ADVERTISEMENT

Hillary expresses dislike for gay-friendly passports in latest email release.

Oh hell, I thought I was being denied some Instagram lighting effects. We love that shit and I would have been pissed. Another attempt to make us more breeder-like? I'll let someone else get worked up over. Go lesbians!
 
Liberals don't give a shit about anybody but themselves. Of course Hillary doesn't like gay people. She just wants them as a voting block and speaking platform to show how "compassionate" she is towards the perceived down-trodden.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Pepperman
I bet if we could go back to 2011, there would be a thread where conservative posters circle jerk about this and claim a change like this could only be made by Hillary or Obama.
 
Liberals don't give a shit about anybody but themselves. Of course Hillary doesn't like gay people. She just wants them as a voting block and speaking platform to show how "compassionate" she is towards the perceived down-trodden.
Wait, what? I thought our problem was we love everyone else too much and want to give them free stuff?
 
  • Like
Reactions: naturalmwa
I read this, and I have no problem with clinton's decision or her flip-flop on the issue, she can do what she wants. However, I do wonder if it matters who the biological parents are for a passport application. Everyone has a Mother and Father, regardless of who's paying the bills, taking care of them, or building a lasting relationship with them.

In the case of divorced and remarried parents, you would list your biological Mother and Father as parents rather than one biological and one "step," right?

You would certainly want any official docs/medical records to match your passport, I'm guessing, particularly in the event you lose you need to proved who you are to a consulate overseas. Or maybe it doesn't matter.

In any case, this is what came to mind as I was asking myself, "does it matter?"
 
The new world = Dr. Seuss world - Thing 1 and Thing 2. No one shall have an identity until the left wants to two groups to square of on one another. Then we will be called something.
 
With all the problems we have in this country it is amazing we spend so much time on this kind of stuff from both sides. The rush to this gotcha moments is a huge distraction to what we need to be discussing.
 
Did you read the email?
I don't think it says what you think it does.

ac47770c-1ac5-4def-8611-ece728401487.jpg

:cool:
 
With all the problems we have in this country it is amazing we spend so much time on this kind of stuff from both sides. The rush to this gotcha moments is a huge distraction to what we need to be discussing.

Totally, completely agree! ^^ Unfortunately, that is what we have reduced ourselves to...very. very surfacy, titillating "stories" that entertainment oriented...designed to appeal to emotions, rather than intellect. However...it works today, people in general are not that deep and we are not demanding of real analysis and contemplation of hard subjects or issues.
 
  • Like
Reactions: TexMichFan
With all the problems we have in this country it is amazing we spend so much time on this kind of stuff from both sides. The rush to this gotcha moments is a huge distraction to what we need to be discussing.
I hear you, but notice how the State Dept. employees actually just took the initiative and made the change and didn't try to waste any time on it at all.
 
Wait - you asked me to not equate "your kind" with Pedo's and then you do... a case of do as I say not as I do? Is that the Dem way?
It's because you did that I even brought it up. There are two issues at play here. First, there's always a double standard with jokes; people are allowed to make fun of themselves in ways that others can't. Second, if humor was your aim initially, that point fell flat. Your use of the idea was perceived as serious. I doubt these basic rules on human interaction are limited to D's, but I'd be happy to break it down more should you disagree.
 
I hear you, but notice how the State Dept. employees actually just took the initiative and made the change and didn't try to waste any time on it at all.
Well the tone of Hillary's email pretty told them all they needed to know. Wonder if they ever found out who had the idea to start with. A bigger point in all this for me is Hillary didn't really agree or disagree with it but was afraid of what a Palin led Fox News response would be.
 
It's because you did that I even brought it up. There are two issues at play here. First, there's always a double standard with jokes; people are allowed to make fun of themselves in ways that others can't. Second, if humor was your aim initially, that point fell flat. Your use of the idea was perceived as serious. I doubt these basic rules on human interaction are limited to D's, but I'd be happy to break it down more should you disagree.

As serious as you sounded (and in text that can be difficult) I figured you were against that type of diatribe in all contextual exchanges. No worries - I can move on.
 
Well the tone of Hillary's email pretty told them all they needed to know. Wonder if they ever found out who had the idea to start with. A bigger point in all this for me is Hillary didn't really agree or disagree with it but was afraid of what a Palin led Fox News response would be.
She thinks like you. She knew this would be a huge distraction too.
 
Well the tone of Hillary's email pretty told them all they needed to know. Wonder if they ever found out who had the idea to start with. A bigger point in all this for me is Hillary didn't really agree or disagree with it but was afraid of what a Palin led Fox News response would be.

This was my thought as well. If she can't handle Sarah Palin's Op-Ed response on Fox news, she will be in a permanent fetal position when dealing with Putin. She is so over her head its not even funny.
 
  • Like
Reactions: unIowa
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT