Skip to main content

View Diary: Their approach to party building versus ours (235 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I am speechless. You offering advice to gay folks (6+ / 0-)

    is like ....well, I do not want to type what I am thinking because it will be said out of anger, it will be true but...nontheless.

    You're a homophobe, just admit it and seek help.

    •  Rec'd to offset HR (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      vets74

      I too am (almost) speechless. One, I saw vets74 making an opinion, not offering advice; but if it were advice, so what? Two, how could you decide s/he was homophobic based on the comments that were made. Three, can only gay people comment on gay issues? Four, do we now HR people just because we disagree with them?

      "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." ~ Mencken

      by royce on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 06:14:09 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  No. I cannot speak for this 'royal we' you (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        trashablanca, Lost and Found

        mention, but

        1. How do you assume from any comment here, or anywhere that I wrote that 'only gay people can comment on gay issues?'
        1. "we" hr'd people not because 'we' disagree with them, however for his past history (which is how 'we know' his views about 'us') and the fact that he not only wrote one comment, but a series that 'we' were not the only one that took offense to.
        •  I misunderstood (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          vets74

          I thought the implication of your comment about 'taking advice from you' meant that s/he wasn't gay. I'm sorry I read that wrong.

          On the other point you made, tho, I'm not sure I  agree. I thought one (as opposed to 'we') could not HR someone because of historical comments...that it had to be something said in the specific comment being HR'd. I'll read the guidelines again.

          Your 'royal we' was uncalled for. It seems as if you are trying to insult/belittle me...why else would you add a 'royal' to my use of 'we' and put them in quotation marks? Why did you have the need to include that? In the future, tho, I'll make sure to use 'one' (is there a "royal one"?) instead of 'we' so you can find something else to jab me about.

          "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." ~ Mencken

          by royce on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 06:59:25 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  It was not meant to be insulting, I was using the (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            trashablanca

            word you used. I am suprised you spoke of 'we' when I can, of course, just respond as me.

            No offense was meant.

            •  Thanks for responding. (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              vets74

              When I used the word, I was talking about how one follows the guidelines for HR'ing a comment. I meant "we" as all of us who comment here; it was not meant as you and me specifically...and certainly not as any 'royal we' (i.e., me alone). I gave up the royal we when I gave up my crown.

              Peace.

              "In this world of sin and sorrow there is always something to be thankful for; as for me, I rejoice that I am not a Republican." ~ Mencken

              by royce on Wed Nov 04, 2009 at 08:49:41 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site