Re: Federal judge rules Alabama city must allow gay pride float at Christmas parade

Klaus Schadenfreude <[email protected]> Thu, 26 Dec 2024 10:33:03 -0800
Newsgroups alt.law-enforcement.corruption,alabama.politics,alt.fan.rush-limbaugh,sac.politics,talk.politics.guns,alt.politics.homosexuality
Organization Newshosting.com - Highest quality at a great price! www.newshosting.com
Message-ID <[email protected]>
On 12/26/2024 9:09 AM, scooter, the drunken Virginia camper and gutless 
chickenshit who is frightened to death of Rudy, lied:

> 
> 
> "Klaus Schadenfreude" <[email protected]> wrote in message 
> news:[email protected]...
>> On 12/25/2024 11:28 AM, scooter, the drunken Virginia camper and gutless 
>> chickenshit who is frightened to death of Rudy, lied:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> "Klaus Schadenfreude" <[email protected]> wrote in message 
>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>> On 12/10/2024 11:00 AM, scooter, the drunken Virginia camper and gutless 
>>>> chickenshit who is frightened to death of Rudy, lied:
>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> "Governor Swill" <[email protected]> wrote in message 
>>>>> news:[email protected]...
>>>>>> On Tue, 10 Dec 2024 09:06:21 -0600, "Scout"
>>>>>>> "Klaus Schadenfreude" <[email protected]> wrote
>>>>>>>> On 12/9/2024 8:20 AM, scooter, the drunken Virginia camper and gutless
>>>>>>>> chickenshit who is frightened to death of Rudy, lied:
>>>>>>>>> "useapen" <[email protected]> wrote
>>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>>>>>> The ruling required the city to provide at least two police officers to
>>>>>>>>>> escort the float throughout the parade.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I'm sorry, but unless ALL floats get an escort of 2 police officers
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> No, scooter. The other floats and parade entries are not at risk of being
>>>>>>>> attacked
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> How would you know which floats are at risk?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Beside, the issue isn't the risk.. it's the DISCRIMINATION.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I mean don't ALL floats deserve a police escort?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Why should THIS float get such a special honor?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Sounds like discrimination.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> See, they don't mind discrimination, they just want discrimination to favor
>>>>>>> them.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Why should low crime areas get police protection?  They don't need it. They
>>>>>> don't have crime.
>>>>>
>>>>> Are you suggest [sic] a parade float is a "high crime area"?
>>>> No, scooter, he's not "suggest" that. But that one float is at *known* risk 
>>>> for attack by you and your mob.
>>>
>>> Please produce your evidence that float is at a "known" risk of attack from 
>>> my or any mobs of mine.
>>>
>>> Further if they are in such danger maybe they should stay home or hire 
>>> private security. After all the police have no obligation to protect anyone, 
>>> nor to provide any special protection to anyone.
>>>
>>> I mean
>>
>> Another scooterism: empty meaningless wheeze. Putting "I mean" before his lie/ 
>> spew adds no meaning.
> 
> Rudy hates that I have to explain things to

You can't explain anything to anyone, scooter. And I'm right about your stupid 
scooterisms, scooter. They're nothing but empty wheeze. *None* of the ones 
listed below adds any meaning.

"Actually..." [empty padding]
"Further..." [empty padding]
"Naturally, ..." [empty padding]
"And just like that..." [scooter going "nyah-nyah" at an opponent immediately 
before fleeing]
"On the contrary..." [scooter childishly disputing, *never* refuting]
"And yet..." [empty padding; scooter adding something irrelevant and pointless]
"Heck..." [empty padding]
"Well..." [empty padding]
"After all..." [empty padding]
"In fact..." [empty padding]
"Indeed..." [empty padding; this is one of "pothole's" favorites, too]
"I acknowledge that..." [something that hasn't happened, so not subject to 
acknowledgment]
"So what you're saying..." [what follows is *always* something the opponent 
*never* said, i.e. a straw man]
"TRANSLATION:..." [the same as "so what you're saying..." — a straw man]
"Rudy/Baxter/Lee admits..." same as "so what you're saying" and "TRANSLATION:.." 
— a straw man]
"Where in the Constitution does it say..." [about shit that wouldn't *be* in the 
Constitution anyway]
"it's" [he means the possessive "its"]
"its" [he means the contraction "it's"]
"and" [he means "an"]
"an" [he means "and"]
"where" [he means "were"]
"were" [he means "where"]
"insure" [he means "ensure"; they are *not* synonyms]
"creditability" [he means "credibility"; "creditability" is not a word]