You can read about it here. But I really liked this part:
“…the next TSA official that gives you an ‘enhanced pat down’ could be a practicing homosexual secretly getting pleasure from your submission.”
I guess if I have to be patted down by a guy I’d prefer some one who is experienced and likes his job. My top preference would be some one who is experienced and likes her job. But you can’t always get what you want.
H/T Radley Balko
Cross Posted at Power and Control
Comments
21 responses to “Predators Infected With Teh Gay At CPAC”
Simon,
no. I’m sorry. In the case of government officers, the idea that they might get their ya yas from patting one down is plain creepy. Why? Because they have the force of government behind them. It will corrupt the selection process, etc.
The problem is NOT their being gay — the problem is their being bureaucrats with power.
Sarah — the authorityphobic.
Sarah,
I agree with you. I was making humor out of the subject. Because the social conservative was more worried about a gay pat down than about government pat downs.
I’m no fan of the TSA.
Many a true word is said in jest. I will point out the phenomenon of “players.” (i.e. men who learn the tricks of seducing large numbers of women for fun.)
Their existence induces others to emulate the behavior, and so “playin” becomes a self reinforcing meme. Adultery works the same way. The more people do it, the more likely others will emulate them.
And the wonderful thing is, nobody gets hurt!
In my youth I set a bad example and lived to tell the tale. But liberty is always risky.
I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than those attending too small a degree of it. – Thomas Jefferson
“Malo periculosam libertatem quam quietum servitium” – “I prefer liberty with danger to peace with slavery”
The craziest thing he said was this:
***QUOTE***
they [gay conservatives] are taking advantage of the alcohol parties at CPAC to poison the minds and pollute the bodies of young conservatives who are still too naïve to know what is being done to them.
***END QUOTE***
So, conservatives who are old enough to drink alcohol and who attend CPAC are too naive to handle seeing gay conservatives at a party?
What planet does this loon come from?
“Many a true word is said in jest. I will point out the phenomenon of “players.” (i.e. men who learn the tricks of seducing large numbers of women for fun.)”
OTOH… One needs exposure to a pathogen to develop an immunity to it. Preferably a less-successful version of said pathogen. And, the more men who try to become players, the more immunity will develop.
I met a number of the less competent types before meeting a competent one. (And I’ve since met several I’d consider competent.) I’m afraid I’m immune though. Sorry, boys.
I disagree with your comment on adultery though. (I do realize the “nobody gets hurt” was sarcastic.) But, the more people do it, the more people SEE that it hurts (the perpetrator in the long run). Kind of like sticking your hand in a fire. No matter how cool it looks, even the stupid eventually get the idea that it’s not a smart move.
Eric, Probably the same planet DiogenesLamp comes from.
P.S. that name really should be Diogene’s Lamp. (Yes, I know, no spaces or non-alphanumeric characters, but it still makes me wince.)
And, if you keep looking for and honest man, Diogenes, and don’t find one…perhaps it’s because you don’t recognize truth when it’s spoken?
P.S. – did any of you see Cain’s speech at CPAC? A lot of people seemed to love him. I watched it. I also thought it was a fabulous speech. Haven’t seen a preacher preach like that since Rev. Martin Luther King.
But that’s the problem. He’s a preacher, and a great one, no matter what else he is. I loved (most of) the speech, but when I see him in charge of the country, my mind says “Jeremiah Scudder.”
But, I’ll admit what the ones who like him say. Put him in a debate with our present POTUS, and POTUS would get stomped. Hard. But is it worth the risk? I don’t think so.
Hmm – my link didn’t come through on Herman Cain’s speech.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pKNalec5CE4
Jeremiah Scudder:
http://www.firearmsroundtable.com/showthread.php?t=646
==================
Kathy – there is the other side as well. I lived in Mormon country for a while. I had a mother there who attempted to get something going between me and her daughter. The daughter was rather “free”. I didn’t take the bait. The whole set up felt creepy. i.e. get the daughter knocked up followed by a shotgun wedding.
My son reports similar shenanigans in Russia.
And, if you keep looking for and honest man, Diogenes, and don’t find one…perhaps it’s because you don’t recognize truth when it’s spoken?
Kathy Kinsley · February 14, 2011 6:16 PM
Certainly I do, but more often I find fallacy masquerading as truth. People tell me things all the time that they truly believe in. The things they tell me just don’t happen to be true.
And, if you keep looking for and honest man, Diogenes, and don’t find one…perhaps it’s because you don’t recognize truth when it’s spoken?
Kathy Kinsley · February 14, 2011 6:16 PM
Certainly I do, but more often I find fallacy masquerading as truth. People tell me things all the time that they truly believe in. The things they tell me just don’t happen to be true.
I disagree with your comment on adultery though. (I do realize the “nobody gets hurt” was sarcastic.) But, the more people do it, the more people SEE that it hurts (the perpetrator in the long run). Kind of like sticking your hand in a fire. No matter how cool it looks, even the stupid eventually get the idea that it’s not a smart move.
Kathy K · February 14, 2011 6:10 PM
Did anyone perceive the non-stated implication? Homosexuality, (and any other sort of deviant fetish) is reinforced by the examples of other people. Ergo, it is also a self reinforcing meme.
I disagree with your comment on adultery though. (I do realize the “nobody gets hurt” was sarcastic.) But, the more people do it, the more people SEE that it hurts (the perpetrator in the long run). Kind of like sticking your hand in a fire. No matter how cool it looks, even the stupid eventually get the idea that it’s not a smart move.
Kathy K · February 14, 2011 6:10 PM
Did anyone perceive the non-stated implication? Homosexuality, (and any other sort of deviant fetish) is reinforced by the examples of other people. Ergo, it is also a self reinforcing meme.
You mean fallacies like: you can’t apply enough force you can get people to stop drinking alcohol or taking drugs you don’t approve of?
I believe in fact that those are fallacies. You just kill everyone who does it and pretty soon there will be no one doing it.
I estimate that it would only require killing between 10 and 30 million to accomplish the goal.
With enough force anything is possible. The Soviets proved that. They completely stamped out the black market for unapproved goods in their domain. It can be done.
I disagree with your comment on adultery though. (I do realize the “nobody gets hurt” was sarcastic.) But, the more people do it, the more people SEE that it hurts (the perpetrator in the long run). Kind of like sticking your hand in a fire. No matter how cool it looks, even the stupid eventually get the idea that it’s not a smart move.
Kathy K · February 14, 2011 6:10 PM
Did anyone perceive the non-stated implication? Homosexuality, (and any other sort of deviant fetish) is reinforced by the examples of other people. Ergo, it is also a self reinforcing meme.
I disagree with your comment on adultery though. (I do realize the “nobody gets hurt” was sarcastic.) But, the more people do it, the more people SEE that it hurts (the perpetrator in the long run). Kind of like sticking your hand in a fire. No matter how cool it looks, even the stupid eventually get the idea that it’s not a smart move.
Kathy K · February 14, 2011 6:10 PM
Did anyone perceive the non-stated implication? Homosexuality, (and any other sort of deviant fetish) is reinforced by the examples of other people. Ergo, it is also a self reinforcing meme.
DL,
The way to solve the problem is to show only hetros fornicating in an approved way on broadcast TV. Then every one will want to do it and the gay problem will be solved.
How about we show people chopping off the hands of criminals, and hanging people for adultery?
Put it on mainstream television, and eventually the acceptance of it would creep upward.
I kid you not. Demonstrating that a behavior is acceptable will promote the acceptance of that behavior. Especially if the law (and the media) DECLARES it so.
I believe in fact that those are fallacies. You just kill everyone who does it and pretty soon there will be no one doing it.
I estimate that it would only require killing between 10 and 30 million to accomplish the goal.
With enough force anything is possible. The Soviets proved that. They completely stamped out the black market for unapproved goods in their domain. It can be done.
M. Simon · February 15, 2011 4:35 PM
You conspicuously left off Mao Tse Tung who eliminated opium addiction in China by killing all the addicts. It’s kind of Ironic. It is the anarchy they created that made it possible for him to come to power. Funny way to repay his benefactors, but he apparently realized that massive drug use is very detrimental to his kingdom.
One would hope that there would be less violent means to providing for the security of a nation, but it has been demonstrated that the violent ones do indeed work.
“Kathy – there is the other side as well. I lived in Mormon country for a while. I had a mother there who attempted to get something going between me and her daughter. The daughter was rather “free”. I didn’t take the bait. The whole set up felt creepy. i.e. get the daughter knocked up followed by a shotgun wedding.
My son reports similar shenanigans in Russia.”
Rather a belated reply, but in “the good old days” (early 70’s) I saw some of that kind of behaviour in the US South (NC, where I was living at the time). That was before the days when knocking up someone without marriage was quite so acceptable. Nowadays, they just reduce they guy’s income to nothing for 18 years. Not sure, really, which is worse.