This should be enough reason for any DUer to make the effort to vote for Coakley;

this guy is SLIME.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hecen-81w0g&feature=player_embedded

conversation. Jerk.

I bet there are thousands. What is wrong with that. How many men in this country show their slimy bodies when they are twenty. Those nudeo pictures of him are sickening. I have seen a lot of pin ups of men but he just looks dirty =====

but the demand? Married at 17, mother at 18 and more to come. I thought that was the repukelican wet dream. Barefoot and pregnant...perpetually.

that's just the myth. Having done family research, I have a database of over 250,000 relatives and in-laws. I can point to countless examples. Here's Lydia Drake, born 26 Jan 1662 and married 10 Apr 1681 at age 19. Here's Sarah Woodward born 25 Oct 1715 and married on 17 Feb 1736 at age 20. Here's Abigail Loomis born 8 May 1745 and married on 29 May 1766 at age 21. Here's Elizabeth Loomis born 10 Jun 1619 and married on 20 May 1640 at age 20.

Not saying it never happened because there's Elizabeth's daughter Elizabeth Hull born 18 Feb 1646 and married on 28 Nov 1661 at age 15.

However, that marriage date may be wrong because the earliest child I have for that couple is Josiah Dibble born 15 May 1667. So why the six year gap between marriage and children?

Josiah Dibble, btw, was married on 20 Jan 1690 to Hannah Cogswell who was born on 4 Jun 1670. Their daughter Elizabeth was born 8 May 1693 (not their first child) and married on 8 oct 1716 at age 23.

This may vary in other regions. I also noticed that in Catholic German villages that girls almost never married, or had children, before the age of 20.

1950s and early 60s. I was considered an "old maid" for not being married before 20.

What fraction of DUers live in MA?

Still, using that reasonable estimate, 49/50 DUers won't be voting for Coakley.

Actually, I never was anything other than settled. :shrug:

really gross