newsobserver.com projects - gays and lesbians - Comments

Maybe

James_Protzman — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 07:47:40 -0400

I'm trying to find out more about this, and eventually will. But in the meantime, I don't mind being a chump. It gives me ye olde moral high ground, from which it is always easier to strike.

Re: Wasn't aware of all that

Gosh — Wed, 03 Jun 2009 00:56:38 -0400

Paul, we agree on little and mainly butt heads on similarities, like how you're wrong all the time and I'm always right.

Yet, I get what you're doing for Chad here, and appreciate your dedication to your misguided beliefs, proven wrong time and again, even by the democratic elections you hold so dear, yet lose so, so, SO badly.

That said and quite selfishly, I agree Fetzer needs nowhere near my opposition party. I like a challenge.

I can't keep Dems honest by myself, and Fetzer can't even be honest with himself, at least any more than you.

Re: Wasn't aware of all that

PaulTerrell — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 23:27:27 -0400

Wait a second. I am agreeing now with Gosh. Is the world upside down?

Politicaljunkee I could say to you what people have said to me about you. But you might get mad if i say it, LOL.

Re: Wasn't aware of all that

Gosh — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 21:44:25 -0400

Goodness. What did the letter say exactly? Was there a voice over imitating Fetzer claiming "There is no God?" making it harder for him to lead the NCGOP which claimed suing over something as frivolous as that is an abuse of the court system and pure politics?

There's nice, then there's chump, James.

Do good. Be nice. Hold hypocritical SOB's accountable for their BS.

Wasn't aware of all that

James_Protzman — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:37:27 -0400

The coverage has been all "gay this" and "gay that." If, as you say, the story is more ominous ... and more libelous ... well, that's a horse of a different color.

Sorry to be making light of something that seems, from your comment, rather serious. My apologies to other readers, and to Mr. Fetzer.

Suit yourself

PoliticalJunkie — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 18:10:10 -0400

I've seen the letter, it accuses Fetzer of much much more than being "gay".

If Paul Terrell or James would sign a contract forgoing their legal right to sue me and provide me with their home address, I would gladly send a similarly libelous anonymous letter to all of their neighbors (I doubt I could get a Raleigh area radio host to read it on the air but you might experience something similar if it appeared in the mailbox of enough neighbors).

I would be interested to see how many of your neighbors let their children within 500 feet of you after reading lies similar to the ones this work of fiction contained about Fetzer.

Re: Fetzer files libel suit against Wright

greenswamp — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 17:32:19 -0400

I agree that whether or not Fetzer is gay is completely irrelevant in this. What seems to be at play here is the demise of the old Lee Atwater brand of politics where rumors are suggested just enough to turn voters. These days, such tactics are going to be challenged. These radio hosts are not called into question enough for their content and political strategies. Instead of a Fairness Doctrine, we need a Truth Doctine which would fine someone in the media for misrepresenting facts.

Re: Hilarious!

PaulTerrell — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 17:09:47 -0400

I agree with James on this. If you are not secure in whatever you say you are. Then it is not someone else calling you a name that you need to be worried about.

James and I might take digs at each other, but at the end of the day we have got to earn the money to pay our bills and taxes. Someone calling me a name is not very high on my list of concerns.

Hilarious!

James_Protzman — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 16:22:57 -0400

Someone called me gay yesterday. I considered it a compliment. There are no doubt dozens of good reasons to shun and avoid Mr. Fetzer. His alleged gayness, however, is not one of them. To my knowledge.

Re: Fetzer files libel suit against Wright

captsfufp — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 15:01:37 -0400

If I were the opposing party, I would examine Rule 11 sanctions for this frivolous lawsuit. Or do they really want to open discovery to allow the defense of truth to be examined?

Re: Fetzer files libel suit against Wright

jlabus — Tue, 02 Jun 2009 13:45:07 -0400

In 2009, filing such a lawsuit may actually be more telling about what a filer thinks of gay people.

Re: Bishops: Bullying bill sets precedent

Prototype — Tue, 05 May 2009 09:22:05 -0400

When I was coming up it was mostly the fat guys who got bullied. And those who wore glasses. And those who did not belong to the country club (I came up before private schools.) And those guys who made good grades got bullied. And those who cried a lot got bullied. And then that guy who wore "pegged" pants got bullied right much. In my day there were quite a few reasons to get bullied. None of the reasons were good but that did not stop the bullying. But then again we did not have a law against it. I'm sure that would have stopped it. LOL

Re: Bishops: Bullying bill sets precedent

domewatcher — Tue, 05 May 2009 09:00:14 -0400

I'm not real sure the North Carolina legislature will be able to stop bullying, with or without a law. The bullies have been bullying since Adam ate the apple. And probably even before. I may be one of the few but I like who I like......regardless of who the General Assembly tells me to like.

When the General Assembly is able to change human nature, then, my friends, we are on to something.

Bishops are shameful

Real_Americans_Think — Mon, 04 May 2009 22:19:14 -0400

If Bishops want to inject their religious-based bigotry into public policy, then they need to be prepared to be censured for their bigoted views. Their homophobic anti-gay agenda is simply despicable. What kind of Bishop thinks it is okay to beat gays to death just because they are gay? The santimony and hypocrisy is outrageous. This is just more proof that there is too much religion foisted upon the rest of us by self-proclaimed Christians who use the Bible to justify their bigotry.

Re: Bishops: Bullying bill sets precedent

PaulTerrell — Mon, 04 May 2009 20:52:44 -0400

These are two parts from this bill:

Nothing in this act shall be construed to create any classification, protected class, suspect category, or preference beyond those existing in present statute or case law."

Bullying or harassing behavior includes, but is not limited to, acts reasonably perceived as being motivated by any actual or perceived differentiating characteristic, such as race, color, religion, ancestry, national origin, gender, socioeconomic status, academic status, gender identity, physical appearance, sexual orientation, or mental, physical, developmental, or sensory disability, or by association with a person who has or is perceived to have one or more of these characteristics.

If a student is harassed because they support Miss Prejean's position on marriage, would they be covered by this bill? The first bill quote above has me really interested in the lawyer speak of this bill. I would sure love to use a bill like this on the college campus known as UNC-Chapell Hill. Intolerance of any kind like the people attacking Miss Prejean and former rep. Tancredo are just as bad and need to be recognized as that by people on the left who have left posts here.
There is after all only ONE unprotected class left in this country. can anyone here name it? We ALL should have zero tolerance for any kind of bullying. Yet someone here blamed a family group using it as a political football. I do recall the other side using it as a political football as well when it failed last time.

How about we take politics out of the equation on both sides and just do what is right.