Ron H. explains how this probably didn't happen, and besides why are liberals getting all double standard?
The article doesn’t say whether or not a conviction was entered or not. Being arrested is one thing but being convicted is an entirely different matter. Even if a conviction was entered the circumstances might help to illuminate what happened. I wouldn’t worry too much about this. Besides, whatever happened to the lefts always calling for second chances? Eh! Oh, that’s right. That is only if you are a brain dead scummy libtard.FlingWingFlyer - the old imaginary double standard strikes again.
If you said, “Slick Willie’s Wife- endorsed candidate _____ _____ arrested for shoplifting in ‘97”, the commie lib ‘RATS would all become hysterical and accuse you of being a “rasis” conducting a “war against women.” The old commie double standard thing strikes again.Slick Willie? What is this, the 1990s?
MagUSNRET seems to have mixed up his Presidents as well:
Our President did drugs... and promotes a drug culture...Yes, this woman is black. SoFloFreeper notices and goes full Token outreach:
That is her reply.........I will give you my shoplifting, and raise you a rapist......YOUR CALL!
Erika is a former Miss America, running for Congress as a conservative Republican in Illinois.Blood of Tyrants goes with his Freeper-specific Democratic crime of choice:
These beautiful, conservative, women of COLOR are scare the Democrat party to death!!
The GOP establishment is not interested in promoting them. Star Parker has been out there for years advocating individual responsibility and constitutional truth, and the GOP-E has ignored HER too.
Time to stand up for these lovely ladies...and let them shine....let them talk to the younger generation and let them know that Obama and Michelle aren't the answer to their problems.
Come on folks, let's support more people like Erika and Katrina!
Bill Clinton raped Jaunita Broadderick and none of the liberals cared at all.diverteach could use this to excuse all candidates of anything!
Ya well, I charge all politicians of pickpocketing the whole country.joethedrummer does the combo of forgicing the Republican, and making up awful crimes for the Democrat.
Oh my... shoplifting before she was 21?? BURN HER!!! SHE’s a WITCH!!!!
but,
Scam a S.S. number(s), get a college “education” via the foreign student program when you’re supposedly an American citizen, Do lots of drugs, hang with known terrorists... ehhh, nothing to see folks!
Gay bar owner say's he will deny entry to his establishment to legislators who vote for anti gay legislation..hypocrite.
ReplyDeletehttp://losangeles.cbslocal.com/2014/02/25/weho-bar-to-ban-lawmakers-who-support-anti-gay-legislation/
Beautiful! I love it!
DeleteActually, one of the problems with "religious denial of service" laws are the unintended consequences that you and other holier-than-thous haven't imagined.
DeleteDon't like Jews? No service
Don't like Mormons? No service
Don't like Catholics? No service
As a vocal supporter in the past of freedoms to do or not do business with anyone you please, what could possibly be your problem with the gay bar owner?
Logically, you should be applauding his principled stance!
Oh wait, I'm equating conservatism with logic ... my mistake.
It's not what I don't get, it's what you don't get. This bar owner is using proposed right-wing legislation to demonstrate why it shouldn't be law. It's not hypocritical at all.
Deleteanon1 ...
DeleteWhat is your position, then, on refusing to bake cakes for Jews, Mormons, Catholics, Baptists, etc ?
Really, one's religious affiliation IS INDEED a choice, a cake baker need not support anyone of those.
Or is it only "gay" couples that should be excluded by law?
That is what I mean by "unintended consequences".
Where should the "religious" line be stopped, if at all?
As long as anon1 isn't personally inconvenienced, he thinks anyone should be able to discriminate against anyone.
DeleteAh, so it should only be legal for businesses to discriminate against gays? Is that only for wedding cakes, or can all businesses interrogate everyone coming into their stores before they'll serve them? Why single out gays? Why not discriminate against the handicapped, blacks or women?
DeleteI think anon1is just rage against the gay because some flaming queen customer gives him skin care tips at the cluck bucket.
DeleteNotice, if you will, how anon1 is directly refusing to address the issues I raised ... which really apply the ultimate application of "religious discrimination".
DeleteSure its easy for him to agree with laws against discrimination on racial and gender grounds, we all do.
But how do the "anti-gay" religious discrimination statutes stop when applied to other religions one does not agree with?
In short, "sincerely held religious beliefs" as a basis for discrimination in public accommodations can be stretched and applied to any person for any reason.
"World Church of the Creator" is a white supremacist "religion", so do their religious beliefs trump racial discrimination statutes?
"Nation of Islam" is a black supremacist "religion". Do they get to discriminate in public accommodation?
I saw your question..at work and making things happen unlike you welfare liberal jizz suckers. I'll get back to both of your questions later..don't get your panties in a twist..jeesh
DeleteAnd here we have anon1 assuming that anyone who disagrees with him must be on welfare, out of work and possibly gay. You can tell when someone has a weak argument when they must resort to this sort of invective.
DeleteNaw, cut anon1 a break.
DeleteI'm at work too, but have a position where other people "make things happen" for me.
Plus, he has to keep a close eye on those deep fryers ... over fried chicken parts just isn't the Cluck Bucket way.
I want to see a straight Muslim deny service to a gay Christian, or a fundyvangelist deny service to a Mormon, and then, as the saying goes, watch the goalposts fly and the Christian pouting commence. It won't happen now, because Jan Brewer has vetoed the bill, as she should have, because this was just bad law. Period.
DeleteOh, and jizz sucking, welfare, blah, blah, blah. Just thought I'd pre-empt the witty retort.
Actually, if a fundyvangelist denies service to a Mormon, the right-wing Christians will be celebrating to high heaven ... the woo-hoos on FR will be in the thousands.
DeleteAny bets on how many freepers who are vowing to boycott next years superbowl will end up watching?
ReplyDeleteI think many are like our old anon1 here ...
Deletethey are generally against discrimination, as they should be ... except when it comes to cake, of all things.
Somehow, the thought of gay people eating cake sends them into apoplectic fits of rage.
This is the hill they're decided to plant their flag on ... the hill of cake.
By next year's Superbowl, gay people will be getting married in at least 40 of the 50 states (and eating cake), and no one is even going to remember Jan Brewer's veto today.
Gay cakes for everyone! Down with Sharia law!
DeleteI detect sarcasm.
ReplyDelete