To: Russ
That's not really her. This is:
She may be a lot of things, but I wouldn't say she's ugly.
42 posted on
10/16/2007 10:47:18 AM PDT by
jdm
To: jdm
“She may be a lot of things, but I wouldn’t say she’s ugly.”
Beer googles?? :-)
50 posted on
10/16/2007 10:49:30 AM PDT by
Hacklehead
(I'm not here to make friends.)
To: jdm
She might not be ugly but she’s no Michelle Malkin, either.
68 posted on
10/16/2007 10:56:31 AM PDT by
Russ
To: jdm
“She may be a lot of things, but I wouldn’t say she’s ugly.
All Commie Democraps are ugly.
126 posted on
10/16/2007 11:27:14 AM PDT by
exile
("Get off my phone, ya big dope"- The Great One)
To: jdm
"That's not really her. This is: She may be a lot of things, but I wouldn't say she's ugly." Perhaps not ugly per se, but without a doubt dumb as a box of hammers.
...& that cannot be disputed.
160 posted on
10/16/2007 12:04:57 PM PDT by
Landru
(finally made it to the dark side of the moon.)
To: jdm
She may be a lot of things, but I wouldn't say she's ugly. They usually aren't when they use 20 year old photos to promote themselves. She is much heavier and older than in that photo. The wrinkles and imperfections have been airbrushed out...
To: jdm
Man, they can sure do wonders with surgery these days, her name used to be Randy.
199 posted on
10/16/2007 2:35:48 PM PDT by
RetSignman
(DEMSM: "If you tell a big enough lie, frequently enough, it becomes the truth")
To: jdm
I wouldn't say she's ugly.That's very charitable of you. Even that 10 year old airbrushed shot isn't particularly easy on the eyes.
To: jdm
She was a looker before she lost weight.
Clinton was chasing her for a while.
218 posted on
10/16/2007 8:14:38 PM PDT by
editor-surveyor
(Turning the general election into a second Democrat primary is not a winning strategy.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson