Paul Ryan promises hate group that he...

Paul Ryan promises hate group that he'll fight equality

There are 5444 comments on the www.wisconsingazette.com story from Oct 9, 2012, titled Paul Ryan promises hate group that he'll fight equality. In it, www.wisconsingazette.com reports that:

In a recent interview with Focus on the Family president Jim Daly, Paul Ryan reassured the anti-gay hate group that a Romney-Ryan administration will fiercely oppose gay rights.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at www.wisconsingazette.com.

“Reality is better than truth.”

Since: Nov 09

Indianapolis

#6019 Jan 5, 2013
My point was that the use of "sambo" in this country was never aimed at east indians. In fact, the illustrations were usually stereotypical american blacks.
http://www.amazon.com/Little-Black-Sambo-Illu...
Curteese wrote:
<quoted text>They were on the order of Denny's. They tried to clean it up and changed their name to Samboy's. but it was too late by then. You're correct about the back ground. Sambo was East Indian, not African background. They don't HAVE tigers in Africa, despite stupid inaccurate Tarzan types of movies.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#6020 Jan 5, 2013
Wondering wrote:
You are bigoted and stupid. You don't understand the constitution.
Wondering, I am not the idiot arguing for fellow citizens to be held as second class citizens with less than equal protection of the law.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#6021 Jan 6, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Wondering, I am not the idiot arguing
Yes you are.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#6022 Jan 6, 2013
Curteese wrote:
<quoted text>They were on the order of Denny's. They tried to clean it up and changed their name to Samboy's. but it was too late by then. You're correct about the back ground. Sambo was East Indian, not African background. They don't HAVE tigers in Africa, despite stupid inaccurate Tarzan types of movies.
Sambo was South Indian. The book was about a child and four tigers.
All racial inferences were in the minds of those easily offended since the story was not offensive.

“Luke laughs at hypocrites!”

Since: Sep 10

Palm Springs, California

#6023 Jan 6, 2013
cpeter1313 wrote:
My point was that the use of "sambo" in this country was never aimed at east indians. In fact, the illustrations were usually stereotypical american blacks.
http://www.amazon.com/Little-Black-Sambo-Illu...
<quoted text>
I know, I am old enough to recall those days.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#6024 Jan 6, 2013
Wondering wrote:
Yes you are.
Wondering, a greater man could respond to the whole of the post, rather than editing it and making a trite comment that addresses only a fragment of what was said.

Thank you, for illustrating once again that you cannot rise to the challenge of offering an intelligent and factually supported argument in support of your position.

Feel free to join the grown ups and offer a legitimate state interest served by denying same sex couples equal protection of the law to marry that would render such a restriction constitutional. Each time that you fail to do so, you merely reaffirm that you have no valid argument.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#6025 Jan 6, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Only to point out that you are.
BWAHAHAHAHA!
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#6026 Jan 6, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
Wondering, a greater man could respond to the whole of the post,
I edit out the nonsense. Your opinion of "a greater man" is about as valuable as your understanding of the constitution, not very.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#6027 Jan 6, 2013
Wondering wrote:
I edit out the nonsense.

You edit the portions to which you lack the competence to respond. Which is to say most everything.
Wondering wrote:
Your opinion of "a greater man" is about as valuable as your understanding of the constitution, not very.
Wondering, I wouldn’t expect a pathetic person, who can’t even stay on topic or offer a valid defense of their position to understand.

As for the constitution, you seem to lack the competence to understand that it mandates that states provide all persons within their jurisdiction equal protection of the laws.

It has been clearly illustrated for you in terms that even a child could understand that homosexuals are people and marriage is a protection of the law.

The fact that you cannot absorb these simple facts says more about you than about me.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#6028 Jan 6, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
You edit the portions to which you lack the competence to respond.
No, just the nonsense. Why waste any more time responding to a dumbass that doesn't understand the response? Now go play with your alphabet blocks.

Lililth_Satans_B ore

Since: May 12

Bellevue, WA

#6029 Jan 6, 2013
Wondering wrote:
<quoted text>
No, just the nonsense. Why waste any more time responding to a dumbass that doesn't understand the response? Now go play with your alphabet blocks.
hey i was just wondering why you so dumb???
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#6030 Jan 6, 2013
Lililth_Satans_Bore wrote:
<quoted text>hey i was just wondering why you so dumb???
hey i was just wondering how thick the calluses on your knees are?

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#6031 Jan 6, 2013
Wondering wrote:
No, just the nonsense. Why waste any more time responding to a dumbass that doesn't understand the response? Now go play with your alphabet blocks.
It appears you are still too stupid to realize that you cannot cite a single legitimate state interest served by denying same sex couples equal protection of the law to marry, because no such interest exists.

Do you know why I keep asking this question, Wondering?(I'll just assume that you don't, because you seem to be singularly incapable of logical thinking) It is because laws MUST serve a legitimate state interest in order to meet the lowest levels of judicial review and to be constitutional.

The fact that you regularly brush aside the simple question of such a state interest served and offer up yet another asinine personal insult simply serves to illustrate the lack of rational foundation for your argument.

You don't respond, because you cannot respond. Congratulations, each time you don't respond, or better yet, respond without actually answering the question, you only make yourself look foolish.

Keep it coming, Wondering, I only respond to give you further opportunities to make an *** of yourself. You see, the more often people see a person like you arguing for fellow citizens to be held as second class citizens with less than equal protection of the laws, the more they support the very concept of equality.
Jane DoDo

West New York, NJ

#6032 Jan 6, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
It appears you are still too stupid to realize that you cannot cite a single legitimate state interest served by denying same sex couples equal protection of the law to marry, because no such interest exists.
Do you know why I keep asking this question, Wondering?(I'll just assume that you don't, because you seem to be singularly incapable of logical thinking) It is because laws MUST serve a legitimate state interest in order to meet the lowest levels of judicial review and to be constitutional.
The fact that you regularly brush aside the simple question of such a state interest served and offer up yet another asinine personal insult simply serves to illustrate the lack of rational foundation for your argument.
You don't respond, because you cannot respond. Congratulations, each time you don't respond, or better yet, respond without actually answering the question, you only make yourself look foolish.
Keep it coming, Wondering, I only respond to give you further opportunities to make an *** of yourself. You see, the more often people see a person like you arguing for fellow citizens to be held as second class citizens with less than equal protection of the laws, the more they support the very concept of equality.
When Wondering dies, they'll have to shoot his mouth to shut him up. He's just another old dog that can't learn anything new.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#6033 Jan 6, 2013
Jane DoDo wrote:
When Wondering dies, they'll have to shoot his mouth to shut him up. He's just another old dog that can't learn anything new.
Judging from his lack of facility with the US Constitution he can't learn anything old either.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#6034 Jan 6, 2013
lides wrote:
<quoted text>
It appears you are still too stupid
More childish insults, oh my.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#6035 Jan 6, 2013
Jane DoDo wrote:
<quoted text>
When Wondering dies, they'll have to shoot his mouth to shut him up. He's just another old dog that can't learn anything new.
I try to learn something new everyday. You should try it.

“No Headline available”

Since: Jan 08

Defiance, Ohio

#6036 Jan 6, 2013
Wondering wrote:
More childish insults, oh my.
Feel free to indicate a legitimate state interest served by denying same sex couples equal protection of the law to marry that would render your argument valid, and prove that you are not worthy of the insults.

Until you do, it is just more of the same childish drivel from you. You have lost this argument some time ago, when you consistently departed from addressing the topic at hand. Each post that you make that doesn't address the topic, like the one I am currently responding to, merely reinforces that you lack a valid argument in support of your position.

An intelligent person could make an factually support an argument in favor of their position, or in the alternative would have the intelligence to remain mute. Yet you seem to lack the ability to do either.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#6037 Jan 6, 2013
lides wrote:
it is just more of the same childish drivel from you.
More? When all you have is insults, you lose.
Wondering

Tyngsboro, MA

#6038 Jan 6, 2013
Notice, JD, I'm still deleting your nonsense.

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.

Massachusetts Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
If there is no God, no heaven or hell...then pl... (Nov '09) Tue wise lady 320
Whiny Welfare Moochers Jun 19 Bau 1992 22
Real Father Son Incest (Aug '15) Jun 17 Dad and son 16
Offshore Wind Turbines Far Too Expensive -Denma... Jun 16 Bob DeLeo 1
Trackers MC Boston? (Apr '13) Jun 13 BSA 34
Massachusetts No Ocean Wind Turbine Port Equals... Jun 12 Bob DeLeo 1
News Trump knocks Romney strategist (Oct '15) Jun 5 Southern Milf club 3
More from around the web