| |
Main
Date: 05 Oct 2006 00:40:21
From: annika1980
Subject: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
I think they should spend $80 million to hire Ken Starr to investigate,
and put government on hold for a couple of years until he can come up
with a 500 page report detailing the situation. Everything else goes
on the back burner until this important scandal is scrutinized more
closely.
Oh wait, that's what the Repugs would do.
Hey, I just thought of a new joke.
"Have ya heard about k Foley's new tell-all book?
It's about 200 pages."
|
|
| |
Date: 09 Oct 2006 12:18:15
From: Tex
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
annika1980 wrote:
> MnMikew wrote:
> > >
> > > My God, are you still clinging to the Vince-Foster-was-murdered theory?
> > >
> > You have your wacko conspiracy theories, we have ours. :-)
>
> You've been watching a bit too much FOX News.
> Speaking of FOX, on at least two occasions in the past week they've
> incorrectly identified Gay Republican Alcoholic Pedophile, k Foley,
> as a Democrat.
>
> Perhaps Foley and Tex will join up and start a viable third party ....
> the GRAP party.
Your obsession with me highlights your addictive personality.
Besides your Dad's beatings and under age girls, what else are you
addicted to?
Tex
|
| |
Date: 05 Oct 2006 16:55:20
From: annika1980
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
MnMikew wrote:
> >
> > My God, are you still clinging to the Vince-Foster-was-murdered theory?
> >
> You have your wacko conspiracy theories, we have ours. :-)
You've been watching a bit too much FOX News.
Speaking of FOX, on at least two occasions in the past week they've
incorrectly identified Gay Republican Alcoholic Pedophile, k Foley,
as a Democrat.
Perhaps Foley and Tex will join up and start a viable third party ....
the GRAP party.
|
| | |
Date: 09 Oct 2006 12:57:50
From: MnMikew
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
"annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1160092520.798931.150300@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> MnMikew wrote:
>> >
>> > My God, are you still clinging to the Vince-Foster-was-murdered theory?
>> >
>> You have your wacko conspiracy theories, we have ours. :-)
>
> You've been watching a bit too much FOX News.
As compared to your beloved Communist News Network?
> Speaking of FOX, on at least two occasions in the past week they've
> incorrectly identified Gay Republican Alcoholic Pedophile, k Foley,
> as a Democrat.
Must be leftovers from the Clinton years.
>
> Perhaps Foley and Tex will join up and start a viable third party ....
> the GRAP party.
>
The GDAP party was formed in the 80s.
|
| |
Date: 05 Oct 2006 11:04:11
From: John B.
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
yongster@hotmail.com wrote:
> annika1980 wrote:
> > I think they should spend $80 million to hire Ken Starr to investigate,
> > and put government on hold for a couple of years until he can come up
> > with a 500 page report detailing the situation. Everything else goes
> > on the back burner until this important scandal is scrutinized more
> > closely.
> > Oh wait, that's what the Repugs would do.
> >
> > Hey, I just thought of a new joke.
> >
> > "Have ya heard about k Foley's new tell-all book?
> > It's about 200 pages."
>
> Just kill everyone who has any information about this and claim that
> everyone of these people committed suicide. At least, that is how a
> scandal was handled in 1994.
My God, are you still clinging to the Vince-Foster-was-murdered theory?
|
| | |
Date: 05 Oct 2006 14:14:01
From: MnMikew
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
"John B." <johnb505@gmail.com > wrote in message
news:1160071449.280152.86050@k70g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
>
> yongster@hotmail.com wrote:
>> annika1980 wrote:
>> > I think they should spend $80 million to hire Ken Starr to investigate,
>> > and put government on hold for a couple of years until he can come up
>> > with a 500 page report detailing the situation. Everything else goes
>> > on the back burner until this important scandal is scrutinized more
>> > closely.
>> > Oh wait, that's what the Repugs would do.
>> >
>> > Hey, I just thought of a new joke.
>> >
>> > "Have ya heard about k Foley's new tell-all book?
>> > It's about 200 pages."
>>
>> Just kill everyone who has any information about this and claim that
>> everyone of these people committed suicide. At least, that is how a
>> scandal was handled in 1994.
>
> My God, are you still clinging to the Vince-Foster-was-murdered theory?
>
You have your wacko conspiracy theories, we have ours. :-)
|
| |
Date: 05 Oct 2006 11:00:59
From: John B.
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
Frank Ketchum wrote:
> "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1160034021.341328.295140@c28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >I think they should spend $80 million to hire Ken Starr to investigate,
> > and put government on hold for a couple of years until he can come up
> > with a 500 page report detailing the situation. Everything else goes
> > on the back burner until this important scandal is scrutinized more
> > closely.
>
> Now how they will handle it:
>
> Talk about nothing else until the next scandal is released (don't worry, it
> won't be long since it is October already). Accuse all Republicans of being
> hypocrites and unfit to govern, scream for resignations, etc. They will
> treat this as the political football of the week. Meanwhile, never discuss
> how they may do anything better, just discuss how bad Republicans are.
>
> And they think year after year of this inspires people to vote for them?
It'll work this year.
|
| |
Date: 05 Oct 2006 10:18:13
From:
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
annika1980 wrote:
> I think they should spend $80 million to hire Ken Starr to investigate,
> and put government on hold for a couple of years until he can come up
> with a 500 page report detailing the situation. Everything else goes
> on the back burner until this important scandal is scrutinized more
> closely.
> Oh wait, that's what the Repugs would do.
>
> Hey, I just thought of a new joke.
>
> "Have ya heard about k Foley's new tell-all book?
> It's about 200 pages."
Just kill everyone who has any information about this and claim that
everyone of these people committed suicide. At least, that is how a
scandal was handled in 1994.
|
| |
Date: 05 Oct 2006 12:37:16
From: Frank Ketchum
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
"annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1160034021.341328.295140@c28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>I think they should spend $80 million to hire Ken Starr to investigate,
> and put government on hold for a couple of years until he can come up
> with a 500 page report detailing the situation. Everything else goes
> on the back burner until this important scandal is scrutinized more
> closely.
Now how they will handle it:
Talk about nothing else until the next scandal is released (don't worry, it
won't be long since it is October already). Accuse all Republicans of being
hypocrites and unfit to govern, scream for resignations, etc. They will
treat this as the political football of the week. Meanwhile, never discuss
how they may do anything better, just discuss how bad Republicans are.
And they think year after year of this inspires people to vote for them?
|
| | |
Date: 05 Oct 2006 07:44:52
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 12:37:16 GMT, "Frank Ketchum"
<fketchum@earthlinknospaam.net > wrote:
>Meanwhile, never discuss
>how they may do anything better, just discuss how bad Republicans are.
>
>And they think year after year of this inspires people to vote for them?
That's what *all* the campaigns I've seen are doing - campaigning
about how bad their opponents are.
The exception is the campaigns which indicate that their opponents
don't already have their minds made up (calling their opponents
flip-floppers).
These campaigns are run by Democrats and Republicans alike.
|
| | | |
Date: 05 Oct 2006 14:11:46
From: Frank Ketchum
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
"Howard Brazee" <howard@brazee.net > wrote in message
news:nt2ai2p4i223vv3il4iqkcmb2iq0ahuc8j@4ax.com...
>
> That's what *all* the campaigns I've seen are doing - campaigning
> about how bad their opponents are.
>
Of course that is typical for campaigns. I am referring to the past 6 or so
years of Republican bashing.
|
| | | | |
Date: 05 Oct 2006 15:51:09
From: \R&B\
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
"Frank Ketchum" <fketchum@earthlinknospaam.net > wrote in message
news:Co8Vg.10335$UG4.9079@newsread2.news.pas.earthlink.net...
>
> "Howard Brazee" <howard@brazee.net> wrote in message
> news:nt2ai2p4i223vv3il4iqkcmb2iq0ahuc8j@4ax.com...
>
>>
>> That's what *all* the campaigns I've seen are doing - campaigning
>> about how bad their opponents are.
>>
>
> Of course that is typical for campaigns. I am referring to the past 6 or
> so years of Republican bashing.
Right, like the Republicans never engage in Democrat bashing.
Gimme a break.
Sean Hannity is holding on line 1 for you.
Randy
|
| | | | |
Date: 05 Oct 2006 08:20:31
From: Howard Brazee
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 14:11:46 GMT, "Frank Ketchum"
<fketchum@earthlinknospaam.net > wrote:
>> That's what *all* the campaigns I've seen are doing - campaigning
>> about how bad their opponents are.
>>
>
>Of course that is typical for campaigns. I am referring to the past 6 or so
>years of Republican bashing.
Which is different from the previous 8 years of Democratic bashing -
how?
|
| | | | | |
Date: 05 Oct 2006 09:32:30
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 08:20:31 -0600, Howard Brazee <howard@brazee.net >
wrote:
>On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 14:11:46 GMT, "Frank Ketchum"
><fketchum@earthlinknospaam.net> wrote:
>
>>> That's what *all* the campaigns I've seen are doing - campaigning
>>> about how bad their opponents are.
>>>
>>
>>Of course that is typical for campaigns. I am referring to the past 6 or so
>>years of Republican bashing.
>
>Which is different from the previous 8 years of Democratic bashing -
>how?
Only lamebrains just stick with a one-party line, instead of looking
at each candidate with a unpredjudiced eye. Neither party is short of
those non-thinkers. Right LLLLLLarrry?
___,
\o
|
| | | | | | |
Date: 05 Oct 2006 11:21:43
From: MnMikew
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
"Bobby Knight" <bknight@conramp.net > wrote in message
news:6n5ai297n37mpi8kbcji7m0baes7b1m5ri@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 08:20:31 -0600, Howard Brazee <howard@brazee.net>
> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 05 Oct 2006 14:11:46 GMT, "Frank Ketchum"
>><fketchum@earthlinknospaam.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> That's what *all* the campaigns I've seen are doing - campaigning
>>>> about how bad their opponents are.
>>>>
>>>
>>>Of course that is typical for campaigns. I am referring to the past 6 or
>>>so
>>>years of Republican bashing.
>>
>>Which is different from the previous 8 years of Democratic bashing -
>>how?
> Only lamebrains just stick with a one-party line, instead of looking
> at each candidate with a unpredjudiced eye. Neither party is short of
> those non-thinkers.
Right Bobby, you probably can't even make a right hand turn in a golf cart.
:-)
|
| | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Oct 2006 11:57:13
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 11:21:43 -0500, "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com >
wrote:
>
>"Bobby Knight" <bknight@conramp.net> wrote in message
>> Only lamebrains just stick with a one-party line, instead of looking
>> at each candidate with a unpredjudiced eye. Neither party is short of
>> those non-thinkers.
>
>Right Bobby, you probably can't even make a right hand turn in a golf cart.
>:-)
>
I've voted for Republicans in the past. Have you ever voted for the
Democratic party? :-)
|
| | | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Oct 2006 13:06:04
From: MnMikew
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
"Bobby Knight" <bknight@conramp.net > wrote in message
news:b9eai2l9u5pb1mtmmgnml0nkb92u2rnr3g@4ax.com...
> On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 11:21:43 -0500, "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com>
> wrote:
>
>>
>>"Bobby Knight" <bknight@conramp.net> wrote in message
>
>>> Only lamebrains just stick with a one-party line, instead of looking
>>> at each candidate with a unpredjudiced eye. Neither party is short of
>>> those non-thinkers.
>>
>>Right Bobby, you probably can't even make a right hand turn in a golf
>>cart.
>>:-)
>>
> I've voted for Republicans in the past. Have you ever voted for the
> Democratic party? :-)
In my early naive days I voted Dem, mostly because my parents did. :-)
There are some local DFL'ers here I'll probably vote for over their GOP
rivals. I'm also voting for a DFL endorsed county commish <gasp >.
|
| | | | | | | | | |
Date: 05 Oct 2006 14:19:01
From: Bobby Knight
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 13:06:04 -0500, "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com >
wrote:
>
>"Bobby Knight" <bknight@conramp.net> wrote in message
>news:b9eai2l9u5pb1mtmmgnml0nkb92u2rnr3g@4ax.com...
>> On Thu, 5 Oct 2006 11:21:43 -0500, "MnMikew" <mnmiikkew@aol.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>"Bobby Knight" <bknight@conramp.net> wrote in message
>>
>>>> Only lamebrains just stick with a one-party line, instead of looking
>>>> at each candidate with a unpredjudiced eye. Neither party is short of
>>>> those non-thinkers.
>>>
>>>Right Bobby, you probably can't even make a right hand turn in a golf
>>>cart.
>>>:-)
>>>
>> I've voted for Republicans in the past. Have you ever voted for the
>> Democratic party? :-)
>
>In my early naive days I voted Dem, mostly because my parents did. :-)
>There are some local DFL'ers here I'll probably vote for over their GOP
>rivals. I'm also voting for a DFL endorsed county commish <gasp>.
>
>
Good for you. You can bet that LLLLLarry votes a straight party
ticket. Especially if it's endorsed by a president that can be
compared to Lincoln. :-)
--
___,
\o
|
| |
Date: 05 Oct 2006 05:12:32
From: dsc
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
Michael Anselmo wrote:
> "annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com> wrote in message
> news:1160034021.341328.295140@c28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
> >I think they should spend $80 million to hire Ken Starr to investigate,
> > and put government on hold for a couple of years until he can come up
> > with a 500 page report detailing the situation. Everything else goes
> > on the back burner until this important scandal is scrutinized more
> > closely.
> > Oh wait, that's what the Repugs would do.
> >
> > Hey, I just thought of a new joke.
> >
> > "Have ya heard about k Foley's new tell-all book?
> > It's about 200 pages."
> >
>
> Back in the 1950s there was a large scandal about congress critters and
> pages. The joke that was around then.......Do you know why congressmen don't
> use bookks? They like their pages bent over.
>
I thought Clinton liked for his to kneel... or hide under his desk...
or something like that... :)
|
| |
Date: 05 Oct 2006 07:01:45
From: Michael Anselmo
Subject: Re: How the Dems should handle the Foley scandal
|
"annika1980" <annika1980@aol.com > wrote in message
news:1160034021.341328.295140@c28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>I think they should spend $80 million to hire Ken Starr to investigate,
> and put government on hold for a couple of years until he can come up
> with a 500 page report detailing the situation. Everything else goes
> on the back burner until this important scandal is scrutinized more
> closely.
> Oh wait, that's what the Repugs would do.
>
> Hey, I just thought of a new joke.
>
> "Have ya heard about k Foley's new tell-all book?
> It's about 200 pages."
>
Back in the 1950s there was a large scandal about congress critters and
pages. The joke that was around then.......Do you know why congressmen don't
use bookks? They like their pages bent over.
How fitting.
|
|
