On Jun 7, 6:20 pm, Muhammad Javed Iqbal <kaleemjavediq...@gmail.com> wrote: Thoughts of A Newly Converted Hindu Lady Muhammad Javed Ekball, your post would have been more complete if you had included the thoughts of the "Newly Converted Hindu Lady" on Taliban's or Sharia Law's generous treatment of women. You have a personal reason to be partial toward Taliban and Sharia Law. If
James Warren wrote: On 07/06/2010 8:59 PM, Al Smith wrote: James Warren wrote: On 07/06/2010 7:52 PM, Al Smith wrote: James Warren wrote: On 07/06/2010 6:42 PM, Al Smith wrote: Rick Walker wrote: "Al Smith" wrote: Rick Walker wrote: The ceremonies have always kept my mind off the weather anyway - especially
James Warren wrote: On 07/06/2010 7:52 PM, Al Smith wrote: James Warren wrote: On 07/06/2010 6:42 PM, Al Smith wrote: Rick Walker wrote: "Al Smith" wrote: Rick Walker wrote: The ceremonies have always kept my mind off the weather anyway - especially when there's a sacrifice, err... "new guest". I think the
Michael Coburn <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote: On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 00:03:41 -0400, Bob LeChevalier wrote: Alas, it is quite possible to walk and chew gum at the same time, and also to represent their constituents and their party at the same time. It is also possible to get reelected by doing all of the above, none of the above, or any mixture in between, especially if you have charisma
On Tue, 01 Jun 2010 00:03:41 -0400, Bob LeChevalier wrote: Michael Coburn <mikcob@verizon.net> wrote: Yes. "necessarily". If the people elect Republicans when such Republicans are "right next to them" then that would indicate a preference for Republicans. And if the sane people of the state can't convince the nutters that Democrats are much more rational and more concerned
