NOYB wrote:
"DSK" wrote in message
...
After the White House reluctantly conceded yesterday that it sat on the
blockbuster news that Cheney shot a hunting buddy Saturday, the veep's
office revealed he didn't even have the proper $7 stamp on his hunting
license to shoot quail in Texas.



NOYB wrote:
He didn't shoot a quail. He shot a Whittington.


Doesn't matter. If you're in the woods with a gun, during hunting season,
you darn well better have all the paperwork in order.

It's kind of like sitting in a boat, with a fishing rod, and line, hook,
bait, etc etc.... and the wildlife enforcement asks to see your fishing
license. You can't just tell him, "Don't need one, we ain't caught nothin'
anyhow."

You can still fish for snook in Florida without a snook stamp...as long as
you have a valid fishing license...and don't keep any snook.

If Cheney wasn't in possession of any quail, he could easily argue he was
hunting for squirrel or other rodents.

So you think it's quite acceptable for the VP to attempt to poach, then
when caught, lie?

wrote in message
oups.com...

NOYB wrote:
"DSK" wrote in message
...
After the White House reluctantly conceded yesterday that it sat on
the
blockbuster news that Cheney shot a hunting buddy Saturday, the veep's
office revealed he didn't even have the proper $7 stamp on his hunting
license to shoot quail in Texas.



NOYB wrote:
He didn't shoot a quail. He shot a Whittington.


Doesn't matter. If you're in the woods with a gun, during hunting
season,
you darn well better have all the paperwork in order.

It's kind of like sitting in a boat, with a fishing rod, and line,
hook,
bait, etc etc.... and the wildlife enforcement asks to see your fishing
license. You can't just tell him, "Don't need one, we ain't caught
nothin'
anyhow."

You can still fish for snook in Florida without a snook stamp...as long
as
you have a valid fishing license...and don't keep any snook.

If Cheney wasn't in possession of any quail, he could easily argue he was
hunting for squirrel or other rodents.

So you think it's quite acceptable for the VP to attempt to poach, then
when caught, lie?


It was OK for Clinton to do it.........and to a grand jury.

" JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message
...

So you think it's quite acceptable for the VP to attempt to poach, then
when caught, lie?


It was OK for Clinton to do it.........and to a grand jury.


No it wasn't. Time for Doug's Perfect Question, not used in quite some time:
Who told you to say that?

Nobody you've ever heard of said it was OK for Clinton to lie. The only
point ever made was that lying about sex is on quite a different scale than
lies which cost thousands of lives.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
" JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message
...

So you think it's quite acceptable for the VP to attempt to poach, then
when caught, lie?


It was OK for Clinton to do it.........and to a grand jury.


No it wasn't. Time for Doug's Perfect Question, not used in quite some
time: Who told you to say that?

Nobody you've ever heard of said it was OK for Clinton to lie. The only
point ever made was that lying about sex is on quite a different scale
than lies which cost thousands of lives.


The Dems said that repeatedly....after all, it was only about
sex.....remember?

" JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
" JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message
...

So you think it's quite acceptable for the VP to attempt to poach, then
when caught, lie?


It was OK for Clinton to do it.........and to a grand jury.


No it wasn't. Time for Doug's Perfect Question, not used in quite some
time: Who told you to say that?

Nobody you've ever heard of said it was OK for Clinton to lie. The only
point ever made was that lying about sex is on quite a different scale
than lies which cost thousands of lives.


The Dems said that repeatedly....after all, it was only about
sex.....remember?


checking my English/Spanish switch here....just a sec....

Nobody said he didn't lie. You know that.

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

" JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
" JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message
...

So you think it's quite acceptable for the VP to attempt to poach,
then
when caught, lie?


It was OK for Clinton to do it.........and to a grand jury.


No it wasn't. Time for Doug's Perfect Question, not used in quite some
time: Who told you to say that?

Nobody you've ever heard of said it was OK for Clinton to lie. The only
point ever made was that lying about sex is on quite a different scale
than lies which cost thousands of lives.


The Dems said that repeatedly....after all, it was only about
sex.....remember?


checking my English/Spanish switch here....just a sec....

Nobody said he didn't lie. You know that.


The Dems said it did not matter. It was only about sex after all, and no
one cared about the lying to the grand jury.

Remember????

" JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...

" JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message
...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
" JimH" jimh_osudad@yahooDOT comREMOVETHIS wrote in message
...

So you think it's quite acceptable for the VP to attempt to poach,
then
when caught, lie?


It was OK for Clinton to do it.........and to a grand jury.


No it wasn't. Time for Doug's Perfect Question, not used in quite some
time: Who told you to say that?

Nobody you've ever heard of said it was OK for Clinton to lie. The only
point ever made was that lying about sex is on quite a different scale
than lies which cost thousands of lives.


The Dems said that repeatedly....after all, it was only about
sex.....remember?


checking my English/Spanish switch here....just a sec....

Nobody said he didn't lie. You know that.


The Dems said it did not matter. It was only about sex after all, and no
one cared about the lying to the grand jury.

Remember????


Saying it didn't matter and saying he didn't lie are two completely
different things. Any English teacher would slam you and keep you after
school if you continued with this line of thinking.

JimH wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

NOYB wrote:
"DSK" wrote in message
...
After the White House reluctantly conceded yesterday that it sat on
the
blockbuster news that Cheney shot a hunting buddy Saturday, the veep's
office revealed he didn't even have the proper $7 stamp on his hunting
license to shoot quail in Texas.



NOYB wrote:
He didn't shoot a quail. He shot a Whittington.


Doesn't matter. If you're in the woods with a gun, during hunting
season,
you darn well better have all the paperwork in order.

It's kind of like sitting in a boat, with a fishing rod, and line,
hook,
bait, etc etc.... and the wildlife enforcement asks to see your fishing
license. You can't just tell him, "Don't need one, we ain't caught
nothin'
anyhow."

You can still fish for snook in Florida without a snook stamp...as long
as
you have a valid fishing license...and don't keep any snook.

If Cheney wasn't in possession of any quail, he could easily argue he was
hunting for squirrel or other rodents.

So you think it's quite acceptable for the VP to attempt to poach, then
when caught, lie?


It was OK for Clinton to do it.........and to a grand jury.

When did Clinton get caught for poaching?

wrote in message
oups.com...

JimH wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

NOYB wrote:
"DSK" wrote in message
...
After the White House reluctantly conceded yesterday that it sat on
the
blockbuster news that Cheney shot a hunting buddy Saturday, the
veep's
office revealed he didn't even have the proper $7 stamp on his
hunting
license to shoot quail in Texas.



NOYB wrote:
He didn't shoot a quail. He shot a Whittington.


Doesn't matter. If you're in the woods with a gun, during hunting
season,
you darn well better have all the paperwork in order.

It's kind of like sitting in a boat, with a fishing rod, and line,
hook,
bait, etc etc.... and the wildlife enforcement asks to see your
fishing
license. You can't just tell him, "Don't need one, we ain't caught
nothin'
anyhow."

You can still fish for snook in Florida without a snook stamp...as
long
as
you have a valid fishing license...and don't keep any snook.

If Cheney wasn't in possession of any quail, he could easily argue he
was
hunting for squirrel or other rodents.

So you think it's quite acceptable for the VP to attempt to poach, then
when caught, lie?


It was OK for Clinton to do it.........and to a grand jury.

When did Clinton get caught for poaching?



After he lied to the Grand Jury.

JimH wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

JimH wrote:
wrote in message
oups.com...

NOYB wrote:
"DSK" wrote in message
...
After the White House reluctantly conceded yesterday that it sat on
the
blockbuster news that Cheney shot a hunting buddy Saturday, the
veep's
office revealed he didn't even have the proper $7 stamp on his
hunting
license to shoot quail in Texas.



NOYB wrote:
He didn't shoot a quail. He shot a Whittington.


Doesn't matter. If you're in the woods with a gun, during hunting
season,
you darn well better have all the paperwork in order.

It's kind of like sitting in a boat, with a fishing rod, and line,
hook,
bait, etc etc.... and the wildlife enforcement asks to see your
fishing
license. You can't just tell him, "Don't need one, we ain't caught
nothin'
anyhow."

You can still fish for snook in Florida without a snook stamp...as
long
as
you have a valid fishing license...and don't keep any snook.

If Cheney wasn't in possession of any quail, he could easily argue he
was
hunting for squirrel or other rodents.

So you think it's quite acceptable for the VP to attempt to poach, then
when caught, lie?


It was OK for Clinton to do it.........and to a grand jury.

When did Clinton get caught for poaching?



After he lied to the Grand Jury.

Cite?