GeorgiaDon 340 #26 August 9, 2008 QuoteEvidently took his chivalry cues from that shitbag Bill Clinton. Or perhaps from Newt Gingrich: (from Wikipedia) Newt Gingrich has been married three times. He married Jackie Battley, his former high school geometry teacher, when he was 19 years old (she was seven years his senior at 26 years old).[6][7] After an alleged affair in 1977 with Ann Manning, then the wife of a West Georgia professor, he sought a divorce from Battley. That was finalized in 1981. Gingrich refused to pay both alimony and child support. The local First Baptist church took up collections for support of Jackie and their children.[8] In 1981, Gingrich wed Marianne Ginther,[9] to whom he remained married until 2000, the same year Gingrich had an affair with a then 33-year-old Congressional staffer, Callista Bisek. He and Bisek were married in 2000 and currently reside in Virginia. He also told his first wife he was divorcing her when she was in the hospital recovering from cancer surgery. Election campaign stories that he had her served with the divorce papers in the hospital are, however, apparently untrue. Somehow all of that wasn't enough to disqualify him from being the leader of the "Republican Revolution". Don_____________________________________ Tolerance is the cost we must pay for our adventure in liberty. (Dworkin, 1996) “Education is not filling a bucket, but lighting a fire.” (Yeats) Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TheAnvil 0 #27 August 9, 2008 Bah. This is between Edwards and his wife. This doesn't change any of his political positions. The zero defect mentality has cost us dearly as a nation with regards to selection of our public servants. I don't like him and disagree with his politics - and I most certainly disagree with the politics of the Democrats - but hope the Dem's use him to his full potential. He's one of their better thinkers, organizers, and strategists and has been a good spokesman for their cause. Vinny the Anvil Post Traumatic Didn't Make The Lakers Syndrome is REAL JACKASS POWER!!!!!! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tbrown 26 #28 August 9, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteEdwards is so far denying paternity, but if one of his campaign shills is volunteering to take the rap for him - why is no father named on the birth certificate ? Edwards said that he's willing to take a test for paternity. I want the bluff checked. Is he counting on the idea that we won't demand the check simply because he dared us to do it and claimed he doesn't fear it? CHECK HIM OUT. I want to know if he's compounded the initial lies with another whopper about whose kid it is.What does it matter if the child is his? He comitted adultery and admitted it. Yup, he sure did. Just another pol thinking with his dick. P.S. Regarding my earlier post about Grover Cleveland, I forgot to mention that he was single at the time he fathered a child out of wedlock. Cleveland later married in the White House, during his first term as President. Your humble servant.....Professor Gravity ! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #29 August 9, 2008 McCain admits he wasn't a faithful husband to his first wife. The beatified Ronald Reagan was boning Nancy Davis before he divorced Jane Wyman to marry her. Bob Dole orchestrated an "emergency divorce" from his first wife. Does marital infidelity indicate awful moral character and a lack of trustworthiness as to everything? Well, if the person is a recreational cheater while trying to maintain a veneer of nobility, maybe so. But sometimes infidelity is not the cause of a broken marriage, it is a symptom of one already in deep, deep trouble, perhaps in its last gasps. In that case, the answer is often no clearer than mud. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #30 August 9, 2008 Quote Bah. This is between Edwards and his wife. This doesn't change any of his political positions. The zero defect mentality has cost us dearly as a nation with regards to selection of our public servants. I don't like him and disagree with his politics - and I most certainly disagree with the politics of the Democrats - but hope the Dem's use him to his full potential. He's one of their better thinkers, organizers, and strategists and has been a good spokesman for their cause. That's very level-headed and sensible. It has absolutely no place in Speakers' Corner. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #31 August 9, 2008 QuoteQuote If he'll cheat-on and lie to his own cancer-sick wife, Elizabeth Edwards' Oncologist considered her cancer a non-issue in 2006, when John had his affair. Moreover, even if it were coincidental, they obviously worked it out within their family a long time ago. Meaning what? She long ago gave him the "Go out and fuck who you want, honey" speech? Is that what they "worked out"? How does that reconcile with the fact that he has apologized for the affair? Doesn't sound like had permission, or else, why apologize? How does it reconcile with the fact that he has said he was "egocentric" and "narcissistic"? I mean, those are his own words for himself. QuoteThis is classical republican playbook - not hesitating to take private family matters and put a spin for political gain on them, regardless of the additional pain inflicted on the family. You mean the Democrats didn't do this with any of the Republicans who have had such issues? They didn't do it with that "wide stance" guy (I've already forgotten his name) or with Mark Foley, the gay senator from Florida? QuoteQuote then he sure as hell won't have any compunction against cheating and lying to the citizens which he aspires to serve. There's absolutely no proof of that hypothesis. Says you. I'd prefer to vest my trust in someone I at least don't already know to be an untrustworthy cheater. I tell you what, if you want to, go ahead and surround yourself with nothing but friends, of both sexes, who you know to have cheated on a spouse. But I don't want to do so, and I sure as hell don't want to be led by cheaters.Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites birdlike 0 #32 August 9, 2008 Quote McCain admits he wasn't a faithful husband to his first wife. The beatified Ronald Reagan was boning Nancy Davis before he divorced Jane Wyman to marry her. Bob Dole orchestrated an "emergency divorce" from his first wife. Does marital infidelity indicate awful moral character and a lack of trustworthiness as to everything? Well, if the person is a recreational cheater while trying to maintain a veneer of nobility, maybe so. Well, Edwards tried to maintain that "nobility" by dismissing tabloid press reports (which were RIGHT) that he was screwing around. That's arrogant, and it makes it all a compound lie (like Clinton wagging that finger with Monica's cunt juice on it in our faces as he told us to back off). A whole other issue is why the mainstream press left it solely to the "tabloid trash" to break this story to the American people. THE MAINSTREAM PRESS KNEW, BUT SPIKED THE STORY. Who says the Dems don't get preferential treatment from the liberal press? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #33 August 9, 2008 QuoteMcCain admits he wasn't a faithful husband to his first wife. The beatified Ronald Reagan was boning Nancy Davis before he divorced Jane Wyman to marry her. Bob Dole orchestrated an "emergency divorce" from his first wife. Does marital infidelity indicate awful moral character and a lack of trustworthiness as to everything? Well, if the person is a recreational cheater while trying to maintain a veneer of nobility, maybe so. But sometimes infidelity is not the cause of a broken marriage, it is a symptom of one already in deep, deep trouble, perhaps in its last gasps. In that case, the answer is often no clearer than mud. So instead of saying, "It's over" an proceeding with dignity, people decide to bang on the side. YEah. That's what we want in leaders. People who won't take steps when it is known it is over. They'll choose instead to proceed as if there is no problem - even when there is one. Yep - sounds like a politician to me. When they can't even admit a marriage is over, they'll go for programs that have failed, cheat on the side, and refuse to admit to failure until it's too late. Yet more evidence that there isn't a damned bit of difference between the two major parties. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites birdlike 0 #34 August 9, 2008 The scary thing is just how many people (voters?) who say that it's nobody's business but the couple involved, and that there is no connection between being this kind of person in one's personal life and being an untrustworthy scumbag in political life, leadership, business, etc. I say to that, BULLSHIT. People don't have one set of character traits for their romantic relationships, and then another for who they are in politics, and another for who they are in business... You'd have to be a fool or a doublethinker to believe that.Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites mnealtx 0 #35 August 9, 2008 Exactly - BOTH sides of the aisle are scumbags. Unfortunately, the two parties run everything, and 3rd parties can't get a decent candidate in to save their lives.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites akarunway 1 #36 August 9, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote Edwards is so far denying paternity, but if one of his campaign shills is volunteering to take the rap for him - why is no father named on the birth certificate ? Edwards said that he's willing to take a test for paternity. I want the bluff checked. Is he counting on the idea that we won't demand the check simply because he dared us to do it and claimed he doesn't fear it? CHECK HIM OUT. I want to know if he's compounded the initial lies with another whopper about whose kid it is. What does it matter if the child is his? He comitted adultery and admitted it. Of course, it matters. Lots of people commit adultery. Only the lowest scum of the earth deny parenting a child. Well. As he won't be running for office now what business is it of ours?I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites happythoughts 0 #37 August 10, 2008 QuoteWell. As he won't be running for office now what business is it of ours? Perhaps. Once things cool down, he may take another run at it. He is currently "best hair in show" winner, or what is called the "Jack Kennedy" effect. Just have a good tan and a great coif, you'll get elected to something. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites rushmc 18 #38 August 10, 2008 Quote The scary thing is just how many people (voters?) who say that it's nobody's business but the couple involved, and that there is no connection between being this kind of person in one's personal life and being an untrustworthy scumbag in political life, leadership, business, etc. I say to that, BULLSHIT. People don't have one set of character traits for their romantic relationships, and then another for who they are in politics, and another for who they are in business... You'd have to be a fool or a doublethinker to believe that. Clinton campain #1 Charater should not be an issue.Ya, got that one right"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites birdlike 0 #39 August 10, 2008 Quote Quote Well. As he won't be running for office now what business is it of ours? Perhaps. Once things cool down, he may take another run at it. He is currently "best hair in show" winner, or what is called the "Jack Kennedy" effect. Just have a good tan and a great coif, you'll get elected to something. Just because Edwards' hair is carefully coiffed does not make it a good, attractive haircut, you know. The fucker looks like "Jonathan Hart -- a self-made millionaire... He's quite a guy!" Sorry, his haircut is out of date, and he looks ridiculous. The Robert Wagner / George Hamilton metrosexual look is OOOOLLLLLDDD, man. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #40 August 10, 2008 Quote I want the bluff checked. Is he counting on the idea that we won't demand the check simply because he dared us to do it and claimed he doesn't fear it? It's quite possible that he's counting on the fact that the mother won't permit the test. Very easy for him to say - 'test me, I'm clean.' Still...none of the GOP posters have answered very directly to why McCain bothers them less. Unlike Edwards, he actually is on the ballot. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites bodypilot90 0 #41 August 10, 2008 He's still at it! He said it was all over and yet what time was he at the hotel? Would your wife believe that story? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 0 #42 August 10, 2008 QuoteExactly - BOTH sides of the aisle are scumbags. Unfortunately, the two parties run everything, and 3rd parties can't get a decent candidate in to save their lives. I understand your feelings, but politics is what it is. A viable 3rd party will very quickly morph into a 3rd group of More Of The Same. Look at the UK - are the Liberal Democrats, now that they're well-established, really all that refreshingly different than Labour or the Tories? 'Course not. Suppose the Federalists still existed today as the 3rd party to the Dems & the GOP. Would they be all the more noble? 'Course not. Third parties, and their candidacies, are not the panacea they're usually cracked up to be. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites birdlike 0 #43 August 10, 2008 Quote Third parties, and their candidacies, are not the panacea they're usually cracked up to be. But they'd be a CHAAAAAANGE! Aren't we supposed to be all about getting a CHAAAAAANGE to occur? I mean, nobody cares what the CHAAAAAANGE will actually BE, but we're supposed to WAAAAAANT it, right? Well, who better to represent the best possible chance for CHAAAAAANGE? More than another glib, lying, charismatic Washington insider, anyway.Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #44 August 10, 2008 Quote>If he'll cheat-on and lie to his own cancer-sick wife, then he sure as >hell won't have any compunction against cheating and lying to the citizens >which he aspires to serve. How about a guy who cheats on (and lies to) his wife after she is disfigured in a car crash, and then later dumps her completely for a new younger (and not damaged looking) woman? Good choice for someone who plans to serve the citizens of the US? Indeed. As despicable as it was, well, McCain took full responsibility. He didn't blame her. He blamed himself. And he owned it. He also didn't spend time painting himself in public (or private) as "the devoted husband" to his wife. I'd think that something that happened in aught-six, and just now learned about, is a bit more relevant than stuff that happened in seventy-six, and well known. Neither party owns the high-ground or low ground. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites kelpdiver 2 #45 August 10, 2008 Quote I'd think that something that happened in aught-six, and just now learned about, is a bit more relevant than stuff that happened in seventy-six, and well known. If both were on the ballot, yes. The McCain would be the lesser of the two evils. But it doesn't appear that Obama traded up to his current wife on the back of a sick ex. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites lawrocket 3 #46 August 10, 2008 True dat. Obama appears squeaky clean on the domestic side. Which is why the Edwards thing will likely hurt McCain more than Obama. Maybe Obama really DOES stan for change. "What other politician has not been out to get more ass than a toilet seat? I am the only one from either side of the aisle." Then again, the instant he says that, I will believe that he has just shagged someone besides his wife. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Andy9o8 0 #47 August 10, 2008 QuoteObama appears squeaky clean Well, Joe Biden confirmed that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites happythoughts 0 #48 August 11, 2008 QuoteNeither party owns the high-ground or low ground. The low ground is a Clinton family ownership, not a party affiliation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites warpedskydiver 0 #49 August 11, 2008 Quote Quote Obama appears squeaky clean Well, Joe Biden confirmed that. I would call that slanderous. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites TrophyHusband 0 #50 August 13, 2008 QuoteIt's quite possible that he's counting on the fact that the mother won't permit the test. Very easy for him to say - 'test me, I'm clean.' you called this one, she is refusing to allow a dna test. "Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama www.kjandmegan.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites Prev 1 2 3 Next Page 2 of 3 Join the conversation You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account. Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible. Reply to this topic... × Pasted as rich text. Paste as plain text instead Only 75 emoji are allowed. × Your link has been automatically embedded. Display as a link instead × Your previous content has been restored. Clear editor × You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL. Insert image from URL × Desktop Tablet Phone Submit Reply 0
birdlike 0 #32 August 9, 2008 Quote McCain admits he wasn't a faithful husband to his first wife. The beatified Ronald Reagan was boning Nancy Davis before he divorced Jane Wyman to marry her. Bob Dole orchestrated an "emergency divorce" from his first wife. Does marital infidelity indicate awful moral character and a lack of trustworthiness as to everything? Well, if the person is a recreational cheater while trying to maintain a veneer of nobility, maybe so. Well, Edwards tried to maintain that "nobility" by dismissing tabloid press reports (which were RIGHT) that he was screwing around. That's arrogant, and it makes it all a compound lie (like Clinton wagging that finger with Monica's cunt juice on it in our faces as he told us to back off). A whole other issue is why the mainstream press left it solely to the "tabloid trash" to break this story to the American people. THE MAINSTREAM PRESS KNEW, BUT SPIKED THE STORY. Who says the Dems don't get preferential treatment from the liberal press? Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #33 August 9, 2008 QuoteMcCain admits he wasn't a faithful husband to his first wife. The beatified Ronald Reagan was boning Nancy Davis before he divorced Jane Wyman to marry her. Bob Dole orchestrated an "emergency divorce" from his first wife. Does marital infidelity indicate awful moral character and a lack of trustworthiness as to everything? Well, if the person is a recreational cheater while trying to maintain a veneer of nobility, maybe so. But sometimes infidelity is not the cause of a broken marriage, it is a symptom of one already in deep, deep trouble, perhaps in its last gasps. In that case, the answer is often no clearer than mud. So instead of saying, "It's over" an proceeding with dignity, people decide to bang on the side. YEah. That's what we want in leaders. People who won't take steps when it is known it is over. They'll choose instead to proceed as if there is no problem - even when there is one. Yep - sounds like a politician to me. When they can't even admit a marriage is over, they'll go for programs that have failed, cheat on the side, and refuse to admit to failure until it's too late. Yet more evidence that there isn't a damned bit of difference between the two major parties. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #34 August 9, 2008 The scary thing is just how many people (voters?) who say that it's nobody's business but the couple involved, and that there is no connection between being this kind of person in one's personal life and being an untrustworthy scumbag in political life, leadership, business, etc. I say to that, BULLSHIT. People don't have one set of character traits for their romantic relationships, and then another for who they are in politics, and another for who they are in business... You'd have to be a fool or a doublethinker to believe that.Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #35 August 9, 2008 Exactly - BOTH sides of the aisle are scumbags. Unfortunately, the two parties run everything, and 3rd parties can't get a decent candidate in to save their lives.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
akarunway 1 #36 August 9, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote Edwards is so far denying paternity, but if one of his campaign shills is volunteering to take the rap for him - why is no father named on the birth certificate ? Edwards said that he's willing to take a test for paternity. I want the bluff checked. Is he counting on the idea that we won't demand the check simply because he dared us to do it and claimed he doesn't fear it? CHECK HIM OUT. I want to know if he's compounded the initial lies with another whopper about whose kid it is. What does it matter if the child is his? He comitted adultery and admitted it. Of course, it matters. Lots of people commit adultery. Only the lowest scum of the earth deny parenting a child. Well. As he won't be running for office now what business is it of ours?I hold it true, whate'er befall; I feel it, when I sorrow most; 'Tis better to have loved and lost Than never to have loved at all. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #37 August 10, 2008 QuoteWell. As he won't be running for office now what business is it of ours? Perhaps. Once things cool down, he may take another run at it. He is currently "best hair in show" winner, or what is called the "Jack Kennedy" effect. Just have a good tan and a great coif, you'll get elected to something. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 18 #38 August 10, 2008 Quote The scary thing is just how many people (voters?) who say that it's nobody's business but the couple involved, and that there is no connection between being this kind of person in one's personal life and being an untrustworthy scumbag in political life, leadership, business, etc. I say to that, BULLSHIT. People don't have one set of character traits for their romantic relationships, and then another for who they are in politics, and another for who they are in business... You'd have to be a fool or a doublethinker to believe that. Clinton campain #1 Charater should not be an issue.Ya, got that one right"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #39 August 10, 2008 Quote Quote Well. As he won't be running for office now what business is it of ours? Perhaps. Once things cool down, he may take another run at it. He is currently "best hair in show" winner, or what is called the "Jack Kennedy" effect. Just have a good tan and a great coif, you'll get elected to something. Just because Edwards' hair is carefully coiffed does not make it a good, attractive haircut, you know. The fucker looks like "Jonathan Hart -- a self-made millionaire... He's quite a guy!" Sorry, his haircut is out of date, and he looks ridiculous. The Robert Wagner / George Hamilton metrosexual look is OOOOLLLLLDDD, man. Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #40 August 10, 2008 Quote I want the bluff checked. Is he counting on the idea that we won't demand the check simply because he dared us to do it and claimed he doesn't fear it? It's quite possible that he's counting on the fact that the mother won't permit the test. Very easy for him to say - 'test me, I'm clean.' Still...none of the GOP posters have answered very directly to why McCain bothers them less. Unlike Edwards, he actually is on the ballot. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
bodypilot90 0 #41 August 10, 2008 He's still at it! He said it was all over and yet what time was he at the hotel? Would your wife believe that story? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #42 August 10, 2008 QuoteExactly - BOTH sides of the aisle are scumbags. Unfortunately, the two parties run everything, and 3rd parties can't get a decent candidate in to save their lives. I understand your feelings, but politics is what it is. A viable 3rd party will very quickly morph into a 3rd group of More Of The Same. Look at the UK - are the Liberal Democrats, now that they're well-established, really all that refreshingly different than Labour or the Tories? 'Course not. Suppose the Federalists still existed today as the 3rd party to the Dems & the GOP. Would they be all the more noble? 'Course not. Third parties, and their candidacies, are not the panacea they're usually cracked up to be. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
birdlike 0 #43 August 10, 2008 Quote Third parties, and their candidacies, are not the panacea they're usually cracked up to be. But they'd be a CHAAAAAANGE! Aren't we supposed to be all about getting a CHAAAAAANGE to occur? I mean, nobody cares what the CHAAAAAANGE will actually BE, but we're supposed to WAAAAAANT it, right? Well, who better to represent the best possible chance for CHAAAAAANGE? More than another glib, lying, charismatic Washington insider, anyway.Spirits fly on dangerous missions Imaginations on fire Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #44 August 10, 2008 Quote>If he'll cheat-on and lie to his own cancer-sick wife, then he sure as >hell won't have any compunction against cheating and lying to the citizens >which he aspires to serve. How about a guy who cheats on (and lies to) his wife after she is disfigured in a car crash, and then later dumps her completely for a new younger (and not damaged looking) woman? Good choice for someone who plans to serve the citizens of the US? Indeed. As despicable as it was, well, McCain took full responsibility. He didn't blame her. He blamed himself. And he owned it. He also didn't spend time painting himself in public (or private) as "the devoted husband" to his wife. I'd think that something that happened in aught-six, and just now learned about, is a bit more relevant than stuff that happened in seventy-six, and well known. Neither party owns the high-ground or low ground. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #45 August 10, 2008 Quote I'd think that something that happened in aught-six, and just now learned about, is a bit more relevant than stuff that happened in seventy-six, and well known. If both were on the ballot, yes. The McCain would be the lesser of the two evils. But it doesn't appear that Obama traded up to his current wife on the back of a sick ex. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
lawrocket 3 #46 August 10, 2008 True dat. Obama appears squeaky clean on the domestic side. Which is why the Edwards thing will likely hurt McCain more than Obama. Maybe Obama really DOES stan for change. "What other politician has not been out to get more ass than a toilet seat? I am the only one from either side of the aisle." Then again, the instant he says that, I will believe that he has just shagged someone besides his wife. My wife is hotter than your wife. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andy9o8 0 #47 August 10, 2008 QuoteObama appears squeaky clean Well, Joe Biden confirmed that. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
happythoughts 0 #48 August 11, 2008 QuoteNeither party owns the high-ground or low ground. The low ground is a Clinton family ownership, not a party affiliation. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
warpedskydiver 0 #49 August 11, 2008 Quote Quote Obama appears squeaky clean Well, Joe Biden confirmed that. I would call that slanderous. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TrophyHusband 0 #50 August 13, 2008 QuoteIt's quite possible that he's counting on the fact that the mother won't permit the test. Very easy for him to say - 'test me, I'm clean.' you called this one, she is refusing to allow a dna test. "Your scrotum is quite nice" - Skymama www.kjandmegan.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
