Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:09 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:02 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:55 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:27 pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,
The president of the university just spent 20 minutes cutting the
president of iran a new rectal opening. He used a chainsaw. I doubt the
little dictator ever heard anything like it before.
As for the ROTC denial, all the military has to do is get over its
idiotic sexual preference discrimination.
The so-called "Minutemen" movement has been exposed for what it is, a
pack of mostly white, racist, vigilantes.
So, if Columbia allows the Iranian pres to visit, why not allow the
head of the Minutemen? This seems a little (ok, a lot)
hypocritical. Columbia does not seem to value free speech so as it
values allowing anti-USA voices. I have no objection to listening to
this nutjob but INVITING him when they would not allow the Minutmen
head to speak and have not invited him back is totally at odds with
any notion of free speech. Why not invite David Duke? This is
nothing but liberal hypocrisy ( a virtue among them) at its most
obvious. They do not allow ROTC but they INVITE someone who executes
gays and stones women to death, only a liberal would think that is
reasonable.
I'm sure if the military ends its official discrimination on the basis
of sexuality, it will be welcome where it isn't welcome now.
So, The Iranian nutjob who kills gays is welcome but ROTC isnt? This
is liberal logic I s'pose, not obvious to us rednecks.
I'll take that as an admission of their hypocrisy.
Huh?

Gilchrist lost control of his pack of racist vigilantes. Is he back in
charge there? Is David Duke still a spokesman for his branch of the GOP?

Harry cannot find any way to defend the hypocrisy. In fact, following
the logic of Columbia, if the US military started executing gays (as
does Iran) ROTC would be invited to Columbia.
Columbia HAS NOT invited the Minutemen back, so much for freedom of
speech there.



I'm sorry, but I cannot find even an atom of logic in what you are
posting here regarding that group that insulted the name of a fine
organization of revolutionary war Bostonians. Have a nice day.

On Sep 24, 3:16 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:09 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:02 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:55 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:27 pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,
The president of the university just spent 20 minutes cutting the
president of iran a new rectal opening. He used a chainsaw. I doubt the
little dictator ever heard anything like it before.
As for the ROTC denial, all the military has to do is get over its
idiotic sexual preference discrimination.
The so-called "Minutemen" movement has been exposed for what it is, a
pack of mostly white, racist, vigilantes.
So, if Columbia allows the Iranian pres to visit, why not allow the
head of the Minutemen? This seems a little (ok, a lot)
hypocritical. Columbia does not seem to value free speech so as it
values allowing anti-USA voices. I have no objection to listening to
this nutjob but INVITING him when they would not allow the Minutmen
head to speak and have not invited him back is totally at odds with
any notion of free speech. Why not invite David Duke? This is
nothing but liberal hypocrisy ( a virtue among them) at its most
obvious. They do not allow ROTC but they INVITE someone who executes
gays and stones women to death, only a liberal would think that is
reasonable.
I'm sure if the military ends its official discrimination on the basis
of sexuality, it will be welcome where it isn't welcome now.
So, The Iranian nutjob who kills gays is welcome but ROTC isnt? This
is liberal logic I s'pose, not obvious to us rednecks.
I'll take that as an admission of their hypocrisy.
Huh?

Gilchrist lost control of his pack of racist vigilantes. Is he back in
charge there? Is David Duke still a spokesman for his branch of the GOP?

Harry cannot find any way to defend the hypocrisy. In fact, following
the logic of Columbia, if the US military started executing gays (as
does Iran) ROTC would be invited to Columbia.
Columbia HAS NOT invited the Minutemen back, so much for freedom of
speech there.

I'm sorry, but I cannot find even an atom of logic in what you are
posting here regarding that group that insulted the name of a fine
organization of revolutionary war Bostonians. Have a nice day.

C'mon Harry, at least try to defend yourself. Columbia invites a guy
who executes gays but somehow you think Columbia will like ROTC if
they allow gays. This makes no sense.

On Sep 24, 3:24 pm, Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:16 pm, HK wrote:



Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:09 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:02 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:55 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:27 pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,
The president of the university just spent 20 minutes cutting the
president of iran a new rectal opening. He used a chainsaw. I doubt the
little dictator ever heard anything like it before.
As for the ROTC denial, all the military has to do is get over its
idiotic sexual preference discrimination.
The so-called "Minutemen" movement has been exposed for what it is, a
pack of mostly white, racist, vigilantes.
So, if Columbia allows the Iranian pres to visit, why not allow the
head of the Minutemen? This seems a little (ok, a lot)
hypocritical. Columbia does not seem to value free speech so as it
values allowing anti-USA voices. I have no objection to listening to
this nutjob but INVITING him when they would not allow the Minutmen
head to speak and have not invited him back is totally at odds with
any notion of free speech. Why not invite David Duke? This is
nothing but liberal hypocrisy ( a virtue among them) at its most
obvious. They do not allow ROTC but they INVITE someone who executes
gays and stones women to death, only a liberal would think that is
reasonable.
I'm sure if the military ends its official discrimination on the basis
of sexuality, it will be welcome where it isn't welcome now.
So, The Iranian nutjob who kills gays is welcome but ROTC isnt? This
is liberal logic I s'pose, not obvious to us rednecks.
I'll take that as an admission of their hypocrisy.
Huh?

Gilchrist lost control of his pack of racist vigilantes. Is he back in
charge there? Is David Duke still a spokesman for his branch of the GOP?

Harry cannot find any way to defend the hypocrisy. In fact, following
the logic of Columbia, if the US military started executing gays (as
does Iran) ROTC would be invited to Columbia.
Columbia HAS NOT invited the Minutemen back, so much for freedom of
speech there.

I'm sorry, but I cannot find even an atom of logic in what you are
posting here regarding that group that insulted the name of a fine
organization of revolutionary war Bostonians. Have a nice day.

C'mon Harry, at least try to defend yourself. Columbia invites a guy
who executes gays but somehow you think Columbia will like ROTC if
they allow gays. This makes no sense.

I'll let it go Harry, I know I gotcha. Us N. FL rednecks are not too
stupid.

"Frogwatch" wrote in message
ups.com...


C'mon Harry, at least try to defend yourself. Columbia invites a guy
who executes gays but somehow you think Columbia will like ROTC if
they allow gays. This makes no sense.

I'll let it go Harry, I know I gotcha. Us N. FL rednecks are not too
stupid.


To his credit and contrary to much of the media predictions, the president
of Columbia didn't lob softball questions or otherwise go easy on the nut
from Iran. Surprised a lot of people.

Eisboch

Frogwatch wrote:


C'mon Harry, at least try to defend yourself. Columbia invites a guy
who executes gays but somehow you think Columbia will like ROTC if
they allow gays. This makes no sense.


There are lots of things in this world that make no sense. Example: why
hasn't Dick Cheney been indicted?

On Sep 24, 12:24?pm, Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:16 pm, HK wrote:





Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:09 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 3:02 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:55 pm, HK wrote:
Frogwatch wrote:
On Sep 24, 2:27 pm, HK wrote:
wrote:
They won't let ROTC on campus because they feel the militarys don't
ask don't tell policy is discriminatory. Yet they let the coward bitch
of Iran talk while his regime simply jails and kills gays. But watch
the so called tolerant liberals defend this guy and Colombia to the
world. Remember this is the same school that allowed LaRaza to speak
for 1 1/2 hours then ran the Minute men off the stage with no voice,
no tolerance,
The president of the university just spent 20 minutes cutting the
president of iran a new rectal opening. He used a chainsaw. I doubt the
little dictator ever heard anything like it before.
As for the ROTC denial, all the military has to do is get over its
idiotic sexual preference discrimination.
The so-called "Minutemen" movement has been exposed for what it is, a
pack of mostly white, racist, vigilantes.
So, if Columbia allows the Iranian pres to visit, why not allow the
head of the Minutemen? This seems a little (ok, a lot)
hypocritical. Columbia does not seem to value free speech so as it
values allowing anti-USA voices. I have no objection to listening to
this nutjob but INVITING him when they would not allow the Minutmen
head to speak and have not invited him back is totally at odds with
any notion of free speech. Why not invite David Duke? This is
nothing but liberal hypocrisy ( a virtue among them) at its most
obvious. They do not allow ROTC but they INVITE someone who executes
gays and stones women to death, only a liberal would think that is
reasonable.
I'm sure if the military ends its official discrimination on the basis
of sexuality, it will be welcome where it isn't welcome now.
So, The Iranian nutjob who kills gays is welcome but ROTC isnt? This
is liberal logic I s'pose, not obvious to us rednecks.
I'll take that as an admission of their hypocrisy.
Huh?

Gilchrist lost control of his pack of racist vigilantes. Is he back in
charge there? Is David Duke still a spokesman for his branch of the GOP?

Harry cannot find any way to defend the hypocrisy. In fact, following
the logic of Columbia, if the US military started executing gays (as
does Iran) ROTC would be invited to Columbia.
Columbia HAS NOT invited the Minutemen back, so much for freedom of
speech there.

I'm sorry, but I cannot find even an atom of logic in what you are
posting here regarding that group that insulted the name of a fine
organization of revolutionary war Bostonians. Have a nice day.

C'mon Harry, at least try to defend yourself. Columbia invites a guy
who executes gays but somehow you think Columbia will like ROTC if
they allow gays. This makes no sense.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Wrong newsgroup. I'd offer the same comment to left wing posters who
put something equivalent here, (and have, lately), so you guys on the
right are entitled to equal treatment. If I might be allowed to
suggest- we should try to avoid getting back to the bad old days when
this group was 60% politics, 20% personal feud, and 20% boats. The way
to do that is to exercise some self control- put your political
opinions in the proper forums and talk about boats here.

The President of Iran is not a nice guy, and it's likely that a
majority of folks from all portions of the spectrun would agree. But
the rant should go where it's appropriate unless it has something to
do with boating. IMO.

Chuck Gould wrote:


Wrong newsgroup. I'd offer the same comment to left wing posters who
put something equivalent here, (and have, lately), so you guys on the
right are entitled to equal treatment. If I might be allowed to
suggest- we should try to avoid getting back to the bad old days when
this group was 60% politics, 20% personal feud, and 20% boats. T


Yeah, now it is 5% boats, 20% advertorial, 10% politics, and 65%
personal insults.

HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:


Wrong newsgroup. I'd offer the same comment to left wing posters who
put something equivalent here, (and have, lately), so you guys on the
right are entitled to equal treatment. If I might be allowed to
suggest- we should try to avoid getting back to the bad old days when
this group was 60% politics, 20% personal feud, and 20% boats. T


Yeah, now it is 5% boats, 20% advertorial, 10% politics, and 65%
personal insults.

Harry,
If you stop the personal insults, you can get the personal insults
number back to the 5% range.

Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:
Chuck Gould wrote:


Wrong newsgroup. I'd offer the same comment to left wing posters who
put something equivalent here, (and have, lately), so you guys on the
right are entitled to equal treatment. If I might be allowed to
suggest- we should try to avoid getting back to the bad old days when
this group was 60% politics, 20% personal feud, and 20% boats. T


Yeah, now it is 5% boats, 20% advertorial, 10% politics, and 65%
personal insults.

Harry,
If you stop the personal insults, you can get the personal insults
number back to the 5% range.



All I am doing now is pointing out the incessant personal insulters,
especially the ones who lob insults in couched language, and then say,
"Who, me?"

HK wrote:
Reginald P. Smithers III wrote:
HK wrote:

Sounds like a great idea. So when is your next trip in your new boat?