 sj |
||
|
||
BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries'
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 13 Aug 13 - 05:44 PM Hey, professor, remember this one??...or is it just one of your 'indelible impromptu laws'.... ..or just more blowhard, sans harmonica?!?! From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 06 Aug 13 - 05:26 PM "SHAW'S LAW: The first time anyone in a thread asks for or claims proof or disproof of the existence of God, or who says they can prove or disprove any scientific theory, the thread will immediately dissolve into raucous belly-laughter...." Well...come to think of it some of your posts have been rather hilarious!... ...but then 'beauty', as well as 'ugly', is in the eye of the beholder! Some people see all those trees, and think they are just lost in the forest! Enjoy your hike. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Musket curious Date: 13 Aug 13 - 05:44 PM Under UK law it is a criminal offence to knowingly pass on communicable diseases. Has been for a long time. Having unprotected sex when you know you are HIV + is already a criminal offence. Many people have been convicted over the years. So that part of your argument is as badly researched as it is respectable. Registering yourself as being gay is a good idea. If you happen to be angry at war reparations and a ridiculous Austrian has found a way of ridding society of its ills. So.... This hate of gay people. Bad experience? People are born innocent apparently and dubious parts of their makeup can normally be attributed to trauma. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 13 Aug 13 - 05:46 PM Being straight isn't a bad idea, either. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Steve Shaw Date: 13 Aug 13 - 05:57 PM new infection rates are rising more quickly than ever. This is an absolute lie. You don't get to just say what you bloody well like in order to make your bogus case, charlatan. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Musket c/w hard on Date: 13 Aug 13 - 05:57 PM The only thing Goofus has said I could agree with, albeit for a very different reason. He says it as an anti gay stance, I say it because I am straight,which has absolute fuck all to do with discussing being gay. It isn't either / or, you sick fuck, as they say your side of the pond, pond life. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Steve Shaw Date: 13 Aug 13 - 06:00 PM Being straight isn't a bad idea, either. Being yourself is even better. The best idea ever, I'd say. The Third Reich would have loved you. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 13 Aug 13 - 06:01 PM Aww Muskrat, you could find something about another guy you'd feel attracted to! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 13 Aug 13 - 06:03 PM "Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries'" Well, respecting the boundary of truth, Steve, go fuck yourself, and your Third Reich! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Steve Shaw Date: 13 Aug 13 - 06:20 PM Heheh. As coherent as ever, I see! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: akenaton Date: 13 Aug 13 - 06:26 PM I think I am correct in saying that new infection rates amongst MSM are the highest on record 21% in London? I dont think you are a charlaton Steve, just poorly informed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Steve Shaw Date: 13 Aug 13 - 07:32 PM I think I am correct in saying that new infection rates amongst MSM are the highest on record 21% in London? Saying that something is "21%" unqualified is useless. Do apprise us as to what you're on about. If you really have to. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Bobert Date: 13 Aug 13 - 08:00 PM I once found my6self working for a drug rehab facility, Rubicon, in Richmond... It had a very interesting clinical psychologist who I got to know really well... He had an interesting take on homosexuality... His definition revolved around which sex that one wanted to spend most of his or her time... You know, socialize with... Hmmmmmm??? He pointed out the high number of males who rather than go home at night to their wives choose to go to the local watering hole and knock down a few chilly ones with other... ...males... Room for thought here... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 13 Aug 13 - 08:13 PM steve: "Heheh. As coherent as ever, I see!" Good!..I knew you were faking it! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 13 Aug 13 - 08:41 PM I see nothing hateful about akenaton's post up above. It's pretty straightforward, matter of fact, informational etc. Not hateful. GfS, lol. Have you ever seen that t-shirt that says, "Don't Assume I'm Straight"? We'll I always wanted to make one in response that says, "Don't Assume I Care." I mean, why would an assumption of heterosexuality, an assumption that would be correct 95% or more of the time, be such an insult? This is an interesting link regarding our perceptions of what % of the population is homosexual: http://m.cnsnews.com/news/article/us-adults-overestimate-homosexual-population-m Now, why do you think we overestimate like that? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Aug 13 - 01:41 AM Great question!...Because the wannabe political jerks, are using them, and over-hyping the significance, and building their case on bad science. That's the short answer..but the truthful one. It's not genetic, but behavioral...but the wannabes will argue till they're blue in the face otherwise. It is a breakdown of the nuclear fabric of society, which they promote, and frankly, a tempest in a teapot, which they exaggerate to no end. Maybe it's a way of showing off how 'liberally minded' and 'hip' they are..but really, who cares? If we get too far into it, another thread will be screwed up with our local defender of homosexuality, to excuse his irresponsible behavior, in his younger and reckless days.....and I'm hoping we don't go there, AGAIN!!..(so I won't name names) being as this thread is about 'Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries'. BTW, Akenaton, for a long time has posted stats, and many from the CDC, only to be shouted down, and called exaggerated names, blasting his character...none of which has been true...and it's from the usual moronic ideologues, who promote sexual permissiveness, wishing to resurrect racial baiting, want higher taxes, limited freedoms, on a crusade to eradicate any mention of anything resembling 'God' OR Spiritual, and favor a massive big brother/nanny-state government, hate anything to do with Israel, (which ironically is more tolerant of homosexuals than their counterparts in the Mid-East), and more than often, are so contradictory, it's staggering to the imagination that they can even wake up and dress themselves. What I think it really is, is that a lot of the present political movements originated in the backlash to the industrial revolution, so that is their point of reference...and they are trying to belatedly apply it to today, is in a backlash to the technological revolution...and they're absolutely lost!...so they scream, piss and moan about anything traditional, and do more screaming, pissing and moaning, accusing anyone who doesn't go along with their semi-literate diatribes, as being some sort of hater, bigot, homophobic, misogynists...or whatever their frustrations can't wrap their brains around!.... Oh well, I'll stop now, trying to keep in mind that this thread is about, 'Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries'. Now watch, all the frothing, foaming, blatherers, will fill up cyberspace with their histrionics! Go for it!! GfS P.S. SJL, did that answer your question? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: akenaton Date: 14 Aug 13 - 03:39 AM Steve the latest figures for London are printed on the HPA website. If you can't be arsed doing a bit of simple research on the subject under discussion, why on earth are you involved? I see you are more interested in stamping out religion than disease, but try to keep up........The figure was printed in most of the UK papers a couple of weeks ago. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Musket curious Date: 14 Aug 13 - 04:54 AM The figure may have been published. The figures in the plural are also published together with the success through intervention figures that GU services should be proud of. Clamydia remains a national issue amongst younger people and HIV still has a hot spot in certain wards of some inner cities that are a concern but as HPA states, stigmatisation leads to cluster communities. Interesting that a hateful disgusting lowlife can look on a website but not read what it says. I have no issue with that. My issue is his insistence on perpetuating the problem by continually stigmatising a section of society on the basis he either doesn't like the idea of being fucked in his arse or didn't enjoy it at the time. Difficult to see which but the result is the same. A dangerous viewpoint that would if shared by others drive a section of the community further away from integration and increase the health issues which can if not practiced safely transmit one of many STDs. Pink News the other week reported, according to HSJ that a poll of readers showed over 50% were celibate and of the rest, safe sex was practiced by all those responding. Not a universal study granted, but just that alone makes sweeping statements over all gay people for health reasons disingenuous. In the meantime, unprotected sex by teenagers causing Clamydia is on the rise. Luckily I suppose, anybody with an interest in public health knows the target. Those with an agenda pick their targets and therefore do not influence those responsible for tackling the issues. I have tried to point out issues to Akenaton. He is a lying disgusting piece of filth and is incapable of debate. What price respectful boundaries now? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Dave the Gnome Date: 14 Aug 13 - 05:38 AM GfS - I am pretty sure you got the wrong idea about the question from SJL. Let me backtrack. Story - US Adults, in the main, vastly over estimate the gay population. Question was - Now, why do you think we overestimate like that? You then go off on one about 'them' promoting the breakdown of society and wanting to be seen as liberal. I am pretty sure that your rant does NOT answer SJL's question although I am sure she will comment for herself (Sorry if I got the gender wrong, SJL) The overestimation of this portion of society is, more than likely, brought on by politicians and media wanting to demonise gays. The exact opposite of what you say. If they wanted to promote the gay lifestyle and show that it was acceptable then, surely, they would present the REAL figures which show that the percentage of gay people is so small that it could never be a threat to the 'nuclear family' or 'fabric of society'. Now, I don't know if you misread the question, misread the article or just wanted to have a go at someone on here. I suspect the latter but I will give you the benefit of the doubt. Now, do you really believe that alternate sexualities are such a threat or are you just making noise? DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: TheSnail Date: 14 Aug 13 - 06:20 AM Steve Shaw instead of joining the Snailist nit-picker corps? What!? Attention to detail in science? We can't be having that. Whatever next? You'll be asking for consistency and logical arguments instead of personal abuse which we all know is the right and proper way of conducting a debate. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: TheSnail Date: 14 Aug 13 - 07:11 AM Musket I have tried to point out issues to Akenaton. He is a lying disgusting piece of filth and is incapable of debate. So why debate with him? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Aug 13 - 10:47 AM Snail: ""Musket: "I have tried to point out issues to Akenaton. He is a lying disgusting piece of filth and is incapable of debate."" "So why debate with him?" Because the thought that his (Muskrat's) whole premise is biased on a political ideology, rather than FACTS, and his alter-ego is attached to it, he needs to project onto others, his brain-lock. Akenaton's figures are not his own...he didn't make them up, so rather than admit that Ake might have a salient point, he is instead painted by the political ideologues as being a bigot or hater. It's a hat trick from the 'so-called liberal's' playbook. It's rubbish. GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: TheSnail Date: 14 Aug 13 - 11:08 AM ...and why on Earth does anyone ever take any notice of anything GfS says? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 14 Aug 13 - 11:13 AM To say 'why' implies that there are people who do so. That's a pretty wild speculation on your part, Snail... |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Aug 13 - 11:15 AM The Snail: "...and why on Earth does anyone ever take any notice of anything GfS says?" They do..but they dismiss it, because it intrudes on their fantasy. BTW, I happened to be agreeing with you....or did you notice?..or were you being facetious? GfS P.S. What did the Snail say as it sat on the turtle? Weeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeee!!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: TheSnail Date: 14 Aug 13 - 11:39 AM Not sure which of my last two posts you are referring to, McGrath, but if you look back through this thread you will see that several people regularly respomd to both Akenaton and GfS. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 14 Aug 13 - 11:47 AM In respect of Bobert's friend' "He had an interesting take on homosexuality... His definition revolved around which sex that one wanted to spend most of his or her time... You know, socialize with..." That would probably throw up a figure of 95% of both sexes homosexual, which I feel would be a rather unreliable indication of sexual activity. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Aug 13 - 12:36 PM In respect to reality, homosexuality depends not solely on whom a person wants 'to spend more time with', but rather, if a person is having sex with the same gender person, and that includes pedophilia, with the same sex, as well. (Almost)Sorry to pop your new attempt at a delusion..... GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Musket err. Forget it Date: 14 Aug 13 - 01:10 PM Snail. I am not debating with it. I am trying to make sure that impressionable people are made aware of the lies in his hate mail and the awfulness of his fascism. Goofus. Please think about two things you said above re Akenaton and his so called point. 1. I have no ideology. None at all. Floating voter politically and charged with helping find solutions to healthcare issues professionally. 2. Akenaton is lying and his figures are from his head. He grabs a figure from statistics and twists it to suit his agenda. And his agenda is not for decent society. Your post above by the way is as bad. Homosexuality describes choice. Your post above precludes you from being taken seriously. The problem with free speech, as much as I defend it is that people with evil intent like you can try o influence gullible people. Luckily you are not clever enough to be taken seriously by anyone. Do you still talk about "curing" gay people? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: akenaton Date: 14 Aug 13 - 01:16 PM Ian....I can't make any sense of your last post? How does it relate to the issue in question? Do you really think that "integration" will stop male homosexuals acting like male homosexuals? Dont you understand anything about male homosexuality? Why are they affected by such huge rates of sexual disease? Is it because they are extremely promiscuous? If so have you ever wondered why they are so much more promiscuous than hetero's? Do you think that there is something intrinsic to male homosexuality, that makes their behaviour so much more risky and unhealthy? Do you think they should be given help with their problem.....or left to rot in a La La land of inclusion and outreach? Call yourself a health professional.....thats a SICK joke! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Aug 13 - 01:33 PM Muskrat, you are so full of it! I never claimed to be able to 'cure' homosexuality(that was an 'assertion' by another wannabe)...however, there are services that do provide that service...but only IF the person wants that treatment. Your post is relatively misleading to the simple minded, as many of your posts are. Go back to sleep and get some much needed rest! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: akenaton Date: 14 Aug 13 - 01:55 PM "Now, why do you think we overestimate like that?" Well SJL, the answer to your question seems to be how homosexuality is presented by the media.....all these non threatening "comedians". and celebrity guests. Homosexuals and the "homosexual lifestyle" are hugely over-represented in the entertainment media.....Like political correctness, it masks the severe problems which are associated with male to male sex. The problems are never mentioned, even the word is never mentioned. All is well in La La Land! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 14 Aug 13 - 01:56 PM " Homosexuality describes choice" That is rather unclear. I take it it's not a definition. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: akenaton Date: 14 Aug 13 - 02:15 PM Ian writes "1. I have no ideology. None at all. Floating voter politically and charged with helping find solutions to healthcare issues professionally." Your voting intentions will have no effect on your ideology Ian, as all the mainstream parties are wedded to "political correctness" We can all see it in every post that you compose, the meaningless jargon, the faux indignation, the appeals for support in your battle against "hatred".....and THE EVIL ONE!! :0) Ever considered a career in theatre? At least that would give the sick a fair chance of recovery! :0) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Dave the Gnome Date: 14 Aug 13 - 02:54 PM Good gracious. These are some of the people who say it disrespectful to use bad language. As I said earlier, in simple language this time in case anyone missed it, I would rather converse with a swearing decent human being than a polite bigoted dimwit any day... DtG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Ebbie Date: 14 Aug 13 - 03:11 PM "Homosexuals and the "homosexual lifestyle" are hugely over-represented in the entertainment media....." ake I have a theory (in support of which I have neither fact nor research. lol) that may account for that phenomenon. As it happens, I am straight. However I have a number of gay friends, of both sexes. In my experience, gay people tend to be introspective and bright and talented far beyond the general population, imo. My gay friends are articulate and aware and insightful; as I said, they tend to be introspective and pretty much know what is going on inside and around them. Have I mentioned talented? Just about every gay person I know - and everyone of my gay friends is talented in more than one field. They paint, they play music, they write. See where I'm going with this? I don't find it surprising that the gay population is heavily represented in the arts, and that includes the movies. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: TheSnail Date: 14 Aug 13 - 03:42 PM I suppose us "gullible people" not to mention the "feckin' eejits" and "dozy sods" should be grateful that we have such mighty intellects to protect us from the likes of Akenaton, Guest from Sanity and pete who could so easily lead us astray and bring down civilization as we know it. A bit like Akenaton with his sincere concern for the well being of gay men. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Musket evolving slowly Date: 14 Aug 13 - 03:51 PM Thank fuck for that Dave. Good job I'm not a health professional. If I were I'd have to be non judgemental but I am judging our wannabe little Nazi. Not by opinion you understand but by asking people to read what he puts. Nothing more nothing less. Goofus. Curing isn't your most outrageous contribution anyway Your post of 12.36 is beyond respectability. Presumably many have given up on this thread. That's a pity because challenging those who wish tiers of society need to know they don't go down well with respectable people. We seriously have a proposal here to force gay people to register and be forced to be tested for sexually transmitted diseases. The other 92% of such infections and sources appear to be of no concern to bigots. Probably to do with ideology and agenda. I assume it would be better to be a Christian to say the following but no matter I'll say it anyway. Jesus wept. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST Date: 14 Aug 13 - 03:54 PM The Lone Haranguer |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Dave the Gnome Date: 14 Aug 13 - 04:45 PM Now you have set off a train of thought, Musket. How about compulsory testing for religious people? There is a survey, I think it was in the same publication that others have quoted, that stated that those with blind faith were more likely to have life threatening mental illnesses than anyone else. What is more, they are contagious and they try, purposely, to contaminate everyone else! If we force them to be tested, say once a week, maybe on a Friday, Saturday or a Sunday, to see if they still have that blind faith we can make sure that they are kept away from respectable folk! Sorted! :D tG |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 14 Aug 13 - 05:16 PM You lack the light touch, Gnome. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Musket musing Date: 14 Aug 13 - 05:24 PM Aye but you can't say the gay bashing is light. About as subtle as a bucket of lard. Anyway, if some had their way, religious types would be herded together at least once a week for a bit of brain washing. The pilot scheme apparently has encouraging results but it is a bit early to say. Only been going in its present sense since medieval times. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Don Firth Date: 14 Aug 13 - 05:59 PM Interesting how "the usual suspects" can't seem to leave this topic alone. Obsession, perhaps? Attitudes serving a defensive function, helping the [homophobic] individual to reduce painful emotions and feelings (e.g., anxiety) that are triggered by gay people or homosexuality. These feelings may occur for a variety of reasons, possibly including the person's own psychological conflicts related to sexuality or gender. The defensive process occurs largely outside of the individual's awareness.Just a thought. . . . Don Firth |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: akenaton Date: 14 Aug 13 - 06:02 PM I think you are probably right in your theory Ebbie, and there is no doubt that they are over -represented....some are very talented, but some play on the stereotype. A large percentage of our young folk take a lead from what they see on TV and that includes the pantomime homosexual. All is a distraction from the serious matter at the core of male to male sex.....some of the most talented performers ....like Freddy Mercury,Elton John, for example, led the most hedonistic lifestyles. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: akenaton Date: 14 Aug 13 - 06:16 PM Dave...You were quite annoyed when I misread your post and assumed that I thought you to be without a social conscience. How do you expect me to say nothing in reply to the disgraceful insults dealt out by Ian, when his threadbare argument developes holes I just borrow Ebbies "stiletto" occasionally. Or a little of Mr McGraths wit? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,musket getting it across Date: 14 Aug 13 - 06:23 PM Only disgraceful insults? I must try a little harder. I am only trying hard to vilify one twisted old bigot. You manage to pour scorn over 5% of the population and upset the sensibility of all decent people. Not in your league. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,Guest from Sanity Date: 14 Aug 13 - 06:44 PM Ebbie: " "Homosexuals and the "homosexual lifestyle" are hugely over-represented in the entertainment media....." "ake I have a theory (in support of which I have neither fact nor research. lol) that may account for that phenomenon" Here Ebbie and others...who seem to gloss over a link posted by 'SJL'. Just in case you gloosed over it...or IGNORED it, for IGNORANCE sake! GfS |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Steve Shaw Date: 14 Aug 13 - 06:55 PM Ah, lies, damn lies and statistics. HIV infection rates have been steady for over ten years. But that bald figure doesn't tell the story. There has been a far greater uptake of voluntary screening in that time, coupled with major advances in testing. So the apparent steadying of the infection rate could actually mean that true infection rates have declined. *Sigh.* |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST,SJL Date: 14 Aug 13 - 06:58 PM GfS- 14 Aug 13 - 01:41 AM- A brilliant analysis- I would also factor in the role of the media and entertainment industry, along with the politicians, to explain this phenomenon of perception. (Dave, your logic is skewed. They ARE hyping it and that is what accounts for our inflated perception of their numbers). Don't forget that the 5% is overrepresented in the entertainment industry compared with the general population and that plays into the hype as well, making what is a fairly unorthodox lifestyle seem ubiquitous and mainstream. It is being actively promoted to the population at large. And when you see such a small percentage of the population exerting such a powerful sociopolitical influence, you realize that far from being a downtrodden minority, they are a special interest group with connections to the elite ($$$). Even when a majority votes down same sex marriage as in Proposition 8, it gets reversed by the courts. Somehow, it gets done. GfS made another astute observation: "a lot of the present political movements originated in the backlash to the industrial revolution, so that is their point of reference...and they are trying to belatedly apply it to today, is in a backlash to the technological revolution." Modern feminism is a case in point. It is clearly a backlash of Victorianism which was the zenith of oppression for women. .. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: GUEST Date: 14 Aug 13 - 07:01 PM Nobody gloosed over it moron. Why should anyone believe Brent Bozell? Were you aware that's who CNS News is? If you weren't you are sloppy. If you were, you have just disproven your own constant protest that you are not a right wing tea potty shill. Which is it? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: Reinforcing respectful 'boundaries' From: Steve Shaw Date: 14 Aug 13 - 07:09 PM Jeez, SJL, I could bloody weep. |
