No KissCam at Mystics Games
When you go to a game at one of the big arenas, they go around with video cameras and find couples and project their image on the big screens while they kiss. It's one of those inexplicable traditions, like playing Gary Glitter or doing the wave, it's just something people do.
But they don't do that at Mystics games, women's basketball. The Washington Post wondered why.
Kids? Appropriate? It's not like they're ... never mind, doing something you can't do in front of kids. It seems like it would be good for kids to see people showing affection for one another with a sweet little lip-to-lip kiss. At least all the other teams think it's harmless.
Ah, here it is.
Ooh, that would be shocking and horrible, if two women showed a little tight-lipped affection for each other.
Oddly, here's what it comes down to: the oil companies.
Looks to me like the time is right for that big kiss-in. It's time for straight people to get over it.
But they don't do that at Mystics games, women's basketball. The Washington Post wondered why.
"Why don't they have a KissCam at Mystics games?" a young friend asked last week, which preceded an awkward pause and an even more awkward answer.
Really, why doesn't the inclusive WNBA franchise in the nation's capital, of all places, send their video cameramen and camerawomen to find unsuspecting couples in the stands during timeouts and capture their mugs for all of Verizon Center's crowd to see? And wait for the couple's reaction, which usually involves a polite, if awkward, peck on the lips.
Just like they do at NBA games and other sporting events in which the participants are men.
"We got a lot of kids here," Sheila Johnson, the Mystics' managing partner, said when asked last week at a game. "We just don't find it appropriate." Mystics Give Big Issue the Kiss-Off
Kids? Appropriate? It's not like they're ... never mind, doing something you can't do in front of kids. It seems like it would be good for kids to see people showing affection for one another with a sweet little lip-to-lip kiss. At least all the other teams think it's harmless.
Ah, here it is.
Understood is that women's professional basketball has two major fan bases: dads and daughters, and lesbians. The KissCam issue, frivolous on its surface, puts the effort to cater to both audiences squarely at odds.
Devon Goldsmith, returning to her seat for last Thursday's game between Washington and Chicago, understands Johnson's rationale -- begrudgingly.
"It's one thing for Daddy and Mommy to be kissing, but Mommy kissing Mommy?" said Goldsmith, a 26-year-old systems analyst from Silver Spring. She also happens to play linebacker for the D.C. Divas semipro women's football team and is openly gay. "I don't think people are ready for it now.
Ooh, that would be shocking and horrible, if two women showed a little tight-lipped affection for each other.
Oddly, here's what it comes down to: the oil companies.
But how long does a league keep some of its most loyal and longtime customers in the closet? How long should any historically persecuted group keep quiet when the Mystics take sponsorship dollars from a company noted for discrimination against gays?
Ranked with 584 other businesses in 2009, Exxon Mobil Corporation was just one of two surveyed by the Human Rights Campaign's corporate quality index to be given a zero rating -- out of 100. (The other was Perot Systems Corp.) When Exxon acquired Mobil a decade ago, it removed explicit protections for employees based on sexual orientation from the company's anti-discrimination policies. Despite shareholder pressure, the company hasn't budged.
...
On the Jumbotron at Wizards games, couples on their first date sometimes balk at kissing, which generates laughter. Other times couples are ready for the lens -- passionate kissing and theatrical groping, which usually brings the building to a crescendo of hilarity.
Funny, huh, not one same-sex couple has ever been shown on that screen.
"The truth," Mystics rookie Marissa Coleman said, "is that I don't think the things that might happen could be accepted by a lot of people."
Looks to me like the time is right for that big kiss-in. It's time for straight people to get over it.
posted by JimK at 11:41 AM
51 Comments:
Well, it's obvious the gay community needs to scare the heck outta these oil companies.
Here's an idea for a protest:
Instead of buying gas and driving on the beltway, walk on it.
A bunch of gays, strolling down the beltway.
That'll get some notice!
Just remember:
"There shouldn’t be any blatant French kissing, or licking, or anything that appears crass or sloppy, nor should there be any removal of clothing, grinding, or groping."
OK, guys, go to it.
"(July 30) - President Barack Obama often talks about all of the forces lining up against his health care plan.
But there's one critic who has remained relatively mum in the debate.
David Scheiner, a Chicago-based doctor, has taken a hard look at the president's prescription for health care reform and sees bad medicine.
"This isn't that kind of health care program that I think is going to work," he said.
So what makes Scheiner so special?
He was Obama's personal physician for 22 years, and voted for the then Illinois senator in the 2008 presidential election."
Now, that's embarassin'!
Guys, I thought Clinton was bad but Obama really takes the cake.
If there's a tacky meter in the White House, it's gonna burst soon.
First there's the embarassingly cheap gifts Obama doles out to other heads of state. He gave Queen Elizabeth an I-Pod for heaven's sake.
Now, get a load of this:
"If you're a corporate CEO, and you are invited to the White House for lunch, you'd better bring your credit card along.
Yes, the days of the free lunch are over at 1600 Pennsylvania Ave.
Case in point: A recent Oval Office powwow between President Obama and the heads of Xerox, Coca-Cola, AT&T, and Honeywell, where the executives were asked by White House staffers to provide their credit card information so that they could be billed for the cost of the meal.
The White House defended the unusual move as a way to avoid conflicts of interest.
But the Bush administration didn't charge presidential guests for meals, one former official said, and at least one etiquette expert found the whole thing unseemly -- suggesting it was a serious breach of protocol.
The president regularly hosts meetings with the nation's top business leaders to listen to their grievances and suggestions, and making them pick up the tab for their meals is intended to show that the relationship is free of ethical complications.
(let me just pause for a moment and say: oh brother!)
No word on what each CEO ordered, and whether the White House price structure seemed fair, wildly exorbitant, or like a bargain."
Hope Officer Crowley got a happy hour price for that Blue Moon!
What you should find embarassing is your constant and total inability to tell the whole truth.
Why does Dr. Scheiner oppose Obama's plan?
Scheiner thinks the president's plan doesn't go far enough.
"If I had to say the single one thing which is the worst part of it, is that private insurers continue to be a part of the health scheme," he said. "Everybody keeps saying we don't want the government getting involved in health care. [But] the government is involved in Medicare, and it works."
Scheiner would rather see the nation adopt a single-payer system like the ones in Canada and Europe.
Medicare, Veterans Administration, the military, Congress -- millions of Americans are covered by a publicly funded health care system and they are happy with it.
I can't count the number of times my private insurance company wouldn't pay up. They cover annual physical for people like me who are over 50 years of age, Its cost will not figure into my deductible, that is, my annual physical is covered whether I've met the deductible or not. Last year, during my physical, when my doctor found a problem that required further diagnostic testing, my private insurer said that meant it was a "sick visit," not a "physical" and so it and the subsequent diagnostic testing became part of my deductible and I had to pay it.
What do these private insurance bureaucrats think a physical for if not to see if there's something wrong with a person or not?
Bureaucrats work at every private insurance company and make lousy decisions like that every day about what's covered and what isn't. The people who make these decisions, do so without any medical degree or knowledge. From what I can tell, they are more concerned with the company's bottom line than anything else.
Did any health insurance companies receive bailout money?
No!
Why not?
Because they see to it their profits are healthy and stay that way. Too bad they aren't as committed to seeing their clients are as healthy as they are their bottom line.
My dear friend who has been a nurse for 30 years recently suffered a mild stroke and went to her health insurer's emergency clinic, knowing time is of the essence to prevent permanent damage. Her left arm and leg were limp, her smile drooped on the left side, and her speech was slurred, all classic symptoms of a stroke. At the emergency clinic, she was given a single pill of blood pressure medication to bring her BP down and sent home with a referral to see a psychiatrist for 3 visits, so she could "discuss why she thought she'd had a stroke"! They never admitted she had and never treated her for her stroke. Now she's permanently disabled.
Apparently, my friend and I are not the only ones who complain about private health insurance companies not doing the right thing for their clients.
Enough! I demand a health care system that is of the people, by the people and for the people. Let private health insurance companies learn to provide excellent health care at a lower cost just like the current publicly funded plans we have in this country do or let them go out of business.
Right on Obama! Let the "heads of Xerox, Coca-Cola, AT&T, and Honeywell" pay for their meals at the White House. At their pay scales, I'm sure even $100 for lunch would seem cheap.
Officer Crowley, on the other hand, is not the head of a major US corporation and he was invited to the White House socially, not to conduct business. Officer Crowley's Blue Moon garnished with an orange slice was on the house.
"Right on Obama! Let the "heads of Xerox, Coca-Cola, AT&T, and Honeywell" pay for their meals at the White House. At their pay scales, I'm sure even $100 for lunch would seem cheap."
oh, it's not that it's alot of money to these guys
it's just the gauche
face it, Obama has no class
"What you should find embarassing is your constant and total inability to tell the whole truth.
Why does Dr. Scheiner oppose Obama's plan?
Scheiner thinks the president's plan doesn't go far enough."
They're right, AB.
You are an idiot.
I never said what the guy's ojection was.
It was irrelevant.
The point is: the trillion dollar plan we're about to enact WON'T WORK.
Hi Jim,
Saw this article over at Slate:
http://www.slate.com/id/2223840/
IUDs were never discussed much when I was on "CACFLHD" -- I wonder if & how the current curriculum addresses them.
Thank you, House Energy and Commerce Committee for doing the right thing by overcoming the GOP's JUST SAY NO TO CHANGE intransigence and approving sweeping health care legislation last night. The bill they passed last night eliminates exclusions for pre-existing conditions, limits premium cost increases, and unlike the Bush/Cheney socialistic Medicare plan, allows the federal government to negotiate prescription drug prices for Medicare. Medicare provides health care for tens of millions of Americans. Thursday night, every GOP member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee refused to defund America's **socialistic** Medicare program. Apparently **some socialistic**, tax payer funded health care programs are OK with some GOP House members.
I never said what the guy's ojection was.
It was irrelevant.
Oh brother, Anon. Only you could equate objecting to the plan because you want change it completely into a single payer system to objecting to the plan because you don't want to change a hair on its head even though the status quo is filling the pockets of health insurers with multimillion dollar bonuses while draining the pockets of needy Americans.
You are unreal.
plan we're about to enact WON'T WORK.
Doing nothing but supporting the status quo WON'T WORK to insure the uninsured, or to get people into wellness centers and out of emergency rooms for their medical care, or to lower prescription drug prices for seniors who have to go to Mexico and Canada to afford them or any of the other things that are wrong with the current system. But by all means cling to JUST SAY NO TO CHANGE all the way down the drain.
Glub glub glub
""Good evening from New York. I`m Richard Wolffe. Keith Olbermann got one more night off.
To all Democrats in Congress who are planning to spend their part of the August recess talking about health care reform at town hall-style meetings back home, we offer this friendly COUNTDOWN public service announcement in our fifth story: Those angry protestors who will disrupt your attempts to talk with your voters -- and trust us they will -- are being coordinated and coached by industry funded, right-wing operatives. Their stated goal will be to rattle you, not to have an intelligent debate. And there`s a good chance they don`t even live in your district.
One conservative front group is now busing people from all over the country to protest against Democratic members -- a strategy endorsed by Republican Congressman Pete Sessions of Texas, who told Politico.com that the days of civil town halls are now over.
A leaked memo from the folks who brought you the tea bag protest gives step-by-step instructions for disrupting town halls, including advice to prevent members of Congress from informing their constituents."
And here we have the memo, detailing the tea baggers' August recess plans:
Rocking the Town Halls -- Best Practices (excerpt)
"...Inside the Hall
-- Spread out in the hall and try to be in the front half. The objective is to put the Rep on the defensive with your questions and follow-up. The Rep should be made to feel that a majority, and if not, a significant portion of at least the audience, opposes the socialist agenda of Washington. They need to leave the hall with some doubts about their agenda. The other objective is to illustrate for the balance of the audience that the national leadership is acting against our founders' principles which are on the other side of the debate - and show them that there are a lot of solid citizens in the district who oppose the socialist approach to the nation's challenges. We want the independent thinkers to leave the hall with doubts about the Democrat solutions continually proposed by the national leadership.
-- You need to rock-the-boat early in the Rep's presentation, Watch for an opporunity to yell out and challenge the Rep's statements early. If he blames Bush for something or offers other excuses -- call him on it, yell back and have someone else tallow-up with a shout-out. Don't carryon and make a scene - just short intemlittent shout outs. The purpose is to make him uneasy early on and set the tone for the hall as clearly infonnal, and free-wheeling. It will also embolden others who agree with us to call out and challenge with tough questions. The goal is to rattle him, get him off his prepared script and agenda. If he says something outrageous, stand up and shout out and sit right down. Look for these opportunities before he even takes questions.
--When the formal Q&A session begins get all your hands up and keep them up -- be persistent throughout the entire session. Keep body language neutral and look positive to improve chances of being selected. When called on, ask a specific prepared question that puts the onus on him to answer. It can be a long question including lots of statistics/facts. You will not be interrupted from reading a solid question. If you ramble on too long without a focus, you will be stopped. After the Rep answers, or more likely diverts or dodges, be prepared with a follow-up -- take the initiative and you will be able to follow-up. The balance of the group should applaud when the question is asked, further putting the Rep on the defensive. If the Rep tries a particularly odious diversion, someone from the group should yell out to answer the question. These tactics will Clearly rattle the Rep and illustrate some degree of his ineptness to the balance of the audience."
Americans are sick and tired of the games the GOP has played for the last 8 years, throwing more heat than light at every problem we face. This ploy is destined to backfire and further lower American's opinion of the already unpopular GOP.
Golly, what will you guys think of next?
Glub glub glub
you can tell Anon-B's getting nervous when she starts throwing out multiple posts
Obama who promised America health care reform has now used his magic chameleon powers to turn his ever-changing bill into a health insurance reform plan instead
neither side, including his socialist doctor, think the massively expensive plan will accomplish anything more than destroy America's economy by raising taxes
the stimulus plan that raised unemployment, the White House beer garden farce that raised a minor incident into a national embarassment, the raising the risks of armed confrontation with Norgth Korea and Iran by encouraging them to greater hostility with conciliatory rhetoric, the lack of simple social etiquette skills, the agreeing to negotiate giving away America's advantage in missile defense, the waste of the billion dollar "cash for clunkers" program, the socialist move on General Motors, the directionless health care debate with no one in charge, and on and on and on
Pew Research is reporting that O's approval rating has dropped 7 per cent since the infamous Gates press conference
let's face it, executive skills are not exactly Obama's forte (he never did much in the legislative arena either but that's another story)
O is a shyster who sold America a bill of goods
we can see why you say "glub-glub-glub" so much
Democrats finally got a chance after decades to be in control and they are throwing it down the drain
happy swirling!
You think I'm nervous? Wrong. You're projecting.
I'm not working today so I have time to do some research and post some facts about what's going on behind the scenes. You're the one who's nervous, looking for Coulter's proof Lynn Sweet's question was planted that doesn't exist. Find it yet??
It's interesting to watch the GOP self-destruct, but I don't want them to become extinct, like John Zogby has warned they might. He's "...not sure the Republicans are addressing change," which is what the country voted for by a landslide last fall, and I have my doubts too. The GOP sure seems set and inflexible in its way, unwilling to change for the betterment of everyone because they are beholden to their campaign contributing special interest groups.
Of course I wish the GOP nothing but good luck with sending out birthers to disrupt healthcare town hall meetings for the next month instead of talking rationally about it, just like I wish them good luck with Palin in 2012 even though she's dropped 40% points in approval of the residents in her home state of Alaska, and most of all, I wish good luck to Republican members of Congress who can only say "NO!" to fixing our broken economy, fixing our broken international reputation, fixing our broken healthcare system, fixing our broken energy policy, fixing our broken environmental protections and on and on even though the nation voted for CHANGE last November.
I hope the GOP will heed the call to be part of the solution rather than continuing to cling to NO CHANGE, KEEP EVERYTHING THE SAME as they spin down the drain to extinction.
yes, I think you're nervous
the Democrats are now in control and have been since January 2007
it's time for them to put up or shut up and there doesn't seem to be any sign anything's going to be put up any time soon
America is watching
thanks for all that behind-the-scenes research
fascinating
the Democrats are now in control and have been since January 2007
ahem
Bush uses sixth veto to reject health-labor bill, November 2007
Wrong again!
Maybe you should consider investing a little time to conduct your own research to verify what you report is true before you post your mistakes for all the world to see here on Vigilance.
Hey Andrew! It's good to see you commenting on Vigilance again! I hope your college career is going well. Jim's tenure on the CAC is over. Now I've been appointed to serve on it, starting this fall.
My understanding is that the only changes to the MCPS sex ed curriculum since you were on the CAC were to add 2 classes in 8th grade and in 10th grade that address "Respect for Differences in Human Sexuality" and 1 class in 10th grade that teaches proper condom usage. All the other contraceptive information from the old curriculum should still be in it.
When my kids attended MCPS and I attended the parent's sex ed meetings at school, the health teachers showed us a demonstration board they used that displayed several different types of contraceptives -- I remember sponges, condoms, diaphragms, and IUDs. Actual items were displayed on the board, but they were encased so that students could not touch them, but only see them. Since the contraception portion of the curriculum is not scripted like the revisions are, it's unclear if IUDs are discussed or if this demonstration board is used by every teacher or not.
Looks the umpire, aka American citizens, have called strike three on Barry Obama:
"WASHINGTON -The success of President Barack Obama's ambitious agenda — from health care and climate change to education — could depend on how quickly he recovers from the sharp drop in support among white voters after criticizing a white policeman's arrest of a black Harvard scholar.
Obama's widely publicized effort to defuse the first racial flare-up of his young presidency by inviting the protagonists to the White House last week for beers and conversation ended with no apologies.
Cambridge, Mass., police Sgt. Joseph Crowley and Harvard scholar Henry Louis Gates Jr. agreed to disagree about the July 16 confrontation.
Obama's impromptu comments about the incident could become a defining moment.
Nearly immediately after Obama's remark that police had "acted stupidly" in arresting Gates, his approval rating plummeted among whites, dropping over two days from 53 percent to 46 percent in a poll by the nonpartisan Pew Research Center.
If Obama is to have success with the policy changes he wants, he can't afford to shed white support.
Not to mention the disaster that losing the affections of many in the blue-collar, Reagan Democrat constituency would spell for any re-election campaign.
Lawrence Jacobs, director of the Center for the Study of Politics and Governance at the University of Minnesota's Hubert H. Humphrey Institute of Public Affairs, said he was stunned at how poorly Obama, normally so controlled, handled what Jacobs called "the first major personal debacle for the president."
"This thing was just hung around his neck and he couldn't get rid of it," Jacobs said. "I think he presumed too much. He really started to believe his own press releases on post-racial America."
Chris Lehane, a Democratic operative in California and a former aide to Al Gore, said Obama prolonged the story by arranging the White House meeting because it fits into another narrative that Obama promotes: that he's a "different kind of president."
"The politically smart move would have been to call the officer, tell the press, not ask for a meeting and pivot back to health care at a time when the White House needs to regain its momentum," Lehane said.
Greg Strimple, a Republican strategist in New York who advised Sen. John McCain, Obama's GOP opponent last year, saw Obama's initial words at the news conference as a calculated play to win points with his base — and it backfired.
"He's lost the center on economic issues," he said, citing the big-government label Obama is earning for the massive stimulus package and his health care and energy proposals.
"When politicians get in trouble, they always revert to audiences that will clap and cheer the loudest for them. ... But they had a fundamental miscalculation on the political strategy of this."
Regardless how he got himself in the fix, Obama must move on from the national debate the incident prompted.
"The most important thing for Obama is to move on to nonracial topics — health care, for instance," Jacobs said. "The loss of white support is potentially devastating.""
brilliant Anon:
"the Democrats are now in control and have been since January 2007"
Anon-B:
"ahem
Bush uses sixth veto to reject health-labor bill, November 2007
Wrong again!
Maybe you should consider investing a little time to conduct your own research to verify what you report is true before you post your mistakes for all the world to see here on Vigilance."
Anon-B, you're such an embarassment to the lunatics
The Democrats were in control then; they had enough votes, with a couple of Republicans who favored the bill, to override it
they were afraid to because:
they know they don't have the support of the American people
that's why the health bill is in such trouble now
Democrats are unsure, after gaining election with so many lies, if the American people will support them in 2010
I think you'll find as we get closer and closer to that election that Barry will have more and more trouble accomplishing his agenda
long-term, Americans are conservative
the lunatic base doesn't realize that but the Democrat politicians are well aware of it
sorry, glubby bubby
you're in for some big disappointment
"I'm not working today so I have time to do some research and post some facts about what's going on behind the scenes."
Anon-B said this yesterday morgen.
Wha' happened?
I hope she hasn't been a victim of foul play.
My guess is she passed out drunk in front of the computer, trying to drown her sorrow at the sinking Obama "yes, we can" regime.
There are situations where one thing might work or another might work but a hybrid system will not and will just waste a bunch of money.
That's where the Obama administration is now.
Just ask his doctor!
And the term "bunch of money" has been redefined in the "yes, we can" era.
"WASHINGTON -The Obama administration is looking at creating a courtroom-within-a-prison complex in the U.S. to house suspected terrorists, combining military and civilian detention facilities at a single maximum-security prison.
Several senior U.S. officials said the administration is eyeing a soon-to-be-shuttered state maximum security prison in Michigan and the 134-year-old military penitentiary at Fort Leavenworth, Kan., as possible locations for a heavily guarded site to hold the 229 suspected al-Qaida, Taliban and foreign fighters now jailed at the Guantanamo Bay detention camp in Cuba."
Yeah, just what we need.
Some new targets for al-Qaida in Kansas and Michigan.
Thanks for sharing your idea, Barry.
We'll pass.
From Haaretz:
LGBT Teens attacked by gunman in Tel-Aviv Center
Things like this have happened in America, but not to my knowledge at this level of severity to meetings of teenagers.
Your concern about my absence late in the afternoon yesterday (FYI, I went wedding dress shopping with my oldest daughter and then my younger daughter and I shared dinner and a few rounds of Scrabble with my elderly mother) is touching but your projections are telling. No Anon, I don't need to drink booze to comment here and I'm not nervous or afraid to have a brilliant black man serving as my President -- all of those are projections of your own mental state. But I see you were silent for hours after our earlier exchange, until after 11 PM last night in fact. When you did finally comment again last night, your fear that Obama will succeed was palpable. Did you require fortification before you could bring yourself to cut and paste another unattributed piece?
Speaking of your unattributed AP piece by Jennifer Loven, published in the Washington Examiner, you may also want to read Chris Brown's critique of it and then go read your beloved WSJ to find out how changing demographics helped Obama win in November and do not bode well for the all Southern white male birther and tea bagging, hot for Palin, GOP base. I bet it makes you blanch to read that in a few years, whites will become another minority group.
You want to talk about GITMO, that mistake Bush said he wanted to close? Sure. Some prisons around the country, especially those under the treat of being closed, are begging for GITMO prisoners because they want to provide jobs for the locals, jobs the locals want. Michigan has one of the highest state unemployment rates in the country and would be tickled pink to house GITMO prisoners in order to keep that soon-to-be-shuttered prison open and its workers employed; those working there now do not want to be laid off.
The Democrats were in control then
In the 2006 midterm elections, Democrats gained majorities in both houses of Congress and W issued 11 of his 12 vetoes, four of which were overridden. On December 19, 2007, the GOP made history with its JUST SAY NO stance by "forcing the 62nd cloture vote to move beyond a filibuster -- breaking the record for a two-year congressional session with a full year to spare."
What did the intransigence of the 110th GOP Senators earn the GOP in the 2008 election? A filibuster-proof Democratic Super Majority in the Senate and a wider majority in the House! And what do they think their continued use of the JUST SAY NO tactic is going to win them in the next midterm election? (Hint: Crazy is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome.)
Yesterday's Post exposed the right wing's latest pack of lies about the healthcare legislation on the Hill. Randall Terry calls one provision "...an attempt to "kill Granny."..."
What's the provision? According to the WaPo it is:
The controversy stems from a proposal to pay physicians who counsel elderly or terminally ill patients about what medical interventions they would prefer near the end of life and how to prepare instructions such as living wills. Under the plan, Medicare would reimburse doctors for one session every five years to confer with a patient about his or her wishes and how to ensure those preferences are followed. The counseling sessions would be voluntary.
The WaPo reports:
The attacks on talk radio began when Betsy McCaughey, who helped defeat President Bill Clinton's health-care overhaul 16 years ago, told former senator Fred D. Thompson (R-Tenn.) that mandatory [that's a lie] counseling sessions with Medicare beneficiaries would "tell them how to end their life sooner" [that's another lie] and would teach the elderly how to "decline nutrition . . . and cut your life short."[three lies, you're out]
And those lies were picked up and carried forward by none other than Minority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) and Republican Policy Committee Chairman Thaddeus McCotter (Mich.), who said it "may start us down a treacherous path toward government-encouraged euthanasia." Another hint: That word "may" is usually barely audible because it's scarier that way.
The WaPo article also pointed out that only about one third of Americans have living wills stating their medical wishes while they are still able to do so, and that these directives are often ignored because the doctor isn't aware of them. IMHO paying for an office visit to discuss your own living will decisions with your doctor once every five years is an excellent way to make sure your doctor is aware of your decisions so they will more often be honored.
Leave it to the GOP to turn a way to help doctors be better informed and therefore enabled to honor elderly people's wishes into a scare tactic. And the GOP leaders wonder why most demographic groups are trending Democratic.
Robert, the news from Israel is so upsetting. Teens gathered at a weekly support group meeting gunned down by a shooter who discharged his hate and homophobia with bullets. As a teacher and a support yourself for LGBT teens right here, I know this hits close to home for you, and I am so sorry. It hits all of us hard. Targeting teens for death is outrageous and I hope the shooter is brought to justice for his crimes.
The NY Times reports the director of the center said,
"We have joined the roster of 'civilized' countries where hatred is the standard."
Whether it's ultra-Orthodox Jews in Israel or homophobic Christians who teach gay=sin right here in America, hatred breeds evil. Why can't hate-filled religious group members remember the one basic rule that can help join us all together: DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE OTHERS DO UNTO YOU
Anon-B:
"I'm not working today so I have time to do some research and post some facts about what's going on behind the scenes."
Anon-brilliant, the next day:
"Wha' happened?"
Anon-B:
"Your concern about my absence late in the afternoon yesterday is touching but your projections are telling."
So Anon-B tells us all she going to waste her day off researching petty comments and when I asked why she didn't do it, she gets all snippy.
sheesh!
"I'm not nervous or afraid to have a brilliant black man serving as my President -- all of those are projections of your own mental state."
Brilliant?
He doesn't do anything.
He basically says he wants something and then tells Nancy Pelosi to write the bill.
Brilliant.
So, a stimulus bill becomes a liberal agenda package and does nothing to reduce unemployment.
Brilliant.
A health care reform intiative morphs into a requirement that all Americans have to have a health insurance policy whether they want one or not.
Oh, and we're getting that big increase in the deficit and tax increase that Obama said wouldn't be necessary.
Not his fault.
He delegated it all to Nancy.
Brilliant.
We don't even need to talk about the mess he's made of foreign policy.
He's gone around the world making concessions to regimes who are committed to our destruction.
The result?
They no longer feel constrained and are taking hostile actions that we'll eventually be forced to respond to, increasing the likelihood of war.
"But I see you were silent for hours after our earlier exchange, until after 11 PM last night in fact."
Yes, but I didn't promise the whole wide world that I would spend my day off doing research to back up biased liberal spin, did I?
It's not nice to break your promises.
We were looking forward to a nice laugh and you ruined it for us.
"changing demographics helped Obama win in November and do not bode well for the all Southern white male birther and tea bagging, hot for Palin, GOP base"
Well, I've heard some say but the election seems to contradict it.
For one thing, these people theorize that the only way to save the Republican Party is to forsake their priciples and go moderate.
But McCain was a moderate.
It didn't work.
If it were true that Republicans lost because of adherence to their principles, explain this:
Why was it that the only time the Republican ticket was leading in the polls was when McCain chose Sarah Palin to be his VP nominee?
That's when the liberal press got scared silly that they were going to lose a third straight election and starting an all-out defamation campaign against Palin.
Obama was so bland there was not much to satirize but if Biden's many idiotic comments had gotten the treatment Palin did, we might have seen a different result.
As it was, the press protected him.
"I bet it makes you blanch to read that in a few years, whites will become another minority group."
All the researchers were saying this 20 years ago but I thought I heard it had been debunked.
Regardless, race is irrelevant to me. I'm more concerned with certain values and most minority groups support traditional family values in greater numbers than whites so if those minorities gained more influence, it would be good news as far as I'm concerned.
"In the 2006 midterm elections, Democrats gained majorities in both houses of Congress and W issued 11 of his 12 vetoes, four of which were overridden."
Demonstratng they were in a position to override vetoes when they wanted to. When they didn't, it was because they were afraid of the consequences in the election.
Democrat influence on legislation and position on key committees allowed them to pressure industries, beginning in January 2007 into doing disastrous things.
It wasn't a Republican who said "let's roll the dice with subsidized housing", it was a gay Democrat.
"What did the intransigence of the 110th GOP Senators earn the GOP in the 2008 election? A filibuster-proof Democratic Super Majority in the Senate and a wider majority in the House! And what do they think their continued use of the JUST SAY NO tactic is going to win them in the next midterm election?"
Well, since Democrats are clearly in control they can't use the same excuses you're using now when they wreck the economy.
Lower marginal tax rates and supply side market economics and capitalism are not just abstract theories. The rest of the world is trying to emaulate the economic policies of the U.S. from from 1981 to 2006. The U.S. deserted these policies in January 2007, mainly because of war anxieties, and wreaked havoc.
"Crazy is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome."
Lady, no two snowflakes are the same and you're about as flaky as they come!
"IMHO paying for an office visit to discuss your own living will decisions with your doctor once every five years is an excellent way to make sure your doctor is aware of your decisions so they will more often be honored."
It may be excellent but it's hard to see why it should be a government entitlement.
Is the government going to pay for estate planning too?
Trouble is, entitlements tend to develop into mandatory requirements.
It's inevitable.
First, they'll start regulating what those doctors can advise. Then, they will decide the government can save money if everyone is required to go.
Ronald Reagan: "government is not the solution to the problem, government is the problem"
It worked until January 2007.
"Robert, the news from Israel is so upsetting. As a support yourself for LGBT teens right here, I know this hits close to home for you, and I am so sorry. It hits all of us hard."
Oh brother.
It's a tragedy, of course, but let's not lose perspective.
Worse things happen to gays in radical Islamic states every day.
Are you "so upset" and "hit hard" every day?
Of course not. You want us to stop being so mean to those nice Taliban fellows.
"Whether it's ultra-Orthodox Jews in Israel or homophobic Christians who teach gay=sin right here in America, hatred breeds evil."
So, we must abandon all moral teaching because someone somewhere might decide to hurt someone?
If someone shoots up a church or a synagogue tomorrow, would it be fair to blame your comment above?
"Why can't hate-filled religious group members remember the one basic rule that can help join us all together: DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE OTHERS DO UNTO YOU"
And did these religious groups do anything that they wouldn't want done to them?
C'mon. Let's be specific.
As long as you continue to characterize codes of morality as "hate", you remain an inflammatory element in society.
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
I'm probably missing some big chunk of the Tel Aviv story, but from what I've read in the link posted here and elsewhere, the killer hasn't been caught. How is it known that the killer was targeting gay people? How do we know that it wasn't a random shooting or that there was some other reason for the shooting?
Maybe the shooter was gay and was targeting an ex boyfriend of girlfriend. Maybe the shooter was heterosexual and was targeting gays. Maybe the shooter went crazy and randomly walked into the bar. Maybe the shooter was trying to gun down a classmate who had vandalized his car. Maybe a thousand scenarios.
Again, maybe some information has come to light about the killer's motive that I'm not aware of....
no, anytime anybody does anything to a homosexual person, it's because Christian scripture says homosexuality is immoral
it's some law of physics or something
I think it was discovered ny Einstein
Sure, walking into a well known gay teen support group meeting wearing a mask, pulling a gun, and firing at the teens there doesn't mean he was targeting gay teens anymore than when the old white guy walked into the Holocaust Museum shooting meant he was targeting Jews. Do you doubt Scott Roeder targeted Dr. Tiller at his church too?
You cling to words like "wish" or "may" or "could" like flotsam to try to stay afloat. Keep wishing away reality, for all the good it'll do you.
Israeli authorities have warned gay clubs to shut down until the killer is caught so that no more group targets are available to him.
Why was it that the only time the Republican ticket was leading in the polls was when McCain chose Sarah Palin to be his VP nominee?
It's called "convention or VP bounce." In case you didn't notice, Palin's bounce flattened and her presence on the 2008 GOP Presidential ticket did nothing to stop the landslide victory of President Barack Obama. In fact, I think the contrast between Palin nervous wisecracks and Obama's quiet confidence helped Obama win by bigger margins. Old white guys love her sex appeal, but there aren't enough of them to get her into national office.
I didn't promise the whole wide world that I would spend my day off doing research
Neither did I. Were you self medicating again when you wrote that? I didn't "promise" anything, and would appreciate it if you would stop putting words in my mouth. I posted results of my research from from early morning until mid afternoon on Saturday. What are you complaining about that I didn't do, poor baby?
I seem to recall you declaring: "Coulter's proof is coming." on July 30, 2009 2:20 PM.
Here it is August 3rd and you have not produced "Coutler's proof" yet. How is "Coulter's proof" due to arrive, on a slow boat from China?
For one thing, these people theorize that the only way to save the Republican Party is to forsake their priciples and go moderate.
The GOP needs to forgo the Southern Strategy because it alienates minorities. They need to eliminate their platform plank that says marriage "...''should be preserved for that unique and special union of one man and one woman," ...:", they need to add "sexual identity and gender identity" to their plank that omits LGBT folks but is called "Ensuring Equal Treatment for All", and they need to eliminate the plank that calls for a litimus test for judges.
If the GOP really supports "Ensuring Equal Treatment for All," they should really support "All," not "All except some minorities" or exclude people from becoming judges because they hold different religious beliefs.
Here's one from the venerable Gallup poll for you Anon. The latest Gallup poll reports four states show a "sizeable GOP advantage in party identification" and 29 states plus Washington DC show the advantage goes toward the Democrats. These trends are unchanged since 2008. (Hint: Crazy is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome.)
"Whether it's ultra-Orthodox Jews in Israel or homophobic Christians who teach gay=sin right here in America, hatred breeds evil."
...If someone shoots up a church or a synagogue tomorrow, would it be fair to blame your comment above?
What do you think, Anon? Did my statement say "go shoot up a church or a synagogue tomorrow" to you?
"Sure, walking into a well known gay teen support group meeting wearing a mask, pulling a gun, and firing at the teens there doesn't mean he was targeting gay teens anymore than when the old white guy walked into the Holocaust Museum shooting meant he was targeting Jews. Do you doubt Scott Roeder targeted Dr. Tiller at his church too?"
In the latter two cases, the perpetrators were identified and their motives were uncovered.
Not so in the Israeli shooting.
"It's called "convention or VP bounce." In case you didn't notice, Palin's bounce flattened and her presence on the 2008 GOP Presidential ticket did nothing to stop the landslide victory of President Barack Obama."
It was more than that. The base was energized. Palin's problems developed from a blatantly biased press onslaught.
It's a fact.
"I posted results of my research from from early morning until mid afternoon on Saturday."
I didn't notice any research being posted.
Instead of keeping your promises, you went shopping and played scrabble.
"How is "Coulter's proof" due to arrive, on a slow boat from China?"
Oh, it's coming. Don't worry about that. She's kindly giving the reporter and Obama a little time to fess up.
"The GOP needs to forgo the Southern Strategy because it alienates minorities. They need to eliminate their platform plank that says marriage "...''should be preserved for that unique and special union of one man and one woman," ...:","
Earth to Anon-B: California is not a Southern state. Nor are dozens of others that have rejected the attack on traditional marriage.
"Southern Strategy" is a liberal propaganda term. Traditional values are supported broadly across the land including overwhelmingly by America's minorities.
"Here's one from the venerable Gallup poll for you Anon. The latest Gallup poll reports four states show a "sizeable GOP advantage in party identification" and 29 states plus Washington DC show the advantage goes toward the Democrats. These trends are unchanged since 2008."
Here's one for you, Anon-B. Those numbers aren't much changed over the last 35 years.
More Americans have always called themselves Democrats than Republicans and yet Republicans controlled the country from 1981-2006.
Here's another one: I'm a registered Democrat myself.
Currently, Blue Dog Democrats have Nancy Pelosi running scared and Palin is promising to campaign for Democrats who support responsible government.
Democrats still idolize JFK who cut capital gains taxes and talked about projecting military strength against the enemies of democracy.
"(Hint: Crazy is doing the same thing over and over and expecting a different outcome.)"
Thank you, Suzy Snowflake!
"What do you think, Anon? Did my statement say "go shoot up a church or a synagogue tomorrow" to you?"
No, it didn't. But neither do religious leaders who preach that gay=sin encourage any type of violence.
You're a bigoted religiophobe, as is apparent to all.
Golly gee, I see your quiver is empty except for another personal attack on me as a "bigoted religiophobe."
No, it didn't. But neither do religious leaders who preach that gay=sin encourage any type of violence.
I'd say that disrupting a soldier's funeral to demonstrate gay=sin is a type of violence to those who came to mourn. Thank goodness The Patriot Guard knows that too. You may not like that the GODHATESFAGS people are religious, but they are; they call themselves Baptists.
I think we should all learn to DO UNTO OTHERS AS YOU WOULD HAVE OTHERS DO UNTO YOU.
But I don't think religions should be used to coerce parents into praying rather than seeking medical help for their sick kids or into sending their teens to dangerous reparative therapy. You think that means I hate or fear religion? No, I just think in those two cases, those religious views can kill kids. In fact, I know they do.
I'm all in favor of religious ideas that encourage us to feed the poor, clothe the naked, and love thy neighbor, etc. But when religion is used to denigrate some people and label those with different beliefs as "enemies," that's not religion IMHO, that's evil.
The FACT is, no one has any idea why the shooting in Tel Aviv occurred. Until we know more, the wise person must use the words "may have," "could have been", etc.
The loss of young lives and the harm done to those children is tragic. Somehow anonymous turns this into an attack on people who support lgbt teens.
The result of such an attack will be fear among lgbt teens (and adults) in Israel. Someone wanted that result. This amounts to real evil.
Anonymous echoes the religious conservative parties in Israel by speculating that this 'might be' an attack by a gay person on other lgbt people. Perhaps. That's beside the point, or do they just entirely fail to understand this. As Bea said, hate breeds violence.
Robert,
You are completely missing the point. If we find out that the killer was a gay person, we might also find out that this gay person was trying to kill an ex boyfriend or girlfriend. If this is the case, then it is logical to assume that the attack had absolutely nothing to do with being gay. It happens to be a crime of passion, which occurs everywhere, amongst all groups. In this case, the sexual orientation of the person or the group is irrelevant.
If the killer was a heterosexual purposefully targeting the gay community, then that would fall under the category of "hate crime" which everyone here seems to think it is.
It seems to me that the gay community is teaching its youngest members to automatically see themselves as victims. I believe that this is severely crippling to those poor kids.
hey, misery loves company
It seems to me that the gay community is teaching its youngest members to automatically see themselves as victims.
Have you got some evidence that brings you to what "seems" to be your conclusion? Have you witnessed someone teaching gay kids to "automatically see themselves victims?"
Who taught Matthew Shepard to be a victim?
I believe that this [undocumented claim that gay kids "seem" to be taught to see themselves victims] is severely crippling to those poor kids.
So tell us Anon, where did you find gay kids being taught to see themselves as victims and then become severely crippled by those lessons?
You **seem** to be low on data but full of spin!
It's beliefs like "you can change your sexual orientation if you try hard enough" when the facts say such change is rare, that have been shown to lead to crippling self-loathing and consequential suicide risk.
hey, misery loves company
Well, maybe you enjoy dispensing your misery on the readers here, but I bet if we took a poll of Vigilance readers, no one except "Anonymous" would claim to "love" it.
Aunt Bea says: "So tell us Anon, where did you find gay kids being taught to see themselves as victims and then become severely crippled by those lessons?"
Well, for starters, take a look at the GLSEN website. It is the most self-pitying, "boo-hoo me" site I have EVER had the misfortune of laying my eyes upon! From the homepage forward, kids are bombarded with negativity and are taught to see themselves as helpless victims.
I have a deep sympathy for gay children growing up with this kind of nonsense being fed to them. Instead of teaching them to be strong, healthy people, regardless of their sexual orientation, they're being taught to be afraid of the world, as they go in search of problems, imagined or real.
From the homepage forward, kids are bombarded with negativity and are taught to see themselves as helpless victims.
Can you cut and paste one or two of these bits you consider to be "negativity" from the GLSEN homepage for us?
Safe schools?
Anti-bullying resources?
GLSEN Accepting Nominations for Inaugural Student Advocate of the Year?
RESPECT AWARDS 2009?
Well, Aunt Bea, it's one thing for an organization to advocate for safe schools or anti-bullying. It's quite another for the two subjects to completely dominate the entire website. And then, when we want a break from the safe schools and anti-bullying subjects, we get to read about suicides.
If I were running that organization, wanting to help those kids, I'd be writing stories and headlines that go something like this:
1. Tom Smith Became an Honor Roll Student and Is Going On to Study Zoology at One of the Best Colleges in the Country. He was Awarded a Scholarship!
2. Maria Sanchez Transformed Her Feelings of Loneliness into Wonderful Works of art! They're Now on Display in St. Louis -- All Are Invited to Attend Her Opening Night Exhibit!
3. Joe Jones Turned a Bullying Situation Into a Great Friendship that He Hopes Will Last a Lifetime. What Lessons Can We All Learn from Joe's Story?
4. How Did Elton John Deal with Difficult Situations in His Early LIfe?
Now, these would be interesting, positive articles. As it is, GLSEN is dreary, unimaginative and, I would argue, damaging to children.
P.S. I didn't mention, too -- GLSEN is not dreary simply because they harp on two subjects -- safe schools and anti-bullying. It is the WAY they are presented and written. I leave the website feeling like I'm a victim with no hope and I'm given the impression that I must remain that way.
We live in the greatest nation on this earth, where gay kids and others have the greatest opportunities in the world. Is our county perfect? No. Can things be made better for everyone? Yes.
But do we have to force kids into a pity fest? I say...JUST SAY NO!
"Who taught Matthew Shepard to be a victim?"
According to journalists who have looked into it, Shepard knew the guys that attacked him, had bought drugs from them and had homosex with one of them.
The depiction popularized in the press is not the whole truth.
Now, you know the rest of the story.
Now, these would be interesting, positive articles.
So go write those article for your very own UNGLSEN website and let us know how much traffic you get.
As it is, GLSEN is dreary, unimaginative and, I would argue, damaging to children.
So go ahead and argue it. What empirical evidence do you have of this damage to children being done by reading "dreary, unimaginative" GLSEN articles?
I leave the website feeling like I'm a victim with no hope and I'm given the impression that I must remain that way.
Do all websites that report how minority groups are oppressed, maligned, and have violence directed at them make you feel that way?
Go look at this one: Matthew Shepard Foundation, and let us know how it makes you feel.
But do we have to force kids...
Last I heard, reading items at the GLSEN website was not mandatory. No one is forced to go there or to read items posted there.
But teens whose parents have certain religious beliefs are sometimes forced to go into dangerous reparative therapy treatment programs or to forgo modern medical cures, with sometimes deadly results.
According to journalists who have looked into it, Shepard knew the guys that attacked him, had bought drugs from them and had homosex with one of them.
The depiction popularized in the press is not the whole truth.
Now, you know the rest of the story.
Who are these journalists and where did they get their information? Where will we find their accounts published?
ABC News 20/20
somewhere around November 2004
interviews with Laramie residents who said Shepard and one of his killers partied together and that the killer was bisexual and that drugs were involved
funny how we haven't heard much about it, isn't it, Anon-B?
just like Israel 2009, the lunatic fringe gay advocacy movement finds the story they want to find
imagine that
You've got to be kidding, Anon!
STATEMENT FROM JUDY AND DENNIS SHEPARD CONCERNING 20/20 UPCOMING REPORT ON THE MURDER OF MATTHEW SHEPARD
On November 26, 2004, 20/20 will air a piece that promised 'new information and facts' about Matt's beating and subsequent death. Dennis and I reviewed an advance copy of the show and were dismayed and saddened by the tabloid nature of the show, its lack of serious reporting of facts in evidence, and the amateurish nature of asking leading questions to the people who were interviewed.
I, too, was asked by 20/20 for an interview and agreed to do so to ensure that all of the facts were correctly stated. My only stipulation was that our legal advisor Sean Maloney, Matthew Shepard Foundation Board member and former senior White House staffer, had to be included in the interview to share his legal knowledge and expertise regarding Matthew's murder. He was quite eloquent in stating the facts pertaining to Matt's case, his knowledge of hate crimes in general, and in debunking 20/20's attempt to rewrite history. As you may or may not know, Sean was deleted from the interview entirely. The editing by 20/20 of my interview seems to leave out all of my relevant comments regarding the potential bias of the show and my deliberate restating of the facts of the case clearly ended up on the cutting room floor. My remarks were reduced to a few very personal maternal comments taken out of context to make it appear as if I agreed with 20/20's theories. That couldn't be farther from the truth.
This same subjective editing occurred with Dave O'Malley's interview. Dave, a Captain with the City of Laramie police force at the time, was Laramie's lead investigator in the case and worked in tandem with Rob DeBree, the lead investigator for the Albany County Sheriff's Department, to bring the case to trial and to provide the evidence necessary to convict both Russell Henderson and Aaron McKinney. (Both law enforcement officers are in complete agreement with the facts as stated during the trials.)
Dave gave Ms. Vargas a detailed account of the case. He described the elements of hate and gay bias that were found during the extensive investigation and were substantiated in the large body of evidence collected for this case. Dave's comments were severely edited. Perhaps they were left out because he did not give Ms. Vargas the answer(s) she needed to maintain her 'new' theory concerning the murder. One of the most glaring omissions in the piece was the transcript of Aaron McKinney's in-custody interview which took place a few days after the murder. This occurred before any 'line of defense' had been established by legal counsel for the two defendants. Had that document been included, it would have shown an un-rehearsed and unemotional anti-gay account of the events before, during, and after leaving Matt tied to the fence.
Despite their promotional efforts to the contrary, 20/20 has not presented a 'new' theory. Much of this information was included in a Vanity Fair story in March 1999. What is new is the unfortunate downslide of a reputable news magazine show when its highly respected host retires. 20/20 has sacrificed years of professional journalistic ethics and values for a stab at revisionist history ... and ratings.
That highly edited spin is what you're relying on? Don't make me laugh!
the 20/20 show had actual interviews with individuals who saw Shepard and McKinney socializing together days before, a male who had sexual relations with McKinney and others who confirmed that drugs influenced the actions of all that night
that Shepard's parents have a different view isn't surprising
parents are frequently unaware of their children's activities and that's especially true if the children are engaged in a homosexual lifestyle
oh, the parents could be right and all these other people lying but there are contradictory accounts here and the gay fringe community wants us to believe this is a simple random hate crime
there was, at minimum, surely more to it
that Shepard's parents have a different view isn't surprising
How surprising is it that you completely ignored this:
Dave, a Captain with the City of Laramie police force at the time, was Laramie's lead investigator in the case and worked in tandem with Rob DeBree, the lead investigator for the Albany County Sheriff's Department, to bring the case to trial and to provide the evidence necessary to convict both Russell Henderson and Aaron McKinney. (Both law enforcement officers are in complete agreement with the facts as stated during the trials.)
What's not surprising is that after they confessed, they tried to change their stories and got their old buddies to lie for them.
The facts at the trial don't establish anti-gay motives
It was irrelevant since there was no hate crimes law in Wyoming
Retired Police Chief of Laramie, Commander Dave O'Malley, in his interview with ABC, pointed out that the drug motive does not necessarily disqualify the anti-gay motive: "My feelings have been that the initial contact was probably motivated by robbery because they needed money. What they got was $20 and a pair of shoes ... then something changed and changed profoundly... But, we will never, ever know because Matt’s dead."
So, at best, police are saying, maybe it was a hate crime in addition to a robbery attempt.
McKinney's girlfriend says McKinney was bi-sexual.
His former landlord, a male, says it too and said he had sex with him.
McKinney doesn't concur that he is bi-sexual, had sex with the guy who said he did or that he had ever met Shepard before so it's a stretch to say anyone is making that up on his behalf
His drug use and the robbery, which he does concur with, are established and he was under the influence when arrested so he may have been repeating things in an enraged stupor that he had heard.
There are other possibilities.
Shepard tested positive for AIDS so if McKinney had had intercourse with him that might have angered him to violence if he found out or if Shepard had told him at the bar that night.
Also, since McKinney was in the closet, he may have objected to Shepard's public acknowledgement of that and may have wanted to make sure no one found he had sexual relations with Shepard.
There are really many scenarios and the random hate crime seems the least likely.
But it's the closest the gay fringe has come to finding a case that substantiates a situation they claim is common.
Right, Anon-B?
Thanks for displaying perfect birther dislogic.
You doubt the parents of the murdered young gay man because you suspect their motives.
You're mute on the fact that the transcript of Aaron McKinney's in-custody interview which took place a few days after the murder was not included in the 20/20 program.
You claim that while being interviewed, the murderer "**may** have been repeating things in an enraged stupor that he had heard" but the interview "took place a few days after the murder" when whatever self-medications the murders used the night of the murder would have worn off.
You believe the statements of McKinney's girlfriend and former landlord more than you believe the trial and police records.
You **may** want to lay off the self-medications yourself.
Anon-B
you want to believe random attacks on gays, out of sheer hatred, are commonplace
this isolated case years ago is the only thing you've got to fee your advocacy
just wanting to believe it, doesn't make it true
the trial was for murder not hate crimes
the motive wasn't ruled on, only the guilt
no one disagrees
btw, jackass, I didn't "suspect the motives of the parents of the murdered young gay man"
I said parents may not always be aware of their children's activities
especially children who have developed same sex deviancy
this isolated case years ago is the only thing you've got to fee[d] your advocacy
Holy toledo, Anon! I told you to lay off the meds, but there you go, making mistakes again!
Anybody who **thinks** Matthew Shepard is the **only** LGBT person to be attacked for being LGBT is mistaken.
And calling me a jackass only proves you are one.
"Anybody who **thinks** Matthew Shepard is the **only** LGBT person to be attacked for being LGBT is mistaken."
All types of people get attacked all the time.
I'm saying random attacks against gays for being gay aren't happening.
It's a delusion you're having.
"And calling me a jackass only proves you are one."
You're the one that made yourself into one.
Here's what you said when you were being a jackass:
"You doubt the parents of the murdered young gay man because you suspect their motives."
I didn't suspect the motives of Shepard's parents and your saying so makes you a jackass.
Now, go out back, chomp on some grass and let out a big ol' bray!
Post a Comment
<< Home