Muscatine

thanks, Robert. that explains that!

BTW, I will note for the record that since certain posters vacated their presence here, you have not had to make deletions of posts as in the past. Been a long time now.

BTW....while fresh in all's minds....the challenge from the Palin post was for bird to prove her stated absolute that historically, (only) Repubs lead (only) Dems in scandalous activities in a 3 to 1 ratio. Not all POLITICAL history as bird tried to twist into the debate thread that got deleted by NL on accident; and only Repubs and Dems since their respective inceptions...because history before their existence cannot be tabulated as R or D.

And I thank ya...

Hi

Now Bigbrother:::: you know I said "political scandal" led by the republican party by a 3-1 majority. Including the Federalists and Wigs. That takes us all the way back to 1777. I said 244 years, but it's 233. Oops gained a decade there. Aw now, don't worry your busy little head about the variables, I'll be fair and unbiased as I always try to be. Should the record show(tomorrow night or the next) the dems edged the repubs, I'll bake that crow pie. Offering a mental "shake on it" Or even if the margin is less, but still a win. Smaller crows in the pie. This is fun huh?

Lucy.

Mrs. Bird:  If you are going back that far, a curious bystander has a question:

Are you going to apply some kind of weighting factor to the "scandals"?    I can't imagine you, for example, equating the Dems on the slavery issue equivalent to a Rep. Congressman sexual peccadilloes for instance.  Or lets say a President committing perjury equivalent to a Congressman accepting a bribe?

What do you have in mind?