PDA

View Full Version : Thank You Mr. Clinton



pooltchr
06-21-2004, 05:07 AM
This would not seem all that relevant today until you get to #14. Then
chills run down the spine.
>
>Dear Mr. Ex President Clinton:
>I recently saw a bumper sticker that said, "Thank me, I voted for
Clinton-Gore." So, I sat down and reflected on that, and I am sending my
"Thank you" for what you have done, specifically:
>
>1. Thank you for introducing us to Jennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Monica
Lewinsky, Dolly Kyle Browning, Kathleen Willey and Juanita Broderick. Did I
leave anyone out?
>
>2. Thank you for teaching my 8 year old about oral sex. I had really
planned to wait until they were older to discuss it with them, but now they
know more about it than I did as a senior in college.
>
>3. Thank you for showing us that sexual harassment in the work place
(especially the White House) and on the job is OK, and all you have to know
is what the meaning of "is" is. It really is great to know that certain
sexual acts are not sex, and one person may have sex while the other one
involved does NOT have sex.
>
>4. Thank you for reintroducing the concept of impeachment to a new
generation and demonstrating that the ridiculous plot of the movie, "Wag
the Dog" could be plausible after all.
>
>5. Thanks for making Jimmy Carter look competent, Gerald Ford look
graceful, Richard Nixon look honest, Lyndon Johnson look truthful, and John
Kennedy look moral.
>
>6. Thank you for the 73 House and Senate witnesses who have pled the 5th
Amendment and 17 witnesses who have fled the country to avoid testifying
about Democratic campaign fund raising.
>
>7. Thank you, for the 19 charges, 8 convictions, and 4 imprisonments from
the Whitewater "mess" and the 55 criminal charges and 32 criminal
convictions (so far) in the other "Clinton" scandals.
>
>8. Thanks also for reducing our military by half, "gutting" much of our
foreign policy, and flying all over the world on "vacations" carefully
disguised as necessary trips. It seems you have been campaigning for
Secretary General of the United Nations since your reelection in 1996.
>
>9. Thank you, also, for "finding" millions of dollars--- I really didn't
need it in the first place, and I can't think of a more well deserving
group of recipients for my hard-earned dollar than jet fuel for all of your
globe-trotting. I understand you, your family and your cronies have logged
in more time aboard Air Force One than any other administration. Good
luck on your continued campaign to be King of the world.
>
>10. Now that you've left the White House, thanks for the 140 pardons of
convicted felons and indicted felons-in-exile. We will love to have them
rejoin society.
>
>11. Thanks also for removing the White House silverware. I'm sure that
Laura Bush didn't like the pattern anyway. Also, enjoy the housewarming
gifts you've received from your "friends."
>
>12. Thanks to you and your staff in the West Wing of the White House for
vandalizing and destroying government property on the way out. I also
appreciate removing all of that excess weight (China, silverware, linen,
towels, ash trays, soap, pens, magnetic compass, flight manuals, etc.) out
of Air Force 1. The weight savings means burning less fuel, thus less tax
dollars spent on jet fuel. Thank you!
>
>13. And, please ensure that Hillary enjoys the $8 million dollar advance
for her upcoming "tell-all" book and you, Bill, the $10 million advance for
your memoirs. Who says crime doesn't pay?
>
>14. The last and most important point - thank you for forcing Israel to
let Mohammed Atta go free. Terrorist pilot Mohammed Atta blew up a bus in
Israel in 1986. The Israelis captured, tried and imprisoned him. As part of
the Oslo agreement with the Palestinians in 1993, Israel had to agree to
release so-called "political prisoners." However, the Israelis would not
release any with blood on their hands. The American President at the time,
Bill Clinton, and his Secretary of State, Warren Christopher, "insisted"
that all prisoners be released. Thus Mohammed Atta was freed and eventually
thanked the US by flying an airplane into Tower One of the World Trade
Center. This was reported by many of the American TV networks at the time
that the terrorists were first identified. It was censored in the US from
all later reports. Why shouldn't Americans know the real truth?
>
>What a guy!! If you agree that the American public must be made aware of
these facts, pass this on.
>
>God bless America and THANK YOU (once again) for spending my taxes so
wisely and frugally.
>
>SINCERELY,
>A US Citizen
>PS. Please pass along a special thank you to Al Gore for "inventing" the
Internet, without which I would not be able to send this wonderful factual
e-mail.
>
>AND THE REST OF THE STORY Hillary Rodham Clinton, as a New York State
Senator, now comes under the "Congressional Retirement and Staffing Plan,"
which means that even if she never gets reelected, she STILL receives her
Congressional salary until she dies.
>(Would it not be nice if all Americans were pension eligible after only 4
years?)
>If Bill outlives her, he then inherits HER salary until HE dies. He is
already getting his Presidential salary until he dies. If Hillary outlives
Bill, she also gets HIS salary until she dies. Guess who pays for that? WE
DO!
>It's common knowledge that in order for her to establish NY residency they
purchased a million dollar-plus house in upscale Chappaqua, New York. Makes
sense. They are entitled to Secret Service protection for life. Still makes
sense. Here is where it becomes interesting.
>Their mortgage payments hover at around $10,000 per month. BUT, an extra
residence HAD to be built within the acreage to house the Secret Service
agents.
>The Clinton's charge the Federal government $10,000 monthly rent for the
use of that extra residence, which is just about equal to their mortgage
payment. This means that we, the taxpayers, are paying the Clinton's
salary, mortgage, transportation, safety and security, as well as the
salaries for their 12 man staff-and, this is all perfectly legal!
>
>When she runs for President, will you vote for her?

Wally_in_Cincy
06-21-2004, 06:26 AM
One more, thanks for making ballistic missile technology available to the Chinese in exchange for campaign cash.

landshark77
06-21-2004, 07:07 AM
ROTFLMAO!
True, True, True!

bluewolf
06-21-2004, 07:33 AM
"Don't blame me. I voted for Perot" [old bumper sticker]

Laura

nAz
06-21-2004, 08:06 AM
Yawnnnnnn

Cueless Joey
06-21-2004, 08:50 AM
OMG, I didn't know the Clintons were that corrupt.
I thought they were honorable dignified people.

mickey2
06-21-2004, 09:48 AM
I am not a Clinton fan, but I don't like it if people present fiction as facts.
Mohammed Atta is not Mahmoud Mahmoud Atta.
'Why shouldn't Americans know the real truth' Point 14 is just propaganda or lack of knowledge.

highsea
06-21-2004, 10:00 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Wally_in_Cincy:</font><hr>One more, thanks for making ballistic missile technology available to the Chinese in exchange for campaign cash.<hr /></blockquote>
And thanks for the 1994 Geneva Agreed Framework, in which we supplied North Korea with a $5 Billion dollar nuclear reactor project, thousands of tons of food aid and fertilizers, and other incentives as a concession that they freeze their Uranium Enrichment Program (which they didn't do of course, they just relocated it to a different facility, funded by US aid).

-CM

highsea
06-21-2004, 10:19 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote mickey2:</font><hr> I am not a Clinton fan, but I don't like it if people present fiction as facts.
Mohammed Atta is not Mahmoud Mahmoud Atta.
'Why shouldn't Americans know the real truth' Point 14 is just propaganda or lack of knowledge. <hr /></blockquote>
You're correct on this point.

Initially, Mohammed Atta's identity was confused with that of a native Jordanian, Mahmoud Mahmoud Atta, who bombed a bus in 1986 on the Israel-controlled West Bank, killing one and severely injuring three. Mahmoud Mahmoud Atta, a naturalized US citizen, was subsequently deported from Venezuela to the United States, extradited to Israel, tried and sentenced to life in prison. The Israeli supreme court later invalidated his extradition and set him free; his whereabouts are unknown. He is 14 years older than Mohammed Atta. After the September 11 attacks, a general furor arose over the supposed failure of immigration authorities and the US intelligence community to stop a known terrorist from entering the country under his true name. Eventually, the Boston Globe factually reported details from records at the US Circuit Court of Appeals detailing the detention and subsequent extradition of Mahmoud Mahmoud Atta from the US.

http://www.nationmaster.com/encyclopedia/Mohammed-Atta

-CM

Qtec
06-21-2004, 10:34 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote mickey2:</font><hr> I am not a Clinton fan, but I don't like it if people present fiction as facts.
Mohammed Atta is not Mahmoud Mahmoud Atta.
'Why shouldn't Americans know the real truth' Point 14 is just propaganda or lack of knowledge.



Touchè.

Q
<hr /></blockquote>

pooltchr
06-21-2004, 11:16 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote mickey2:</font><hr> I am not a Clinton fan, but I don't like it if people present fiction as facts.
Mohammed Atta is not Mahmoud Mahmoud Atta.
'Why shouldn't Americans know the real truth' Point 14 is just propaganda or lack of knowledge.
<hr /></blockquote>
Point well taken. I will base my opinion of the man strictly on the first 13 items. The jury is instructed to ignore the last item!

Qtec
06-21-2004, 11:39 AM
Pooltchr,how do you know that the other 13 items are also not true./ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
Do you believe everything you read?

Q.

eg8r
06-21-2004, 11:45 AM
[ QUOTE ]
Pooltchr,how do you know that the other 13 items are also not true.
Do you believe everything you read? <hr /></blockquote> Which ones (other than 14) don't you believe are true? and why?

eg8r

Qtec
06-21-2004, 11:56 AM
LOL.

I dont care if they are true or not. All I am saying is that after Pooltchr,s main point was 'blasted out the water /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif, why should I assume that the rest of his info is correct. No big deal.

Q

Cueless Joey
06-21-2004, 12:49 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> Pooltchr,how do you know that the other 13 items are also not true./ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif
Do you believe everything you read?

Q. <hr /></blockquote>
I just threw up but I'll be ok. /ccboard/images/graemlins/laugh.gif

pooltchr
06-21-2004, 01:08 PM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Qtec:</font><hr> LOL.

I dont care if they are true or not. All I am saying is that after Pooltchr,s main point was 'blasted out the water /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif, why should I assume that the rest of his info is correct. No big deal.

Q <hr /></blockquote>
I guess that would depend on what your definition of "true" is....kinda like what the definition of "is" is. /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif

eg8r
06-21-2004, 01:23 PM
[ QUOTE ]
I dont care if they are true or not. All I am saying is that after Pooltchr,s main point was 'blasted out the water , why should I assume that the rest of his info is correct. No big deal.
<hr /></blockquote> Is that your best?

eg8r &lt;~~~does not care about the validity of question 14, since the first 13 were overwhelming enough.

Ross
06-22-2004, 01:16 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote pooltchr:</font><hr> This would not seem all that relevant today until you get to #14. Then
chills run down the spine.
&gt;
&gt;Dear Mr. Ex President Clinton:
&gt;I recently saw a bumper sticker that said, "Thank me, I voted for
Clinton-Gore." So, I sat down and reflected on that, and I am sending my
"Thank you" for what you have done, specifically:
&gt;
<font color="blue"> Not picking on you Steve, but, against my better judgement, I just have to do this... </font color>
&gt;1. Thank you for introducing us to Jennifer Flowers, Paula Jones, Monica
Lewinsky, Dolly Kyle Browning, Kathleen Willey and Juanita Broderick. Did I
leave anyone out?

<font color="blue"> Yes, Clinton had a weakness for bimbos. I'll give you that. We have a long line of cheating presidents from Jefferson, to Garfield, to Cleveland, Harding to Roosevelt to Johnson, to Eisenhower to Kennedy (his affairs incle Inga Arvad During WW II, Florence Pritchett, wife of Earl T Smith, a US Ambassador to Cuba, Marylin Monroe, Jayne Mansfield, Judith Campbell Exner, Pamela Turnure - Jacqueline Kennedy's press secretary, Priscilla Wear - a secretary, Jill Cowan -a secretary, Mary Pinchot Meyer, Blaze Starr, and Tempest Storm to name a few) to Clinton. Only one of these Presidents have had their private lives dragged publicly through the mud for their infidelities. Women throw themselves at handsome charismatic men with power (or non-handsome non-charismatic men with power in the cases of Johnson and Eisenhower) and succomb to the temptation and take the women up on their offers. Don't judge unless you've had women throwing themselves at you and you took the high road. However, if Clinton was guilty of non-consensual sex then I agree that is the business of the public and should be a major "stain" (excuse the pun) on his reputation. But I don't know if those accusations are true.
</font color>
&gt;
&gt;2. Thank you for teaching my 8 year old about oral sex. I had really
planned to wait until they were older to discuss it with them, but now they
know more about it than I did as a senior in college.

<font color="blue">Pure BS. No 8 year old learned about oral sex or was damaged psychologically from the impeachment hearings, just like no 8 year old was damaged by Janets boobie view. And any one who only learned about bj's in college - well, no wonder they are Republican! (Sorry, couldn't resist!) </font color>
&gt;
&gt;3. Thank you for showing us that sexual harassment in the work place
(especially the White House) and on the job is OK, and all you have to know
is what the meaning of "is" is. It really is great to know that certain
sexual acts are not sex, and one person may have sex while the other one
involved does NOT have sex.
<font color="blue"> It was consensual, Clinton was not Monica's boss, and she sought him out as much as the other way around. Poor taste, but not harrassment. And Monica herself, as many of her generation, somehow defined sex as requiring intercourse. I agree that makes no sense, though. </font color>

&gt;
&gt;4. Thank you for reintroducing the concept of impeachment to a new
generation and demonstrating that the ridiculous plot of the movie, "Wag
the Dog" could be plausible after all.
&gt;
<font color="blue"> No, thank the holier than thou Republicans who insisted that the bj and Clintons lying about the bj were impeachable offenses. What a collosal waste of time, money, and energy by our government.</font color>


&gt;5. Thanks for making Jimmy Carter look competent, Gerald Ford look
graceful, Richard Nixon look honest, Lyndon Johnson look truthful, and John
Kennedy look moral. <font color="blue"> There is no logic in this statement, so I will just ignore it. </font color>
&gt;
&gt;6. Thank you for the 73 House and Senate witnesses who have pled the 5th
Amendment and 17 witnesses who have fled the country to avoid testifying
about Democratic campaign fund raising.
&gt;
<font color="blue"> ??? If the Democratic party did illegal fundraising then why the hell hasn't the Republican controlled House and Senate done anything about it? And if there was illegal fundraising I would blame the party, not the President, just like I would if there were illegal Republican fundraising. </font color>
&gt;7. Thank you, for the 19 charges, 8 convictions, and 4 imprisonments from
the Whitewater "mess" and the 55 criminal charges and 32 criminal
convictions (so far) in the other "Clinton" scandals.
&gt; <font color="blue">I know there are dozens of books with conspiracy theories about this, but again it is all just conjecture. As far as I know Bill Clinton was not found guilty of any of illegal activities associated with whitewater. </font color>
&gt;8. Thanks also for reducing our military by half, "gutting" much of our
foreign policy, and flying all over the world on "vacations" carefully
disguised as necessary trips. It seems you have been campaigning for
Secretary General of the United Nations since your reelection in 1996.

<font color="blue"> Well it is true that the number of available troops decreased by 1/3 from 1992 to 2000. But it is also true that as late as July 2001 the Pentagon was complaining that Bush/Rumsfeld were not asking congress for more military money. Quoting superconservative William Kristol on that date:

"I've talked to Democrats and Republicans about this. President Bush has made increase the defense spend a low priority. He could have had it. If he had said I want a tax cut but we need to spend more in defense, everyone agrees we're not spending enough just to keep doing what we're doing right now let alone doing the transformation that Mike correctly says is important if Bush and Cheney and Rumsfeld had gone to the Hill, they would have had huge bipartisan support for a big supplemental this year and for a big budget increase for next year. They chose not to do that. In a respect there was a failure of leadership on the part of the president..."

Now as far as the travel overseas - well Clinton, unlike Bush and Reagan, correctly saw the US as part of a larger, interacting and interdependent world, and therefore was interested in what was going on in the rest of the world. He spent time in Ireland where he helped broker the truce that ended that decades-old terrorist conflict. He made a noble attempt to broker a truce between the Israeli's and the Palestinians. The US led NATO intervention in Kosovo was relatively successful with a minimal loss of US lives. Meanwhile Bush has shown little interest and almost no leadership in promoting peace around the world unless you see the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq in that light. It is difficult and slow bringing long-warring sides to a peace accord, but other US Presidents besides Clinton have successfully led such efforts in the past. Ultimately, that is where true peace lies, not in just creating a fortified US island like Superman's hideaway. </font color>
&gt;
<font color="blue"> That's all I have time for now -I have to go to bed. </font color> <hr /></blockquote>

pooltchr
06-22-2004, 05:53 AM
Ross,
If you honestly believe that Clinton was an honorable man who put the well-being of the country ahead of his own (and his wife's) well-being and political aspirations, I will not argue. In my opinion there was more than enough smoke during his presidency to make me believe there were quite a few fires. The fact that he managed to keep his own toes out of the flames doesn't mean he was innocent.

That being said, I think there are very few politicians out there who I would consider honorable. I personally believe the system corrupts, and even someone with the best of intentions is going to get pulled into the mud of the political system. Clinton, in my opinion, just seemed to be a little bit muddier than most.

Additionally, I understand no one is perfect, and I don't think we will ever find anyone who can stand up under the microscope of the media. Let's face it. Neither you or I would come out squeaky clean if the full brunt of the national media decided they wanted to dig deep enough to take us down. That's just the way it is. For the life of me, I can't imagine why anyone in his right mind would want that job. $200 grand a year and all the silverware you can steal just isn't enough! (sorry, I couldn't resist! /ccboard/images/graemlins/grin.gif )
Steve

Wally_in_Cincy
06-22-2004, 06:37 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ross:</font><hr> ..., against my better judgement, I just have to do this... <hr /></blockquote>

liberal scum /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif j/k

eg8r
06-22-2004, 06:39 AM
[ QUOTE ]
No, thank the holier than thou Republicans who insisted that the bj and Clintons lying about the bj were impeachable offenses. What a collosal waste of time, money, and energy by our government.
<hr /></blockquote> You have got to be kidding me, you are joking right? Lying in court, under oath is no big deal?

[ QUOTE ]
If the Democratic party did illegal fundraising then why the hell hasn't the Republican controlled House and Senate done anything about it? <hr /></blockquote> If the Republican party does nothing about it, does it make it alright? The Republican party has constantly sat on their butt and allowed the dems to do whatever they want and get away with it, and I don't know why (quite possibly to make sure their own skeletons stay hidden).

[ QUOTE ]
Well it is true that the number of available troops decreased by 1/3 from 1992 to 2000. But it is also true that as late as July 2001 the Pentagon was complaining that Bush/Rumsfeld were not asking congress for more military money. Quoting superconservative William Kristol on that date:
<hr /></blockquote> Did you try at all to find a superdem that said Bush was spending too much money on the military (heck we have had plenty say it on this board, however, I don't know that they are superliberals)? Congress has had issues every single time Bush has asked for money to support the troops over in Iraq and Afghanistan. Kerry himself (superliberal) has voted against money for the troops (right after he voted for it).

[ QUOTE ]
Now as far as the travel overseas - well Clinton, unlike Bush and Reagan, correctly saw the US as part of a larger, interacting and interdependent world, and therefore was interested in what was going on in the rest of the world. <hr /></blockquote> Boy, could that logic be spun around a million times given any sort of bias.

[ QUOTE ]
The US led NATO intervention in Kosovo was relatively successful with a minimal loss of US lives. Meanwhile Bush has shown little interest and almost no leadership in promoting peace around the world unless you see the invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq in that light. <hr /></blockquote> Should I be surprised that you brought up Kosovo and failed to mention the fact that Clinton attacked them without the approval of the UN (I wonder just what the ratios were for soldiers fighting from other countries, did they resemble what we have seen in Iraq)? As far as the attack on terror in Afghanistan, and the finishing of his father's job in Iraq, if you don't see that as promoting peace, then you are not even trying. If ridding the world of Saddam Hussein and Taliban, is not a step in the right direction as far as promoting peace, then, WHAT IS?

eg8r

eg8r
06-22-2004, 08:03 AM
[ QUOTE ]
For the life of me, I can't imagine why anyone in his right mind would want that job. $200 grand a year and all the silverware you can steal just isn't enough! (sorry, I couldn't resist! )
Steve <hr /></blockquote> For some reason, I think the 200k figure has gone up, but I could be wrong. The nice part about being Prez or in Congress, etc is that they get to keep their same pay for the rest of their lives (even if they get another job) and they never pay into Social Security. They also never have to worry about living on SS because they have a better plan. This is why the Dems push SS. SS is a vote buying scheme, set up by people who will never have to live under the same rules.

eg8r

moblsv
06-22-2004, 08:56 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ross:</font><hr> Quoting superconservative William Kristol<hr /></blockquote>

Crap. I hope I'm not becoming conservatized by reading this forum /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif. I watched him in a debate a few days ago and thought he came across as somewhat moderate.

Wally_in_Cincy
06-22-2004, 10:48 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote moblsv:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ross:</font><hr> Quoting superconservative William Kristol<hr /></blockquote>

Crap. I hope I'm not becoming conservatized by reading this forum /ccboard/images/graemlins/shocked.gif. I watched him in a debate a few days ago and thought he came across as somewhat moderate. <hr /></blockquote>

Yeh, I would hardly call William Kristol a hard right winger, more of a limp-wristed country club Republican...IMO

Ross
06-22-2004, 11:13 AM
Hey Steve. How's it going?
To tell you the truth I was kind of dreading opening this thread this morning. I expected diatribe and vitriol, and it was a pleasant surprise to see your reasonable reply. So thanks for listening, even if you come to a different conclusion.

I do think Bill Clinton is/was a man who honestly did have the country's best interest at heart. Remember, this is a man whose annual vacation at Hilton Head (I think that is where they were) consisted of getting the best policy minds together to discuss public policy. The laws he fought for as governor and President tended to favor the working class and the poor. And I think he actually did pretty well in the foreign policy area. His interventions were mostly successful at restoring peace and ending carnage and he was able to carry these out without turning most of the world against us.

Unfortuantely, a highly successful (big $$$) mini-industry has grown up that owes it's existence almost solely to the demonizing of the Clintons. Authors sell books and talk shows get big ratings by creatively and selectively piecing together bits of facts, conjecture, and myths, to come up with outlandish conspiracy theories. To be honest, the essence of these theories is scarily reminiscent of the conspiracy theories the Birchers used to spin about Jews, World Banks, and the Tri-lateral Commission. In both cases, the demonized group is seen to have these mysterious hidden powers that they exercise in secrecy to control our destiny for their own benefit. Of course you can never disprove these theories since everything is done in secret. And - for some reason, once your mind starts going down this road you really need no evidence to sustain the theory. Everything that happens just confirms it.

A recent example from the Clintons. Many Clinton-hating conspiracy theorists are now writing that the Clinton's manipulated things so that the Democrats would nominate a candidate sure to lose so that Hillary could fullfill her evil ambitions to be President in 2008. I have friends in the office who believe this. Is there ONE bit of credible evidence for this theory? None. Nada. Zilch. When I ask my friends why they believe it, they say it is just something that sounds like something she would do. So, I guess the logic is, if it fits my theory it is true. And by believing something they made up in their heads they reinforce their preconceived notion that Hillary is an uncaring blindly ambitious bitxx, and the fantasy world perpetuates itself.

Real evidence about Hillary, like praise from both Republican and Democratic Senators about how well prepared she is, how hard she works for her constituents, how easy she is to work with, how willing she was to pay her dues as a freshman Senator, just don't register with people who have already made up their minds. "Don't bother me with facts - I have some anger at the world and I need a fall guy."

Of course both Clinton's have flaws. Bill was a womanizer who had difficulties with impulse control. I guess Hillary's personality can turn some people off. But the rest of these outlandish theories (murdering opponents, scamming the world, caring nothing about their constituents, responsible for everything that goes wrong, etc.) need to die a merciful death.

And you are right Steve - none of us would look that great if we lived our lives under a public microscope. And especially not if there were hundreds of people and millions of dollars devoted to extracting info from our lives and packaging it to put us in the worst light possible.

Of course, as always, JMO.

Ross ~ who could use a little more scandal in his life

Ross
06-22-2004, 11:16 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Wally_in_Cincy:</font><hr> <blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ross:</font><hr> ..., against my better judgement, I just have to do this... <hr /></blockquote>

liberal scum /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif j/k <hr /></blockquote>

conservative poopy-head! /ccboard/images/graemlins/smirk.gif

Ross
06-22-2004, 11:20 AM
Oops, I'm probably wrong then about the "ultra" part. I haven't watched him that much.

pooltchr
06-22-2004, 11:26 AM
<blockquote><font class="small">Quote Ross:</font><hr>Ross ~ who could use a little more scandal in his life
<hr /></blockquote>

I will see if I can start some juicy gossip about you next time I am up in the RDU area. Always glad to help out a friend! /ccboard/images/graemlins/wink.gif
Steve