PDA

View Full Version : A Tribute To Barney Frank!



Gayle in MD
11-30-2011, 05:15 AM
While I am very sad that we are losing Barney Frank, a good, and great man, and a dedicated representatiive who has often been the voice of fairness, and honor, I am expecting that he will play an even more powerful role in doing what he has always done best, exposing the gross hypocrisy of the Repiglican Party!!!

Here is Rachel's great tribute to Barney, as shown on last nights Rachel Maddow program! We will miss his authenticity, intelligence and humor!

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/26315908/ns/msnbc_tv-rachel_maddow_show/#45485871

LWW
11-30-2011, 05:40 AM
You spewwed twibute incowwectwy.

LWW
11-30-2011, 05:42 AM
Hewws what she weft out. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1ZHTj6HPEQ&feature=player_embedded)

Qtec
11-30-2011, 06:40 AM
If that was true, why isn't he in jail?

Q..........

Qtec
11-30-2011, 06:49 AM
From your source.

Bush (http://www.youtube.com/user/Lied2Bad#p/u/2/s7gkTJ1ebfU)

Pyramids on Mars. (http://www.youtube.com/user/Lied2Bad#p/u/6/9Q_P9MZMWJk)

Q....LOL

Gayle in MD
11-30-2011, 08:22 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If that was true, why isn't he in jail?

Q.......... </div></div>

Another of Widdle Wonkie Weenie's undocumented MYTHS.

These On The Government Dole RWers are full of them...

/forums/images/%%GRAEMLIN_URL%%/smirk.gif

Pathetic.

eg8r
11-30-2011, 09:33 AM
Well, I question why it took this idiot so long to quit. Thank goodness it is over.

eg8r

sack316
11-30-2011, 10:07 AM
While I'm not a fan of the man, and don't agree with much of anything he says or does... I do believe he sincerely did want the best, and tried to do what he thought was best for the country. And I can at least respect that.

On a side note, I'd love to see him and Lou Holtz have a conversation!

Sack

Gayle in MD
11-30-2011, 10:11 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">While I'm not a fan of the man, and don't agree with much of anything he says or does... I do believe he sincerely did want the best, and tried to do what he thought was best for the country. And I can at least respect that.

On a side note, I'd love to see him and Lou Holtz have a conversation!

Sack </div></div>

Yes, I agree, his heart is always in the right place, IMO.

He's a straight shooter, IMO, and manages to maintain some humor through it all.

I've always liked him, and had respect for him, as being very authentic, and intelligent.

G.

Soflasnapper
11-30-2011, 06:57 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> Hewws what she weft out. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P1ZHTj6HPEQ&feature=player_embedded) </div></div>

And here's what you left out:

Washington Call Boys (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YTO2MStUQOA&feature=related)

A homosexual pedophile call boy ring ran out of the Reagan/Bush White House, according to front page reporting from the Washington Times?

Jeff Gannon, male prostitute, the old 'in and out' of the WH, more than a hundred times when there was no briefing to attend, and including multiple occasions when the Secret Service entrant records indicate overnight stays?

IF the claim that Barney Frank knew and condoned the prostitution business run out of his basement is true (he denied it, of course), the answer to the questions raised here is that he wielded Mutual Assured Destruction at his critics, and they folded their hands.

I don't think the facts back up that claim, however, as the claim is that Frank did not share in any of the proceeds of the prostitution, and rather instead paid this man $20k for his services. And the sole evidence that Frank knew and approved of this is from Mr. Steve Gobie, meaning the word of a felon against someone never charged or convicted of any crime?

A compendium of Washington Times stories (http://www.voxfux.com/features/bush_child_sex_coverup/article_archive.htm) concerning <span style='font-size: 17pt'>the pedophile prostitution ring run out of the WH and at the highest level of the Republican Party.</span>

LWW
12-01-2011, 05:06 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">If that was true, why isn't he in jail?

Q.......... </div></div>

If you watched it you would knoe.

LWW
12-01-2011, 05:12 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body">
Pyramids on Mars. (http://www.youtube.com/user/Lied2Bad#p/u/6/9Q_P9MZMWJk)

Q....LOL </div></div>

Are you denying the NASA photographs?

Of course they are there ... it's just that some folks come up with unverified explanations, much like

This bit of silliness is no different than esteemed astronomer Percival Lawrence Lowell's belief in Martian canals.

LWW
12-01-2011, 05:14 AM
Why can't you ever stay on topic?

Sev
12-01-2011, 09:56 AM
I would prefer to see him the victim of a ruptured colon.
Bad meat in the can as it twer.

Sorry this is one individual I find to be completely reprehensible.

The sooner he joins Ted Kennedy the better.

Qtec
12-02-2011, 12:49 AM
http://mars-earth.com/cydonia_eygpt/image010.jpg

Pyramids?

Q

LWW
12-02-2011, 03:00 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> http://mars-earth.com/cydonia_eygpt/image010.jpg

Pyramids?

Q </div></div>

I know it's hard for you, but please try to stay on topic.

The topic isn't pyramids on Mars.

The topic is giving a fitting twibute to Bonnie Fwank.

llotter
12-02-2011, 03:51 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: sack316</div><div class="ubbcode-body">While I'm not a fan of the man, and don't agree with much of anything he says or does... I do believe he sincerely did want the best, and tried to do what he thought was best for the country. And I can at least respect that.

On a side note, I'd love to see him and Lou Holtz have a conversation!

Sack </div></div>

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. However, there are other ways to get to get there and Barney knows them all.

LWW
12-02-2011, 04:11 AM
I hear he travels the backroads.

Stretch
12-02-2011, 06:14 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I hear he travels the backroads. </div></div>

As much as it pains you to say? St.

Soflasnapper
12-02-2011, 07:20 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why can't you ever stay on topic? </div></div>

The question was asked, if all that was mentioned were true, why would Rep. Frank not have ended up in jail?

As your link and mine said, he threatened to expose the various right wing and other Republicans who were doing the same or worse, although in the closet.

I explained that this would have been a kind of mutually assured destruction, and provided the evidence of what he was threatening to further expose.

That could not have been more on topic, IMO. That was the topic.

Soflasnapper
12-02-2011, 07:25 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I would prefer to see him the victim of a ruptured colon.
Bad meat in the can as it twer.

Sorry this is one individual I find to be completely reprehensible.

The sooner he joins Ted Kennedy the better. </div></div>

Maybe some Texas boys could beat him to death and drag him by their pickup truck until his head fell off, Shephard-style, you mean?

Jeeze, I have plenty of people I think are horrible for the country, very bad actors (okay, that's a hint and a pun!), but never would wish them physical harm, let alone death. What's up with this? Do you think he as a minority member of the House (which runs on pure majoritarianism) was really the decisive figure in the sub-prime crisis as he is falsely portrayed, or what?

Soflasnapper
12-02-2011, 07:30 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Qtec</div><div class="ubbcode-body"> http://mars-earth.com/cydonia_eygpt/image010.jpg

Pyramids?

Q </div></div>

PYRAMID (not plural)!

And we know who built it-- the D&M Company. If it's not a pyramid, how come we know who built it?

Ok, space stuff is always good for a laugh or two, but I judge this claim as neither impossible, nor carrying a zero realistic chance.

To see the basis for some bare chance of this claim, at least, you'd have to read Hoagland (enterprisemission.com) and see the geometry he adduces in this plateau region.

Sev
12-02-2011, 08:29 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">I would prefer to see him the victim of a ruptured colon.
Bad meat in the can as it twer.

Sorry this is one individual I find to be completely reprehensible.

The sooner he joins Ted Kennedy the better. </div></div>

Maybe some Texas boys could beat him to death and drag him by their pickup truck until his head fell off, Shephard-style, you mean?

Jeeze, I have plenty of people I think are horrible for the country, very bad actors (okay, that's a hint and a pun!), but never would wish them physical harm, let alone death. What's up with this? Do you think he as a minority member of the House (which runs on pure majoritarianism) was really the decisive figure in the sub-prime crisis as he is falsely portrayed, or what? </div></div>

That wouldn't be a racist act. Franks white. Although that scene from Pulp Fiction has some possibilities.

I would prefer to see him go to that animal farm in Montana of his own volition and die by over penetration from a horse named Mr Head. (Hint. That's a pun.)

At least we would all get a laugh out of it.

LWW
12-03-2011, 04:51 AM
I've read Hoagland.

It's an interesting hypothesis ... but nothing more at this point.

Gayle in MD
12-03-2011, 07:28 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: LWW</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Why can't you ever stay on topic? </div></div>

The question was asked, if all that was mentioned were true, why would Rep. Frank not have ended up in jail?

As your link and mine said, he threatened to expose the various right wing and other Republicans who were doing the same or worse, although in the closet.

I explained that this would have been a kind of mutually assured destruction, and provided the evidence of what he was threatening to further expose.

That could not have been more on topic, IMO. That was the topic. </div></div>

Believe me, anyone who worked in Washington D.C., when Reagan came into office, knows that the Gay Population trippled during his administration....so many came into the nation's capitol at that time, and gay bars were popping up everywhere.

I respect Barney for being the first elected representative with enough courage to come out of the closet, and that is admirable, IMO, and something that numerous Repiglican homosexuals who vote against Gay rights, refuse to do, Lindsey Graham among them....

One need only walk the halls of Congress, to notice the obvious...Repiglican staffers are by and large, Gay, and it has been such since the Reagan Administration.

My question on this subject is.... if Mehlman came out of the closet, what is Ron Christie waiting for????

What about Grover Norquist?

The list of closeted Gay Repiglicans, is too long to go into...,,


G.

Sev
12-03-2011, 07:40 AM
What I dont understand is why people believe they are entitled to know what an individuals sexual orientation is.
That is a private matter as is the reason they may not bring it into public light.

If its just have the chance to call them a hypocrite is seems a bit petty. They may not even like the fact that their genetic makeup drives them in that direction and wish it was otherwise. They may not want to have the public scrutiny either.

Do you think you have a right to violate an individuals privacy because they may be different? I thought you were a supporter of the right to privacy.

LWW
12-03-2011, 07:43 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What I dont understand is why people believe they are entitled to know what an individuals sexual orientation is.</div></div>

Because they are demokrooks and the fastest way to power for a totalitarian state is to Balkanize society into groups which can be pitted against each other.

Sev
12-03-2011, 07:50 AM
Well why go through all the effort.
Just blame the Jews. Its worked pretty good so far.

Gayle in MD
12-03-2011, 08:42 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What I dont understand is why people believe they are entitled to know what an individuals sexual orientation is.
That is a private matter as is the reason they may not bring it into public light.

<span style="color: #990000"> It was during the Gingrich era that the gentleman's agreement, that used to prevail in political circles, fell by the way side, when the Repiglican Party spent a forture investigating Bill Clinton and all they could come up with was a quiet little petting session between Bill, and another adult woman, with a history of wearing her 'knee pads to Washington' and going after older men, in positions of power.....

As you know, Gingrich was out there calling for Clinton to resign, and then, Gingrich proved to be the ONLY SOTH to ever be fined and reprimanded for corruption, worse yet, exposed for his own affair during the same time, with a younger staffer, years his junior. Ah, but then, we all know about that...and a number of other Repigs, who were exposed for doing exactly what they most railed against, like Barr, for example, who wrote out a check for his wife's abortion, after railing against abortion?</span>

If its just have the chance to call them a hypocrite is seems a bit petty.

<span style="color: #990000"> No, not at all petty, rather, it is petty and hypocritical of them, to rail against and vote against homosexual rights, condemning them as evil, and calling them Godless, demons, every name in the book, while the accusers are themselves, Gay.

The known Repiglican closeted gays, and there are many, who have been exposed by some of their Gay Lovers who got pissed because their Repiglican lovers voted consistantly against their own Gay rights, are the hypocrites who deserve to be outed, IMO, because they are waging the battle against the Constitutional rights, of gay people.

</span> They may not even like the fact that their genetic makeup drives them in that direction and wish it was otherwise.

<span style="color: #990000"> That is probably true, as self-hate is usually beneath agressive attacks against others who are just the same as they are, however, they foolishly contend that genetics don't factor in, which flies in the face of Science, which Repiglicans continue to rail against on every level. </span>


They may not want to have the public scrutiny either.

<span style="color: #990000"> Thanks to Gingrich, those days are over, regardless of how we feel about it.

Today, if you don't want scrutiny of your private life, then don't go into politics, a little item that all of the current Repiglican presidential contenders, have foolishly overlooked, since they believe that IIARIOK. </span>

Do you think you have a right to violate an individuals privacy because they may be different? I thought you were a supporter of the right to privacy.

</div></div>


<span style="color: #990000"> Absolutely not. I have never outed a Gay person. That is something that I, personally, would never do.

Additionally, I might add that it was two from your own cabal, one of them from here, another from AZ, on this site, which worked together and "Investigated" others private lives, to expose and also twist to their liking, taking out of context certain previously private information about others here, that they THOUGHT would be embarrassing, not I.

Did you find that to be petty? Most all of us here found it to be a new low for this forum, but then, it was two low down P's OS who did it.

G. </span>

LWW
12-03-2011, 08:45 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Well why go through all the effort.
Just blame the Jews. Its worked pretty good so far. </div></div>

Well ... charlotte and the cabal are pretty adept at claiming boy buggerers who support demokrook kandidates are actually republichickens.

Soflasnapper
12-03-2011, 10:12 AM
Gingrich smeared Speaker Tom Foley as gay, with his chief of staff putting out that word on his office stationary, then Gingrich denied he was involved.

Gingrich threatened to reveal that Bill Paxson was gay when he was among the leaders of the attempted coup against him as Speaker, causing his lover journalist Sandy Hume to commit suicide, and Paxson to resign from the third position in the House leadership and his House seat altogether, prior to the end of his term.

Gayle in MD
12-03-2011, 10:18 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Soflasnapper</div><div class="ubbcode-body">Gingrich smeared Speaker Tom Foley as gay, with his chief of staff putting out that word on his office stationary, then Gingrich denied he was involved.

Gingrich threatened to reveal that Bill Paxson was gay when he was among the leaders of the attempted coup against him as Speaker, causing his lover journalist Sandy Hume to commit suicide, and Paxson to resign from the third position in the House leadership and his House seat altogether, prior to the end of his term. </div></div>

I remember that. No wonder the right is so enamored with Gingrich. They always go for the most corrupt, offensive and crooked possible person. I am beginning to realize that Murdoch wanted Gingrich all along. Makes all of the Cain BS understandable.

G.

eg8r
12-03-2011, 11:23 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Quote:</div><div class="ubbcode-body">That is a private matter as is the reason they may not bring it into public light.
</div></div>gayle only believe this when the subject was Clinton. After that she broke all her own rules.

eg8r

Sev
12-03-2011, 11:40 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What I dont understand is why people believe they are entitled to know what an individuals sexual orientation is.
That is a private matter as is the reason they may not bring it into public light.

<span style="color: #990000"> It was during the Gingrich era that the gentleman's agreement, that used to prevail in political circles, fell by the way side, when the Repiglican Party spent a forture investigating Bill Clinton and all they could come up with was a quiet little petting session between Bill, and another adult woman, with a history of wearing her 'knee pads to Washington' and going after older men, in positions of power.....

As you know, Gingrich was out there calling for Clinton to resign, and then, Gingrich proved to be the ONLY SOTH to ever be fined and reprimanded for corruption, worse yet, exposed for his own affair during the same time, with a younger staffer, years his junior. Ah, but then, we all know about that...and a number of other Repigs, who were exposed for doing exactly what they most railed against, like Barr, for example, who wrote out a check for his wife's abortion, after railing against abortion?</span>

If its just have the chance to call them a hypocrite is seems a bit petty.

<span style="color: #990000"> No, not at all petty, rather, it is petty and hypocritical of them, to rail against and vote against homosexual rights, condemning them as evil, and calling them Godless, demons, every name in the book, while the accusers are themselves, Gay.

The known Repiglican closeted gays, and there are many, who have been exposed by some of their Gay Lovers who got pissed because their Repiglican lovers voted consistantly against their own Gay rights, are the hypocrites who deserve to be outed, IMO, because they are waging the battle against the Constitutional rights, of gay people.

</span> They may not even like the fact that their genetic makeup drives them in that direction and wish it was otherwise.

<span style="color: #990000"> That is probably true, as self-hate is usually beneath agressive attacks against others who are just the same as they are, however, they foolishly contend that genetics don't factor in, which flies in the face of Science, which Repiglicans continue to rail against on every level. </span>


They may not want to have the public scrutiny either.

<span style="color: #990000"> Thanks to Gingrich, those days are over, regardless of how we feel about it.

Today, if you don't want scrutiny of your private life, then don't go into politics, a little item that all of the current Repiglican presidential contenders, have foolishly overlooked, since they believe that IIARIOK. </span>

Do you think you have a right to violate an individuals privacy because they may be different? I thought you were a supporter of the right to privacy.

</div></div>


<span style="color: #990000"> Absolutely not. I have never outed a Gay person. That is something that I, personally, would never do.

Additionally, I might add that it was two from your own cabal, one of them from here, another from AZ, on this site, which worked together and "Investigated" others private lives, to expose and also twist to their liking, taking out of context certain previously private information about others here, that they THOUGHT would be embarrassing, not I.

Did you find that to be petty? Most all of us here found it to be a new low for this forum, but then, it was two low down P's OS who did it.

G. </span> </div></div>

Point taken.
However one being gay and voting in a manner that appears contrary to ones own self interests does not make one a hypocrite. It also does not necessarily reflect self hate.
I think you assume to much there.

As far as Clinton goes. He shook his finger at America and lied.
Had he been transparent after being caught the firestorm would never have occurred and it would have save the country a lot of angst. Had he remained faithful to his vows what transpired would not have happened in the first place.
Republicans didnt put his member between her lips. That was a personal decision.
The entire affair was a circus. That Hillary didnt dismember him is amazing.

Being gay by enlarge is not a personal decision. Its genetic.
You may want to consider that outing somebody that is gay in order to make a public spectacle simply because you disagree with their politics is on par with harassing somebody that has MS.
Neither individual is responsible for their condition. As a matter of fact doing the later could be considered a hate crime in today's age.
Perhaps we need some legislation to protect gays from being maliciously outed. We have laws for everything else to create protected classes.

Your war with LWW is another matter. I heard rumor he was reported to homeland security long before your personal incident surfaced. Now correct me if I am wrong. Have you not on occasion made reference as to being close with people in Washington? That would make it quite easy for you to ask for a favor. Would it not?

Those that live by the sword. Die by the sword.

Gayle in MD
12-03-2011, 04:06 PM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Gayle in MD</div><div class="ubbcode-body"><div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">What I dont understand is why people believe they are entitled to know what an individuals sexual orientation is.
That is a private matter as is the reason they may not bring it into public light.

<span style="color: #990000"> It was during the Gingrich era that the gentleman's agreement, that used to prevail in political circles, fell by the way side, when the Repiglican Party spent a forture investigating Bill Clinton and all they could come up with was a quiet little petting session between Bill, and another adult woman, with a history of wearing her 'knee pads to Washington' and going after older men, in positions of power.....

As you know, Gingrich was out there calling for Clinton to resign, and then, Gingrich proved to be the ONLY SOTH to ever be fined and reprimanded for corruption, worse yet, exposed for his own affair during the same time, with a younger staffer, years his junior. Ah, but then, we all know about that...and a number of other Repigs, who were exposed for doing exactly what they most railed against, like Barr, for example, who wrote out a check for his wife's abortion, after railing against abortion?</span>

If its just have the chance to call them a hypocrite is seems a bit petty.

<span style="color: #990000"> No, not at all petty, rather, it is petty and hypocritical of them, to rail against and vote against homosexual rights, condemning them as evil, and calling them Godless, demons, every name in the book, while the accusers are themselves, Gay.

The known Repiglican closeted gays, and there are many, who have been exposed by some of their Gay Lovers who got pissed because their Repiglican lovers voted consistantly against their own Gay rights, are the hypocrites who deserve to be outed, IMO, because they are waging the battle against the Constitutional rights, of gay people.

</span> They may not even like the fact that their genetic makeup drives them in that direction and wish it was otherwise.

<span style="color: #990000"> That is probably true, as self-hate is usually beneath agressive attacks against others who are just the same as they are, however, they foolishly contend that genetics don't factor in, which flies in the face of Science, which Repiglicans continue to rail against on every level. </span>


They may not want to have the public scrutiny either.

<span style="color: #990000"> Thanks to Gingrich, those days are over, regardless of how we feel about it.

Today, if you don't want scrutiny of your private life, then don't go into politics, a little item that all of the current Repiglican presidential contenders, have foolishly overlooked, since they believe that IIARIOK. </span>

Do you think you have a right to violate an individuals privacy because they may be different? I thought you were a supporter of the right to privacy.

</div></div>


<span style="color: #990000"> Absolutely not. I have never outed a Gay person. That is something that I, personally, would never do.

Additionally, I might add that it was two from your own cabal, one of them from here, another from AZ, on this site, which worked together and "Investigated" others private lives, to expose and also twist to their liking, taking out of context certain previously private information about others here, that they THOUGHT would be embarrassing, not I.

Did you find that to be petty? Most all of us here found it to be a new low for this forum, but then, it was two low down P's OS who did it.

G. </span> </div></div>

Point taken.
However one being gay and voting in a manner that appears contrary to ones own self interests does not make one a hypocrite.

<span style="color: #990000"> It does make them a hypocrite when they are calling Gays, demons, saying they are Godless, spreading lies around saying that they choose to be gay, and that is in fact the overall position of the Guns, God and Gays, Republican stance on the subject. </span>

It also does not necessarily reflect self hate.
I think you assume to much there.

<span style="color: #990000">That's your opinion. I don't agree. </span>

As far as Clinton goes. He shook his finger at America and lied.
Had he been transparent after being caught the firestorm would never have occurred and it would have save the country a lot of angst. Had he remained faithful to his vows what transpired would not have happened in the first place.
Republicans didnt put his member between her lips. That was a personal decision.
The entire affair was a circus. That Hillary didnt dismember him is amazing.

<span style="color: #990000">I've never defended what Clinton did as regards his sexual behavior. Remaining faithful is the hallmark of maintaining respect and authenticity in a relationsip.

As far as that goes, as I stated, Gingrich was incredibly hypocritical, as are a number of Gay Republicans who rail against the sins of Gay's while they hide in the closet, and vote against Gay rights. If you don't see the gross hypocrisy in that, then we will have to agree to disagree.</span>

Being gay by enlarge is not a personal decision. Its genetic.
You may want to consider that outing somebody that is gay in order to make a public spectacle simply because you disagree with their politics is on par with harassing somebody that has MS.

<span style="color: #990000">Again, I have never "outed" anyone for being Gay. It is usually someone they have been with in their private life, who blows their cover, no pun intended. </span>
Neither individual is responsible for their condition.

<span style="color: #990000">Apparently you have forgotten that I have written that same opinion many times on this forum. As I stated, it is the Right, the Republicans, the so called "Christian" "Family Values" people, who are always out there bashing Gays, not the progressive Party, which is my party, and which as been the champions of all underdogs, all who are oppressed, and all Americans, regardless of their ethnic, sexual, gender, or religious beiefs. I have consistantly spoken out against discrimintion against our Gay population.</span>

As a matter of fact doing the later could be considered a hate crime in today's age.
Perhaps we need some legislation to protect gays from being maliciously outed. We have laws for everything else to create protected classes.

<span style="color: #990000">Yes, and Democratics have been resposible for every gain made by our Gay community in our country, and Republicans vote consistantly against them. RR refused to even mention AIDS for years, failing to answer the call of a growing disease which caused death and strugle for many suffering from AIDS.

There is a long history of Republicans bashing Gays, don't tell me you are not aware of that?

The Republicans voted against protecting Gays from hate crimes. They were also against Gays serving in the military. They are also against Gays having the right to marry whomever they wish. Surely, you are aware of the relentless attacks against Gays, by the right?</span>

Your war with LWW is another matter.

<span style="color: #990000">I have no war against LWW. LWW stated that he came here to go after me. He has slandered my name on two forums, and probably others, as well.

I simply find him repulsive, deceitful, immature, without conscience, and generally irrelevant to my interests, and hence, his disgusting behavior here proves his own lack of honor, IMO.

I was simply asking your opinion about his own dishonorable behavior, since he seems your good friend, and has committed the very sins to which you have stated disapproval, and made himself famous for digging around trying to find something to expose about others, albeit a failed attempt, by and large, of false, and inaccurate information. </span>


I heard rumor he was reported to homeland security long before your personal incident surfaced.

<span style="color: #990000">You heard? Then you prove a lack of conscience and intelligence, regarding your decision to believe unfounded, unproven vicious gossip, because that is a lie.

LWW has told many lies on this forum. Frankly, I'm surprised you would believe anything that he spreads around about others....

I have never reported anyone to homeland security. LWW is a vicious liar. </span>


Now correct me if I am wrong. Have you not on occasion made reference as to being close with people in Washington?

<span style="color: #990000">Actually I have loads of friends all over this country, and many who work in Washington D.C....so what?

I grew up here, in the Washington D.C. Metropolitan area, and hence, I have made quite a number of friends here, as anyone would if they lived their entire life in the same general metropolitcan region.</span>

That would make it quite easy for you to ask for a favor. Would it not?

<span style="color: #990000">I don't usually ask for favors from my friends, and additionally, I'm quite sure that any reports to HLS, would not require any connections to others who work in Washington D.C.

However, that sort of thinking only proves that you foolishly decided to believe gossip, from an unreliable source, a stalker who stalks my every post....and one who has proven that he is the kind of person who searches around for information about others, for the purpose of exposing incomplete information, cherry picked, and for vicious, evil intentions.

LWW generally makes a complete fool out of himself. I wouldn't think you would find someone like that to be a reliable source, someone who spends his time spreading lies and inuendo about a number of people here, including this false accusation against me, which is a complete lie, just like most of what he writes here always is a lie.

Did you find his behavior justifiable? </span>

Those that live by the sword. Die by the sword.


<span style="color: #990000"> If only!

G. </span>

</div></div>

Sev
12-05-2011, 07:47 AM
When you create protected classes you by default are saying they are inferior to others and incapable of standing up for themselves.
Doing so creates social warfare.
You might as well hand them handicap tags.
I disagree with this as I do with the designation of hate crimes.
There is no difference between beating a white guy, black guy or gay guy with a tire iron.

As far as what LWW and yourself sling at each other what proof is there that either one of you are telling the truth?

As far as the article that was posted concerning your personal episode. I'll keep my own counsel on how I feel about it.

However perhaps you should consider it a lesson on how political candidates are treated on both sides of the aisle. Being the subject of continual muck raking cant be a pleasant experience for them as I doubt it was for you.

Gayle in MD
12-05-2011, 08:44 AM
<div class="ubbcode-block"><div class="ubbcode-header">Originally Posted By: Sev</div><div class="ubbcode-body">When you create protected classes you by default are saying they are inferior to others and incapable of standing up for themselves.

<span style="color: #990000"> That is not true of guaranteeing Equal Rights, for all, and condemning discrimination.

Those are the principles our country was founded upon, equal rights, under the law. Freedom and liberty, to live as one chooses, make one's own decisions in teir lives, and enjoy certain rights to personal privacy, all of the things that the Republican Party tries to destroy. </span>

Doing so creates social warfare.

<span style="color: #990000">No, we are talking about equal rights, hence not so at all.

Social warfare usually comes about because of fascist colusion between corporate interests, and government corruption which is slanted to favor the wealthy, or a certain religion...seeks to remove human rights of the common man and woman, in the interest of the financially powerful, or force certain religious tenents upon others...

Social Warfare is always a result of some kind of inhumane oppression, and in this country Repubicans have advanced in many ways, corrupt colusion between government and business. Hence, they seek to remove protections of consumers, to advance opprotunities for corporate interests to commit even further theft and pollution, obviously. Repiglicans are always against consumers, and for the irrespomnsible "bottom line only" interests of corporations.

Tax policies designed and created to favor the wealthy.

Religious oppression used to dictate to all others, according to their so called, "Christian" ideologies, the very antithesis of Equal Rights.

History makes that very clear. And again, these are the policies of the Republican Party, and obviously, fit the description of launching class warfare....given the vast redistribution of wealth to the top, which we have surely witnessed under every Republican administration and Republicann Congress.

I might add, that during the Clinton administration, which, BTW removed more people from welfare, and into jobs, than any other recent administration, Republican policies were fraught with attacks on those less fortunate, Gays, the poor, the ill, and also the demonizing language which Repigicans made popular, under Newt Gingrich, and followed by religious leaders, who are repulsive, and just as money mongering as pigs like Limpballs, Gingrich, Coulter, all who use irrational and insulting language to cause division against and between others, those who are different, those who are ill and poor. Those who they call, Ungodly, Liberals, whom they have demonized since the days og gingrich, and the colossal PIG, Karl Rove.

Hence, I would NEVER vote for a Repiglican. I find their policies, repulsive.</span>


You might as well hand them handicap tags.
I disagree with this as I do with the designation of hate crimes.
There is no difference between beating a white guy, black guy or gay guy with a tire iron.


<span style="color: #990000"> Unbelievable statements. Yes, there is a huge difference.

How sad, to subscribe to such un-American beliefs...particularly at a time in our history, when there are oppressed people all over the globe, fighting to have their human rights respected, and dying for the cause of humane and equal rights, under their own laws.

My heart goes with those who are struggling for the human rights and future of their children, and willing to die for those rights, and then I find it repulsive, that people in our country don't vote, yet they are yapping and critical of the system, but fail to stand up and vote. A disgrace, IMO.

Under the inhumane regimes which cause so much human suffering, for so many, there is no country which is pristine in their actions, at various times in history, incluidng our own. </span>

As far as what LWW and yourself sling at each other what proof is there that either one of you are telling the truth?

<span style="color: #990000"> I generally ignore LWW, as you could easily see for yourself, given his post count, and given that I generally ignore any posts he makes directly to me. He's the last person on this forum who could rationally claim that he is being stalked, and he has proven his lack of character, and ugly intentions, many times.

Yet you were ready to believe his lies and gossip?

I don't spend my time digging around to try to expose personal information about others here, hence, an intelligent person, IMO, would consider the source of such gossip....not put any value or credibility on their ugly intentions, but consider the source. </span>

As far as the article that was posted concerning your personal episode. I'll keep my own counsel on how I feel about it.

<span style="color: #990000"> Actually, there wasn't an article ever posted, which actually had any truth, or had anything at all to do with what happened to my husband and I.

The article was false on many, many levels, however, most of my friends here, knew it was false, because they knew the whole story, which neither you, nor LWW, knows.

The important revelation was that his actions exposed the breadth of his own character flaws, and rotten, ugly behavior, and sorry to say, you have proven that you believed one of his many gross lies, as I have never reported anyone to Homeland Security, nor sought to dig up or seek to expose personal, private information wich was formally, unheard of and unknown on this forum, hence, ugly, evil, low down intentions, seeking to hurt or damage another member. That is LWW's M.O., and everyone here, knows that.

We all know that LWW has done that, and hence, anyone who would buy into his gross lies, annd gossip, proves themselves to be far from discriminating in their appraisals, and should perhaps consider having their head examined.

</span>

However perhaps you should consider it a lesson on how political candidates are treated on both sides of the aisle. Being the subject of continual muck raking cant be a pleasant experience for them as I doubt it was for you.

<span style="color: #990000">And You think yourself above criticizing politicians? LMAO! Think again.

I'm not a public politician, and additionally, LWW lost all respect and credibility when he brought this forum down to a new low, which he had already done long before he stooped to such obviously low down, petty, immature and juvenile shennaigans.

You righties think it's fine to slander any Democratic politicians you want, but apparently think yourselves as having a special license to do so, and then you respond with slander and attacks upon others for airing their own views, just as you ALL have done here for years.

Politicians know when they get into politics, that their personal behavior, is Fair Game. I'd say you could thank Gingrich, Boner, LOL, Rove, Limpballs, Coulter, Beck, and the Repiglican Party, for that.

I don't find any of your arguments in this thread to be rational, BTW, but that doesn't mean that I intend to investigate your life, with the intention of damaging your name, seeking to embarrass you, or causing you any discomfort.

I have never done that to anyone here.

LWW is lucky I didn't sue him. Many here wanted me to do so, MANY, including my attorney, who monitors this forum.

G.</span>


</div></div>

"Ronald Reagan proved that deficits don't matter"
Dickhead Cheneycrook