On Tue, 28 Oct 2003 06:09:33 GMT, "Moorehead Johnson III"
<moorehead_johnson@hotmail.com> wrote:

>
>"Krisblake" <Krisblakemy2luvs@aol.com> wrote in message
>news:lj8rpvskidguimg2e3p11foq4skum0mh94@4ax.com...
>> On 27 Oct 2003 06:19:51 -0800, moorehead_johnson@hotmail.com
>> (Moorehead Johnson) wrote:
>>
>> >Bob <sd@sd.net> wrote in message news:<Xns94208EC4C5B57SD@68.6.19.6>...
>> >> Krisblake <Krisblakemy2luvs@aol.com> wrote in
>> >> news:mjgopv8bbd0m6dmsc02jinmppfmr80b583@4ax.com:
>> >>
>> >> > On Sun, 26 Oct 2003 21:20:27 GMT, "Moorehead Johnson"
>> >> ><moorehead_johnson@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>
>> >> >>"Patrick Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
>> >> >>news:szkbrs47egm.fsf@fnord.io.com...
>> >> >>> "Moorehead Johnson" <moorehead_johnson@hotmail.com> writes:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> >"Patrick Humphrey" <patrick@io.com> wrote in message
>> >> >>> >news:szkfzhg7fzk.fsf@fnord.io.com...
>> >> >>> >> "Moorehead Johnson" <moorehead_johnson@hotmail.com>
writes:
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> [...]
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> >> >I'm well aware of what a sig is - that is the waste
of
>bandwidth
>> >> >>> >> >that morons put on the bottom of their posts that
NO ONE EVER
>> >> >>> >> >READS because they are typically the sign of an
AOL newbie who
>> >> >>> >> >just posted to usenet
>> >>  for
>> >> >>> >> >the first time and doesn't realize how annoying
they are.
>> >>
>> >> >>> >> Too bad I've only been hanging around Usenet since 1989,
back
>> >> >>> >> when
>> >>  .sigs
>> >> >>> >> were in use, too.  (Free clue:  your opinion is yours,
not
>> >> >>> >> everyone else's.)
>> >>
>> >> >>> >And you STILL haven't learned about sigs?  You really are
a moron,
>> >> >>> >aren't you?  I'm surprised you're not top-posting me.
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>> Since I never adopted that practice, why should I start now?
>> >> >>
>> >> >>The practice of being intelligent rather than being a moron is
>thought
>> >> >>by most folks (outside the babykillers, anyway)
>> >> >
>> >> > Not a very intelligent response....
>> >> >
>> >>  But a very typical response from yet another anti-choice loon.  :o)
>> >
>> >So then you disagree that it is better to be intelligent than not?
>>
>> No. I'd rather be me than you.
>
>So you aspire to be...

Smart, not dumb (like you).