Civil unions clear Colo. Legislature, head to gov

Mar 12, 2013 Full story: SavannahNow 210

Civil unions for gay couples was a rallying cry for Democrats who took control of the Colorado House in last year's elections and vowed an early vote on the proposal.

Read more

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#86 Mar 18, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> You have exposed nothing but your "vain and self conceit." And if you're too stupid to realize you've been outed as a fraud, that substantiates (yet again) my assessment that you are incredibly stupid.
You can be as comfortable and dishonest as gives you a stiffy. Doesn't matter to the real world. But I notice your new disclaimer "if not this year, then the year after, or the year after, or the year after." Conveniently added wiggle room showing yet again your dishonesty and bullsh!t. Different than your claim that you *will* win your decision in the next three months. Yet again, you are shown to be a fraud. Surprise. I can predict with absolute certainty that you will die, "if not this year, or the year after, or the year after." But eventually, you will die.
<quoted text> I spent four years in uniform at a time when people like you didn't appreciate or respect people in uniform... until the matter of gays in the military became convenient to your bigotry and hatred. Don't talk to me about fighting. Phuque you. I don't suppose you ever considered putting on the uniform and REALLY fighting for what you believed in. No, you just want to play victim and expose yet again what a fraud and bigot you are. My guess is that your version of "fighting for what you believe in" is to whine, play the victim, and carry on about how people don't like you because you're gay. More likely people don't like you because you're simply a self-absorbed, self-loathing, not-at-all nice person.
And I won't bore you with what some of us did in the sixties and seventies re real civil rights. You wouldn't believe it anyway because it happened to have been done by a straight guy.
Have I mentioned recently that you're a fraud, and Phuque you?
Nope wrong yet again.

Why do you feel a need to lie about what I posted when we can all go back and read what I ACTUALLY said, and not what you WANTED me to say?

You'll notice I said we'd "LIKELY" have federal recognition in about 3 months. Obviously there's a possibility the SCOTUS will uphold DOMA, but I think it is LIKELY they will overturn it.

Ooooh, you did 4 whole years? Well thank you for your service. Unfortunatley for your little diatribe my 20+ years of military service was 5 TIMES what you did; I served before & during the DADT years. My only regret was not still being on active duty when the ban was finally repealed, though I have enjoyed being retired since age 38.

Now cry some more about what a mean person I am.......

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#87 Mar 18, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> hehehe. You poor dumb bastard. What lie do you fantasize? Oh, that's right. You can't. Once again, you are outed as a complete fraud. Quote somewhere that I stated I would NOT support, or specifically oppose, rectifying inequities of civil union. Not your tortured and dishonest interpretation of what you would like to dishonestly believe, but factual quotes. Quotes only will be accepted since you are a known and proven liar.
Go ahead. I'l wait... and get a head start on gloating over your continued humiliation.
Oh gee, maybe in the following posts-

#75- "I'm not working at all on federal recognition of anything. Don't much care, nor am I required to care."
#75- "I support you having limited rights."

That doesn't sound like supporting equal rights for civil unions to me. Now go ahead an lie once again about what you said.
BS Detector

La Puente, CA

#88 Mar 18, 2013
Quest wrote:
<quoted text>
The only way to completely rectify the inequalities would be to make civil unions absolutely identical to marriage in every way, on both the state and federal levels.
And then you would need to change the name to marriage, since the requirement of having a "special" name for an identical institution still sets it apart, and below.
I disagree re the necessity of a name change/unification. I still don't call a tangerine and orange even if it is very similar. They look almost identical. They taste almost identical. There are different varieties of oranges and tangerines. They have been designated different because of their differences by those who designate such things. Does that make a tangerine bad? Does it make a tangerine inferior? Does it make one variety of tangerine better or worse than another? I don't think so.

Yes, same sex marriage is different. If you deem said differences to be bad or inferior, that's not my problem. I don't.
BS Detector

La Puente, CA

#89 Mar 18, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Oh gee, maybe in the following posts-
#75- "I'm not working at all on federal recognition of anything. Don't much care, nor am I required to care."
#75- "I support you having limited rights."
That doesn't sound like supporting equal rights for civil unions to me. Now go ahead an lie once again about what you said.
You were the one who claimed "limited rights" for civil unions. I merely taunted you about your bullsh!t and continue to do so for cause. Nowhere were you able to quote me saying that I did not support equal rights for civil unions. Nowhere. Yet again, you are clearly shown to have lied, and lied with malice... and stupidity for believing I'd buy into your continued lying when of course I know better.

And really, don't I always know better than you?

So let's recap. You failed to cite anything credible and yet again made up your tortured "interpretation" to try and support your continued dishonesty.

The optimal term is, "You failed...."
BS Detector

La Puente, CA

#90 Mar 18, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
Nope wrong yet again.
Why do you feel a need to lie about what I posted when we can all go back and read what I ACTUALLY said, and not what you WANTED me to say?
You'll notice I said we'd "LIKELY" have federal recognition in about 3 months. Obviously there's a possibility the SCOTUS will uphold DOMA, but I think it is LIKELY they will overturn it.
Ooooh, you did 4 whole years? Well thank you for your service. Unfortunatley for your little diatribe my 20+ years of military service was 5 TIMES what you did; I served before & during the DADT years. My only regret was not still being on active duty when the ban was finally repealed, though I have enjoyed being retired since age 38.
Now cry some more about what a mean person I am.......
Nah. Why cry over you? You're not worth that much effort... or anything else.

And I'm not sure that I believe that you were in the military. Can't say for certain, of course, but you lie so often and so badly, I'm not convinced you would ever tell the truth in this forum, especially if you thought you could score an imaginary point against somebody like me who has humiliated and ridiculed you for so long with such ease and regularity.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#91 Mar 18, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> I disagree re the necessity of a name change/unification. I still don't call a tangerine and orange even if it is very similar. They look almost identical. They taste almost identical. There are different varieties of oranges and tangerines. They have been designated different because of their differences by those who designate such things. Does that make a tangerine bad? Does it make a tangerine inferior? Does it make one variety of tangerine better or worse than another? I don't think so.
Yes, same sex marriage is different. If you deem said differences to be bad or inferior, that's not my problem. I don't.
So is inter-racial marriage, and inter-faith marriage, and blond-redhead marriages, and tall-short marriages, and lefty-righty marriages, and fat-skinny marriages, etc, etc, etc.

All marriages are different on some level, but we call them all marriages just as we should.

There is simply no reason to call marriages of same-sex couples anything other than marriage.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#92 Mar 18, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> You were the one who claimed "limited rights" for civil unions. I merely taunted you about your bullsh!t and continue to do so for cause. Nowhere were you able to quote me saying that I did not support equal rights for civil unions. Nowhere. Yet again, you are clearly shown to have lied, and lied with malice... and stupidity for believing I'd buy into your continued lying when of course I know better.
And really, don't I always know better than you?
So let's recap. You failed to cite anything credible and yet again made up your tortured "interpretation" to try and support your continued dishonesty.
The optimal term is, "You failed...."
The optimal term is- "You lied....." again.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#93 Mar 18, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> Nah. Why cry over you? You're not worth that much effort... or anything else.
And I'm not sure that I believe that you were in the military. Can't say for certain, of course, but you lie so often and so badly, I'm not convinced you would ever tell the truth in this forum, especially if you thought you could score an imaginary point against somebody like me who has humiliated and ridiculed you for so long with such ease and regularity.
And of course you lie about everything, so your claim of service is questionable.

You haven't scored anything.

You just keep making a fool of yourself.

And we keep getting closer to true marriage equality in spite of your oppostion. Obviously your continued failures are starting to wear on you.
BS Detector

La Puente, CA

#94 Mar 18, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text> And while I'm a registered Republican so I can vote in their primary races to help them pick the worst possible candidate, I'm actually an independent who votes for the Dems in the general election.
So you fraudulently register as a Republican so you can fraudulently vote to candidates you don't approve of. Well, at least you clearly substantiate your fraud and dishonesty and total contempt for the precious right to vote that so many better than you died for. According to your own words, you are clearly a fraud with no integrity.

You must be so proud of your bigotry.
BS Detector

La Puente, CA

#95 Mar 18, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text> You haven't scored anything.
I'm not trying to. You're the hysterical one desperate to change my position. I simply stated mine.

“Live and let live”

Since: Apr 08

New Orleans

#96 Mar 18, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> So you fraudulently register as a Republican so you can fraudulently vote to candidates you don't approve of. Well, at least you clearly substantiate your fraud and dishonesty and total contempt for the precious right to vote that so many better than you died for. According to your own words, you are clearly a fraud with no integrity.
You must be so proud of your bigotry.
Registering as the opposite party to vote for the worst candidates in a primary is actually a pretty common thing.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#97 Mar 18, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> So you fraudulently register as a Republican so you can fraudulently vote to candidates you don't approve of. Well, at least you clearly substantiate your fraud and dishonesty and total contempt for the precious right to vote that so many better than you died for. According to your own words, you are clearly a fraud with no integrity.
You must be so proud of your bigotry.
How have I "fraudulently registered"? I have every right to register and vote for the Republican I want to represent the GOPasaurs in the general election just like every other citizen.

You're just pouting because you got called out on yet another of our lies.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#98 Mar 18, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> I'm not trying to. You're the hysterical one desperate to change my position. I simply stated mine.
Nope, wrong yet again.

I simply pointed out the lies in your position.

I hope you continue to oppose marriage equality; that way we all get to hear you cry like a little girl every time we win another victory.

The more you & your fellow anti-gays whine is an indication we're that much closer to marriage equality.

“Headed toward the cliff”

Since: Nov 07

Tawas City, Michigan

#99 Mar 18, 2013
Josh in New Orleans wrote:
<quoted text>
Registering as the opposite party to vote for the worst candidates in a primary is actually a pretty common thing.
I've been doing it for 30 years!

“Incorrupta fides, nudaque veri”

Since: May 07

Vincit qui se vincit

#100 Mar 18, 2013
BS Detector wrote:
<quoted text> You have exposed nothing but your "vain and self conceit." And if you're too stupid to realize you've been outed as a fraud, that substantiates (yet again) my assessment that you are incredibly stupid.
You can be as comfortable and dishonest as gives you a stiffy. Doesn't matter to the real world. But I notice your new disclaimer "if not this year, then the year after, or the year after, or the year after." Conveniently added wiggle room showing yet again your dishonesty and bullsh!t. Different than your claim that you *will* win your decision in the next three months. Yet again, you are shown to be a fraud. Surprise. I can predict with absolute certainty that you will die, "if not this year, or the year after, or the year after." But eventually, you will die.
<quoted text> I spent four years in uniform at a time when people like you didn't appreciate or respect people in uniform... until the matter of gays in the military became convenient to your bigotry and hatred. Don't talk to me about fighting. Phuque you. I don't suppose you ever considered putting on the uniform and REALLY fighting for what you believed in. No, you just want to play victim and expose yet again what a fraud and bigot you are. My guess is that your version of "fighting for what you believe in" is to whine, play the victim, and carry on about how people don't like you because you're gay. More likely people don't like you because you're simply a self-absorbed, self-loathing, not-at-all nice person.
And I won't bore you with what some of us did in the sixties and seventies re real civil rights. You wouldn't believe it anyway because it happened to have been done by a straight guy.
Have I mentioned recently that you're a fraud, and Phuque you?
I want to say thanks to you sir for serving our great country and keeping us a free and safe even though morons can't see this, for this they should be booted out of the country.

American haters don't have to like us and constructive re-pore is one thing but if you're filled with so much hate and anger towards Americans then you're most certainly are in the wrong country and should have your sorry ass shipped out of the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA as fast as possible, in fact I would gladly pitch in on a "Send Them Home" campaign and help fund one way tickets back home, we can even save money by kicking them out in mid air flight and parachutes are optional IF you can afford it!

“Live and let live”

Since: Apr 08

New Orleans

#101 Mar 18, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
I've been doing it for 30 years!
Seriously, even my professor in a class on political science recommended it... said there is nothing a person can't keep private that would get them kicked out of a political party except what is divulged. Had a strong stance against parties, and said that is at least one way a person can voice disapproval in an effective way. I never did it 'cause I guess I got that southern honesty, but I have thought about it. I am mad at the Republican Party because if not for the gay issue, I would vote that way. I do, but only for candidates that unequivocally support equality, and that is rare.
BS Detector

La Puente, CA

#102 Mar 18, 2013
Josh in New Orleans wrote:
<quoted text>
Registering as the opposite party to vote for the worst candidates in a primary is actually a pretty common thing.
I truly never heard of it. At any rate, it's dishonest and shows a lack of integrity. If that's what you support, so be it. I disagree with that and support honesty and integrity.
BS Detector

La Puente, CA

#103 Mar 19, 2013
Josh in New Orleans wrote:
<quoted text>
Seriously, even my professor in a class on political science recommended it...
Then I consider you professor unfit to teach. Anything.
Josh in New Orleans wrote:
<quoted text>
...said there is nothing a person can't keep private that would get them kicked out of a political party except what is divulged. Had a strong stance against parties, and said that is at least one way a person can voice disapproval in an effective way. I never did it 'cause I guess I got that southern honesty, but I have thought about it. I am mad at the Republican Party because if not for the gay issue, I would vote that way. I do, but only for candidates that unequivocally support equality, and that is rare.
Glad for your southern honesty."

I have never been a one issue voter. Personally I think it ill-advised. There are too many issues that warrant careful consideration. While I am a Republican, I don't march lockstep with some of the more stringent right inclined. True, I support a strong national defense. I support not increasing the debt and deficit by another dime. I support tighter immigration controls and penalties. I support damn near unrestricted reproductive choice and support public funding for same, abortion being a helluva lot cheaper than welfare or prison. I support more public funding for the arts (not the Mapplethorpe type of crap), and I think the feds have no business being in education of health care. I think the religious right weakens the GOP and it's easy for the less successful and productive to want the more productive and successful to carry their sorry asses and dishonestly call taking somebody else's money a "fair share." I also am strongly against any religion's influence in public policy and do not support what you call "marriage equality" but support civil unions or domestic partnerships.

Does that sound like I be a good fit for the left inclined Democrats? I don't expect nor demand that you agree with my positions. My point being that I think there are too many issues to limit yourself because of just one.

Feel free to honestly disagree.
BS Detector

La Puente, CA

#104 Mar 19, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
There is simply no reason to call marriages of same-sex couples anything other than marriage.
Not to you because you are dishonest. Millions of people disagree with you.
BS Detector

La Puente, CA

#105 Mar 19, 2013
WeTheSheeple wrote:
<quoted text>
And of course you lie about everything, so your claim of service is questionable.
You haven't scored anything.
You just keep making a fool of yourself.
And we keep getting closer to true marriage equality in spite of your oppostion. Obviously your continued failures are starting to wear on you.
And yet you can't provide a single quote to substantiate that. Your attempt at deceit failed. As always, you failed. Again.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Greenwood Village Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Ban the user above you game (Oct '11) 4 hr Satans Evil Son 2,801
News Colo. gay discrimination alleged over wedding cake (Jun '13) 4 hr Poof1 17,846
last post wins! (Feb '11) 4 hr Satans Evil Son 25,090
Republicans the party of LIARS (Dec '11) 5 hr tbird19482 16,986
News Lawmakers Consider Gay Discrimination Policies 5 hr Reverend Alan 1,631
Cass Meraz naked Mon darkelf12 2
CatCiao! (Apr '12) Mon letitsnow 2,413
More from around the web

Greenwood Village People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]