... -- THE VENT BOARD

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, [10] ]

Subject: ...

Author:
Mitchell

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: Tuesday, March 11 2003, 18:23:16 GMT ( - 8 )

I never read the shack anymore, but since the recent attacks I�ve started skimming it again. I�m glad to see things there hasn�t changed. Jim is still walking around with that conservative chip on his shoulder daring someone to knock it off so he can lay the smack-down on them.

Before I get into my rant I�d just like to ask the conservatives this. What has this administration done for these gay kids you keep setting straight? Okay, you�ve cashed your $300 tax rebate and had religion crammed down your troat, now your as happy as hogs in shit. What about the kids? The kids that have decided they are NOT going to live their lives as married straight men who just happen to find men attractive? The kids who want to fall in love with someone and marry that person? The kids want to live their life as themselves at work? Or maybe the ones who can�t afford college and their only option is to serve their country in the military to get the money? What have they done? NOT A GOD DAMN THING!!!! I take that back, they have mounted an attack on the their way of life!

I find it amazing how any gay person can align themselves with a group that wishes you were dead. A group the claims gay people want �special rights.� Is it a special right to be able to walk down the street and hold your boyfriends hand without having your fucking head bashed in? Is it a special right to be able to have a picture of your boy friend on your desk at work without be fired? Is it a special right to be able to marry the person you love and have decided to spend your life with? Is it a special right to not be able to keep the house you�ve lived in and helped pay for because your partner�s family is homophobic? I could probably fill the page with these questions but there is no need. The answer is NO! These are BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS. And you think that republicans, most of whom think AIDS was sent by God to rid the world of homosexuals, are going to do a God damn thing to give these kids those rights? You�ve lost your fucking minds!!!!

I popped over to the link that Jim provided as proof that Ed attacks people. I didn�t read the post, I didn�t need to. I know how passionate Ed is and how vigorously he defends his opinions. You know what I did notice about that post? The names in the reply, �The Good Ole Boys Drama Club.� Not one of the kids chimed in on it. Do you know why? You guys may not realize it, but you are very intimidating to the kids. Most of the kids on the shack at least have self-esteem problems. Some of them have bonafide physiological problems and need professional help, not some placebo-want-to-be therapist. Just like Ed said, most of those kids are liberal, being insecure anyhow, having an adult tell them they are wrong or shouldn�t express their opinions because a bunch of old drama queens don�t agree with them is very intimidating. It does NOTHING to help them.

I don�t know why you wouldn�t want them to express concerns over things the government are doing if it�s troubling them. I guess you only want to here from them when they are talking about boy friends, going to the mall, having fights with mom and dad, typical gay kid stuff. Could that be you didn�t get to �grow-up gay� and that�s the only thing your interested in?

We�ll I�ve got news for you, these kids are the ones who are going to be paying for all the God damn tax cuts and preemptive wars for the rest of their lives! They are the ones that are going to be fighting in the wars they don�t believe in. Let them scream, cry, stop their feet, and throw a tantrum! That is exactly what our forefathers wanted! They came from a place where if you spoke out against the government it was treason. They wanted us to question the government if we didn�t agree with them, and if the government didn�t listen, they wanted us to take to the streets and let the government know what we thought! Not roll over like pansies because it wasn�t the popular idea!

Leave the fucking kids alone!

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> Subject: Go Mitchey GO!!! Hooray Mitchey's our boy! * puts 500 on Mitchey for a knockout*
Author: Kris [ Edit \| View ]	Date Posted: Tuesday, March 11 2003, 18:45:49 GMT ( - 8 ) Hell I have been accused of a lot of things in the last year from rascism to homophobia but I HAVE NEVER told kids to shut up and live life contrary to their desires. Some should drown JimC .. better late than never.. [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Fights???? Where???? Geronimoooooooo!!!!!!!!! I haven't been at the Shack in months and now I remember why.

Author:
Alie
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, March 12 2003, 0:17:06 GMT ( - 8 )

I had enough of having to avoid other topics than boy bands (which I don't even know) and clothes (about which I don't care), and the fun of being called un-American, unpatriotic, and liberal, had worn off pretty much (in particular as the guy calling me all this didn't even realize how funny he was.)

IMHO, the censor-in-chief there actually and honestly thinks he's not censoring and judging because he's somewhat more softspoken than others who are more outspoken and straightforward. I think he really doesn't see that he is one of the worst kind of censor that can be because he censors form in order to target the content. When he's caught censoring he can (and does) always maintain that he was only critizing the style and not the message. It sure would be more honest to simply say "You can express your opinion in hexameters or as sonett and sing it to Mozart tunes but you still cannot do it here".

Maybe we all should head over to the Shack and participate again? Or better not. I think I alone could upset the whole applecart in two lines. I did a lot of reading these last two weeks, and the result of it is that I think the Bush 43 administration is in the same league as Franco, Salazar, Papadopoulos, and even Mussolini. Of course they are still beginners, but very talented beginners. Given enough time and considering what they already accomplished whithin 2 years they certainly will develop nicely. I guess if I told this at the Shack, some people will not be able to censor me because they had a heart attack before the could hit the reply button.

Why does JimC keep a copy of the Shack archives? I hope it's not to refer to posts which he thinks to be not enough pc.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: LMAO "happy as hogs in shit"!! We don't have that in the uk, but seriously...

Author:
James
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, March 12 2003, 2:49:41 GMT ( - 8 )

I never realised the Shack has this whole history of stuff - I only found it sorta October last year, and everything has been like love and peace, so this whole thing has been a bit of a shock! I never realied Jimc has this sorta unsavoury past! lol
Aaannyway, I'm glad I found this board! Now I can winge, winge, winge...you'll definitely be seeing me around! lol

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Well GEEZ LOUISE!!! QUACK - Alie he hasn't changed and you have him pegged! Mitchell you should read the replies to my post that Jim left a link to for "his proof that I attack people" (roflmao)

Author:
<:) duck/ed still pink
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: Wednesday, March 12 2003, 11:57:21 GMT ( - 8 )

The url...

GO HERE TO VIEW JIM'S PROOF OF THE ATTACKING DUCK - quack!!

he left and the post in which he states that I attacked both Trevor and him is the one I made on Veterans day. I woke up still groggy and there was Bush addressing Veterans - Admittedly it got me steamed. Nevertheless I attacked NO ONE FROM THE SHACK, ACTUALLY NO ONE OTHER THEN BUSH AND I THINK I HAD A COUPLE OF COMMENTS FOR THE VICE PRESIDENT ALSO -

Perhaps I am more dazzed and confused then I thought - (which would be difficult cause I'm so totally there most of the time) because I'm still scratching my head on why Jim thinks the historic thread that he left a url too will explain things. To Jixi in a reply he made at the shack he leaves this reply in referring to Trevor: "he should never have been attacked angrily and irrationally because his views differed from someone else. But he was attacked (and so was I)".

If anyone here has the time please do me a favor and read the post then READ TREVOR'S and JIM'S RESPONSE TO MY POST - then if you think that I attacked Trevor angrily and irrationally because of his views - or attacked Jim angrily and irrationally because of his views as Jim claims please respond and let me know - I'm absolutely serious because if my rhetoric was an attack on their views and not a response to their blatant attack on me personally, in which I attempted to be reasonable though admittedly sarcastic I need to know cause I can 't see it!. To me the post that Jim left to explain some things just re-enforces everything I said in my last post at the shack, rather then post replies which simply stated their disagreement with the post or even that what I had to say in the post was bullshit with or without evidence to support that, they both teamed up to attack the poster for expressing an opinion and then made me out to be the divisive one.

The post drew replies but the only ones (who would leave their name) that I think could be considered "divisive" were from Jim C. and Trevor. They immediately and vehemently attacked me over and over again with all kinds of accusations. They made the post personal not I, because
they disagreed with my sentiments about Bush. Neither one ever got around to the content of my post or picking out a section of it to state as inaccurate or that it was wrong - they simply slung dirt at the poster and made it a point how divisive I was being and how I was destroying the
board etc etc etc- As they attacked I attempted to refrain from engaging in the same behavior that they did, but admittedly did get sarcastic in some of my replies to their rhetoric and rhetoric it was that Jim used as he brought up every subject under the sun and a few not even in our
galaxy,

He misquoted not exactly what he did was he used a quote totally out of context which was an apology that I made when Comsie withdrew from the shack and took the name with him - Of course he omited the fact that it was Alie, Wolfie and myself that kept the place alive after he withdrew - until with much effort we build it back to a place that Comsie felt he could once again associate his name with even though he stated at the time "he never would come back or have anything to do with it again" (I understand why at the time he was so furious as the personal arguments and attacks that were going on were very painful to him as he watched friend attack friend and this is against everything that he stands for and has written about). We restored it to a place that was once again a friendly active family of individuals who could disagree yet not 'fight' each other and Comsie returned
and admitted that he was proud of the community and its behavior at the time - and Jim had the balls to use some out of context quotes from me where I apologized to Comsie for my involvement in the uproar that was going on even though in reality what my efforts were was an attempt to
put a stop to the bickering that had been brought to the shack from another board, and Comsie understood that completely.

I made a post about the service record of the President and my opinion of him because of his service record Jim C and Trevor both went on and on about me about this and that and everything except the posts content and then he uses this as an example of how I have attacked people on the board.

For Jim to use that as an historic example of my attacks on other Shackers I find incredulous - Sure I got a bit defensive after attacked but nowhere near the name calling that Trevor unleashed.

All I can say is THANK YOU Jim you have by your diligent saving of shack posts and you selfless (quack haha) re-posting of it, gone to extroardinary lenghts to enforce everything that I said in my last post at the shack about Trevor's and your behavior!!

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]