russett, what I say next may seem odd to you, but what is, is what is.
Now to use more correct, but still poor English grammer, what is...
1. you and d reply to posts using the same method
2. your method to reply to a post is to send it back, as is
3. you and d are not able to create a post
4. you and d only use others thoughts
5. you and d do not understand the thoughts of others
Now it has nothing to do with you, but Ron Reece is a good example
of one who accepts the thoughts of others while at the same time
refuses to judge their validity. But he does atleast have the ability,
eventhought he has recently crossed into "never to return Land" I am
sad to report since he had such great potential to do right.
For sure you are not getting this, what I am saying, but then thats
my point, which leads to the conclusion that I am explaining what you
are to one, you, who is unable to understand. But it is not without value,
as I have mentioned before one must have a comparison before one can say
what is good or bad, or there or not.
<<... living in a world full of ghosts and goblins.>>
Yes, but my song keeps them away.
"they are coming to take me away, ha ha, they are coming to take me away"
doug |
