Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#51
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
What is it about Democrat leaders
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:19:28 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... I wonder if it's illegal for presidents to have sex with anyone they want, wherever they want. I said ILLEGAL. Of course not. But it *is* illegal to swear under oath that you did not in a lawful investigation. It's called perjury. Eisboch Yes, I know perjury is illegal, but that's not the question I asked, now is it? If you disagree, be a linguist for a moment and show me how I could've written my question more clearly. End it with a question mark? A question mark does not belong at the end of the sentence in the form I wrote it. No competent student of our native would disagree. Jeez, where's Harry when you need him? |
#53
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
What is it about Democrat leaders
wrote in message
... On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:38:38 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message . .. A question mark does not belong at the end of the sentence in the form I wrote it. No competent student of our native would disagree. You asked how to write a question that was clearer. I suggested that you should try ending questions with a question mark. I made no comment other than that about your deficient writing skills. What is a "student of our native"? LOL! It's called a typo. Now, onward: Verson 1) I wonder if it's illegal for presidents to have sex with anyone they want, wherever they want. Version 2) I wonder if it's illegal for presidents to have sex with anyone they want, wherever they want? Are you telling me that YOU believe version 2 to be easier for you to understand, the only difference being the presence of the question mark? I'm beginning to believe the critics here who claim you are a severe alcoholic. Why do you say that? |
#54
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
What is it about Democrat leaders
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:36:27 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message ... On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:24:55 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message om... On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:20:24 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message news:jogkp3p47ftc2rejgkri7pps2b19dak52s@4ax .com... On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:11:26 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message news:e6gkp3dsbv8d37q718vo4bgef5unnngu32@4 ax.com... On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:55:10 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "BAR" wrote in message news:MLWdnS7E37GyoAfanZ2dnUVZ_ojinZ2d@c omcast.com... wrote: On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 10:24:18 -0500, Kippered wrote: Harry, it's not the sex. I know this is, for you, especially hard to understand. The guy *perjured* himself. That means lying. Believe it or not, most folks consider that wrong. Of course, you and your buddy find nothing wrong with that because it gains you notoriety, and some probably think it's right cool. But it isn't. Uh, perjury and lying are not the same thing. Clinton was guilty of one, but we was not guilty of the other. Don't you remember Bill pointing his finger at us and saying "I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinski!" Let's ask the wives if a blow job is sex or not before you parse Bill's answer. That weren't perjury, Bucko! You're responding to someone else with that comment. Yes. It's called an inline response. I left the post above it, so you could see to whom who I was responding. Is your name Bucko? If so I apologize for the confusion. I wonder if it's illegal for presidents to have sex with anyone they want, wherever they want. I said ILLEGAL. It depends on many factors, and how the courts decide on a case by case basis. Sounds like you know more than you're telling. What factors might make it illegal? If the president has sex with a 2 year old boy, I'm pretty sure that would be considered illegal. If the president has sex with a subordinate, that also might be considered illegal. 2 year old boy: Agreed Subordinate: You seem to know more than you are telling. Is it illegal to have sex with a subordinate, or not? Legal? Not legal? Read what I wrote and you won't have to ask stupid follow-up questions. It's not a stupid question at all. You said: "If the president has sex with a subordinate, that also might be considered illegal." You used the words "might be", so you must have some sort of information to back up your belief. Or, maybe you don't. Whattya got? Anything at all? I said, "If the president has sex with a subordinate, that also might be considered illegal." My belief is that it might be considered illegal. What's to back up besides your overworked colon? Here's where I'm going with this: Throughout the period when the fake saints were tormenting Clinton, all sorts of legal experts commented on the proceedings. I don't recall any of them saying that having sex with a subordinate was illegal. Add another factor: The fake saint with the biggest mouth didn't believe that what Clinton did was improper. How do we know this? He did it himself at the very time he was posing as a saint: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Story?id=2937633&page=1 Logically, we can conclude that Gingrich and the other fake saints had no purpose other than to appear holy, and to waste their time and our money. No other conclusion holds any water. You sound like you may know more than you are letting on. Would that be "holy" water? Assuming the sexual incident was not illegal, there was no *****legal***** reason for the fake saints to ask about it. Do you disagree? If so, please explain why? Do you want the POTUS to leave himself open to black mail? I don't care which side of the aisle he sits on. |
#55
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
What is it about Democrat leaders
"D.Duck" wrote in message
... "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:36:27 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message m... On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:24:55 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message news:c7hkp39u6qtp0uluasbq95ii0vld5nl3v6@4ax. com... On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:20:24 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message news:jogkp3p47ftc2rejgkri7pps2b19dak52s@4a x.com... On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:11:26 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message news:e6gkp3dsbv8d37q718vo4bgef5unnngu32@ 4ax.com... On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:55:10 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "BAR" wrote in message news:MLWdnS7E37GyoAfanZ2dnUVZ_ojinZ2d@ comcast.com... wrote: On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 10:24:18 -0500, Kippered wrote: Harry, it's not the sex. I know this is, for you, especially hard to understand. The guy *perjured* himself. That means lying. Believe it or not, most folks consider that wrong. Of course, you and your buddy find nothing wrong with that because it gains you notoriety, and some probably think it's right cool. But it isn't. Uh, perjury and lying are not the same thing. Clinton was guilty of one, but we was not guilty of the other. Don't you remember Bill pointing his finger at us and saying "I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinski!" Let's ask the wives if a blow job is sex or not before you parse Bill's answer. That weren't perjury, Bucko! You're responding to someone else with that comment. Yes. It's called an inline response. I left the post above it, so you could see to whom who I was responding. Is your name Bucko? If so I apologize for the confusion. I wonder if it's illegal for presidents to have sex with anyone they want, wherever they want. I said ILLEGAL. It depends on many factors, and how the courts decide on a case by case basis. Sounds like you know more than you're telling. What factors might make it illegal? If the president has sex with a 2 year old boy, I'm pretty sure that would be considered illegal. If the president has sex with a subordinate, that also might be considered illegal. 2 year old boy: Agreed Subordinate: You seem to know more than you are telling. Is it illegal to have sex with a subordinate, or not? Legal? Not legal? Read what I wrote and you won't have to ask stupid follow-up questions. It's not a stupid question at all. You said: "If the president has sex with a subordinate, that also might be considered illegal." You used the words "might be", so you must have some sort of information to back up your belief. Or, maybe you don't. Whattya got? Anything at all? I said, "If the president has sex with a subordinate, that also might be considered illegal." My belief is that it might be considered illegal. What's to back up besides your overworked colon? Here's where I'm going with this: Throughout the period when the fake saints were tormenting Clinton, all sorts of legal experts commented on the proceedings. I don't recall any of them saying that having sex with a subordinate was illegal. Add another factor: The fake saint with the biggest mouth didn't believe that what Clinton did was improper. How do we know this? He did it himself at the very time he was posing as a saint: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Story?id=2937633&page=1 Logically, we can conclude that Gingrich and the other fake saints had no purpose other than to appear holy, and to waste their time and our money. No other conclusion holds any water. You sound like you may know more than you are letting on. Would that be "holy" water? Assuming the sexual incident was not illegal, there was no *****legal***** reason for the fake saints to ask about it. Do you disagree? If so, please explain why? Do you want the POTUS to leave himself open to black mail? I don't care which side of the aisle he sits on. That's an interesting point, but that's not why the fake saints asked him the infamous question. You know that. |
#56
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
What is it about Democrat leaders
wrote in message
... On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 21:52:53 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message . .. On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:36:27 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message m... On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:24:55 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message news:c7hkp39u6qtp0uluasbq95ii0vld5nl3v6@4ax. com... On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:20:24 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message news:jogkp3p47ftc2rejgkri7pps2b19dak52s@4a x.com... On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:11:26 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: wrote in message news:e6gkp3dsbv8d37q718vo4bgef5unnngu32@ 4ax.com... On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 19:55:10 GMT, "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote: "BAR" wrote in message news:MLWdnS7E37GyoAfanZ2dnUVZ_ojinZ2d@ comcast.com... wrote: On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 10:24:18 -0500, Kippered wrote: Harry, it's not the sex. I know this is, for you, especially hard to understand. The guy *perjured* himself. That means lying. Believe it or not, most folks consider that wrong. Of course, you and your buddy find nothing wrong with that because it gains you notoriety, and some probably think it's right cool. But it isn't. Uh, perjury and lying are not the same thing. Clinton was guilty of one, but we was not guilty of the other. Don't you remember Bill pointing his finger at us and saying "I did not have sex with that woman, Monica Lewinski!" Let's ask the wives if a blow job is sex or not before you parse Bill's answer. That weren't perjury, Bucko! You're responding to someone else with that comment. Yes. It's called an inline response. I left the post above it, so you could see to whom who I was responding. Is your name Bucko? If so I apologize for the confusion. I wonder if it's illegal for presidents to have sex with anyone they want, wherever they want. I said ILLEGAL. It depends on many factors, and how the courts decide on a case by case basis. Sounds like you know more than you're telling. What factors might make it illegal? If the president has sex with a 2 year old boy, I'm pretty sure that would be considered illegal. If the president has sex with a subordinate, that also might be considered illegal. 2 year old boy: Agreed Subordinate: You seem to know more than you are telling. Is it illegal to have sex with a subordinate, or not? Legal? Not legal? Read what I wrote and you won't have to ask stupid follow-up questions. It's not a stupid question at all. You said: "If the president has sex with a subordinate, that also might be considered illegal." You used the words "might be", so you must have some sort of information to back up your belief. Or, maybe you don't. Whattya got? Anything at all? I said, "If the president has sex with a subordinate, that also might be considered illegal." My belief is that it might be considered illegal. What's to back up besides your overworked colon? Here's where I'm going with this: Throughout the period when the fake saints were tormenting Clinton, all sorts of legal experts commented on the proceedings. I don't recall any of them saying that having sex with a subordinate was illegal. Add another factor: The fake saint with the biggest mouth didn't believe that what Clinton did was improper. How do we know this? He did it himself at the very time he was posing as a saint: http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/Story?id=2937633&page=1 Logically, we can conclude that Gingrich and the other fake saints had no purpose other than to appear holy, and to waste their time and our money. No other conclusion holds any water. You sound like you may know more than you are letting on. Would that be "holy" water? Assuming the sexual incident was not illegal, there was no *****legal***** reason for the fake saints to ask about it. Do you disagree? If so, please explain why? Now you are putting question marks where they DON'T belong. You're right. Now, please explain the mystery described above. Why did the fake saints ask the infamous question? Prurient interest? |
#57
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
What is it about Democrat leaders
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... I wonder if it's illegal for presidents to have sex with anyone they want, wherever they want. I said ILLEGAL. Of course not. But it *is* illegal to swear under oath that you did not in a lawful investigation. It's called perjury. Eisboch Yes, I know perjury is illegal, but that's not the question I asked, now is it? If you disagree, be a linguist for a moment and show me how I could've written my question more clearly. Your question is impossible to answer. First of all, you are leaving out a whole bunch of contributing factors, including the stupid woman (forget her name) that Monica confided in and became a potential blackmail threat. People in positions of responsibility .... even lowly enlisted military people with access to classified information ... are subject to investigation if the potential for a security leak exists. Stop playing lawyer. You'd make a lousy one. Eisboch |
#58
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
What is it about Democrat leaders
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 17:48:36 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:
"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... I wonder if it's illegal for presidents to have sex with anyone they want, wherever they want. I said ILLEGAL. Of course not. But it *is* illegal to swear under oath that you did not in a lawful investigation. It's called perjury. Eisboch Yes, I know perjury is illegal, but that's not the question I asked, now is it? If you disagree, be a linguist for a moment and show me how I could've written my question more clearly. Your question is impossible to answer. First of all, you are leaving out a whole bunch of contributing factors, including the stupid woman (forget her name) Linda Tripp |
#59
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
What is it about Democrat leaders
"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message ... On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 17:48:36 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... I wonder if it's illegal for presidents to have sex with anyone they want, wherever they want. I said ILLEGAL. Of course not. But it *is* illegal to swear under oath that you did not in a lawful investigation. It's called perjury. Eisboch Yes, I know perjury is illegal, but that's not the question I asked, now is it? If you disagree, be a linguist for a moment and show me how I could've written my question more clearly. Your question is impossible to answer. First of all, you are leaving out a whole bunch of contributing factors, including the stupid woman (forget her name) Linda Tripp Thank you. Eisboch |
#60
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
What is it about Democrat leaders
Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:
On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 17:48:36 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote: "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... "Eisboch" wrote in message ... "JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message ... I wonder if it's illegal for presidents to have sex with anyone they want, wherever they want. I said ILLEGAL. Of course not. But it *is* illegal to swear under oath that you did not in a lawful investigation. It's called perjury. Eisboch Yes, I know perjury is illegal, but that's not the question I asked, now is it? If you disagree, be a linguist for a moment and show me how I could've written my question more clearly. Your question is impossible to answer. First of all, you are leaving out a whole bunch of contributing factors, including the stupid woman (forget her name) Linda Tripp Now that was one ugly woman, and she wasn't very attractive, either. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Storage for trolling lures w/leaders | General | |||
Wire leaders for blackfin tuna???? | General | |||
Opinion Leaders Deserting Bush | General | |||
(OT) Foreign Leaders For Kerry Identified | General |