Thursday, August 30, 2007

Sipping the Hatorade.

Harpy Susan Estrich has a few angry questions for "Senator Wide Stance."

"An airport men's room? Couldn't you do better than that, Senator? After consistently voting against efforts to protect gay and lesbian Americans from hate crimes and to preserve their civil rights, you go into the men's room at the airport and try to pick up the guy in the next stall?"

Question: If he'd voted FOR hate-crimes legislation would it have protected him from Susan's HATE?

18 Comments:

Blogger David Diano said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

August 30, 2007 at 10:20 AM 
Blogger Spencerblog said...

She doesn't HATE hypocrites? It sure sounds like she does.

August 30, 2007 at 10:38 AM 
Anonymous Randal said...

The most blatant hate and hypocrisy in this saga has come from the Gay & Left.
It’s kinda been funny to watch them contort so as they desperately grasp to cast stones with their limp wrists.

Notice how every Lib news report on this breezily mentions how Craig has “constantly voted to deny gay ‘rights’ and protections blahblahblah” as if his voting record itself were some sort of indictment, along with their implication of hypocrisy.
When did the Gay Agenda become the mainstream standard and everyone who opposes it the villain? That’s some slick (backward & crazy) PR they’ve had working for them.

August 30, 2007 at 11:17 AM 
Blogger David Diano said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

August 30, 2007 at 11:48 AM 
Anonymous Randal said...

This isn’t just about Craig. The Gay Agenda gets too much friendly press from their Lib buddies in the Press. Good people who are against the Gays’ unreasonable demands have been vilified. And every time they do it they reveal their own intolerance, hatred and hypocrisy. Hardly solid footing to go casting stones, that.

And Homos already enjoy the very same equal rights and protections that the rest of us do. What they are demanding are special rights. Again, it’s difficult to drum sympathy for that.

August 30, 2007 at 12:11 PM 
Blogger David Diano said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

August 30, 2007 at 12:40 PM 
Anonymous Randal said...

Ok, let’s get something clear right up front. Some of us have not been bullied into silence by you Libs and your political correctness. So long as gays call themselves “homos” and such, so too will I.
I’m assuming you’re also onea them Libs who tries to bully whites into silence from speaking on racial issues by tossing your silly labels around. That has worked to keep all discussions racial one-sided for a number of years. Times are-a-changing.
I abide by no conversation stifling double standard, calculated, contrived or otherwise.

Yes, gays already enjoy all those ‘rights’ you listed, as the rest of us do. What they want are special rights and accommodations bullied through for them by Libs wielding PC. Much like you have tried to here.

August 30, 2007 at 1:15 PM 
Blogger David Diano said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

August 30, 2007 at 2:29 PM 
Anonymous Randal said...

Sure. No one asked them if they were gay so they could have kept their jobs had they not told anyone.
That was actually a staged Gay stand that backfired on them anyway. And you Libs have been running with it ever since. And maybe some of them just wanted out of the service and that's how they elected to go about it?
Either way, such games are hardly respectable.

August 30, 2007 at 4:11 PM 
Blogger David Diano said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

August 30, 2007 at 10:02 PM 
Anonymous Randal said...

Right. And then the others came forward as some act of gay solidarity. They thought they would be able to bully their wants through, as in, “we’re so important we can force the Military to accept us openly declaring our sexual perversions”. They were wrong. But then they still got to say “see what Don’t ask/ Don’t tell has done to our efforts in the war on terror!” Either way the Gay Agenda gets good press. Crap.

Even Liberals are right once a d... What am I saying?? No they're not.

August 30, 2007 at 11:11 PM 
Blogger David Diano said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

August 31, 2007 at 12:10 AM 
Blogger David Diano said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

August 31, 2007 at 12:11 AM 
Anonymous Randal said...

Normal and natural? Just because something is legal that doesn’t make it right.

Leave it to a Lib to interject race into a discussion where it has no place whatsoever. Are you comparing gay sex to inter-racial sex? That’s not very nice.

August 31, 2007 at 12:34 AM 
Blogger David Diano said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

August 31, 2007 at 1:35 AM 
Anonymous Randal said...

I get points just fine, Davey. When I see you make one I’ll let you know.

That some Lib court declared it legal does not make it normal and natural.
No, I would not outlaw homoism. I think it is disgusting but I’m all about letting people live their lives without too much intrusion. However, when it comes to the unreasonable bullying demands of the Gay Agenda, well, that’s another story.
And tell me, just why is it “fortunate” that Libs made man-on-man sex legal, anyway?? Being tolerant or looking the other way is a whole lot different than celebrating such perversion. You Libs are a mess.

I didn’t answer your question concerning race because it has no place here. And it sure looks like you were comparing the two… something you have not seen me do, by the way. That you Libs love to insert race into everything as some sort of grasp for a “gotcha!” does not make your petty efforts here valid. It was actually rather offensive.

August 31, 2007 at 10:35 AM 
Blogger David Diano said...

This comment has been removed by the author.

August 31, 2007 at 11:41 AM 
Anonymous Randal said...

The workplace is not an appropriate setting for people to be broadcasting their sexuality. (Not that we ever see heteros publicly declaring their sexuality as gays do, btw.)
Don’t Ask/ Don’t Tell should be the standard across our society. It is a very reasonable compromise. (Not that you Libs and Gays care one stitch about reason or compromise once you’ve decided on something you want forced on our society regardless of how the rest of us feel about it.) It actually acts to protect gays from unreasonable harassment and such. If you Lefties would let go of your blind gay wants advocacy for a moment you’d see this.

September 4, 2007 at 10:58 AM 

Post a Comment

Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home