Patterico's Pontifications

5/31/2015

NY Hotelier Who Hosted Ted Cruz Dinner Actually Donated Max Amount Allowed To His Campaign

Filed under: General — Dana @ 12:06 pm

[guest post by Dana]

The NYT is reporting that, in spite of earlier claims that it was not a fundraising event and no checks were written, one of the now infamous hoteliers who hosted a dinner for Sen. Ted Cruz last month actually donated the maximum amount allowed to Cruz’s presidential campaign, but requested it be returned:

“In the interest of transparency, I gave Senator Cruz a $2,700 check to show my support for his work on behalf of Israel,” Mr. Reisner said in a statement he provided after The Times learned of the donation from two people with direct knowledge of it. “When I realized his donation could be misconstrued as supporting his anti-gay marriage agenda, I asked for the money back. Senator Cruz’s office gave the money back, and I have no intention of giving any money to any politicians who aren’t in support of L.G.B.T. issues.”

Cue the LGBT outraged brigade, because no one is allowed to think for themselves and make their own decisions which may or may not appear to be breaking ranks for a cause other than gay rights. Because it is always about them:

Mr. Reisner and Mr. Weiderpass have been doing damage control for over a month since the dinner, which made them pariahs in New York City’s gay rights community in which they’d been figures for years. As two people who have rarely donated politically, they seemed surprised by the reaction, stressing they were drawn to Mr. Cruz because of their mutual interests in foreign policy.

How sad that a grown man felt compelled to lie about his donation made to show support for a cause other than gay rights. How sad that he chose to cave to intolerant militancy rather than stand by his convictions. Certainly it has been a painful lesson for Reisner to see just how powerful and relentless the hate can be for going against the flow. Foolishly, he believed his stature in the cause made him immune to such attacks. But there can will be no dissension (or even the appearance of…). Ironically and tellingly, it is this very group whose opinion of him matters most – as he continues to support and be a willing participant in their hate machine.

The intolerant LGBT crowd simply cannot fathom or accept allow others within their ranks to actually think as individuals and not trained monkeys. Never can any other issue be equally as important as gay rights:

Yet the anger at the hoteliers has been fierce and unrelenting. Mr. Reisner is under great pressure from angry residents in the Fire Island Pines who want him to divest of his interest in the commercial property there. In early May, Eric von Kuersteiner, a businessman on Fire Island who previously owned the properties in the harbor, even approached Mr. Reisner offering to buy him out for somewhere in the ballpark of $2 million.

–Dana

204 Responses to “NY Hotelier Who Hosted Ted Cruz Dinner Actually Donated Max Amount Allowed To His Campaign”

  1. Hello.

    Dana (86e864)

  2. In the immortal words of the Daleks, “Exterminate! Exterminate!”

    Gazzer (94c2c7)

  3. seriously?

    here’s what the hotel douche wrote in the NY Observer

    It is amazing that my businesses are being boycotted by some because I hosted a discussion with an elected official. Not a fundraiser. Not an endorsement. A dialogue.

    Hotel boy is a liar, and how is it in any way out of bounds if the people he lied to are now even more disinclined to gay it up at hotel boy’s businesses?

    I don’t get it.

    Seriously I should teach a business class for how not to take needlessly stupid political stances what alienate your core customers. I would call it How To Not Take Needlessly Stupid Political Stances What Alienate Your Core Customers

    happyfeet (831175)

  4. Yes, supporting Israel is awful.

    JD (46826b)

  5. The commercial itself is hardly controversial. Comedian and talk-show host Ellen DeGeneres, wearing holiday-themed gloves and hat, sits at a diner table with three of Santa’s elves. She asks them to make more toys for a JC Penney contest, and ends up accidentally insulting the tiny little helpers with a bunch of clumsy short jokes.

    “I know this is no small feat,” DeGeneres says as the elves grimace at what they take as a height reference. “Well, it’s a big deal.” Finally, she changes the subject entirely: “Who wants a cookie?”

    But the appearance of DeGeneres, a lesbian, is controversial indeed to those belonging to One Million Moms. The group posted this update Tuesday on its website:

    “Since April, JC Penney’s has not aired Ellen DeGeneres in one of their commercials until now. A new JCP ad features Ellen and three elves. JCP has made their choice to offend a huge majority of their customers again. Christians must now vote with their wallets.”

    happyfeet (831175)

  6. me me me

    i’d like a cookie ellen!!

    but i can’t have one cause of i went to dylan’s last week and had a dylan’s chillin (this is how you can make one at home)

    they’re these like smoothies they make with chocolate ganache

    mine was white chocolate and had a piece of cake and whipped cream on top

    it was ridiculous

    for one thing it’s $9

    which is fine but they give you way too much i think

    and it’s SO hard not to drink the whole thing cause it’s so good it make you wanna cry

    and sing

    and cry some more

    that’ll be all the chillin i do for awhile

    but the deal is you can get them hot, so next winter I’m a go there for when i needs me some hot chocolate

    happyfeet (831175)

  7. i love israel so much but the sad truth is unless she gets way way WAY better allies she’s so doomed

    right now as we speak obama’s negotiating israeli genocide with his persian pals

    john kerry was working on it but the story is he crashed his bike

    what a doof i hope he landed on his stupid face

    happyfeet (831175)

  8. Well, progressives are totalitarian. There is no private space and there is no picking and choosing what you will support. Once your identity is established, the whole party line follows.

    Gabriel Hanna (31e58f)

  9. I have no intention of giving any money to any politicians who aren’t in support of L.G.B.T. issues Democrats.

    Fixed that for you.

    If he were to give money to a Republican who supported “LGBT issues,” then the progressives would find some other reason to attack the target of his donation.

    The only way to be safe from the progressive lynch mob is to either shut up or give money to democrats.

    Because freedom.

    egd (1ad898)

  10. Clown nose off; clown nose on.

    Gazzer (d90d8d)

  11. you’re that nose guy

    happyfeet (831175)

  12. Happyfeet,’he gave money because of Cruz’s support of Israel. And you find that objectionable. Because of the buttsecks. And because you like tort your inner totalitarian out on this topic.

    JD (3b5483)

  13. nonono my point is that the people protesting the guy have every right to do so is all

    it’s not some huge outrage that people are critical of the dishonest hotel boys

    nobody’s even quantified how much this is even hurting their businesses, nor has anyone really explained why anyone should care if the businesses fail

    the hotel boys need to grow the eff up i think

    if i give monies to a fascist whore like obama, i can understand that there are some people what might not want to buy my peabnut bubber cookies

    if I give monies to a divisive anti-gay piece of harvard trash like Ted Cruz, i can understand that there are some people what might not want to buy my peabnut bubber cookies

    here is my solution

    i keep my monies!

    this way there’s more money for me!

    ok now just try and pick apart this argument i bet you can’t cause of it’s thoughtful and well-reasoned

    happyfeet (831175)

  14. A simple square footage calculation would tell you the chances are very high he landed on his face… “why the long face John..”-Sarah Palin
    See hf you do have something in common with her… so all yourLBTQI friends will now unfriend you and try to torpedo (so to speak) you and your livelihood.
    JC Penney will get over it. Ellen DeGeneres got paid regardless and is in no danger of being hurt by a boycott (I’ve met her and Portia in passing and they were very nice to me and my dog).
    I get real upset when anyone attacks an individual gay, straight, whatever who really cannot fight back.
    The cowards have figured out they can’t hurt Cruz, so they attack a guy who makes a living running a boutique hotel. Why ruin his life? Oh, to make an example of him so no one else dares decide to step out of line.
    What if a gay Jewish man declared for Cruz based on Cruz’ stance on ISIS? ISIS being important because they are stoning gay men to death (probably after raping them)?
    Noting that Cruz’ approach would likely save more gay men than the LBTQI office at the State dept>

    steveg (fed1c9)

  15. not a big fan of the trannies and i don’t even know what q’s and i’s are Mr. g

    but i see nothing wrong with not giving someone your monies if they’re acting against your best interests

    this is why i have no cable bill

    this is why i do not drive a stupid general motors car some disgusting uaw p.o.s. slobbered all over

    this is why i don’t eat organic food cause organic food is gay stupid and inefficient

    and does any of this make me a bad person no it do not

    happyfeet (831175)

  16. sometimes i get the organic spinach but that’s cause it comes in a really cool box

    happyfeet (831175)

  17. He gave money because of Cruz’s support of Israel? That right there is enough to get him boycotted, lynched, drawn and quartered. The demorats/leftists/pinkos/gays/Illegals and every other faction of demoratness all hate Israel. It’s demorat policy to hate Israel and love Palestine. They only used the “gay” thing so they didn’t have to admit they’re Jew haters. The gay thing “looks” better but we know what they really are. Anti-Semites. Jew haters. Racists. Bigots. But they love them some queers so all is good.

    Hoagie (f4eb27)

  18. (cue creaking rocking chair sound)
    Voice(elderly man’s voice): I remember… back in the day… they said you shouldn’t be a one-issue voter…
    of course back then they meant don’t let your vote be based on abortion,
    there were too many issues to think of to just limit your priorities on protecting the lives of the most defenseless…
    yep, that’s what they said…
    now, those same people say you should be a one issue voter, if its LGBT…

    Why is it “they ” get to tell us what to do, while they say we are telling them what to do?

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  19. Why is it “they ” get to tell us what to do, while they say we are telling them what to do?
    MD in Philly (f9371b) — 5/31/2015 @ 1:50 pm
    = = = = = =

    Because the Left does not know cause from effect. [Or: CHOOSES not to know, if you get what I mean.]

    Same thing when anarchist Blacks do their tribal-warfare “hit-and-run” attacks against whites — Our jolly Lefties take this as PROOF of “White Racism”, which OBVIOUSLY “triggers” this “unfortunate retaliation” by the “under-served and oppressed minorities”.

    Once the MF-MSM gets hold of an anti-establishment meme, good-freaking-luck trying to get Cause put back before Effect again. (And, the Cause-Effect conundrum *always* reminds me of Mark Steyn’s faux-headline: “Muslims fear backlash after tomorrow’s train bombing”.)

    A_Nonny_Mouse (f6c872)

  20. But the appearance of DeGeneres, a lesbian, is controversial indeed to those belonging to One Million Moms. The group posted this update Tuesday on its website:

    “Since April, JC Penney’s has not aired Ellen DeGeneres in one of their commercials until now. A new JCP ad features Ellen and three elves. JCP has made their choice to offend a huge majority of their customers again. Christians must now vote with their wallets.”

    happyfeet (831175) — 5/31/2015 @ 12:53 pm

    So tell us exactly what your point is as it relates to this hotelier. Assuming you know what it is.

    Gerald A (6b504a)

  21. You know, I felt kind of bad for Mr. Reisner when all of this first launched. Here he was facing a boycott from the Gaystapo because he refuses to tow the leftist line. But ever since he has layered groveling apology on top of groveling apology I have been forced to conclude that he is simply a coward, and at this point he frankly deserves to have his business interests fail, no matter what the reason. I can’t root for anyone who lacks the courage of his convictions.

    JVW (8278a3)

  22. JVW,

    I think it’s worse than just lacking the courage of his convictions and groveling: by confusing to seek their forgiveness he is publicly proclaiming he not only supports their tactics and approves of them, but also that he wants to remain a member of the hate mongers group. He is no different than they are – weak, without character, and just as intolerant.

    Dana (86e864)

  23. now, those same people say you should be a one issue voter, if its LGBT…

    It’s worse than that, MD. It’s not as if the LGBT community is in danger of being put into boxcars and sent to internment camps, despite their flair for drama and self-aggrandizement. No, being “an LGBT allly” these days means you have to buy into the whole program of graphic propaganda-based sex education in schools, set-asides and quotas for LGBT representation in all facets of life, forced “celebrating” of the LGBT lifestyle, and the wholesale change of any longstanding tradition which hasn’t already been altered to not just accommodate but celebrate their arbitrary whims. They are the antithesis of live and let live, which I was always told was all they were asking of the rest of us.

    JVW (8278a3)

  24. There are new rules in our transformed nation.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  25. Yes, DRJ, and when constraints and principles are removed in the name of any social fill-in-the-blank, the possibilities are limitless.

    Dana (86e864)

  26. Bruce Springsteen wrote a lyric about this:

    All them golden-heeled fairies in a real bitch fight
    Pull .38s and kiss their girls tonight

    I think he meant “girls” with quotation marks.

    nk (dbc370)

  27. yes, JVW, DRJ, and “DANA”

    many of us knew this was coming when the claim was for SSM “just to be fair”
    SS couples could have been afforded many of the legal privileges of marriage, had that been what society was willing to give them,
    without trying to make the argument that morally a SS couple was the same as a hetero- let the govt stay out of that one
    but feets and others said no, that’s not just a disagreement you are allowed to have, but bigoty hatred in this land where we bigoty haters aren’t allowed.

    Alinsky 101-marginalize and demonize your opponents
    which perhaps is another form of liberal projection

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  28. The LGBT God is a jealous God. Thou shalt have no other Gods before him/her/it.

    Russ from Winterset (e912a7)

  29. Now go read Patterico’s sermons about Rightwing behavior.

    This is what they do to their own, let alone Republicans.

    gahrie (12cc0f)

  30. “It is amazing that my businesses are being boycotted by some because I hosted a discussion with an elected official. Not a fundraiser. Not an endorsement. A dialogue.”

    I suppose donating to Cruz could be seen as an endorsement, but the meeting did not have toi ber a fundraiser for him to donate money to Cruz.

    Davod (f3a711)

  31. Happyfeet – it is simple to dismantle your emotional argument. You haven’t established Cruz is anti-gay.

    JD (3f77b7)

  32. Now go read Patterico’s sermons about Rightwing behavior.

    What does that mean, specifically?

    How dare I suggest for a moment that while calling out hypocrisy is fine, we should not lie or do immoral things in the process?

    Why, I must not be on the TEAM!!!

    Patterico (f82c2d)

  33. You are clearly overwrought

    JD (3b5483)

  34. I’M OVERWROUGHT BECAUSE MD IN PHILLY JUST PUT ME IN QUOTATION MARKS!

    Dana (86e864)

  35. hmmm, my quotation marks had nothing to do with nk’s or Bruce’s quotation marks,
    it just had to do with making you all caps for the sake of “case alliteration”

    and I am not overwrought about it

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  36. You are clearly overwrought

    When I’m not sermonizing I am overwrought.

    Patterico (f82c2d)

  37. Now me? I’m mostly underwrought.

    Gazzer (d90d8d)

  38. I don’t think it is cowardice. That depends on where he goes from here.
    His entire world was threatened and he needed and needs to buy some time to learn how to handle this firestorm.

    The simple way to do it would be to throw Obama under the bus as a guy who claims to be for Israel, but is letting Iran get nuclear.
    A guy who was against gay marriage and then switched with the political wind
    But the gay community won’t let that happen, so he has to figure out how to survive this economically during the high season on Fire Island.
    His entire economic life is tied up in this mess along with partners who no doubt have pointed out “this is on you. fix it now or I’ll sue”
    Mulling this over, I now think he asked for the “donation for Israel” back too soon.
    He should have attacked (nameless) politicians who say they are for Israel and then do the opposite as well a people who get all for same sex marriage during one cycle of elections and all traditional when the polls say they need those votes.

    Most gay men I know are very sensitive to criticism from other gay men. And gay men can be f****** mean and intolerant.

    steveg (fed1c9)

  39. Most gay men I know are very sensitive to criticism from other gay men.

    That’s just a nice way of saying that they are moral cowards, lacking the courage of their convictions.

    JVW (8278a3)

  40. @ steveg,

    I now think he asked for the “donation for Israel” back too soon.
    He should have attacked (nameless) politicians who say they are for Israel and then do the opposite as well a people who get all for same sex marriage during one cycle of elections and all traditional when the polls say they need those votes.

    According to the article, he asked for the donation back after the NYT reported on it. In the interest of transparency, one wouldn’t lie until they were found out. I don’t think he was overwhelmed about how to handle this, I think he was caught lying.

    Dana (86e864)

  41. Elton John played at Rush Limbaughs wedding.
    I doubt Elton needed the money (although I heard he asked $1,000,000)
    Besides the money, Elton says he did it because we should never stop talking to each other, and I do think that a lot of Limbaugh fans came away with an appreciation (see dictionary) of that insight.

    Sometimes you start off with the common ground… in this instance Israel… and go from there.

    hf- did you have a bad experience with a tranny? they can be way meaner than gay hairdressers

    lemme get this right…
    L is for Lesbian. G is for Gay. B is for Bi-Sexual. T is for Transexual and I is for intersex
    Somebody musta bought a vowel while I was in getting a beer

    steveg (fed1c9)

  42. Besides the money, Elton says he did it because we should never stop talking to each other, and I do think that a lot of Limbaugh fans came away with an appreciation (see dictionary) of that insight.

    Now see, Elton John on the other hand is a man with the courage of his convictions. Granted, he’s fabulously wealthy (see what I did there?), but he still shows the good sense not to kowtow to the LGBT Haya.

    JVW (8278a3)

  43. T.O.T.A.L.I.T.A.R.I.A.N!

    WarEagle82 (d35bad)

  44. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

    Since no one has ever said this before, I claim the phrase as mine. You may quote me with attribution.

    I will sue.

    Ag80 (eb6ffa)

  45. The Black community needs marriage promoted in it more than the gay community needs it. All the SJW’s what have you done about marriage for a community that could really benefit from it? Removes all doubt about whether those promoting gay marriage are
    ‘promoting marriage’ or ‘their view of marriage’ as they would say or really don’t give a crap out it and have a different agenda.

    jpm100 (504e18)

  46. The man is TEH GHEY. Anything he does is just groovie!! We cannot criticize TEH GHEY or TEH WYMYN.
    Chris Cuomo told me so. Something about James Madison outlawing HATE speech in TEH CONSTITUTION.

    Gus (7cc192)

  47. Let my synopsize!! Gay Jew, is only GAY. Being GAY defines who he is. Butt..(heh heh), not until other HOMO’S make it clear that GAY….IS MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE to anything else. Supporting Israel VERSUS a CULT that MURDERS HOMO’S is NOT APPROVED!! NO SOUP FOR HIM.

    Gus (7cc192)

  48. please to not dismantle my emotional argument

    not today

    not this early in the week

    let me just have this one thing

    happyfeet (831175)

  49. hf- did you have a bad experience with a tranny? they can be way meaner than gay hairdressers

    not in particular i just think the whole tranny moment thing is stupid trashy extremely contrived and very ree ree

    plus i think trannies are parasitic losers what glom onto the whole LGB thing because they’re deluded mentally ill self-mutilating morons who don’t realize they have absolutely nothing in common with gay people

    i don’t know why gay people put up with it

    plus they just look like they smell funny

    happyfeet (831175)

  50. Happyfeet brings up a good point. Amongst the LGBT-whatever community, every letter after G is considered to be lower caste untouchables by many of the L’s and the G’s. They go as far as believing that bisexuals want to “steal your energy” and give it to straights.

    Russ from Winterset (4335ca)

  51. Too many acronyms, too little time!

    Dana (86e864)

  52. this is why I check if there are two moons in the sky and bearded spock in the corner:

    http://legalinsurrection.com/2013/04/is-opisrael-invited-to-cunys-homonationalism-and-pinkwashing-conference/

    narciso (ee1f88)

  53. Let’s look at this from the opposite side. But to do that we need to do some supposing. First of all, we need to accept, for the purpose of this exercise, the premise that opposition to same-sex marriage is the same thing as bigotry against homosexuals. That is a ridiculous premise, but the people we’re talking about regard it as a self-evident truth, something so obvious it not only needs no evidence, but anyone who denies it is consciously lying.

    Actually, though, to make this exercise work we’ll need to do some more supposing: we’ll have to suppose that Cruz not only hates homosexuals, but is campaigning to reverse Lawrence and have sodomy once again banned in as mnay states as he can persuade to do so, and that if he were elected president he would drive homosexuals out of the civil service and armed forces, discriminate against them in the provision of federal services, and generally move the calendar back on gay rights as far as he could, preferably to the 1950s. You and I know that this is nonsense, that Cruz wouldn’t do that even if he could, but the people we’re talking about really and truly believe the opposite, or at least act as if they did and are not open to persuasion otherwise.

    OK, have we got those suppositions in mind? Now I want you to imagine a hypothetical situation which is the reverse of what happened here (or rather the reverse of what these people imagine happened here). Let’s suppose Mr Reisner, instead of hosting an event for Senator Cruz, held one for a left-wing candidate who supports gay rights, same-sex marriage, the whole gay agenda, but who is also openly anti-Israel, associated with CAIR and J Street, and if elected would withdraw US support for Israel and let its enemies do their best to destroy it and massacre or expel its Jewish population; let’s say a Cynthia McKinney or Hillary Clinton James Baker (no idea how he stands on homosexual issues, but let’s suppose he’s pro-gay). Can you not imagine the outrage in Jewish and pro-Israel circles? If Mr Reisner ran a kosher hotel, do you not suppose he might have a lot of vacancies this summer?

    Think about it.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  54. Voice(elderly man’s voice): I remember… back in the day… they said you shouldn’t be a one-issue voter…

    Who said it? Not the HRC types who are punishing Reisner. They are proudly one-issue voters (or two issues, since HRC is also pro-abortion). And that’s the point here. Reisner has two issues that are dear to him, and when a candidate supports one but opposes the other he has to balance them in a way that those who support only one of his issues may not like.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  55. It’s worse than that, MD. It’s not as if the LGBT community is in danger of being put into boxcars and sent to internment camps, despite their flair for drama and self-aggrandizement.

    But they really think they are. And it’s not so long ago that this was the reality in America, so they’re entitled to their paranoia, just as many Jews still fear that Christians will revert to their historical antisemitism and bring back the blood libels and autos-da-fe.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  56. that earlier link, illustrates the bizarre venn diagram that the left indulges in,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  57. Milhouse, please point out all the former internment camps for homosexuals scattered around the American countryside.

    Or just give me one. One would be enough.

    Russ from Winterset (4335ca)

  58. We’ve had internment camps for the Japanese (thanks FDR!), internment camps for Native Americans, and even internment camps for German-Americans and union members during WW1 (thanks, Woodrow!). But for the life of me I don’t recall any periods in history where American Brownshirts went door-to-door rounding up “gender minorities”.

    Maybe I was sick the day they taught that in American History class?

    Russ from Winterset (4335ca)

  59. Now see, Elton John on the other hand is a man with the courage of his convictions. Granted, he’s fabulously wealthy (see what I did there?), but he still shows the good sense not to kowtow to the LGBT Haya.

    He doesn’t depend for his livelihood on the LG* community’s goodwill. If he did, you can bet he’d toe the line.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  60. Milhouse, please point out all the former internment camps for homosexuals scattered around the American countryside.

    Every prison in America.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  61. I don’t recall any periods in history where American Brownshirts went door-to-door rounding up “gender minorities”.

    Look up “gay bashing”.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  62. In the 1950s homosexuals were constantly subject to being imprisoned, or committed to mental asylums, fired from their jobs, and beaten to death without the police lifting a finger to stop it.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  63. There are people alive who experienced this. Those days are thankfully gone, and are not coming back, but paranoia is understandable.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  64. Amongst the LGBT-whatever community, every letter after G is considered to be lower caste untouchables by many of the L’s and the G’s.

    Many male gays are effeminate in dress and behavior, and many lesbians over-masculine. Trannies are an even more emphatic reminder that “gay” and “lesbian” are only points on a spectrum of paraphilias and sexual fetishes, and not a “normal” variant of what stirs the undergrowth.

    In any event, what the LGBT-whatever “community” finds acceptable should concern normal people about as much as what the paranoid-schizophrenic community finds acceptable. But Orange County cops definitely should not beat them to death for sitting on the curb.

    nk (dbc370)

  65. you’re torching strawmen with a flamethrower, Milhouse,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  66. Yeah. I can remember seeing that “Arbeit Macht Frei” sign over the front gate of the Iowa State Penitentiary the last time I drove through Fort Madison.

    You latched onto a comment about “cattle cars” taking gays to camps here in America. That’s a very specific image. It’s a shame that you were just bull**itting.

    Russ from Winterset (4335ca)

  67. Government organizations rounding up a minority to send them to work & death camps = a few drunken yahoos who decide to beat someone up because they’re different.

    Russ from Winterset (4335ca)

  68. No, I’m telling the exact truth. And explaining how this history lends credence to paranoid delusions, which are then in turn cynically manipulated by the political operatives who make up the organized “gay activism” scene.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  69. Yeah. I can remember seeing that “Arbeit Macht Frei” sign over the front gate of the Iowa State Penitentiary the last time I drove through Fort Madison.

    What difference does a sign make? The sign is not what’s significant about Auschwitz; it’s what lay behind the gates. There’s nothing even wrong with “work makes one free”, as a slogan. That it was cynically put up in that place doesn’t mean that any place without such a sign is not Auschwitz.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  70. “Paranoia is understandable”. Yes. I agree.

    It would be natural for homosexuals to fear a group who CURRENTLY executes them in horrible ways (crucifixion, defenestration, stoning). But that would be considered “islamophobia” by our betters in government, and would quickly be stopped by a few well placed calls to LGBT-whatever community leaders.

    Russ from Winterset (4335ca)

  71. Government organizations rounding up a minority to send them to work & death camps = a few drunken yahoos who decide to beat someone up because they’re different.

    Brownshirts = “a few drunken yahoos”. The brownshirts were not a government organization, but the government approved of what they did and refused to do anything to stop them, exactly as the police approved of gay bashing and refused to do anything to stop it. And it was certainly government organizations who routinely arrested homosexuals and incarcerated them, and who ran Nuremberg-like restrictions against them.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  72. I have ancestors who were killed by Indians in the 1750’s. They were Amish farmers who decided it was better to passively bar their cabin door rather than grab their rifles and fight back. And the savages broke down the door and killed several of them and took the rest into captivity.

    Would this make it “perfectly rational” for me to work tirelessly to ostracize anyone who spoke favorably of Native Americans?

    Russ from Winterset (4335ca)

  73. It would be natural for homosexuals to fear a group who CURRENTLY executes them in horrible ways (crucifixion, defenestration, stoning). But that would be considered “islamophobia” by our betters in government, and would quickly be stopped by a few well placed calls to LGBT-whatever community leaders.

    Bullsh*t.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  74. The 1750s is not the 1950s.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  75. “62.In the 1950s homosexuals were constantly subject to being imprisoned, or committed to mental asylums, fired from their jobs, and beaten to death without the police lifting a finger to stop it.”

    And now we’ve progressed to a point where the refusal to participate in a gay wedding can result in hefty fines from government agencies and boycotts/death threats that send the poor, sad, Xistian bigots into hiding.

    Nope. 2015 and 1955? Not one little bit of difference.

    Russ from Winterset (4335ca)

  76. He doesn’t depend for his livelihood on the LG* community’s goodwill.

    I suppose that if you have a vegan restaurant you may end up being pressured to forbid your servers to wear leather shoes and to otherwise completely toe the PETA line, but that’s what you have gotten yourself in to by deciding to serve a very specific audience. But if you are running a hotel and your business model is to appeal specifically to the LGBT community — even in cities like New York or San Francisco — you probably have a pretty weak business model.

    JVW (8278a3)

  77. I doubt that any American jurisdiction punished the status of homosexual. Behavior yes, but very few for private behavior and even fewer as a serious crime. Public indecency laws against homosexual behavior pretty much paralleled heterosexual public indecency laws. Kennedy lays out the history in Lawrence v. Texas, to show that Virginia’s and Texas’s laws were aberrations historically as well as in modern times.

    nk (dbc370)

  78. The 1750s is not the 1950s.

    Sez you, injun-lover.

    Show me someone who remembers the 1750s.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  79. In the 1950s homosexuals were constantly subject to being imprisoned, or committed to mental asylums, fired from their jobs, and beaten to death without the police lifting a finger to stop it.”

    And now we’ve progressed to a point where the refusal to participate in a gay wedding can result in hefty fines from government agencies and boycotts/death threats that send the poor, sad, Xistian bigots into hiding.

    Indeed we have. The gay rights movement was right and just and necessary, and it achieved its legitimate goals. Hooray. Then it kept going and overshot, and now the pendulum has swung the other way. Things are not nearly as bad for Christians today as they were for homosexuals 50 years ago, and anyone who condones the way homosexuals were treated 50 years ago has no business complaining about how Christians are treated today, but it’s still objectively wrong and needs to be corrected. This does not change the fact that the Bad Old Days are still in living memory, and those who experienced them are justified in fearing that they might come back.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  80. But if you are running a hotel and your business model is to appeal specifically to the LGBT community — even in cities like New York or San Francisco — you probably have a pretty weak business model.

    Um, no. The hotel in question is in the Fire Island Pines. 100% of its potential clientele is gay. It’s as good a model as running a kosher restaurant in Brooklyn. And a kosher restaurateur who held an event for a Cynthia McKinney or a Pat Buchanan would go out of business.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  81. I doubt that any American jurisdiction punished the status of homosexual.

    Involuntary commitment to mental asylums, disqualification from public employment or from holding poublican’s licenses or professional licenses, is not technically “punishment”, but the difference is immaterial. As I said, Nuremberg-type laws.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  82. Things are not nearly as bad for Christians today as they were for homosexuals 50 years ago, and anyone who condones the way homosexuals were treated 50 years ago has no business complaining about how Christians are treated today, but it’s still objectively wrong and needs to be corrected.

    No, Milhouse, you are wrong. Christians were being fed to the lions long before homosexuals were fed to the lions. Homosexuality was celebrated in Greece before Christianity came on the scene. So I am not to sure your line of reasoning is particularly sound.

    What’s that? You said “not nearly as bad for Christians today?” Are you living under a rock? Christians decapited en masse just like the gays. Did you miss that?

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  83. Show me someone who remembers the 1750’s?

    I’m pretty sure the current occupant of the oval office remembers them clearly. After all, the Crusades are fresh in his mind.

    Russ from Winterset (623e61)

  84. “aberrations historically”. I’ve read that Germany did not have the history of anti-Semitism that its neighbors did. No towns named Judenberg (Jewtown) or Matajudios (Kill the Jews), or Cossacks raiding villages. It didn’t matter. It can happen here, so Milhouse’s parallel is not entirely inapropos. Although in oral arguments in the SSM case, the gays compared themselves to blacks not Jews (citing Brown and Loving). 😉

    nk (dbc370)

  85. Christians decapited en masse just like the gays.

    In America? That is the context, after all.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  86. Milhouse, I remembered your word “now”, I had hoped you would have remembered my word “like”. True, no gays being decapited in the U.S. just like no gays being decapited in the U.S.

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  87. Gahhhhh, “….just like no christians….”

    I blame work!

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  88. And nobody claimed that either gays or Christians are being decapitated in the USA. But the fact is that, within living memory, gays used to be persecuted in the USA in the name of Christianity. Now gays are no longer persecuted, and that’s a good thing. But there is now some persecution of Christians, in the name of gay rights, and that’s a bad thing. However, what is done to Christians today is nothing like what was done to gays 50 years ago, and many of those complaining about what’s happening now approve of what was happening 50 years ago.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  89. Um, no. The hotel in question is in the Fire Island Pines. 100% of its potential clientele is gay.

    No, Milhouse, it’s a bad business model if you are forever at the risk of offending your one narrow clientele base. Like my example of having a vegan restaurant but maybe not having the “right” opinions on using animals for research purposes. If your business means that you have to walk on eggshells always wondering if your politics meets with their approval, then you have chosen a really stupid business.

    JVW (8278a3)

  90. very nicely said Mr. Milhouse i wish i had your eloquence

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  91. (#89)

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  92. Milhouse,

    Surely you aren’t saying it’s fair to hurt Christians now because some people 50 years ago were cruel to gays?

    If so, would it be fair to hurt Christians now because some people are still being cruel to gays?

    DRJ (e80d46)

  93. First of all, Peace be with you, Milhouse!

    Now: “…and many of those complaining about what’s happening now approve of what was happening 50 years ago.”

    You seem so sure of that statement, sir. But I guess you could also say that were many who did approve then who now complain today. But I would stop short of saying that those who did condone then are not to be accorded any right to complain today, because tit for tat, maybe?. Why should you advocate this? It is not justice. This is what bothers me about your previous statment and I should have just addressed that alone.

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  94. It would be nice if you would answer my questions, too, happyfeet.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  95. Many of those complaining now approve of what happened in the 50’s?

    Please wash your hands thoroughly before putting words in my mouth. I don’t know where your hands have been. If “most” of the people you speak with condone historical gaybashing, maybe you should stop talking to the Phelps family from Topeka so much.

    Russ from Winterset (5cfb81)

  96. It seems we Texans are troubled by the same things.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  97. Fret not, Happyfeet. You are just as eloquent as Mr. Milhouse. That’s a good thing.

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  98. Surely you aren’t saying it’s fair to hurt Christians now because some people 50 years ago were cruel to gays?

    No, I’m saying the exact opposite, and I don’t see how you could possibly derive that position from anything I wrote.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  99. “Gay lives matter!” Christians? You’re just getting karma for what a few of your brethren did 60 years ago.

    And muslims……..we never mentioned you. Please don’t kill us.

    Russ from Winterset (5cfb81)

  100. Iowans are troubled at that as well, DRJ.

    Russ from Winterset (5cfb81)

  101. Milhouse,

    You compared treatment of Christians now with treatment of gays then, and apparently conclude that gays were treated worse then and some current Christians approved of that. As felipe said, it sounds like tit-for-tat.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  102. Surely you aren’t saying it’s fair to hurt Christians now because some people 50 years ago were cruel to gays?

    If so, would it be fair to hurt Christians now because some people are still being cruel to gays?

    nobody should be hurting nobody, but people have to take responsibility for their own actions

    by which i mean it’s really really difficult to provoke gay people to where they want to “hurt” you in some malevolent albeit ill-defined sense

    honest-to-pickles, i think if you can’t manage to get through your day without pissing off gay people, you’re just doing it wrong and you should re-think your strategy

    also I reject this idea that “Christians” are monolithic

    you have your normal Catholics and Lutherans and Presbyterians and such

    then you have your Duggars and your Daddy Duck and your Rick Perry and your Church of Christers and your non-denominational weirdos, which you have to sort of take on a case by case basis

    it’s a gloppy gloppy gumbo, what’s become of Christianity in failmerica

    but you can always pick out the shrimp

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  103. It’s difficult to provoke gays?

    DRJ (e80d46)

  104. “…by which i mean it’s really really difficult to provoke gay people to where they want to “hurt” you in some malevolent albeit ill-defined sense…”

    The gay hoteliers had no trouble provoking teh gays – obviously they were doing it wrong. Maybe they need to take a class in gay sensitivities?

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  105. But I would stop short of saying that those who did condone then are not to be accorded any right to complain today, because tit for tat, maybe?

    Those who condoned it then, but have since changed their minds, are entitled to complain today. Those who today approve of what was done then, are in no moral position to complain today.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  106. You compared treatment of Christians now with treatment of gays then, and apparently conclude that gays were treated worse then and some current Christians approved of that.

    Yes. How do you conclude from that that the current persecution (however mild) of Christians is fair or just?

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  107. Well, you shouldn’t put sand in their Vaseline, that’s for sure.

    And why not bake them a cake? Personally, I enjoy cooking for people.

    But you should not need to write things on the cake, or on a t-shirt, that you disagree with.

    nk (dbc370)

  108. i don’t know anybody in real life what has ever provoked gays to where the gays were all like omg we’re so mad at you

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  109. by which i mean it’s really really difficult to provoke gay people to where they want to “hurt” you in some malevolent albeit ill-defined sense

    No, feets, it really isn’t. And there’s nothing ill-defined about putting someone out of business. Those running the anti-Reisner campaign are thugs. They have malice in their hearts, and they want to put fear in the hearts of anyone else who might dare to differ from their one-issue agenda (which is actually nothing of the sort). But the reason they are able to do this is because there is real fear in the gay community that the bad days might come back, and they are cynically manipulating that fear.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  110. Can you be more specific about what was done 50 years ago that you find so horrible, Milhouse? How many people here were adults 50 years ago, and how many of them did anything against gays? Or are you including disapproval of living a gay life as having no moral authority?

    DRJ (e80d46)

  111. but you can always pick out the shrimp

    But God hates shrimp.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  112. i don’t know anybody in real life what has ever provoked gays to where the gays were all like omg we’re so mad at you

    Then you must not know any gay people in real life.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  113. Can you be more specific about what was done 50 years ago that you find so horrible, Milhouse?

    I’ve already done so. Read above. My comparison to the Nuremberg laws was not hyperbole.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  114. Milhouse,

    There is a vast difference between persecution that kills or maims people, and verbal persecution that hurts feelings. Trying to destroy someone’s business falls somewhere in between. I can’t tell what you are equating until you clarify how you think gays were treated 50 years ago.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  115. To recap my original comment on this thread, since there’s been a lot said since: Ted Cruz is not a homophobe. There is no reasonable basis on which one could conclude that he would like to turn the calendar back on gay rights to the 1950s. But the 1950s are not so long ago, there are many in the gay community (especially older people who have both the time and money to spend the summer at a gay hotel) who still remember them, or grew up hearing these memories, and it’s easy to manipulate them into thinking that Cruz (or any Republican, really) is the bogeyman whose election will herald the return of those days. And it’s easy to understand how gay people who believe this would regard a gay Jew who supports him because he supports Israel the same way that Jews would regard a gay Jew who supports Cynthia McKinney because she supports gays.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  116. “Those who condoned it then, but have since changed their minds, are entitled to complain today. Those who today approve of what was done then, are in no moral position to complain today.”

    No, sir. Justice is not to be treated as an entitlement. There should be justice even for those in no moral position. There is no greater “teaching moment” than granting justice to those who denied it to others. Otherwise one is simply dealing in quid pro quo.

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  117. Once again, DRJ, see above. What was done to gay people in the 1950s was certainly not “verbal persecution”, whatever that means.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  118. No, sir. Justice is not to be treated as an entitlement.

    What has that got to do with the right to complain? Does a gang member who has killed many innocent people have any right to complain when someone dear to him is killed by a rival gang?

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  119. Okay, so you are talking about comment 62. I agree gays weren’t part of mainstream American culture 50 years ago, just as some lifestyles are not widely accepted now. But isn’t your point that anyone who disagrees with these cultural changes is unacceptable in today’s world?

    DRJ (e80d46)

  120. Does someone who applauds ISIS have the right to be appalled at the treatment of the Rohynga?

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  121. everyone here gets through their day without incurring the wrath of the gay hordes Mr. Milhouse

    and they do this day after day after day

    it’s cause they got mad skills

    and it makes it hard to feel super sorry for that infinitesimally wee tiny small percentage of people what blunder into these trashy social media sh!t shows and end up making a spectacle of themselves

    honest to pickles it’s getting tedious if you want to know the truth

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  122. DRJ, do you have any idea what the Nuremberg laws were?

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  123. Or is your point that anyone who wants to hurt gays should not complain about getting hurt? If so, then we’re back to tit-for-tat.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  124. Why don’t you educate me on whatever you think I’m missing, Milhouse.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  125. I’m sorry I bore you, happyfeet.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  126. Everyone faces discrimination in life, Milhouse. I’m sure you have and happyfeet has and I have. But what I don’t get is why you are letting what happened in the 1950’s affect the guidelines for behavior in 2015. Is it possible some gays may fear being ostracized or hurt by discrimination because of their past experiences? Of course, and I sympathize with their concerns but that doesn’t make them reasonable concerns, nor does it mean they deserve accommodations.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  127. “What has that got to do with the right to complain?”

    So those people who condoned the injustices on Gays in the 50’s have a right to complain today?

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  128. Because, yes, the murderous gang menber has that right. To paraphrase Moses (Charlton Heston) in Cecil B. DeMille’s Ten Commandments:

    Do they love less who have murdered?

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  129. Everyone faces discrimination in life, Milhouse.

    No, DRJ, we are talking about legal persecution. Being subject at any moment to arrest or involuntary commitment, to being legally banned from public employment and from practising any profession or running any business that requires a license, and to the police not giving a d**n if one is beaten to death. None of that happens to anybody in the USA today.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  130. Or is your point that anyone who wants to hurt gays should not complain about getting hurt?

    Yes. Is that not completely obvious? How can anyone dispute that?

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  131. So those people who condoned the injustices on Gays in the 50’s have a right to complain today?

    Um, I have no idea what you just wrote. Please rephrase that in English.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  132. everyone here gets through their day without incurring the wrath of the gay hordes Mr. Milhouse

    and they do this day after day after day

    it’s cause they got mad skills

    Look how easy it was for that pizza woman in Indiana to incur the wrath of the gay hordes.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  133. Gays are delicate flowers and you need tread gently around them so as not to bruise their petals.

    nk (dbc370)

  134. sorry I’m confused which of your comments are to me and which are to Mr. Milhouse

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  135. Milhouse,

    Do you see those things happening to gays today in America?

    DRJ (e80d46)

  136. Also, Milhouse, I think we need to define “hurting gays.” I don’t have sympathy for someone who wants to imprison or maim gays. I don’t think disagreeing with SSM is equivalent to that, but it’s not clear to me that you agree. It seems like you are saying any opposition to gay rights is the same as the Nuremberg laws.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  137. It is in English. Perhaps you are having a “senior” moment?

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  138. i got french toast muffins from ho fooz

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  139. I just took a pizza out of the oven. Self-sufficiency is the key. If you can make your own pizzas and cakes, you don’t need to worry as much about discrimination.

    nk (dbc370)

  140. Milhouse,

    There have been things I wanted to do in my life that I could not do because I was a woman, but women today can do the things I couldn’t do. I don’t see that as a reason to complain. I see that as a reason to rejoice and to remember that the pendulum can’t swing so far that we discriminate against men.

    I see parallels between that and your concern for discrimination against gays in 1950’s America. The abuses you recount may or may not have been common, but they are definitely in the past. Compensating for the past is not always the best way to head into the future.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  141. Michael’s also sells decal paper, that I can print anything I want on with my Inkjet, and iron on my own t-shirts.

    nk (dbc370)

  142. Roger that, nk. I just made white (racist!)cake with a dark chocolate ganache. All is right in the world.

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  143. Would they have sold that decal paper if you had told the cashier that you were going to print “I hate you, yeah, you!” on it?

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  144. In 1973, the American Psychiatric Association declassified homosexuality as a mental disorder. One can argue whether this change of status was based on science or on societal pressure. But one cannot deny that having the stigma (for lack of better words) of mental illness created opportunities for discrimination both in housing and employment for out or suspected homosexuals prior to that time. It also caused some homosexuals to be institutionalized and/or jailed for “morals violations”. Many were brutalized while in custody.

    In fairness, I think, DRJ, that you are vastly underestimating the cases and prevalence and memories of that sort of thing within the gay community, and Milhouse is probably over- stressing the cases. It makes for a weird discussion. But the truth is there somewhere.

    Did anybody see the movie “The Imitation Game” about codebreaker hero Alan Turing? Turing was prosecuted in 1952 for homosexual acts, when such behaviour was still criminalised in the UK. He accepted treatment with oestrogen injections (chemical castration) as an alternative to going to prison. Turing died in 1954, 16 days before his 42nd birthday, from cyanide poisoning.In 2009, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown made an official public apology on behalf of the British government for “the appalling way he was treated”. Queen Elizabeth II granted him a posthumous pardon in 2013.

    elissa (01155d)

  145. Do you see those things happening to gays today in America?

    No, of course not. What part of “None of that happens to anybody in the USA today” did you not understand?

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  146. I don’t have sympathy for someone who wants to imprison or maim gays. I don’t think disagreeing with SSM is equivalent to that, but it’s not clear to me that you agree. It seems like you are saying any opposition to gay rights is the same as the Nuremberg laws.

    Then you must be having a problem with the English language.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  147. I have been against harassing gays since I knew what a gay was, long ago and before I was a Christian, in the last century.

    If anyone thinks going out of their way to cause headaches for a large part of the American people, maybe a majority even, today will make the world a better place to “makeup” for something that happened 60 years ago,
    can think again.

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  148. It is in English. Perhaps you are having a “senior” moment?

    Felipe, your comment I responded to was incoherent. If it was intended to be in English then you need to rephrase it and try again.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  149. Elissa, Turing’s case has been overhyped. He went out of his way to get into trouble. And he didn’t do it for a cause, he did it because he was confident that he was completely immune. He learned that he wasn’t. But the authorities who tried to go easy on him didn’t do that for most people.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  150. If anyone thinks going out of their way to cause headaches for a large part of the American people, maybe a majority even, today will make the world a better place to “makeup” for something that happened 60 years ago,

    I doubt anyone does think that.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  151. If it was intended to be in English then you need to rephrase it and try again.
    Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/1/2015 @ 1:13 pm

    No, I do not need to rephrase my comment. I suggest the problem lies elsewhere.

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  152. Milhouse, I concede that I must have a problem with the English language because this is pointless.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  153. elissa:

    In fairness, I think, DRJ, that you are vastly underestimating the cases and prevalence and memories of that sort of thing within the gay community.

    That must be true because, while I said above that I understand gays’ concerns for what happened in the past, I don’t view the concerns as reasonable when it comes to what happens in 2015. Perhaps it’s true that, if I had been discriminated against to that degree 50 years ago, I would be traumatized and unable to put it behind me. I am fortunate that did not happen.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  154. Felipe, “So those people who condoned the injustices on Gays in the 50’s have a right to complain today?” makes no sense in English. It’s impossible to reply to it, because it doesn’t say anything. I don’t know whether English is your native language.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  155. You say you do not understand my comment. I have no reason to doubt your sincerity. Let’s just leave it at that.

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  156. the important thing is things can only get better from here

    unless they keep getting worse, which is very likely here in Illinois cause of they don’t have their ducks in a row

    their ducks are all higgledy-piggledy

    i worry for them

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  157. DRJ, I am utterly serious. No rational person, conversant in the English language, could possibly draw the conclusions you did from what I wrote.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  158. You say you do not understand my comment.

    No, felipe, it’s not that I don’t understand your comment, it’s that your comment is incomprehensible by anyone.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  159. I don’t have sympathy for someone who wants to imprison or maim gays. I don’t think disagreeing with SSM is equivalent to that, but it’s not clear to me that you agree.

    How could I possibly have made it more clear?

    It seems like you are saying any opposition to gay rights is the same as the Nuremberg laws.

    What did I write that could possibly give anyone that impression?

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  160. Yes, Milhouse, it is that you do not understand my comment. You are mistaken when you say “…your comment is incomprehensible by anyone.”

    I understand my comment. By the way, I think you might mean “incomprehensible to anyone.” But what do I know?

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  161. Now Milhouse adds I am not rational, as well as not understanding the English language (per Milhouse) and not being thoughtful enough for gays (per elissa) and being boring (per happyfeet). This is a humbling day for me. I am not rational, literate, interesting, or sympathetic. At least I am smart enough to quit, now, before there is nothing left of me.

    DRJ (e80d46)

  162. Which reminds me of a song, DRJ.

    All of me, why not take all of me?

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  163. I statenthis without reservation, I don’t give a flying f@ck what people did 50 years ago. Or 100 years ago. Or 200 years ago. I am tired of the you, or somebody like you did something bad bad bad a long long time ago and you must be held to account for their actions. It is a fools game.

    Milhouse never fails to bring self-righteousness on steroids. Good Allah

    JD (3f77b7)

  164. Fools have a unique place in the economy of creation: They help perfect patience.

    -felipe

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  165. Milhouse could give Finkelbomb a run for his money is a self-unaware contest.

    JD (3f77b7)

  166. I am tired of the you, or somebody like you did something bad bad bad a long long time ago and you must be held to account for their actions.

    And who, exactly, has said that?

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  167. For you DRJ.

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  168. I understand my comment.

    No, felipe, I don’t think you do understand your own comment, you merely remember what you were thinking when you made it. If someone makes an illegible scrawl and then claims to be able to read it, is he telling the truth, or is he simply remembering what he intended to write and repeating it from memory?

    By the way, I think you might mean “incomprehensible to anyone.” But what do I know?

    No, I don’t tink so.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  169. or even think so

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  170. “No, I don’t tink so” – therefore you aren’t.

    Did you understand that?

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  171. here have a muffin

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  172. Huh?

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  173. Therefore I aren’t what?

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  174. Milhouse proves my point.

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  175. Thank you, Milhouse. You may carry on.

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  176. Muffin from muffin leaves muffin.

    felipe (b5e0f4)

  177. If anyone thinks DRJ is being rational, let them demonstrate how she could possibly have drawn the conclusions she did from what I wrote. And while we’re about it, let someone other than felipe have a go at explaining his cryptic comment, and he can say whether they guessed right.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  178. this is NOT over

    happyfeet (a037ad)

  179. “If anyone thinks DRJ is being rational, let them demonstrate how she could possibly have drawn the conclusions she did from what I wrote. And while we’re about it, let someone other than felipe have a go at explaining his cryptic comment, and he can say whether they guessed right.”

    – Milhouse

    I don’t think anyone really wants to talk to you, dude.

    Leviticus (f9a067)

  180. I understood DRJ. And Felipe. And they aren’t trying to be dlcks. Unlike some people.

    JD (3b5483)

  181. Oh for godsake, Milhouse,

    You are being insufferably rude. Just stop it. If you want to have a discussion, then show some respect for those participating. You’re an intolerant fool, Milhouse, and mores the pity because I think you bring interesting ideas to the table, but you need to remember you are not God. And that humility is a gift worth cultivating.

    Dana (86e864)

  182. Closet Conservatism is in vogue it seems.

    Rodney King's Spirit (b31520)

  183. surprise, surprise,

    yhttp://dailysignal.com/2015/06/01/emails-raise-questions-of-bias-in-case-against-bakers-who-denied-service-for-same-sex-wedding/

    narciso (ee1f88)

  184. I understood DRJ. And Felipe.

    Then perhaps you’d care to explain their words.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  185. If you want to have a discussion, then show some respect for those participating.

    If someone asks a question that is incomprehensible, how can I answer without asking what they meant? And what kind of respect is it for DRJ to repeatedly misrepresent what I have written, attributing opinions to me that are the exact opposite of what I wrote? I’m entitled to some respect too, you know, and that includes reading what I wrote, not what you imagine I wrote, and acknowledging your error when I point it out and you go back and see that you misread it.

    If you honestly think it is possible to derive DRJ’s conclusions from what I have written on this thread, then perhaps you can explain how it’s done.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  186. Milhouse is infallible.

    JD (3b5483)

  187. narciso (ee1f88) — 6/1/2015 @ 5:49 pm
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k5VZjT0JE70

    /Not

    MD in Philly (f9371b)

  188. I am hardly infallible, but if you think I am in error the onus is on you to point it out. If you think DRJ is not the one being stubborn and unreasonable here, then explain how anyone could possibly reach the conclusions she did from my words.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  189. In fact what you have done here is pure Alinsky; you have turned me into the issue, instead of the topic. I have stuck to the topic, and all you want to talk about is my character. I’m not putting up with it.

    Milhouse (a0cc5c)

  190. elissa, you think any determination is based on science anymore, it’s based on raw power dynamics, or perception of same, this is how 1% of the population dominates the other vast majority,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  191. they got rid of the incandescent light bulb, not based on science, common core is not based on science,
    but ‘the aristocracy of pull’

    narciso (ee1f88)

  192. Well, narciso, it took years of us battling the government food pyramid nazis and the Center for Science in the Public Interest, but it is now widely understood through actual long term clinical studies that fat, butter, eggs and coffee are actually very good for you no matter what Michelle O. says. So yeah, I think it’s worth fighting on.

    elissa (01155d)

  193. yez, big woop, I’m talking about important things, the legacy of scientific discovery, the way knowledge is transmitted,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  194. Is there some reason you chose to engage me about “science”(191 192) with what strangely feels like hostility, narciso? I am curious because my only reference to science on this thread (and a vague aside at that) harkened back to 1973.

    elissa (01155d)

  195. it’s gotten much worse since then, who would have thought they would ban the light bulb. because some fictional warming, what I mockingly call the skydragon, that this would be part of state indoctrination over say reading, writing and basic math,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  196. Perhaps I am wrong, elissa, but narciso (ee1f88) — 6/1/2015 @ 6:57 pm was not directed to you, but to Milhouse (a0cc5c) — 6/1/2015 @ 6:33 pm, but I could be wrong. But I was wondering about narciso’s choice as well. I suspect he is just trying to clean up the air in here.

    felipe (56556d)

  197. yes, in part, those eloi claxons have been awfully loud,

    narciso (ee1f88)

  198. lol.

    felipe (56556d)

  199. So have you decided which three books were taken back into the future?

    felipe (56556d)

  200. It was three, wasn’t it?

    felipe (56556d)

  201. que?

    narciso (ee1f88)

  202. I always thought one for reading, one for writing, and one for arithmatics.

    felipe (56556d)

  203. arithmatics is how one learns to cypher by proper breathing.

    felipe (56556d)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 1.7859 secs.