Shmitz Gay..hysterical.
Posted on 07/29/2003 6:25:52 AM PDT by Kieri
This morning I decided to let BRAVO have an earful. Here is my email:
"As a DirecTV subscriber, I am notifying you I am permanently blocking BRAVO from my menu on my DSS receiver.
Your push for homosexual-'friendly' programming demonstrates your pandering to an audience that exhibits behavior that is not only detrimental to their own health, but the health and safety of families everywhere. I refuse to risk allowing my children to see promo material on your channel, so I find it necessary to block BRAVO and will encourage others to do so. Your advertisers will no longer reach me or my family members, and I have let DirecTV know of our all too easy decision to block BRAVO.
You may consider a homosexual audience on worthy of pursuit, but families who treasure their own lifestyles think otherwise."
I encourage others to let both BRAVO and their cable/DSS companies know that you're blocking their agenda-pushing programming!
BRAVO's "Contact Us" page is here:
http://www.bravotv.com/Contact_Us/
OR you can smail mail them here:
Bravo Viewer Relations
c/o NBC Entertainment
3000 W. Alameda Ave.
Burbank, CA 90036
Man! You've really swallowed their propaganda hook, line and sinker, haven't you? I think I know which gay propaganda line you're referring to here. The claim I've repeatedly heard is always trotted out whenever the issue of gay sex / pedophilia correlation comes up, and it goes something like this - "There's no connection between homosexuality and pedophilia! Statistics show that most pedophiles are HETEROsexual, not HOMOsexual. So there! Ha! QED! Case closed!"
Well guess what, the sentence starting with "Statistics show ..." is actually technically true. But the "no connection" statement is a lie. It turns out that the stat they are basing their argument on is the statistic that only about 30-some percent of pedophiles are homosexual.
Now, there's two ways of looking at this stat. The liberals and libertarians look at it and say, "A majority of pedophiles are straight; therefore homosexuality's not an issue here; case closed". But those awful, scary, VRWC, homophobic, naziphilic, biblethumpin troglodytes like myself will spin this little statistic somewhat differently. We say, "Whoa! So you're telling me that homosexuals - who comprise roughly 2-3 percent of the population - make up 30 percent of all pedophiles? OK, so that means a homosexual male babysitter/ caregiver/ scout leader/ youth-leader is 10 to 15 times more likely to molest my son than a heterosexual male in the same position is likely to molest my daughter? And I'm supposed to smile and say, 'Hey! There's no connection between pedophilia and homosexuality'?"
Which Freeper was it who long ago - on the issue of Gay Scoutmasters - said,
"Which part of 'We don't want homosexuals going into the woods with our boys!' don't you understand?"
Pedophiles should be castrated (chemically, physically, I don't really care), but raising that "issue" in a debate on homosexuality is an irrelevant red herring.
Looks more like you're the herring who's swallowed the gay propaganda fishook
Jimminy Crickets. If the homosexuals were as powerful as some of you people think they are, the White House would be the Mauve house by now.
Whatever. Have a good time watching Big Brother or Surviror or Paradise Hotel or 25 hours of pro sports this week. Forget about the people that are attempting to advance their agendas, which just might infringe on you or your liberty, by getting political power and influencing the laws of the land.
Kudos on your (support for the) hilarious new show "Queer Eye for the Straight Guy"! My fiancee and I both love the show, and the transformation of disgusting slobs into stylish, high-confidence guys is simply remarkable. The fashion tips are damn handy whether you are gay or straight, and I myself used that tip about gelling my hair from the back rather than the front, with many compliments from my fiancee. The featured products look great, and I am much more likely to purchase them after viewing your show.
Some narrow-minded folks might decry this show, but they don't know what they're missing (often literally; I've often found that the shrillest critics are the ones who've never even bothered to sample the work criticized). Keep up the good work!
VR
Some FR posters live in towns where gays keep a low profile, so they tend to overreact when seeing openly gay people or discussing gay issues.
I consider myself über-conservative, but I have lived many years in California and Florida near the large population centers.
Gays don't bother me, since I know that most of them are too busy living their lives to even worry about "taking over" anything. The few times gay men have tried to pick me up at the gym or the beach, I have just told them I'm not interested; they always leave alone.
Btw, are you near Carmel, the most beautiful coastal town in California?
Except that sodomites don't surround our leader at the moment, thank God. Instead, we have a manly leader surrounding himself with military types who are waging an extremely successful war so far.
Now, in Clinton's day we had a different story....much like the Kaiser...and many sodomites.
Ah, yes! Freddie Mercury, was but one of many losses to the lifestyle. I sure do miss his awesome performances. It's a shame he chose to become gay and took up the Berlin homo lifestyle. There hasn't been his match for vocal power in the 90's or beyond.
You totally missed the point of my post, but that's okay.
Where in my post did I mention gay sex or speedos??
And every single episode is about helping a STRAIGHT guy clean up his act, usually for the express purpose of attracting a STRAIGHT girl. Some homosexual agenda.
If that's the case, then why only use homosexuals to teach these guys about fashion, cooking, decorating and social graces? Are there no chefs, fashion consultants or interior designers who aren't gay?
Shmitz Gay..hysterical.
Becasue there are a million other shows that do that. This shows angle happens to be that the subject is straight and the people who give the makeover are gay.
You sound no different than any other liberal when they sarcastically laugh at conservatives who complain about bias in the media. Their standard response goes something like this -
"Bias? Media bias???? What the !@#$#%& are you afraid of? So what if Dan Rather is a Democrat? I suppose you're afraid that one night you might accidentally tune your TV into Dan, and after watching him for 5 minutes you're going to immediately renounce your Republican Party membership and join the Democrat Party! HA HA HA!!! LOL!!! ROTFLMAO!!!!! Boy am I such a wit!!! Is my sarcastic humor the greatest wonderfullest thing you ever read or what? Ho ho ho!!!! I mean hey, did my overwhelmingly devastatingly superior wit just lay to rest once and for all the issue of Media Bias, or didn't it? ROFL!!!! Sometimes I'm so funny I scare myself!"
Anyway, that's exactly the way you come across.
Most people are too busy to worry about "taking over" anything. But we all know that Hollywood is run by leftists with agendas.
It could be Golden Girls II where they all complain about the high cost of prescription drugs and cry about how we need socialized medicine. Some people would laugh and some would be suckered. There would be more people who believe only the government can provide affordable health care because of the propaganda. It would probably strengthen the AARP and politicians such as Ted Kennedy and Hitlery Clinton, but that would not mean most old people were trying to take over the world.
With the recent emphasis on gay characters or gay programming, it seems that TV people have a PC agenda they are trying to push. Many could be straight, even! And I'm sure that some gay-hucksters similar to race-hucksters such as Jesse Jackson would love to see the homosexual population increase to increase their own power among the politicos. "I represent 5% of the population. in 10 years, 15% of the population will be homosexual or have tried it. You need to listen to me to help you reach these voters," they'll say to politicians.
Just because your friends are/were not thinking of takeovers, doesn't mean they all aren't. Your friends probably had no political aspirations. Most of the old people and black people and gay people I know do not have political aspirations, but that doesn't mean there aren't activists in those populaitons with agendas.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.