Was Pitts right?
in [Golf]
|
From: dene on 13 Dec 2009 19:33 "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message news:4b254ce7$0$4887$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... > On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 14:52:15 -0500, BAR wrote: > > In article <alangbaker-E3199E.11383013122009(a)news.shawcable.com>, > > alangbaker(a)telus.net says... > >> > >>> 2. No. I can only imagine how his family feels. But, I think I have > >>> a pretty good idea. Given how my wife has reacted to far lesser > >>> "transgressions", I know that I would be on the couch at a friend's > >>> house if my betrayals were even in the same universe as Tiger's. I > >>> would also be looking for a lawyer. > >> > >> Your wife is not Elin Woods. > > > > Don't you get tired of being an argumentative prig? > > How does that make Alan different from any of the rest of us? You know the trolling game Baker plays. -Greg
From: Carbon on 13 Dec 2009 21:01 On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 16:33:04 -0800, dene wrote: > "Carbon" <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote in message > news:4b254ce7$0$4887$9a6e19ea(a)unlimited.newshosting.com... >> On Sun, 13 Dec 2009 14:52:15 -0500, BAR wrote: >>> In article <alangbaker-E3199E.11383013122009(a)news.shawcable.com>, >>> alangbaker(a)telus.net says... >>>> >>>>> 2. No. I can only imagine how his family feels. But, I think I >>>>> have a pretty good idea. Given how my wife has reacted to far >>>>> lesser "transgressions", I know that I would be on the couch at a >>>>> friend's house if my betrayals were even in the same universe as >>>>> Tiger's. I would also be looking for a lawyer. >>>> >>>> Your wife is not Elin Woods. >>> >>> Don't you get tired of being an argumentative prig? >> >> How does that make Alan different from any of the rest of us? > > You know the trolling game Baker plays. My thought is we all like to bicker, usually over nothing.
From: assimilate on 14 Dec 2009 03:05 On 13-Dec-2009, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > Really all I'm trying to say is that, by and large, > people cannot be defined by their failings or by their > successes. Being human means you're defined by some > combination of both. That's all. true enough, however, sometimes one side is so large it overshadows the other. Is that the case here? Not enough info (happy Alan? :-) ) -- bill-o
From: assimilate on 14 Dec 2009 03:07 On 13-Dec-2009, Carbon <nobrac(a)nospam.tampabay.rr.com> wrote: > > Don't you get tired of being an argumentative prig? > > How does that make Alan different from any of the rest of us? I'm afraid Carbon is correct, we all wear that shoe size! -- bill-o
From: Alan Baker on 14 Dec 2009 03:15
In article <4b25f1d4$0$29018$882e0bbb(a)news.ThunderNews.com>, assimilate(a)borg.org wrote: > On 13-Dec-2009, Chris Bellomy <ten.wohsdoog(a)sirhc> wrote: > > > Really all I'm trying to say is that, by and large, > > people cannot be defined by their failings or by their > > successes. Being human means you're defined by some > > combination of both. That's all. > > true enough, however, sometimes one side is so large it overshadows the > other. Is that the case here? Not enough info (happy Alan? :-) ) Perfectly. Why it should have been so hard for so many to admit this rather than just take the easy way out, I don't know. -- Alan Baker Vancouver, British Columbia <http://gallery.me.com/alangbaker/100008/DSCF0162/web.jpg> |