We can have anyone we want

  1. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    In response to Joebreidey's comment:

    It would be interesting to have a team made up of just ex-Sox players, just to see how they would do. I say look out MLB!

    We've given away very little over the past ten years.

    Murphy has had a good year, but he is a .804 career hitter primarily as a platoon player.
    Reddck has had a good year, but with a .652 OPS over his last 30 games.  And he still has a 126/48 K/W which is decidedly below average.
    Masterson has had one good year.
    The jury is still out on Rizzo/Kelly.
    Hanley has had a great career, but we were going to have to give something up for Beckett.
    Lowrie has been okay for half-season.
    Arroyo a solid #3.

    That's not a lot over a ten-year period.



    Reddick is a star on his team, with banners in the stands and everything. I'm happy for him. He wouldn't have gotten that attention here.

    Arroyo...I actually forgot about him. I was really annoyed after he was gone. I really liked him. Even enough to buy his CD. I think Beltre did OK after he was gone as well.

    Btw, nice homerun by Coco. I guess he wanted to join in the fun, too.

     
  2. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    In response to dannycater's comment:

    The Players respond to the Manager. You don't fire the Players.



    Agreed. And the "firings" will continue until BV gets everyone off the team that he doesn't like, or who doesn't like him. Aceves is clearly up next, by what is becoming a pattern..."the insulting comments to the press" routine after he's probably done with annoying Aceves personally first.
     
  3. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

     

    It's all in the marketing. You want the King? Done. All the Sox have to do is use any of the players they've traded away as examples of what can happen to your team when you get an ex-Sox player. Whenever the Sox trade away players, they can make their team better. They can even become the best player on your team, and at the very least, be a spark for better production from your team. The examples are endless. Sox players seem to be pure gold when they leave the Sox.

    Either the team has no idea who a player is before they trade them away, or the player decides to show the team how wrong they were about them. Either way, it's a win-win for the team that gets them.

    I think that the history of this happening to teams on the receiving end should add value to any possible trades the Sox make. We should be able to give them anyone for King Felix, and those players will probably make everyone wonder why we traded them away to get the King, or anyone you can name for that matter.

    It would be interesting to have a team made up of just ex-Sox players, just to see how they would do. I say look out MLB!

     




    You mean like Bay?


    Now if you were only GM for Seattle...

     



    I thought you agreed with JBay when he said I was posting to get attention. Stop giving me attention. And btw, there's a word for guys like JBay who surround themselves with Yankee trolls because they beat up on the Sox fans he doesn't like so he doesn't have to do it himself. I can't put the word here, but let's just say he doesn't have the        to do it himself, and needs the backup. It would also fit a guy who doesn't debate posters, he just has their posts removed. I don't know any guys who behave like that.

     




    I don't think I ever agreed with JBay that you want attention. Other stuff, yes. Why you brought that up is curious. No matter; it's probably a good idea for all concerned, provided you don't bring me up in other contexts, like you did recently.

     



    Yes you did. You said you "trust him" and you'll take his word for it. And twice I had my posts removed arguing with you, which was either you or him. No one else would care, and there wasn't anything in my post that would have it removed by the forum. But your girlfriend JBay says he emails the director of the boston forums which no one else would even know because they don't run crying to him. Apparently, this director doesn't know what an       JBay is.

     



    No, I believe I said I would take his word for it on a baseball matter, and, to be honest, I was just being polite in that particular instance since he & I were annoying each other via our partisan tendencies and I didn't want to escalate it.  However, you conjectured I was in cahoots with him (BTW, we're not going steady); and since you couldn't "out" me as a Yankee fan in disguise (your personal brand of McCarthyism when someone says something about the RS you don't like; do you really believe the stuff you write? Most of those posters are clearly RS fans. Maybe you're a Yankee fan trying to make RS fans look bad, LOL), perhaps this was the next best thing wrt whatever odd convolution of accusations works for you in some odd attempt to discredit someone as self-justification for a previous volley of remarks where it appears you were on the short end.

    If/When they purge the NYY fans (including me), don't be surprised if you're one of the casualties, among a few others. And, no, I don't have any insider info.

     



    Actually you are a Yankee fan in disguise. You post on a Sox board as "Nhsteven", which sounds like you're a Sox fan from NH. And you don't identify yourself as a Yankee fan anywhere in your profille or posts. Anyone reading the board would think your comments are coming from a Sox fan. But you know that, it's why you included "nh" in your name.

    Everytime I'm arguing with you about something, you bring up things that have nothing to do with the argument to try and change the subject. My guess is because you know who deleted my posts, and maybe you did it yourself.

    Either way, I can't imagine having a conversation with someone who deletes posts or has someone else delete posts his doesn't like. It's lame and only total babies would do that.

     



    Patently false. I use this name in many of my personal IDs that have nothing to do with this site. My avatar clearly claims I'm a Yankee fan, as per your request way back when. You're the one who changes the subject BTW, with many posters.  And all of the other stuff regarding the forum politics and me is completely wrong. Of course, granted, there is no way for you to know for sure or for me to prove that. I guess you know how it feels to be falsely accused,  such as when a bunch of posters call you pike.  However, little matter at this point; you can think what you want.  




    .
     
  4. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to dannycater's comment:

    The Players respond to the Manager. You don't fire the Players.



    Agreed. And the "firings" will continue until BV gets everyone off the team that he doesn't like, or who doesn't like him. Aceves is clearly up next, by what is becoming a pattern..."the insulting comments to the press" routine after he's probably done with annoying Aceves personally first.

     



    Actually, IMO just the opposite. BV going in, could not pick his coaches and had little or no say about the culture or the diva players, i.e, he was a puppet MGR. The FO finally realized this (unless it's just a charade of late); and the big trade could indicate he's coming back. He deserves a chance to straighten out this mess, which would mean at least 1 more year. However, I could see where the FO may not want to have that patience. and just blow it up; especially if Farrell can get out of his last yr with Toronto.
     
  5. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    OH Kim, there is one exception. If I see a slanderous post, I would hit the "report abuse" button. However, I can count the # of times on both hands how often I've used it.
     
  6. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

     

    It's all in the marketing. You want the King? Done. All the Sox have to do is use any of the players they've traded away as examples of what can happen to your team when you get an ex-Sox player. Whenever the Sox trade away players, they can make their team better. They can even become the best player on your team, and at the very least, be a spark for better production from your team. The examples are endless. Sox players seem to be pure gold when they leave the Sox.

    Either the team has no idea who a player is before they trade them away, or the player decides to show the team how wrong they were about them. Either way, it's a win-win for the team that gets them.

    I think that the history of this happening to teams on the receiving end should add value to any possible trades the Sox make. We should be able to give them anyone for King Felix, and those players will probably make everyone wonder why we traded them away to get the King, or anyone you can name for that matter.

    It would be interesting to have a team made up of just ex-Sox players, just to see how they would do. I say look out MLB!

     




    You mean like Bay?


    Now if you were only GM for Seattle...

     



    I thought you agreed with JBay when he said I was posting to get attention. Stop giving me attention. And btw, there's a word for guys like JBay who surround themselves with Yankee trolls because they beat up on the Sox fans he doesn't like so he doesn't have to do it himself. I can't put the word here, but let's just say he doesn't have the        to do it himself, and needs the backup. It would also fit a guy who doesn't debate posters, he just has their posts removed. I don't know any guys who behave like that.

     




    I don't think I ever agreed with JBay that you want attention. Other stuff, yes. Why you brought that up is curious. No matter; it's probably a good idea for all concerned, provided you don't bring me up in other contexts, like you did recently.

     



    Yes you did. You said you "trust him" and you'll take his word for it. And twice I had my posts removed arguing with you, which was either you or him. No one else would care, and there wasn't anything in my post that would have it removed by the forum. But your girlfriend JBay says he emails the director of the boston forums which no one else would even know because they don't run crying to him. Apparently, this director doesn't know what an       JBay is.

     



    No, I believe I said I would take his word for it on a baseball matter, and, to be honest, I was just being polite in that particular instance since he & I were annoying each other via our partisan tendencies and I didn't want to escalate it.  However, you conjectured I was in cahoots with him (BTW, we're not going steady); and since you couldn't "out" me as a Yankee fan in disguise (your personal brand of McCarthyism when someone says something about the RS you don't like; do you really believe the stuff you write? Most of those posters are clearly RS fans. Maybe you're a Yankee fan trying to make RS fans look bad, LOL), perhaps this was the next best thing wrt whatever odd convolution of accusations works for you in some odd attempt to discredit someone as self-justification for a previous volley of remarks where it appears you were on the short end.

    If/When they purge the NYY fans (including me), don't be surprised if you're one of the casualties, among a few others. And, no, I don't have any insider info.

     



    Actually you are a Yankee fan in disguise. You post on a Sox board as "Nhsteven", which sounds like you're a Sox fan from NH. And you don't identify yourself as a Yankee fan anywhere in your profille or posts. Anyone reading the board would think your comments are coming from a Sox fan. But you know that, it's why you included "nh" in your name.

    Everytime I'm arguing with you about something, you bring up things that have nothing to do with the argument to try and change the subject. My guess is because you know who deleted my posts, and maybe you did it yourself.

    Either way, I can't imagine having a conversation with someone who deletes posts or has someone else delete posts his doesn't like. It's lame and only total babies would do that.

     



    Patently false. I use this name in many of my personal IDs that have nothing to do with this site. My avatar clearly claims I'm a Yankee fan, as per your request way back when. You're the one who changes the subject BTW, with many posters.  And all of the other stuff regarding the forum politics and me is completely wrong. Of course, granted, there is no way for you to know for sure or for me to prove that. I guess you know how it feels to be falsely accused,  such as when a bunch of posters call you pike.  However, little matter at this point; you can think what you want.  




    .

     



    Your avatar looks like a guy swinging a baseball bat to me. Did you pick the one picture that covered the team's logo on purpose? There are so many pics you could have used of your revered team. 

     
  7. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    And never with you, despite your ramblings and false accusations. They never crossed that line IMO.
     
  8. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

     

    It's all in the marketing. You want the King? Done. All the Sox have to do is use any of the players they've traded away as examples of what can happen to your team when you get an ex-Sox player. Whenever the Sox trade away players, they can make their team better. They can even become the best player on your team, and at the very least, be a spark for better production from your team. The examples are endless. Sox players seem to be pure gold when they leave the Sox.

    Either the team has no idea who a player is before they trade them away, or the player decides to show the team how wrong they were about them. Either way, it's a win-win for the team that gets them.

    I think that the history of this happening to teams on the receiving end should add value to any possible trades the Sox make. We should be able to give them anyone for King Felix, and those players will probably make everyone wonder why we traded them away to get the King, or anyone you can name for that matter.

    It would be interesting to have a team made up of just ex-Sox players, just to see how they would do. I say look out MLB!

     




    You mean like Bay?


    Now if you were only GM for Seattle...

     



    I thought you agreed with JBay when he said I was posting to get attention. Stop giving me attention. And btw, there's a word for guys like JBay who surround themselves with Yankee trolls because they beat up on the Sox fans he doesn't like so he doesn't have to do it himself. I can't put the word here, but let's just say he doesn't have the        to do it himself, and needs the backup. It would also fit a guy who doesn't debate posters, he just has their posts removed. I don't know any guys who behave like that.

     




    I don't think I ever agreed with JBay that you want attention. Other stuff, yes. Why you brought that up is curious. No matter; it's probably a good idea for all concerned, provided you don't bring me up in other contexts, like you did recently.

     



    Yes you did. You said you "trust him" and you'll take his word for it. And twice I had my posts removed arguing with you, which was either you or him. No one else would care, and there wasn't anything in my post that would have it removed by the forum. But your girlfriend JBay says he emails the director of the boston forums which no one else would even know because they don't run crying to him. Apparently, this director doesn't know what an       JBay is.

     



    No, I believe I said I would take his word for it on a baseball matter, and, to be honest, I was just being polite in that particular instance since he & I were annoying each other via our partisan tendencies and I didn't want to escalate it.  However, you conjectured I was in cahoots with him (BTW, we're not going steady); and since you couldn't "out" me as a Yankee fan in disguise (your personal brand of McCarthyism when someone says something about the RS you don't like; do you really believe the stuff you write? Most of those posters are clearly RS fans. Maybe you're a Yankee fan trying to make RS fans look bad, LOL), perhaps this was the next best thing wrt whatever odd convolution of accusations works for you in some odd attempt to discredit someone as self-justification for a previous volley of remarks where it appears you were on the short end.

    If/When they purge the NYY fans (including me), don't be surprised if you're one of the casualties, among a few others. And, no, I don't have any insider info.

     



    Actually you are a Yankee fan in disguise. You post on a Sox board as "Nhsteven", which sounds like you're a Sox fan from NH. And you don't identify yourself as a Yankee fan anywhere in your profille or posts. Anyone reading the board would think your comments are coming from a Sox fan. But you know that, it's why you included "nh" in your name.

    Everytime I'm arguing with you about something, you bring up things that have nothing to do with the argument to try and change the subject. My guess is because you know who deleted my posts, and maybe you did it yourself.

    Either way, I can't imagine having a conversation with someone who deletes posts or has someone else delete posts his doesn't like. It's lame and only total babies would do that.

     



    Patently false. I use this name in many of my personal IDs that have nothing to do with this site. My avatar clearly claims I'm a Yankee fan, as per your request way back when. You're the one who changes the subject BTW, with many posters.  And all of the other stuff regarding the forum politics and me is completely wrong. Of course, granted, there is no way for you to know for sure or for me to prove that. I guess you know how it feels to be falsely accused,  such as when a bunch of posters call you pike.  However, little matter at this point; you can think what you want.  




    .

     



    Your avatar looks like a guy swinging a baseball bat to me. Did you pick the one picture that covered the team's logo on purpose? There are so many pics you could have used of your revered team. 

     




    Good grief; I love that pix. More than 90 % would know that's Mantle. I would gladly pick another.
     
  9. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    PS, you can see the logo on his chest (partly hidden), and his cap (admittedly small)
     
  10. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to dannycater's comment:

    The Players respond to the Manager. You don't fire the Players.



    Agreed. And the "firings" will continue until BV gets everyone off the team that he doesn't like, or who doesn't like him. Aceves is clearly up next, by what is becoming a pattern..."the insulting comments to the press" routine after he's probably done with annoying Aceves personally first.

     



    Actually, IMO just the opposite. BV going in, could not pick his coaches and had little or no say about the culture or the diva players, i.e, he was a puppet MGR. The FO finally realized this (unless it's just a charade of late); and the big trade could indicate he's coming back. He deserves a chance to straighten out this mess, which would mean at least 1 more year. However, I could see where the FO may not want to have that patience. and just blow it up; especially if Farrell can get out of his last yr with Toronto.

     



    Nonsense. Didn't Bob McClure take a personal leave after BV became manager? That's interesting.  It was also said, that BV only spoke to the assistant coaches, and ignored the actual coaches. That's insulting, and also probably his way of making them feel unwelcomed, and that he wanted them gone. It's the Bobby way.

     
  11. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    OH Kim, there is one exception. If I see a slanderous post, I would hit the "report abuse" button. However, I can count the # of times on both hands how often I've used it.



    Slanderous? LOL You're a screenname. There's no slander to screennames.
     
  12. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to dannycater's comment:

    The Players respond to the Manager. You don't fire the Players.



    Agreed. And the "firings" will continue until BV gets everyone off the team that he doesn't like, or who doesn't like him. Aceves is clearly up next, by what is becoming a pattern..."the insulting comments to the press" routine after he's probably done with annoying Aceves personally first.

     



    Actually, IMO just the opposite. BV going in, could not pick his coaches and had little or no say about the culture or the diva players, i.e, he was a puppet MGR. The FO finally realized this (unless it's just a charade of late); and the big trade could indicate he's coming back. He deserves a chance to straighten out this mess, which would mean at least 1 more year. However, I could see where the FO may not want to have that patience. and just blow it up; especially if Farrell can get out of his last yr with Toronto.

     



    Nonsense. Didn't Bob McClure take a personal leave after BV became manager? That's interesting.  It was also said, that BV only spoke to the assistant coaches, and ignored the actual coaches. That's insulting, and also probably his way of making them feel unwelcomed, and that he wanted them gone. It's the Bobby way.

     




    It is rare that a MGR can't pick his own coaches, so if that's what he did, I could see that, not that I'm condoning his subsequent behavior. Also, there were some who didn't want him hired, and maybe McClure fell into that camp.
     
  13. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    Tito was a once in a lifetime peach (personal pecadillos notwithstanding, which is true fopr anyone), but eventually it became too much for him. A MGR for any team is hard, but managing the RS or NYY is probably the 2nd toughest job in America, and, for the moment, the RS job looks tougher.
     
  14. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    Tito was a once in a lifetime peach (personal pecadillos notwithstanding, which is true fopr anyone), but eventually it became too much for him. A MGR for any team is hard, but managing the RS or NYY is probably the 2nd toughest job in America, and, for the moment, the RS job looks tougher.



    And you defend him because he creates chaos in the Sox clubhouse. If I were a Yankee fan, I would love BV, too. I wish the Yankees would take him. I would love to see aftermath of that perfect storm.
     
  15. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    Tito was a once in a lifetime peach (personal pecadillos notwithstanding, which is true fopr anyone), but eventually it became too much for him. A MGR for any team is hard, but managing the RS or NYY is probably the 2nd toughest job in America, and, for the moment, the RS job looks tougher.



    And you defend him because he creates chaos in the Sox clubhouse. If I were a Yankee fan, I would love BV, too. I wish the Yankees would take him. I would love to see aftermath of that perfect storm.

     



    Wrong again. I'm used to it. I defended Tito too when posters wanted him fired.
     
  16. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    OH Kim, there is one exception. If I see a slanderous post, I would hit the "report abuse" button. However, I can count the # of times on both hands how often I've used it.



    Slanderous? LOL You're a screenname. There's no slander to screennames.

     




    Bad semantics on my part. The few times I used it I did pick a category, and I felt slander was an appropriate catch all for the categories shown in total. My mistake.
     
  17. You have chosen to ignore posts from Motown9009. Show Motown9009's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    Their two biggest needs right now are a Manny and a Pedro - a hitter you can depend on to put up great numbers ever year, and a pitcher who's going to be a Cy Young candidate every year. I like Buchholz, but he's a guy who's capable of giving you a great start anytime he goes out, not a sure thing to do it. I want a guy who's going to do it, and when he doesn't it's a rare occurance. They have a lot of guys who can be great some days, not so much other days. They don't have much of a core to build around right now.
     
  18. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    OH Kim, there is one exception. If I see a slanderous post, I would hit the "report abuse" button. However, I can count the # of times on both hands how often I've used it.



    Slanderous? LOL You're a screenname. There's no slander to screennames.

     




    Bad semantics on my part. The few times I used it I did pick a category, and I felt slander was an appropriate catch all for the categories shown in total. My mistake.

     



    I think it's pretty lame to hit report abuse for something you consider slanderous when you're just a screenname. If someone posts something you don't like, I don't understand why a person would not just debate it. I've debated a lot of abusive posts. You think I care that much what someone thinks of me on a baseball forum? IMO it's done to be controlling. And if Yankee fans are all hitting report abuse on Sox fans on a Sox forum -- along with the honorary Yankee fan JBay - Sox posters have a hard time saying anything on their own forum.

    Having said that, I don't think posts should be removed unless they actually fit the description of what is selected as abuse, and not just because someone decides it fits that description. Even if someone is in contact with the director of the forums -- whoever that is.

    All crybabies need their own private forum so other posters can say whatever they want as long as it's not actually abusive, i.e. racist or something along those lines. Removing posts from people debating someone because they are insulted by the comments is ridiculous.

     
  19. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    OH Kim, there is one exception. If I see a slanderous post, I would hit the "report abuse" button. However, I can count the # of times on both hands how often I've used it.



    Slanderous? LOL You're a screenname. There's no slander to screennames.

     




    Bad semantics on my part. The few times I used it I did pick a category, and I felt slander was an appropriate catch all for the categories shown in total. My mistake.

     



    I think it's pretty lame to hit report abuse for something you consider slanderous when you're just a screenname. If someone posts something you don't like, I don't understand why a person would not just debate it. I've debated a lot of abusive posts. You think I care that much what someone thinks of me on a baseball forum? IMO it's done to be controlling. And if Yankee fans are all hitting report abuse on Sox fans on a Sox forum -- along with the honorary Yankee fan JBay - Sox posters have a hard time saying anything on their own forum.

    Having said that, I don't think posts should be removed unless they actually fit the description of what is selected as abuse, and not just because someone decides it fits that description. Even if someone is in contact with the director of the forums -- whoever that is.

    All crybabies need their own private forum so other posters can say whatever they want as long as it's not actually abusive, i.e. racist or something along those lines. Removing posts from people debating someone because they are insulted by the comments is ridiculous.

     



    Incorrect again; 1st of all, in the 7 yrs I've been here, I hit that button maybe 6x; and it was  for disguised expletives, sexual and/or racist comments directed at someone. And, if you don't care what goes on a forum, then what is all your complaining about all these yrs? 

    IMO, you're just in the mood to argue, or you would have given up several posts ago.
     
  20. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    I also doubt JBay is the middleman; in general you have quite an imagination, and an unhealthy one at that.
     
  21. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    I also doubt JBay is the middleman; in general you have quite an imagination, and an unhealthy one at that.



    Actually, I wouldn't even know that if JBay didn't say so himself. That's why he appears to be the spokesperson for BDC. And you hit the button for disguised expletives? What? Are you 10-years-old?
     
  22. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    Yes, LOL, that must be it.
     
  23. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    Yes, LOL, that must be it.



    I would bet you $100,000 you NEVER hit the report abuse button on a Yankee fan.
     
  24. You have chosen to ignore posts from nhsteven. Show nhsteven's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    Yes, LOL, that must be it.



    I would bet you $100,000 you NEVER hit the report abuse button on a Yankee fan.

     




    Gosh, what a shocking thing for you to say; and false again.
     
  25. You have chosen to ignore posts from kimsaysthis. Show kimsaysthis's posts

    Re: We can have anyone we want

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    In response to kimsaysthis' comment:

    In response to nhsteven's comment:

    Yes, LOL, that must be it.



    I would bet you $100,000 you NEVER hit the report abuse button on a Yankee fan.

     




    Gosh, what a shocking thing for you to say; and false again.

     



    Well, it definitely wasn't your new good friend, Mikey, whom you've talked recently a number of times like compadres. It's amazing the trouble you went to to get rid of Beni's threads, and yet Benitoismyhero is fine because it's Mikey.

    You do realize that all the posters who you thought were Beni just agreeing with himself, were Mikey, right? Knowing now Mikey's obsession with politics, all the immitations were political names and avatars like small-package for Anthony Weiner, and probably even chain-reaction with Dick Cheney who now supports him and lauds over his posts on the political forum. And let's not forget that Mikey's big obsession was getting rid of Beni.

     
Sections
Shortcuts

Share