Republicans - older, whiter, and far righer

metalman said:
Could have linked the Folsom Street Fair, Nude Bike Ride, TransGender March, Slut Walk, .... so many to choose from in the Progressive Utopia
Click to expand...
Just saying I'm kind of in awe at your link collection.
 
@Metalman
Ever think that an endless collection and endlessly posting offensive gay porn makes you look like someone that seriously enjoys offensive gay porn.
 
faethor said:
@Metalman
Ever think that an endless collection and endlessly posting offensive gay porn makes you look like someone that seriously enjoys offensive gay porn.
Click to expand...

What porn? No porn sites were linked.
They're all photo's taken while attending public events in the "Progressive Utopia," taken on a public street.
All events are listed on San Francisco's official events calendar promoting tourism in the city! No photos with children in them were displayed, because while children were attending the events, posting those photos on the internet could be considered "child porn". But Children were in attendance, getting a good dose of "progressive family values."

Up Your Alley Fair
July 31, at 11 am-6 pm
Leather lovers flaunt their stuff in this small version of the late September Folsom Street Fair. All proceeds from admission donations and beverage sales go to various AIDS and community service organizations.
On Dore Alley between Howard and Folsom, and parts of Folsom and 10th streets. Suggested donation $7.

Q: Can I be nude at Up Your Alley or at the Folsom Street Fair?
A: There is no Federal law against nudity but neither is it a guaranteed right. This means that state, county and local laws can take precedence. Nudity, per se, is not a crime in California unless a person is lewd. The San Francisco District Attorney's office has consistently discharged public nudity citations because "being naked in San Francisco is not a crime" (D.A. spokesperson Debbie Mesloh, September 2004). Folsom Street Events maintains local community standards.

Folsom Street Fair
Sunday Sept 25th 2011

Nancy Pelosi, Minority leader of the House, who represents San Francisco answered a question about the Folsom Street Fair "It's a Constitutional question. It's a religious question. It's about as global a question as you could ask...I'm a big believer in the First Amendment. I do not believe Christianity has been harmed by the Folsom Street Fair."

And the Halloween Fair!?
There are actually complaints in SF that that fair is "too" out of control ...

Has to be a real "progressive utopia" if you can go to a street fair, drink beer, get a Hep B vaccination, and a prostate massage all at the same event!?
 
As long as they play techno music, it's all good as far as I'm concerned!

 
@metalman

I don't particularly care what they are doing at those "Fairs" but .. why do you?
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
@metalman

I don't particularly care what they are doing at those "Fairs" but .. why do you?
Click to expand...

Peculiar, many Whyzzat members get worked into a froth when the odd republican politician gets busted doing something homosexual behind closed doors. Here is a link to half of the Obama voters in San Francisco behaving badly out in public and there is a collective shrug.
 
Well if public displays of nudity is the problem, why not link to mardis gras in New Orleans, which is far better known and attracts more people. Or even some of the goings on at Daytona Beach during Spring Break. Or Burning Man. But oh wait, only heterosexuals can behave badly in public. :rolleyes:
 
Glaucus said:
Well if public displays of nudity is the problem, why not link to mardis gras in New Orleans, which is far better known and attracts more people. Or even some of the goings on at Daytona Beach during Spring Break. Or Burning Man. But oh wait, only heterosexuals can behave badly in public. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

I think there is a big difference between a couple woman flashing a boob here and there, compared to the public display in metalman's links. The difference with Mardi Gras and this is New Orleans police arrest woman who flash boobs, if they see it.
 
redrumloa said:
Peculiar, many Whyzzat members get worked into a froth when the odd republican politician gets busted doing something homosexual behind closed doors.
Click to expand...

I can only speak for myself here; it's not so much that they're Republican, it's that they're hypocrites.
But I think you know that anyway.
 
Yes, it's hypocrisy. It's a non issue otherwise.
 
FluffyMcDeath said:
@metalman

I don't particularly care what they are doing at those "Fairs" but .. why do you?
Click to expand...

I find it bizarre that these street fairs "maintains local community standards." and are promoted as public cultural events.

You have to be in a "progressive utopia" for these events to "meet community standards"

Just posting "exactly what" the public standards are in a "progressive utopia"

and faethor started the thread implying that California was some progressive example to the rest of the nation.
 
Glaucus said:
Well if public displays of nudity is the problem, why not link to mardis gras in New Orleans, which is far better known and attracts more people. Or even some of the goings on at Daytona Beach during Spring Break. Or Burning Man. But oh wait, only heterosexuals can behave badly in public. :rolleyes:
Click to expand...

You need to show that most of those attending are "conservatives" at these events.

Don't see a problem with Burning Man, its a private party in the Nevada Desert.
 
Robert said:
I can only speak for myself here; it's not so much that they're Republican, it's that they're hypocrites.
But I think you know that anyway.
Click to expand...

Your argument summarized:

Conservative in sex scandal >> CONDEMN! he's a hyprocrite!

Progressive in a sex scandal >> FORGIVEN! he's NOT a hypocrite!

But what your not acknowledging is “hypocrite” is only applied to one side:

Conservatism >> has moral standards >>> "conservative in sex scandal" >>> CONDEMN! he's a hypocrite! >> resigns in disgrace

Progressism >> amoral >>> "progressive in a sex scandal" >>> FORGIVE! he's amoral! NOT a hypocrite! >> BUT how will it effect the decision of independent voters in the next election?

Within the parameters of “Hypocrisy” …Which do you think the voting public prefers: An ideology that at least tries to set a moral standard, but whose representatives sometimes fail to live up to it; or an ideology that by its own definition is inherently amoral and whose representatives have no moral code to violate?

.
 
redrumloa said:
Peculiar, many Whyzzat members get worked into a froth when the odd republican politician gets busted doing something homosexual behind closed doors. Here is a link to half of the Obama voters in San Francisco behaving badly out in public and there is a collective shrug.
Click to expand...
The point is more often then not the Republican politican has been 'promoting family values' which often has involved an anti-gay agenda. They then get caught doing what they claimed to have not liked.

Though I'd like to add this isn't only 'liberals' picking on 'conservatives'. We've seen Republicans demand that other gay affair caught Republicans give up their elected post and drop from the party. We've also seen Republicans charge Clinton with lying about staining a dress while the other Republican lies that impact the world, the nation, and definitely our economy are excused. Somehow an affair is a much, much worse deed to Republicans then say lying about WMDs which don't exist, lying about terrorists which don't exist as an excuse to attack another nation and spend Trillions of dollars.

Clearly there's a problem here in society and a few people in SF aren't impacting us the way a few in DC are.
 
metalman said:
Your argument summarized:

Conservative in sex scandal >> CONDEMN! he's a hyprocrite!

Progressive in a sex scandal >> FORGIVEN! he's NOT a hypocrite!
Click to expand...

Not at all.

My understanding is that yon Mr. Weiner is considered to be a "Progressive" by some. In my opinion he was rightly shown up for his behaviour.

So, I don't really get your take on my comment at all.

-EDIT-

I also don't really get this word, "Progressive," that seems to be a favourite of yours.

Is it just another word for "Democrat?"
 
metalman said:
Your argument summarized:

Conservative in sex scandal >> CONDEMN! he's a hyprocrite!
Click to expand...

Err, when was the last time that a "Conservative" sex scandal involving for instance homosexuality didn't have the main actor actively condemning said group prior to it coming out?

metalman said:
Progressive in a sex scandal >> FORGIVEN! he's NOT a hypocrite!
Click to expand...

If that "Progressive" is prior to being outed actively attacking the group he is found to be in, then, yes, (s)he would be condemned also.

Problem is, when someone from the liberal end of the political spectrum is found again using the prior example as being gay, it's highly unlikely (though I imagine that you could probably find a contrary example if you looked hard enough) that they have been attacking that group.

metalman said:
But what your not acknowledging is “hypocrite” is only applied to one side:
Click to expand...

How is it a double standard, oh that's right, you're deliberately leaving out the bit where these same "moral" people actively attack others for their immorality, verses someone who doesn't.

metalman said:
Conservatism >> has moral standards >>>"conservative in sex scandal" >>> CONDEMN! he's a hypocrite! >> resigns in disgrace
Click to expand...

And the one thing in common with that is your casual glossing over of the fact that they prior to being outed were attacking the very thing that they turn out to be doing.

metalman said:
Progressism >> amoral >>>
Click to expand...

Bzzzt. Logic fail right there.

metalman said:
An ideology that at least tries to set a moral standard, but whose representatives sometimes fail to live up to it;
Click to expand...

When they place themselves into a position where they impose those morals on others, they damn well better live up to it.

metalman said:
an ideology that by its own definition is inherently amoral.
Click to expand...

You have yet to A provide a concise definition of what a "Progressive" is, much less prove that they are inherently amoral. So far all you've got it yet another synonym for "I don't like".
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top