In article . com>,
"Jay Santos" > wrote:

> Ron wrote:
> > In article .com>,
> > "Rudy Canoza" > wrote:
> >
> > > Ron wrote:
> > > > > > > > As a fudgepacker, all you know about children is how to
> bugger the
> > > > > boys. Children think they're reponsible for NOTHING, you
> ignorant
> > > fat ****.
> > > >
> > > > Fat?
> > >
> > > Fat ****.
> >
> > What is my weight,
>
> No one cares, fat ****.
>
> >
> > > As usual, no substance. The pattern is clear. Whenever you are
> proved
> > > wrong, your ego won't let you do either of the two correct
> responses -
> > > admit your error, or say nothing. Instead, you are driven to make
> a
> > > substance-free snarky response.
> >
> > Which vegan killed what animal
>
> It doesn't matter.

I think it does matter. Which vegan killed what animal?

> > > The fact remains that your belief about what is "consistent" with
> the
> > > thinking of a child is wrong, and a stupid thing for anyone to
> believe.
> >
> > Where is that substantive argument that you keep insisting I never
> make
>
> Reread that. What a moron you are. If you never make it, it doesn't
> exist, so I can't know where "it" is, because "it isn't".

More of that dishonest editing.