1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Strict Constructionists, Take Note

Discussion in 'Sports and News' started by zeke12, Oct 26, 2007.

  1. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

  2. Strange bedfellows, so to speak.
  3. hockeybeat

    hockeybeat Guest


    Larry, no one is stupid enough to buy this argument.
  4. Bob Cook

    Bob Cook Active Member

    The grossest part of that interview was Mrs. Craig saying she knew that the descriptions of an area only she knew were wrong on three counts. I totally understand why Matt Lauer didn't go for the follow-up on that one. It would have been the most uncomfortable discussion about private parts since Michael Jackson's complaint about the police taking pictures of his penis.
  5. zeke12

    zeke12 Guest

  6. slappy4428

    slappy4428 Active Member

    Dear Larry,
    You pled guilty, you knew what you were doing.
    Get over it, get out and move on...
  7. D-Backs Hack

    D-Backs Hack Guest

    I believe Craig is hoping that there is a more lenient penal code in Minnesota.
  8. joe

    joe Active Member

    How the hell do you have a "wide stance" if your pants are around your ankles, or knees, or pulled down? Isn't that a physical impossibility? I mean, how the hell does this argument pass muster, even in his mind?
  9. Dan Rydell

    Dan Rydell Guest

  10. FileNotFound

    FileNotFound Well-Known Member

    These are the people we keep electing. The best and the brightest, indeed.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page