Sunday, February 03, 2008

Sunday: It Was a Pretty Good Week

On Sunday mornings, WPFW tends to play religious and gospel music before nine. I get up, usually, before the rest of the family, make a pot of coffee and listen to the radio while I take some time to write something for the blog, sitting at the kitchen table. Now a soprano is singing "Ave Maria" with piano accompaniment. It sounds pure and undisappointed in a way I'll never be.

A couple of things happened this week that we should be glad about, things having to do with the sex-ed curriculum here in Montgomery County. First of all, it was great to get the report from the school district about the classes that have been implemented. Both eighth and tenth grade classes have been taught. Ninety-seven percent attendance in the high schools -- that's wonderful. There was no controversy, no disturbance, kids went to class, took notes, thought about tolerance, respect, and empathy for a couple of hours. All the classes have been taught, everything was normal and cool.

It is so amazing to think that a group of our neighbors spent so much effort trying to stop something that is so positive and good. It is also amazing to look back at the amount of effort we put into stopping them. Across the country there are communities where people didn't stop them, people sat in their own houses grumbling but didn't get out and shine a light on the nuttiness, they let them get away with the lies and the dirty tricks. We have an election this year, but I don't know if it will be enough to undo the damage that has been done. I think individual people have to take action at the personal level, to erase the ugliness these dangerous people have created.

Another good thing was the judge's ruling in the latest appeal. It's getting a little complicated at this point, there's been so much, but the Nutty Ones asked a county court to overrule the decision by the state school board that the county school board had done the right thing in developing and implementing the new curriculum. This week the court said, no, there's no problem, the state board's decision to support the county board was just fine.

This should be the end of it. The classes have been taught, the courts have ruled a bunch of times, the opposition has no momentum, no support. They told The Post they have a month to file an appeal, I assume that's correct and that they'll probably do it. They have lost, but they keep going. It's like the ninth inning when the home team is winning, and the visitors still want to play the second half of the inning.

Of course, now they've changed their mission. They changed their name from Citizens for a Responsible Curriculum to Citizens for Responsible Government, and now the very same people are parading around trying to get a referendum on the ballot to remove gender identity from the county's nondiscrimination law. Their whole argument is that the law will lead to men going into ladies shower-rooms and bathrooms. It is a weak and disingenuous premise, and a lie. There's no law against men going into the ladies room now, and it won't change when the new law comes into effect. There are some few people who are undergoing sex reassignment surgery and have ambiguous physical features, perhaps breasts and a penis, as they transition from one sex to the other. It would be surprising to see somebody like that in a shower-room, but the fact is the number of people in that state is extremely small, especially the number of them who belong to a gym, and they are going to be shy about it, not parading around. The absurdity of the hypothetical situation is so bizarre, you wonder how the CR-Whatever are able to show their faces in public.

They need 12,501 petition signatures by tomorrow. Their latest newsletter says they have 11,500 "raw signatures in hand." They are discovering what they call "issues" with a lot of the signatures, and say they need another 4,000. We are hearing from people who encounter them at shopping malls, people who are receiving robo-calls telling them that the bill will let men go into the women's showers. They were caught staging a hoax at a local gym, where one of their men put on a dress and went into the ladies locker room, apparently to prove how "real" the threat is. We have heard of pastors telling their congregations to sign the petitions, to keep men out of the ladies room.

If they are able to turn 12,501 valid signatures in to the Board of Elections tomorrow, then they will need to get another 12,501 by the middle of the month, this is just a halfway mark that the referendum process requires them to meet. Given the trouble they are having getting the first half, I think it's pretty safe to say we won't be voting on this in November.

You just have to wonder why this is so important to them. How often do you see a transgender person? How inconvenient is it for you -- think about your own life -- to treat them fairly? I mean, really, how big of a deal is that? It doesn't make any kind of sense to invest that much energy in fighting to keep the right to discriminate against transgender people, doesn't make sense on any level. Even if you took their argument at face value, that transitioning transgender people, in particular males who are transitioning to female, are going to use the ladies locker-room -- how often do you think that is going to happen? Ever? Have you ever in your life heard of that happening? And if it did, can you explain what the danger was? They are really going to some trouble over this.

Well it's Super Bowl day. My wife made a big bowl of her special salsa yesterday and there's still some left, though it's not guaranteed that we won't have eaten it all by gametime. Ah, here I see the kids left the bag of chips open, I'm sure they'll be nice and stale -- teenagers! This seems like a good day to put a log in the fireplace and kick back around the house.

46 Comments:

Blogger Dana Beyer, M.D. said...

Capped off by the most stunning upset in Super Bowl and NY football Giants history!

February 04, 2008 12:12 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yeah, Dana, don't you think Eli makes a much better MVP than his irritating brother?

"On Sunday mornings, WPFW tends to play religious and gospel music before nine. I get up, usually, before the rest of the family, make a pot of coffee and listen to the radio while I take some time to write something for the blog, sitting at the kitchen table. Now a soprano is singing "Ave Maria" with piano accompaniment. It sounds pure and undisappointed in a way I'll never be."

Hey, Jim, give yourself a treat. Get dressed some Sunday morning and go hear some of that music live.

It's free!

February 04, 2008 8:14 AM  
Blogger Christine said...

There was also some sad news this week. We lost the President of the County Council, Marilyn Praisner.

Arrangements Announced for

Montgomery County Councilmember Marilyn Praisner

Memorial Mass to be Held Saturday, Feb. 9

ROCKVILLE, February 1, 2008—Arrangements for a viewing and a memorial mass for Montgomery County Councilmember Marilyn J. Praisner have been announced.

Mrs. Praisner, the longest serving current member of the Council in her fifth term, passed away this morning at Suburban Hospital in Bethesda of complications following heart valve replacement surgery. She was 66.

Viewing on Monday, Feb. 4, and Tuesday, Feb. 5: From 2-4 p.m. and 6-8 p.m. at Hines Rinaldi Funeral Home, 11800 New Hampshire, Silver Spring. A prayer service will be held on Tuesday evening at 7:30 pm.

Interment: Will be private.

Memorial Mass on Saturday, Feb. 9: At 11 a.m. at St. John the Baptist Church, 12319 New Hampshire Avenue, Silver Spring.

In lieu of flowers: The family of Mrs. Praisner said that contributions can be made to the following:

Ida Raitano Scholarship Fund
c/o Associate Alumnae of Douglass College
181 Ryder Lane
New Brunswick, NJ 08901

February 04, 2008 4:26 PM  
Anonymous Mr. Teacher Man said...

www.nbc4.com.

I just wanted to keep everyone abreast of ongoings.

BALTIMORE -- A federal judge in Baltimore has upheld the October jury verdict in the lawsuit brought against a fundamentalist church group for its anti-gay protest at the 2006 Maryland funeral of a Marine killed in Iraq.

However, the judge has reduced by more than half the total amount of damages awarded to the plaintiff, the Marine's father.

The decision by U.S. District Judge Richard Bennett means the Kansas-based Westboro Baptist Church and three of its members must pay total compensatory and punitive damages of $5 million for emotional distress and invasion of privacy. The original jury award was $10.9 million.

The appeal by Westboro to overturn the verdict is still pending.

Westboro members believe U.S. deaths in Iraq are punishment for the nation's tolerance of homosexuality.

February 04, 2008 7:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Just thought I'd keep everyone abreast of the latest activities of the lunatic fringe gay advocacy groups:

"The Gay-Straight Alliance Network (GSA) is doing its best to make sure high schools use next week — the so-called Freedom to Marry Week — to rally support among students for same-sex "marriage." Schools are encouraged to feature mock weddings, guest speakers, teach-ins and a movie night with gay-themed films.

Randy Thomas, executive vice president with Exodus International, said the agenda is clear.

“GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network) and GSA groups are all about indoctrinating our young people to a gay worldview," he told Family News in Focus. "And now they’re not settling for just indoctrinating young people, they’re trying to turn them into activists.”"

February 04, 2008 7:58 PM  
Anonymous Mr. Teacher Man said...

I think it's a fantastic thing that we we teaching tolerance. Go GLSEN! GO Gay-Straight Alliances! Thank God MCPS does not support the Red Neck Agenda (nor do the majority of well-traveled, educated and worldly Americans). My GSA is quite active and very well-accepted in my school and, once again, tolerance builds equality. No injustice against human rights should be tolerated, however. You CRW(weirdos) need to go somewhere where facts and education is no valued... How about Mars? Truth wins.

February 04, 2008 8:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

BTW- the GSA at my school will be at those rallies and so will over 40 of their straight allies. We are looking forward to the Feb. 11th lobby days as well.

February 04, 2008 8:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I think it's a fantastic thing that we we teaching tolerance."

Bizarro Teacher-Man is a hypocrite. He doesn't want tolerance for all sexual perversions. Only homosexuality.

February 04, 2008 9:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Andrea- not anon
Moron Anon - go away. You are a hateful bigot- you belong elsewhere. I am serious- you are disgusting. Please go and write on the Recall/Shower blog with like minded haters. You must really be pathetic to keep coming here and writing the trash you do.

February 04, 2008 10:31 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Andrea- not anon
Moron Anon - go away. You are a hateful bigot- you belong elsewhere. I am serious- you are disgusting. Please go and write on the Recall/Shower blog with like minded haters. You must really be pathetic to keep coming here and writing the trash you do.

February 04, 2008 10:31 PM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

Anonymous said...
"Bizarro Teacher-Man is a hypocrite. He doesn't want tolerance for all sexual perversions. Only homosexuality."
----
From the CRC "blog" June 27, 2007:

Lichman wants to open the door to “sexual orientation.” But not all 30 orientations found in the DSM-IV-R such as Apotemnophilia - sexual arousal associated with the stump of an amputee; Coprophilia - sexual arousal associated with feces; Kleptophilia - obtaining sexual excitement from stealing; Sexual Sadism - the intentional infliction of pain or humiliation on another person in order to achieve sexual excitement; not to mention pedophila, necrophilia and many others are discussed, yet. When will we hear about these? We believe if you want to discuss orientation, put them all on the table. We don’t want our children to be ignorant. After all, Sexual Identity Disorder is celebrated in the curriculum by Portia.
--
Anon and the CRW would teach that all GLBT students in Montgomery County are the equivalent of:

The stump of an amputee
Feces
The act of stealing
The act of inflicting pain and humiliation
Raping children
Screwing corpses

In their minds there is no difference between loving these things and a gay person loving another human being.

Furthermore, the "morality" of Randy Thomas of Exodus and Focus on the Family, would be to indoctrinate young people into believing that all GLBT persons should be imprisoned and put to death - as per their support of anti-sodomy laws and use of Leviticus 20:13.

Thus, the necessity of GLSEN and GSA’s.

February 04, 2008 11:12 PM  
Anonymous Mr. Teacher Man said...

Then call me a hypocrite, AnonFreak. I know that my God is a loving God who loves me for who I am. Just like women who wear pants...even though it's a sin he still loves them. He also still loves those who go out and work on during the Sabbath... And, oh my, what about those of us who support those who work during the Sabbath by going out to a bar, going out for dinner or the movies? Wow, we are just a whole bunch of sinners here.

No, I don't not believe that "ex-gays" exist in MCPS or anywhere else in the world. I believe that they are some vulnerable individuals who were taught hate and homophobia as something that is "right" as they were being raised were tricked into your Red Neck Agenda and usually end up spend the rest of their lives depressed and suicidal. I am not sure that God would approve of people trying to change others like that--Nor would our U.S. Constitution.

I do not believe that majority needs laws protecting them. And, even though I do not believe they exist, "ex-gays" are just that, "ex-gays"-- would be part of the majority--"straight". Truth wins.

February 05, 2008 5:31 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

So, Mr B-TM, are there or are there not any sexual perversions that you would not tolerate?

I'm just trying to find out if you're an intolerant bigot. When you say: "I think it's a fantastic thing that we we teaching tolerance", what exactly are we teaching tolerance of? Is it complete tolerance or is it only tolerance for those you have deemed worthy of tolerance?

February 05, 2008 7:59 AM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

Anonymous said...
"Randy Thomas, executive vice president with Exodus International, said the agenda is clear."
--
Exodus International also maintains that Hitler was gay and that gays are responsible for the holocaust.

Now let's try this again:
--
"Randy Thomas, executive vice president with Exodus International, said the agenda is clear.

“GLSEN (Gay, Lesbian & Straight Education Network) and GSA groups are all about indoctrinating our young people to a gay worldview," he told Family News in Focus"

--
So the "gay worldview" = treating other people as fellow human beings, and the Exodus International Family News in Focus worldview = teaching that same gender attraction, IN AND OF ITSELF, lead to the deaths of 6 million people.

And Anonymous would like for these people get into the schools.

February 05, 2008 8:22 AM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

From the book American Fascists. The first chapter opens with this quote.
--
Unlimited tolerance must lead to the disappearance of tolerance. If we extend unlimited tolerance even to those who are intolerant, if we are not prepared to defend a tolerant society against the onslaught of the intolerant, then the tolerant will be destroyed, and tolerance with them.

In this formulation, I do not imply, for instance, that we should always suppress the utterance of intolerant philosophies; as long as we can counter them by rational argument and keep them in check by public opinion, suppression would certainly be most unwise. But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols.

We should therefore claim, in the name of tolerance, the right not to tolerate the intolerant. We should claim that any movement preaching intolerance places itself outside the law, and we should consider incitement to intolerance and persecution as criminal, in the same way as we should consider incitement to murder, or to kidnapping, or to the revival of the slave trade, as criminal.

Karl Popper, The Open Society and Its Enemies

February 05, 2008 8:39 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols."

Wow!

Improv has now revealed himself. According to him, violence is justified against those he deems intolerant because they might become violent. Pre-emptive violence.

Here we have a card-carrying member of the lunatic fringe.

February 05, 2008 9:51 AM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

Anonymous said...
"Wow!

Improv has now revealed himself. According to him, violence is justified against those he deems intolerant because they might become violent. Pre-emptive violence."

--
That accusation doesn't answer my question.

So I repeat:

If same-gender attraction, IN AND OF ITSELF, were not a sin, what problem would you then have with it?

February 05, 2008 10:10 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Didn't know you thought I had to answer to you.

Thanks for letting me know.

I didn't make an accusation. I pasted a portion of a quote from you stating that violence is a justified response to "intolerant" speech.

I had assumed that freedom of speech was an irreducible standard of civilized behavior that was agreed to by everyone here but apparently the lunatic fringe elements have no irreducible standards.

February 05, 2008 10:23 AM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

Anonymous said...
"Didn't know...I had to answer to you.

Thanks for letting me know."


You're welcome. :)

February 05, 2008 10:41 AM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

Christine said…
There was also some sad news this week. We lost the President of the County Council, Marilyn Praisner.

Montgomery County Councilmember Marilyn Praisner

---
Thank you Christine.
---
From another article:

"Nobody in Montgomery County government ever worked harder, knew more, or cared more than Marilyn Praisner," Montgomery County Executive Isiah Leggett says in a statement. "[She worked] tirelessly to make a good County better in her 18 years on the Council... [and] brought to whatever task at hand a keen intellect, a big heart, and a passionate devotion to public service."
---
Thank you for everything Marilyn.

~Patrick
---
From the same link:

In lieu of flowers, Mrs. Praisner's family has requested donations be made to the Ida Raitano Scholarship Fund at Douglass College, a fund named for Praisner's mother, who died in 2001. The scholarship provides financial assistance annually to a first-in-family college student or an older student.

Contributions may be sent to:

Ida Raitano Fund/Douglass Annual Fund
Douglass College Alumnae Association
181 Ryder Lane, New Brunswick, N.J. 08901-8557

February 05, 2008 11:05 AM  
Anonymous Robert said...

Anonymous,

You never answered my question: is anti-gay activism (or, if you will, combatting the gay agenda) part of your job?

rrjr

February 05, 2008 11:49 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

sorry, Robert, no personal questions

the conversation should be about ideas not personalities

lunatic fringe types love to shift the conversation to personal attacks

February 05, 2008 12:31 PM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

Anonymous said...
"the conversation should be about ideas not personalities"

Sorry, homey don't play that. Every time you say gay agenda this, homosexual agenda that, you've made it personal for every LGBT person on the planet.
--
Fourth time:

If same-gender attraction, IN AND OF ITSELF, were not a sin, what problem would you then have with it?

February 05, 2008 12:47 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Didn't know you thought I had to answer to you.

Thanks for letting me know.

February 05, 2008 1:25 PM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

Anonymous said...
"Didn't know you thought I had to answer to you.

Thanks for letting me know."

--
Yes you did, but I digress.

How do you know that the Bible is true?

February 05, 2008 1:50 PM  
Blogger Randi Schimnosky said...

Anonymous said "Improv has now revealed himself. According to him, violence is justified against those he deems intolerant because they might become violent. Pre-emptive violence.".

No the quote specifically said if they "answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols" we should be prepared to use force.

Anonymous, why are you afraid of answering this question: "If same-gender attraction, IN AND OF ITSELF, were not a sin, what problem would you then have with it?"?

Are you afraid that if you're truthful you can't defend your bigotry?

February 05, 2008 2:02 PM  
Blogger Randi Schimnosky said...

Anonymous said "So, Mr B-TM, are there or are there not any sexual perversions that you would not tolerate?".

Yes, I tolerate heterosexuality.

February 05, 2008 2:15 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"quote specifically said if they "answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols" we should be prepared to use force."

You're wrong, Randi. Here's the quote:

"But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols."

It says it is justified not as a response to violence but as a response to the possibility that they MAY teach others to be violent. It's a dangerous and inflammatory quote, endorsed improvisationally by our not-to-thoughtful friend, Improv.

February 05, 2008 2:22 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Anonymous said "So, Mr B-TM, are there or are there not any sexual perversions that you would not tolerate?".

Yes, I tolerate heterosexuality."

But is there any perversion that you or Mr B-TM wouldn't tolerate?

February 05, 2008 2:23 PM  
Anonymous Mr. Teacher Man said...

I tolerate you, AnonFreak... you seem quite perverted since all you do is sit at home and think about what kind of sex the rest of the world is having behind closed doors.

February 05, 2008 2:24 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Anonymous, why are you afraid of answering this question: "If same-gender attraction, IN AND OF ITSELF, were not a sin, what problem would you then have with it?"?"

I didn't answer it the first time because it was out of sync with the conversation at the time.

I'm not answering it now because Improv wants me to.

February 05, 2008 2:25 PM  
Anonymous Mr. Teacher Man said...

Maybe you should just do what the Bible says and go out and start killing gays, AnonFreak. Then you would be happy... especially in prison...don't drop the soap!

February 05, 2008 2:26 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I tolerate you, AnonFreak... you seem quite perverted since all you do is sit at home and think about what kind of sex the rest of the world is having behind closed doors."

And I am so grateful for your gracious tolerance but I was asking is there any perversion you won't tolerate.

You don't have to answer. Silence is kind of an answer here.

February 05, 2008 2:28 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Maybe you should just do what the Bible says and go out and start killing gays,"

The Bible doesn't say that, Mr B-MT.

February 05, 2008 2:29 PM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

Anonymous said...
"I'm not answering it now because Improv wants me to."

Note the time and date for that comment:
February 05, 2008 2:25 PM
--
I actually appreciate that Anon, it's honest.

February 05, 2008 2:35 PM  
Anonymous Mr. Teacher Man said...

I don't consider homosexuality perversion, AnonFreak. I am not a pervert. I love my fiancé and we will soon be married and adopt children. I love my job as a teacher and feel like my students are good-spirited people who believe in equality and justice.

I'll play your game, "I don't understand your question-- could you be more specific???"

February 05, 2008 2:50 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"Note the time and date for that comment"

OK, man, we noted it.

February 05, 2008 2:52 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

"I don't consider homosexuality perversion,"

But you see, Mr TM, some people do. I can understand you disagreeing and even being angry about it. But the whole "tolerance" thing is just a dishonest rhetorical device. We all agree that perversion shouldn't be tolerated. We just don't agree on what it is.

February 05, 2008 2:56 PM  
Blogger Randi Schimnosky said...

Red Baron said "You're wrong, Randi. Here's the quote:

"But we should claim the right to suppress them if necessary even by force; for it may easily turn out that they are not prepared to meet us on the level of rational argument, but begin by denouncing all argument; they may forbid their followers to listen to rational argument, because it is deceptive, and teach them to answer arguments by the use of their fists or pistols."

It says it is justified not as a response to violence but as a response to the possibility that they MAY teach others to be violent.".

No, it says use force "IF necessary", if they "answer arguments by the use of fists or pistols."

Red Baron said " We all agree that perversion shouldn't be tolerated".

Wrong. People are welcome to whatever perversion they want as long as they do it with conscenting adults and don't hurt anyone. In otherwords you're welcome to heterosexuality.

February 05, 2008 3:29 PM  
Blogger Randi Schimnosky said...

Emproph asked Red Baron "If same-gender attraction, IN AND OF ITSELF, were not a sin, what problem would you then have with it?".

Red Baron replied, "I'm not answering it now because Improv wants me to.". A rather immature and pathetic excuse. You don't answer it because if you do you can't defend your bigotry.

Red Baron said "The Bible doesn't say that, Mr B-MT.".

Maybe if you made your lies a little less obvious you could get away with it. Clearly the bible does call for the death of gays:

Leviticus 20:13
"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them.".

You knew you were lying, knew you were going to get caught at it, and yet you did it anyway - shows just how insane and dishonest you are and explains why you don't want to be associated with the posts you make

February 05, 2008 3:36 PM  
Anonymous Mr. Teacher Man said...

I agree, Randi.

AnonFreak, have all the heterosexual life you want and I will stick my homosexual life.

I'm happy, secure and confident: what else could one want (Oh, AnonFreak, I am sure you will come up with something...but for me, it's all I want)????????????

February 05, 2008 3:38 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This just in:

Huckabee won the first race of Super Tuesday, taking all of West Virginia's delegates.

Exit polling showed voters wanted to send a message to TTF.

February 05, 2008 3:46 PM  
Anonymous Mr. Teacher Man said...

Oh, AnonFreak.

What a fake little world you live in.

February 05, 2008 3:55 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Check the news, BM.

Huck took the first Super Tuesday contest.

February 05, 2008 4:10 PM  
Anonymous Emproph said...

Anonymous said...
"I don't consider homosexuality perversion,"

"But you see, Mr TM, some people do. I can understand you disagreeing and even being angry about it. But the whole "tolerance" thing is just a dishonest rhetorical device. We all agree that perversion shouldn't be tolerated. We just don't agree on what it is."
--
For the record, and as loathe as I am to do so, I can see that statement as non-antagonistic, and possibly even mostly sincere.

I disagree with the dishonesty aspect of "tolerance thing," as you put it.

Even if you believe we're perverted, it's important to understand that we don't consider ourselves as so, and therefore don't consider our motives to be dishonest.

I can handle the condemnation of perversion, but not the accusation of dishonesty.

It's an important distinction, unless you believe that our "perversion" is what causes our "dishonesty" (gay agenda, etc).

So anyway Anon, in between mocking you to death, I'm perfectly willing to be honest with you if you're willing to be honest with me, when the time calls for it.

February 05, 2008 4:14 PM  
Anonymous you've got to be kidding said...

Anon said ...Pre-emptive violence.

Here we have a card-carrying member of the lunatic fringe.


If pre-emptive violence indicates membership in some lunatic fringe, what does pre-emptive war indicate?

Anon continued the conversation should be about ideas not personalities..., and then she said, I'm not answering it now because Improv wants me to..., turning the conversation about ideas into ... a ... clash of personalities!

Anon crowed Huck took the first Super Tuesday contest.

Yeah, that'll carry old Huck all the way to the White House...

February 05, 2008 5:38 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home