Posted on 07/27/2005 6:38:35 PM PDT by bannie
Edited on 07/28/2005 5:33:32 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]
On Hannity and Colmes, While discussing the requirements of a Supreme Court nominee, Ann just sarcastically noted that it was ok to kill a girl at Chappiquiddic. Colmes said that was a low blow and that comment was below her.
WHY??? WHAT is so darned SACRED about mentioning the truth???
Ann said, "Why..."
Colmes didn't answer, and the set was quiet.
Hannity and Reagan (another guest) should have spoken up.
This is another example of "The Emperor is NAKED!"
Do you usually see yourself as a "minority" on the subject? What makes me ask that? Oh, come on, you love the attention. Admit it. I'm reminded of something my mother told me a long time ago. If children don't feel they are getting the attention they want, they'll do something "bad"to get it! Makes sense to me.
Everyone wants attention! If we don't give it we don't get it. And we should seek it in the right way, not by challenging everyone. For instance, I have described one of my siblings this way: I say white, he says black. I say black, he says white. This happens with the most insignificant topic, as in what washload a fabric softener should be used. I mention that I add it when washing towels. He doesn't. It makes them less absorbent. I don't CARE when or if he uses it. But he just has to disagree. And I still love him and care about him very much.
It goes beyond whether he killed her. There is no doubt he drove her into the water, but had he genuinely tried in every way to rescue her it would have been nothing more than a scandal with a tragic outcome. What is the real crime here is leaving her to die while he sat around contemplating how he could rescue his political career in the face of her apparent death. We know it is possible she was alive for some time in the car, so his concern over his political career, and crude attempts at a coverup should be considered manslaugher at best, but probably 2nd degree murder. What did he actually get? Was it a traffic violation? The man is a predatory pig.
For me it is his past same with Kennedy. Does that make me mean spirited?
Hey, it's just conjecture on my part. The same sort of conjecture you've been making every time you attribute intense guilt to Kennedy. The same as when you say he was "probably" this or that.
What, it only works when you're the one making unsubstantiated guesses?
There's a horrible tasteless joke here somewhere:
How many Ivy League liberal dorks does it take
to report a car accident with a girl trapped
under water?
Sorry...I just panicked under the pressure of the moment.
They should review this case at Harvard Law every Fall semester.
No. I'm sorry if I seemed to imply that.
He was freaked out. He was afraid. He wasn't thinking rationally.
I think this is very believable.
”He was freaked out. He was afraid. He wasn't thinking rationally.
I think this is very believable.”
Then he didn’t report it for hours. Doesn’t this in it’s self show poor leadership skills? Though not quite as bad as Carter and the killer rabbit. Panic under fire is poor leadership skills.
"a woman to drown in 4 feet of water while he saved his own sorry ass"
No, she didn't drown. She suffocated. Teddy boy could have gone for help and still saved her. He decided to go sober up for 10 hours instead
"He was freaked out. He was afraid..."
So that's why he concocted the story that Mary Jo drove the car into the pond...that she was alone when it went over the bridge. This is the scenario he cooked up to tell police, as he stalled for many hours before reporting the accident. It wasn't until the car was spotted in the water and a diver went in and pulled the body of Mary Jo from the car that he reported his version of what occurred in a written statement.
He escaped the required minimum sentence of 20 days in prison for leaving the scene of an accident. When the question came up in court about his previous driving offenses, the answer given in court was NONE...a blatant lie. His driver's license was expired, but being who he was, a Senator and a Kennedy, that was amended to show he had a valid license.
He got off without paying any penalty. If you found yourself in a similar situation, count on the law bearing down heavily on you. Unless you have a famous name.
For an entire description of what took place before, during and after the Chappaquiddick tragedy, read here:
http://ytedk.com/intro.htm
Believe it or not. My last word on Chappaquiddick.
My last response to you is redundant. Having perused previous posts to you on same subject, you have been fully informed of just about all that occurred at Chappaquiddick in July 1969.
As I surmised from the outset, you are playing games with everyon in this thread to garner attention for yourself.
My advice to others is to completely ignore your posts. What you do is "use people" to gratify your need. No matter how many FReepers give you evidence on the subject, you have an insatiable desire to deny. To agree to any other viewpoint, based on strong evidence, will leave you without an audience.
I don't mean to be unkind. I do suggest that you look for a more helpful way to deal with life...the joys and fun are no problem. It's the pain and grief that goes along with it. And I've yet to meet anyone who has escaped it.
My last message to you said I was done with the
Chappaquiddick tragedy. If you care to contact me beyond that "argument", I'm here.
Is this yet another undead thread?
Oh, well. I'll just have to look at the pics...
Love your Twilight Zone pic. Liberals live there.
That's how I look at it too. Most rural communities are red, I'm willing to wager, and most cities are blue. Cities are full of people who LOVE those handouts. Love, Mxxx
Noooooo.
You are so emotionally involved in defending Mr. K.s feelings and actions that I suspect you have some sort of reason to feel connected to them. The reason may be personal and you don't have to say what it is, of course, but I suspect you feel in some way responsible or attached to the situation.
I do not hate Mr. K. but hate the things he has done and the way in which he has promoted many evil causes.
Where on this board have I ever attacked you personally, or advised others to boycott your posts?
You can disagree with me all you like.
But the above is just plain meanspirited.
The closest I come to being emotionally involved is that I have saved two people from drowning in my past.
I doubt this what you mean by being "connected"?
I dunno. Matt Drudge tried to tell the truth, and he was shown the door. Of course, that was a while ago now, but nonetheless, I doubt things have changed much.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.