BS: Is it time for a gay president?

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 12:46 PM

Little Hawk, let's see if I understand: If I make a comment about a political figure I don't like or respect but in so doing I display a characteristic of that person that is commonly used by bigots, my comment is not bigoted?

Say that the politician I don't like is widely known to make back room deals- wouldn't portraying him or her in a back room be legitimate thing? If the politician is Black or a Jew or Hispanic and instead of showing the back room I draw him or her as a caricature of that person's race, is that not racist or bigotry?

Incidentally Hitler's government and press routinely showed the Jew as being less than human, but since they usually depicted only ONE person at a time you couldn't call it bigoted, could you now.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 01:15 PM

While the OPINIONATED idiots on the far left, think it obsolete, for Christians to teach creationism, they point to Darwin, for his THEORY of us all coming from apes...then get their shorts in a twist when someone points out that ONE certain picture, causes another certain person to resemble an ape..IN THAT PICTURE ALONE. Methinks it points to hypocrisy, and them not having their minds develop anything near past an ape!!!!!..Even apes aren't that hypocritical. It all goes to prove.."If you turn-on a lame, what you get is a turned-on lame!!!"

oh, by the way......and these were doctored

The pic I was referring to was not doctored..it was just a candid, in the moment snap.

Now get off it!..Go have your bowl of 'Fruit Loops'

Oh, and while your at it....are you going to object to the pic of Bush????

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 01:23 PM

I was looking for it..but found this one instead...

Not as good as the one I saw before...but...

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 01:35 PM

Jeez!...I only saw one of these!...The one to which I was referring was the bottom middle one. ....and I am in NO WAY meaning it as a racial slur, but ribbing Little Hawk, as to his taste in women!!!!

jeez, I only saw one of these......

..and I think Little Hawk got it.....and is mature enough to take the kidding. Sorry for some of you!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Stringsinger
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 01:53 PM

The most important thing a chief executive must have is executive skills. It doesn't matter whether a president is of a particular race or sexual orientation.

Here's what an executive does. He/she decides on a course of action based on many different ideas, wades through them all and makes an educated guess.

If an executive is too creative, his/her ideas may abound but get in the way of selection.
If an executive is too insular and not good with people, then those people get left out of the equation when making a decision.

A C.E.O for a corporation is not a good model for a president. They are concerned with the financial interest of the corporation and its shareholders. Remember at one time BP and Goldman Sachs were considered to be top companies. Would you want Lloyd Blankfein or Tony Hayward running the US?

Public service requires a total vision of what is good for the country. When we elect a president, it's important to consider whether that chief executive knows how to run the country and not just how to get elected.

It wouldn't matter if the president had the qualifications mentioned above if he/she were tri-sexual.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Wesley S
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 01:54 PM

GfS - Your 15 minutes were up a long time ago.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 01:56 PM

Well, I guess you gotta get your jollies somewhere.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 02:05 PM

Great. ;-) We're actually talking about some stuff now. Okay...

Let's start with Wesley.

"You seem to have an amazing talent for knowing the unknowable."

I don't KNOW for certain what GfS's motives are, Wesley, but I suspect, based on hundreds and hundreds of posts I've read already by Gfs, that his dislike of Michelle and Barack Obama is based on their political position, not their racial profile.

And I have seen no evidence that he is prejudiced against Black people in general...just against politicians he doesn't like.

I'm not saying that all his motives are "noble", I'm just saying that there is no solid basis for calling him a "bigot". Note, Wesley that you are extrapolating my various statements all to some ridiculous extreme...therefore you appear to think you can read my mind. ;-) No, I do not think everyone has absolutely noble motives. Matter of fact, I think many people here are out to hurt other people whom they disagree with, and that's why they say the mean things they say. It was mean of GfS to compare Michelle Obama to a chimp, and it's mean of other people to slap him with the "racist" or "bigot" tag for doing it.

"And is there anyone you would not defend?"

I'll defend anyone when they're attacked in an inappropriate manner. I just defended Michelle Obama AND GfS on that basis. I'll defend you on that basis when you are unfairly attacked. However, I will not defend you when you attack someone else unfairly. Clear?

****

John P - Righto. I follow your reasoning.

"I said it made a comparison that is a common racial slur and recommended that it acknowledge that."

Fine. I have no problem with that, but it doesn't necessarily guarantee that you will get such acknowlegement. I also indicated to GfS that I thought there was no basis for insulting Michelle Obama in such a fashion.

"it is, demonstrably, bigoted against homosexuals"

I've read a lot of stuff GfS has posted about homosexuals, and I honestly do not believe he is a bigot in regards to homosexuals. You believe he is. Okay, we have a different opinion about that then.

"What do you think should happen when people make overtly bigoted comments?"

I think we should take issue with the comment itself, and present an alternative view of our own. I do not think we should yell "bigot" at the other person, because then it's not a debate anymore, it's a verbal street fight, and that accoplishes nothing.

I took issue with the comment, and because I respect GfS (after long online acquaintance), I simply said "She looks fine to me." What I was thereby saying to Gfs was: "You have no basis for saying that about Michelle Obama." Good enough. He can respond to that if he wants to, but we've still got a discussion, don't we, rather than a verbal street fight?

Public shaming, John, is something people love to do to others, but I don't think there's a very healthy instinct behind it. It has been used too often by sadists and oppressors of all sorts to intimidate and destroy those they dislike...or just for their own satisfaction...and you know what it stirs in the heart of the one so shamed? It stirs a deep desire for revenge upon the one doing the shaming. I don't recommend it. What I do recommend is that one oppose a view one considers wrongful with reasoned arguments that make clear the wrongfullness and error of that view. In other words, don't attack the person...attack the foundation of the person's argument.

There is absolutely no foundation for comparing Michelle Obama to a gorilla, in my opinion, and that is what I would focus on.

*****

Ebbie - "Little Hawk, let's see if I understand: If I make a comment about a political figure I don't like or respect but in so doing I display a characteristic of that person that is commonly used by bigots, my comment is not bigoted?"

It might be. Or it might not be. That depends on a whole bunch of different possibilities about YOU and what you're thinking at the time you make the comment. You may actually intend bigotry or you may not. How do we know for sure? To simply leap to the conclusion that you ARE intending bigotry and are therefore "a bigot" is to do what's convenient for the person leaping to the conclusion...but the conclusion may or may not be a correct one. You might simply be attacking the individual...but not the generic group of people the individual is a member of.

And my impression of GfS, based on long acquaintance, is that GfS does not attack Black people on the basis of race.

"If the politician is Black or a Jew or Hispanic and instead of showing the back room I draw him or her as a caricature of that person's race, is that not racist or bigotry?"

It might be. Is drawing someone as an ape a caricature of the person's race? How so? Or is it simply a caricature of the person? It could be either. Are you saying that it has to be bigotry whenever it's about a Black, a Jew or a Hispanic...but it isn't bigotry when it's about a White person who belongs to no "visible minority"? How so? Is it impossible to be bigoted against the White majority? Or are we all just reacting to current popular political trends instead of thinking indepently and assessing situations intelligently and on their own merits? Are minority people themselves capable of bigotry? Evidence suggests that they are. Everyone is capable of bigotry...but why are only certain types of bigotry deemed worthy of recognition in the present milieu? And is that fair or objective?


"Incidentally Hitler's government and press routinely showed the Jew as being less than human, but since they usually depicted only ONE person at a time you couldn't call it bigoted, could you now."

Ha! ;-D You could have saved yourself the trouble of typing that, Ebbie. You know as well as I do that the Nazi administration attacked all the Jews as a group. They attacked everyone who was a Jew, merely because they were Jews. That is definitely bigotry, there's no doubt about it, and you know it.

I have no reason whatsoever at this point to believe that GfS attacks Blacks as a group, merely because they are Black. He has a political bone to pick with the Obamas.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Bonzo3legs
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 02:05 PM

I would suggest that a diet of vindaloo curries and guiness would cure such a president!!

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Wesley S
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 02:27 PM

By the Little Hawk - So far I've not called GfS a bigot. I have no way of knowing if it's a bigot or not. What I've suspected from the comments it's made already is that it's so starved for attention that it will make all kinds of remarks just to be noticed. Bigoted remarks don't neccessarily make one a bigot. What I suspect is that GfS is scared to death that we will stop paying attention. Sort of like a two year old. Negative attention is better than none. And that's what GfS might be getting in the 3D world.

The Mudcat is a safe haven for a lot of trolls. And if trolls can come here to let off steam then so be it. Better than ending up like that poor sod of an Englishman a few days ago that drove around killing people with a shotgun.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Don Firth
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 02:33 PM

Good God, GfS! You just insist on digging yourself in deeper!!!

In the meantime—you've made some allegations about me above, so to set the record straight:

Again, GfS, you descend to personal attacks while knowing nothing about the person you are attacking. What little you do know, you twist into the worst possible interpretation, then vomit it out as an attack.

As to my lack of accomplishments, I'd say I haven't done too badly. As a singer, from the late 1950s to the late 1960s, I made a fairly good living singing folk songs and ballads, and worked steadily as a singer in clubs (not folk clubs, night clubs) and coffeehouses (for regular pay, not for tips), doing concerts, mostly at colleges and universities, all up and down the Pacific Coast, across to eastern Canada, in Michigan, Montana, Colorado. Not just house concerts (many of those), but concerts in theaters and concert halls. This, along with a fair amount of television, including an educational television series on Seattle's local PBS affiliate. I'm still singing, but not quite as actively as I used to—by choice. If I want to do more concerts, all I need do is make a couple of telephone calls. That's not bragging. That's a fact!

I'm currently writing a great deal and putting together programs for a series CDs.

In addition, I have taught both classical guitar and folk techniques to many hundreds of people in both private lessons and classes. Several of my former students went on to have successful careers in music.

I was never a hippy. I do not smoke dope and I have never taken drugs.

To attempt to fill in some of the deficiencies in your education, GfS, there is more to being an on-the-air announcer at a classical music radio station than merely sitting there playing records as one might do at home. Stations don't pay AFTRA wages for their announcers to just sit there and do nothing while a recording of a symphony or an opera is playing. While keeping an ear on the in-studio monitor, the announcer uses that time to do such things as prepare for the next newscast and line up the next group of commercial and public service announcements, along with maintaining both the program and transmitter logs. This, in addition to taping new commercials and PSAs.

And unlike quite a number of other people, broadcasting was not a major ambition of mine, although I have the voice and I was good at it. From the late 1960s into the late 1970s, it was my "day job."

I did not "abandon" my wife and son to pursue a career in radio, as you're trying to claim I did. The mother of my son and I were not married. [Have a ball with that, GfS!! You will undoubtedly put the sleaziest possible spin on that because you, yourself, are a sleazy person.] She was unhappily married to a man who was much older than she was, and they had not been married for more than a few months when she decided that she'd made a grave mistake.

GfS, you have no understanding of the depth of emotions such as love. To you, that sort of thing is limited to the area of the crotch. You have displayed that you have no concept of such things. You would make the story of Romeo and Juliet something petty and tawdy. In the case of my emotional relationship with my son's mother, think "Tristan and Isolde," but with the presumption that Isolde and King Mark were already married.

I'm talking WAY over your head, aren't I!

But that was pretty much the situation. You, however, would turn that into something mean and sleazy, because that's the kind of person you are.

"I just read that your most recent struggled accomplishment was getting your Medi-caid/Welfare package in the mail!!... Hats off, and congratulations on you latest achievement!"

No "struggle" on my part, GfS. And it wasn't Medicaid, it was a Medicare package that I received in the mail. As did every other person in Washington State—or the country, as far as I know. It was an announcement—a mass mailing—to all potential Medicare recipients about the new benefits that had been added to the Medicare program. I posted that in rebuttal to someone's remark that Obama had "killed" Medicare. Obviously, as that timely mailing showed, untrue.

And as to a "Welfare package," I am not on welfare, as you, in your cheesy way, are trying to imply. Both my wife and I are now retired. We are not wealthy, but we are reasonably well off and self-sufficient. We both receive Social Security benefits, as does everyone over retirement age—and for which Barbara and I have paid all our working lives. But we have also made some reasonably good investments, following the excellent suggestions of our financial advisor, and we receive some income from that.

Unlike the vast majority of Americans, apparently, Barbara and I own our own home, free and clear. No mortage. And we are completely debt free. We do use a credit card for convenience' sake, but we pay off the entire amount every month.

Can you say that, GfS?

And as to Medicare, although both Barbara and I qualify for it, we rarely use it, because we have quite good private health insurance.

As to my son, we are the best of friends and have been for years. No anger. No resentment. Never did have any. He totally understands the situation his mother and I were in and agrees that we did what was necessary for the benefit of all concerned.

He and I share a lot of interests. He graduated from college in Canada with a degree in Philosophy. He was worked in movies, on the film crew (key grip), and has written a couple of screen plays and is waiting for a good opportunity to market them. In the meantime, he works as a writer with a consulting firm, often under contract to the Canadian government, on environmental issues. He and his partner (a lovely young woman) come out to Seattle a couple times a year and stay with Barbara and me, generally for a couple of weeks. They're looking forward to moving out here permanently.

But you, GfS, just don't understand things like that, do you?

Don't bother to try to answer this. Since you are an established liar and slanderer, you have nothing to say that I care about.

Now—back to our regular broadcast.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 04:29 PM

Yes, Wesley, Mudcat is a safe haven for trolls, soreheads, perennial complainers, passive-agressive individuals harbouring resentment, internet addicts (like me), and all sorts of people with very restless minds and too much time on their hands who want to fight with someone else about something that ain't gonna change either one of them one iota. ;-) Don't I know it! It is that way because the management here allow it to be that way, and therefore it continues. You wouldn't find that on most public forums, because most are far more strictly moderated than this one, but it does make for some interesting interchange from time to time.

All I'm saying here is that one is better off to respond to the argument itself rather than launching character attacks on the arguer.

As for the personal vendettas that go on and on and on here between certain individuals...they go on like that for one basic reason: the people engaging in them are too proud (or insecure) to just let go of the bone of contention they're chewing on and let the other guy else get away with having "the last word". That would mean "defeat", wouldn't it? Unthinkable!!! ;-D

I draw comfort from the fact that 100 years from now no one will know about any of this or give a damn either, and the world will still be turning. Time is the great leveler when it comes to that.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Wesley S
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 05:06 PM

"I draw comfort from the fact that 100 years from now no one will know about any of this or give a damn either, and the world will still be turning."

100 years? How about next week?

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 05:46 PM

LOL!

Yeah, that sounds like a good estimate, Wesley.

Meanwhile, this question comes to me:

Is it time for a gay, nondenominational, handicapped, redheaded, necrophiliac, 12-toed, suspenders-wearing, butterly collecting, lefthanded, sado-masochistic Orangutan with ADD to be elected president of the USA?

Or is it a little too soon to be venturing into such uncharted waters? Is the public just not ready for this transition??? Have we matured as a society to the point where such a candidate would be taken seriously and given equal respect?

Tune in at 6:00 PM on Friday for the mindblowing answer to this incredibly important question!!!!!!!!!!

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Wesley S
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 05:50 PM

It will have to be native born and have the papers to prove it. And be over 35 years old. I assume that's 35 HUMAN years.....

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 06:08 PM

Good point. I'm not quite sure what the lifespan of Orangutans is when they have access to modern medical care, but I think it may be reasonably similar to that of a human being.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 06:27 PM

Just for the record, and in case some of you were not aware, when I posted the post mentioning a couple of gredits, Turner, Jackson and Gil Scott Heron,..I also mentioned a guy named James Baldwin, who toward the last 15 0r 17 years of his life, we became close friends. For all you ultra liberal know-it-alls, who more than likely never heard of him, and to those of you who have accused me of being racist, bigoted, or homophobic; it occurred to me, why not 'enlighten the 'oh so hip liberals(?)...so, why not.....Here:

just in case you wanted NOT to know...

Thank you for your embarrassment, to yourselves!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Ebbie
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 06:37 PM

Just to point out how very out of touch with us you are, what on earth makes you postulate that we wouldn't know who James Baldwin was? The embarrassment is - or should be - yours.

(I read his bio in the link but danged if I couldn't find your name there. Knowing that anyone can claim>/em> anything, let me point out that you have not earned any credibility here. I met a man once that I needed to have dealings with and the one thing he kept harping on is that when he was in 7th grade of school he was working at college level. I have no idea whether his claim was true but the fact that he kept repeating it made me very leery of it. So, as far as I'm concerned, you can drop the braggadocio- you ain't convincin' anybuddy.)

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 06:55 PM

It will have to be native born

Where does it say that in your constitution?

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: John P
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 08:02 PM

I don't think the Constitution mentions anywhere that the president has to be human, so maybe Chongo has a chance. Is he really gay? Interesting . . . next on Oprah: Gay chimps and the humans who handle them . . .

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Wesley S
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 08:27 PM

Age and Citizenship requirements - US Constitution, Article II, Section 1

No person except a natural born citizen, or a citizen of the United States, at the time of the adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that office who shall not have attained to the age of thirty-five years, and been fourteen years a resident within the United States.

Term limit amendment - US Constitution, Amendment XXII, Section 1 – ratified February 27, 1951

No person shall be elected to the office of the President more than twice, and no person who has held the office of President, or acted as President, for more than two years of a term to which some other person was elected President shall be elected to the office of the President more than once.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 09:18 PM

Ebbie, Down here, the sky was blue.

Almost sorry to have taken you off guard!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Don Firth
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 09:34 PM

I read some of James Baldwin's work back in the late '50s, early '60s.

The only person who should be embarrassed here is you, GfS, to make the asinine assumption that we ultra liberal know-it-alls wouldn't know who he is.

By the way, are you familiar with playwright August Wilson? Lived in Seattle. Died about five years ago.

I didn't think so.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 07 Jun 10 - 11:49 PM

So....you ALL (meaning both GfS and the rest of you who are fighting with him here) want "the other guy" (or the other gal) to be embarrassed over either not knowing who James Baldwin was? Or embarrassed because you thought someone else didn't know who James Baldwin was?

Get a life! The only thing you should all be embarrassed about at this point is your apparent inability to stop engaging in puerile personal vendettas and trying to humiliate each other in some way or another. What a silly spectacle it is. A pissing contest like this one should provide enough "juice" to irrigate California, if all else fails...but what a stench when it starts to ferment!

GfS - Thanks for the biographical link. James Baldwin was a very interesting man indeed, and a major figure in the social struggles of the 50s and 60s. I remember seeing his books around at the time, and hearing about him, don't think I read any of them, though.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: mousethief
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 12:15 AM

LH, where did you reprimand ichMael for implying that Obama was gay? I'd like to think you were even-handed.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 12:52 AM

nah, Little Hawk scolds very selectively. He hasn't realized yet that he's not on the side of the angels on this one. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 01:25 AM

With some folks, self-righteous pomposity is like a drug.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: GUEST,Guest fron Sanity
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 01:40 AM

Thanks, Little Hawk!..Sometimes even I can get caught up battling dummies, as if you can teach a pig to sing!

My personal experiences should remain my own...though I was mistaken to believe that someone might have been interested in learning of them. The quote that I have used on here, "Left wing and right wing are on the same bird", was one of his that he told me personally, and when needed, I've quoted him. Just to give credit, where credit is due.

Yo-Ho,

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 05:57 AM

""While the OPINIONATED idiots on the far left, think it obsolete, for Christians to teach creationism, they point to Darwin, for his THEORY of us all coming from apes...then get their shorts in a twist when someone points out that ONE certain picture, causes another certain person to resemble an ape.""

Well, bigot or not, one thing is for sure.

GfS knows diddly squat about Darwin's theory of evolution.

At no time did Charles Darwin make any reference to Man coming from Apes.

His theory shows Apes and Man as separately evolved branches of the tree.

This Man from Apes misquote is the desperate subterfuge of those who would like to deny evolution and cannot find any credible argument against it.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Ed T
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 07:22 AM

Should there not be a mudcat thread for personal attacks? This would save all the drifts that take many threads far off topic....and make them less interesting to those not in the attacking mood, at the time, anyway:)

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Wesley S
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 07:27 AM

The initial concept of this thread was a personal attack. So there can't be much in the way of thread drift on this one.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 11:30 AM

Personal attacks happen when people are blocked from learning, by EXCHANGING IDEAS...and being set in one's ways, is a sign of a 'less than open' mind.
Why do you think that a lot on here have only stuck to folk music..or the blues (3 chords), for 40 years, or so???!!??

As for myself, I am NOT a political 'activist' of any sort! That being said, I can be more flexible as to understanding different concepts, other than my own...unless it contradicts known science FACTS.

Political 'liberals' are NOT known for being open minded, despite how they fancy themselves....but rather seek advantage, from the work of others!

They cite the Constitutionality, of equal rights, but not much more, and would rather do away with virtually every other part, that does NOT entitle them to a free handout...instead of safeguarding the rights, that give people the freedom to work, and build FOR THEMSELVES. They see themselves as 'disadvantaged'..and project that mindset onto everyone else, assuming that nobody outside themselves will notice.

The reverse of that, is often 'Conservatives', just want to protect their avarice...they are seen as uncaring, yet donate more of their money, usually for tax breaks, to charity, than causes. Liberals spend more of their time donated....but then, they have more time to 'donate'...sot of a way to launder their inactivity, for DOING for their families, and themselves!

Now, of course, that might piss some of you off, to read that, but before your shorts get so twisted, that parts of you begin to turn black and blue, think for a minute, of the people you know, even of yourselves...and you will find that what I said is true!..though I'm quite sure, you won't be able to admit it...because of a certain dishonesty employed, to protect your own personal disadvantage!!!...which in turn, feeds your 'sense of entitlement'!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

OK, now you can resume your lame personal attacks, (as if you have much to say),

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: frogprince
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 12:23 PM

Well, your syntax, is, still pretty, tortured, but I think I can grope through to most of, what you're, trying to, other than that, this time.
And I actually believe you've made something of an effort at fairness, for which you should get a bit of credit. But admitting that conservatives may sometimes donate money largely for the tax breaks is a rather small sop to offer to compensate for a lot of hallucinatory exposition about the motivation of liberals.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 02:25 PM

Who died and left you boss..or judge?

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 02:51 PM

For your,information frog,prince is, my newest hero.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 03:11 PM

I already had figured that out!!

By the way, Brainiac, when you posted, "(I read his bio in the link but danged if I couldn't find your name there."..just what name were you looking for????..Mine??..and what name is that??? ..Just more of your lame prattling!

...and chances are, you never heard of him till you read the link!
You were just playing to the mob!..trying desperately hard to be tragically hip!

Ok super hero, come to her rescue!...beat me with your purse, and sachet away!

Great Piece of Music, that Applies!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Don Firth
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 06:22 PM

A point or two regarding a couple of GfS's recent observations:

GfS:    "Why do you think that a lot on here have only stuck to folk music..or the blues (3 chords), for 40 years, or so???!!??"

A narrow, stereotyped idea of what many serious singers of folk songs do. One folk singer I know was also a classical violinist. Another was a jazz musician with a degree in music. And I could list dozens of others. I, myself, started out with an interest in opera, and to enhance my own performances of folk songs and ballads, took singing lessons, studied music first in a major university music department, then transferred to a music conservatory—and spent several years studying classical guitar. My accompaniments usually use quite a bit more than merely three chords. And by far, I am not the only one here who is fully aware that folk music can be, and is, a serious academic and musical study, and who approach it as such.

Also, whether one sings or not, traditional songs are a serious study in themselves:   in music, English literature, poetry, and anthropology, not to mention history.

So GfS's comment is either a cheesy attempt to belittle those frequenting this forum who do not agree with him, or a betrayal of his own ignorance of the field—or both.

GfS:   "Personal attacks happen when people are blocked from learning, by EXCHANGING IDEAS...and being set in one's ways, is a sign of a 'less than open' mind."

Do a bit of a spot-check on this and other threads upon which GfS has posted and see for yourself who is, by far, the greatest user of personal attacks. Then ask yourself, "Who here is really 'blocked from learning .  .  .  and being set in one's ways.' And who, then, is showing a sign of a 'less than open mind.'"

You'll get a real snort out of that statement!

And his comments about liberals in general show an abysmal ingnorance of political philosphy.

The dull-witted often have a very difficult time comprehending what goes on in the minds of those more intelligent than themselves, as GfS more than amply demonstrates.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: frogprince
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 06:29 PM

I'm, sorry but, poor little, Ebbie will just, have to def,end her self; I'm sitting here all curled up, traumitized, by the, things you just said to me.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Wesley S
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 07:17 PM

Since this thread all started over a silly internet rumor that the President was gay - I'll pass on that CNN just reported another internet rumor that Barak Obama was in a rap video. The song was called "Whoop - there it is" and you should be able to find it if you look hard enough. I'll admit that the fella pictured does look something like Obama but with a hat and glasses on it could be almost anybody.

There you go - Silly internet rumor of the day.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Wesley S
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 07:21 PM

The person they mention is pictured just after the guy who slam dunks a basket.


Whoomp There it is - Tag Team

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: frogprince
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 07:33 PM

Yes, that's definitely Obama in the video; you can tell by that gay smile.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Wesley S
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 07:36 PM

And the bling too.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: frogprince
Date: 08 Jun 10 - 07:39 PM

He's so gay,
I bet he thinks this thread is about him,
Don't he, don't he...

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 09 Jun 10 - 04:35 AM

Now there goes Don, AGAIN...promoting himself, and his delusions of grandeur. He goes off, on his classical training, and how folk musicians study more than three chords, and goes off on this big ol' giant premise, of how astute he is in his musical prowess...which is all fine and dandy(he never misses an opportunity to puff his chest out)..however, he, once again is going off onto a tangent! My quote was: "....or the blues (3 chords),..."..as in 1-4-5..and back to the 1. Now I'm aware that some blue tunes incorporate a 4th chord, and some even have substitutions..but basically, its 1-4-1-5-4-1, or 1-4-1-4-5,4-1,4-5, and back to the 1-4-5...Three basic chords.

My suggestion to Don is, put your bio on Wikipedia, so whenever anyone has the need.........

As to Froggie, Don't you have a can of spinach in your blouse, somewhere?...You'll feel better!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: akenaton
Date: 09 Jun 10 - 08:13 AM

Sanity my friend, I read Baldwin's "Another Country" many years ago, and recognise the point you make. Don't be intimidated by the people here who try to clip your wings, these forums should be a vehicle for flight, not a pair of gumboots to allow us to wallow in the mud.

I remember the sense of anger which pervaded James Baldwins writing, not anger at society for being unable to understand his situation, but anger at himself for being "hooked" into the degradation which often accompanies the homosexual lifestyle.

Baldwin was no victim.....like we see today, with their assorted "rights activists" and strident parades. He would be disgusted to see his "addiction" become a cause celebre.

I was impossible to enjoy Baldwins work......much too disturbing, but with a ring of truth that many here would benefit from hearing!

Perhaps not, leave them in their cosy little "liberal" Disneyland!!

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Don Firth
Date: 09 Jun 10 - 01:36 PM

GfS, you seem to resent people who can back up what they say with actual credentials rather than just the sort of unsubstantiated wild claims that you make about being an authority on every subject that comes up for discussion in order to try to lend weight to your feeble and baseless arguments.

I cite my education and experience (which is easily documented), not for purposes of self-promotion (don't need it), but to give the lie to your constant implications that I (and others here) are merely lightweights compared to your august and exhaustive knowledge. (PTUI!!)

And the extraneous details you threw into your attempt to slam me just above further display how little you really know and understand about folk music, blues, and pretty much everything else.

Don Firth

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Jun 10 - 03:20 AM

Frotho: "GfS, you seem to resent people who can back up what they say with actual credentials rather than just the sort of unsubstantiated wild claims that you make about being an authority on every subject that comes up for discussion in order to try to lend weight to your feeble and baseless arguments."

Hogwash!...and quit putting words in other people's mouths, so you can 'debate' your own conflicts!

Akenaton: When I met Baldwin, it was in his latter years. He had mellowed quite a bit, and seemed to have walked away from some of his earlier positions..however, he was impressively quite articulate! I met him in Santa Fe, New Mexico..during one of his travels, and was introduced to him, by another very close friend of mine. I had never, at that time, ever read anything he had written, and only vaguely recognized his name, but we spent hours, round the clock chatting about his life, and sharing observations in life. although he did not elaborate over certain things in his past, we both grew a mutual respect for each other, and in time parted on great terms. I'd love to share the things we talked about, but would rather do that privately, so the 'extremely blocked' wouldn't trash it. All I can say, is he had returned to some of his very early beliefs.

Regards...and nice to hear from you, again!

GfS

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Wesley S
Date: 10 Jun 10 - 07:13 AM

To know you is to love you? Tell us more.

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: Ebbie
Date: 10 Jun 10 - 09:46 AM

Oh, I thought perhaps you had met him in Paris during one of your frequent travels.

How about Neil Armstrong? Where did you meet him? And how did that come about?

Subject: RE: BS: Is it time for a gay president?
From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity
Date: 10 Jun 10 - 12:34 PM

Do you derive great pleasure being asses? So, the bottom line, is "Is it time for a gay president?".....Well, I suppose if his supporters ignore the truth, and are as out as touch, with the people, as they are, they got their guy!!

GfS