On 7/22/16 12:59 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 12:12:39 -0400, Poquito Loco
wrote:


I agree. Attempting a 'discussion' with you has proved fruitless. When presented with a valid
argument, you side step or name call. Yet, Greg continues to provide you a forum to show just how
stupid you can sound.

Why he persists, with one who will *not* respond to a valid argument, is beyond me.

Harry should go get his money back from UK because he did not get the
critical thinking skills the says college was supposed to give him. He
came out with a rigid philosophy that does not accept any alternate
ideas about anything. It is no surprise that the biggest innovators of
the latter 20th century, dropped out of college because it was holding
them back. (Gates, Zuckerburg etc)


My lessons in critical thinking taught me to not jump to conclusions
based upon a silly, singular data point. As usual, you are trying to
make more of my little offering than there was. You would have been the
easiest of formal debate opponents.

On 7/22/16 1:07 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 12:40:35 -0400 (EDT), justan wrote:


I've lost track of the alphabet soup of letters that describe the
different kinds of gay people. It's really not important but it
would be nice if someone would explain it all.

It took me a while to get my head around all of the variations of men
in women's clothes. Fortunately (for the process) there were lots of
gay people in the flower business and the home decor business (things
my wife did before she got into HVAC and construction).
It was an interesting intellectual exercise but I was happy to be
around normal people again. Some of the gay guys were regular folks
but some were crazy as a ****house rat.
I spent more time that I wanted to with the various iterations of
"gay". It turns out, most men in dresses are not even gay ... if you
can believe what they say. That makes them in the ladies room even
more troubling.



Gays are normal people.

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 12:59:11 -0400, wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 12:12:39 -0400, Poquito Loco
wrote:


I agree. Attempting a 'discussion' with you has proved fruitless. When presented with a valid
argument, you side step or name call. Yet, Greg continues to provide you a forum to show just how
stupid you can sound.

Why he persists, with one who will *not* respond to a valid argument, is beyond me.

Harry should go get his money back from UK because he did not get the
critical thinking skills the says college was supposed to give him. He
came out with a rigid philosophy that does not accept any alternate
ideas about anything. It is no surprise that the biggest innovators of
the latter 20th century, dropped out of college because it was holding
them back. (Gates, Zuckerburg etc)

He may have some, but he keeps them well hidden. He is not, in his words, going to 'waste them on
rec.boats'. But then again, maybe he's displaying all the talent he has, which doesn't say much for
UK.

Keyser Söze Wrote in message:
On 7/22/16 12:54 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 11:45:37 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 7/22/16 11:37 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 11:11:36 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 7/22/16 10:50 AM, wrote:

I offer up a sarcastic and ironic data point and you build it into a
theorem. You're a funny guy.

I am a thinking person who extends your brain farts to a logical
conclusion.

You should find another calling.

Can't keep up?


With what? Your jumping to erroneous/silly conclusions?

No imagination huh?
Everything must have been exactly the way it was no matter whether
mistakes were made or not.
I suppose the Iraq war, Afghanistan and Libya were just the way it had
to be too ... at least that is what Hillary will be telling us next
week. ;-)

I usually don't try to reach a conclusion in a presentation on the basis
of one data point, especially one that was offered as an example of
irony and satire.


Have you ever come to a conclusion on your own? The unions and D N
C own you.

--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Keyser Söze Wrote in message:
On 7/22/16 1:07 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 12:40:35 -0400 (EDT), justan wrote:


I've lost track of the alphabet soup of letters that describe the
different kinds of gay people. It's really not important but it
would be nice if someone would explain it all.

It took me a while to get my head around all of the variations of men
in women's clothes. Fortunately (for the process) there were lots of
gay people in the flower business and the home decor business (things
my wife did before she got into HVAC and construction).
It was an interesting intellectual exercise but I was happy to be
around normal people again. Some of the gay guys were regular folks
but some were crazy as a ****house rat.
I spent more time that I wanted to with the various iterations of
"gay". It turns out, most men in dresses are not even gay ... if you
can believe what they say. That makes them in the ladies room even
more troubling.



Gays are normal people.


That's a pretty broad statement. Plesae elaborate.
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

Poquito Loco Wrote in message:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 12:40:35 -0400 (EDT), justan wrote:

Poquito Loco Wrote in message:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 05:45:51 -0700 (PDT), True North wrote:


StinkyJim farts...

"Progressives need to push for demolishing all multi stall
bathrooms and replaceing them with individual lockable bathrooms
so the gays and libs can shoot up in privacy. Might even borrow
the handicap parking only idea and designate gay only and not
sure only privileged pottys."


Boy, you demand a lot for yourself and your buddies.

Actually, the solution is good for the GLBTZP crowd also.


I've lost track of the alphabet soup of letters that describe the
different kinds of gay people. It's really not important but it
would be nice if someone would explain it all.

Well, I accidentally left off the 'Q', which stands for 'queer' and is a PC term.

The rest, in order, a Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transsexual (or Transvestite, not sure which),
Zoophile, and Pedophile. None of those are 'sexual disorders' but are normal behaviors of those born
with such an inclination, i.e., they are 'natural' states of being.

I hope that didn't offend anybody.


Other than the alphabetsoup folks and Harry Louse, probably not.
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 7/22/16 3:01 PM, justan wrote:
Keyser Söze Wrote in message:
On 7/22/16 12:54 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 11:45:37 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 7/22/16 11:37 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 11:11:36 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 7/22/16 10:50 AM, wrote:

I offer up a sarcastic and ironic data point and you build it into a
theorem. You're a funny guy.

I am a thinking person who extends your brain farts to a logical
conclusion.

You should find another calling.

Can't keep up?


With what? Your jumping to erroneous/silly conclusions?

No imagination huh?
Everything must have been exactly the way it was no matter whether
mistakes were made or not.
I suppose the Iraq war, Afghanistan and Libya were just the way it had
to be too ... at least that is what Hillary will be telling us next
week. ;-)

I usually don't try to reach a conclusion in a presentation on the basis
of one data point, especially one that was offered as an example of
irony and satire.


Have you ever come to a conclusion on your own? The unions and D N
C own you.

More ignorant "TrumpTalk" from you.

On 7/22/16 3:13 PM, justan wrote:
Poquito Loco Wrote in message:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 12:40:35 -0400 (EDT), justan wrote:

Poquito Loco Wrote in message:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 05:45:51 -0700 (PDT), True North wrote:


StinkyJim farts...

"Progressives need to push for demolishing all multi stall
bathrooms and replaceing them with individual lockable bathrooms
so the gays and libs can shoot up in privacy. Might even borrow
the handicap parking only idea and designate gay only and not
sure only privileged pottys."


Boy, you demand a lot for yourself and your buddies.

Actually, the solution is good for the GLBTZP crowd also.


I've lost track of the alphabet soup of letters that describe the
different kinds of gay people. It's really not important but it
would be nice if someone would explain it all.

Well, I accidentally left off the 'Q', which stands for 'queer' and is a PC term.

The rest, in order, a Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transsexual (or Transvestite, not sure which),
Zoophile, and Pedophile. None of those are 'sexual disorders' but are normal behaviors of those born
with such an inclination, i.e., they are 'natural' states of being.

I hope that didn't offend anybody.


Other than the alphabet
soup folks and Harry Louse, probably not.



He forgot the "J" for JustanAssholePhile.

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:18:09 -0400, Poquito Loco
wrote:

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 12:40:35 -0400 (EDT), justan wrote:

Poquito Loco Wrote in message:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 05:45:51 -0700 (PDT), True North wrote:


StinkyJim farts...

"Progressives need to push for demolishing all multi stall
bathrooms and replaceing them with individual lockable bathrooms
so the gays and libs can shoot up in privacy. Might even borrow
the handicap parking only idea and designate gay only and not
sure only privileged pottys."


Boy, you demand a lot for yourself and your buddies.

Actually, the solution is good for the GLBTZP crowd also.


I've lost track of the alphabet soup of letters that describe the
different kinds of gay people. It's really not important but it
would be nice if someone would explain it all.

Well, I accidentally left off the 'Q', which stands for 'queer' and is a PC term.

The rest, in order, a Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, Transsexual (or Transvestite, not sure which),
Zoophile, and Pedophile. None of those are 'sexual disorders' but are normal behaviors of those born
with such an inclination, i.e., they are 'natural' states of being.

I hope that didn't offend anybody.

"T" is currently "trans gender" but these things tend to change over
time. It used to be "trans sexual". (a person who actually believes
they were misassigned at birth)
Transvestite is a whole different shade of pink, typically a
homosexual who dresses to attract men for fun or profit. Cross
dressers are generally straight men who just like to dress like women.

At least that was what it was a while ago when we knew gay folks who
could explain these things.

On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 14:39:03 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 7/22/16 12:54 PM, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 11:45:37 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 7/22/16 11:37 AM, wrote:
On Fri, 22 Jul 2016 11:11:36 -0400, Keyser Söze
wrote:

On 7/22/16 10:50 AM, wrote:

I offer up a sarcastic and ironic data point and you build it into a
theorem. You're a funny guy.

I am a thinking person who extends your brain farts to a logical
conclusion.

You should find another calling.

Can't keep up?


With what? Your jumping to erroneous/silly conclusions?

No imagination huh?
Everything must have been exactly the way it was no matter whether
mistakes were made or not.
I suppose the Iraq war, Afghanistan and Libya were just the way it had
to be too ... at least that is what Hillary will be telling us next
week. ;-)

I usually don't try to reach a conclusion in a presentation on the basis
of one data point, especially one that was offered as an example of
irony and satire.

No you simply become offended when you are presented with satire.