|
![]() ![]() ![]() |
This topic is archived. |
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News |
![]() |
DeepModem Mom
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 03:21 PM Original message |
Facing questions, Edwards evades reporters |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
sinkingfeeling
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 03:28 PM Response to Original message |
1. Why should he answer questions about crap in a tabloid? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
still_one
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 03:30 PM Response to Reply #1 |
2. What he should do is sue the enquirer like Carol Burnet did some time ago |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JDPriestly
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 03:55 PM Response to Reply #2 |
6. He is a public figure. That limits his ability to sue. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rsdsharp
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:15 PM Response to Reply #6 |
14. His ability to sue isn't limited. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JDPriestly
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:32 PM Response to Reply #14 |
25. You are correct, Radsharp. The higher standard of proof limits him. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JeanGrey
![]() |
Sat Aug-09-08 11:40 AM Response to Reply #14 |
148. Which we all know is true so he has no case. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
zbdent
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:28 PM Response to Reply #6 |
22. not really a public figure ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LisaL
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 05:43 PM Response to Reply #22 |
38. Hah? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
zbdent
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 05:45 PM Response to Reply #38 |
39. Isn't he now a private citizen? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Noisy Democrat
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 11:10 PM Response to Reply #39 |
52. He wasn't when the alleged events allegedly occurred |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Freddie Stubbs
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 01:56 AM Response to Reply #6 |
78. Carol Burnet is a public figure, and she won |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JoFerret
![]() |
Tue Aug-05-08 06:16 AM Response to Reply #6 |
130. Stop deadendering |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
INDIA
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:00 PM Response to Reply #2 |
9. Too bad truth is an absolute defense to defamation. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
tabasco
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 11:41 PM Response to Reply #9 |
106. You trust the National Fucking Enquirer. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
INDIA
![]() |
Sun Aug-03-08 11:20 PM Response to Reply #106 |
121. I'm glad Obama won. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
INDIA
![]() |
Fri Aug-08-08 05:05 PM Response to Reply #106 |
140. Too bad I trusted the NE huh? Oh wait...nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Codeine
![]() |
Fri Aug-08-08 05:08 PM Response to Reply #106 |
142. Who's the idiot now, smartass? nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Psephos
![]() |
Sat Aug-09-08 06:28 AM Response to Reply #106 |
143. Quick-draw McGraw shoots self in foot again n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JeanGrey
![]() |
Sat Aug-09-08 11:41 AM Response to Reply #106 |
149. Oh for god's sake! He has ADMITTED it unless you |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
unapatriciated
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:12 PM Response to Reply #2 |
13. She did win but the cost was very high |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
orleans
![]() |
Fri Aug-08-08 02:56 PM Response to Reply #2 |
137. why would he sue the enquirer? he admitted to the "affair"?? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JeanGrey
![]() |
Sat Aug-09-08 11:39 AM Response to Reply #2 |
147. Sue for what? TELLING THE TRUTH? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DeepModem Mom
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 03:32 PM Response to Reply #1 |
4. Yeah. I posted this because it's the first I've seen beyond Enquirer and Fox. So... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
struggle4progress
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 12:08 AM Response to Reply #4 |
55. " ... California State law permits the father's name to be reported on the birth certificate only if |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JDPriestly
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 10:52 PM Response to Reply #4 |
75. Edwards has promised to do everything he can to get Obama elected. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ian David
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 03:30 PM Response to Original message |
3. Same 'reporter' that fabricated the Ted Kennedy Love Child story. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ian David
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 03:33 PM Response to Original message |
5. Because The Enquirer is so credible |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dysfunctional press
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:25 PM Response to Reply #5 |
17. from what i understand, the enquirer has apparently gotten much beter than it used to be... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Inspired
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 05:37 PM Response to Reply #17 |
35. They nailed the OJ stuff? What about that Obama stuff? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dysfunctional press
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 05:59 PM Response to Reply #35 |
40. what stuff are you referring to...? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
saracat
![]() |
Sun Aug-03-08 08:32 PM Response to Reply #40 |
115. Try "Obama Gay Love triangle" or the current "Obama Marriage Collapse". |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
zbdent
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 09:40 AM Response to Reply #17 |
58. really? Much better about that stuff? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
dysfunctional press
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 04:12 PM Response to Reply #58 |
67. the 'bush on cocaine' headline is from the globe, not the enquirer... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
struggle4progress
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 04:58 PM Response to Reply #67 |
92. The same trash from the same publisher |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onehandle
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 03:58 PM Response to Original message |
7. And here it is posted at DU. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DeepModem Mom
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:06 PM Response to Reply #7 |
11. I posted this -- and have posted nothing before about it -- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onehandle
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:30 PM Response to Reply #11 |
23. See reply #19. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DeepModem Mom
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:38 PM Response to Reply #23 |
28. I've PMed you, onehandle. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Merlot
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 06:39 PM Response to Reply #7 |
42. Don't you mean "Democrat Underground?" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DeepModem Mom
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 09:56 PM Response to Reply #42 |
48. Self-delete. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jeanruss
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 03:59 PM Response to Original message |
8. I don't care |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
question everything
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 11:38 PM Response to Reply #8 |
54. If this story were about Romney, would you still say that you don't care? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jeanruss
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 10:00 AM Response to Reply #54 |
60. yes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Noisy Democrat
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 11:36 AM Response to Reply #60 |
63. The problem is |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
jeanruss
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 02:47 PM Response to Reply #63 |
66. Republicans |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Noisy Democrat
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 10:17 AM Response to Reply #66 |
83. But he would have lost |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
goclark
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 06:21 PM Response to Reply #83 |
95. McCain called his wife a c*** in public |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Psephos
![]() |
Sun Aug-03-08 10:21 PM Response to Reply #66 |
117. "We need a smart and competent person who has the balls to stand up to corporations..." |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Critters2
![]() |
Mon Aug-04-08 12:55 AM Response to Reply #117 |
122. There's a mother, there's a father. Why would a DNA test be necessary? nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Psephos
![]() |
Mon Aug-04-08 10:32 PM Response to Reply #122 |
124. There's a mother and a statement to the press, not a father. Do you understand the difference? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Critters2
![]() |
Mon Aug-04-08 10:48 PM Response to Reply #124 |
125. The woman hasdenied the story. The man has admitted paternity, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Psephos
![]() |
Tue Aug-05-08 01:17 AM Response to Reply #125 |
128. bye bye little sheep n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Critters2
![]() |
Tue Aug-05-08 06:09 AM Response to Reply #128 |
129. Defending a Progressive Democrat against the unfounded charges of a tabloid |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Psephos
![]() |
Fri Aug-08-08 02:35 PM Response to Reply #129 |
132. Care to comment now that Edwards admits to the affair? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JeanGrey
![]() |
Sat Aug-09-08 11:42 AM Response to Reply #60 |
150. I don't believe that. Look how we trashed Larry Craig. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JDPriestly
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:03 PM Response to Original message |
10. The woman has already denied this story. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
INDIA
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:18 PM Response to Reply #10 |
15. He was "visiting" her at what, 3 am? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Inspired
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:26 PM Response to Reply #15 |
18. How do you know he was visiting 'her' at 3:00 am? Because the NE told you so? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JDPriestly
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:28 PM Response to Reply #15 |
21. The woman was accompanied by a man and her baby. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
aquart
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:43 PM Response to Reply #21 |
31. "Why would she take a man and her baby to an illicit rendez-vous? " |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
INDIA
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 05:28 PM Response to Reply #21 |
34. Because it might be his baby. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
brentspeak
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 06:22 PM Response to Reply #34 |
41. Or it might be your baby |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
INDIA
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 07:22 PM Response to Reply #41 |
43. Complete lack of any connection whatsoever. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JDPriestly
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 10:39 PM Response to Reply #34 |
73. Why not visit John and Elizabeth at the same time if they are friends? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Mushroom
![]() |
Sun Aug-03-08 01:09 AM Response to Reply #34 |
107. Reduce, reuse, recycle! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JDPriestly
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:36 PM Response to Reply #15 |
27. As an Edwards supporter, I remember hearing and reading |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JDPriestly
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 10:47 PM Response to Reply #15 |
74. John Edwards is one of the few politicians who takes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DeepModem Mom
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:23 PM Response to Reply #10 |
16. Thanks for adding this info. nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JeanGrey
![]() |
Sat Aug-09-08 11:42 AM Response to Reply #10 |
151. We all know about "denials" now, don't we? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
BrklynLiberal
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:08 PM Response to Original message |
12. Trying to bring the Dems down to the level of the hypocritical Repukes?? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Voltaire99
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:26 PM Response to Original message |
19. "Sorry, not now" doesn't cut it, Edwards |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JDPriestly
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:30 PM Response to Reply #19 |
24. You are libeling Edwards. You have no facts at this point |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Noisy Democrat
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 11:02 PM Response to Reply #24 |
49. Actually, I don't think it is his private business |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
fjc
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 10:06 AM Response to Reply #49 |
61. Maybe. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JDPriestly
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 10:37 PM Response to Reply #49 |
72. "Charged" is the key word. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Noisy Democrat
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 11:04 PM Response to Reply #72 |
76. No, I'm not |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JDPriestly
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 01:25 AM Response to Reply #76 |
77. But, he is a private citizen now. He is not running for office. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Noisy Democrat
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 10:09 AM Response to Reply #77 |
80. But he was running for office when all of this |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
saracat
![]() |
Sun Aug-03-08 11:10 PM Response to Reply #49 |
118. There is a lot of rumour and inuendo about our presumptive nomineee as well. That doesn't make any |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
onehandle
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:34 PM Response to Reply #19 |
26. I think you missposted. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Redstone
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:42 PM Response to Reply #19 |
30. He doesn't "owe" anyone jack shit. Least of all you. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Noisy Democrat
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 11:06 PM Response to Reply #30 |
50. Actually, he may |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Inspired
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 05:39 PM Response to Reply #19 |
37. What the fuck? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Critters2
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 12:13 AM Response to Reply #19 |
56. He doesn't owe anyone crap!! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Noisy Democrat
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 10:14 AM Response to Reply #56 |
82. Because some of us expect our leaders to act with integrity? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Critters2
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 08:41 PM Response to Reply #82 |
100. Scamming you? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 04:57 PM Response to Reply #19 |
70. What is your stake? What do you care about his personal life? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Noisy Democrat
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 10:11 AM Response to Reply #70 |
81. So lying to the voters is hunky-dory? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 02:33 PM Response to Reply #81 |
87. Oh, b#llshit. You have no evidence that John lied about anything. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
halobeam
![]() |
Sun Aug-03-08 09:13 PM Response to Reply #81 |
116. just an observation or two...... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LittleClarkie
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 03:28 PM Response to Reply #70 |
91. How did you feel when Sen. Craig was caught. Feel the same way? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 11:01 PM Response to Reply #91 |
102. I defend all potential love children, being one myself. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
noamnety
![]() |
Sun Aug-03-08 10:23 AM Response to Reply #19 |
110. "shamelessly parading his wife" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Ian David
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:27 PM Response to Original message |
20. Here's the REAL story: Investigation of GOP group sought |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Redstone
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:41 PM Response to Original message |
29. And you're posting negative bullshit about Edwards, exactly why? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DeepModem Mom
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 04:59 PM Response to Reply #29 |
32. See my post #11. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Redstone
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 05:38 PM Response to Reply #32 |
36. You don't need to apologize to me. You can post whatever you want to. And I can ask why |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Noisy Democrat
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 11:09 PM Response to Reply #36 |
51. Have you thought about the feelings of |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
EFerrari
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 02:54 PM Response to Reply #51 |
89. What in world is John Edwards' responsibility for |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Name removed
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 12:55 AM Response to Reply #29 |
57. Deleted message |
flvegan
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 05:14 PM Response to Original message |
33. Why are we even discussing this on DU? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
INDIA
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 07:29 PM Response to Reply #33 |
44. Well, I didn't donate to the Edwards campaign. But I would be pissed if I did... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Critters2
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 04:46 PM Response to Reply #44 |
68. Then STFU. I did donate to the Edwards campaign, and volunteered for it, |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
INDIA
![]() |
Sun Aug-03-08 11:19 PM Response to Reply #68 |
120. I'm glad Obama won. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Critters2
![]() |
Mon Aug-04-08 10:50 PM Response to Reply #120 |
126. The National Enquirer has published a "love child" story about him, too. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
INDIA
![]() |
Fri Aug-08-08 05:07 PM Response to Reply #68 |
141. Is it still unfounded mycritters2? nt |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
asdjrocky
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 08:11 PM Response to Original message |
45. Enough with this shit all ready. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DearAbby
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 08:18 PM Response to Original message |
46. Tabloid trash....good enough response for me |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
waiting for hope
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 09:36 PM Response to Original message |
47. This is all crap and anyone with half a |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
MissDeeds
![]() |
Thu Jul-31-08 11:19 PM Response to Reply #47 |
53. Ouch |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Orsino
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 09:44 AM Response to Original message |
59. Guy couldn't *buy* coverage when running for president. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
robcon
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 10:42 AM Response to Original message |
62. He should answer the questions to save his wife the embarrassment. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Noisy Democrat
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 11:38 AM Response to Reply #62 |
64. Yes |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Critters2
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 04:47 PM Response to Reply #62 |
69. Bullshit. He shouldn't dignify it with an answer. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
robcon
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 08:29 PM Response to Reply #69 |
71. It's so easy to say" I wasn't there" - then attack the Enquirer. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Critters2
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 08:43 PM Response to Reply #71 |
101. Responding is what will drag it out. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
hopewell1985
![]() |
Fri Aug-01-08 11:59 AM Response to Original message |
65. Cut this guy some slack |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rasputin1952
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 07:58 AM Response to Original message |
79. I suppose it was a slow news hour or two... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ohio2007
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 10:29 AM Response to Reply #79 |
84. Does this means Edwards is off "the short list" ? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
rasputin1952
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 11:15 AM Response to Reply #84 |
85. I don't think so...but I really don't think there will be any announcement |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
GoldenOldie
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 11:16 AM Response to Reply #84 |
86. This is "Breaking News?" God help us all! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ohio2007
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 07:03 PM Response to Reply #86 |
96. It was only three weeks ago that John Edwards was fielding media questions on his chances of filling |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
cobalt1999
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 02:49 PM Response to Reply #84 |
88. I doubt Edwards was ever on the short list. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
roamer65
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 03:11 PM Response to Original message |
90. I don't a rat's ass about this "story". |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LittleClarkie
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 05:27 PM Response to Reply #90 |
93. If we're going to go after Republicans and their vices, then our own vices are fair game |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 05:32 PM Response to Original message |
94. Does anyone truly believe that Edwards is getting VP slot . .. ? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
ohio2007
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 07:11 PM Response to Reply #94 |
97. And, where's Elizabeth? Still fighting her cancer I think |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 07:38 PM Response to Reply #97 |
99. Elizabeth is always there, even with cancer . . . she's smarter than John ... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Bozita
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 11:18 PM Response to Reply #97 |
103. She was on with Colbert last week. She looked GOOD! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 11:20 PM Response to Reply #103 |
104. Right . . . remember the THREAT he had from the Chamber of Commerce . . .??? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JanMichael
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 07:16 PM Response to Original message |
98. let's see. People in the US are losing their homes, and are hungry. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
defendandprotect
![]() |
Sat Aug-02-08 11:23 PM Response to Reply #98 |
105. right . . . and we're looking for a political basis we can believe in . . . |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
JanMichael
![]() |
Sun Aug-03-08 01:15 PM Response to Reply #105 |
111. I don't know if you have caught the news lately-- |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Psephos
![]() |
Sun Aug-03-08 11:17 PM Response to Reply #111 |
119. I don't know if you caught the news lately |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
clear eye
![]() |
Sun Aug-03-08 09:23 AM Response to Reply #98 |
108. It Is Exceedingly Unlikely That Another Man Would Claim Paternity if |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
marshall
![]() |
Mon Aug-04-08 09:06 AM Response to Reply #108 |
123. Remember the Anna Nicole case? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
LisaL
![]() |
Sun Aug-03-08 09:52 AM Response to Original message |
109. I have no clue whether there is any truth to this story. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
w4rma
![]() |
Sun Aug-03-08 01:28 PM Response to Original message |
112. "an Edwards campaign worker claimed to be the father of the woman's then-unborn child" |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
clear eye
![]() |
Sun Aug-03-08 07:47 PM Response to Reply #112 |
113. Thank you. n/t |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
robcon
![]() |
Sun Aug-03-08 08:31 PM Response to Reply #112 |
114. When was it debunked? |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Wabbajack_
![]() |
Mon Aug-04-08 10:54 PM Response to Original message |
127. A man has needs |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
The Croquist
![]() |
Tue Aug-05-08 06:23 AM Response to Reply #127 |
131. His wife has needs too |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
mnhtnbb
![]() |
Fri Aug-08-08 03:31 PM Response to Reply #127 |
139. That is narcissistic bullshit. Try masturbation. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Psephos
![]() |
Fri Aug-08-08 02:42 PM Response to Original message |
133. Thank you DeepModem Mom for putting up with a lot of "shoot the messenger" bile here |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Freddie Stubbs
![]() |
Fri Aug-08-08 02:54 PM Response to Reply #133 |
136. A lot of people like to put their fingers in their ears to avoid eharing things which clash with |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DeepModem Mom
![]() |
Sat Aug-09-08 10:42 AM Response to Reply #133 |
145. Thank you, Psephos. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
snooper2
![]() |
Fri Aug-08-08 02:47 PM Response to Original message |
134. lot of crow... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
RamboLiberal
![]() |
Fri Aug-08-08 02:53 PM Response to Reply #134 |
135. Yep - I think some DU'ers owe others DU'ers an apology |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
Montypython
![]() |
Fri Aug-08-08 03:05 PM Response to Original message |
138. We don't need this now. |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DeepModem Mom
![]() |
Sat Aug-09-08 10:48 AM Response to Reply #138 |
146. Hi, Montypython -- welcome to DU! |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
TaffyMoon
![]() |
Sat Aug-09-08 06:35 AM Response to Original message |
144. Now real news will disappear into the "scandal" black hole... |
Printer Friendly | Permalink | | Top |
DU
AdBot (1000+ posts) ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Fri Jun 21st 2024, 04:06 AM Response to Original message |
Advertisements [?] |
Top |
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News |
![]() |
Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators
Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.
Home | Discussion Forums | Journals | Store | Donate
About DU | Contact Us | Privacy Policy
Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.
© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC