Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
regardless of where this guy is served, suing him is frivolous.
there is no evidence that there was malicious intent or that this rumor did any harm to palin, and so far no one has even been able to say how it *could have* caused her harm. palin is just needlessly tying up court time pursuing this. there is no evidence of malicious intent. barely anyone took it seriously in the short time before it was denied. rumors about public figures start and end on the internet every day.
"Real Americans" don't march into a kindergarten to create a disruption to serve papers. They don't involve five year old kis in this nonsense.
yeah, like you are thinking normally. What does a paper being delivered to an employee have ANYTHING to do with the kids? Oh, so in your eyes, the mail shouldn't be delivered either because the kids will be reading it?
yeah, like you are thinking normally. What does a paper being delivered to an employee have ANYTHING to do with the kids? Oh, so in your eyes, the mail shouldn't be delivered either because the kids will be reading it?
First of all, personal attacks are against the TOS. Secondly, the mail is usually not delivered to the classroom, it's delivered to the office, and placed in teacher's individual mailboxes. It's just drama to do it this way, and Palin and her lawyer are not thinking about the kids.
First of all, personal attacks are against the TOS. Secondly, the mail is usually not delivered to the classroom, it's delivered to the office, and placed in teacher's individual mailboxes. It's just drama to do it this way, and Palin and her lawyer are not thinking about the kids.
First of all, where's the personal attack? I didn't think so. Second of all, how do you know for sure the plan is to interupt a classroom? You have no proof of either of those, it's all hot air.
guilt by association means you're in trouble because you KNOW someone who once robbed a store. and that is exactly what people are trying to peg on obama.
First of all, where's the personal attack? I didn't think so. Second of all, how do you know for sure the plan is to interupt a classroom? You have no proof of either of those, it's all hot air.
"Like you are thinking normally" is a personal attack.
If the plan is to deliver the papers to the classroom, it will interrupt the class.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
