On 7/7/2012 6:58, Dave Drum -> John Massey wrote:   
      
    DD>> I don't see that your cut & paste mini-effort requires an answer   
      
    JM>> I can see why since it shows you are  just plain wrong about what   
    JM>> doctors make., Kinda shoots to hell you stupid idea that significant   
    JM>> numbers of doctors make even close to 400K.   
      
    DD> I can cherry-pick reports and statistics that support my position as   
    DD> well. So what?   
      
    DD> The claim was that there are more doctors and lawyers in the 1% than   
    DD> rock stars, athletes and actors. You've done nothing, beyond attempted   
    DD> misdirection, to answer that.   
      
      
   First that was not the claim.   
   YOU make the claim that Doctors make up a LARGE part of those in the 1%.   
   Rock stars, athletes and actors and whether there are more of them than   
   Doctors and Layers didn't come in until I was making fun of your laughable   
   claim. You use that as a dodge.   
   SO Cherry-pick away. Present something that backs up the ludicrous idea that a   
   "Large number," say 50% +1,  of practicing  Doctors are in the 1%. We will get   
   to the lawyers later.   
      
    DD>> which  you would pay no attention to anyway.   
      
    JM>> I always pay attention to what foolish people (liberals) believe.   
    JM>> Reminds me of how correct my friend is when he refers to the Dumb   
    JM>> Masses, and provides seconds of hummor.   
      
    DD> Why is it you lock steppers use "liberal" like a curse word?   
      
    It is a derogatory term  a lot milder than what I am allowed to call a   
   liberal in this echo.   
      
    DD>> I was merely enquiring as to the chances of your presenting future links   
    DD>> in a more usable manner   
      
    JM>> I don't think that is what you were doing.   
      
    DD> I really don't think you think.   
      
    DD>> or if you are going to persist in being an inconsiderate berk like most   
    DD>> of those of your indicated political leanings.   
      
    JM>> I thik you ment to say jerk, not berk. Anyway,  am only inconiserate to   
    JM>> those that I have no respect for.   
      
    DD> I typed berk - I meant berk.   
      
   An idiot. Similar in tone to 'prat', 'prick', 'twat' or similar. Originally   
   from the rhyming slang 'Berkeley Hunt', for 'cunt', although not generally   
   considered as offensive as that.   
      
   My apology. I was not familiar with that new urban  slang.   
      
   Damn sure glad I am not like most of those of any indicated political leanings.   
      
    DD> If you see yourself as a jerk, than so be   
    DD> it.   
      
   I can be the biggest asshole your have ever dealt with or the nicest person   
   you have ever dealt with. All depends on the person I happen to be interacting   
   with.   
      
    And if you don't understand the difference - I'm not surprised.   
      
   Now that you have educated me on "berk" I know the difference between being   
   called jerk and being called a "cunt."   
      
   --- Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:13.0) Gecko/20120614 Thunderbird/13.   
    * Origin: Fidonet Via Newsreader - http://www.easternstar.info (1:123/789.0)