So the Question of the Day on MSNBC right now is:
"Should President Clinton have been made to testify in public under oath?"*
I say, why bother? He's already demonstrated that "under oath" means absolutely nothing to him.
*or something pretty close to that. I'm not good on verbatim, but I'm excellent on accurate gist.
I would say you sized it up about right, there Nathan.
Posted by: Kang A. Roo at April 9, 2004 05:30 PM![]() |
|
Prev | List | Random | Next Powered by RingSurf! |
| Pagerank |
| Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 2 | 3 | ||||
| 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 |
| 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 |
| 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 |
| 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29 | 30 | 31 |