wrote in message
...
On Feb 10, 11:29 am, "Eisboch" wrote:
"HK" wrote in message

...





Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
Jim wrote:
According to one of the tabloid covers, Bill has stated that if she
doesn't win the White House he's going to divorce her. It's probably
not true, but I'll bet we see a lot more of this sort of stuff.

I had a feeling that was your source of news, that and, of course,
Faux
News.

Are you familiar with Jerry Zeifman ?

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/hillar...in-connecticut

Eisboch

\
Nope.

Short bio taken from the link:

"Mr. Zeifman is a life-long Democrat, served for 17 years as Counsel to
the
House Judiciary Committee, and is the author of Without Honor: Crimes of
Camelot and Impeachment of President Clinton (1995) and Hillary's Pursuit
of
Power (2007)"

Eisboch- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

He is anti-Billary, he will be dismissed here by the more vocal
posters.. Almost like Paulbots... loud but..

I suspect that Harry won't have anything to say about this.

On Feb 10, 11:30*am, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:21:13 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Jim wrote:
According to one of the tabloid covers, Bill has stated that if she
doesn't win the White House he's going to divorce her. It's probably not
true, but I'll bet we see a lot more of this sort of stuff.

I had a feeling that was your source of news, that and, of course, Faux
News.

Are you familiar with Jerry Zeifman ?

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/hillar...in-connecticut

She did it again yesterday...

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slides...7e15e00cf5...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Apparently it worked twice so far, so no more need to be subtile huh?
Man, could she have worn a sign or something?

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:21:13 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:


"HK" wrote in message
...
Jim wrote:
According to one of the tabloid covers, Bill has stated that if she
doesn't win the White House he's going to divorce her. It's probably
not
true, but I'll bet we see a lot more of this sort of stuff.


I had a feeling that was your source of news, that and, of course, Faux
News.


Are you familiar with Jerry Zeifman ?

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/hillar...in-connecticut

She did it again yesterday...

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slides...c72ac6b53fa95/

She doesn't look very presidential in that photo, I'm afraid. ;-

"HK" wrote in message
...
Eisboch wrote:
"Chuck Gould" wrote in message
...

Huck needs to win every "winner-take-all" state and *smoke* McCain in
the apportioned
states to have a chance, and it's too late.


But the Huckster says he didn't major in math. He majored in miracles.

Eisboch





I enjoy watching Huckabee.

That's nice.

"Jim" wrote in message
...
According to one of the tabloid covers, Bill has stated that if she
doesn't win the White House he's going to divorce her. It's probably not
true, but I'll bet we see a lot more of this sort of stuff.

Let us not forget the last Clinton experience. Sorry, if Hilary gets in my
faith in the American voter just tanked. Bill does not need more years
influencing in the Whitehouse. Slight integrity issue here. Would rather
spin the dice and try someone else.

On Feb 10, 11:24*am, HK wrote:
Eisboch wrote:
"HK" wrote in message
...
Jim wrote:
According to one of the tabloid covers, Bill has stated that if she
doesn't win the White House he's going to divorce her. It's probably not
true, but I'll bet we see a lot more of this sort of stuff.

I had a feeling that was your source of news, that and, of course, Faux
News.

Are you familiar with Jerry Zeifman ?

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/hillar...in-connecticut

Eisboch

\
Nope.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Was you at Yale the same time as Hillary?

On Feb 10, 10:30*am, Short Wave Sportfishing
wrote:
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 11:21:13 -0500, "Eisboch" wrote:

"HK" wrote in message
...
Jim wrote:
According to one of the tabloid covers, Bill has stated that if she
doesn't win the White House he's going to divorce her. It's probably not
true, but I'll bet we see a lot more of this sort of stuff.

I had a feeling that was your source of news, that and, of course, Faux
News.

Are you familiar with Jerry Zeifman ?

http://www.aim.org/aim-column/hillar...in-connecticut

She did it again yesterday...

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slides...7e15e00cf5...- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Who flashed her?

http://news.yahoo.com/nphotos/slides...eeef366d0869f6

On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 08:21:09 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould
wrote:

On Feb 10, 6:32?am, "Jim" wrote:
According to one of the tabloid covers, Bill has stated that if she doesn't
win the White House he's going to divorce her. It's probably not true, but
I'll bet we see a lot more of this sort of stuff.

On the D side, Momentum seems to have shifted to Obama.
Now nearly tied in delegates, Obama trounced Clinton by 60-40 and
70-30 margins in three very states spread all across the country
yesterday.

She's now beginning to imitate his oratical style, a sure sign that
she knows she's in serious trouble. It's hilarious to watch her
flailing her arms around and adjusting her modulation and phrasing to
imitate Barack.

Huckabee is drawing support from fundamentalists who want to see a
preacher in the WH and from R's who would rather vote for *anybody*
except McCain. Obamba/McCain would be a horse race, Obama/Huckabee
would be a lopsided victory for the D's (IMO). But it's too late for
Huckabee. I saw an analysis revealing that if Huckabee wins the R
primaries and caucuses in *every* remaining state with a plurality in
the low 50's, McCain still gets enough delegates from the apportioned
states to nail the nomination on the first R ballot. Huck needs to win
every "winner-take-all" state and *smoke* McCain in the apportioned
states to have a chance, and it's too late.

It's an interesting process. No matter what, any of the final
contenders will be a giant step up from the current POTUS.

I think we'll soon see what 1 or 2 "third parties" have to offer as
well.

I'll be voting for Obama on Tuesday.
--
John H

On Feb 10, 5:38�pm, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 08:21:09 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould





wrote:
On Feb 10, 6:32?am, "Jim" wrote:
According to one of the tabloid covers, Bill has stated that if she doesn't
win the White House he's going to divorce her. It's probably not true, but
I'll bet we see a lot more of this sort of stuff.

On the D side, Momentum seems to have shifted to Obama.
Now nearly tied in delegates, Obama trounced Clinton by 60-40 and
70-30 margins in three very states spread all across the country
yesterday.

She's now beginning to imitate his oratical style, a sure sign that
she knows she's in serious trouble. It's hilarious to watch her
flailing her arms around and adjusting her modulation and phrasing to
imitate Barack.

Huckabee is drawing support from fundamentalists who want to see a
preacher in the WH and from R's who would rather vote for *anybody*
except McCain. Obamba/McCain would be a horse race, Obama/Huckabee
would be a lopsided victory for the D's (IMO). But it's too late for
Huckabee. I saw an analysis revealing that if Huckabee wins the R
primaries and caucuses in *every* remaining state with a plurality in
the low 50's, McCain still gets enough delegates from the apportioned
states to nail the nomination on the first R ballot. Huck needs to win
every "winner-take-all" state and *smoke* McCain in the apportioned
states to have a chance, and it's too late.

It's an interesting process. No matter what, any of the final
contenders will be a giant step up from the current POTUS.

I think we'll soon see what 1 or 2 "third parties" have to offer as
well.

I'll be voting for Obama on Tuesday.
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Very nice and thoughtful choice, John. There are several decent
choices curenty available, and you have landed on a good one.

Chuck Gould wrote:
On Feb 10, 5:38�pm, John H. wrote:
On Sun, 10 Feb 2008 08:21:09 -0800 (PST), Chuck Gould





wrote:
On Feb 10, 6:32?am, "Jim" wrote:
According to one of the tabloid covers, Bill has stated that if she doesn't
win the White House he's going to divorce her. It's probably not true, but
I'll bet we see a lot more of this sort of stuff.
On the D side, Momentum seems to have shifted to Obama.
Now nearly tied in delegates, Obama trounced Clinton by 60-40 and
70-30 margins in three very states spread all across the country
yesterday.
She's now beginning to imitate his oratical style, a sure sign that
she knows she's in serious trouble. It's hilarious to watch her
flailing her arms around and adjusting her modulation and phrasing to
imitate Barack.
Huckabee is drawing support from fundamentalists who want to see a
preacher in the WH and from R's who would rather vote for *anybody*
except McCain. Obamba/McCain would be a horse race, Obama/Huckabee
would be a lopsided victory for the D's (IMO). But it's too late for
Huckabee. I saw an analysis revealing that if Huckabee wins the R
primaries and caucuses in *every* remaining state with a plurality in
the low 50's, McCain still gets enough delegates from the apportioned
states to nail the nomination on the first R ballot. Huck needs to win
every "winner-take-all" state and *smoke* McCain in the apportioned
states to have a chance, and it's too late.
It's an interesting process. No matter what, any of the final
contenders will be a giant step up from the current POTUS.
I think we'll soon see what 1 or 2 "third parties" have to offer as
well.
I'll be voting for Obama on Tuesday.
--
John H- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Very nice and thoughtful choice, John. There are several decent
choices curenty available, and you have landed on a good one.


I don't know why, but I suspect Herring's motivation.