Other
See other Other Articles
Title: SanFag Fudgepacker Pride Parade celebrates 40th anniversary
Source:
Breitbart
URL Source: http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D9GJIA1G0&show_article=1
Published: Jun 27, 2010
Author: SUDHIN THANAWALA
Post Date: 2010-06-27 07:18:38 by Happy Quanzaa
Keywords: queers, fags, faggots, dykes, butches, fudgepackers, carpet munchers
Views: 151553
Comments: 167
SAN FRANCISCO (AP) - San Francisco's 40th annual gay pride weekend drew thousands to Civic Center Plaza, with even more expected Sunday for a parade, a Backstreet Boys concert and comments from U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi. Organizers kicked off the event Saturday in front of City Hall where thousands converged as vendors sold barbecue and burritos and DJs spun tunes on a large stage. Advocates for the lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender community shared booths alongside corporate sponsors. "It's part political, it's part a party," said Darryl Groom, 55, explaining the elements that brought him and his partner, Tobey Tam, 41, to San Francisco from Cape Coral, Fla. San Francisco's gay pride festivities have come a long way since the first parade in 1970, as has the LGBT movement, organizers and historians say. The first pride parade had about 150 to 200 people, said Gerard Koskovich of the GLBT Historical Society. "Barely anybody noticed," he said. "I've seen pictures of it." The following year, there wasn't even a march, he said, just a gathering in Golden Gate Park. Today, the march attracts tens of thousands of people, and a growing number of those are not in the LGBT community, Koskovich said. "That homophobia that says, 'Eek, I'm not going to hang out with these people,' has turned into, 'Boy, these people throw a great party.'" San Francisco Pride Executive Director Amy Andre said the fight for equal rights for lesbians, gays, bisexual and transgender people has also come a long way since the first pride celebration in 1970. At the time, gay sex was a crime in California. This year, a prerecorded address will be delivered by Pelosi and The Backstreet Boys will perform. Andre said this year's theme, "40 and Fabulous," is partly intended to celebrate the movement's progress. "But we're also reflecting on the fact that we still have a long way to come for equal rights," Andre added.
A member of the Mike's on Bike rides his
bike nude down Market Street...
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-40) not displayed.
.
.
.
#41. To: mininggold (#40)
That was last week, Paultard. Smoking so much rope that you lose track of time?
Oh gosh I hope I'm not going to be banned for missing the exact day you posted another one of your lies. What's with your Ron Paul OCD anyway? Even posters on other boards are starting to worry about your and White Sands' 'sanity'.
Making the world safe for United Fruit.
You were proven to be a dumbass on the subject and you still want continue to make an ass of yourself? Go back to playing WoW, paultard.
Eric needs to update his profile. I don't see anything about being a Registered Chemical Engineer on it. About Me US Navy (hon.) & FSU Graduate. Traveled to all 50 states and over 30 countries worldwide on 5 continents. Cert. Interpreter for Spanish. Also, fluent in Italian, French & Portuguese. Author - "Worldwide Multilingual Phrase Book" and "Vacation Spanish." Politics: Founder, Republican Liberty Caucus, fmr. Libertarian Party National Committeeman, Travel Aide Ron Paul, Libertarian for President 1987/88, Senior Aide to US Congressman Ron Paul 1997-2003, Co-Founder of "Libertarians for Bush" in 2004; and Co-Founder of "Draft Sarah Palin for VP" in 2008. Current - Petition Consultant for Property Rights and other free market initiatives. I wonder how well that Petition Consultant gig pays?
That's because you Paultards are stupid enough to actually think I am Dondero.
What's really stupid is you calling every one who disagrees with you a "paultard". Get a life, Eric.
You're a Paultard and you know it.
No Eric, I'm not. In fact, if it weren't for you, I wouldn't even know who he was.
Who's Eric? In fact, if it weren't for you, I wouldn't even know who he was. So you're just a plain ole 'tard.
If being a Paultard means getting you Sarahtards to repeatedly post your lack of objectivity and obsessiveness, or even basic knowledge of your candidate I'm all for being one. Your silly list says much more about you and your state of 'mind' than anything any paultard can post. Is being an israel Firster a symptom of a mental disorder?
Making the world safe for United Fruit.
No, Eric, I just don't care that much about an old Texas congressman. What is it about him that has you all hot and bothered, besides him having fired you?
As I said, go to any website and read the terms of service. ALL content is copyrighted. And frankly, posting more than a few lines of a copyrighted article violates Fair Use. But you know all of this stuff. Let's face it...neither you nor Tull have ever come any where close to overcoming any of my points in our discussions. Tull had to ban me and you had to overreact as a moderator and "suspend" me for a "violation" no more egregious than those committed by the same posters day in and day out.
#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace I'm biased, obviously, given the shit I'm subjected to daily here from the anti groupie. Badeye posted on 2010-06-10 11:34:31 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
The word "optional" appears beside the place for the link. When Nebbawhatever was here he never posted a link. He was never called out for that.
#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace I'm biased, obviously, given the shit I'm subjected to daily here from the anti groupie. Badeye posted on 2010-06-10 11:34:31 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
Shucks, it looks like missed all the fun here. I can't give up my Sunday church and lunch routine though.
Apparently you've forgotten what your own site looks like.
'Supp with this Dwarf????? Instead of asking just you and your "other" (probably Fredrica Jerx).... give the firsthand "heads up" (no pun on your part intended.....wellll maybe.........BBBWWWAAAAHHHHAAAA) BE this dwarfpoodle oddity is getting positively pathological in his stalking habits.....sheeeeshhhhh:):):)
Death to everybody who does not get outta my way. Below is positively the most hilariously BS overflowing comment from the resident obamunist spent-condom EVER:) "This is WHY I left the GOP in the mid 90's. ." Dwarf
BUT!!!!!!...never forget this........whining delivered MAIL!!! Sarah has nothing on her:)
Death to everybody who does not get outta my way. Below is positively the most hilariously BS overflowing comment from the resident obamunist spent-condom EVER:) "This is WHY I left the GOP in the mid 90's. ." Dwarf
Hey smart ass. I just gave you the rules. Just because you can be an asshole and leave it blank doesn't mean I condone that. It is for people who write their own articles. Got it?
That explanation was previously found where?
#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace I'm biased, obviously, given the shit I'm subjected to daily here from the anti groupie. Badeye posted on 2010-06-10 11:34:31 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
Didn't you listen. Let me tell you again. The titles are descriptions of articles. You can put whatever you want as long as it gets past the editor (me). You cannot alter the content of the article. It is not complicated, except for liberals. Quit whining, it is so liberal.
It doesn't matter. You know it now.
Then I suggest you change the posting screen. How hard can that be?
Just for the record. I wasn't calling you an asshole. I just mean in general people who post articles should put the link.
Got it. So far: Anyone posting shit you agree with can violate copyright laws but I can't. Any other serendipitous rules you'd care to share? Or do you need to consult with Tull?
#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace I'm biased, obviously, given the shit I'm subjected to daily here from the anti groupie. Badeye posted on 2010-06-10 11:34:31 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
For me. Impossible. I'm not a programmer. Look no one is going to get banned for not putting the link. Unless it is a deliberate pattern. It is just the honor system.
First off. Copyright laws is limited to a 10 mile jurisdiction. Secondly there is no violation of any copyright law for describing an article in your own words. If I think it is fair it will stay. If it offends me I may remove it. If it is an article that offends me with the original title. I will probably let it stay. There are all kinds of articles people post here that I believe are pure bullshit. But I let 99 percent of them stay. You like to argue a lot.
Never been a problem for me. I always put in the link.
You like to single me out a lot. Everyone here is in an argument at any given time. And what you've stated is 100% incorrect. Copyright reach extends within the jurisdiction of the US and is even enforceable beyond water's edge under some treaties. There's a whole body of common law dedicated to it.
#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace I'm biased, obviously, given the shit I'm subjected to daily here from the anti groupie. Badeye posted on 2010-06-10 11:34:31 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
Yeah, and the constitution doesn't protect free speech for corporations.
Yeah I do. It is because you like to argue a lot about the rules.
Correct. Only people have rights. Read Madison. He specifically states that corporations are dangers to liberty. He makes the case that they exist as an entity NOT as a person. There was no such thing as corporate "rights" until the late 19th century when they started buying politicians. Do you know what Panama came into existence?
#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace I'm biased, obviously, given the shit I'm subjected to daily here from the anti groupie. Badeye posted on 2010-06-10 11:34:31 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
Can you link me to the rules?
#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace I'm biased, obviously, given the shit I'm subjected to daily here from the anti groupie. Badeye posted on 2010-06-10 11:34:31 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
I'll take your word for that. It is not something I go around checking. Only when someone brings it up.
No. There are no written rules. I make judgements based on what I think is right. It would be impossible to write a set of rules and follow them consistently all the time. They would be riddled with mistakes and exceptions. Just remember I am a conservative and I consider liberals the ones with targets on their heads.
Myth: The protections of the Free Speech Clause properly apply only to individuals, not corporations. Justice Scalia dispatched with this argument nicely in his concurring opinion by pointing out that the First Amendment has long been extended beyond isolated individuals to groups and associations whose members gather for a wide variety of purposes ranging from political to commercial. The Democratic party, the Sierra Club, and the New York Times aren’t individuals, but their speech nonetheless falls under the umbrella of First Amendment protection. But the formalistic obsession with whether a corporation should have the legal status of a “person” with a “right” to free speech quite misses the substantive issues at stake, which concern how the principle of free expression should be applied to the political speech of certain types of social groups. In particular, is there something uniquely harmful and/or unworthy of protection about political messages that come from corporations and unions, as opposed to, say, rich individuals, persuasive writers, or charismatic demagogues? Which brings us to our next point: Myth: A deluge of corporate and union speech will corrupt the democratic process. The very idea that political speech in an open democracy can be “corrupting” rests on fundamentally illiberal assumptions about individuals’ capacity for reasoned deliberation and self-government. The First Amendment was designed to allow all speakers to put their messages out into the public debate, be they rich or poor, vicious or virtuous. The underlying principle is that over the long run, a society of free individuals is best equipped to evaluate the merits of political arguments for themselves, and that a distrustful government cannot ban speech out of the worry that its citizens will be unduly swayed by it. Rich individuals and talented polemicists have always been permitted to put out quantities and qualities of speech that may exert a disproportionate influence on society, but political opponents and voters have always been trusted to evaluate these speakers’ arguments for themselves, respond with counter-arguments, and ultimately make up their own minds about the truth of any matter of controversy. Especially with the explosion of diverse viewpoints and avenues of expression that have come from the Internet media revolution, it simply defies common sense to think that any corporation or union could ever hope to so overwhelm the political debate as to prevent dissenting voices from being heard and reasonably contemplated by the electorate. Of course, this freewheeling political dialogue may be messy, imperfect, and prone to abuses, but the First Amendment makes it constitutionally preferable to censorship targeted at disfavored groups. http://www.nationalreview.com/bench-memos/49322/defending-i-citizens-united-i/anthony-dick
The supreme court just bitch slapped that nonsense. Only people can talk so they are the only ones who could possible have free speech. People are free to contract as they see fit. They are allowed to peacefully assemble. Just because they form a corporation doesn't mean they lose any rights. Do they also lose right to trial by jury? What about the fourth amendment? And on and on and on.
Chuckles...for an "originalist", Scalia doesn't know his Madison. He - and you - should start with #10 and the danger of factions claiming the same rights as individuals.
#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace I'm biased, obviously, given the shit I'm subjected to daily here from the anti groupie. Badeye posted on 2010-06-10 11:34:31 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
Nope. The SCOTUS is as much a statist body as the other two branches. There is nothing that can be found contemporary to the creation of the USCON and the first amendment that put the "commerical" under the penumbra of the Speech clause.
#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace I'm biased, obviously, given the shit I'm subjected to daily here from the anti groupie. Badeye posted on 2010-06-10 11:34:31 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
You're a broken record war. Also I have a suggestion for Neil. Neil if you could some day make two new functions for your pinguinite software. One function would be called blind. The host could blind users from seeing comments from other users. Another would be bind. It would prevent certain posters from interacting with each other. Just an idea I've had for a while.
When the right is claimed as a body created in law rather than an individual endowed with natural rights, the body, created by law and thus can be destroyed by law, has no rights other than those endowed by its creator, i.e., the legislature.
#67. To: war (#48) Keep hiding behind the bozo, bozo. (laughing) You've always been a world class pussy. Badeye posted on 2010-01-14 16:12:48 ET Reply Trace I'm biased, obviously, given the shit I'm subjected to daily here from the anti groupie. Badeye posted on 2010-06-10 11:34:31 ET Reply Trace Private Reply
Comments (81 - 167) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestThis week he said he was a Registered Chemical Engineer,
#42. To: no gnu taxes (#41)
(Edited)
That was last week, Paultard. Smoking so much rope that you lose track of time?
#43. To: mininggold (#42)
Oh gosh I hope I'm not going to be banned for missing the exact day you posted another one of your lies.
#44. To: mininggold (#42)
(Edited)
#45. To: Skip Intro (#44)
Eric needs to update his profile. I don't see anything about being a Registered Chemical Engineer on it.
#46. To: no gnu taxes (#45)
That's because you Paultards are stupid
#47. To: Skip Intro (#46)
#48. To: no gnu taxes (#47)
You're a Paultard and you know it.
#49. To: Skip Intro (#48)
No Eric, I'm not.
#50. To: no gnu taxes (#47)
You're a Paultard and you know it.
#51. To: no gnu taxes (#49)
So you're just a plain ole 'tard.
#52. To: A K A Stone (#13)
(Edited)
The titles here are descriptions of the articles.
#53. To: A K A Stone (#14)
(Edited)
The link isn't optional.
#54. To: Skip Intro (#51)
#55. To: A K A Stone (#14)
The link isn't optional.
#56. To: dwarf, Happy Quanzaa, Badeye (#1)
Did anyone check this article for accuracy...given the poster's defiant history of editing articles?
#57. To: A K A Stone (#29)
You're jealous of Sarah. Is she everything you wish you were but aren't. Pretty, SMART, ambitious, decent,caring.
#58. To: Skip Intro (#55)
#59. To: A K A Stone (#58)
#60. To: war (#52)
Let's face it...neither you nor Tull have ever come any where close to overcoming any of my points in our discussions. Tull had to ban me and you had to overreact as a moderator and "suspend" me for a "violation" no more egregious than those committed by the same posters day in and day out.
#61. To: war (#59)
#62. To: A K A Stone (#58)
Hey smart ass. I just gave you the rules. Just because you can be an asshole and leave it blank doesn't mean I condone that.
#63. To: Skip Intro (#55)
#64. To: A K A Stone (#61)
(Edited)
#65. To: Skip Intro (#62)
Then I suggest you change the posting screen. How hard can that be?
#66. To: war (#64)
Anyone posting shit you agree with can violate copyright laws but I can't.
#67. To: A K A Stone (#65)
Look no one is going to get banned for not putting the link.
#68. To: A K A Stone (#66)
(Edited)
You like to argue a lot.
#69. To: war (#68)
#70. To: war (#68)
You like to single me out a lot.
#71. To: A K A Stone (#69)
(Edited)
#72. To: A K A Stone (#70)
#73. To: Skip Intro (#67)
Never been a problem for me. I always put in the link.
#74. To: war (#72)
Can you link me to the rules?
#75. To: war (#71)
#76. To: war (#71)
#77. To: no gnu taxes (#75)
#78. To: A K A Stone (#76)
(Edited)
The supreme court just bitch slapped that nonsense.
#79. To: war, pinguinite (#78)
#80. To: A K A Stone (#76)
(Edited)
Just because they form a corporation doesn't mean they lose any rights.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]