Forum Thread

Lake Pat Cleburne Topics

(Lake Pat Cleburne Specific)

0 messages

Updated

Off-Topic

Lakes Online Forum

84,091 messages

Updated 11/8/2024 10:28:12 AM

Boat Maintenance

Lakes Online Forum

5,204 messages

Updated 9/14/2024 10:10:50 AM

Lake Pat Cleburne Fishing

(Lake Pat Cleburne Specific)

0 messages

Updated

Jokes

Lakes Online Forum

4,172 messages

Updated 9/9/2024 5:04:44 PM

Sports

Lakes Online Forum

4,262 messages

Updated 11/6/2024 6:43:09 PM

Grilling & Recipes

Lakes Online Forum

2,979 messages

Updated 6/26/2024 5:03:03 AM

Tallapoosa River Topics

Lakes Online Forum

98 messages

Updated 4/15/2024 1:00:58 AM

Forum Usage Rules

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Is Perry kaput?
Date:	11/10/2011 10:38:30 AM

Boy was that the worst thing I have ever seen in a debate. I can't imagine the Obama campaign commercials and the government media replays of that flubbed answer about departments he would eliminate. My goodness, my answer would have not only rolled off my tongue but I would have responded, "I only get to eliminate 3?!?!? Thats gonna be tough but if it were only three it would be education, commerce and hud. But here are the others I would also eliminate...." This election is all about getting rid of Obama and it seems to me more and more likely that Perry is not the guy. Romney must be laughing his backside off.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Is Perry kaput?
Date:	11/10/2011 6:04:51 PM

I was seriously disturbed about the answers Cain and Romney gave about the Italian Debt situation. It was just a bunch of gobblygook. Cain mumbling something about a "dollar is a dollar"... whatever that has to do with the Italian issue. And all Romney could say was that he wouldn't bail out the banks.... but neither one demonstrated any understand of the problem. Perry is hopeless. I hope he just drops out. He is laughable. You know, for all the talking the Conservatives have done about brilliant solutions to solve the economic issues, every time I see the field, I just wonder -- is this really the best they can do? Where did all the smart people go? Everything I'm hearing from the current field is just nibbling around the edges.

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	Is Perry kaput?
Date:	11/10/2011 6:13:03 PM (updated 11/10/2011 6:15:41 PM)

They are still in the Legislature. I'd love to see a Paul Ryan/Marco Rubio ticket. Now there's two smart dudes....apparently too smart because they haven't subjected themselves to the Presidential Primary meat grinder.

And the one still in the race that has the best grasp on things is Newt Gingrich. I just don't know if he is electable. I surely like his suggestion to have a three hour debate with Obama....after Obama ran out of talking points Newt would drive him straight into the stage floor.

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	Is Perry kaput?
Date:	11/10/2011 7:19:52 PM

I think it would be hilarious if someone were to somehow substitute the intended text with some utter nonsense. I just wonder how long he would read it before realizing that he'd been had.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Is Perry kaput?
Date:	11/10/2011 7:46:09 PM

Newt was a terrible Speaker of the House, and he had ethics problems to boot. He was practically run out of town. Now why would I want him as President?

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Is Perry kaput?
Date:	11/10/2011 7:51:21 PM

Better the devil I know than the devil I don't. As much as Obama has been a disappointment to me, I would vote for him again. One of current Republican field would more likely to be a bigger disappointment and create a bigger problems. I am sorely disappointed to realize that people running for the most important job in the country no longer think they have to understand and speak intelligently about the major issues facing this kaput.

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	Is Perry kaput?
Date:	11/10/2011 9:38:02 PM (updated 11/10/2011 9:40:05 PM)

Funny that you talk about ethics and Newt, yet we have all kinds of evidence that Obama is enriching his buddies with OUR money, knowing that they were going down the tubes....and negotiating away OUR money in favor of his buddies' investments - even though it is against the law.

I said I didn't think Newt was electable, but he would absolutely destroy Obama in a debate that didn't involve Obama using canned sound bites from a teleprompter. The times that his teleprompter failed him and he actually had to say something that required thought were something akin to slapstick comedy. Whether or not Newt was a good speaker or was ethical, in a debate he would have Obama running away with his tail tucked beteween his legs as most bullies do when confronted with superior intelligence and force.

I guess I and others are smarter than you in that we would vote for ANY of the Republican candidates over Obama, knowing we, as a country, would be better...or at least less worse off. That you can't see that and would still vote for this guaranteed train wreck named Obama is, well, interesting.

Name:	Barneget -	Reply
Subject:	Is Perry kaput?
Date:	11/10/2011 9:59:22 PM

Hound, your opinions regarding the current state of the race for Republican Presidential nominee are laughable. There has never been any doubt as to your 2012 intentions. You claim to have voted Republican in the past, and excused your 2008 vote for zerO as an anti Bush vote. Using this forum, over the last 2 1/2 years, you have repeatedly defended the actions of zerO, and his wife, while ignoring his administrations assault on business, privacy, constitutional protections, and a free market economy. You have defended screwing the GM bondholders, and US taxpayers (e.g. green energy and stimulus) with his blatant redistribution techniques to include nationalized health care, while ignoring zerO's long term association with BLT advocates, home deals with convicted felons, international ineffectiveness, policy contributions to high unemployment, advocacy for taxpayer funded abortions, running guns to Mexico, pandering to unions, and coziness with anti US terrorists, both foreign and domestic, yet tonight, you state that Newt has ethics issues, while Cain and Romney can't articulate a policy regarding Italian debt. You have only managed to fool yourself with your costume of a free thinking, unprincipled independent. Wait until tomorrow and Morning Joe will lay out your thoughts for the weekend. The mantra, chant, billboard, primal scream of people capable of logical thought, and recognition of consequences, should be ABO 2012.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Is Perry kaput?
Date:	11/10/2011 11:22:24 PM

Well, I guess I should congratulate you both on your high opinion of your own intelligence. Thankfully, my opinion of my own is not dependent on your opinions. And Barnaget, you don't know me at all -- we've never met -- I find it amazing that you are also a psychic and know exactly what my intentions are and what I think. Time will tell, you two, time will tell.

Name:	buzzbuster -	Reply
Subject:	Is Perry kaput?
Date:	11/11/2011 12:10:40 AM

I have said from the begining that Newt was the dark horse and I will vote for him over the others. Now that being said why would you not vote for Newt or any of the rest of the panel against who we have now. At least when Newt was Speaker our government did accomplish alot and managed to get things done and actually by reaching across the aisle and not blaming everyone else for thier failures and demanding everything has to get done NOW, when he has dragged his feet instead of coming up with a good solution or at least a compromise. I would vote for anybody over what we have in office now. I would also like who does get in office to stop apologizing for who we are and do as a country, we help the world and I think we need to help us first, at least we would appreciate it, other country's don't.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Is Perry kaput?
Date:	11/11/2011 7:39:02 AM

And who among the current candidates do you think will do that? Herman Cain? He admits he will be figuring out foreign policy as he goes along? Hire someone that can "advise" him. He doesn't even know the names of the countries. And his latest comment about "Princess Nancy" is just further evidence to me that he has no respect for women. Shameful. Whether you agree with her politics (and I don't) to refer to the first woman Speaker of the House in that way, particularly when you have 4 other women saying that you have sexually harassed them, just shows that he has no respect for women. And it's pretty stupid to boot. Huntsman is the only one in the field that has a practical clue about foreign affairs. Newt is nothing more than a puffed up policy wonk. He's in love with his intellect and his own ideas, yet he failed at his chance to lead in the House. So why would I think that he should be President. Remember when Les Aspin was made Secretary of Defense? Nothing ever got done because he over intellectualized and wanted nothing more than to meet and debate and discuss. Newt would be exactly the same. He's not a leader. Romney is the only one in the current field who has a chance. And he's no Ronald Reagan in terms of his ability to bring the country together. Where are the leaders? Where are the smart people? Is this field the best Republicans can do? Sad, really sad.

Name:	Barneget -	Reply
Subject:	Is Perry kaput?
Date:	11/11/2011 8:09:37 AM

Hound, my intelligence is remarkably average, and am totally lacking in psychic ability. The earlier post merely highlighted the pattern you have established, here, on this forum. You did unmask and that places the true perspective on your future posts regarding conservatives and Republicans.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Wow did I miss all the fun
Date:	11/11/2011 8:40:00 AM

Was flying back from Seattle yesterday and missed all this banter. Folks, you can forget about Hound and not voting for Oblamer. She is one of those so-called "Independents" that is really a Democrat in disguise. Sort of like the seminar callers to conservative talk shows that start off with, "I always agree with everything you say and I voted for George Bush twice, but....." followed by the Democrat talking points. She has consistently bashed every GOP candidate except the one that is also a Democrat in disguise (you know, Oblamer's former ambassador to China). She has never once acknowledged the objectively abysmal performance of Oblamer in his handling of domestic or foreign policy issues. In short, she is hopeless and not one of the Independents that can be converted. Fortunately polling data shows that Independents have abandoned the Messiah in droves but being the fickle group that they are they could return to him in sufficient numbers to reelect him. As for the current nomination process, all we have to do is look back to 2008 during the Dem process to see a similar food fight. I am still optimistic that what will come out of the process is the best candidate to defeat the current WH occupant. That has to be the goal and any desire for ideological purity will only be cutting off our nose to spite our face. Regardless of what Hound says any one of the candidates would be significantly better than Oblamer. As for her comments about Newt being a terrible Speaker I guess it all depends on your frame of reference. If you liked the legislative accomplishments like welfare reform, fiscal sanity that gave us surpluses, etc. then you would come to another conclusion. You would say Newt has highly effective as Speaker. He was also highly partisan and much detested by Democrats. And for that he was punished with ethics charges and unlike the dozens of Democrats that have done much worse, he is a Republican and had to go. Yet again another example of his ethics woes would have been a resume enhancer were he a Democrat. Let's face it, when you actually have principals you are going to suffer for lapses. When you lack principals (i.e., you are a Democrat) you can do just about anything and stay in office.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Question for you Hound
Date:	11/11/2011 8:43:18 AM

You seem to think all they do is nibble around the edges on the economy. I have actually heard quite a few very good policy recommendations from them but I actually listen. But I digress. Here is my question. What do you think they should recommend be done to improve the economy? What do you think are the right policies or what they are missing? Seems to me that if you can make this judgement you must have answers. I am all ears.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Thanks but no thanks
Date:	11/11/2011 9:54:45 AM

Hound, considering who you selected to be a leader in 2008 I think we can all get along just fine without your endorsement of any of the GOP candidates. You don't have much credibility with us on this........

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Totally agree
Date:	11/11/2011 10:59:09 AM

Although I probably like GF more than the others because he at least sometimes humorous at times unlike most libtards. They usually have no sense of humor........

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Question for you Hound
Date:	11/11/2011 11:31:44 AM

For one thing, I think there needs to be a balance in cuts and increases in revenue. I believe that SS and Medicare needs to be restructured in some serious way. If it is the desire of the people of this country to use SS as a "retirement" program, then it needs to be rethought and changed to that end. As it stands it makes no sense. Social Security disability needs to be restructured and the eligibility narrowed. Obama care should be repealed and replaced by some kind of universal health care benefit that people can subscribe to with several different levels of coverage, and on a sliding scale for payment. The current welfare system should be discontinued and restructured with a program with limitations as to the length of time one can be eligible, and $$ benefits tied to previous earnings. Food stamps should be available only for the most basic of food items, no convenience foods. The whole tax code needs to be simplified. People should not have to have a degree in accounting or tax law to understand it. Any legislation that is passed must state how it will be paid for. For major expenditures, like wars, health care systems, education benefits, there should be special referendums for people to vote -- not relying on the political interests of their representatives. *Term limits* Members of Congress and their staffs should be prohibited from working for lobbyists, PACs or other special interest groups for 10 years. A national immigration law should be a top priority. Let U.S citizens vote on several proposals. Reexamine all of our commitments for special funding to foreign governments to see if they still support US National Security goals. IF not, they should be discontinued. All $$ spent should directly support US National Security. No tickee, no shirtee. Reduce the overall number of political appointees, advisors, and others in government. In the government, reduce the ratio of "managers and executives" to the number of actual working level employees. I have no problem with reducing the size of government agencies and reducing their missions. The people of the United States should vote on which government agencies exist. Totally revamp the system of government acquisition. It's based on some model that was developed around WWII and makes no sense in today's environment. Those are some of my ideas.

Name:	Barneget -	Reply
Subject:	Totally agree
Date:	11/11/2011 11:31:58 AM

Never had the pleasure of meeting either GF or Hound, yet like them both. I read their posts whenever I can, and look at their insight much like I look at the daily horoscopes, for entertainment only.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Wow did I miss all the fun
Date:	11/11/2011 11:34:43 AM

You know, MM, you are a Republican "apologist". You can rationalize the worst Republican leaders -- and for you, the means always justify the ends. How is it that Republicans that do wrong are always being "punished" by Democrats, but Democrats that do wrong are "getting what is coming to them". You are a one trick pony, secure in your little conservative world.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Wow did I miss all the fun
Date:	11/11/2011 12:14:37 PM

Well i sure don't apologize for everything that every Republican does like you do with Obama. For example, with Bush and the profligate Republicans i widely criticized them for the Prescription Drug program, Bush's stance on amnesty for illegals, etc. What i mean by Republicans being punished is that they actually resign, unlike Dems. They actually use their scandals as resume enhancers. Let me know if you need a long list of examples......

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Question for you Hound
Date:	11/11/2011 12:40:37 PM

Hound, some good ideas but many of them have little or nothing to do with improving the economy. You seem to be working around the edges just like you criticized the GOP candidates for doing. Put your ideas in quotes with some comments. "For one thing, I think there needs to be a balance in cuts and increases in revenue." We don't have a revenue problem, we have a spending problem. We also know from experience that revenues do not increase with tax rate increases. Just the opposite happens. But if you mean broadening the tax base by bringing the 50% that pay no federal income taxes I would be open minded about this change. "I believe that SS and Medicare needs to be restructured in some serious way. If it is the desire of the people of this country to use SS as a "retirement" program, then it needs to be rethought and changed to that end. As it stands it makes no sense. Social Security disability needs to be restructured and the eligibility narrowed." I agree and over the years a number of GOP politicians have suggested so and have been demonized by Dems. Never happen until the politics change and Dems stop demonizing. But how does this improve the economy unless you are suggesting a reduction in payroll taxes. "Obama care should be repealed and replaced by some kind of universal health care benefit that people can subscribe to with several different levels of coverage, and on a sliding scale for payment." Repealing Obamacare is your best idea to help the economy. However, universal healthcare is absolutely crazy. I could go into a lot of detail but the only way universal care makes even the slightest sense is to make it mandatory for all citizens. If it is voluntary it will quickly devolve into adverse selection and people will only sign up when they are sick. Who do you think will pay for this? American businesses that will cut costs to pay for it which means fewer jobs. And as we have seen in every single country with universal health care it will result in rationing of services, reduced R&D for new and better drugs and a reduced quality of care. Just go to Canada or the UK and try to get an MRI. Universal health care guarantees 10% unemployment, and this in countries who rely on the U.S. for the national defense. economic suicide, pure and simple. "The current welfare system should be discontinued and restructured with a program with limitations as to the length of time one can be eligible, and $$ benefits tied to previous earnings. Food stamps should be available only for the most basic of food items, no convenience foods." Agree but how does this improve the economy unless they cut taxes? "The whole tax code needs to be simplified. People should not have to have a degree in accounting or tax law to understand it. Any legislation that is passed must state how it will be paid for. For major expenditures, like wars, health care systems, education benefits, there should be special referendums for people to vote -- not relying on the political interests of their representatives." I agree that the tax code needs to be scrapped in favor of something simpler and fairer. But your idea about referendums on major expenditures is unconstitutional and would not work. And besides, how does this help the economy? The only way it will work is if the job creaters are left with more money to invest in new jobs. "*Term limits* Members of Congress and their staffs should be prohibited from working for lobbyists, PACs or other special interest groups for 10 years." I have commented on this before because on the surface it has appeal but it won't work. All that will happen is that the special interests will turn their attention to next batch to run. And also all the power and knowledge will end up in the lap of the staff because we will constantly have new members. And besides, the only way this helps the economy is if they don't create new laws and regulations that harm businesses. Fat chance that would the outcome. "A national immigration law should be a top priority. Let U.S citizens vote on several proposals." We don't need a new law. We need to enforce existing laws and modify them to make more sense out who we want to let in legally. But until we enforce the current laws we will still have illegals. That would help the economy. "Reexamine all of our commitments for special funding to foreign governments to see if they still support US National Security goals. IF not, they should be discontinued. All $$ spent should directly support US National Security. No tickee, no shirtee." Agreed but again how does this help the economy unless you mean it translates into lower taxes?

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Question for you Hound
Date:	11/11/2011 1:28:36 PM

But, if you do some of these things, it WILL improve the economy. I don't agree we have just a spending problem. That's what Conservatives say, but I don't happen to agree with it. Yes, we need to cut spending, but we also need at least a temporary increase in revenue. Don't pretend that Republicans won't spend money. They just want to spend it differently than Democrats. They have just as big a reputation for earmarks and needless spending as any Democrat. And we need to put money into our country's infrastructure. Our country is literally falling apart. In and around the cities the roads are totally inadequate to handle the traffic. So more money needs to be put into roads, or into mass transit. And we need to spend money on Education. I don't particularly care if this is done by the States or on a national level. But we are falling behind IN THE WORLD in the area of education. I think the government should set out a broad framework of goals for education. Just closing our eyes to it is not a solution. And Alabama is a prime example of what happens when you do. And you notice, I want actual people to vote on the big stuff -- I want to take these decision out of the hands of politicians and I want the citizens to vote -- just like in county and states. The citizens of this country need to get involved in the direction of our country -- not just complaining about it. Not everyone will be happy, but so what?

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Wow did I miss all the fun
Date:	11/11/2011 1:40:24 PM

You see, MM, it's not just all about the money. There is a quality of life issue too. As Americans, we need to decide what our quality of life is going to be, and how the things that people agree are the priorities are going to be paid for. That's the problem with Republicans. They can't get past that it is all about the money. Short term gains. The tech bubble, the housing bubble... Everything is great until it's not. And as far as Health care, I didn't say that the government should pay for it. I said that people should have access to health care that they pay for. The reason a large number of people don't have health care is because they can't afford the $750 - $850 a month for coverage. No one said that companies would pay for it in total. Universal is probably a misnomer. We can never have "Universal" Health care. But we should strive to make it affordable for those who want it and are willing to pay for it. And that covers a really large group of people. Nothing says that you have to get it through your employer at all.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	Wow did I miss all the fun
Date:	11/11/2011 2:29:54 PM

OK, I better understand your definition of universal. That's probably a bad term to use in your scenario because it generally means government-provided health insurance and includes a mandate. What you are suggesting is that you open up some form of insurance options to everyone. That still doesn't resolve the issue of adverse selection and the extra costs will be borne by the consumer. A good percentage of the uninsured are there voluntarily. If they know they can get insurance when they get sick that will only increase the number of uninsured, not decrease it. And when only the sick sign up whoever provides that insurance (presumably private companies under contract to the government as the federal program works) will pass those costs along to others. It is simple mathematics. Probably ways to get around this but am not sure. I still do not think any government run health care system is the solution and the uncertainty while the sausage is made would be ruinous to the economy. I frankly this issue needs to be set aside until after Obamacare is repealed in its entirety and the economy is back on track.

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	Respectfully disagree
Date:	11/11/2011 4:13:23 PM

The citizens should NEVER be allowed to vote on any referendum at the national level. That is why we elect Representatives, to vote for us. To open a national election to the voters is to open it to mob rule, and mob rule gets "down sparkles" from me.There are enough folks concentrated in certain metropolitan/urban areas to sway the vote against the majority of the country.

Control is what matters. The federal government needs to get out of our lives and send control back to the States where the framers intended MOST governmental functions to lie. Local, where it is easier to exert influence on the politicians and they don't have the cover of running back to Washington to hide from all but the wealthiest of their constituents.

As for health care in America, the only thing wrong with the system we have is, everything!! Do away with health insurance, or third party payees, i.e. government programs, and go to direct purchase of health care services and prices would plummet. But since we know that ain't gonna happen just let them sale across state lines and watch insurance prices fall. Image having 7-10 regional offices as opposed to having to have 50 different state offices like BCBS currently has

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Respectfully disagree
Date:	11/11/2011 4:22:16 PM

Considering that our current representatives can't agree on anything and can't get anything done, other than agree that "In God we Trust" is still our national motto, I'll take my chances with the public referendum. At least I know when American citizen aren't being bought by lobbyists and special interest groups. They can do the routine stuff, but for my money, I'd rather have a direct vote on the big stuff. Bet we wouldn't have any more 10 year wars.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Wow did I miss all the fun
Date:	11/11/2011 4:24:46 PM

We agree that we don't need to have government health care. I have no desire to go the route of Canada and the UK.

Name:	Lifer -	Reply
Subject:	Respectfully disagree
Date:	11/11/2011 4:54:01 PM

If you don't think that people, in groups or mobs can be bought you need to go join any one of the many "Occupy" movements around the country. Do you really think they ore not getting paid, either directly or indirectly?

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Respectfully disagree
Date:	11/11/2011 7:49:16 PM

Who do you think is getting paid? And by whom?

Name:	buzzbuster -	Reply
Subject:	Is Perry kaput?
Date:	11/12/2011 3:25:52 AM

Any of the current field would be better than Obama! The Dems are the really sad ones with nobody but the failure that is in place at the moment.

Name:	MrHodja -	Reply
Subject:	Question for you Hound
Date:	11/12/2011 9:02:30 AM (updated 11/12/2011 9:05:45 AM)

I think the fundamental problem with education is not in the classroom but in the home. Parents don't instill in their kids the value of academic excellence nor nor an expectation that the kids will achieve that excellence.

And more money is not the solution because it will just pay teachers more with no demand for increased performance. The key to improving the children's learning experience is to introduce competition between schools. There is one of the European countries (Holland or Belgium) that did just that - gave students the choice of schools to attend, and paid the schools based on how many students chose their school. Achievement and excellence in the classroom skyrocketed. John Stossel had a special on Fox News the other night that related similar experiences in the US with charter schools.

In Montgomery we have several really good private schools, and those who can afford it send their kids there so they can get a good education and be in a safe atmosphere where the expectation is that they learn and behave responsibly. Those families have at least some control over the their kids' education in that they can vote with their feet. If a private school doesn't perform it dies. We need something similar for our public schools.

And teachers unions, like many unions, serve a good purpose in advancing the welfare of the teachers. But like many unions they take things way too far. The unions should ensure teachers are not unfairly dismissed, but they basically fight ALL terminations, even when the teacher simply can't or won't teach. I have a daughter-in-law who teaches in the Montgomery public school system. She had to teach three years before she achieved tenure, and in each of those years she and all the non-tenured teachers were issued pink slips, with the school system rehiring only those who they wanted and/or needed. That seems to be a good way to eliminate early those who can't teach, but I don't advocate that to be the case every year of a teacher's teaching career....but there certainly needs to be leeway to get non- or poorly- performing teachers from the classroom. As it is now the unions prevent that.

Name:	Talullahhound -	Reply
Subject:	Question for you Hound
Date:	11/12/2011 9:45:38 AM

You and I are in agreement that the emphasis on education starts in the home. Parents need to be involved with the education of their children, and have high expectations of success in school. I think that parents have to put the emphasis on learning, and I think schools have to create an environment for success. I'm actually in favor of a longer school day, a longer school year, and a more disciplined approach to education. I have no personal experience with teacher's unions. But I think it is a smart idea for teachers to have a one year at a time contract. I would think it would keep teachers on their toes, realizing that if they don't measure up they will not have a job.

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	test
Date:	11/14/2011 2:00:04 PM

This a paragraph.

This is another paragraph.

Name:	GoneFishin -	Reply
Subject:	another test
Date:	11/14/2011 2:02:36 PM

This is a paragraph. This is another paragraph.

Name:	MartiniMan -	Reply
Subject:	another test
Date:	11/14/2011 2:56:53 PM

Well sure enough you are right. When you show the entire thread it wacks the line breaks. Weird stuff. Responded to your email.

Quick Links
Lake Pat Cleburne News
Lake Pat Cleburne Photos
Lake Pat Cleburne Videos