Home | Contact Us | FAQ | Search & Site Map | Link to Us
Sign In | Join | Other 45 Sites in Network
HomeAnnouncements
Discussion Groups
By Brand
BMWChevroletDodgeFordGMHondaLexusMercedes-BenzNissanPeugeotToyotaVolkswagenOther Brands
By Topic
4x4 CarsRVsDrivingMaintenance & RepairCar AudioCollectible Cars
Country Specific
Australian ForumsUK Forums
ArticlesAuto InsuranceBuyingCars & TechnologyMaintenanceMiscellaneousSafety
DMV Resources
Related Topics
MotorcyclesBoatsMore Topics ...

Re: He's baaaaaaaaaaaaaack!

Tip: Looking for answers? Try searching our database.



You are accessing this site in a read-only mode. For full access to all member benefits, including message posting, please login or register. Registration is completely free, simple, and takes only a few seconds.

Login | Free CarKB.com registration | Whole discussion thread

The message you are replying to and its parents are listed in the reverse order with the most recent posts first. This might not be the whole discussion thread. To read all the messages in this thread please click here.

Re: He's baaaaaaaaaaaaaack!

mac davis11 Sep 2006 14:50
>>you are 100% correct and I agree with what you have to say about this.  My
>>point now, as it was in the beginning with craig was simple.  Though the
[quoted text clipped - 5 lines]
>wide variety of topics.  dodge trucks is simply a place holder, the
>topic of discussion is wide open.

<snip>

For sure... It's been my experience that newsgroups that stay strictly on topic
usually dry up and blow away...
Sure, this is a good place to get and give help about Dodge trucks, but there
are only so many questions to ask/answer... the wide range of other stuff we
talk about is what keeps the group going between the "real" purpose of the
group..

IMHO, restricting talk here to dodge is like restricting the talk at a Lions
Club meeting to charity events... After a while you have an empty room to talk
to.. YMWV
Mac

https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis
https://home.comcast.net/~mac.davis/wood_stuff.htm

theguy@whatever.net11 Sep 2006 14:02
>you are 100% correct and I agree with what you have to say about this.  My
>point now, as it was in the beginning with craig was simple.  Though the
>title of the group indicates one thing, as with any un-moderated group, any
>topic is fair game.  We both know that we all talk about so much in here
>that is not dodge truck related it is not funny.

i agree with you.  in a way, it is funny though, i enjoy reading the
wide variety of topics.  dodge trucks is simply a place holder, the
topic of discussion is wide open.

>I am not a religious person, but I can not and will not fault Budd for his
>feelings, thoughts and beliefs and I don't think that it is right that
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>on a incorrect posting is the right thing to do also, but there has to be a
>line drawn some where, right?.  I think it ALL should just be left at that.

agreed again.  i really am trying to do just that.  

>>>Hey a.shole, what the f.ck don't you understand!  If you don't f.cking 
>>>like
[quoted text clipped - 92 lines]
>>>>
>>>> Craig C.

azwiley111 Sep 2006 05:16
you are 100% correct and I agree with what you have to say about this.  My
point now, as it was in the beginning with craig was simple.  Though the
title of the group indicates one thing, as with any un-moderated group, any
topic is fair game.  We both know that we all talk about so much in here
that is not dodge truck related it is not funny.

I am not a religious person, but I can not and will not fault Budd for his
feelings, thoughts and beliefs and I don't think that it is right that
everyone appears to be doing just that.  On the other hand though (sorry
Budd) I also don't feel that religion need be introduced in every single
solitary discussion in here.  The sig line is one thing, correcting some one
on a incorrect posting is the right thing to do also, but there has to be a
line drawn some where, right?.  I think it ALL should just be left at that.

>>Hey a.shole, what the f.ck don't you understand!  If you don't f.cking 
>>like
[quoted text clipped - 92 lines]
>>>
>>> Craig C.

theguy@whatever.net11 Sep 2006 04:42
>Hey a.shole, what the f.ck don't you understand!  If you don't f.cking like
>it, don't f.cking read it you Dee Dee Dee!
>This is an un f.cking moderated group!  Now sit the f.ck down, shut the f.ck 
>up or get the f.ck out and STOP trying to f.cking moderate!

larry, look, the same argument you use against craig, he can use
against you.  this is an unmoderated ng, you are correct.  that simply
means that everyone can say whatever they want, including craig.  now,
we would hope that common sense would enter into all of this
somewhere, but of course common sense is not so common.  the deal
really is that craig is using some common sense but you want to argue
individual rights.  in an unmoderated ng, i suppose that individual
rights rule becuase people can be as moronic as they chose to be.
never the less, you are using a philosophy that is just as valid for
craig as it is for budd.  craig isn't trying to moderate any more than
he is trying to get budd to stop moderating this ng as a religious
debate.  in the end though, craig and budd can pretty much say
whatever the f.ck they want to say.  obviously, common sense has no
place here as friendships and emotion prevail.  me?  i got no problem
with that.  i got no problem with budd.  he has every right to be
whatever he choses to be.  he has made it pretty clear what he choses
to be.  i'm willing to let that go, but you really got to let craig be
what he choses to be.  in this case, he really is just a fairly sane
voice in a fog of stupidity, but that is just my opinion.

>>> No, the name of the group, alt.autos.dodge.trucks, merely means the
>>> primary
[quoted text clipped - 61 lines]
>>
>> Craig C.

azwiley111 Sep 2006 03:54
Hey a.shole, what the f.ck don't you understand!  If you don't f.cking like
it, don't f.cking read it you Dee Dee Dee!
This is an un f.cking moderated group!  Now sit the f.ck down, shut the f.ck 
up or get the f.ck out and STOP trying to f.cking moderate!

>> No, the name of the group, alt.autos.dodge.trucks, merely means the
>> primary
[quoted text clipped - 61 lines]
>
> Craig C.

craig@metronet.com11 Sep 2006 03:21
> No, the name of the group, alt.autos.dodge.trucks, merely means the primary
> indicated topic of the group is Dodge trucks but, by virtue of being
> UNMODERATED, almost any topic is permitted.

Your religious topics are unwelcome.  Are you too ignorant to see that?

> Oh, btw, I only talk about my beliefs when the Bible is misquoted,
> misinterpreted or an attack is made on my beliefs, all of which have
> happened in this Dodge newsgroup.

No, you spout your sh.t unlike any "victim" I have ever seen.  Were you
a.s raped by a priest?  Is that the drive behind your constant
religious mantra?  (Even if this is the case, I'd still like you to
understand that this IS NOT the ng for that discussion.  Try
alt.religion.a.s.rape.budd.will.he.ever.shut.up)

> Again for the anti-Christian bigots, the group is unmoderated. Feel free to
> leave if it bothers you so much.

Or ... YOU can leave and spread your nonsense to a religious group,
where it BELONGS.  This is alt.autos.dodge.trucks.

> There you go moderating again. Why don't you just go start your own group
> and you can only discuss your topics?

alt.autos.dodge.trucks.  What does that mean to you?

> I (me, myself, I, first person singular pronoun) have never said it is the
> answer to all mankinds problems, but the Bible does.

Shut the f.ck up for christ's sake.

> > Correct.  Then some "unnamed" jackass started all of the God talk.
>
> Ah, you're talking about the person that got all bent out of shape when I
> mentioned my personal beliefs in a thread a couple years ago. Shame on you
> for calling them names.

And where did those beliefs get mentioned?  alt.AUTOS.DODGE.TRUCKS.
See anything out of place there?

> > Futher proving the point of many that religion simply ruins everything.
>
> No, it proves you don't understand Christianity and have no desire to,
> that's all.

My experiences with christianity aside, it still does not change the
FACT that this is not the forum for such discussions.

> > Religious tyranny.
>
> Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!!! ROTFLMBO!!!!!!
>
> Apparently, it's "religious tyranny" in your dictionary to be harrassed for
> having Christian beliefs, evidently.

You are old and apparently retarded as well.  ALT.AUTOS.DODGE.TRUCKS.
Dwell on it.

Craig C.

Budd Cochran11 Sep 2006 01:36
>> Sadly, your stupidity is that you are (or at least are giving the
>> appearance
[quoted text clipped - 4 lines]
> TRUCKS ... NOT GOD, JESUS, THE LAST DAYS, BIBLE, THEOLOGY or other
> PERSONAL CHOICE topics.

No, the name of the group, alt.autos.dodge.trucks, merely means the primary
indicated topic of the group is Dodge trucks but, by virtue of being
UNMODERATED, almost any topic is permitted.

Oh, btw, I only talk about my beliefs when the Bible is misquoted,
misinterpreted or an attack is made on my beliefs, all of which have
happened in this Dodge newsgroup.

>> The sad thing I find here is that a lot of people are trying to moderate
>> the
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> established for that purpose.  Again, for the slow/religious retards,
> this is NOT a religious ng.

Again for the anti-Christian bigots, the group is unmoderated. Feel free to
leave if it bothers you so much.

>> don't like or believe, why the f.ck don't we all just ignore it?
>
> No!  This is a group for talk of Dodge trucks.  Not theology.

There you go moderating again. Why don't you just go start your own group
and you can only discuss your topics?

>> At one time, this group was full of people that talked, shared
>> information
>> and helped people.
>
> Right ... about DODGE TRUCKS.  NOT about whether Christianity is the
> answer for mankind.

I (me, myself, I, first person singular pronoun) have never said it is the
answer to all mankinds problems, but the Bible does.

>>I would even go so far as to say that at one time, each
>> one of us though of the others as "friends."
>
> Correct.  Then some "unnamed" jackass started all of the God talk.

Ah, you're talking about the person that got all bent out of shape when I
mentioned my personal beliefs in a thread a couple years ago. Shame on you
for calling them names.

> Futher proving the point of many that religion simply ruins everything.

No, it proves you don't understand Christianity and have no desire to,
that's all.

>> What the f.ck happen?
>
> Religious tyranny.

Bwa-ha-ha-ha-ha!!!!! ROTFLMBO!!!!!!

Apparently, it's "religious tyranny" in your dictionary to be harrassed for
having Christian beliefs, evidently.

> Craig C.

Killfile me, Craig, or leave the group, what ever you choose.

Signature

Budd Cochran

John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.
It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other."
(John Adams)

--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Warning: Do not use Ultimate-Anonymity
They are worthless spammers that are running a scam.


craig@metronet.com10 Sep 2006 22:28
> Sadly, your stupidity is that you are (or at least are giving the appearance
> of) trying to moderate an un-moderated group.

Oh, kiss my a.s.  I am not trying to moderate anything.  However, the
NAME of this ng indicates that the discussions should be about DODGE
TRUCKS ... NOT GOD, JESUS, THE LAST DAYS, BIBLE, THEOLOGY or other
PERSONAL CHOICE topics.

> The sad thing I find here is that a lot of people are trying to moderate the
> group.  If you want a moderated, invitation only group, start one.

And if I want to talk about god, I'll go to a group that was
established for that purpose.  Again, for the slow/religious retards,
this is NOT a religious ng.

> don't like or believe, why the f.ck don't we all just ignore it?

No!  This is a group for talk of Dodge trucks.  Not theology.

> At one time, this group was full of people that talked, shared information
> and helped people.

Right ... about DODGE TRUCKS.  NOT about whether Christianity is the
answer for mankind.

>I would even go so far as to say that at one time, each
> one of us though of the others as "friends."

Correct.  Then some "unnamed" jackass started all of the God talk.
Futher proving the point of many that religion simply ruins everything.

> What the f.ck happen?

Religious tyranny.

Craig C.

azwiley109 Sep 2006 19:59
Sadly, your stupidity is that you are (or at least are giving the appearance
of) trying to moderate an un-moderated group.

The sad thing I find here is that a lot of people are trying to moderate the
group.  If you want a moderated, invitation only group, start one.  If you
are protecting the interest of the unknowing, as it the case with Snoballs,
that is all well and fine.  But, if it is just something that you simply
don't like or believe, why the f.ck don't we all just ignore it?

At one time, this group was full of people that talked, shared information
and helped people.  I would even go so far as to say that at one time, each
one of us though of the others as "friends."  Then there was the problems
w/Lil Jay, then DD, and god knows who else.

What the f.ck happen?

>> So, you want to censor me if I see a need to respond with a corrected
>> Biblical quote or an explanation from the Scriptures?
[quoted text clipped - 13 lines]
>
> Craig C.

craig@metronet.com09 Sep 2006 19:16
> So, you want to censor me if I see a need to respond with a corrected
> Biblical quote or an explanation from the Scriptures?
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
> my Light under a bushel (Matthew, Mark and Luke) and I'm to keep myself
> acceptable to the Lord (Matthew).

Here we go again.  Try this, thick skull: talk religious nonsense on a
religious ng ... NOT ALT.AUTOS.DODGE.TRUCK.

Your stupidity is not that you believe ... it's that you try to
convince everyone else.  If we want to be brain washed, we'll find you
in alt.religion.*

Craig C.

Budd Cochran09 Sep 2006 18:29
So, you want to censor me if I see a need to respond with a corrected
Biblical quote or an explanation from the Scriptures?

Roy, as I understand and believe the Scriptures, I am to be ready to give
everyone an answer and a reason for my faith (1st Peter). I am to not hide
my Light under a bushel (Matthew, Mark and Luke) and I'm to keep myself
acceptable to the Lord (Matthew).

I apologize for not reading your mind and in that manner discovering I'm not
allowed to type as many words as I see fit to use to reply to a post. A pox
on me!!!!!

Tell me something, would a person of another ethnic persuasion from yourself
be required to deny what that persuasion is in order to respond to a post by
your rules? There's a name for that . . . .

I am a Fundamental, Conservative Christian (an ethnicity by definition) and
I will not deny it for you or anyone.

Oh, golly, this makes six (6) paragraphs!!!!

All you have to do, Roy, is not reply and let me be as I am. Either accept
me or killfile / ignore me. But as long as you continue to tell me what I
can or cannot do, can or cannot be, can or cannot believe, then I will reply
to those comments because, by the Bill of Rights, I have the right to reply
to misquotes and misinterpretations of Scripture, be the Christian I believe
I should be, and believe the Bible is the inerrant Word of God, transcribed
by 47 inspired authors in the form of 66 books with an accuracy of 99.5%
when compared to the oldest copies of the books of the Bible.

Have a good day.
Signature

Budd Cochran

John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.
It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other."
(John Adams)

>> No, Roy, I did not turn them into what you call "religious experiences".
>> Someone else did that.
[quoted text clipped - 27 lines]
>
> Roy

Signature

Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


Roy09 Sep 2006 17:43
> No, Roy, I did not turn them into what you call "religious experiences".
> Someone else did that.

That was enuff said for me but you continue on into a 4 or 5 paragraph.

> I responded as I believe I am supposed, to according to my beliefs, to
> misquotes and untruths about Christianity, which is to offer the
[quoted text clipped - 16 lines]
> If you want to argue with someone over what's in the Bible, take it up
> with God. I'm just the messenger boy.

No you are the one who constantly interjects your belief in the bible into
every response you make as you have here.. Thus my "religious experience"
Not a argument just how I see it..

Roy

Budd Cochran09 Sep 2006 11:55
No, Roy, I did not turn them into what you call "religious experiences".
Someone else did that.

I responded as I believe I am supposed, to according to my beliefs, to
misquotes and untruths about Christianity, which is to offer the corrections
for the quotes and truth instead of untruths. I will continue to do so.

It was the refusal to accept both what the Bible actually says and what
Christianity really is that caused the problem. I just caught the flak
because God, according to the attackers, wasn't available. So, I was told I
was "over the edge", had "lost it", "going too far", etc.

Stop and think carefully, Roy, I only said the Bible says other belief
systems are wrong, that the verses in the Bible have simple meanings, and
that the Bible says those who do not believe as the Scriptures say you
should will go to Hell.

Not one darn time did I say you had to believe as I do or else. That is your
choice

If you want to argue with someone over what's in the Bible, take it up with
God. I'm just the messenger boy.
Signature

Budd Cochran

John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23,

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.
It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other."
(John Adams)

>> Roy, that depends on you and the others.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
>
> Roy

Signature

Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


Roy09 Sep 2006 05:40
> Roy, that depends on you and the others.
>
> If any arguments start with me, it will be because you, theguy, beekeeper,
> T-bone, or someone else chooses to tell me to not practice my beliefs, to
> shut up, ... to censor me, to deny me my Constitutional Right to Freedom
> of Religion, to worship as I please.

Budd, as I see it and saw it before ya did your usual, nobody gives a damn
what ya believe,  if ya believe or not. But every damn thread you involved
youself in immediatly turned into a religious experience. That what ya want
to do that's fine, I'm sure the results will be the same. Worked for me
anyway.

Roy

Budd Cochran08 Sep 2006 20:41
Roy, that depends on you and the others.

If any arguments start with me, it will be because you, theguy, beekeeper,
T-bone, or someone else chooses to tell me to not practice my beliefs, to
shut up, ... to censor me, to deny me my Constitutional Right to Freedom of
Religion, to worship as I please.

If my beliefs include verses in my sigline or responding to false teachings
or misquoted Scriptures, what does that matter to you or the others?

Signature

Budd Cochran

John 3:16-17, Ephesians 2:8-9, Romans 3:23, 6:23, Ephesians 2:8-9

"Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people.
It is wholly inadequate for the government of any other."
(John Adams)

>> And posting with avengeance.
>>
[quoted text clipped - 10 lines]
> Roy
>> beekeep

Signature

Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


Roy08 Sep 2006 17:23
> And posting with avengeance.
>
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
> Now if we could just get Little Jay to come back.

Well, it should make for a interesting week end.

Roy
> beekeep

beekeep08 Sep 2006 17:17
And posting with avengeance.  

I knew he couldn't resist our sand box for too long.  Let the games begin.

Ya don't suppose snohole is paying Budd to take the heat off if him do ya?

Now if we could just get Little Jay to come back.

beekeep

Quick links:

 
Sign In
Join
My Latest Posts
My Monitored Threads
My Blog
My Photo Gallery
My Profile
My Homepage




©2009 Advenet LLC   Privacy Policy - Terms of Use
This website includes both content owned or controlled by Advenet as well as content owned or controlled by third parties.