Free Market Victory
 

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:40:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 7/22/16 1:07 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 12:40:35 -0400 (EDT), justan wrote:


I've lost track of the alphabet soup of letters that describe the
different kinds of gay people. It's really not important but it
would be nice if someone would explain it all.

It took me a while to get my head around all of the variations of men
in women's clothes. Fortunately (for the process) there were lots of
gay people in the flower business and the home decor business (things
my wife did before she got into HVAC and construction).
It was an interesting intellectual exercise but I was happy to be
around normal people again. Some of the gay guys were regular folks
but some were crazy as a ****house rat.
I spent more time that I wanted to with the various iterations of
"gay". It turns out, most men in dresses are not even gay ... if you
can believe what they say. That makes them in the ladies room even
more troubling.



Gays are normal people.

It depends on the gay person. I know some who are very normal, I have
also met plenty who were flaming fags and they would be the first ones
to say it.
The guy who worked for my wife, until he went to jail (DUI and
"driving after") looked and acted like a guy you would meet in a duck
blind or a construction job. Even my wife, who has very good "gaydar",
did not believe he was gay until she met his partner.

Free Market Victory
 

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 15:01:20 -0400 (EDT), justan wrote:


Have you ever come to a conclusion on your own? The unions and D N
C own you.

Harry has his opinion as soon as Rachel Maddow or Chris Matthews gives
it to him.

Free Market Victory
 

On 7/22/16 4:14 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 15:01:20 -0400 (EDT), justan wrote:


Have you ever come to a conclusion on your own? The unions and D N
C own you.

Harry has his opinion as soon as Rachel Maddow or Chris Matthews gives
it to him.


Yet more stupidity and incorrect conclusion-reaching.

Free Market Victory
 

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:18:09 -0400, Poquito Loco
wrote:

The rest, in order, a Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transsexual

Since we are still talking about marriage equality, it is the
bisexuals who are being discriminated against now.
They should be allowed to have a husband and a wife if we are being
fair. Otherwise we are forcing them to deny their natural state or
they will have to seek relationships outside of their marriage and
that is unfair.
I know that sounds strange right now but not any stranger than 2 men
being married 8 years ago (when Hillary was against it) or men being
allowed in the ladies room 4 years ago when nobody would have
supported it.

Free Market Victory
 

On 7/22/16 4:08 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:39:03 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 7/22/16 12:54 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 11:45:37 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 7/22/16 11:37 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 11:11:36 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 7/22/16 10:50 AM, wrote:

I offer up a sarcastic and ironic data point and you build it into a
theorem. You're a funny guy.

I am a thinking person who extends your brain farts to a logical
conclusion.

You should find another calling.

Can't keep up?


With what? Your jumping to erroneous/silly conclusions?

No imagination huh?
Everything must have been exactly the way it was no matter whether
mistakes were made or not.
I suppose the Iraq war, Afghanistan and Libya were just the way it had
to be too ... at least that is what Hillary will be telling us next
week. ;-)

I usually don't try to reach a conclusion in a presentation on the basis
of one data point, especially one that was offered as an example of
irony and satire.

No you simply become offended when you are presented with satire.


No, I don't. Wait...you post satire?

Free Market Victory
 

On 7/22/16 4:12 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:40:47 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 7/22/16 1:07 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 12:40:35 -0400 (EDT), justan wrote:


I've lost track of the alphabet soup of letters that describe the
different kinds of gay people. It's really not important but it
would be nice if someone would explain it all.

It took me a while to get my head around all of the variations of men
in women's clothes. Fortunately (for the process) there were lots of
gay people in the flower business and the home decor business (things
my wife did before she got into HVAC and construction).
It was an interesting intellectual exercise but I was happy to be
around normal people again. Some of the gay guys were regular folks
but some were crazy as a ****house rat.
I spent more time that I wanted to with the various iterations of
"gay". It turns out, most men in dresses are not even gay ... if you
can believe what they say. That makes them in the ladies room even
more troubling.



Gays are normal people.

It depends on the gay person. I know some who are very normal, I have
also met plenty who were flaming fags and they would be the first ones
to say it.
The guy who worked for my wife, until he went to jail (DUI and
"driving after") looked and acted like a guy you would meet in a duck
blind or a construction job. Even my wife, who has very good "gaydar",
did not believe he was gay until she met his partner.



Wait...*you* are defining "normal"? Are you posing as John Herring, the
self-appointed guy in charge of...nothing?

Free Market Victory
 

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 16:21:09 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

I usually don't try to reach a conclusion in a presentation on the basis
of one data point, especially one that was offered as an example of
irony and satire.

No you simply become offended when you are presented with satire.


No, I don't. Wait...you post satire?

Not often, I prefer facts but other people do and you call them
racist. You even call facts racist if you do not like the conclusion
they present.

Free Market Victory
 

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 16:24:43 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:


Gays are normal people.

It depends on the gay person. I know some who are very normal, I have
also met plenty who were flaming fags and they would be the first ones
to say it.
The guy who worked for my wife, until he went to jail (DUI and
"driving after") looked and acted like a guy you would meet in a duck
blind or a construction job. Even my wife, who has very good "gaydar",
did not believe he was gay until she met his partner.



Wait...*you* are defining "normal"? Are you posing as John Herring, the
self-appointed guy in charge of...nothing?

If you think a guy walking down the street wearing ass chaps is
"normal" you live in a strange place.

Free Market Victory
 

On 7/22/16 4:32 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 16:24:43 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:


Gays are normal people.

It depends on the gay person. I know some who are very normal, I have
also met plenty who were flaming fags and they would be the first ones
to say it.
The guy who worked for my wife, until he went to jail (DUI and
"driving after") looked and acted like a guy you would meet in a duck
blind or a construction job. Even my wife, who has very good "gaydar",
did not believe he was gay until she met his partner.



Wait...*you* are defining "normal"? Are you posing as John Herring, the
self-appointed guy in charge of...nothing?

If you think a guy walking down the street wearing ass chaps is
"normal" you live in a strange place.


I'M sure I see less of that than you do. On the other hand, I saw
someone wearing a Trump button today. Strange, obviously stupid guy.

Free Market Victory
 

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 16:26:11 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 16:21:09 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

I usually don't try to reach a conclusion in a presentation on the basis
of one data point, especially one that was offered as an example of
irony and satire.

No you simply become offended when you are presented with satire.


No, I don't. Wait...you post satire?

Not often, I prefer facts but other people do and you call them
racist. You even call facts racist if you do not like the conclusion
they present.

===

Damn those racist facts!