On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 20:04:52 -0400, grub@internet.charitydays.co.uk
wrote:

>>
>>
>>
>>Mephistopheles wrote:
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>> Telling his phone guest to "get aids and die" is not "disagreeing."
>>> It's hate speech.
>>
>>No it only hate speech when spoken by a conservative. When said
>>by a liberal, it is only expressing their true feelings.
>>
>>David
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>".........get aids and die........."
>
>
>
>Why AIDS ?
>
>Why didn't he suggest death by some other disease ?
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~


Well, gee, you can do THAT math, can't you?


----
__________________________________________________ ___________
/BitHead's Place: Political commentary from the REAL world. /\
/ http://home.rochester.rr.com/bitheads/ _/ /\
/Bit's weekly commentaries also available internationally: / \/
/ http://www.rightpoint.ca/ http://clik.to/bithead/ \ /
/ http://greysanctuary.com/columnists/bithead/index.asp /\
__________________________________________________ ________/ /
\ __________________________________________________ ________\/
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

..BitHead. <bithead@rochester.rr.com> wrote:

>On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 18:21:11 GMT, Mephistopheles <Satan@Hell.gov>
>wrote:
>
>>eflorack@rochester.rr.com (eflorack) wrote:
>>
>>>Tempest <tempest@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3F0CA3F5.BFF92651@hotmail.com>...
>>>> "B. Nice" wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> > ".BitHead." <bithead@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
>>>> > news:i51ngv02ueju1pe8og8baudjtun4j8h79k@4ax.com...
>>>> > > On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 02:43:09 GMT, "B. Nice"
>>>>
>>>> > > Now, when I priaed MSNBC for canning Donahue, you said pretty much the
>>>> > > same thing.
>>>>
>>>> Donahue wasn't fired for being a homophobic ranting moron.
>>>
>>>
>>>So, let me see, here.
>>>One cannot disagree with homosexuals on any point without the label gun showing up?
>>
>>Telling his phone guest to "get aids and die" is not "disagreeing."
>>It's hate speech.
>
>
>Funny thing; You fail to mention what the person he';d said that to,
>had said to HIM. I suppsoe he's suppsoed to sit there and take abuse?
>

Exactly. It doesn't matter what the caller said - he isn't a
professional commentator expected to live up to professional
standards.

Savage could have responded in any number of other ways. He could have
given an Ann Coulter-ish response about how liberals resort to insults
when they run out of arguments. He could have given a calm, "my, you
have issues, don't you?" He could have given a Tucker Carlson-esque
"Okay... next caller." (IMHO, the most effective response in disarming
an angry caller, because it leaves him looking angry, inconsequential,
and possibly disturbed.) Can you really picture Bob Novak responding
the way Savage did? Pat Buchanan? I can picture O'Reiley doing it, but
I don't think he would either.

No, any of the above responses, and many others, would have been
preferable. In short, Savage could have responded like a professional.

Savage chose none of those options. Instead, he gave a response that
made him look unprofessional and, in the process, positively
homophobic. The Republican party is currently trying to court
traditionally Democratic supporters: african-americans, jews, and
homosexuals. Savage is a conservative commentator, and as such,
represents conservative thought. In responding in the way he did, he
didn't only make himself look bad: he made conservatives in general
look bad. That undermines the efforts of his own party.

But, when the conservative MSNBC fired him... they sent the message
that his remarks are unacceptable to conservatives. You shouldn't be
defending him... you should be distancing yourself FROM him, and
defending the conservative boss who fired him.

After all, there is no shortage of conservatives on cable.

On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 04:18:51 GMT, Mephistopheles <Satan@Hell.gov>
wrote:

>.BitHead. <bithead@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 18:21:11 GMT, Mephistopheles <Satan@Hell.gov>
>>wrote:
>>
>>>eflorack@rochester.rr.com (eflorack) wrote:
>>>
>>>>Tempest <tempest@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3F0CA3F5.BFF92651@hotmail.com>...
>>>>> "B. Nice" wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> > ".BitHead." <bithead@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
>>>>> > news:i51ngv02ueju1pe8og8baudjtun4j8h79k@4ax.com...
>>>>> > > On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 02:43:09 GMT, "B. Nice"
>>>>>
>>>>> > > Now, when I priaed MSNBC for canning Donahue, you said pretty much the
>>>>> > > same thing.
>>>>>
>>>>> Donahue wasn't fired for being a homophobic ranting moron.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>So, let me see, here.
>>>>One cannot disagree with homosexuals on any point without the label gun showing up?
>>>
>>>Telling his phone guest to "get aids and die" is not "disagreeing."
>>>It's hate speech.
>>
>>
>>Funny thing; You fail to mention what the person he';d said that to,
>>had said to HIM. I suppsoe he's suppsoed to sit there and take abuse?
>>
>
>Exactly. It doesn't matter what the caller said - he isn't a
>professional commentator expected to live up to professional
>standards.

Spoekn like someone who has never been in the busienss... and
particularly someone in denial about the virtiol coming from the left
at their selected targets.


----
__________________________________________________ ___________
/BitHead's Place: Political commentary from the REAL world. /\
/ http://home.rochester.rr.com/bitheads/ _/ /\
/Bit's weekly commentaries also available internationally: / \/
/ http://www.rightpoint.ca/ http://clik.to/bithead/ \ /
/ http://greysanctuary.com/columnists/bithead/index.asp /\
__________________________________________________ ________/ /
\ __________________________________________________ ________\/
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \

..BitHead. <bithead@rochester.rr.com> wrote:

>On Fri, 11 Jul 2003 04:18:51 GMT, Mephistopheles <Satan@Hell.gov>
>wrote:
>
>>.BitHead. <bithead@rochester.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>On Thu, 10 Jul 2003 18:21:11 GMT, Mephistopheles <Satan@Hell.gov>
>>>wrote:
>>>
>>>>eflorack@rochester.rr.com (eflorack) wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Tempest <tempest@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:<3F0CA3F5.BFF92651@hotmail.com>...
>>>>>> "B. Nice" wrote:
>>>>>> >
>>>>>> > ".BitHead." <bithead@rochester.rr.com> wrote in message
>>>>>> > news:i51ngv02ueju1pe8og8baudjtun4j8h79k@4ax.com...
>>>>>> > > On Wed, 09 Jul 2003 02:43:09 GMT, "B. Nice"
>>>>>>
>>>>>> > > Now, when I priaed MSNBC for canning Donahue, you said pretty much the
>>>>>> > > same thing.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Donahue wasn't fired for being a homophobic ranting moron.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>So, let me see, here.
>>>>>One cannot disagree with homosexuals on any point without the label gun showing up?
>>>>
>>>>Telling his phone guest to "get aids and die" is not "disagreeing."
>>>>It's hate speech.
>>>
>>>
>>>Funny thing; You fail to mention what the person he';d said that to,
>>>had said to HIM. I suppsoe he's suppsoed to sit there and take abuse?
>>>
>>
>>Exactly. It doesn't matter what the caller said - he isn't a
>>professional commentator expected to live up to professional
>>standards.
>
>Spoekn like someone who has never been in the busienss... and
>particularly someone in denial about the virtiol coming from the left
>at their selected targets.
>

How sad... you looked as if you were going to debate sensibly, but
instead you respond by editing my post and giving a hand-waiving
response. Spoken like the wanna-be you are.

We're done here.

"David Lentz" <dlentz10@/*NOSPAM*/rochester.rr.com> wrote in message news:FdyPa.99432$8B.52690@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
>
>
> Mephistopheles wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
> > >Funny thing; You fail to mention what the person he';d said that to,
> > >had said to HIM. I suppsoe he's suppsoed to sit there and take abuse?
> > >
> >
> > Exactly. It doesn't matter what the caller said - he isn't a
> > professional commentator expected to live up to professional
> > standards.
> >
> > Savage could have responded in any number of other ways. He could have
> > given an Ann Coulter-ish response about how liberals resort to insults
> > when they run out of arguments. He could have given a calm, "my, you
> > have issues, don't you?" He could have given a Tucker Carlson-esque
> > "Okay... next caller." (IMHO, the most effective response in disarming
> > an angry caller, because it leaves him looking angry, inconsequential,
> > and possibly disturbed.) Can you really picture Bob Novak responding
> > the way Savage did? Pat Buchanan? I can picture O'Reiley doing it, but
> > I don't think he would either.
> >
> > No, any of the above responses, and many others, would have been
> > preferable. In short, Savage could have responded like a professional.
> >
> > Savage chose none of those options. Instead, he gave a response that
> > made him look unprofessional and, in the process, positively
> > homophobic. The Republican party is currently trying to court
> > traditionally Democratic supporters: african-americans, jews, and
> > homosexuals. Savage is a conservative commentator, and as such,
> > represents conservative thought. In responding in the way he did, he
> > didn't only make himself look bad: he made conservatives in general
> > look bad. That undermines the efforts of his own party.
> >
> > But, when the conservative MSNBC fired him... they sent the message
> > that his remarks are unacceptable to conservatives. You shouldn't be
> > defending him... you should be distancing yourself FROM him, and
> > defending the conservative boss who fired him.
> >
> > After all, there is no shortage of conservatives on cable.
>
> Why are only conservatives expected to maintain civilized
> standards for speech. Liberal are fond of wishing their opponent
> to die disease, to include AIDS. Militant homosexuals have
> spent deciding trying to main stream AIDS. Despite decades of
> vain attempts to main stream the disease, AIDS is still and
> acronym for Anal Injec5ed Death Sentence, and the homophiles know
> it. It is there diseases.

Amazing ignorance, considering your intelligent replies in other
threads, David. 8 out of 10 AIDS infections worldwide have
resulted from heterosexual intercourse. Wake up.
http://www.thebody.com/niaid/stats.html

RickW

Rick wrote:

<snio>

> > Why are only conservatives expected to maintain civilized
> > standards for speech. Liberal are fond of wishing their opponent
> > to die disease, to include AIDS. Militant homosexuals have
> > spent deciding trying to main stream AIDS. Despite decades of
> > vain attempts to main stream the disease, AIDS is still and
> > acronym for Anal Injec5ed Death Sentence, and the homophiles know
> > it. It is there diseases.
>
> Amazing ignorance, considering your intelligent replies in other
> threads, David. 8 out of 10 AIDS infections worldwide have
> resulted from heterosexual intercourse. Wake up.
> http://www.thebody.com/niaid/stats.html

It still goes in anally. In Africa, anal intercourse is used as
a method of birth control. Hence, the high incidence of AIDS in
AFrica among heterosexuals.

David

>
>
>
>Rick wrote:
>
><snio>
>
>> > Why are only conservatives expected to maintain civilized
>> > standards for speech. Liberal are fond of wishing their opponent
>> > to die disease, to include AIDS. Militant homosexuals have
>> > spent deciding trying to main stream AIDS. Despite decades of
>> > vain attempts to main stream the disease, AIDS is still and
>> > acronym for Anal Injec5ed Death Sentence, and the homophiles know
>> > it. It is there diseases.
>>
>> Amazing ignorance, considering your intelligent replies in other
>> threads, David. 8 out of 10 AIDS infections worldwide have
>> resulted from heterosexual intercourse. Wake up.
>> http://www.thebody.com/niaid/stats.html
>
>It still goes in anally. In Africa, anal intercourse is used as
>a method of birth control. Hence, the high incidence of AIDS in
>AFrica among heterosexuals.
>
>David
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
".........8 out of 10 AIDS infections worldwide have resulted from heterosexual intercourse........."


Good argument.

I'll use it next time the topic comes up.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

"David Lentz" <dlentz10@/*NOSPAM*/rochester.rr.com> wrote in message news:npDPa.33250$EQ5.6314@twister.nyroc.rr.com...
>
>
> Rick wrote:
>
> <snio>
>
> > > Why are only conservatives expected to maintain civilized
> > > standards for speech. Liberal are fond of wishing their opponent
> > > to die disease, to include AIDS. Militant homosexuals have
> > > spent deciding trying to main stream AIDS. Despite decades of
> > > vain attempts to main stream the disease, AIDS is still and
> > > acronym for Anal Injec5ed Death Sentence, and the homophiles know
> > > it. It is there diseases.
> >
> > Amazing ignorance, considering your intelligent replies in other
> > threads, David. 8 out of 10 AIDS infections worldwide have
> > resulted from heterosexual intercourse. Wake up.
> > http://www.thebody.com/niaid/stats.html
>
> It still goes in anally. In Africa, anal intercourse is used as
> a method of birth control. Hence, the high incidence of AIDS in
> AFrica among heterosexuals.

Exactly. AIDS transmission is specific to certain sexual acts
and not specific sexual orientations. There's no need for anyone
to "mainstream" the disease. In 2001, 580,000 children under
age 15 died of AIDS.

RickW