Path: news.nzbot.com!not-for-mail
From: gardibolt@yahoo.com (gardibolt)
Newsgroups: alt.fan.winona-ryder
Subject: Re: Why Couldnt It Have Been Winona Instead Of Janet Jackson Last Night?
Date: 3 Feb 2004 15:21:54 -0800
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <7ae73d85.0402031521.6ab032d6@posting.google.com>
References: <grlt105dl2cenn23m271a7nrc8a44bb9sg@4ax.com>
NNTP-Posting-Host: 165.189.4.6
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1075850514 847 127.0.0.1 (3 Feb 2004 23:21:54 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2004 23:21:54 +0000 (UTC)
Xref: news.nzbot.com alt.fan.winona-ryder:97
Cullinane <kc@chain.com> wrote in message news:<grlt105dl2cenn23m271a7nrc8a44bb9sg@4ax.com>...
> Wouldn't that have been neat? She could have lip-synced. Janet
> Jackson has droopy breasts. Winona's are large and firm. Who's with
> me?
Now there's something I can agree with. :)
Mark
|
|