Gay Patriot Header Image

HRC blogs about 3-year-old using anti-gay slur;
silent when adult gay activist uses it

This is a screen capture I just made of my search on HRC’s blog for “Dan Savage“:

It has been a full month (and three days) since Mr. Savage used “faggot” as a derogatory slur.  And still HRC still hasn’t spoken up.

And yet when Sarah Palin’s grandson used the same slur and his mother said (on her reality show) that this suggests she’s “doing a terrible job disciplining Tripp. I know he’s going to continue to push the boundaries and push the limits.” Seems she’s acknowledging this is not a good term to use.

Maybe she should talk to Dan Savage.   Someone’s been doing a terrible job disciplining that bully; he continues to push the boundaries, push the limits.

The folks at HRC’s blog found the Palin episode worthy of a blog post, reminding us “this isn’t the first time the anti-gay phrase has landed one of the Palin daughters in hot water. Two years ago, Willow herself used the same slur on Facebook.”  (H/t reader Just Me in the comments.)

When a three-year-old utters the word, “faggot,” HRC sees fit to issue a blog post.  When a grown man uses it to slur his political adversaries, the supposed gay advocacy outfit is silent.  Wonder why that is.

UPDATE: Did 3-year-old really use the gay slur? (Via Mark Steyn.)

Share

46 Comments

  1. While I understand someone has more influence when they have have earned someone’s respect, I will encourage GP commenters, both liberal and conservative, to express concern to both HRC and GLAAD, regardless of the perceived effectiveness. Like they say, there is power in numbers. You can find contact information on the previous thread.

    Or just feel free to take me to task for the above plea. Whichever is a better use of your energy. That’s all I’m going to say on this matter.

    Thank you, BDB, for bringing this to our attention.

    Comment by Cinesnatch — July 23, 2012 @ 9:15 pm - July 23, 2012

  2. OMG. Who the F cares what 3 year olds say? Sometimes I think our society is in one long nervous breakdown.

    Comment by EssEm — July 23, 2012 @ 10:16 pm - July 23, 2012

  3. While I understand someone has more influence when they have have earned someone’s respect…

    Or just feel free to take me to task for the above plea. Whichever is a better use of your energy. That’s all I’m going to say on this matter.

    Comment by Cinesnatch — July 23, 2012 @ 9:15 pm – July 23, 2012

    Gee, Cinesnatch, four uses of “I” or “me” in six sentences.

    That makes it quite clear what your post is all about.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 23, 2012 @ 10:30 pm - July 23, 2012

  4. I don’t know what’s worse, the completely myopic views of gay rights organizations in putting all their eggs in the “leftist” basket, or that gay people seem to also be so brainwashed that when gay rights initiatives and movements fail over and over by being so tied to complete leftist orthodoxy, that they don’t seem to put 2 and 2 together…

    What exactly, IS, HRC’s and the mainstream gay rights groups’ strategy if we end up with a Republican president, House and Senate come November? Keep calling Republicans doody heads until 2014 and hope the economy is still shitty enough Democrats win back some seats?

    In the Northwest all the political boards are completely left wing activists. When they can’t put being gay before being a Democrat, why aren’t they being held responsible for the failure of gay rights movements? If they really wanted gay rights to succeed, you’d think they build coalitions of people of all political stripes instead of investing so heavily in the American people suddenly embracing all socialist policies and by proxy, gay rights. Disappointing…

    Comment by Tim in MT — July 23, 2012 @ 10:40 pm - July 23, 2012

  5. Why do you care so very much about gay lobbyist group?
    You write blog post and blog post over what you perceive as gay hypocrisy.
    I’ve checked out this blog since the Dan Savage incident. If there is one thing I’ve noticed is you have a really, really, really low opinion of non-conservative gays.
    You don’t seem to care about gay marriage.
    You oppose anti-discrimination laws.
    You have described the concept of “equality” as a Marxist principle.
    You made fun of Anderson Cooper when he came out.
    You made jokes about Rep Franks marriage.
    Your commenter’s are even vitriol in their assessment of non-conservative gays.
    NDT routinely goes on homophobic rants implying non-conservative gays are child molesters, pro-murder, vectors for STDs, welfare whores, bigots, etc. (NDT feel free to go on your clichéd anti-gay rant filled with the same hyperlinks and name-calling)
    Heliotrope seems to be demanding that gay solve the problem of what is good and evil from an objective standpoint, before gay marriage can be permitted.
    V the K and Sean_A basically view non-conservative gays as the lowest possible creature that is still barely human.
    So in sum, we have organizations fighting for gay equality. A concept you are at best lukewarm towards. Your commenter’s, whose views and comments you don’t censer or chastise, view non-conservative gays as immoral, child molesting, pro-murder, Christian hating, STDs spreading, bigoted welfare whores, who are unworthy of being called human. Yet you’re most upset about their hypocrisy!?
    Seriously!?
    Hypocrisy is nothing compared to these other traits. So why the obsession with it!? Or for that matter, why do you care what non-conservative gays do or think anyways. If I believed a group of people had those traits I could care less about their policy preferences or hypocrisy. So why do you?

    Comment by J.Nau — July 24, 2012 @ 12:57 am - July 24, 2012

  6. First of all, Mr. Nau, our commenters don’t speak for us nor we for them. And I have (on numerous occasions) upbraided commenters (on both sides of the political aisle) for their uncivil discourse.

    Please do point out where I described the concept of equality as a Marxist principle; I have noted that in its present connotation, it often has socialist overtones.

    What you call obsession, we call sarcasm; we delight in mocking HRC for their hypocrisy. They’re the ones (as per this post) who get all agitated when a member of the Palin family, even one so young as 3, uses the term, “faggot,” yet when an adult gay activist uses it, they are silent.

    You ask why we blog about it? First, to mock and point out the hypocrisy, second, by so doing, to make clear that these groups don’t speak for the gay community, much as the media treats them as representatives for all of us.

    Are you suggesting we should remain silent in the face of their hypocrisy?

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — July 24, 2012 @ 1:38 am - July 24, 2012

  7. One has to remember, Tim, that the Obama Party makes four arguments:

    1) Everything bad that ever happens to you is someone else’s fault.

    2) If someone has more than you do, they stole it from you.

    3) You should get whatever you want because you’re (insert minority status here).

    4) If someone doesn’t give you what you want or disagrees with you, they are (insert minority status here)-phobic.

    In short, it promises pay without work, social status without character, and life without responsibility.

    In contrast, the GOP makes it clear that, if you want the goods, you have to work for them and take responsibility for your choices.

    In the immortal words of Hobbes, “Virtue needs some cheaper thrills”.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 24, 2012 @ 1:39 am - July 24, 2012

  8. Cue ND30 in five, four, three …

    Comment by Cinesnatch — July 24, 2012 @ 1:39 am - July 24, 2012

  9. J nau, it is stated clearly that this blog is by gay conservatives (the true black sheeps of the gay movement), i believe there are plenty of lefty gay sites that you can join that won’t hurt your delicate sensibilities.

    In hystory there have been gays on the right side of the political spectrum that received nothing but contempt from lefty gays*. It is only fair there is a blog for them.

    *i can elaborate further if you want, but you just have to google pym fortuyn for a start, a conservative/right gay from the Netherlands that was first a concerned citizen and secondly a gay and you will find him very different from the typical gay politician from the left that the above mentioned orgs cuddle and promote

    Comment by susan — July 24, 2012 @ 5:21 am - July 24, 2012

  10. If there is one thing I’ve noticed is you have a really, really, really low opinion of non-conservative gays.

    Yup. And the non-conservative gays who post here — Levi, Insipidity, Cas, Cinesnatch — consistently reinforce my negative opinion of their kind.

    You don’t seem to care about gay marriage.

    Wrong. I oppose gay marriage. That’s caring about it, sort of.

    You oppose anti-discrimination laws.

    Mostly, yeah, I think discrimination is wrong, but I think it’s none of the Government’s business.

    You have described the concept of “equality” as a Marxist principle.

    Your point?

    You made fun of Anderson Cooper when he came out.

    Oh, hells yeah!

    You made jokes about Rep Franks marriage.

    You would have to have a heart of stone not to find the mincing pederast from Massachusetts worthy of ridicule for his private life, and a brain of stone not to acknowledge the massive damage he and his ilk inflicted on the economy.

    Unlike you, we don’t buy into the philosophy of “Gay excuses everything.” You’ll give anyone a pass … no matter how vile they are … (cough Dan Savage cough)… if they are gay or support the agenda. I’m not like you. Nor would I want to be.

    Comment by V the K — July 24, 2012 @ 7:55 am - July 24, 2012

  11. Now, the funny part about Annie Cooper coming out wasn’t that he was gay, it was how long he thought he was in the closet. Also, coming out in the form of an email to Andrew “Sarah Palin’s Imaginary Gynecologist” Sullivan was also pretty damn funny.

    If you have a sense of humor. Leftists typically don’t.

    Comment by V the K — July 24, 2012 @ 9:32 am - July 24, 2012

  12. Just thought I’d let you know how MUCH I like your weblog. I’m probably one of your older readers, being 65. When I was growing up in a rural town, there was ABSOLUTELY NO safe way to let anyone know I was attracted to other boys.
    I joined the Navy and served all over the world for a full career. At no time during that did I dare out myself – I was in various high security assignments. I didn’t even dare subscribe to gay publications.
    I have been able to relax and tell a few friends since retiring.
    When web-searching for GayOrgs, all I could find were ones like HRC and GLAAD. One day, HOORAY – I ran across YOU! That meant that there ARE other gay men who think Conservative principles are the best ones to govern our country with.
    Thank you, thank you for being there and being so loud.

    Comment by SailorMan — July 24, 2012 @ 10:39 am - July 24, 2012

  13. You realize that they’re talking about inferrence made about a 3 year old’s mumbling.

    I think the only case in which identity excuses anything, is when the identity is that of a child.

    Comment by Joe — July 24, 2012 @ 12:19 pm - July 24, 2012

  14. Thanks for the responses! Really clears things up.

    Some observations though.

    First, mocking their hypocrisy is an interesting choice. If I thought a group of people where among other things child molesters, and I wanted to attack them or mock them, I’d use that and not the far lesser sin (relative to child molestation) of hypocrisy.

    Second, since you are concerned and bothered by the media positing that groups like HRC and GLAAD speak for you, might I suggest a far more effective method of correcting that assumption.

    Tell a member or members of the media, that you oppose gay marriage, oppose anti-discrimination laws, and you think among other things non-conservative gays are child molesters.

    I can guarantee you, the media won’t ever assume the HRC and like groups speak for you.

    Third, while I understand these post are primary a circle jerk. Getting back to the original point. HRC isn’t going to respond to you. You don’t like non-conservative gays. You oppose gay marriage. You oppose gay equity. As a result, they don’t care what you think. Their not going to respond to your e-mails, inquires, or condemnation of what you consider hypocrisy.

    Comment by J.Nau — July 24, 2012 @ 12:25 pm - July 24, 2012

  15. Hey, Sailor Man:

    First of all, thank you from the bottom of my heart for your service to our country. You are a far better man than I, and I could not hold you in higher esteem for that commitment to our future.

    Second, WELCOME ABOARD! You have found a “safe harbor” (sorry, couldn’t help myself). You are among friends. And like all good friends, we often disagree–sometimes vociferously–but we remain friends.

    Glad you found the blog, and if I may speak on behalf of the guys whose blog it is, again I would like to welcome you.

    Thanks.

    Comment by Bastiat Fan — July 24, 2012 @ 12:26 pm - July 24, 2012

  16. Mr. Nau, please read my posts before making allegations about my opinions. No, I don’t oppose gay marriage. And if I didn’t like non-conservative gays, I would have far fewer friends than I do now. I have repeatedly praised Ellen De Generes on this blog and she has indicated (in a subtle and civil manner) that she supports this president.

    Mocking hypocrisy has been a staple of political discourse at least since Jonathan Swift, if not Aristophanes.

    But, the point remains that these groups get all agitated when the progeny of prominent conservative woman uses a word as a slur, yet remain silent when a gay activist uses the term in a far more derogatory manner.

    So, let me ask you, Mr. Nau, was HRC right to ask Sarah Palin to speak out about her daughter’s language? And was Dan Savage wrong to use the same language?

    And if your answer is “Yes,” to the first question and “No,” to the second, please explain how you distinguish the two actions.

    Thanks!

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — July 24, 2012 @ 12:35 pm - July 24, 2012

  17. J. Nau >> I don’t believe you’ve read the previous thread.

    Comment by Cinesnatch — July 24, 2012 @ 12:36 pm - July 24, 2012

  18. C.mon, it´s not too difficult. It´s not WHAT is said, it is WHO said it.! It´s like the ¨n¨word. If you´re black you can use it in anger or in cmedy, as did Richard Pryor, and even as a friendly greeting as in Rush Hour, ¨What´s up my n?¨ But if you´re any other race and use it, it can cause problems, as it did for the character Jackie Chan portayed in the aforesaid movie.

    Comment by Roberto — July 24, 2012 @ 2:32 pm - July 24, 2012

  19. First, I’m willing to wager that if Swift believed British nobles were simultaneously hypocrites and child molesters, Swift would have told a satirical tale about the virtue of Irish children for purposes of molesting Irish babies.

    Second, if HRC is a hypocrite for speaking out against Palin and not Savage, are you not a hypocrite for the opposite?

    Third, if HRC’s hypocrisy brothers you because the media believes they speak for all gays. Correcting the media’s mistake can be better accomplished then pointing out HRC’s hypocrisy.

    Fourth, if you’ll permit an argument by analogy. HRC’s behaviour is completely rational.
    The United States is an active proponent for preventing nuclear proliferation. However, if nations like South Korea, Israel, the UK expanded their arsenal, the US wouldn’t say anything.

    However, North Korea, Iran or Russia doing the same would be met with vocal condemnation.

    Is the United States being hypocritical concerning proliferation? Yes.

    But the US is primarily concerned about US power, US security and global security. From the perspective of the US, South Korea, Israel, and the UK aren’t a threat to those interests. North Korea, Iran and Russia are.

    Is HRC and GLADD hypocritical about the use of that word? Sure. But Savage isn’t a threat to HRC and GLADD’s goal, gay equality. The Palins are.

    Comment by J.Nau — July 24, 2012 @ 2:49 pm - July 24, 2012

  20. So in sum, we have organizations fighting for gay equality.

    Fighting for gay equality or making ass loads of money from being political tools and useful idiots?

    Comment by TGC — July 24, 2012 @ 3:00 pm - July 24, 2012

  21. Wow. Somebody’s really fixated on child molestation. Sheesh! Further, I can only conclude that he’s interested in stirring up the pot as he continues to make asinine arguments.

    Comment by TGC — July 24, 2012 @ 3:03 pm - July 24, 2012

  22. “But Savage isn’t a threat to HRC and GLADD’s goal, gay equality. The Palins are.”

    in your desperate quest for equality, people like Savage do far more damage than the Palins. True that you are not into winning hearts and minds but more about shoving down people’s throat gay marriage via other means that do not involve referendums, still Dan Savage is not exactly attractive for the non-gay population. Ugly, not intelligent, vulgar, angry, permanently unsatisfied, disgusted by the mere view of any portion of the female anatomy.

    If you think gays like you are better off being represented by someone who says a vagina is ” canned ham dropped from a great height”, then maybe it is not entirely wrong to keep you apart from civil society. I surely wouldn’t want anything to do with someone with this mindset.

    Comment by susan — July 24, 2012 @ 3:28 pm - July 24, 2012

  23. So, Mr. Nau, you’re saying we should ignore HRC’s hypocrisy? It is real and it is glaring. And should be pointed out.

    And Mr. Savage is actually a bigger threat to promoting a positive image of gay people than are the Palins. The more his nastiness becomes manifest, the more gay groups refuse to criticize his mean-spirited attacks on his political adversaries, the more people will see the sex columnist as representative of gay culture.

    Gay people should want to differentiate themselves (to borrow an expression) from such an individual.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — July 24, 2012 @ 3:46 pm - July 24, 2012

  24. *applauds Dan’s reasoned reply*

    I noticed that J Mau won’t condemn Dan Savage either.

    Amusingly, I do agree that Dan Savage does more damage by his antics than a word spoken by a child. Trip can’t reasonably be expected to stand by, or fully understand, what he said. Savage doesn’t have that defense.

    Additional aside, if you’re going to look for trouble, you’re going to find it. I got called out on the carpet for using the term whipping boy at work. Apparently my (unnamed) accusers didn’t know what the term meant, they saw ‘whip’ and freaked out.

    Comment by The_Livewire — July 24, 2012 @ 4:03 pm - July 24, 2012

  25. I’m suggesting that HRC’s conditional condemnation of the use of the word faggot shouldn’t come at a surprise. HRC is a rational actor trying to reach a goal, namely gay equality. Chastising Savage doesn’t serve or help reach that goal.

    Pointing out their hypocrisy is like pointing out the sun rises in the east.

    Palin’s policy preferences are in line and aid conservative policy preferences, and thus your support of her despite the use of the word faggot doesn’t come as a surprise.

    This is all Machiavellian, but it’s the way the world works

    Comment by J.Nau — July 24, 2012 @ 4:24 pm - July 24, 2012

  26. No, Mr. Nau, HRC, as was made clear by its early endorsement of Mr. Obama and its recent image wondering about Mr. Romney’s tax returns, is merely the gay auxiliary of the Democratic National Committee.

    If they were interested in promoting gay “equality,” they would spend less time bashing Republicans and more time building bridges to them in the hopes of winning their votes on legislative initiatives.

    And bear in mind that Mrs. Palin never uttered the term “faggot” herself. And that HRC never previously attacked the prominent parent of an unruly adolescent for that teen’s language.

    HRC may well be a rational actor, but a rational actor playing a partisan game.

    Comment by B. Daniel Blatt — July 24, 2012 @ 4:45 pm - July 24, 2012

  27. And Mr. Savage is actually a bigger threat to promoting a positive image of gay people than are the Palins. The more his nastiness becomes manifest, the more gay groups refuse to criticize his mean-spirited attacks on his political adversaries, the more people will see the sex columnist as representative of gay culture.

    I agree with this. If an organization wants to promote equality or at least create a positive image and bridge to those who oppose them, they need to be holding themselves to the higher standard, not the people on the other side of the divide.

    Comment by Just Me — July 24, 2012 @ 4:46 pm - July 24, 2012

  28. Salior Man
    At 65 you are one of the oldest of GP readers. Ha! I am 90 and I am going to continue reading GP as long as my eyes hold out. And by the way I was in the Service and we didn’t have sex on base neither. That was not what we were there for. But we sure had plenty off base.

    !

    Comment by John R — July 24, 2012 @ 4:52 pm - July 24, 2012

  29. J Nau, Dan Savage screams on national TV that gays want all Republicans dead.

    HRC fully endorses the bigot Dan Savage and his antics, which means they endorse and support murdering your political opponents.

    If neither you or they are mentally and emotionally capable of condemning a grown man who calls for people to be murdered based on their voting differently than he wants, you have even less business throwing a public tantrum out of what comes out of a three-year-old’s mouth.

    Especially when you and your fellow HRC bigot gays are savaging that child’s family and claiming that anyone who criticizes you for doing so is “homophobic”.

    Comment by North Dallas Thirty — July 24, 2012 @ 5:14 pm - July 24, 2012

  30. You have described the concept of “equality” as a Marxist principle.

    It is, assuming you are referring to equality of outcome. The only fair thing is equality of opportunity and freedom to pursue your goals.

    Your commenter’s are even vitriol in their assessment of non-conservative gays.

    You say gay conservatives don’t like “non-conservative gays,” but the more salient point is that gay lefties hate gay conservatives. There is one “non-conservative gay” that I’ve ever interacted with that wasn’t a jerk, and only a couple others that weren’t utter hateful assholes. I speak for myself only, but I always try to treat people how they treat me. If I am ever disrespectful towards someone, it is usually because they were disrespectful first.

    Again, I speak for myself only, but the only thing I care about is individual rights. I strongly oppose “gay rights” (as a concept).

    Second, if HRC is a hypocrite for speaking out against Palin and not Savage, are you not a hypocrite for the opposite?

    No. The “speaking out” that is being done here is about the hypocrisy, not the use of the word “faggot.” Personally, I don’t care if someone says “faggot” as long as everyone is allowed to say it.

    Fourth, if you’ll permit an argument by analogy. HRC’s behaviour is completely rational.
    The United States is an active proponent for preventing nuclear proliferation. However, if nations like South Korea, Israel, the UK expanded their arsenal, the US wouldn’t say anything.

    However, North Korea, Iran or Russia doing the same would be met with vocal condemnation.

    Is the United States being hypocritical concerning proliferation? Yes.

    But the US is primarily concerned about US power, US security and global security. From the perspective of the US, South Korea, Israel, and the UK aren’t a threat to those interests. North Korea, Iran and Russia are.

    That is a flawed analogy. If the US’s goal is security, to which nuclear weapons in the hands of enemies pose a threat, of course it will oppose its enemies being allowed to develop nuclear weapons. The use of the word “faggot” has nothing to do with gay marriage or gay rights.

    One more thing, is it just me, or does J.Nau’s writing style seem awfully familiar? I’ve never seen him post a comment before. This isn’t a conjecture, it is just an observation.

    Comment by Rattlesnake — July 24, 2012 @ 6:34 pm - July 24, 2012

  31. I think I have a comment in the spam queue.

    [You did. Rescued. Not sure why it got caught. –Dan]

    Comment by Rattlesnake — July 24, 2012 @ 6:36 pm - July 24, 2012

  32. HRC is a rational actor trying to reach a goal, namely gay equality. Chastising Savage doesn’t serve or help reach that goal.

    One of the very worst aspects of contemporary political culture is the willingness to excuse horrible behavior so long as it comes from someone “on our side.” And to excuse this as “rational” is the sign of complete moral and ethical vacancy.

    Comment by V the K — July 24, 2012 @ 6:39 pm - July 24, 2012

  33. Sailor Man and John R I hate to admit that you have company. I feel and believe I am 21 but next Friday I will be celebrating the 54th Anniversary of my 21st birthday. I´ve been nurtured on idea that, ¨nobody loves you when you´re old and gay.¨I agree with G:B: Shaw that youth is wasted on the young. I´m also a Viet Nam era vet. I wa RA all the way.

    Comment by Roberto — July 24, 2012 @ 6:48 pm - July 24, 2012

  34. SailorMan, John R, and all vets: Thank you for your service!

    #16 – Dan rules! :-)

    Comment by ILoveCapitalism — July 25, 2012 @ 12:03 am - July 25, 2012

  35. HRC is a rational actor trying to reach a goal, namely gay equality. Chastising Savage doesn’t serve or help reach that goal.

    Hmm.

    By inspiring and engaging all Americans, HRC strives to end discrimination against LGBT citizens

    So I guess they only strive to end discrimination against certain LGBT citizens who share their group-think. They sure couldn’t give a shit less about LGBT folks in other countries who are imprisoned and/or executed but they can sure get their bloody panties in a knot over what a 3 year old says.

    Pretty damn sad, no?

    Comment by TGC — July 25, 2012 @ 1:44 am - July 25, 2012

  36. @TGC,
    Worse (in a local sense) is that they won’t come to the defense of a group of gays defamed by one of their own.

    Comment by The_Livewire — July 25, 2012 @ 7:47 am - July 25, 2012

  37. Robert and others that may wonder if anyone will love you when you are old and gay. The problem that I have is that many friends and relatives are dieing and I am slow in replacing them with friends and of couse, it impossible to replace my relatives. As for friends you would be surprised how many young people are facinated with old guys. I think ‘facination’ more or less explains it.

    What I have found the wrost in growing old is that they would not renew my drivers license. That has hurt me more than anything else.
    Of couse if you live like my and Dan’s friends, Alex and Christian, right in the middle of Denver in a high rise you wont need a car. but if you live out in ‘sticks’ you can wear out your friends very shortly.

    Comment by John R — July 25, 2012 @ 12:46 pm - July 25, 2012

  38. @John, I can’t link to a you tube performace from work, but do a search for “Ride Forever” sung by Paul Gross.

    Comment by The_Livewire — July 25, 2012 @ 1:30 pm - July 25, 2012

  39. Thank you John R. I am now living in El Salvador and my drivers license will expire on the anniversary of my 21st birthday in 2014. since I´m a member of AAA affilate Auto Club of El Salvador (ACES) no tickets or or accidents, which is a miracle because the locals drive like egotistical maniacs, renewal won´t be a problem. My concern is, on returning to the U.S. tentatively Arizona, securing a drivers license.
    Since it is an experience living out of the U.S , I´ve started writing a book for people who are contemplating retiring south of the border, entitled, ¨The Grass Looks Greener On The Other Side.¨

    Comment by Roberto — July 25, 2012 @ 3:03 pm - July 25, 2012

  40. I don’t know if it is axiomatic that no one loves you when you’re old and gay. In the past, elderly gays may have been isolated, but I think with cultural openness, a lot of groups of gay friends will have grown old together.

    Nonetheless, rather glad I spent my thirties raising a family and building a career instead of whoring around.

    Comment by V the K — July 25, 2012 @ 7:01 pm - July 25, 2012

  41. Roberto. I will be looking forward to reading your book. I have spent quite a lot of time out of the country. Only one country that I would consider moving to would be New Zealand. But at my age I will not be moving anywhere. The weather where I live just south of SFO is almost perfect. But that is about all I can say about The Golden State right now.

    Comment by John R — July 25, 2012 @ 7:43 pm - July 25, 2012

  42. The Livewire. I found Riding Forever. I enjoyed it very much. Thanks for telling me about it. After I get this typed, I am going back and lisen to it again. It takes me so long to type even a short e-mail. The film was made in Canada. I have been across Canada many times driving and flying a small Piper. A beautiful country.

    Comment by John R — July 25, 2012 @ 8:17 pm - July 25, 2012

  43. You would have to have a heart of stone not to find the mincing pederast from Massachusetts worthy of ridicule for his private life

    [doing a Tex Avery wolf whistle at VtK as my heart thumps six feet out of my chest...<3 <3 <3]

    Comment by Throbert McGee — July 25, 2012 @ 8:37 pm - July 25, 2012

  44. John R.

    Again, thank you. I would imagine that New Zealand would be very much like the British Isles in culture and in attitudes. I don´t think of New Zealand and Australia as Third World countries. I think that acclimation would require very little effort. In my case I had family that migrated to El Salvador, so when I came to visit my experiences were shopping sprees in the super market, department stores, and street vendors for souvenirs. Based on those limited experiences I thought it was a good suggestion to buy my house before retirement. Little did I know that I would have to put up with inconveniences on a daily basis, and idiocy in some of the commercial institutions.

    If you´ve ever seen the HGTV´s program House Hunters International, what I´ve noticed when Americans buying homes in Latin America, they´re in the honeymoon stage, i.e. love of the beach, the beautiful scenery, and the apparent friendliness of the natives. For me the honeymoon is over. What I can´t fathom is Americans buying in Nicaragua. Daniel Ortega is anti-American. There are still 334 former residents who have had their property confiscated by the Sandinistas who are suing for recovery or recompense. Then there was the case of Eric Volz arrested for a murder he didn´t commit. All the evidence and witnesses proved that he was nowhere near San Juan del Sur when the murder took place. The Sandinista judge refused to accept any evidence or testimony aparte from two drunks, one whom could have been the killer of Eric´s girlfriend. He was judged guilty and sentenced to 30years. Diplomatic channels got him released after more than a year. Another American was arrested in a raid on Joluva Hotel, a gay resort in Granada, Nicaragua. Fox News had reported a minister from Georgia, who is missing and could be in Venezuela where he has a house. Maybe he is like Sean Penn, Hugo Chavez´s useful idiot.

    While we emote over the failings of Barak Obama and the silly defenses of the libtards, there is a lot going on in the world that we ignore because it doesn´t effect our daily lives. Maybe we should develop more of a world view because it will trickle down. I blame W for allowing ignoring Latin America after 9/11 because it allowed Hugo Chavez to get where he is today and spread his cancer to Bolivia, Ecuador, Argentina, and Iran. The uranium that Ahmadinejad is processing came out of the mines of Venezuela.

    Comment by Roberto — July 26, 2012 @ 2:16 pm - July 26, 2012

  45. Roberto. Thank you for the above information.

    Comment by John R — July 26, 2012 @ 6:44 pm - July 26, 2012

  46. Oh, Throbert, you just like me because I have that John Roberts/suburban dad thing working for me; minus the sniveling suck-ups to the left.

    Comment by V the K — July 26, 2012 @ 9:51 pm - July 26, 2012

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.