BethFromVA

But you're bitching about the bashing.

Rodriguez, it's a RANT thread. If you don't like how it comes across, there's this little button called NEXT that you can find something more to your liking.

Then show some personal accountability and stay out of a thread entitled "I DON'T CARE: A MICHAEL JACKSON RANT" for crying out loud...

I'm glad I waited a second and saw your post below hers because I was gonna let fly with some very colorful language that would not be anywhere as delicate and proper as yours is... words pertaining to the stupidity and absurdity of youth today, for a start. :thumbdown:

But he WASN'T a little boy, he was a grown man! So... would you let any 40-something man sleep in bed with your kid/s during a slumber party? Forget that it's Michael Jackson... would you let ANY grown man sleep in bed with your kid/s??

I'm with ya, Glouc, just so you know. What we revere these days is alarming. Look at the other pop star that people can't get enough of. :thumbdown:

Bush was no walk in the park, but Obama sucks. Taking over private businesses and trying to socialize medicine... well, all I can say is welcome to Big Brother and government intervention into your lives like never before.

I'm with you on that, KartMan.

Good idea, Ebony! I don't remember when your last interview was, but wasn't it something like two weeks ago this coming Tuesday? Boy, they sure drag their bums, no? I called and left a message saying I was told I would hear something by mid-week LAST week, and I'm trying to determine what route I need to take and would appreciate hearing something, even if it's "no."

I just felt a couple posts in this thread sounded a bit snarky. Unfortunately I don't immediate switch to thinking it is pure humor, especially since we have had a "history." But I'll do my best. :thumbup:

Ebony: Any word yet?? It's another Friday... I keep hoping Fridays would be the day they would come to you. I just called the attorney's office to find out what's going on. I e-mailed Thursday of last week and heard nothing. Today I ramped it up a bit and called. Had to leave a message. Ugh.

If you say so.

Maybe just more realistic. I'm glad to see you're not making personal jabs again as per our agreement. :thumbup:

And now Michael Jackson is dead. It was first reported as cardiac arrest, but now it's said they think he overdosed on sleeping pills. Wow.

The only broad brush I intended was the one that lumps most politicians into the fold with Clinton, Franke, and this guy from SC. I have very little faith that ANY of them are anything but liars, cheats, and scumbags.

The one thing I AM glad about is not seeing some forlorn, sappy wife standing next to him. Let him stand up there by himself. Serves him right.

I used to go to high school with one of her cousins (though he died his senior year), and I knew where their family lived.

Farrah Fawcett died today. :bored:

That's not what I'm saying at all. But you are in a backhanded way admitting that when the left gets caught, they DO lie about it. And obviously Clinton's situation was proof positive that it was accepted, expected, and okay to many people. I didn't say that. I said that the way you worded it sounded like the right is all about high morality and family values, which seems to connote that the left is not. Again, it appears to be a backhanded way of admitting the differences between the two sides (ostensibly speaking, of course :thumbup:), saying that if the right is for this, then the left, being the opposite, is not. I didn't say that. But you yourself said that the right touts family values and high morality. What, then, does that mean the left touts? It comes across as if you are separating the right by what they supposedly believe in, and I can only assume then that it means the left is opposite of that...? Not at all. I mean, if you think the right is a bunch of PattyGreens, you'd be badly mistaken. Thankfully. :bored: I certainly don't preach nor do I profess to live a sinless life, but I believe. And I'm certainly not out fornicating. :scared2: I believe EVERY SINGLE POLITICIAN who is caught being immoral, dishonest, or otherwise corrupt should be raked over the coals, regardless of party affiliation or adherence to a particular belief, no matter what. We entrust these people to run our country, and more and more they are proving from both sides of the aisle that they aren't qualified to run a Taco Bell, much less determine what laws WE should be adhering to. I have never EVER made concessions for "my side" while blasting "your side." I think if you've seen me post often enough on the political threads, I don't make a differentiation. However, it seems some on the left DO -- somehow those on the right who get caught are to be treated more harshly than those on the left who are caught, and I just don't get that. I want them ALL punished for being egotistical boobs who feel the rules don't apply to them. I don't want him treated any less harshly than he should be, but I don't believe he should be treated MORE harshly simply based on whether he has the letter D or R behind his name. Why not hold them ALL up to the same, GOOD standard? Otherwise what you're still saying without coming out and saying it is that those on the right are held to a higher expectation because they tout values that, what, the left does not? It sure seems that way -- not only that that's what's being said in a backhanded way, but that it's acceptable for those on the left to do whatever because, hey, they don't claim to be highly moral or for family values. I'm sure that's not what you're trying to say, but it is what is being said by the way it's worded.

But the thing that sank Clinton wasn't his affair, it was that he perjured himself when he lied under oath. And even then, those on the left didn't really have a problem with it. If the left had their way, we wouldn't have heard anything about any of that. Absolutely true, but do you see the irony in that statement? It says in a roundabout way that liberals are not for those things, and that's why they don't tout them -- so they can be as disgusting and immoral as they want to be and, hey, how can anybody complain because we all know what they're all about. This comment says that libs are not about family values or high moral standards -- which is not a surprise to me, but it's actually being verbalized if only by saying that the right is this one extreme, indicating that the left is the opposite. I know that takes it to an extreme (kinda), but it's what I read into what you're saying -- not saying that I haven't already felt that way. The impeachment ONLY came about because he lied under oath, a crime. His affair was not a crime. Lying about it under oath, especially while as president of the United States, is what got him impeached. However, the left would not vote to have him removed, as he should have been. They were all okay with it when it meant their boy would be ousted.

Nope, no head under covers here. I had never heard of him until the other day when he was missing... then on the Appalachian Trail... then this. I think he should crash and burn, but that's because I'm a conservative. If he was a democrat, we wouldn't be hearing a thing about this -- or if we did, it would be minimized, there would be no call from the left for him to step down, etc. The only time you hear about the call for heads to roll is when the right does it.

HAHAHA!! :bored:

Never got an e-mail, but I did find the post. Yeah, kinda strange...