The question to dogleg was: Do you think lying is OK? Yes or No?
I do not understand how answering that, one would feel like they were being stalked. I have never asked him where he is from I know that. And I have never asked him where he resides, I do not care.
Your response to that thread, is why I posted my previous post. My communication skills are not good enough to carry on a meaningful conversation with you.
We, supposedly have a person, dogleg, who was elected to represent people in local government who can not even answer a simply yes or no question about lying. And feels the need to use several ID�s. His approach to life, if true, should warm the souls of his constituents. But, he smugly feels that they will never know ... so where is the harm. Hmmp!
I sure know that I would be pleased as punch to know that the people I elected sat around all the time chit chatting on a Yahoo chat board! Yes, he may have been elected dog catcher! And not because he is a thinker, clearly he is not. If elected I suspect it is because of the old saying, it�s not who you know, but who you nose!
answer:on this board? you must be joking;plus not when you are a predator!!
answer#3:And now for the election results: dogleg~ 78; Opponent #1~ 72; Opponent #2 ~49; Opponent #3~ 38 ... its the dog by a nose!
you're for sure very nosy.:))gossip style;joan rivera is alike.:))
The decision, written by Judge Michael Luttig, questioned why the administration used one set of facts before the court for 3 1/2 years to justify holding Padilla without charges but used another set to convince a grand jury in Florida to indict him last month.
Luttig said the administration has risked its "credibility before the courts" by appearing to use the indictment of Padilla to thwart an appeal of the appeals court's decision that gave the president wide berth in holding enemy combatants.