General John Kelly: "He said that, in his opinion, Mr. Trump met the definition of a fascist, would govern like a dictator if allowed, and had no understanding of the Constitution or the concept of rule of law."
Saturday, August 17, 2013
OH NOES! TEH GAY AGENDA IS SPREADING
And it's coming to your small hometown! CAUTION TO GAY BASHERS! REMOVE SHARP OBJECTS FROM IMMEDIATE AREA BEFORE WATCHING THIS:
shaw...great video...lol...btw...AOW is a hate monger...her comment rules say no personal attacks..or they'll get...deleted...then she let the morons who post there...personally attack you...hypocrite...and a conservative...same thing...
Probably. Wondering if you visit the conservative blogs lol refers to and say the same thing?
LOL Anon,
I'm aware of it. It's not just AOW who's practices selective deletion. The way the cons work it is that they delete any comment that trashes their own, and they allow personal attacks on people they dislike.
It's quite simple-minded.
You're being called a "pot-stirrer" for commenting on conservative bloggers' duplicity.
Those who live by the sword shall die by the sword.
Make of that what you will, but please allow me to say that, once it becomes an end in itself, exacerbating ill will and promoting endless belligerence profits no one. It can have only a destructive effect on those who allow themselves to be sucked into the process.
Just as "eavesdroppers never hear any good about themselves," so will it be for anyone who would add gasoline to a fire, or attack rescue workers at a disaster area.
It's never possible to "get even." By responding in kind one can only escalate and enhance whatever destructive powers have been unleashed.
We would take you seriously, if at all, if you spread your "adult" scolding to those on the Right who indulge in endless character assassination on the blogs LOL Anon referred to in the first comment.
Have you? (I haven't looked, so I don't know.) When and if you do, we'll believe that you're monitoring the hallways to make sure the kids are behaving.
PS. You apparently haven't noticed that I do not allow boiler-plate drivel that bashes conservatives who host blogs.
LOL is a friend who checks in now and again to let me know what's going on.
Mr. Free Thinke,
I understand all that. I don't believe I'm a flame-thrower. I post what is of interest to me and what I think people who read this blog are interested in.
hey anon@11:17AM, go sell you indignation over at the blog that hosts nothing but idiots bashing shaw!...she doesn't allow that on her blogg...like the cons do...you're one of them...its obvious...becuz you don't post your...complains about "disharmony" on their blogs...shaws doing just fine...myob...
Please understand that I rarely post remarks aimed at one person in particular -- even you ;-) -- but prefer to issue observations and criticisms based on general principles I believe in that often apply to many on both sides of The Great Divide.
Commenting on politicians and other public figures is, of course, an entirely different matter. Perhaps that ought not to be the case, but that's the way it is -- and always has been -- in American politics.
Far be it from me to try to "explain" my friends to one another, but some bloggers we know do not bother to censor inane or troublesome remarks. When trolls take over, I tend either to ignore them or stay away altogether. When that became impossible at my blog, I simply closed it. A victory for the trolls? Perhaps, but I refuse to let myself be used as The City Dump.
I'm sure you support the right of each blogger to set her or his own standards.
Perhaps all of us ought to use the old disclaimer from radio days:
"This opinions expressed on this broadcast are not necessarily those of our sponsors or if NBC."[or whatever broadcast corporation or publisher may apply]
Trying to give constructive criticism should not be regarded as scolding. An intelligent person ought to be able to tell the difference between hectoring and badgering and honest opinion.
There isn't one of us who hasn't said or done something regrettable and even reprehensible from time to time, but DWELLING on that aspect of each other to the exclusion of other considerations seems destructive to me. What good could it possibly do?
Now, I'm off to enjoy a basket of fried clams for lunch.
Please understand that I rarely post remarks aimed at one person in particular -- even you ;-)"
Mr. Free Thinke,
You're not included in my comments above. You attack politicians and policies you dislike. That's fair game.
You were brought up in an age that valued manners and decent behavior.
As you have observed, sadly, those days are long gone.
Our friend, KP, got it just right when he talked about blogging etiquette. He said we should treat each other the way we would if we were sitting across the table from each other.
Enjoy your fried clams, one of my favorites.
I'll be visiting the Fishermen's Feast here in the North End. That will be the subject of my post tomorrow.
some dude on AOW's blog is impersonating me...but when you link to the "lol anonymous" comment it goes to a conservative's blog...wow...that dude is a psycho...went after shaw...now me...never knew they were that sicky crazy...lol
The video isn't about Colbert at all, he just introduces it.
It's about a very, very small town in Kentucky that has elected a gay man as its mayor, and how he's done a wonderful job as mayor, and the people like him. He grew up in the small town. One segment has the police chief telling the interviewer how much he cares about this mayor. They've been friends since childhood, and the police chief says the mayor knows all his secrets, including why all 4 of his marriages failed. He said the mayor is his best friend.
Many of the other people interviewed say his sexual orientation means nothing to them because he's just a stand-up guy, and does his job.
One man at the end says he knows the Bible says homosexuality is wrong, but then he muses: God made these people the way they are, so it doesn't make sense to have God disapprove of what He himself created. The guy kept saying he couldn't understand that at all, and that he just takes the mayor as he is. A decent, hard working neighbor.
That's about it.
Small, what some would call podunk tiny town in Kentucky, and they've all figured it out.
Oh, all except the local pastor who is against the mayor and doesn't approve of him because he's going to hell, and he's wicked.
Does the Republican party realize that the homophobia is hurting them badly with normal voters?
I don't think so. They were in Boston the other day and Reince Priebus is going on about attracting younger voters to he Republican party but without changing the platform.
Completely tone deaf to how much the "culture war" nonsense is hurting them but they can't risk steaming of the evangelicals.
Thank you for explaining the contents of the video, Ma'am. From what I have seen of small town America in my now-long life, the situation with the Mayor and the Police chief and the townspeople may not be all that unusual.
In REALITY most people have a live and let live attitude about these things. The openness of the mayor, however, marks a healthy change in my opinion. Not so long ago, many local businessmen and parishioners may have been "that way" -- at least part of the time when ostensibly when they took a fishing trip now and then with a buddy or went away on business trips -- but to acknowledge a purely homosexual identity openly was practically unheard of.
In most cases "everybody knew," but never spoke about it.
Persecution as in the tragic case of Matthew Shepard has been exceedingly rare, despite what the militant agenda-driven gay activists loudly assert.
A healthy acceptance such as you describe is doubtless a good thing. Making a cause celebre out of every openly gay relationship to gain political leverage is NOT a good thing.
Also, the practice of "outing" those who do not wish to be "outed" is frankly outrageous. Using shame, fear and threat of marital or professional ruin to BLACKMAIL individuals into supporting a political position with which they may not be sympathetic is a terrible thing no matter WHAT righteous or noble cause it purports to serve.
Only in the rarest instances might desirable ends justify ignoble means.
Preachers such as the one denigrated may be out of step with the times, and something of a pain-in-the-ass, but they TOO are Americans who have a right to be who THEY are, and to express THEIR opinions as freely as anyone else.
If we truly wish to build a freer, fairer nation, I don't believe it could be accomplished by limiting freedom of expression or by turning the tables on perceived "enemies."
Allowing or encouraging former victims to become victimizers solves nothing. It merely perpetrates a vicious cycle of grievance and vengeance.
It is obvious to even the most casual observer, that it really does not matter what the GOP says at the _national_ level; they are finished and they know it. They have no person who can stand up FOR anything: much less articulate a position coherently. The have become the RepublicanT Party.
The national level RepublicanT Party has been taken over by people without hope, who have made it clear, they are not interested in governing. They are playing to their hate-filled base whose goals are to tear-down and destroy; Murdoch Media/Fox Networks.
Of course this is the time when the RepublicanT Party is at its most dangerous.
Hi Friend, yours was a good overview of the Colbert clip. A mostly feel good story about a small Kentucky town's progress.
You left out one thing; the bigoted laughter at the way the men talked and looked. Not what they said. The way they said it.
It's unnecessary and by the end of the tape it becomes offensive. Same as when FOX goes into the inner city and finds blacks speaking Ebonics about Obama phones.
One poster wrote:
"Seems all those knuckle dragging bible belt folks aren't so stupid after all."
Exactly. And that begs the question, why would someone believe that stereotype in the first place. "It just takes more time for some to understand. Some of course never will."
KP, I was so concentrating on what the people in the video were saying that I didn't hear the laughter!
I had to go back and watch it again.
Yes, it is offensive. But people are regionalists and make fun of other folks' speech patterns.
I know this quite well, because I'm from Bahstin where we pahk ah cahs.
Perhaps I didn't notice because very close friends of mine are from Kentucky, and a niece lived there for a number of years, so their regional speech was no surprise?
My friends from Louisville explained a while ago that some folks in eastern Kentucky still speak a sort of Elizabethan English because of who their ancestors were and because of those who settled in the remote parts of Kentucky.
I actually love to hear that regionalism in their speech because I think of how historic it is and it's a window into the past.
Here in Boston, our speech patterns were influenced by the folks who settled here from East Anglia in England (not everyone agrees with this). The subsequent immigrants who came here and learned English learned it with an East Anglian accent. That's why we pahk ah cahs in Havahd Yahd!
That video is encouraging, but then they didn't speak to that many people. It wasn't as if it was a survey... although the guy did get elected.
On the other hand a PEW Research Center poll says that "only 40 percent of Republicans today feel that government has a responsibility to help those who are struggling, compared with 62 percent during President Reagan's second term (quote from the article linked to by Shaw... the one where David Vitter calls supporters of Affordable Care Act freeloaders).
25 comments:
shaw...great video...lol...btw...AOW is a hate monger...her comment rules say no personal attacks..or they'll get...deleted...then she let the morons who post there...personally attack you...hypocrite...and a conservative...same thing...
!
Ema, agreed.
Anon@10:50 AM
Probably. Wondering if you visit the conservative blogs lol refers to and say the same thing?
LOL Anon,
I'm aware of it. It's not just AOW who's practices selective deletion. The way the cons work it is that they delete any comment that trashes their own, and they allow personal attacks on people they dislike.
It's quite simple-minded.
You're being called a "pot-stirrer" for commenting on conservative bloggers' duplicity.
Predictable.
Those who live by the sword shall die by the sword.
Make of that what you will, but please allow me to say that, once it becomes an end in itself, exacerbating ill will and promoting endless belligerence profits no one. It can have only a destructive effect on those who allow themselves to be sucked into the process.
Just as "eavesdroppers never hear any good about themselves," so will it be for anyone who would add gasoline to a fire, or attack rescue workers at a disaster area.
It's never possible to "get even." By responding in kind one can only escalate and enhance whatever destructive powers have been unleashed.
Disbelieve that at your peril. ;-)
There you go again "Wicked", exposing the, what was it, inbreds?
Liked that dude at the end. Seems all those knuckle dragging bible belt folks aren't so stupid after all.
It just takes more time for some to understand. Some of course never will.
Sir Baron von Quilty
Funny video.
I'm not worried about Hell. Satan is probably gay too.
Anon@12:13,
We would take you seriously, if at all, if you spread your "adult" scolding to those on the Right who indulge in endless character assassination on the blogs LOL Anon referred to in the first comment.
Have you? (I haven't looked, so I don't know.) When and if you do, we'll believe that you're monitoring the hallways to make sure the kids are behaving.
PS. You apparently haven't noticed that I do not allow boiler-plate drivel that bashes conservatives who host blogs.
LOL is a friend who checks in now and again to let me know what's going on.
Mr. Free Thinke,
I understand all that. I don't believe I'm a flame-thrower. I post what is of interest to me and what I think people who read this blog are interested in.
What did you think of the video?
Sir Baron von Quilty,
Do you believe they ever will?
"promoting disharmony and anger."
hey anon@11:17AM, go sell you indignation over at the blog that hosts nothing but idiots bashing shaw!...she doesn't allow that on her blogg...like the cons do...you're one of them...its obvious...becuz you don't post your...complains about "disharmony" on their blogs...shaws doing just fine...myob...
@ "Wicked" who asked... "Do you believe they ever will?"
There is always HOPE for change.
Sir Baron von Quilty
Dear, Ms Shaw,
Please understand that I rarely post remarks aimed at one person in particular -- even you ;-) -- but prefer to issue observations and criticisms based on general principles I believe in that often apply to many on both sides of The Great Divide.
Commenting on politicians and other public figures is, of course, an entirely different matter. Perhaps that ought not to be the case, but that's the way it is -- and always has been -- in American politics.
Far be it from me to try to "explain" my friends to one another, but some bloggers we know do not bother to censor inane or troublesome remarks. When trolls take over, I tend either to ignore them or stay away altogether. When that became impossible at my blog, I simply closed it. A victory for the trolls? Perhaps, but I refuse to let myself be used as The City Dump.
I'm sure you support the right of each blogger to set her or his own standards.
Perhaps all of us ought to use the old disclaimer from radio days:
"This opinions expressed on this broadcast are not necessarily those of our sponsors or if NBC." [or whatever broadcast corporation or publisher may apply]
Trying to give constructive criticism should not be regarded as scolding. An intelligent person ought to be able to tell the difference between hectoring and badgering and honest opinion.
There isn't one of us who hasn't said or done something regrettable and even reprehensible from time to time, but DWELLING on that aspect of each other to the exclusion of other considerations seems destructive to me. What good could it possibly do?
Now, I'm off to enjoy a basket of fried clams for lunch.
Cheerio!
"Dear, Ms Shaw,
Please understand that I rarely post remarks aimed at one person in particular -- even you ;-)"
Mr. Free Thinke,
You're not included in my comments above. You attack politicians and policies you dislike. That's fair game.
You were brought up in an age that valued manners and decent behavior.
As you have observed, sadly, those days are long gone.
Our friend, KP, got it just right when he talked about blogging etiquette. He said we should treat each other the way we would if we were sitting across the table from each other.
Enjoy your fried clams, one of my favorites.
I'll be visiting the Fishermen's Feast here in the North End. That will be the subject of my post tomorrow.
Ciao!
some dude on AOW's blog is impersonating me...but when you link to the "lol anonymous" comment it goes to a conservative's blog...wow...that dude is a psycho...went after shaw...now me...never knew they were that sicky crazy...lol
I'd love to see the video, even though I don't care very much for Stephen Colbert, but I can't get it to play.
This is happening more and more with videos posted at various blogs.
I wis there had been more discussion OF the video by those who presumably could see it, but ...
Why bother to end that sentence?
Mr. Free Thinke,
The video isn't about Colbert at all, he just introduces it.
It's about a very, very small town in Kentucky that has elected a gay man as its mayor, and how he's done a wonderful job as mayor, and the people like him. He grew up in the small town. One segment has the police chief telling the interviewer how much he cares about this mayor. They've been friends since childhood, and the police chief says the mayor knows all his secrets, including why all 4 of his marriages failed. He said the mayor is his best friend.
Many of the other people interviewed say his sexual orientation means nothing to them because he's just a stand-up guy, and does his job.
One man at the end says he knows the Bible says homosexuality is wrong, but then he muses: God made these people the way they are, so it doesn't make sense to have God disapprove of what He himself created. The guy kept saying he couldn't understand that at all, and that he just takes the mayor as he is. A decent, hard working neighbor.
That's about it.
Small, what some would call podunk tiny town in Kentucky, and they've all figured it out.
Oh, all except the local pastor who is against the mayor and doesn't approve of him because he's going to hell, and he's wicked.
Does the Republican party realize that the homophobia is hurting them badly with normal voters?
I don't think so. They were in Boston the other day and Reince Priebus is going on about attracting younger voters to he Republican party but without changing the platform.
Completely tone deaf to how much the "culture war" nonsense is hurting them but they can't risk steaming of the evangelicals.
Toast.
These are the sort of people who are attracted to the modern GOP and who the TeaPublicans love to support:
This jerk.
And this jerk.
And this "family values" GOPer.
Thank you for explaining the contents of the video, Ma'am. From what I have seen of small town America in my now-long life, the situation with the Mayor and the Police chief and the townspeople may not be all that unusual.
In REALITY most people have a live and let live attitude about these things. The openness of the mayor, however, marks a healthy change in my opinion. Not so long ago, many local businessmen and parishioners may have been "that way" -- at least part of the time when ostensibly when they took a fishing trip now and then with a buddy or went away on business trips -- but to acknowledge a purely homosexual identity openly was practically unheard of.
In most cases "everybody knew," but never spoke about it.
Persecution as in the tragic case of Matthew Shepard has been exceedingly rare, despite what the militant agenda-driven gay activists loudly assert.
A healthy acceptance such as you describe is doubtless a good thing. Making a cause celebre out of every openly gay relationship to gain political leverage is NOT a good thing.
Also, the practice of "outing" those who do not wish to be "outed" is frankly outrageous. Using shame, fear and threat of marital or professional ruin to BLACKMAIL individuals into supporting a political position with which they may not be sympathetic is a terrible thing no matter WHAT righteous or noble cause it purports to serve.
Only in the rarest instances might desirable ends justify ignoble means.
Preachers such as the one denigrated may be out of step with the times, and something of a pain-in-the-ass, but they TOO are Americans who have a right to be who THEY are, and to express THEIR opinions as freely as anyone else.
If we truly wish to build a freer, fairer nation, I don't believe it could be accomplished by limiting freedom of expression or by turning the tables on perceived "enemies."
Allowing or encouraging former victims to become victimizers solves nothing. It merely perpetrates a vicious cycle of grievance and vengeance.
As is so often the case, a cliché makes the point perfectly: "TWO WRONGS DON'T MAKE A RIGHT."
.
It is obvious to even the most casual observer, that it really does not matter what the GOP says at the _national_ level; they are finished and they know it. They have no person who can stand up FOR anything: much less articulate a position coherently. The have become the RepublicanT Party.
The national level RepublicanT Party has been taken over by people without hope, who have made it clear, they are not interested in governing. They are playing to their hate-filled base whose goals are to tear-down and destroy; Murdoch Media/Fox Networks.
Of course this is the time when the RepublicanT Party is at its most dangerous.
Ema Nymton
~@:o?
.
Hi Friend, yours was a good overview of the Colbert clip. A mostly feel good story about a small Kentucky town's progress.
You left out one thing; the bigoted laughter at the way the men talked and looked. Not what they said. The way they said it.
It's unnecessary and by the end of the tape it becomes offensive. Same as when FOX goes into the inner city and finds blacks speaking Ebonics about Obama phones.
One poster wrote:
"Seems all those knuckle dragging bible belt folks aren't so stupid after all."
Exactly. And that begs the question, why would someone believe that stereotype in the first place. "It just takes more time for some to understand. Some of course never will."
KP, I was so concentrating on what the people in the video were saying that I didn't hear the laughter!
I had to go back and watch it again.
Yes, it is offensive. But people are regionalists and make fun of other folks' speech patterns.
I know this quite well, because I'm from Bahstin where we pahk ah cahs.
Perhaps I didn't notice because very close friends of mine are from Kentucky, and a niece lived there for a number of years, so their regional speech was no surprise?
My friends from Louisville explained a while ago that some folks in eastern Kentucky still speak a sort of Elizabethan English because of who their ancestors were and because of those who settled in the remote parts of Kentucky.
I actually love to hear that regionalism in their speech because I think of how historic it is and it's a window into the past.
Here in Boston, our speech patterns were influenced by the folks who settled here from East Anglia in England (not everyone agrees with this). The subsequent immigrants who came here and learned English learned it with an East Anglian accent. That's why we pahk ah cahs in Havahd Yahd!
KP, here's an interesting link.
"That's why we pahk ah cahs in Havahd Yahd!"
Ha! I love it :)
KP I wonder how much of that stereotype is due to Deliverance.
Myself, I've always felt people in the Appalachian area are pretty resilient.
Hola, Ducky. Resilient is a good word.
That video is encouraging, but then they didn't speak to that many people. It wasn't as if it was a survey... although the guy did get elected.
On the other hand a PEW Research Center poll says that "only 40 percent of Republicans today feel that government has a responsibility to help those who are struggling, compared with 62 percent during President Reagan's second term (quote from the article linked to by Shaw... the one where David Vitter calls supporters of Affordable Care Act freeloaders).
Post a Comment