Re: Dean: Gay Republicans aren't in their right mi
Read back Mazda. I didn't change the subject, you did. I'm still talking about Statistics, what are you talking about? Spies and bogymen er, terrorists? I've never met either to my knowledge, but I have met a lot of assholes who think they know more than the average joe, and like to lord it over the joe by saying things like "if I told you what I know, I'd have to kill you". What a steaming crock of shit. And you have no idea what kind of data I collect, but I don't see any at all coming from you.
The suject of clearance was mentioned in a post by spensed from a post by someone entirely not on this board (as far as i know)
The conversation evolved from an idiotic saying by Dean to Libs defending it with oh so smooth comment like "Gay republicans make me sick" to very eloquent examples given by spensed on what the Clintons and Democrats have given the gay Community. On from there to Hate legislation. Then on even further to why people vote the way they do. Like I said Spensed made the comment about clearance based on someone elses blog you then took up the same line with a comment on J Edgar Hoover and used the same post to tell me I was full of shit and knew it and whats more I should know that because of Craig.
I responded that my knowledge of how and what is checked for a clearance is not bullshit but fact.
Meantime you entered the entire conversation with one of the most biggoted viewpoints I have ever observed. I called you on it. You cannot judge all by two. You responded that I obviously don't know LCR because only then would I say such an ignorant thing. Then you try to appeal to my squeamish side saying they dont love me. I know that. Neither do the Dems. Thats what you dont understand.
I called you on that statement immediately in this
post and you failed to respond. I addressed your blatant bigotry in this
post since the requirements in your life didnt allow you to respond to the initial volley.
SO then finally you respond to say that because of polling where they take a sample and form a opinion that racism, sexism and political party-ism are okie dokie. Just take the two you have met and cast your net of hate. You would have done well in the south in 1960 as a klansman. They used the same arguments. SO then you go on to assume that it was because of their party affiliation that "trained" or "brainwashed" hate against blacks and latinos. All based on two people. Never been to a party meeting, never listened to a word but you simply assume.
I then took great offense at your inferrence of ideology on a whole group of people and your applying that bigotry to me because I value conservative ideas. I work in wuite possibly the most diverse major industry in America and I have placed my life in the hands of people you would view at the end of your nose because they have different ideas than you.
You then go on with how statistics justifies racism. Since you smugly responded to only the sound bite of where I claim to know the facts of how to get a clearance but choose to take it out of context I then provided an article and some facts that are current. However the new article has more to do with ideology vice cash reward for spies. Still you refuse to respond to that with nothing more than insults.
SO somehow your next response is completely out of context from any of the conversation. You choose to attack Bush Lies instead of responding to the clearance conversation i was continuing. You still have failed to give any credible proof as to why you can impose a bigoted view on all conservative gay men based on two. Then your argument winner and end of story is Guantanamo.
You incessantly want to discuss everything in the world you can find abhorent to disguise the fact that you made and obvioulsy believe the extremely bigoted statements you make. I think it is you sir that needs to focus. Put away the name calling. You need not spend three paragraphs singing the sarcastic praises on me. You need to answer for your own "mis-spoken" statements.
Throughout all of this you claim that you look for sources in your post but no where ......no where in this thread is one single source provided.
I realize you pad your link statement with when I post a thread but that really is apples and oranges is it not? To claim I supply no links just opinion and then do the same yourself is pretty self assuming is it not?
I really feel like I am arguing with a playmate on the playground. These simple to see through tactics were blown up and disgarded when I was 7. I would hope you can do better.
So now to hear exactly why it is you may view an entire group based on two:
We're waiting.
p.s. The difference between polls inferring an opinion and you inferring an ideology to an entire group is epic. I am sorry you can not see that.
