Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Bill:
A whale ate it, but when they found it, it was still ticking. BG
Sue
HI Sue,
And then there was that guy who said "I'm mad as hell and won't take it
any more" and then he blew his brains out on live tv and.oh, wait a
minute, that
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Bill:
I think that we have the right to know the truth about what is going on
in the WH in regards to things like Watergate, White Water, Vietnam,
Iraq, Bosnia, etc. But when it comes down to the personal lives of
anyone, I don't think so. I
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
HI Sue,
Not only that, but this guy doesn't have one iota of evidence to support
the fact that this even happened. You would think he'd at least have the
decency to know beyond any doubt that this was true. I agree with you.
After all this
moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
People do not hesitate in the slightest to trash those they dislike
repeating the grossest and flimsiest rumors as absolute truth
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
HI Sue,
This kind of gossip can do the country no good at any time it is bandied
about.
Bill
On Tue, 07 Apr 1998 21:14:44 -0700 Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
writes:
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Bill:
I think that we have the
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Bill:
I forgot about that guy. You are right one of them did apologize. He
was even on television defending his apology. Go figure.
Sue
Hi Sue,
Terry is wrong again. That guy who wrote the article for Spectator
magazine that first
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (William J. Foristal) writes:
Hi Sue,
Terry is wrong again. That guy who wrote the article for Spectator
magazine that first mentioned a woman named "Paula" gave a very sincere
apology to Clinton and to the public because he fell for the right wing
conspirators' line of bull
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Sue,
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
I think that we have the right to know the truth about what is going on
in the WH in regards to things like Watergate, White Water, Vietnam,
Iraq, Bosnia, etc. But when it comes down to the personal lives of
anyone, I
moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
People do not hesitate in the slightest to trash those they dislike
repeating the grossest and flimsiest rumors as absolute truth while
complaining loudly that the most obvious flaws of their heros are just
unfounded rumors.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
moonshine [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
People do not hesitate in the slightest to trash those they dislike
repeating the grossest and flimsiest rumors as absolute truth while
complaining loudly that the most obvious flaws of their heros are
DocCec [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
In a message dated 98-04-07 11:55:53 EDT, you write:
''I only write about people's private life when it
impinges
on their performance as a public official.
''The bottom line is that we are not all jerks in this business. A lot
of times
there are
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Sue,
(I have no idea if Nixon beat his wife or not per the title of this thread.)
But responding to your question, if history has any meaning the bad as well
as the good needs to be known. In the future people will deny they knew
about the corruption in this
Sue Hartigan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Hi Terry:
I agree that good or bad we do need to know about what goes on in the WH
concerning things such as Vietnam, Iraq, etc. Even Watergate, and yes
even Whitewater.
But do we really need to know things such as "Nixon Beat His Wife",
"Johnson's
13 matches
Mail list logo
