Gay Patriot Header Image

Banning Israeli Float from Madrid Gay Pride Parade

Posted by B. Daniel Blatt at 11:07 am - June 9, 2010.
Filed under: Gays in Other Lands,Islamic War on Gays

The more I learn about the antics of gay leaders (and other organizers of gay events) in this country and abroad, the more convinced I become that their primary concern is not promoting greater social acceptance of gay people, but in becoming the gay auxiliaries of various left-wing (and often anti-Western) movements.  

The latest evidence we have comes from Madrid where the organizers of the Gay Pride parade disinvited Israeli participants:

. . . in the wake of the Gaza flotilla incident, the organizers of the Madrid parade folded quickly to pressure to get rid of the Israeli participants.

Before the invitation was officially withdrawn, it was reportedly “hinted” to the Israelis that their participation in the event would be an “embarrassment” and would mean the additional expense of increased security. When the Israelis failed to take the hint and voluntarily stay home, the axe fell on them.

No matter that Israel is, of nations in the Mideast, the most tolerant of gay people.  No matter that the flotilla was sponsored in large part by terrorist organizations which advocate the execution of gay people.  No matter that gay people face persecution in the terrorist-run enclave of Gaza.

It will be interesting to see what (if any) gay organizations condemn this exclusion and commend Israel for its policies protecting gay people and allowing our fellows in the Jewish State to live openly and celebrate publicly.

As Allison Kaplan Sommer put it in the post linked above, “Those who are truly interested in lesbian and gay rights should welcome Israel with open arms as a model of tolerance in an intolerant region.”

Yet, to all too many gay organizations, that tolerance matters less than belonging to the “Grand Coalition of those Oppressed by Western Civilization.”

Share

42 Comments

  1. In light of recent events, they should have called it a “peace activist floatilla”. They couldn’t have turned that down!!! :-)

    Comment by Sonicfrog — June 9, 2010 @ 11:32 am - June 9, 2010

  2. Honestly, as a straight guy, I don’t think the gay community cares about the plight of GLBTs in Muslim countries. You’d think that they’d realize that Israel, despite its faults, is a lot more tolerant of gays than its neighbors.

    It reminds me of the weird logic that Iran’s treatment of gays was somehow less offensive than Bush being President.

    Comment by Nick — June 9, 2010 @ 12:20 pm - June 9, 2010

  3. Dan, you and I likely disagree on much involving the flotilla incident, but on this one, you’re completely right. There is no good reason to disinvite the Israelis from participating.

    I’m checking through the sources, etc., but you just might be surprised how many gay organizations would have a problem with this.

    Comment by Evan Hurst — June 9, 2010 @ 12:21 pm - June 9, 2010

  4. The very notion that a gay identified group would have anything to do with a group that at its core would annihilate them just for being gay is the height of absurd. Any minute I fully expect these leaders to start quoting verbatim from Huxley and Orwell with perhaps a lovely Goebbels twist for that gay piquant flavor.

    Comment by Delusional Bill — June 9, 2010 @ 12:38 pm - June 9, 2010

  5. I’ve never understood that myself, Bill.

    Do they honestly believe that their opposition to those who tolerate them will score points with the people who want to kill them?

    “But I stood with you against the Jew!”
    “That matters not to Allah, infidel” *drops wall*

    Comment by The_Livewire — June 9, 2010 @ 12:56 pm - June 9, 2010

  6. [...] Dan Blatt, who is actually also mostly right about this.) Tags: equality, flotilla, gay rights, Gaza, Israel, [...]

    Pingback by Truth Wins Out - Israeli Floats No Longer Welcome At Madrid Gay Pride — June 9, 2010 @ 12:58 pm - June 9, 2010

  7. Should Israel ban Spanish participants in the Tel Aviv Gay Pride Parades because of Spain’s ‘shocking treatment’ of its ETA (Basque) Terrorists and/or its Franco legacy?

    Comment by eaglewingz08 — June 9, 2010 @ 1:17 pm - June 9, 2010

  8. My first instinct is screw ‘em, march in the parade anyway. This mindset infuriates me. PC crapola. It’s this outlook that gives us the odious “Queers For Palestine”. Betcha dollars to donuts you’ll never see “Palestinians For Queers”.

    Comment by Jim Michaud — June 9, 2010 @ 1:38 pm - June 9, 2010

  9. So! The mighty have spoken and the boom has been lowered. The politically correst and astute gays of Madrid have banned the Israeli gays from launching their float in the Madrid Gay Pride Parade. Let WWIII commence.

    If this be the stuff of Gay Pride, the Gay Pride agenda needs an enema. I suppose the Gay Pride hissy-fit committee will now engage throwing beads that sting as the Israeli gays.

    I would like to listen in on the discussions of the Grand Council of Gay Pride. It must be an absolute hen house of outrageous Robin Williams skits played out with sincere fervor.

    Why don’t the Gay Pride people make a huge float of Mohammed dressed in colorful robes and blowing kisses to a harem of studs all chained to his waist?

    Comment by heliotrope — June 9, 2010 @ 3:46 pm - June 9, 2010

  10. [...] Dan Blatt, who is actually also mostly right about [...]

    Pingback by Israeli Floats No Longer Welcome At Madrid Gay Pride — June 9, 2010 @ 4:00 pm - June 9, 2010

  11. “…the more convinced I become that their primary concern is not promoting greater social acceptance of gay people, but in becoming the gay auxiliaries of various left-wing (and often anti-Western) movements.”

    Dan, I’m glad to see you address this and you frame the issue more succinctly than I’ve ever been able to. I share your astonishment at the propensity of not only gay leaders to embrace every left-wing cause beyond “gay rights,” but also this tendency of most gays generally. Though I believe that leftist ideology offers far less to gays than conservatism, it’s not difficult to understand why a majority of gays fall for liberalism–clearly, the Left’s support for same-sex marriage, the repeal of DADT, hate crimes legislation, ENDA, etc. gives liberals the edge to claim that they represent gays’ best interests (and the manufactured moral authority to apply the labels “pro-gay” and “anti-gay” as they see fit). But what’s less clear is why gays typically swallow whole every aspect of the Left’s ideology and dutifully champion liberal “non-gay” causes with the same vigor and passion.

    Abortion on demand? Man-made climate change zealotry? Hostility to charter schools and vouchers? Confiscatory taxes? Oppressive regulation of small businesses? Open borders immigration? Nuclear disarmament? Anti-war pacifism? Gun control? What conceivable “skin” do gays have in these games? And why would gays have any reason to presumptively favor the Left’s position on these issues over conservative positions? There is a perplexing and illogical lack of diversity of thought among liberal gays concerning these issues, but at least it can be explained by gays choosing the Democratic Party based on its support for “gay rights” and thereby becoming a captive and easily brainwashed audience for the rest of the party’s stupid and immoral agenda.

    However, it’s when they throw their lot in with the anti-semites and join the anti-Israel crusade that the gays truly depart from reality. At best, it exposes a shocking (and embarrassing) susceptibility that gays have to being seduced by fashionable causes and their pathetic vulnerability to shady groups that are all to happy to exploit useful idiocy wherever they find it. At worst, the explanation is the one Nick has proposed (#2)—they simply don’t care about gays being persecuted and exterminated in Muslim countries because they place a higher value on the promotion of their own victim status and their ability to bash conservatives in their own culture. Either way, it’s vile.

    P.S. Mark Larsen said something interesting on his radio program this morning regarding the world’s response to the recent floatilla incident and the MSM’s treatment of the issue—if Israel ISN’T EVIL, then we really are in trouble because it means the Left has all but succeeded in turning the world UPSIDE-DOWN.

    Comment by Sean A — June 9, 2010 @ 4:26 pm - June 9, 2010

  12. #3: “I’m checking through the sources, etc., but you just might be surprised how many gay organizations would have a problem with this.”

    No, Evan Hurst, I expect that we will not be surprised at all by how many gay organizations have no problem with this whatsoever. Disgusted? Yes. Surprised? No.

    Comment by Sean A — June 9, 2010 @ 4:33 pm - June 9, 2010

  13. I demand the the Israeli gay build a flotilla of floats and run this blockade.

    Comment by Scatcat — June 9, 2010 @ 4:49 pm - June 9, 2010

  14. Hello,

    quote: “[...]the more convinced I become that their primary concern is not promoting greater social acceptance of gay people, but in becoming the gay auxiliaries of various left-wing (and often anti-Western) movements.” unquote.

    Very good indeed.

    It seems that there is a tendency
    - to define an unjustice,
    - then pinpoint “the enemy” (a vague danger so that many people can cope with it), – declare everybody who disagrees as enemy too,
    - install a media hype of likeminded people and here you are.

    The content becomes irrelevant, you must follow the rules of political and media presence. Declaring a person a “persona non grata” will – as a left wing activist – guarantee political mainstream recognition.

    The idea, this warm feeling of belonging to something greater than oneself – “Grand Coalition of those Oppressed by Western Civilization” – is such a mighty illusion that no common sense will overcome it.

    Where to go, if the Western Civilization fails – or should I say: Where to hide then?

    Desperately happy :-)
    AJ

    Comment by AJ — June 9, 2010 @ 5:18 pm - June 9, 2010

  15. Why don’t the Gay Pride people make a huge float of Mohammed dressed in colorful robes and blowing kisses to a harem of studs all chained to his waist?

    28 of them, to be precise …

    Comment by Adriane — June 9, 2010 @ 5:29 pm - June 9, 2010

  16. Let me criticize Gay Pride Parades for just a minute.
    First of all, let’s call Gay Pride Parade by another title. Let’s call it Gay Heritage Parade out of respect. The main theme is to celebrate the heritage and history of Americans who are gay, lesbian, bisexual, or transgender. June should NOT be dedicated to gay porn stars, nudists, sado-masochist child abusers, and promiscuous sex. What the h3ck is wrong with those gay liberals? Thats why I’m not interested in Gay “Pride” Parades.
    Gay Heritage could be celebrated using age-appropriate images. Its a time for safe festivities that all ages and backgrounds of people, not only gay adults, can enjoy.
    The Liberalists enjoy making gay people look stupid, selfish, and too liberal, even during Gay Heritage Parades. We need more gay conservatives/libertarians who know how to put some nice, appropriate Summertime clothes on their bodies. They can wave a rainbow flag next to an American flag while stating “I’m proud to be an American and being gay is just a small part of who I am” at the Parade audience.

    Lastly, I condemn what gay Spaniards have done to those gay Israelis by rejecting them from the Gay Heritage celebration. I hope Madrid changes their stance so that gay Spaniards and Israelis can create civil dialogue. If not, then too bad I guess.

    Maybe we can invite those gay Israelis to the United States during our Gay Heritage Parade this June. I would love that. But how do we do it?

    Comment by Totakikay — June 9, 2010 @ 5:31 pm - June 9, 2010

  17. [...] June 2010 by hamerdinger B. Daniel Blatt is starting to think the left uses gay people… The more I learn about the antics of gay leaders (and other organizers of gay events) in this [...]

    Pingback by I’m not Surprised « Random Neural Synapses — June 9, 2010 @ 5:31 pm - June 9, 2010

  18. If I cared about these Pride parades I’d probably be a bit miffed, but since I don’t I just gleefully point to the rank hypocrisy…

    Comment by John — June 9, 2010 @ 6:03 pm - June 9, 2010

  19. This behavior is hardly new. For years at Gay Pride events (here in Philly at least), the idol of gay acceptance had to be worshiped at the altar of left-wing ideology. You couldn’t go to a gay event without there also being union organizers, left-wing political parties, pro-abortionists, uber-feminists, and others, all insisting that you prostrate yourself before their god in order to consider yourself a ‘true gay’ person.

    Comment by Guy — June 9, 2010 @ 8:17 pm - June 9, 2010

  20. #16: “Maybe we can invite those gay Israelis to the United States during our Gay Heritage Parade this June. I would love that. But how do we do it?”

    Haven’t they suffered enough?

    Comment by Sean A — June 9, 2010 @ 9:14 pm - June 9, 2010

  21. I believe things have come full circle when Gay parade organizers tell gay Israelis without a hint of irony, “don’t ask, don’t tell” your Israeli.
    I could almost accept that provided there were a gay Saudi and Iranian float that refused to march with them. Crazy world.

    Comment by Rob — June 9, 2010 @ 9:29 pm - June 9, 2010

  22. It reminds me of the weird logic that Iran’s treatment of gays was somehow less offensive than Bush being President.

    BOOSH!! I gotta remember that line.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 9, 2010 @ 10:52 pm - June 9, 2010

  23. I demand the the Israeli gay build a flotilla of floats and run this blockade.

    Something along the lines of the parade in Animal House.

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 10, 2010 @ 12:51 am - June 10, 2010

  24. The more I learn about the antics of gay leaders… the more convinced I become that their primary concern is not promoting greater social acceptance of gay people, but in becoming the gay auxiliaries of various left-wing (and often anti-Western) movements.

    Bingo!

    The “gay rights movement” is essentially over. I mean, you have the issue of gays serving openly in the US military, which
    A) isn’t a right to begin with and
    B) is merely academic for 99% of gays anyway.

    And then you have gay marriage which,
    A) also isn’t a right to begin with and
    B) is merely academic to 99% of gays anyway…hell its even academic to people like Andrew Sullivan who are the biggest advocates.

    But admitting that gays are free and treated equally would require abdicating the victim crutch that have become permanent appendages of the gay left….SO they search for new grievances to grieve and new outrages at which to rage.

    Give them an inch and they demand 8.5.

    Comment by American Elephant — June 10, 2010 @ 3:47 am - June 10, 2010

  25. To put it another way, the “gay rights movement” is like MoveOn.org.

    They formed in order to rescue Bill Clinton from impeachment, and 10 years later, they still wont shut up and go away.

    Comment by American Elephant — June 10, 2010 @ 3:51 am - June 10, 2010

  26. Unfortunately, this is an example where some gay people fall off the stupid tree and hit every branch on the way down. I’ve been supportive of Israel over the flotilla hype. But even if Israel was somehow wrong, it still doesn’t excuse banning Israeli participation in this parade.

    Comment by Pat — June 10, 2010 @ 7:03 am - June 10, 2010

  27. The leadership that is always shouting the loudest about being INcluded in the conversation are now wanting to EXclude.

    Comment by Delusional Bill — June 10, 2010 @ 9:42 am - June 10, 2010

  28. Sean at #12:

    “No, Evan Hurst, I expect that we will not be surprised at all by how many gay organizations have no problem with this whatsoever. Disgusted? Yes. Surprised? No.”

    Well, I blogged about it, and I’m a very liberal person who is also very gay, and all of the writers at our site think what Spain did is stupid and counterproductive, and I haven’t had one negative comment on the subject about our opinions on the matter. So, admittedly, we’re not “all gay organizations,” but we are a liberal gay organization, and we all pretty much agree with Dan here.

    Comment by Evan Hurst — June 10, 2010 @ 10:09 am - June 10, 2010

  29. Evan,
    Your assertion was that we might be surprised by how many gay organizations have a problem with the Israeli would-be participants being disinvited from Madrid’s gay pride festival. You’ve found only one such organization–yours. Again, not surprising.

    Comment by Sean A — June 10, 2010 @ 11:29 am - June 10, 2010

  30. Haven’t read the thread, sorry if someone already said this…

    Basically, Madrid Gay Pride has managed to ban representatives of the ONE AND ONLY country in the Middle East that… holds Gay Pride events.

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — June 10, 2010 @ 12:15 pm - June 10, 2010

  31. Bingo!

    The “gay rights movement” is essentially over.

    No it isn’t.

    I mean, you have the issue of gays serving openly in the US military,

    How is it “academic” to serve in the armed forces?

    And then you have gay marriage which,
    A) also isn’t a right to begin with and
    B) is merely academic to 99% of gays anyway…hell its even academic to people like Andrew Sullivan who are the biggest advocates

    How is marriage equality academic? You’re thinking that these people don’t actually want to get married?

    And even without marriage equality, there’s the issue of job discrimination, hate crimes, AIDS, parental rights, the hatemongering right, and many other issues.

    Comment by Lloyd — June 10, 2010 @ 1:01 pm - June 10, 2010

  32. How is marriage equality academic? You’re thinking that these people don’t actually want to get married?

    Yup.

    Davis, who came out as a lesbian in 1997, also addressed LGBT access to marriage, explaining that the institution of marriage has historically symbolized the “civil death” of one spouse. “Marriage may signal freedom to those who are affluent,” she said, “but I want us to think about the extent to which we can respect gay marriage and at the same time be radically critical of the institution of gay marriage.”

    In short, she and her fellow Obama Party gays and lesbians are openly ATTACKING the institution of marriage and declaring it evil. They’re just faking their whiny “marriage equality” rhetoric for the cameras because it makes much more political sense than admitting that gays and lesbians are radically opposed to and want to destroy marriage, with the full endorsement and support of the Obama Party.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — June 10, 2010 @ 1:05 pm - June 10, 2010

  33. And even without marriage equality, there’s the issue of job discrimination, hate crimes, AIDS, parental rights, the hatemongering right, and many other issues.

    Well, let’s try job discrimination.

    Here’s a fine example of how gay and lesbian people claim job discrimination.
    Chief Bleskachek says that she did succeed and that is precisely why she is entangled in such a case.

    “Being an out lesbian, which the mayor really wanted to push, the first openly lesbian fire chief, made me an easy target,” she said. “The sharks smelled blood in the water.”……..

    “I’ve worked too hard for years,” she said. “If I’m such a terrible manager, if I’m such a bad leader, where are the red flags in my past? The only thing I can come up with is that this is a whole lot of homophobia and sexism.”
    Here’s the facts.

    Last month, Lemon filed a civil lawsuit against Bleskachek and the city of Minneapolis in Hennepin County District Court, alleging that she’s been illegally discriminated against. Lemon’s claim is just one of three lawsuits brought against Bleskachek and the city in recent months by current employees of the fire department. Two other firefighters—Jennifer Cornell, a former domestic partner of Bleskachek’s, and Kathleen Mullen—have also filed claims in U.S. District Court alleging discriminatory behavior by the chief. In addition, rumors that a fourth lawsuit may soon be filed against the chief by a female firefighter have been circulating through the department for weeks. On March 22, at her own behest, Bleskachek was placed on paid leave by the city pending an investigation.

    Taken together, the lawsuits depict a fire department in which Bleskachek’s rise to the top was punctuated by episodes involving sex, claims of favoritism or intimidation, and situations in which social interactions seemed to count more than job performance did. The civil complaints lay out a soap opera of sexual liaisons and angry reprisals. In short, if the allegations are to be believed, a fire department that was once notoriously an old white boys’ club had been transformed into a similarly nepotistic old girls’ club.

    So again, we see gays and lesbians like Lloyd sexually harassing their coworkers, punishing those who they find sexually unattractive or who turn them down, and then insisting that taking action against them is “homophobia and sexism” and “job discrimination”, and demanding that laws be passed that punish people who don’t let them do whatever they want in the workplace without consequence.

    AIDS is the same issue. Bluntly put, gay-sex liberals like Lloyd want to be promiscuous and irresponsible and be guaranteed free welfare, medicine, and treatments for life in exchange.

    IF AIDS is such a problem to gay-sex liberals, why aren’t they condemning and shaming gays who have promiscuous, disease-spreading sex? Because, bluntly put, gay-sex liberalism is not about solving the problem; it’s about getting other people to pay for the consequences of your choices.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — June 10, 2010 @ 1:15 pm - June 10, 2010

  34. #31: “How is marriage equality academic? You’re thinking that these people don’t actually want to get married?”

    Lloyd, in the words of NDT, YUP.

    “The city of Toronto, which hosted the claimed “million-strong” annual Gay Pride March on Sunday, has one of the largest homosexual populations in Canada. Despite this fact, however, the demand for same-sex marriage licenses has drastically declined. Last year, the city issued 107 licenses to Canadian homosexual couples, whereas this year it has so far only issued 1…

    The Gay Toronto Tourism Guide claims homosexual persons make up 14% of the city’s population, thereby making Toronto the third largest gay community in the world. Nevertheless, this year’s 1 legal gay “marriage” comprised only 0.01% of the marriages taking place in Ontario’s capital. This would seem to strongly confirm past charges that the political and legal campaigns which successfully and dramatically changed the institution of marriage in Canada were ultimately about nothing more than forcing acceptance of homosexuality.”

    http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2007/jun/07062710.html

    Comment by Sean A — June 10, 2010 @ 3:13 pm - June 10, 2010

  35. That’s typical. Gay-sex liberals here in California are refusing to enter domestic partnerships because, ironically, those are required to follow the same rules as marriage, including those of community property.

    It’s hilarious. You go to one of these gay-sex marriage rallies, and the overwhelming majority of the couples weeping about how they’re “deprived” marriage aren’t even domestically partnered. It is ALL about gay-sex liberals forcing their beliefs onto society.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — June 10, 2010 @ 3:26 pm - June 10, 2010

  36. In short, she and her fellow Obama Party gays and lesbians are openly ATTACKING the institution of marriage and declaring it evil.

    She personally disapproves of it, but nonetheless will fight for those who do approve of it to participate in it-unlike rightwing thugs who would simply destroy it.

    So again, we see gays and lesbians like Lloyd sexually harassing their coworkers, punishing those who they find sexually unattractive or who turn them down, and then insisting that taking action against them is “homophobia and sexism” and “job discrimination”, and demanding that laws be passed that punish people who don’t let them do whatever they want in the workplace without consequence.

    Was that fire chief a pig and were her actions wrong? Yes. Does that change the fact that job discrimination is a real and serious threat in the LGBT community? No.

    IF AIDS is such a problem to gay-sex liberals, why aren’t they condemning and shaming gays who have promiscuous, disease-spreading sex?

    Because condemning and shaming it would be counterproductive. If sex is conducted openly and safely, it is safer than if it’s conducted secretly and dangerously. It’s unsafe sex that spreads AIDS-and the problem is right-wing grunters ditching safe sex ed in favor of “abstinence” programs that don’t work.

    Comment by Lloyd — June 10, 2010 @ 8:40 pm - June 10, 2010

  37. #36: “She personally disapproves of it, but nonetheless will fight for those who do approve of it to participate in it-unlike rightwing thugs who would simply destroy it.”

    Lloyd, you’re not making any sense. She disapproves of marriage but will fight for it for those who do “unlike rightwing thugs who would simply destroy it”? What does that mean? What are “rightwing thugs” destroying?

    “Was that fire chief a pig and were her actions wrong? Yes. Does that change the fact that job discrimination is a real and serious threat in the LGBT community? No.”

    It doesn’t prove that job discrimination IS a real and serious threat in “the LGBT community” either, Lloyd. The fact that you call something “a real and serious threat” doesn’t make it true. Or are you actually basing your assertion that job discrimination is a “real and serious threat” on something that you didn’t pull out of your a*s?

    “It’s unsafe sex that spreads AIDS-and the problem is right-wing grunters ditching safe sex ed in favor of “abstinence” programs that don’t work.”

    Well, I’m glad to see you at least being reasonable enough to blame both Republicans AND unsafe sex for AIDS, Lloyd. (Usually liberals blame AIDS exclusively on Republicans and a “lack of funding.”) One minor quibble though—since you admit that unsafe sex is at least ONE of the causes of AIDS, are you willing to condemn the barebacking “bug-hunters” that have a fetish for acquiring and/or spreading HIV intentionally? Or would that be “counterproductive”? Or maybe you’re going to try to pretend like that subculture doesn’t exist in “the GLBT community”?

    Comment by Sean A — June 10, 2010 @ 9:36 pm - June 10, 2010

  38. It’s unsafe sex that spreads AIDS-and the problem is right-wing grunters ditching safe sex ed in favor of “abstinence” programs that don’t work.

    So since condemning bare-backing flicks is “counterproductive”, does that mean if you ignore it, people will stop?

    And could you please explain to me how giving kids “fisting kits” with vinyl gloves (which are not approved Personal Protection Devices for bloodborne pathogens) does work?

    Comment by ThatGayConservative — June 11, 2010 @ 12:57 am - June 11, 2010

  39. Because condemning and shaming it would be counterproductive.

    So seriously, you believe that promiscuous, disease-spreading sex should not be condemned.

    So seriously, you believe that people who have promiscuous, disease-spreading sex should not be in the least ashamed of their behavior.

    Well, that explains why you and the gay-sex liberal movement you represent has been so darn effective in infecting an entire new generation of people.

    I always find it vaguely sinister that Lloyd and his ilk so adamantly oppose any type of education or program that tells children not to have sex. Add to that the fact that gay-sex liberals like himself consider age-of-consent laws to be “homophobic” and that sex with underage children is “common” and normal in the gay community, and it goes over into full-blown creepy.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — June 11, 2010 @ 2:44 am - June 11, 2010

  40. NDT, it’s just that Lloyd wants rewarded for good behaviour, like a pet.

    Donna and I never got married. Our relationship wasn’t one that really warrented a court sanctioned certificate. We’d both been married several times between us, and didn’t feel this ‘rose’ to the level of a ceremony and government recognition.

    I didn’t take care of her for any reason besides loving her. I was ready to live on raman noodles and library internet access to pay down the debts I had incurred before she was taken from me so suddenly. To Lloyd, that kind of fidelity is a burden, not a benefit.

    Comment by The_Livewire — June 11, 2010 @ 6:56 am - June 11, 2010

  41. Maybe they should have seen the MEDIA bias in the attacks before they banned the float! They did not base their decision on FACTS.
    http://www.foxnews.com/world/2010/06/08/reuters-fake-photos-ihh-gaza-blockade-commandos/

    Comment by Equal Justice — June 11, 2010 @ 10:11 am - June 11, 2010

  42. Getting back to the topic at hand, I would posit that the Israelis should be glad that they’re not forced to mix with the intolerant GayLeftLibs in Spain. After all, the Hebrew religion forbids getting in contact with swine.

    As Rob would say: BOOSH!

    (Leah and Dan, I got your back.) ;-)

    Regards,
    Peter H.

    Comment by Peter Hughes — June 11, 2010 @ 12:00 pm - June 11, 2010

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.