Forums | MacLife

So the White House is claiming he just randomly got in?

treehouse wrote:

Jeff Gannon just won't go away, and who wants him to, really?

My favorite pundit had some choice words for the issue, and I quote the best of 'em:

"So now liberals are lashing out at the gays. Two weeks ago, The New York Times turned over half of its op-ed page to outing gays with some connection to Republicans. There is no principled or intellectual basis for these outings. Conservatives don't want gays to die; we just don't want to transform the Pentagon into the Office of Gay Studies. By contrast, liberals say: "We love gay people! Gay people are awesome! Being gay is awesome! Gay marriage is awesome! Gay cartoon characters are awesome! And if you don't agree with us, we'll punish you by telling everyone that you're gay!" In addition to an attack on a Web site reporter for supposedly operating a gay escort service and thereby cutting into the business of the Village Voice, another Times op-ed article the same day gratuitously outed the children of prominent conservatives. These are not public figures. No one knows who they are apart from their famous parents. I didn't even know most of these conservatives had children until the Times outed them. Liberals can't even cite their usual "hypocrisy" fig leaf to justify the public outings of conservatives' family members. No outsider can know what goes on inside a family, but according to the public version of one family matter being leered over by liberals, a prominent conservative threw his daughter out of the house when he found out she was gay. Stipulating for purposes of argument that that's the whole story

Last edited by Camp David (2005-03-03 11:54 am)

Ann Coulter is certainly disconnected enough from reality to claim that "Liberals" are now "attacking gays".

bedstuy wrote:

Not that Camp David read the referenced article in the NY Times either.

I did bedstuy, did you? Can you answer a question with a yes/no answer?

Did the New York Times ask permission of Maya Keyes before it ran its story?

obtuse wrote:

Does it have to?

If the aim of the article was to simply "out" a homosexual.... yes! It shouldn't have run the article at all, but we all know whose side the Times is on!

Last edited by Camp David (2005-03-03 12:13 pm)

Camp David wrote:

obtuse wrote:

Does it have to?

If the aim of the article was to simply "out" a homosexual.... yes! It shouldn't have run the article at all, but we all know whose side the Times is on!

She's already "out."  You can't "out" an "out" lesbian.  What's your IQ again?

When Maya Keyes has an article in the Advocate with her girlfriend and says "I'm queer, get used to it." I'd say that's a confession.

Now defend Ann some more for us.  It's amusing.  Bottom line for the Grand Ole Party (or is that Gay Ole Party??? where's Ken Mehlman?):  if your gay and wanna play with us STAY IN THE CLOSET!!!

Last edited by bedstuy (2005-03-03 12:30 pm)

Why are you guys wasting your time?

shiny shiny right down behin' me
shiny shiny sha na-na na!

Name that early 80's tune!

Last edited by bedstuy (2005-03-03 12:55 pm)

Does anyone seriously believe that Gannukert is actually writing this himself?  Just because it's the same URL and promoted as being the same person (whoever that really is), what is there to prove that this is anything more than another attempt by the GOP spin machine to infiltrate the independent media?

bedstuy wrote:

Gatchaman wrote:

Does anyone seriously believe that Gannukert is actually writing this himself?  Just because it's the same URL and promoted as being the same person (whoever that really is), what is there to prove that this is anything more than another attempt by the GOP spin machine to infiltrate the independent media?

Are you implying that a hooker would lie?

Camp David wrote:

I quote this for a reason: the left is using the Gannon issue for a reason, just as Ms. Coulter alleges... " Stop opposing our agenda

---

http://smurf.com/