In article ,
says...

On 2/10/11 6:30 AM, I am Tosk wrote:
In , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 2/9/11 10:15 PM, I am Tosk wrote:
In , payer3389
@mypacks.net says...

On 2/9/11 8:43 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 09 Feb 2011 17:11:46 -0800, wrote:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2010/0..._n_738007.html

Yikes! I wonder if it's true.

Has there ever been an allegation of an affair by a congressman that
wasn't true? ;-)

That seems to be where democrats and republicans all coincide.

The Republicans seem to prefer same sex relationships, or relationships
with underaged boys.

Really Harry, with your statements suggesting that old men should be
able to rape girls as young as 10 years old (progressives call this
"loving" the children) and ferry them off for an abortion with
absolutely no parental consent at all to cover up their crimes... you
really have no place to morally judge anybody s sexual endeavors.

Sorry.


You are fantasizing again, little ****. I made no such statements.
BTW, what *does* happen when you spend the night in that tent with your
underaged kid?

You certainly did..

I asked about parental consent, you said no. I asked how young and you
refused to answer. I said it 10 to young to have an abortion without
parental consent, you said no, even at ten at best you might consider
parental notification, after the abortion.. It's all there Harry, you
said it...



You have often repeated your lie that I think "old men should be able to
rape girls as young as 10." I've never said that nor have I implied it.
It's just fantasy on your part.

Fantasy nothing. If a ten year old girl is pregnant, she *has been
raped, period*. And if the "rapist" sneaks her out for an abortion, it's
to cover up a crime of "rape". What is so difficult about that? You are
protecting rapists, that is a clear fact...