--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> > wrote:
> > >
> >
> > > And as far as cowardise on the part of Bush is concerned: Wel
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> wrote:
> >
>
> > And as far as cowardise on the part of Bush is concerned: Well,
> > going into the job, Bush knew that he:
> >
> > 1) had an approximatel
TurquoiseB wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> We have Chucklenuts in the area. Last night on the news they were
>> showing the Radisson where he is staying surrounded by municipal
>> and school buses as barricades. The emperor is truly paran
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> And as far as cowardise on the part of Bush is concerned: Well,
> going into the job, Bush knew that he:
>
> 1) had an approximately 1 out of 10 chance of being killed on the
> job (4 out of 42 presidents have
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"
> wrote:
>
> > That's encouraging, although I wonder if that means he's
> > going to pull a McGreevey.
>
> He just did exactly that, through his lawyer,
> at th
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote:
> >
> > authfriend wrote:
>
> > > VERY unlikely. They aren't going to sacrifice a House
> > > seat to take attention away from Condi's lies; the stakes
> > > ar
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote:
> >
> > We have Chucklenuts in the area. Last night on the news they
were
> > showing the Radisson where he is staying surrounded by municipal
> > and school bu
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That's encouraging, although I wonder if that means he's
> going to pull a McGreevey.
He just did exactly that, through his lawyer,
at the very end of his statement to the press,
and not a propos of anything he had
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote:
> >
> > We have Chucklenuts in the area. Last night on the news they
were
> > showing the Radisson where he is staying surrounded by municipal
> > and school bu
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> We have Chucklenuts in the area. Last night on the news they were
> showing the Radisson where he is staying surrounded by municipal
> and school buses as barricades. The emperor is truly paranoid.
And that's what he
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> authfriend wrote:
> > VERY unlikely. They aren't going to sacrifice a House
> > seat to take attention away from Condi's lies; the stakes
> > are too high. Also, this scandal reflects very poorly
> > on congressional R
authfriend wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "wayback71" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
>> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote:
>>
>>> shempmcgurk wrote:
>>>
I heard an interesting analysis of the Foley scandal on the
> radio
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[snip]
> FWIW:
>
> When responding to questions relating to Foley's sexuality, [Foley's
> lawyer David] Roth admitted he could not speak to the issue of
> whether Mark Foley is gay, but wanted to make explicitly clear
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> > > wrote:
> > > >
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"
> > wrote:
> > What too much booze *might* do is remove inhibitions
> > about acting on tho
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> > > wrote:
> >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> > wrote:
>
> > > And in any event, what they get to ask about is
> > > *sexual history*,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> wrote:
> > And in any event, what they get to ask about is
> > *sexual history*, not just "sexual harassment."
> > So that part was wrong too. Clinton didn't
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> > wrote:
>
> > > "Kinda like Clinton who pushed through the law that required
> > > defen
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"
> wrote:
> > I agree with you completely, Judy. However, these are GOPers
> > we're dealing with, and they have a tendency to think gay
> > people are in need of
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "wayback71" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu wrote:
> >
> > shempmcgurk wrote:
> > > I heard an interesting analysis of the Foley scandal on the
radio
> > > tonight. Because the age of consent is 16 where the in
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> wrote:
> > "Kinda like Clinton who pushed through the law that required
> > defendents in civil sexual harrassment suits to answer questions
> > about PREVIOUS
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter
wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
--- wayback71 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > shempmcgurk wrote:
> > > I heard an interesting analysis of the Foley
> scandal on the radio
> > > tonight. Because the age of consent is 16 where
> the instant messag
Seen this yet, from the New York Times?
Mr. Foley was a big supporter of President Clinton's impeachment.
"Part of his thing was, `What do we tell the children?'" recalls the
longtime Clinton aide Paul Begala. "Apparently, we'll tell them in a
sexually explicit e-mail.
http://tinyurl.com/g9dsd
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Bhairitu <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> shempmcgurk wrote:
> > I heard an interesting analysis of the Foley scandal on the radio
> > tonight. Because the age of consent is 16 where the instant messaging
> > took place, Foley would have been better off having
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
>
> > > wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter wrote:
> > >
> > > Foley also just checked into a booze
> > > rehab joint. Perhaps it was the demon
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> > wrote:
> >
> > [I wrote:]
> > > > Not only did you state the law incorrectly, but the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> wrote:
>
> [I wrote:]
> > > Not only did you state the law incorrectly, but there
> > > are vastly more differences than similarities.
> >
> > Yes, and they a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "Alex Stanley"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter wrote:
> >
> > Foley also just checked into a booze
> > rehab joint. Perhaps it was the demon rum? ;-)
>
> Riiight... if not for booze, he'd have zero desire for
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Foley also just checked into a booze
> rehab joint. Perhaps it was the demon rum? ;-)
Riiight... if not for booze, he'd have zero desire for hot young cock.
To subscribe, send a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Or
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Nobody's disputing that it's a stupid law. Peter's
> quite correct that it was a "show" law, something
> for Republicans to brag about to their constituents
> as exemplifying their commitment to children's
> safety.
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
[I wrote:]
> > Not only did you state the law incorrectly, but there
> > are vastly more differences than similarities.
>
> Yes, and they are all -- embarassingly -- in Foley's favour.
Um, no, to the contrary.
Just
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
>
> > > wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> > wrote:
>
> > > > > > > > > > Of course, the difference between Foley and
> > > > > > >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> > wrote:
> >
> > > > > No, the REAL question is: why is it more of a crime to TALK
> >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> wrote:
>
> > > > No, the REAL question is: why is it more of a crime to TALK
> > > > about sex with a 17-year-old than actually HAVING sex with
> > > > that s
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> wrote:
> > > > > > > > > Of course, the difference between Foley and
> > > > > > > > > Clinton is that Clinton actually had sex
> > > > > > > > > with the und
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> > > No, the REAL question is: why is it more of a crime to TALK
> > > about sex with a 17-year-old than actually HAVING sex with
> > > that same 17-year-old...
> >
> > That's a real question, but not *the* real que
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
>
> --- shempmcgurk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
> > "shempmcgurk"
> > wrote:
> > > [...]
> > > > Becaus
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote:
>
> > > The REAL question is: what did GOP leadership know and when
did
> > they know
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter
> > wrote:
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > --- shempmcgurk wrote:
> > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLife@ya
--- shempmcgurk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
> "shempmcgurk"
> wrote:
> > [...]
> > > Because the age of consent in DC is 16, had
> Foley had consentual
> sex
> > > with
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" wrote:
> > The REAL question is: what did GOP leadership know and when did
> they know it? This could
> > be a major, MAJOR scandal due to obstruction of justice c
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The REAL question is: what did GOP leadership know and when
> did they know it? This could be a major, MAJOR scandal due to
> obstruction of justice charges against many members of
> Congress and the White House.
Only
--- shempmcgurk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Shemp, why are you avoiding stating that Foley was
> > pursuing a minor? Clinton's sex with Monica was
> > inappropriate, unethical, but legal because she
> was
> > not a minor. Foley's sexual emails to the page are
> > inappropriate, unethical AND
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter
> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > --- shempmcgurk wrote:
> >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> > >
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > --- In FairfieldLif
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "sparaig" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
wrote:
> [...]
> > Because the age of consent in DC is 16, had Foley had consentual
sex
> > with the 17-year-old minor instead of IM conversations he would
have
>
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[...]
> Because the age of consent in DC is 16, had Foley had consentual sex
> with the 17-year-old minor instead of IM conversations he would have
> been in less trouble!
>
> Believe me, this is NOT a defense of Fole
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Peter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>
>
> --- shempmcgurk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> >
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
> > "shempmcgurk"
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> > > wrote:
>
--- shempmcgurk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
> "shempmcgurk"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com,
> "authfriend"
> > > wrote:
> > > >
> > >
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
>
> > > wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> > wrote:
> > > Kinda like Clinton who pushed through the law that required
> > > defen
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
>
> > > wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend"
> wrote:
> >
> > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I heard an interesting analysis of the Foley scandal on the
> radi
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk"
> wrote:
> >
> > I heard an interesting analysis of the Foley scandal on the
radio
> > tonight. Because the age of consent is 16 where the instant
> messaging
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> I heard an interesting analysis of the Foley scandal on the radio
> tonight. Because the age of consent is 16 where the instant
messaging
> took place, Foley would have been better off having sex with the page
59 matches
Mail list logo
