nuns with the big old school headdress. Anyway, Lennon was a pretty ugly dude. But of course most women don't see him that way because he was in a rock band and he had money. I imagine with his clothes off he would be a horrid sight. Add Yoko to the mix and it's time to bring out the vomit bag. Add your Aunt Fanny (and yourself) to the mix and it's time to bring out the whole package. That would be a good TV show if kept short - "Famous People Fucking", sort of like Seinfeld's "People Having Coffee" thing. All of them would be pretty ugly with the clothes off, and that includes John F. Kennedy who was considered good looking by women but who would have been snubbed by most if sitting infamous in a bar. Then for most women it would be, "Ewww, look at that one, what a creep!" Even worse for the Right Honorable Reverend Doctor Martin Luther King. They'd look at him and go, "Ewwww, a predator. Stay away from that one, girls."

If MLK were in that bar, he'd get laid. Not because he's famous but
because he's black. There's always some slut willing to hook-up with a
brother for no other reason than they want BBC. I personally don't have
to be aggressive because black dudes love us big girls. I can be choose
who I want and MLK wouldn't be my choice.

Judith Latham wrote:

> If MLK were in that bar, he'd get laid. Not because he's famous but
> because he's black. There's always some slut willing to hook-up with a
> brother for no other reason than they want BBC. I personally don't have
> to be aggressive because black dudes love us big girls. I can be choose
> who I want and MLK wouldn't be my choice.

It's not just with Black males - women have advantages not available to the average man. Of course I am not average, but even still I can't always get my way the way even an ugly woman can. "I never fucked a midget before", one might exclaim to herself before setting out to find out. Or maybe she just sees him at the end of the bar and thinks, "I wonder what it's like", before heading down to talk to the little man. Or she might see a guy who looks like he stinks, even really bad, and says to herself, "I wonder what it's like", and goes for it because she knows she can always get rid of the guy. But can she? Maybe not. Maybe she goes out with the guy and finds herself the next morning chained to a radiator in the guy's basement. Yes, they can have their way more than men - that is their advantage - but it comes with a cost. As it should. Same with hitchhiking for example. A woman will say that when she hitchhikes she has to put up with more harassment than male hitchhikers. Could be true, but that is the price of getting rides easier than her male counterparts. There is a price for everything. I see a while woman with a black guy and all I can imagine most of the time is a pair of dotted trailer trash eyes.

Judith Latham wrote:
> > If MLK were in that bar, he'd get laid. Not because he's famous but
> > because he's black. There's always some slut willing to hook-up with a
> > brother for no other reason than they want BBC. I personally don't have
> > to be aggressive because black dudes love us big girls. I can be choose
> > who I want and MLK wouldn't be my choice.

It's not just with Black males - women have advantages not available to the average man. Of course I am not average, but even still I can't always get my way the way even an ugly woman can. "I never fucked a midget before", one might exclaim to herself before setting out to find out. Or maybe she just sees him at the end of the bar and thinks, "I wonder what it's like", before heading down to talk to the little man. Or she might see a guy who looks like he stinks, even really bad, and says to herself, "I wonder what it's like", and goes for it because she knows she can always get rid of the guy. But can she? Maybe not. Maybe she goes out with the guy and finds herself the next morning chained to a radiator in the guy's basement. Yes, they can have their way more than men - that is their advantage - but it comes with a cost. As it should. Same with hitchhiking for example. A woman will say that when she hitchhikes she has to put up with more harassment than male hitchhikers. Could be true, but that is the price of getting rides easier than her male counterparts. There is a price for everything. I see a while woman with a black guy and all I can imagine most of the time is a pair of dotted trailer trash eyes.

On Wednesday, January 12, 2022 at 2:29:25 PM UTC-5, jazee...@gmail.com wrote:
> Judith Latham wrote:
>
> > > If MLK were in that bar, he'd get laid. Not because he's famous but
> > > because he's black. There's always some slut willing to hook-up with a
> > > brother for no other reason than they want BBC. I personally don't have
> > > to be aggressive because black dudes love us big girls. I can be choose
> > > who I want and MLK wouldn't be my choice.
>
> It's not just with Black males - women have advantages not available to the average man. Of course I am not average, but even still I can't always get my way the way even an ugly woman can. "I never fucked a midget before", one might exclaim to herself before setting out to find out. Or maybe she just sees him at the end of the bar and thinks, "I wonder what it's like", before heading down to talk to the little man. Or she might see a guy who looks like he stinks, even really bad, and says to herself, "I wonder what it's like", and goes for it because she knows she can always get rid of the guy. But can she? Maybe not. Maybe she goes out with the guy and finds herself the next morning chained to a radiator in the guy's basement. Yes, they can have their way more than men - that is their advantage - but it comes with a cost. As it should. Same with hitchhiking for example. A woman will say that when she hitchhikes she has to put up with more harassment than male hitchhikers. Could be true, but that is the price of getting rides easier than her male counterparts. There is a price for everything. I see a while woman with a black guy and all I can imagine most of the time is a pair of dotted trailer trash eyes.

I think men are jealous that women can get laid easier. But then is it really so hard for a man? If a man settles for anything his odds of se go way up. It is the competiton for the 'queen' that drives men nuts. Lower your sights. Take aim on the lesser females.

OllieN...@aol.com wrote:

> I think men are jealous that women can get laid easier. But then is it really so hard for a man? If a man settles for anything his odds of sex go way up. It is the competiton for the 'queen' that drives men nuts. Lower your sights. Take aim on the lesser females.

You are correct on all counts. As for taking aim next time, there is no next time. It's porn from here on out unless something decent comes along by chance. I am not seeking out women not only for my own selfish reasons but also for their own good. I am doing them a favor. You are right about the all the guys going for the 'Queen'. Same applies to women going for the King. The King can be any old piece of shit as long as he has money or is famous or seems to have the potential. I was in that group once. Women came on to me. But never the ones I liked the most. I liked the ones that disliked me the most. The upturned nose - the disco queen type - fight starters - good looking mostly on the surface. I had some good ones and didn't know it at the time. Too bad. I'm not looking back.

"Thomas Joseph" wrote in message
news:bae4fea4-58e1-4a62-a850-f6a9cd198465n@googlegroups.com...

OllieN...@aol.com wrote:

> I think men are jealous that women can get laid easier. But then is it
> really so hard for a man? If a man settles for anything his odds of sex go
> way up. It is the competiton for the 'queen' that drives men nuts. Lower
> your sights. Take aim on the lesser females.

You are correct on all counts. As for taking aim next time, there is no
next time. It's porn from here on out unless something decent comes along
by chance. I am not seeking out women not only for my own selfish reasons
but also for their own good. I am doing them a favor. You are right about
the all the guys going for the 'Queen'. Same applies to women going for the
King. The King can be any old piece of shit as long as he has money or is
famous or seems to have the potential. I was in that group once. Women
came on to me. But never the ones I liked the most. I liked the ones that
disliked me the most. The upturned nose - the disco queen type - fight
starters - good looking mostly on the surface. I had some good ones and
didn't know it at the time. Too bad. I'm not looking back.

Yep that is the reason why you are dying of a.i.d.s. Tommy Joe — always
wanting to get laid and suck out some other dude's asshole — Women never
came on to you — You are one of the most effeminate geeky old queers on the
planet TJ — what weird woman would want to even meet you?
Now you spend your whole life in bed and talk everday (BORE) about how you
are dying — you are not dying — you are dying of A.I.D.S.

On Friday, January 14, 2022 at 3:05:02 PM UTC-5, jazee...@gmail.com wrote:
> OllieN...@aol.com wrote:
>
> > I think men are jealous that women can get laid easier. But then is it really so hard for a man? If a man settles for anything his odds of sex go way up. It is the competiton for the 'queen' that drives men nuts. Lower your sights. Take aim on the lesser females.
>
>
> You are correct on all counts. As for taking aim next time, there is no next time. It's porn from here on out unless something decent comes along by chance. I am not seeking out women not only for my own selfish reasons but also for their own good. I am doing them a favor. You are right about the all the guys going for the 'Queen'. Same applies to women going for the King. The King can be any old piece of shit as long as he has money or is famous or seems to have the potential. I was in that group once. Women came on to me. But never the ones I liked the most. I liked the ones that disliked me the most. The upturned nose - the disco queen type - fight starters - good looking mostly on the surface. I had some good ones and didn't know it at the time. Too bad. I'm not looking back.

I believe we look for a mate who we feel is better than us. Women do too. It is biology trying to improve the species. The trick is to never let the one you are after to think they are better than you. This is why treating them bad often works.

OllieN...@aol.com wrote:

> I believe we look for a mate who we feel is better than us. Women do too. It is biology trying to improve the species. The trick is to never let the one you are after to think they are better than you. This is why treating them bad often works.

LOL - and I'll bet you can't guess why. When I clicked into the group I saw only 3 unread posts on the board and assumed you had not posted. I did not look at your name. I figured it was Ras. Then, reading his words I thought, "The nutcase is beginning to make sense", or, "Is this the real Bozo?", before finally seeing your name on the post. Funny. Yes, I told you before, I often respond to the post itself more than the person's name. It was funny how at first I thought you were Ras. It's a compliment actually. I thought the writing made too much sense to be Ras, or that the real Ras was emerging, made a better bad via association with us in this group. I thought wrong, and you know me you know I love being wrong at the right time..

On Sunday, January 16, 2022 at 8:12:15 AM UTC-5, OllieN...@aol.com wrote:
> I believe we look for a mate who we feel is better than us. Women do too. It is biology trying to improve the species. The trick is to never let the one you are after to think they are better than you. This is why treating them bad often works.

I don't mean to put you to work, but do you know there's a bunch of posts from me on page #2. We have been forced off the front page, further proof that the front page is worthless. Anyway, I don't know if you're aware of it or not. I star the posts I feel are active. I never used to do that but started a month or so ago. I look for original posts, checking the name, etc., but tend to zero in on the threads I've starred. Anyway, there's a bunch of unanswered posts from me on page two of this group. Now get to work!

OllieN...@aol.com wrote:

> I believe we look for a mate who we feel is better than us. Women do too. It is biology trying to improve the species. The trick is to never let the one you are after to think they are better than you. This is why treating them bad often works.

What a selfish fuck I am at times. I posted two responses and none concerned your post, only my own thoughts. "This is why treating them bad often works" - LOL. Especially the word "often", which implies not necessarily all the time. I see you now in front of the Judge on a murder rap of treating a women badly enough to kill her and explaining to the Judge, "But Your Honor, treating them bad often works. Just because it didn't work this one time is no reason to get all worked up about it. You got to with the odds, Your Honor. What are the odds of you giving me a break on this one?"