<< Yeah so was OJ Simpson and I don't think there are many people who believe he was innocent.....Do You? >>
I am convinced that OJ, who was portrayed by "honorable" professionals, as a badly debilitated old man; is guilty of a double murder. What a crock! You can check out his debilitated condition if you would follow after him each day, at the golf course, where he takes violent swings at the ball!
But, so what? What is your point? Is your point that we should consider people guilty, without a benefit of a trial? Besides..... being judged as "Not Guilty" does not mean that the person is "innocent" of the crime.
<< Its called circumstantial evidence and I for one believe there was and is plenty (in both cases). Furthermore, there will be more to come in the days to follow so get off your Liberal soapbox and face reality. >>
You must believe that you make a stronger point if you call names. Do you consider "name calling" a good way to prove your point?
You've taken issue with my statement that someone is innocent until proven guilty? And, because that is the basis for our legal system, and I believe in it, you are telling me to get off of my liberal soapbox?
Anyway, who cares? There won't be a trial over a little nookie in the White House. When you think about it, some of the greatest decisions, of all times, came after an energizing round of oral sex! <g>
<< BTW: Perjury is a felony...Remember? >>
When you think about it, some of the worst decisions, of all times, came after an energizing round of oral sex! <g>
What would you like this country to do regarding those that lie about sex? Do you want to form a posse and go out after them? If you do, best of luck, but look into the mirror before you leave the house! <G>
Regards, Bob |
