I note your piece on the "bad education" at the Woman's office. the page is for "women" from 10-16. Women from 10-16 have sex, but it is a small minority. It is simply not clear that omitting the information about sex from a page intended for 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, and 16 year olds constitutes "bad education".

After all, most kids accessing this page are likely to be on the lower end. Do you wish to furnish 10 year old girls with information about sex?I don't think so. Bad idea.

In fact, the whole piece is just more liberal whining that kids need sex education. As a parent who put my girls through a very explicit education process in my church (unitarian-universalist; they discuss everything, penetration, lesbian sex, male homosexual sex, etc), I would not want my 10 year old child to be exposed to information about safe sex. 10 year olds are too young.

Actually, there are several. You could call them "house niggas" or you could call them "Judas goats" or you could call them "Judases" or you could just call them "Uncle Toms".

They are stabbbing their own people in the back to earn money.

Someone needs to give these boys a little weaponry, and then they can settle the hash of ol' Methusalah, point blank. There are some issues that only can be settled directly.

In fact, if you listen to the comment, Biden was commenting on the industriousness and extremely entrepreneurial nature of Indians. He was commenting that they have a niche which they occupy very well.

Have you ever been in a cheap motel in CO, WY, NV, AZ, NM, and many other western states? They are almost all owned by Indians, and specifically by Patels. Why Patels? Because this large family/clan/tribe/group has identified this as a good niche market, because they sponsor immigration by relatives, because they provide apprenticeship training for new members.

So, when we go west, we stay in the Paki Motel Chain.

This issue is hard. However, we are not going to have gay marriage any time soon. I really don't care if it is "right" or "just" or whatever. No one except gays and extreme liberals votes on this issue. Gays: 1-2 %. Extreme liberals: 15-20 %.

This is not going to be an issue on which dems get into office. This issue will damage Dems as long as it is on the ballot. This has NOTHING to do with justice. It has to do with voting.

If you voted for Bush and are in the military, it's your own funeral .... hmmmm ..... lot of truth in that.....

Don't come whining to me when you get your leg shot off, however.

If you voted for Bush and are not in the military, why the fruck not? Time for you to give your left leg for George...

If you voted against Bush, I have sympathy for you. Otherwise, I don't give a shit.

LeCastor's BF is sooo happy that he doesn't have to buy a cow, because he gets his milk for free! And on top of that, she's convinced she's being a feminist while making his case for him. What she's taking at law school, Torts for Tarts?

Wow, what is this - back to the '50s or something. Perhaps if you stop reading Morals for Morons, you would realize that marriage is an ECONOMIC arrangement to raise children.

Geezus, morality fascists are so annoying.

We also had a small, intimate family wedding. (Our biggest extravagance was a chocolate chip cheesecake wedding cake.) Now, when I hear everyone's tales of Bridezilla, Momzilla, and other assorted wedding woes, I just smile.

Sounds like our wedding. We had the ceremony in the JP's office. We had the reception outside. We bought a cake, a keg of beer and some popcorn.

I didn't buy an engagement ring, either. Too cheap.

If it had rained, we would have had trouble, since we had no alternative location.

She needs to establish a new set of friends. There are many of these around. They are called churches.

Our church, a Unitarian Universalist one, is lots of fun. My wife and I are not hugely religious, but neither is anyone else at the church. We get together occasionally and have nice times. The church is full of couples with young children. Many women come without their husbands, as some couples have different religious ideas. Additionally, being a U-U church, drinking is not only condoned, but pretty common. Usually church functions involve wine. We also have church-related dinners at homes, which also involve drinking. Plenty of people in churches have small children, too. Catholic churches involve drinking, but it is frowned on in Methodist and some Protestant sects. Of course, Mormons don't drink. I note the drinking, because the original letter expressed a wish to get together with friends and share a glass of wine.

This is all stupid. Why would Lieberman, a democrat, have run with such enthusiasm to retain his seat, if he were willing to immediately relinguish it.

Come ON, JOE, there are plenty of things to write about. Stop with the speculative nonsense.