|
|
 | | Re: Wench as a word
|
| Ed, Boy, Ed, you sure an interesting person. (...) Boy, Ed, the ability to iron a sure sure qualifies someone to have a House seat, huh? I would love to see what your thoughts on qualifications are. James happens to be one of the few Democrats that (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Wench as a word
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Edward Sanburn writes: [snip] And no, not all Democrats are Marxists, (How many (...) Well there's a fine figure to admire. James Trafficant, the man that took money from a "Supposed" mob-figure and then the mob (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Wench as a word
|
| (...) hehe. Debate's over so I don't have to point out that you don't have to be a Marxist to be a bad person... Hillary isn't a Marxist, but she's a bad person nonetheless. ++Lar (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Wench as a word
|
| Ed, (...) Hey, she spins those letters very well! ;) (...) Well, read some books about her, look at her life, she what she believes in, read her book, it takes a government, ah, village, etc. She is a very devout leftist. And no, not all Democrats (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: Wench as a word
|
| (...) always (...) to (...) [snip] (...) Re: Wench - the term was used to describe a serving woman in the middle ages. Not politically incorrect at that time. Now, it is a derogatory comment. In fact, it is a very useful derogatory comment. Vanna (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.general, lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: *Native* (was "Re: Future Wild West Possibilities")
|
| (...) the (...) less (...) Why (...) but (...) to be (...) doesn't (...) your (...) because (...) development (...) inclusion in (...) required (...) someone (...) consider (...) unless (...) lump (...) the (...) and his (...) like (...) Ok what we (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: *Native* (was "Re: Future Wild West Possibilities")
|
| Hi, (...) **Note the small "n"--more on that later. (...) Yeah, but even American Indian is a name not given by the people themselves. Why not simply call Ojibwe Ojibwe, Oneida Oneida, and Cherokee Cherokee? Sure, it blows all of our (note that (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: *Native* (was "Re: Future Wild West Possibilities")
|
| (...) Ditto-i feel that columbus' error that america was india should not be pripagated.I'm indian (as in originally from the indian subcontinent) Give the early inhabitants of the americas (Hmmm EIOAs) some credit and their own less confusing (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | Re: LEGOLAND.CC Auction WAS: (Re: The Nugator Company for Sale ???)
|
| Scott E. Sanburn wrote in message <38D83277.B6E578E0@c...eb.net>... (...) it and (...) that (...) judge (...) Without a doubt, that is the seller's obvious intent. What can TLC legally do about intent?? I do not know, but my guess in this situation (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | | | LEGOLAND.CC Auction WAS: (Re: The Nugator Company for Sale ???)
|
| Kevin, (...) infringement, because the sellers intent was to use the LEGO brand name to motivate someone to buy it. "Make Millions off of LEGO," and all that. Scott S. ___...___ Scott E. Sanburn-> ssanburn@cleanweb.net Systems (...) (25 years ago, 22-Mar-00, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
|
