Stacey Gets The Boot

[Oh Shoot]

I got several. One from Lowe Finney(wife went to HS with him so she can drop him a personal one. It was more like I haven't read this bill yet but I will and view it in our best interest. ..

You must have pull.

I've still only received the one. Then again, Stacey is my senator. My rep is Joe Armstrong who votes against ANY pro-firearms legislation.

- OS

[R_Bert]

Would not recognize Sarah, but would be polite and respectful to both.

and yes... the owner and Stacey can say anything they like. I am not sure which side is on the higher ground right now, but I am not inclined to patronize *anyone* who publically humiliates me (or others) in front of guests.

Edited February 1, 2012 by R_Bert

[Guest bkelm18]

Would not recognize Sarah, but would be polite and respectful to both.

and yes... the owner and Stacey can say anything they like. I am not sure which side is on the higher ground right now, but I am not inclined to patronize *anyone* who publically humiliates me (or others) in front of guests.

Well, I was in support of her, but since she openly supports the KKK over Mr. Campfield, not so much.

[R_Bert]

Well, I was in support of her, but since she openly supports the KKK over Mr. Campfield, not so much.

we truly live in strange and troubled times..

[Guest bkelm18]

we truly live in strange and troubled times..

Indeed we do.

[Oh Shoot]

we truly live in strange and troubled times..

Indeed we do.

Just following our President's tactics: divide to conquer.

- OS

[Garufa]

Just following our President's tactics: divide to conquer.

- OS

In Stacey's case the past president.

I've been wondering why a man his age, single, no real trace of personal relationships or family that one can usually find for an elected person is so obsessed with homos.

[Guest bkelm18]

In Stacey's case the past president.

I've been wondering why a man his age, single, no real trace of personal relationships or family that one can usually find for an elected person is so obsessed with homos.

You know, they say that those that are the most outspoken against homosexuals are usually closet gays themselves...

[TMF]

You know, they say that those that are the most outspoken against homosexuals are usually closet gays themselves...

I was thinking the same thing when I first saw this story... figured I'd see him on the news at some point being rolled up in an airport restroom.

[daddyo]

You know, they say that those that are the most outspoken against homosexuals are usually closet gays themselves...

I've found that it's a bogus argument used by the homosexual community when they can't defend their position from a logical point of view and is straight out of the Saul Alinsky "handbook" - it's simply a tactic they use to shut their opponent up and it's a strong indicator that they've lost the debate.

Edited February 2, 2012 by DaddyO

[Guest bkelm18]

I've found that it's a bogus argument used by the homosexual community when they can't defend their position from a logical point of view and is straight out of the Saul Alinsky "handbook" - it's simply a tactic they use to shut their opponent up and it's a strong indicator that they've lost the debate.

Well it's certainly turned out to be true in some cases and it certainly has grounding in psychology. I'm not saying it's always true, but it's not always false either.

[daddyo]

Well it's certainly turned out to be true in some cases and it certainly has grounding in psychology. I'm not saying it's always true, but it's not always false either.

Please name those cases.

[Oh Shoot]

Please name those cases.

A few obvious famous ones: Ted Haggard, Larry Craig, Mark Foley, "Bishop" Eddie Long

And apparently about 25% of the Catholic priests in the world.

- OS

[JAB]

I disagree...if there aren't rules of language and meaning there can be no communication between two people.

If I say I'm a "native American" (and I am) it doesn't mean I'm American Indian.

I find your argument about the use of 'American Indian' to be ironic. That is because you are talking about the misuse of words yet you keep saying that the MISUSED term 'American Indian' should remain in use. Keep in mind these folks were called Indian in the first place because the explorers thought they had found a new route to India. They were wrong and the native peoples were incorrectly called 'Indian'. They were not, are not and never were 'Indian'. They were, however, the peoples who were indigenous (native) to the Americas and had been for a period beginning about 20,000 years ago, whose cultures were native to the Americas - ergo, Native Americans is the term that more correctly describes them while 'Indian' is simply, totally, 100% incorrect.

As for the whole use of the word 'gay', what bugs me is that homosexuals want to use the word to mean something it didn't mean then turn around and have campaigns to stop people from using the word to mean strange or dumb, as in, "That's so gay." Well, guess what, just as the homosexual community is free to use that word to mean what they want, the rest of us are free to use that word to mean what we want. Equal rights (to use words) are a bitch, aren't they.

Edited February 2, 2012 by JAB

[daddyo]

A few obvious famous ones: Ted Haggard, Larry Craig, Mark Foley, "Bishop" Eddie Long

And apparently about 25% of the Catholic priests in the world.

- OS

While those turned out to be true, it's immature and disrespectful to accuse someone of being gay themselves just because they don't agree with the gay lifestyle, especially if there is no evidence to support that accusation.

[Oh Shoot]

While those turned out to be true, it's immature and disrespectful to accuse someone of being gay themselves just because they don't agree with the gay lifestyle, especially if there is no evidence to support that accusation.

I didn't accuse anybody of anything.

Though I must admit I'm curious when folks make a crusade against some sexual proclivity. It's well accepted that repressed sexual desire, hetero or homo, may dramatically influence behavior, sometimes obsessively so.

- OS

[TMF]

While those turned out to be true, it's immature and disrespectful to accuse someone of being gay themselves just because they don't agree with the gay lifestyle, especially if there is no evidence to support that accusation.

Awww, c'mon... just havin' fun. The guy clearly has strong opinions on the subject but hasn't made the effort to educate himself on the facts... he's a moron and should be the subject of ridicule.

As for the whole use of the word 'gay', what bugs me is that homosexuals want to use the word to mean something it didn't mean then turn around and have campaigns to stop people from using the word to mean strange or dumb, as in, "That's so gay." Well, guess what, just as the homosexual community is free to use that word to mean what they want, the rest of us are free to use that word to mean what we want. Equal rights (to use words) are a bitch, aren't they.

That argument is totally gay.

[daddyo]

I didn't accuse anybody of anything.

Though I must admit I'm curious when folks make a crusade against some sexual proclivity. It's well accepted that repressed sexual desire, hetero or homo, may dramatically influence behavior, sometimes obsessively so.

- OS

I didn't say you did. I was making a generalization about people who use that argument.

Another thing I find interesting is when a gay person uses that argument as an insult against his/her opponent. What a minute, I thought gays regarded their sexual orientation as a good thing, so why would they insinuate that it was a bad thing?

Kinda contradictory if you ask me.

Edited February 2, 2012 by DaddyO

[Smith]

Not to get into a debate but there is little denial that when AIDS appeared it was fairly isolated to the gay (men) in California and NY and was fairly isolated to those communities. It began to grow as more men began spreading it in various relationships, blood transfusion, etc and now it is what it is. Statistically it is still mainly spread through male homosexual activity. Whatever it is now, how it started and spread is not all that ambiguous. As to the pilot and monkey that is one theory, but he is actually factual fairly accurate on the other issue. So those crying he is a moron and needs "education" maybe it is your own repressed urges that need education! Tongue in cheek fellas

The History of HIV and AIDS in America

HIV/AIDS in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Guest bkelm18]

Not to get into a debate but there is little denial that when AIDS appeared it was fairly isolated to the gay (men) in California and NY and was fairly isolated to those communities. It began to grow as more men began spreading it in various relationships, blood transfusion, etc and now it is what it is. Statistically it is still mainly spread through male homosexual activity. Whatever it is now, how it started and spread is not all that ambiguous. As to the pilot and monkey that is one theory, but he is actually factual fairly accurate on the other issue. So those crying he is a moron and needs "education" maybe it is your own repressed urges that need education! Tongue in cheek fellas

The History of HIV and AIDS in America

HIV/AIDS in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Oh there's no dispute that it was fairly concentrated in the gay community, however his other statements are blatantly ignorant.

[TMF]

Not to get into a debate but there is little denial that when AIDS appeared it was fairly isolated to the gay (men) in California and NY and was fairly isolated to those communities. It began to grow as more men began spreading it in various relationships, blood transfusion, etc and now it is what it is. Statistically it is still mainly spread through male homosexual activity. Whatever it is now, how it started and spread is not all that ambiguous. As to the pilot and monkey that is one theory, but he is actually factual fairly accurate on the other issue. So those crying he is a moron and needs "education" maybe it is your own repressed urges that need education! Tongue in cheek fellas

The History of HIV and AIDS in America

HIV/AIDS in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Sorry, suggesting that a gay airline pilot banged a chimp and that it is "virtually impossible" to spread HIV during heterosexual intercourse are not based in fact and are the ramblings of someone who is purposefully ignorant. Both are untrue. If someone is going to feel so strongly about something (gays) they should at least get their facts straight.

The reasons HIV spread so quickly through the gay community has more to do with common sense than conspiracy. Without wanting to go into the mechanics of it, HIV is more easily contracted through man/man gay sex than through vaginal sex. Of course, if the lady is into Greek than it's just as easy to spread to a woman. Secondly, the gay community was still small/concentrated and umm... in the closet when HIV started being spread around so rapidly. The sexual habits of male homosexuals during that time were very loose and contributed to the spread exponentially within the gay community. Since gay men usually only have sex with other gay men it makes sense that the male gay community bore most brunt and still do to this day.

HIV spread so specifically through the gay community at first for the same reasons that some retirement communities in Florida have off-the-charts VD reporting. I remember hearing of an outbreak of syphillus back in the '90s where only old folks in the retirement trailerpark were gettting infected. Is that because God hates them for being deviants?

[Smith]

Sorry, suggesting that a gay airline pilot banged a chimp and that it is "virtually impossible" to spread HIV during heterosexual intercourse are not based in fact and are the ramblings of someone who is purposefully ignorant. Both are untrue. If someone is going to feel so strongly about something (gays) they should at least get their facts straight.

The reasons HIV spread so quickly through the gay community has more to do with common sense than conspiracy. Without wanting to go into the mechanics of it, HIV is more easily contracted through man/man gay sex than through vaginal sex. Of course, if the lady is into Greek than it's just as easy to spread to a woman. Secondly, the gay community was still small/concentrated and umm... in the closet when HIV started being spread around so rapidly. The sexual habits of male homosexuals during that time were very loose and contributed to the spread exponentially within the gay community. Since gay men usually only have sex with other gay men it makes sense that the male gay community bore most brunt and still do to this day.

HIV spread so specifically through the gay community at first for the same reasons that some retirement communities in Florida have off-the-charts VD reporting. I remember hearing of an outbreak of syphillus back in the '90s where only old folks in the retirement trailerpark were gettting infected. Is that because God hates them for being deviants?

As to your question our choices have consequences and what you mentioned simply reflect that. Don't know where that last statement made it into the discussion but it does seem God has a pretty good idea of the consequences of our choices. I yet to see where he cautions or forbids us something that doesn't negatively impact the person or society.

[TMF]

As to your question our choices have consequences and what you mentioned simply reflect that. Don't know where that last statement made it into the discussion but it does seem God has a pretty good idea of the consequences of our choices. I yet to see where he cautions or forbids us something that doesn't negatively impact the person or society.

Well, the last comment made it in because his stance on gays (as he puts it) is a religious belief. I get that the numbers support the theory that dude on dude gay sex carries with it a higher risk of contracting HIV, but that is a lifestyle choice. An elected official shouldn't be spouting off against free Americans who make that lifestyle choice. He is a moron.

[daddyo]

Well, the last comment made it in because his stance on gays (as he puts it) is a religious belief. I get that the numbers support the theory that dude on dude gay sex carries with it a higher risk of contracting HIV, but that is a lifestyle choice. An elected official shouldn't be spouting off against free Americans who make that lifestyle choice. He is a moron.

How was he "spouting off"? Are you "spouting off" whenever you offer your opinion?

[TMF]

How was he "spouting off"? Are you "spouting off" whenever you offer your opinion?

Yes, but I don't get paid to represent the People.