Re: Bushwacked

["Mark R. Leaman" <mleaman@sccoast.net>]

>Mark: I will "humbly" apologize to Keets. Sorry, Keets.

Dan:

I'm impressed.

> Now, Mark, why
>don't you share with us that article in Time magazine that you read not

Only too glad to. It wasn't only about the S&L, but his entire
son-of-priviledge, failure-filled career. I no longer have the issue, but
the cover had a closeup of his face and the words "President Bush?" Don't
know if Time archives online, but you should be able to find it at your
local library. Enjoy! I did. I believe it came out last Fall.

>long ago? And, by the way, why do you have to consistently tell all of us
>what Pete's political persuasions are?

I don't know what you mean by "consistently;" I made one comment. I think
it's as legitimate a topic as many of the other topics here, and besides I
said it in jest just as I did the Bush aside. But I understand; the truth
hurts. If you truly want to "stick to The Who" then you should understand
that aside references are just that, and not a reason to start a thread.
They are frequent, and usually meant to amuse.
You could have contacted me offlist.


                       Cheers                                   ML