In a message dated 7/30/06 3:53:54 P.M. Central Daylight Time, [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Well, I can't speak for her appearance on Donny Duetsch, but on
> Hardball it was quite obvious she was poking fun at liberal thought
> processes by holding a liberal icon up to that light of inquiry.

"Holding a liberal icon up to the light of inquiry"??


"The light of inquiry" is what she was holding
Clinton up to?

And since when do liberals hold people "up to
the light of inquiry" by publicly speculating that
they're gay?

It's conservatives who tend to think being gay is
somehow scandalous and terrible.

Liberals tend not to think it's worth bothering
to speculate about. (Except in the case of
conservatives who moralize over what an awful
threat to society homosexuality is and then turn
out to be secretly gay themselves. Then it's
their ugly hypocrisy that is really the topic
I think you miss the point she subtly made. Either defend the concept that rampant promiscuous  sexual encounters are a sign of latent homosexuality or defend Clinton for having them. I don't think Ann really thinks Clinton is gay. I don't think many people do.< I've heard a number of times liberals speculating that Condi is "really" gay and a few others as well. Remember the fellow that was accused of being a ringer in the White House press corp for the Administration? He was accused of being gay for no other reason than to try to embarrass the administration. Remember Kerry's comments about Mary Cheney in the debates? Do you think Kerry was really concerned for Mary Cheney or was hoping he might embarrass the Cheney's on national TV for having a lesbian daughter. It happens more by liberals than you think and not strictly to point out hypocrisy.

To subscribe, send a message to:

Or go to:
and click 'Join This Group!'



Reply via email to