On May 25, 2006, at 4:18 PM, shempmcgurk wrote:

> n FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Sal Sunshine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>  wrote:
>  >
>  > That's why I said "if" Shemp--if it had been proven, i.e. in court-
>  -not
>  > based on here-say.  That's inconsistent?
>
>
>
>  Yeah, it's inconsistent because there was no "if" with at least one
>  incident with Clinton and yet you defended him.
>
>  There are only "if's" with Muktananda (not that I'm defending him).

And that's why I didn't say to toss him in prison--nothing's been
proven and, since the man is dead, nothing ever will be.
>

> > Re: your comments about Clinton I have no answer, didn't we just
>  go
>  > over this topic? You seem to be simply obsessed with the man. 
>
>
> As I've said many times, I like the man.
>
> Give it
>  > up, Shemp, he's been out of office 6 *years.*
>
>
>  Then why go out of your way to defend him and yet come out with the
>  statement about Muktananda?  Again, you're inconsistent.

You know, this is really silly. I've mentioned Clinton exactly *once,* 
about two weeks ago in passing, in relation to Tucker Carlson and the
scandal he went through.  I've never said another word about him on my
own, and yet, that's enough to cause a rash of messages on how I'm
"defending" him--and not only that, going out of my way to do so.

I'm sure there must be a 12-step group for this addiction, Shemp.

Sal



To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]

Or go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/
and click 'Join This Group!'




SPONSORED LINKS
Religion and spirituality Maharishi mahesh yogi


YAHOO! GROUPS LINKS




Reply via email to