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]