>Fact is, this is just another salvo in your blanket race wars
>coaching agenda. Which is usually fine, I generally agree
>with you that the stigma exists and I dig the premise of the
>original post.

Not sure what you're crying about now, but YOU brought up
"hires"

>Problem is, you want to apply it to every situation under the
>sun, regardless if it's actually relevant. You said Luke's
>name in post #4, I called out your insinuation and you got
>caught.


Okay. So what does this have to do with your bringing up
"hires" when not relevant?

>You tried to spin it to Mike Brown, you tried to fake
>ignorance, now you're trying to spin it on some semantic
>"hires" lameness. Thing is, if you actually took a second and
>thought about context, your agenda would be much stronger.

Uh. Who brought up "hires?" You or me?























































Oh.


----------------------------



O_E: "Acts like an asshole and posts with imperial disdain"




"I ORBITs the solar system, listenin..."

(C)Keith Murray, "