Re: Will Comcast Make This The Last St. Patrick's Day Parade To Exclude Gays?

Little Brucie Girl is a crazed Libbie Loon.

On Mar 20, 9:31 am, Bruce Majors <majors.br...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Tommy is one of those fascists who wants the government to monopolize
> streets, air, water, health care etc and then say since it belongs to the
> State you must obey the State when you are forced to use the things they
> have taken control of
>
> This is why nazis like Tommy must be executed
>
> On Tuesday, March 20, 2012, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>
>
> > militants
> > who want to change the definition of marriage
> > ---
> > it's already changed
>
> > beating a dead horse tenderizes the meat
>
> > On Mar 19, 5:16 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> I don't have any issues with what one does behind closed doors now
> >> PlainOl.  As a matter of fact and record,  I have been involved in the
> >> legal defense of a number of individuals whose rights have been trampled
> >> upon because of their sexuality.
>
> >> That's not the case here,  and that is not the case with those militants
> >> who want to change the definition of marriage, but we've been down this
> >> road......
>
> >> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 6:09 PM, plainolamerican
> >> <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
> >> > Since when did Gays, Lesbians and Transgender folks get banned from
> >> > marching in the St. Paddy's Day parade?
> >> > ----
> >> > the 1995 U.S. Supreme Court case Hurley vs. Irish-American Gay,
> >> > Lesbian, Bisexual Group of Boston,  ruled parade organizers do have a
> >> > legal right to decide who marches in the parade.
> >> > Join the Impact, another gay, lesbian and transgender group in Boston,
> >> > was also denied permission to walk in the parade this year. The Irish-
> >> > American group marched in the parade in 1992 after obtaining a court
> >> > order, but no gay or lesbian organization has walked since the Supreme
> >> > Court ruling;
>
> >> > militant secular spin lies and prevaricate hogwash from
> >> > again, the militant, homosexual agenda!
> >> > ----
> >> > find a deprogrammer fast!
>
> >> > That pretty much eliminates TommyTomTomForNews from marching,
> >> > probably
> >> > PlainOl too.
> >> > ---
> >> > gfy
> >> > I haven't posted on any of tommys gay posts because I don't want to
> >> > argue with you about homosexuality. I am not gay, don't care about
> >> > their plight, or think I'm right and you're wrong ... I just find the
> >> > religious right's position indefensible. Eventually, they are going to
> >> > accept homos ... it's just going to take time.
>
> >> > On Mar 19, 4:15 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > Since when did Gays, Lesbians and Transgender folks get banned from
> >> > > marching in the St. Paddy's Day parade?
>
> >> > > Once again,  more militant secular spin lies and prevaricate hogwash
> from
> >> > > again, the militant, homosexual agenda!
>
> >> > > The only restriction, against ANYONE or ANY GROUP,  is that this is a
> >> > > family parade, and there will be no nekkidness,  there will be no
> >> > > fornication,  there will be no one dressed in assless chaps,  or
> nekkid
> >> > > Statues of Liberty.
>
> >> > > That pretty much eliminates TommyTomTomForNews from marching,
>  probably
> >> > > PlainOl too.
>
> >> > > On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 11:59 AM, plainolamerican <
> >> > plainolameri...@gmail.com
>
> >> > > > wrote:
> >> > > > an embarrassment
> >> > > > in a state where we now have marriage rights
> >> > > > ---
> >> > > > Irish and African-American lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and
> >> > > > queer (LGBTQ) communities have a lot in common when it comes to
> being
> >> > > > excluded from the iconic institutions in their communities.
>
> >> > > > For LGBTQ African Americans, it's the Black Church, and for LGBTQ
> >> > > > Irish Americans, it's the St. Patrick's Day Parade.
>
> >> > > > Unlike the Black Church, however, that has and continues to throw
> the
> >> > > > Bible at its LGBTQ community to justify their exclusionary
> practices,
> >> > > > the St. Patrick's Day parade committee uses the First Amendment,
> >> > > > debating that they are constitutionally guaranteed freedoms of
> >> > > > religion, speech and association, and the tenet separating church
> and
> >> > > > state.
>
> >> > > > In 1994 Boston's St. Patrick's Day parade was canceled over this
> >> > > > issue. The state's highest court ruled that the parade organizers
> >> > > > could not ban members of the LGBTQ community from marching. But in
> a
> >> > > > counter lawsuit, parade officials won, accusing LGBTQ
> Irish-Americans
> >> > > > of violating their rights to free speech under the First Amendment.
>
> >> > > > On Mar 19, 10:37 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> > > > > Will Comcast Make This The Last St. Patrick's Day Parade To
> Exclude
> >> > Gays?
>
> >> > > > > -by Michelangelo Signorile
>
> >> > > > > It's 2012, and in the state of New York gays and lesbians have
> full
> >> > > > > civil rights, including marriage equality. Moreover, gays are no
> >> > > > > longer banned in the U.S. military. But they are still banned
> from
> >> > > > > Fifth Avenue's annual St. Patrick's Day Parade in an embarrassing
> >> > > > > throwback for everyone involved.
>
> >> > > > > It's frankly appalling that NBC, and now its parent company
> Comcast,
> >> > > > > still sells the broadcast rights (on its local affiliate, WNBC)
> to
> >> > the
> >> > > > > intolerant bunch that runs the parade (in 2007 that amount was
> >> > > > > $300,000) and then helps the organizers sell advertising to major
> >> > > > > companies. More than that, one of NBC's top executives, a man who
> >> > aids
> >> > > > > the organizers in getting those ad dollars, was chosen as this
> year's
> >> > > > > Grand Marshal.
>
> >> > > > > As David Mixner notes, most New York politicians who support
> equality
> >> > > > > won't march in the parade because of this bigotry. Last year, the
> >> > > > > Irish Foreign Minister condemned the parade, and the President of
> >> > > > > Ireland declined an invitation to be Grand Marshal. But Francis
> X.
> >> > > > > Comerford, Chief Revenue Officer and President of Commercial
> >> > > > > Operations for the NBC Owned Television Stations, has no problem
> >> > > > > leading the parade as Grand Marshal.
>
> >> > > > > Groups like the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation
> (GLAAD)
> >> > > > > have criticized NBC for its relationship with the parade since
> the
> >> > > > > early '90s. Other groups have protested the parade annually,
> >> > sometimes
> >> > > > > resulting in arrests, and this year the group Irish Queers will
> be
> >> > > > > demonstrating once again. For years it's all been to no avail.
>
> >> > > > > But with Comcast now in charge after the controversial merger
> with
> >> > NBC
> >> > > > > was finalized, 2012 could be the last year in which gays are
> excluded
> >> > > > > -- or the last year in which NBC is involved in the parade.
>
> >> > > > > There are a few reasons for this. One of them has to do with the
> >> > terms
> >> > > > > of the merger itself, in which Brian Roberts, chairman and CEO of
> >> > > > > Comcast, testified before the House Judiciary Committee, where he
> >> > > > > vowed to adhere to diversity in every aspect of the company's
> >> > business
> >> > > > > dealings. From the company's own blog:
> >> ...
>
> >> read more »
>
> >>  beating-a-dead-horse.gif
> >> 2212KViewDownload
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Time for a Drink

Its called the 10th amendment.... Sovereign States have the Sovereign
right to make their own decisions
---
but federal law trumps state law

On Mar 21, 1:42 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Its called the 10th amendment.... Sovereign States have the Sovereign
> right to make their own decisions... Wouldn't it be great if ALL
> decisions that affected the populations of the Several States were
> made this way... to reflect the ideas and ideals of those states and
> localities? I think it would.
>
> On Mar 20, 11:54 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > "Some religious people always focus on the negative. They don't drink, dance, smoke, chew, or go with girls who do -- but then they want to spread the misery even if it means using the state to tell others how they should live. It reminds me of H.L. Mencken's famous definition of puritanism: "The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.""Time for a Drinkby Laurence M. Vance, March 20, 2012
> > While eating in a restaurant in the Atlanta airport recently, I noticed that the restaurant's bar was closed and -- to make it perfectly clear -- all the chairs had been turned over and placed on the bar.
> > Now, although I don't frequent bars in airports or anywhere else, I was nevertheless intrigued. "The bar doesn't open until 12:30 on Sundays," said my waiter. But, as I found out later, it isn't just this particular airport bar that didn't open until Sunday afternoon. In Georgia, no alcohol may be served in restaurants or bars until after 12:30 on Sundays.
> > In fact, until just recently, alcohol sales in retail stores on Sundays were prohibited by the Georgia legislature. On April 28, 2011, Nathan Deal, Georgia's governor, signed legislation allowing local communities the option of voting on whether to continue the Sunday alcohol-sales ban in their cities and counties or to eliminate it. Georgia's previous governor, Sonny Perdue, had always pledged to veto any measure ending the ban on Sunday sales, but he left office on January 10, 2011, constitutionally ineligible to seek a third consecutive term.
> > On November 8, 2011 (the first election date available under state law), about 120 of Georgia's almost 700 cities and counties held areferendumon the matter of Sunday alcohol sales. In more than 100 communities that voted, the Sunday restriction was lifted, in many cases by large margins. The effective date of the repeal varied from November to February. Sunday sales in Georgia's capital and largest city, Atlanta, began on January 1, 2012.
> > The cost of having a single-issue ballot kept many communities from having such a referendum. However, on March 6, voters in some Georgia communities had more than a Republican presidential nominee to vote on in the Super Tuesday elections. In 16 cities and counties, there also appeared on the ballot the Sunday alcohol-sales question. The measure passed everywhere it was voted on except in the city ofJeffersonville, where it failed by one vote.
> > But Georgia is not alone when it comes to states that restrict alcohol sales on Sundays. Unlike Nevada and Louisiana, where beer, wine, and liquor sales are legal 24 hours a day, seven days a week, most states (or cities and counties that have been given a local option) restrict alcohol sales in some way on Sundays. A distinction is usually made between alcohol consumed on-premises and alcohol purchased for consumption off-premises. In Indiana, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Minnesota, and Connecticut, the sale of alcohol is prohibited for consumption off-premises on Sunday. Most counties in Arkansas and Mississippi are the same way. In Colorado, the Sunday sales restriction wasn't lifted until 2008. Hard liquor cannot be sold for off-premise consumption on Sunday in Texas, Utah, North Carolina, or South Carolina. In Nebraska, there can be no on- or off-premises sales of hard liquor before noon on Sundays. No alcoholic beverages of any kind can be sold on- or off-premises before 1:00 p.m. on Sunday in West Virginia. Other states (and cities or counties) with Sunday restrictions generally have a later time on Sunday morning for alcohol sales (on- or off-premises) than during the other days of the week.
> > Why?
> > It can't possibly be because the states, counties, and municipalities are exercising what is commonly referred to as their police powers to protect the public's health, safety, and morals.
> > If there is something dangerous about drinking alcohol on Sunday morning before noon, then it is equally dangerous to drink alcohol before noon on any other day of the week. Yet most states with Sunday alcohol-sales restrictions generally allow the on-premises sale of alcohol the rest of the week sometime between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. But what is so magical about 6:00 a.m.? Is there really any difference between letting someone be served a drink at 5:30 a.m. instead of 6:00 a.m.? Some states prohibit the sale of alcohol only between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. Do they not care about the health, safety, and morals of their citizens the other 20 hours of the day?
> > States are doing a poor job if they are protecting their citizens from the dangers of alcohol only during certain hours and on certain days. Shouldn't all states at least follow the model of Kansas, Mississippi, and Tennessee? Those states are "dry" by default; individual counties must vote to become "wet." Thirty other states allow their counties to go dry only by public referendum, but at least they give their counties that option. Seventeen states preclude any of their counties from going dry.
> > Consistency was never the hallmark of government at any level. In Wisconsin, one can be served alcohol until 2:00 a.m. on Sunday through Thursday, but until 2:30 a.m. on Friday and Saturday, with no ending time at all on New Year's Day. That seems counterintuitive, since the government is extending alcohol sales during the times when people aremore likelyto abuse alcohol. And why is it that casinos all along the Mississippi River are permitted to be open 24/7 and give free alcohol to gambling patrons all hours of the day and night? Many convenience stores also sell pornography in addition to beer and wine. There are no time restrictions on the purchase of pornography. And there are no laws that forbid the purchase of pornography on Sundays.
> > There is really only one reason that state and local governments and voters in counties and cities support restricting alcohol sales on Sundays: they are puritanical busybodies clinging to Prohibition- or Colonial America-era blue laws.
> > It was generally religious preferences that led Georgians to vote against the November referendum on the matter of Sunday alcohol sales. In the city of Snellville,James Freedlevoted against the referendum, saying, "I don't think it's appropriate to drink on Sunday." In the city of Forest Park, Mayor and Sunday School teacherCorine Deyton, who also said she voted no, commented, "If you can't do without alcohol one day a week, there's something bad wrong with you." In rural Elbert County, one of the few areas where the referendum failed to pass, church pianistPatsy Scarboroughpointedly said, "This nation has a trend of turning away from good morals. Americans need to be in church on Sunday, not out buying alcohol." "Thanks for voting no to sell alcohol on Sunday," read a sign on an Elbert County local church after the referendum failed.
> > But it's not just alcohol sales on Sunday. In some states and counties it is still illegal on Sunday to hunt, hold horse races, sell cars, or open a store before noon.
> > Now, as a religious person myself whodoesattend church on Sunday anddoesn'tpurchase alcohol on Sunday or any other day of the week, I am sympathetic to those Georgians' views of church attendance and alcohol. That does not mean, however, that I believe that people who, for whatever reason, don't attend church on Sunday should be punished by not allowing them to buy a six-pack of beer at 7-Eleven on Sunday morning before they go fishing.
> > Some religious people always focus on the negative. They don't drink, dance, smoke, chew, or go with girls who do -- but then they want to spread the misery even if it means using the state to tell others how they should live. It reminds me of H.L. Mencken's famous definition of puritanism: "The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy."
> > The problem with alcohol prohibitionists -- religious or otherwise -- is that they, for whatever reason, have never accepted or been introduced to the philosophy of freedom. Restricting the sale of alcohol or any other product on Sunday is really a restriction on commerce, property, and freedom, things that Americans -- religious or otherwise -- say they hold dear.
> > In a free society, businesses make their own decisions as to the days and times when they will offer their products for sale, just as individual persons make their own decisions as to the day and time when, and place of business where, they will make purchases. In fact, a free society can't have it any other way.
> > No alcohol was consumed on Sunday during the writing of this article.http://www.fff.org/comment/com1203q.asp

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Homophobic Cops in Dresses March In Parade That Excludes Conservatively Dressed Gays

Kilts are dresses.

Dresses are Feminine.

You are the liar.

On Mar 21, 1:29 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> The Aboyne Dress is the feminine form and none of the people shown
> were wearing it.... You stand as a liar.
>
> On Mar 21, 11:46 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Homophobic Cops in Dresses March In Parade That Excludes
> > Conservatively Dressed Gays
>
> > Nassau County Police Bagpipe Band. St Patrick's Day Parade, NY, 2012.
>
> > Watch Here:
>
> >http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JysAP7C4XE
>
> > --
> > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> > Have a great day,
> > Tommy
>
> > --
> > Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> > Have a great day,
> > Tommy- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Race and Rhetoric

I fully
support it.
---
ditto

On Mar 20, 8:26 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thoughtful post.
>
> PlainOl reminds me of something though.   Many of our laws turn out to be
> discriminatory or biased.  I honestly don't believe that this was the
> intent, and in some cases, it cannot be helped, but the crack cocaine laws
> are one that comes to mind.   This law (which has since been modified and
> partially repealed)  is a very good example.  It held crack cocaine 10-1
> for sentencing purposes, as compared to powder cocaine.  The goal was to
> instill that crack cocaine was much more dangerous, etc., etc., etc.;  but
> it affected a larger portion of blacks, (because crack was a lot cheaper to
> buy on the streets)  and was found predominately in the black communities,
> whereas powder cocaine was found in the more upscale white communities.
>
> I have no doubt that the current trend by States to enforce a law that
> requires an individual to have a picture ID in order to vote will be
> somewhat discriminatory,  but it is requisite to have such a law.  I fully
> support it.  (A topic for another thread)
>
> At any rate,  as stated,  good post, thanks for sharing Michael and PlainOl!
>
> On Tue, Mar 20, 2012 at 9:44 AM, plainolamerican
> <plainolameri...@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > Political rhetoric is intended to do one thing – win votes
> > ---
> > racial rhetoric is intended to do one thing - make laws to give our
> > tax dollars to minorities.
>
> > race, religion, and ethnicity are all used as excuses ... it's way
> > past time to disregard those who use them for an advantage
>
> > On Mar 20, 6:34 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> > > "Political rhetoric is intended to do one thing – win votes. Whether the
> > policies that accompany that rhetoric make people better off or worse off
> > is far less of a concern to politicians, if any concern at all."[How about
> > whether the TALK ever manifests itself into ACTION? THAT is apparently of
> > little concern to many.]Race and Rhetoricby Thomas Sowell
> > > One of the things that turned up, during a long-overdue cleanup of my
> > office, was an old yellowed copy of theNew York Timesdated July 24, 1992.
> > One of the front-page headlines said: "White-Black Disparity in Income
> > Narrowed in 80's, Census Shows."
> > > The 1980s? Wasn't that the years of the Reagan administration, the
> > "decade of greed," the era of "neglect" of the poor and minorities, if not
> > "covert racism"?
> > > More recently, during the administration of America's first black
> > president, a 2011 report from the Pew Research Center has the headline,
> > "Wealth Gaps Rise to Record Highs Between Whites, Blacks and Hispanics."
> > > While the median net worth of whites was ten times the median net worth
> > of blacks in 1988, the last year of the Reagan administration, the ratio
> > was nineteen to one in 2009, the first year of the Obama administration.
> > With Hispanics, the ratio was eight to one in 1988 and fifteen to one in
> > 2009.
> > > Race is just one of the areas in which the rhetoric and the reality
> > often go in opposite directions. Political rhetoric is intended to do one
> > thing – win votes. Whether the policies that accompany that rhetoric make
> > people better off or worse off is far less of a concern to politicians, if
> > any concern at all.
> > > Democrats receive the overwhelming bulk of the black vote by rhetoric
> > and by presenting what they have done as the big reason that blacks have
> > advanced. So long as most blacks and whites alike mistake rhetoric for
> > reality, this political game can go on.
> > > A Manhattan Institute study last year by Edward Glaeser and Jacob Vigdor
> > showed that, while the residential segregation of blacks has generally been
> > declining from the middle of the 20th century to the present, it was rising
> > during the first half of the 20th century. The net result is that blacks in
> > 2010 were almost as residentially unsegregated as they were back in 1890.
> > > There are complex reasons behind such things, but the bottom line is
> > plain. The many laws, programs and policies designed to integrate
> > residential housing cannot be automatically assumed to translate into
> > residentially integrated housing. Government is not the sole factor, nor
> > necessarily the biggest factor, no matter what impression political
> > rhetoric gives.
> > > No city is more liberal in its rhetoric and policies than San Francisco.
> > Yet there are less than half as many blacks living in San Francisco today
> > as there were in 1970.
> > > Nor is San Francisco unique. A number of other very liberal California
> > counties saw their black populations drop by 10,000 people or more, just
> > between the 1990 and 2000 censuses – even when the total population of
> > these counties was growing.
> > > One of the many reasons why rhetoric does not automatically translate
> > into reality is that the ramifications of so many government policies
> > produce results completely different from what was claimed, or even
> > believed, when these policies were imposed.
> > > The poverty rate among blacks was nearly cut in half in the 20 years
> > prior to the 1960s, a record unmatched since then, despite the expansion of
> > welfare state policies in the 1960s.
> > > Unemployment among black 16- and 17-year-old males was 12 percent back
> > in 1950. Yet unemployment rates among black 16- and 17-year-old males has
> > not been less than 30 percent for any year since 1970 – and has been over
> > 40 percent in some of those years.
> > > Not only was unemployment among blacks in general lower before the
> > liberal welfare state policies expanded in the 1960s, rates of imprisonment
> > of blacks were also lower then, and most black children were raised in
> > two-parent families. At one time, a higher percentage of blacks than whites
> > were married and working.
> > > None of these facts fits liberal social dogmas.
> > > While many politicians and "leaders" have claimed credit for black
> > progress, no one seems to be willing to take the blame for the
> > retrogressions represented by higher unemployment rates, higher crime
> > rates, and higher rates of imprisonment today. Or for the disintegration of
> > the black family, which survived centuries of slavery and generations of
> > government-imposed discrimination in the Jim Crow era, but began coming
> > apart in the wake of the expansion of the liberal welfare state and its
> > accompanying social dogmas.
> > > The time is long overdue to start looking beyond the prevailing
> > political rhetoric to the hard realities.
> >http://www.lewrockwell.com/sowell/sowell79.1.html
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Time for a Drink

Its called the 10th amendment.... Sovereign States have the Sovereign
right to make their own decisions... Wouldn't it be great if ALL
decisions that affected the populations of the Several States were
made this way... to reflect the ideas and ideals of those states and
localities? I think it would.

On Mar 20, 11:54 am, MJ <micha...@america.net> wrote:
> "Some religious people always focus on the negative. They don't drink, dance, smoke, chew, or go with girls who do -- but then they want to spread the misery even if it means using the state to tell others how they should live. It reminds me of H.L. Mencken's famous definition of puritanism: "The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy.""Time for a Drinkby Laurence M. Vance, March 20, 2012
> While eating in a restaurant in the Atlanta airport recently, I noticed that the restaurant's bar was closed and -- to make it perfectly clear -- all the chairs had been turned over and placed on the bar.
> Now, although I don't frequent bars in airports or anywhere else, I was nevertheless intrigued. "The bar doesn't open until 12:30 on Sundays," said my waiter. But, as I found out later, it isn't just this particular airport bar that didn't open until Sunday afternoon. In Georgia, no alcohol may be served in restaurants or bars until after 12:30 on Sundays.
> In fact, until just recently, alcohol sales in retail stores on Sundays were prohibited by the Georgia legislature. On April 28, 2011, Nathan Deal, Georgia's governor, signed legislation allowing local communities the option of voting on whether to continue the Sunday alcohol-sales ban in their cities and counties or to eliminate it. Georgia's previous governor, Sonny Perdue, had always pledged to veto any measure ending the ban on Sunday sales, but he left office on January 10, 2011, constitutionally ineligible to seek a third consecutive term.
> On November 8, 2011 (the first election date available under state law), about 120 of Georgia's almost 700 cities and counties held areferendumon the matter of Sunday alcohol sales. In more than 100 communities that voted, the Sunday restriction was lifted, in many cases by large margins. The effective date of the repeal varied from November to February. Sunday sales in Georgia's capital and largest city, Atlanta, began on January 1, 2012.
> The cost of having a single-issue ballot kept many communities from having such a referendum. However, on March 6, voters in some Georgia communities had more than a Republican presidential nominee to vote on in the Super Tuesday elections. In 16 cities and counties, there also appeared on the ballot the Sunday alcohol-sales question. The measure passed everywhere it was voted on except in the city ofJeffersonville, where it failed by one vote.
> But Georgia is not alone when it comes to states that restrict alcohol sales on Sundays. Unlike Nevada and Louisiana, where beer, wine, and liquor sales are legal 24 hours a day, seven days a week, most states (or cities and counties that have been given a local option) restrict alcohol sales in some way on Sundays. A distinction is usually made between alcohol consumed on-premises and alcohol purchased for consumption off-premises. In Indiana, Tennessee, Oklahoma, Minnesota, and Connecticut, the sale of alcohol is prohibited for consumption off-premises on Sunday. Most counties in Arkansas and Mississippi are the same way. In Colorado, the Sunday sales restriction wasn't lifted until 2008. Hard liquor cannot be sold for off-premise consumption on Sunday in Texas, Utah, North Carolina, or South Carolina. In Nebraska, there can be no on- or off-premises sales of hard liquor before noon on Sundays. No alcoholic beverages of any kind can be sold on- or off-premises before 1:00 p.m. on Sunday in West Virginia. Other states (and cities or counties) with Sunday restrictions generally have a later time on Sunday morning for alcohol sales (on- or off-premises) than during the other days of the week.
> Why?
> It can't possibly be because the states, counties, and municipalities are exercising what is commonly referred to as their police powers to protect the public's health, safety, and morals.
> If there is something dangerous about drinking alcohol on Sunday morning before noon, then it is equally dangerous to drink alcohol before noon on any other day of the week. Yet most states with Sunday alcohol-sales restrictions generally allow the on-premises sale of alcohol the rest of the week sometime between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 9:00 a.m. But what is so magical about 6:00 a.m.? Is there really any difference between letting someone be served a drink at 5:30 a.m. instead of 6:00 a.m.? Some states prohibit the sale of alcohol only between 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. Do they not care about the health, safety, and morals of their citizens the other 20 hours of the day?
> States are doing a poor job if they are protecting their citizens from the dangers of alcohol only during certain hours and on certain days. Shouldn't all states at least follow the model of Kansas, Mississippi, and Tennessee? Those states are "dry" by default; individual counties must vote to become "wet." Thirty other states allow their counties to go dry only by public referendum, but at least they give their counties that option. Seventeen states preclude any of their counties from going dry.
> Consistency was never the hallmark of government at any level. In Wisconsin, one can be served alcohol until 2:00 a.m. on Sunday through Thursday, but until 2:30 a.m. on Friday and Saturday, with no ending time at all on New Year's Day. That seems counterintuitive, since the government is extending alcohol sales during the times when people aremore likelyto abuse alcohol. And why is it that casinos all along the Mississippi River are permitted to be open 24/7 and give free alcohol to gambling patrons all hours of the day and night? Many convenience stores also sell pornography in addition to beer and wine. There are no time restrictions on the purchase of pornography. And there are no laws that forbid the purchase of pornography on Sundays.
> There is really only one reason that state and local governments and voters in counties and cities support restricting alcohol sales on Sundays: they are puritanical busybodies clinging to Prohibition- or Colonial America-era blue laws.
> It was generally religious preferences that led Georgians to vote against the November referendum on the matter of Sunday alcohol sales. In the city of Snellville,James Freedlevoted against the referendum, saying, "I don't think it's appropriate to drink on Sunday." In the city of Forest Park, Mayor and Sunday School teacherCorine Deyton, who also said she voted no, commented, "If you can't do without alcohol one day a week, there's something bad wrong with you." In rural Elbert County, one of the few areas where the referendum failed to pass, church pianistPatsy Scarboroughpointedly said, "This nation has a trend of turning away from good morals. Americans need to be in church on Sunday, not out buying alcohol." "Thanks for voting no to sell alcohol on Sunday," read a sign on an Elbert County local church after the referendum failed.
> But it's not just alcohol sales on Sunday. In some states and counties it is still illegal on Sunday to hunt, hold horse races, sell cars, or open a store before noon.
> Now, as a religious person myself whodoesattend church on Sunday anddoesn'tpurchase alcohol on Sunday or any other day of the week, I am sympathetic to those Georgians' views of church attendance and alcohol. That does not mean, however, that I believe that people who, for whatever reason, don't attend church on Sunday should be punished by not allowing them to buy a six-pack of beer at 7-Eleven on Sunday morning before they go fishing.
> Some religious people always focus on the negative. They don't drink, dance, smoke, chew, or go with girls who do -- but then they want to spread the misery even if it means using the state to tell others how they should live. It reminds me of H.L. Mencken's famous definition of puritanism: "The haunting fear that someone, somewhere, may be happy."
> The problem with alcohol prohibitionists -- religious or otherwise -- is that they, for whatever reason, have never accepted or been introduced to the philosophy of freedom. Restricting the sale of alcohol or any other product on Sunday is really a restriction on commerce, property, and freedom, things that Americans -- religious or otherwise -- say they hold dear.
> In a free society, businesses make their own decisions as to the days and times when they will offer their products for sale, just as individual persons make their own decisions as to the day and time when, and place of business where, they will make purchases. In fact, a free society can't have it any other way.
> No alcohol was consumed on Sunday during the writing of this article.http://www.fff.org/comment/com1203q.asp

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Homophobic Cops in Dresses March In Parade That Excludes Conservatively Dressed Gays

The Aboyne Dress is the feminine form and none of the people shown
were wearing it.... You stand as a liar.

On Mar 21, 11:46 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Homophobic Cops in Dresses March In Parade That Excludes
> Conservatively Dressed Gays
>
> Nassau County Police Bagpipe Band. St Patrick's Day Parade, NY, 2012.
>
> Watch Here:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JysAP7C4XE
>
> --
> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> Have a great day,
> Tommy
>
> --
> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> Have a great day,
> Tommy

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Homophobic Cops in Dresses March In Parade That Excludes Conservatively Dressed Gays

On Mar 21, 11:46 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Homophobic Cops in Dresses March In Parade That Excludes
> Conservatively Dressed Gays
>
> Nassau County Police Bagpipe Band. St Patrick's Day Parade, NY, 2012.
>
> Watch Here:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JysAP7C4XE
>
> --
> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> Have a great day,
> Tommy
>
> --
> Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
> Have a great day,
> Tommy

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Petition To Declare Muslim Brotherhood A Terrorist Organization

I don't want to reform them, (Well, yes I do)
---
good luck

I mainly want to outlaw
them,
---
killing them in mass is cheaper and less time consuming

On Mar 20, 8:44 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> I don't want to reform them,  (Well, yes I do)  I mainly want to outlaw
> them, as we do with other entities and individuals who break laws under the
> guise of religion.
>
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 10:05 AM, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > wrote:
> > hell ... we may as well add them to the list
>
> > but then, who needs a list when so many Americans are determined to
> > control and ultimately reform radical muzzies?
>
> > On Mar 18, 6:37 pm, Travis <baconl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > **
> > >            New post on *actjonesboroar*
> > > <http://actjonesboroar.wordpress.com/author/burkasrugly/>  Petition To
> > > Declare Muslim Brotherhood A Terrorist
> > > Organization<
> >http://actjonesboroar.wordpress.com/2012/03/18/petition-to-declare-mu..
> > .>by
> > > burkasrugly <http://actjonesboroar.wordpress.com/author/burkasrugly/>
>
> > > Fellow infidels,
> > > Dick Morris has a petition on his website that you can sign that will
> > > automatically send a copy of the petition letter to your senators,
> > > congressmen and President Obama. Please go here to Dick Morris'
> > > website<
> >http://dickmorris.rallycongress.com/6303/declare-muslim-brotherhood-t..
> > .>and
> > > check it out.  You can also look on the right side of this blog to
> > > find
> > > the link.  Please send to all of your friends and post on your Facebook
> > > page.
>
> > > Until next time,
>
> > > Burkasrugly
> > >  *burkasrugly <http://actjonesboroar.wordpress.com/author/burkasrugly/>*
> > |
> > > March 18, 2012 at 6:11 pm | Tags: Dick
> > > Morris<http://actjonesboroar.wordpress.com/?tag=dick-morris>,
> > > Muslim Brotherhood
> > > petition<
> >http://actjonesboroar.wordpress.com/?tag=muslim-brotherhood-petition>|
> > > Categories: Radical
> > > Islam <http://actjonesboroar.wordpress.com/?cat=259237> | URL:
> >http://wp.me/p1t1Gt-zX
>
> > >   Comment<
> >http://actjonesboroar.wordpress.com/2012/03/18/petition-to-declare-mu...>
> > >    See all comments<
> >http://actjonesboroar.wordpress.com/2012/03/18/petition-to-declare-mu...>
>
> > >   Unsubscribe or change your email settings at Manage
> > > Subscriptions<
> >https://subscribe.wordpress.com/?key=7f89380f46003915c34c2cdd2b126a38...>.
>
> > > *Trouble clicking?* Copy and paste this URL into your browser:
> >http://actjonesboroar.wordpress.com/2012/03/18/petition-to-declare-mu...
> > >     Thanks for flying with WordPress.com <http://wordpress.com/>
>
> > --
> > Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
> > For options & help seehttp://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
>
> > * Visit our other community athttp://www.PoliticalForum.com/
> > * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
> > * Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Please Donate To ADL

The ADL is a jewish organization that is only concerned about
political power for jews and israel. They are something other than
Americans.

know the enemy

the Anti-Defamation League is an organization that supports Jewish
ethnic and religious supremacy, and relentlessly "defames" anyone who
dares to point out its own hypocrisy. While supposedly opposing ethnic
segregation and ethnic superiority, the ADL supports Israel and
international Zionism which promotes not a vision of a "multi-
cultural," "multi-ethnic" Israel, but of a "Jewish state." That state
is openly dedicated to the advancement of the Jewish religion,
culture, and even the genetic preservation of the Jewish people. This
is, of course, the very opposite of the policies it proposes for our
American nation.

Consider the following:

The ADL supports forced integration of schools, neighborhoods,
apartment complexes, clubs, churches and communities in America.

Yet it supports Israel which has a policy of segregated schools,
neighborhoods, apartment complexes and even whole towns for Jews and
Gentiles.

The ADL has been instrumental in changing America's immigration
policies in a manner that would result in European Americans becoming
a minority in America and countrie in Europe by the middle of this
century unless Whites unite to stop this dispossession from our own
homelands.

Of course, the ADL supports Israel, which has a "Jews only"
immigration policy. In fact, it even keeps out Palestinians who were
born there and then forced out during the Zionist takeover in 1948.

The ADL has condemned European Americans, such as the administrators
of Bob Jones University, who oppose racial intermarriage. Yet the ADL
supports Israel, a nation that does not even recognize as a legal
union marriage between a Jew and Gentile. The ADL has also never
condemned the extensive Jewish opposition to intermarriage between
Jews and non-Jews. Every major Jewish organization around the world
has openly stated policies opposing intermarriage.

The ADL has condemned Sadam Hussein and any of his supporters around
the world for his invasion of Kuwait, production of chemical,
biological and nuclear weapons, and for violating United Nations
resolutions.

But the ADL did not condemn Israel for the brutal invasion of
neighboring Lebanon, resulting in at least 30,000 civilians dead, and
lasting almost twenty years in violation of U.N. resolutions. Nor has
the ADL condemned Israel for its extensive development of biological
and chemical weapons.

The ADL has repeatedly condemned scientists who show that there are
significant genetic differences in intelligence between Whites and
Blacks, and they have condemned me for simply pointing out that
scientific truth.

Yet, the ADL has not condemned the founder of Israel, David Ben
Gurion, for his statement that he believed in the "intellectual and
moral superiority" of the Jewish people.

The ADL is by its own definition a racist, supremacist organization,
and recognizing that fact should not make someone deserve the label of
"anti-Semite." The truth is that the ADL is anti-Gentile! They are not
about anti-defamation, but their whole modus operandi is concerned
with defaming anyone of any nationality who wants for their own people
what the Jewish ADL leaders want for theirs. In other words, they are
opposed to every other ethnic nationalism but their own! The whole
organization is based on attacking, intimidating and defaming anyone
who opposes their Jewish supremacism.

In fact, anyone who criticizes their hypocrisy and that of Israel,
whether or not the critics are "racially aware" or "anti-racist," will
be condemned by the ADL. For their real mission is simply to advance
the Jewish Supremacist agenda in America and around the world.

On Mar 21, 9:12 am, Joe Bruno <atjoebru...@gmail.com> wrote:
> If you've been on the Internet as much as I have, you've seen the bigots at
> work with their filthy lies.They lie about Jews, Blacks and anyone who
> disagrees with them.They are the enemies of good people everywhere who are
> trying to get along
> and make this world work.
>
> The stated objectives of the bigots are:
> 1.To eliminate the rights and citizenship of non-whites
> 2.To deport non-whites from Western nations to Africa and asia.
>
> ADL exposes their lies with education and publicity.
>
> I urge anyone who can to donate to ADL so they can continue this important
> work.
>
> ADL: Fighting Anti-Semitism, Bigotry and Extremismwww.adl.org
> The mission of the Anti-Defamation League is to stop the defamation of the
> Jewish people, to secure justice and fair treatment to all citizens alike.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Stop violence against women

 

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Homophobic Cops in Dresses March In Parade That Excludes Conservatively Dressed Gays

Homophobic Cops in Dresses March In Parade That Excludes
Conservatively Dressed Gays

Nassau County Police Bagpipe Band. St Patrick's Day Parade, NY, 2012.

Watch Here:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3JysAP7C4XE

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
Together, we can change the world, one mind at a time.
Have a great day,
Tommy

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Will Comcast Make This The Last St. Patrick's Day Parade To Exclude Gays?

Funny the pics are from a gay "only" parade...

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Tommy News <tommysnews@gmail.com> wrote:

Little Homophobic Kiethie Keith-


False and misleading, as always.

These parades are not private events at

all as police, firefighters, public officials, etc. both on and off
duty, march on public property in a tax funded public parade.

Your photographs are represenative of vulgar heterosexual
exhibitionism.
Most gays dress conservatively, tastefully, and far nicer than you
do.


LIAR!

On Mar 19, 11:49 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Tom!   (And Mark!)
>
> Tom,  they are private events, from a number of standpoints, but to add to
> what Mark just said,  the Gasparilla Parade here in Tampa is a private
> event.  Ye Mystic Crewe of Gaspar pays a tremendous amount of money for the
> permit, but also for other city services, as well as security,  (to include
> off duty Tampa Police Officers and Hillsborough County Sheriff's
> Deputies);  I could go on, about sanitation,  parking,  etc.;  and how the
> City of Tampa reaps in a number of these "Permit Payments/Payola";  for
> other vendors.And then,  there's television.....Do you think that these TV
> stations get to set up for free?  In NYC;  for St. Paddies, which is
> televised all over the world.......Wonder how much that costs? Wonder what
> the City makes?
>
> One of the articles you posted eariler touched upon this subject.
>
> Yep,  no question the parade is private.
>
> But here's the real issue, and why militant Gay Secularist organizations
> like the ones you belong to are persona non grata at family oriented
> parades:
>
> :

>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Little Kiethie Kieth-
>
> > You need to go back to law school.
>
> > In 1995 , the GOP Roberts SCOTUS decided that the parade organizers
> > could exclude gay groups from marching, on the false premise that
> > these are "private events".  In truth, they are not private events at
> > all as police, firefighters, public officials, etc. both on and off
> > duty, march on public property in a tax funded public parade. The city
> > provides security, policing, clean up, crowd control, etc. paid for by
> > public tax dollars.
>
> > On Mar 19, 4:15 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Since when did Gays, Lesbians and Transgender folks get banned from
> > > marching in the St. Paddy's Day parade?
>
> > > Once again,  more militant secular spin lies and prevaricate hogwash from
> > > again, the militant, homosexual agenda!
>
> > > The only restriction, against ANYONE or ANY GROUP,  is that this is a
> > > family parade, and there will be no nekkidness,  there will be no
> > > fornication,  there will be no one dressed in assless chaps,  or nekkid
> > > Statues of Liberty.
>
> > > That pretty much eliminates TommyTomTomForNews from marching,  probably
> > > PlainOl too.
>
> > > On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 11:59 AM, plainolamerican <
> > plainolameri...@gmail.com
>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > an embarrassment
> > > > in a state where we now have marriage rights
> > > > ---
> > > > Irish and African-American lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and
> > > > queer (LGBTQ) communities have a lot in common when it comes to being
> > > > excluded from the iconic institutions in their communities.
>
> > > > For LGBTQ African Americans, it's the Black Church, and for LGBTQ
> > > > Irish Americans, it's the St. Patrick's Day Parade.
>
> > > > Unlike the Black Church, however, that has and continues to throw the
> > > > Bible at its LGBTQ community to justify their exclusionary practices,
> > > > the St. Patrick's Day parade committee uses the First Amendment,
> > > > debating that they are constitutionally guaranteed freedoms of
> > > > religion, speech and association, and the tenet separating church and
> > > > state.
>
> > > > In 1994 Boston's St. Patrick's Day parade was canceled over this
> > > > issue. The state's highest court ruled that the parade organizers
> > > > could not ban members of the LGBTQ community from marching. But in a
> > > > counter lawsuit, parade officials won, accusing LGBTQ Irish-Americans
> > > > of violating their rights to free speech under the First Amendment.
>
> > > > On Mar 19, 10:37 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Will Comcast Make This The Last St. Patrick's Day Parade To Exclude
> > Gays?
>
> > > > > -by Michelangelo Signorile
>
> > > > > It's 2012, and in the state of New York gays and lesbians have full
> > > > > civil rights, including marriage equality. Moreover, gays are no
> > > > > longer banned in the U.S. military. But they are still banned from
> > > > > Fifth Avenue's annual St. Patrick's Day Parade in an embarrassing
> > > > > throwback for everyone involved.
>
> > > > > It's frankly appalling that NBC, and now its parent company Comcast,
> > > > > still sells the broadcast rights (on its local affiliate, WNBC) to
> > the
> > > > > intolerant bunch that runs the parade (in 2007 that amount was
> > > > > $300,000) and then helps the organizers sell advertising to major
> > > > > companies. More than that, one of NBC's top executives, a man who
> > aids
> > > > > the organizers in getting those ad dollars, was chosen as this year's
> > > > > Grand Marshal.
>
> > > > > As David Mixner notes, most New York politicians who support equality
> > > > > won't march in the parade because of this bigotry. Last year, the
> > > > > Irish Foreign Minister condemned the parade, and the President of
> > > > > Ireland declined an invitation to be Grand Marshal. But Francis X.
> > > > > Comerford, Chief Revenue Officer and President of Commercial
> > > > > Operations for the NBC Owned Television Stations, has no problem
> > > > > leading the parade as Grand Marshal.
>
> > > > > Groups like the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD)
> > > > > have criticized NBC for its relationship with the parade since the
> > > > > early '90s. Other groups have protested the parade annually,
> > sometimes
> > > > > resulting in arrests, and this year the group Irish Queers will be
> > > > > demonstrating once again. For years it's all been to no avail.
>
> > > > > But with Comcast now in charge after the controversial merger with
> > NBC
> > > > > was finalized, 2012 could be the last year in which gays are excluded
> > > > > -- or the last year in which NBC is involved in the parade.
>
> > > > > There are a few reasons for this. One of them has to do with the
> > terms
> > > > > of the merger itself, in which Brian Roberts, chairman and CEO of
> > > > > Comcast, testified before the House Judiciary Committee, where he
> > > > > vowed to adhere to diversity in every aspect of the company's
> > business
> > > > > dealings. From the company's own blog:
>
> > > > > Diversity: A few members of the Committee raised questions about
> > > > > diversity at Comcast (and NBCU). Brian reiterated the company's
> > > > > commitment to promoting diversity in everything the company does. To
> > > > > me, as Comcast's Chief Diversity Officer, this means, among other
> > > > > things, diversity in our workforce, in our programming lineup, in our
> > > > > supplier base, and in our community investments (philanthropy) -- and
> > > > > having results we can be proud of.
> > > > > Furthermore, the actual approval letter from the FCC states that
> > > > > Comcast must adhere to diversity rules for seven years or the merger
> > > > > could be undone:
>
> > > > > Protecting Diversity, Localism, Broadcast and Other Public Interest
> > > > > Concerns. The Commission is also imposing conditions and accepting
> > > > > voluntary commitments concerning a numbers of other public interest
> > > > > issues, including diversity, localism, and broadcasting, among
> > others.
> > > > > Sure, it's debatable whether selling the broadcast rights to a parade
> > > > > that admittedly excludes a minority group violates the FCC's
> > diversity
> > > > > rules. But it's certainly something that LGBT activists would argue,
> > > > > bringing a lot of attention to the issue. Comcast may not want that
> > > > > fight now.
>
> > > > > And that brings me to the other reasons. Comcast prides itself on its
> > > > > outreach to the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT)
> > > > > community. Just take a look at this page, where the company touts its
> > > > > 95-percent score on the Human Rights Campaign's Corporate Equality
> > > > > Index and brags of programming that reaches out to LGBT people.
> > > > > Comcast also sponsors the annual GLAAD Media Awards and, as the
> > > > > company describes, "partners with various LGBT community centers
> > > > > across the country that provide a range of services for the LGBT
> > > > > community."
>
> > > > > It's a different time than when the Ancient Order of the Hibernians
> > > > > began excluding gays from the St. Patrick's Day Parade in the early
> > > > > '90s. Netroots activism gets things done very quickly today. HRC, in
> > > > > part responding to pressure from other activists, lowered Target's
> > and
> > > > > Best Buy's CEI score after the retail chains gave money to a
> > political
> > > > > action committee that backed an anti-gay candidate. GLAAD withdrew
> > its
> > > > > support of the failed AT&T/T-Mobile merger after grassroots activists
> > > > > mobilized on the Web and raised concerns.
>
> > > > > Already, GLAAD is calling for the parade to be dropped moving forward
> > > > > if gays are not included. "The idea that a group of LGBT people
> > aren't
> > > > > allowed to participate in a parade in the middle of New York City in
> > > > > the year 2012 is completely out of touch with a majority of Americans
> > > > > and it is frankly indefensible," GLAAD spokesperson Herndon Graddick
> > > > > said in a statement. "GLAAD will be requesting to meet with WNBC to
> > > > > ensure that, if such discriminatory practices remain in place, the
> > > > > event isn't one associated with such an important and inclusive media
> > > > > outlet that should represent the full diversity of New York City."
>
> > > > > When LGBT activists have organized online and focused on companies
> > > > > that have supported homophobia -- companies that pride themselves on
> > > > > being pro-gay -- they've been enormously successful. Microsoft
> > > > > reversed course pronto in 2005 after it went neutral on a gay rights
> > > > > bill in the state of Washington, and that's just one example.
>
> > > > > The truth is, most LGBT activists weren't focused on the St.
> > Patrick's
> > > > > Day Parade all these years, with bigger fish to fry. But many are now
> > > > > looking at this as unfinished business -- as I said, an embarrassment
> > > > > in a state where we now have marriage
>

> ...
>
> read more »
>
>  dad_assless_chaps_son_pride_parade.jpg
> 206KViewDownload
>
>  JustGirlfriendsAtTheNeighborhoodParade..jpg
> 273KViewDownload
>
>  TommyTomTomForNews.DoingTheNeighborhoodSt.PaddiesDayParade..JPG
> 190KViewDownload
>
>  TommyTomTom.....MarchesToUtopia..jpg
> 260KViewDownload
>
>  HeyEverybody!IHonkOnBobo!.jpg
> 189KViewDownload- Hide quoted text -

>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Mark M. Kahle H.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Will Comcast Make This The Last St. Patrick's Day Parade To Exclude Gays?

And like any other group they apply to the committee to be included or or sent an invitation just like it is with any private gathering.

On Wed, Mar 21, 2012 at 11:28 AM, Tommy News <tommysnews@gmail.com> wrote:

No. False.

The cops, city employees, city offoicials etc. march in the parade, in
full uniform, on duty, on tyhe taxpayer's dime, and espouse hatred,
exclusion, and discrimination on the false and discriminatory premise
of "Family Values".



On Mar 19, 9:34 pm, THE ANNOINTED ONE <markmka...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Tommytomtom,
>
> Those are the basic services that come with the issuance of ANY
> parade, march, park assembly permit... That is why permits are
> required of private organizations... so the city/county/state
> departments have an idea beforehand about attendance and scope to
> supply the proper safety/sanitary measures.
>
> It is indeed a private, by invitation only, parade. My group once
> participated in the Fiesta Bowl Parade..It  is indeed private as
> well.... it took three years to be accepted and the rules which had to
> be followed constituted a small book. Your kind of folk also
> applied... they were accepted.....they later declined because of the
> rules and the minimum 30K price tag to participate. Not everyone in a
> parade gets to march for free....those are the exceptions.
>
> On Mar 19, 6:58 pm, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> > Little Kiethie Kieth-
>
> > You need to go back to law school.
>
> > In 1995 , the GOP Roberts SCOTUS decided that the parade organizers
> > could exclude gay groups from marching, on the false premise that
> > these are "private events".  In truth, they are not private events at
> > all as police, firefighters, public officials, etc. both on and off
> > duty, march on public property in a tax funded public parade. The city
> > provides security, policing, clean up, crowd control, etc. paid for by
> > public tax dollars.
>
> > On Mar 19, 4:15 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > Since when did Gays, Lesbians and Transgender folks get banned from
> > > marching in the St. Paddy's Day parade?
>
> > > Once again,  more militant secular spin lies and prevaricate hogwash from
> > > again, the militant, homosexual agenda!
>
> > > The only restriction, against ANYONE or ANY GROUP,  is that this is a
> > > family parade, and there will be no nekkidness,  there will be no
> > > fornication,  there will be no one dressed in assless chaps,  or nekkid
> > > Statues of Liberty.
>
> > > That pretty much eliminates TommyTomTomForNews from marching,  probably
> > > PlainOl too.
>
> > > On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 11:59 AM, plainolamerican <plainolameri...@gmail.com
>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > an embarrassment
> > > > in a state where we now have marriage rights
> > > > ---
> > > > Irish and African-American lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and
> > > > queer (LGBTQ) communities have a lot in common when it comes to being
> > > > excluded from the iconic institutions in their communities.
>
> > > > For LGBTQ African Americans, it's the Black Church, and for LGBTQ
> > > > Irish Americans, it's the St. Patrick's Day Parade.
>
> > > > Unlike the Black Church, however, that has and continues to throw the
> > > > Bible at its LGBTQ community to justify their exclusionary practices,
> > > > the St. Patrick's Day parade committee uses the First Amendment,
> > > > debating that they are constitutionally guaranteed freedoms of
> > > > religion, speech and association, and the tenet separating church and
> > > > state.
>
> > > > In 1994 Boston's St. Patrick's Day parade was canceled over this
> > > > issue. The state's highest court ruled that the parade organizers
> > > > could not ban members of the LGBTQ community from marching. But in a
> > > > counter lawsuit, parade officials won, accusing LGBTQ Irish-Americans
> > > > of violating their rights to free speech under the First Amendment.
>
> > > > On Mar 19, 10:37 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Will Comcast Make This The Last St. Patrick's Day Parade To Exclude Gays?
>
> > > > > -by Michelangelo Signorile
>
> > > > > It's 2012, and in the state of New York gays and lesbians have full
> > > > > civil rights, including marriage equality. Moreover, gays are no
> > > > > longer banned in the U.S. military. But they are still banned from
> > > > > Fifth Avenue's annual St. Patrick's Day Parade in an embarrassing
> > > > > throwback for everyone involved.
>
> > > > > It's frankly appalling that NBC, and now its parent company Comcast,
> > > > > still sells the broadcast rights (on its local affiliate, WNBC) to the
> > > > > intolerant bunch that runs the parade (in 2007 that amount was
> > > > > $300,000) and then helps the organizers sell advertising to major
> > > > > companies. More than that, one of NBC's top executives, a man who aids
> > > > > the organizers in getting those ad dollars, was chosen as this year's
> > > > > Grand Marshal.
>
> > > > > As David Mixner notes, most New York politicians who support equality
> > > > > won't march in the parade because of this bigotry. Last year, the
> > > > > Irish Foreign Minister condemned the parade, and the President of
> > > > > Ireland declined an invitation to be Grand Marshal. But Francis X.
> > > > > Comerford, Chief Revenue Officer and President of Commercial
> > > > > Operations for the NBC Owned Television Stations, has no problem
> > > > > leading the parade as Grand Marshal.
>
> > > > > Groups like the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD)
> > > > > have criticized NBC for its relationship with the parade since the
> > > > > early '90s. Other groups have protested the parade annually, sometimes
> > > > > resulting in arrests, and this year the group Irish Queers will be
> > > > > demonstrating once again. For years it's all been to no avail.
>
> > > > > But with Comcast now in charge after the controversial merger with NBC
> > > > > was finalized, 2012 could be the last year in which gays are excluded
> > > > > -- or the last year in which NBC is involved in the parade.
>
> > > > > There are a few reasons for this. One of them has to do with the terms
> > > > > of the merger itself, in which Brian Roberts, chairman and CEO of
> > > > > Comcast, testified before the House Judiciary Committee, where he
> > > > > vowed to adhere to diversity in every aspect of the company's business
> > > > > dealings. From the company's own blog:
>
> > > > > Diversity: A few members of the Committee raised questions about
> > > > > diversity at Comcast (and NBCU). Brian reiterated the company's
> > > > > commitment to promoting diversity in everything the company does. To
> > > > > me, as Comcast's Chief Diversity Officer, this means, among other
> > > > > things, diversity in our workforce, in our programming lineup, in our
> > > > > supplier base, and in our community investments (philanthropy) -- and
> > > > > having results we can be proud of.
> > > > > Furthermore, the actual approval letter from the FCC states that
> > > > > Comcast must adhere to diversity rules for seven years or the merger
> > > > > could be undone:
>
> > > > > Protecting Diversity, Localism, Broadcast and Other Public Interest
> > > > > Concerns. The Commission is also imposing conditions and accepting
> > > > > voluntary commitments concerning a numbers of other public interest
> > > > > issues, including diversity, localism, and broadcasting, among others.
> > > > > Sure, it's debatable whether selling the broadcast rights to a parade
> > > > > that admittedly excludes a minority group violates the FCC's diversity
> > > > > rules. But it's certainly something that LGBT activists would argue,
> > > > > bringing a lot of attention to the issue. Comcast may not want that
> > > > > fight now.
>
> > > > > And that brings me to the other reasons. Comcast prides itself on its
> > > > > outreach to the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT)
> > > > > community. Just take a look at this page, where the company touts its
> > > > > 95-percent score on the Human Rights Campaign's Corporate Equality
> > > > > Index and brags of programming that reaches out to LGBT people.
> > > > > Comcast also sponsors the annual GLAAD Media Awards and, as the
> > > > > company describes, "partners with various LGBT community centers
> > > > > across the country that provide a range of services for the LGBT
> > > > > community."
>
> > > > > It's a different time than when the Ancient Order of the Hibernians
> > > > > began excluding gays from the St. Patrick's Day Parade in the early
> > > > > '90s. Netroots activism gets things done very quickly today. HRC, in
> > > > > part responding to pressure from other activists, lowered Target's and
> > > > > Best Buy's CEI score after the retail chains gave money to a political
> > > > > action committee that backed an anti-gay candidate. GLAAD withdrew its
> > > > > support of the failed AT&T/T-Mobile merger after grassroots activists
> > > > > mobilized on the Web and raised concerns.
>
> > > > > Already, GLAAD is calling for the parade to be dropped moving forward
> > > > > if gays are not included. "The idea that a group of LGBT people aren't
> > > > > allowed to participate in a parade in the middle of New York City in
> > > > > the year 2012 is completely out of touch with a majority of Americans
> > > > > and it is frankly indefensible," GLAAD spokesperson Herndon Graddick
> > > > > said in a statement. "GLAAD will be requesting to meet with WNBC to
> > > > > ensure that, if such discriminatory practices remain in place, the
> > > > > event isn't one associated with such an important and inclusive media
> > > > > outlet that should represent the full diversity of New York City."
>
> > > > > When LGBT activists have organized online and focused on companies
> > > > > that have supported homophobia -- companies that pride themselves on
> > > > > being pro-gay -- they've been enormously successful. Microsoft
> > > > > reversed course pronto in 2005 after it went neutral on a gay rights
> > > > > bill in the state of Washington, and that's just one example.
>
> > > > > The truth is, most LGBT activists weren't focused on the St. Patrick's
> > > > > Day Parade all these years, with bigger fish to fry. But many are now
> > > > > looking at this as unfinished business -- as I said, an embarrassment
> > > > > in a state where we now have marriage rights -- and they are also
> > > > > seeing Comcast as a company that is vulnerable. If Comcast doesn't
> > > > > want a battle on its hands, a battle it will
>
> ...
>
> read more »- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

--
Mark M. Kahle H.

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum
 
* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.

Re: Will Comcast Make This The Last St. Patrick's Day Parade To Exclude Gays?

Little Homophobic Kiethie Keith-

False and misleading, as always.

These parades are not private events at
all as police, firefighters, public officials, etc. both on and off
duty, march on public property in a tax funded public parade.

Your photographs are represenative of vulgar heterosexual
exhibitionism.
Most gays dress conservatively, tastefully, and far nicer than you
do.

LIAR!

On Mar 19, 11:49 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hey Tom!   (And Mark!)
>
> Tom,  they are private events, from a number of standpoints, but to add to
> what Mark just said,  the Gasparilla Parade here in Tampa is a private
> event.  Ye Mystic Crewe of Gaspar pays a tremendous amount of money for the
> permit, but also for other city services, as well as security,  (to include
> off duty Tampa Police Officers and Hillsborough County Sheriff's
> Deputies);  I could go on, about sanitation,  parking,  etc.;  and how the
> City of Tampa reaps in a number of these "Permit Payments/Payola";  for
> other vendors.And then,  there's television.....Do you think that these TV
> stations get to set up for free?  In NYC;  for St. Paddies, which is
> televised all over the world.......Wonder how much that costs? Wonder what
> the City makes?
>
> One of the articles you posted eariler touched upon this subject.
>
> Yep,  no question the parade is private.
>
> But here's the real issue, and why militant Gay Secularist organizations
> like the ones you belong to are persona non grata at family oriented
> parades:
>
> :
>
>
>
> On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 8:58 PM, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Little Kiethie Kieth-
>
> > You need to go back to law school.
>
> > In 1995 , the GOP Roberts SCOTUS decided that the parade organizers
> > could exclude gay groups from marching, on the false premise that
> > these are "private events".  In truth, they are not private events at
> > all as police, firefighters, public officials, etc. both on and off
> > duty, march on public property in a tax funded public parade. The city
> > provides security, policing, clean up, crowd control, etc. paid for by
> > public tax dollars.
>
> > On Mar 19, 4:15 pm, Keith In Tampa <keithinta...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Since when did Gays, Lesbians and Transgender folks get banned from
> > > marching in the St. Paddy's Day parade?
>
> > > Once again,  more militant secular spin lies and prevaricate hogwash from
> > > again, the militant, homosexual agenda!
>
> > > The only restriction, against ANYONE or ANY GROUP,  is that this is a
> > > family parade, and there will be no nekkidness,  there will be no
> > > fornication,  there will be no one dressed in assless chaps,  or nekkid
> > > Statues of Liberty.
>
> > > That pretty much eliminates TommyTomTomForNews from marching,  probably
> > > PlainOl too.
>
> > > On Mon, Mar 19, 2012 at 11:59 AM, plainolamerican <
> > plainolameri...@gmail.com
>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > an embarrassment
> > > > in a state where we now have marriage rights
> > > > ---
> > > > Irish and African-American lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender and
> > > > queer (LGBTQ) communities have a lot in common when it comes to being
> > > > excluded from the iconic institutions in their communities.
>
> > > > For LGBTQ African Americans, it's the Black Church, and for LGBTQ
> > > > Irish Americans, it's the St. Patrick's Day Parade.
>
> > > > Unlike the Black Church, however, that has and continues to throw the
> > > > Bible at its LGBTQ community to justify their exclusionary practices,
> > > > the St. Patrick's Day parade committee uses the First Amendment,
> > > > debating that they are constitutionally guaranteed freedoms of
> > > > religion, speech and association, and the tenet separating church and
> > > > state.
>
> > > > In 1994 Boston's St. Patrick's Day parade was canceled over this
> > > > issue. The state's highest court ruled that the parade organizers
> > > > could not ban members of the LGBTQ community from marching. But in a
> > > > counter lawsuit, parade officials won, accusing LGBTQ Irish-Americans
> > > > of violating their rights to free speech under the First Amendment.
>
> > > > On Mar 19, 10:37 am, Tommy News <tommysn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > > > Will Comcast Make This The Last St. Patrick's Day Parade To Exclude
> > Gays?
>
> > > > > -by Michelangelo Signorile
>
> > > > > It's 2012, and in the state of New York gays and lesbians have full
> > > > > civil rights, including marriage equality. Moreover, gays are no
> > > > > longer banned in the U.S. military. But they are still banned from
> > > > > Fifth Avenue's annual St. Patrick's Day Parade in an embarrassing
> > > > > throwback for everyone involved.
>
> > > > > It's frankly appalling that NBC, and now its parent company Comcast,
> > > > > still sells the broadcast rights (on its local affiliate, WNBC) to
> > the
> > > > > intolerant bunch that runs the parade (in 2007 that amount was
> > > > > $300,000) and then helps the organizers sell advertising to major
> > > > > companies. More than that, one of NBC's top executives, a man who
> > aids
> > > > > the organizers in getting those ad dollars, was chosen as this year's
> > > > > Grand Marshal.
>
> > > > > As David Mixner notes, most New York politicians who support equality
> > > > > won't march in the parade because of this bigotry. Last year, the
> > > > > Irish Foreign Minister condemned the parade, and the President of
> > > > > Ireland declined an invitation to be Grand Marshal. But Francis X.
> > > > > Comerford, Chief Revenue Officer and President of Commercial
> > > > > Operations for the NBC Owned Television Stations, has no problem
> > > > > leading the parade as Grand Marshal.
>
> > > > > Groups like the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation (GLAAD)
> > > > > have criticized NBC for its relationship with the parade since the
> > > > > early '90s. Other groups have protested the parade annually,
> > sometimes
> > > > > resulting in arrests, and this year the group Irish Queers will be
> > > > > demonstrating once again. For years it's all been to no avail.
>
> > > > > But with Comcast now in charge after the controversial merger with
> > NBC
> > > > > was finalized, 2012 could be the last year in which gays are excluded
> > > > > -- or the last year in which NBC is involved in the parade.
>
> > > > > There are a few reasons for this. One of them has to do with the
> > terms
> > > > > of the merger itself, in which Brian Roberts, chairman and CEO of
> > > > > Comcast, testified before the House Judiciary Committee, where he
> > > > > vowed to adhere to diversity in every aspect of the company's
> > business
> > > > > dealings. From the company's own blog:
>
> > > > > Diversity: A few members of the Committee raised questions about
> > > > > diversity at Comcast (and NBCU). Brian reiterated the company's
> > > > > commitment to promoting diversity in everything the company does. To
> > > > > me, as Comcast's Chief Diversity Officer, this means, among other
> > > > > things, diversity in our workforce, in our programming lineup, in our
> > > > > supplier base, and in our community investments (philanthropy) -- and
> > > > > having results we can be proud of.
> > > > > Furthermore, the actual approval letter from the FCC states that
> > > > > Comcast must adhere to diversity rules for seven years or the merger
> > > > > could be undone:
>
> > > > > Protecting Diversity, Localism, Broadcast and Other Public Interest
> > > > > Concerns. The Commission is also imposing conditions and accepting
> > > > > voluntary commitments concerning a numbers of other public interest
> > > > > issues, including diversity, localism, and broadcasting, among
> > others.
> > > > > Sure, it's debatable whether selling the broadcast rights to a parade
> > > > > that admittedly excludes a minority group violates the FCC's
> > diversity
> > > > > rules. But it's certainly something that LGBT activists would argue,
> > > > > bringing a lot of attention to the issue. Comcast may not want that
> > > > > fight now.
>
> > > > > And that brings me to the other reasons. Comcast prides itself on its
> > > > > outreach to the gay, lesbian, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT)
> > > > > community. Just take a look at this page, where the company touts its
> > > > > 95-percent score on the Human Rights Campaign's Corporate Equality
> > > > > Index and brags of programming that reaches out to LGBT people.
> > > > > Comcast also sponsors the annual GLAAD Media Awards and, as the
> > > > > company describes, "partners with various LGBT community centers
> > > > > across the country that provide a range of services for the LGBT
> > > > > community."
>
> > > > > It's a different time than when the Ancient Order of the Hibernians
> > > > > began excluding gays from the St. Patrick's Day Parade in the early
> > > > > '90s. Netroots activism gets things done very quickly today. HRC, in
> > > > > part responding to pressure from other activists, lowered Target's
> > and
> > > > > Best Buy's CEI score after the retail chains gave money to a
> > political
> > > > > action committee that backed an anti-gay candidate. GLAAD withdrew
> > its
> > > > > support of the failed AT&T/T-Mobile merger after grassroots activists
> > > > > mobilized on the Web and raised concerns.
>
> > > > > Already, GLAAD is calling for the parade to be dropped moving forward
> > > > > if gays are not included. "The idea that a group of LGBT people
> > aren't
> > > > > allowed to participate in a parade in the middle of New York City in
> > > > > the year 2012 is completely out of touch with a majority of Americans
> > > > > and it is frankly indefensible," GLAAD spokesperson Herndon Graddick
> > > > > said in a statement. "GLAAD will be requesting to meet with WNBC to
> > > > > ensure that, if such discriminatory practices remain in place, the
> > > > > event isn't one associated with such an important and inclusive media
> > > > > outlet that should represent the full diversity of New York City."
>
> > > > > When LGBT activists have organized online and focused on companies
> > > > > that have supported homophobia -- companies that pride themselves on
> > > > > being pro-gay -- they've been enormously successful. Microsoft
> > > > > reversed course pronto in 2005 after it went neutral on a gay rights
> > > > > bill in the state of Washington, and that's just one example.
>
> > > > > The truth is, most LGBT activists weren't focused on the St.
> > Patrick's
> > > > > Day Parade all these years, with bigger fish to fry. But many are now
> > > > > looking at this as unfinished business -- as I said, an embarrassment
> > > > > in a state where we now have marriage
>
> ...
>
> read more »
>
>  dad_assless_chaps_son_pride_parade.jpg
> 206KViewDownload
>
>  JustGirlfriendsAtTheNeighborhoodParade..jpg
> 273KViewDownload
>
>  TommyTomTomForNews.DoingTheNeighborhoodSt.PaddiesDayParade..JPG
> 190KViewDownload
>
>  TommyTomTom.....MarchesToUtopia..jpg
> 260KViewDownload
>
>  HeyEverybody!IHonkOnBobo!.jpg
> 189KViewDownload- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -

--
Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups.
For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum

* Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/
* It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls.
* Read the latest breaking news, and more.