![]() |
Larry King Live tonight! (1/17/06)
Gays and religious conservatives will go head to (sparkly, perfectly accessorized) head debating the issues. All thanks to that damned mountain winning a few golden globes.
A friend of mine told me that he would only watch if the two guests were Mario Cantone and Pat Robertson. The old man and the queen. Personally, I want to watch if there are outspoken, in your face 100% red blooded FAGGOTS who will give the religious reich...er...right exactly what they have coming to them. I'm sure we'll end up with a few ministers squabbling with a lesbian in a power suit from the HRC, but a boy can dream, can't he? Set your TiVo, it's gonna be a good one! |
no word on who the guests are?
|
What about gay conservatives...why are they never thrown into the mix...
why always one extreme against the next?!?! I guess it makes for good TV...who knows. |
Rachel Madows would be good. She's a lesbian progressive talk show host and could likely give those jackasses a real piece of her mind!
|
Quote:
I suspect that this show will be dominated by the fundamentalist whackos and that the gays will have as little airtime as possible. The fundies will bring up Leviticus and how disgusting same-sex anything is, and the gays will crow about their rights and will promptly be ignored. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
In all seriousness, the Log Cabin Republicans and their ilk are ridiculous. They're unwanted by the very party that they support, yet they continue to lend their support. They have done next to nothing in terms of changing the party from within and they hold no power of any kind. A gay Republican is an oxymoron. A gay conservative who doesn't adopt the Republican moniker is essentially the same thing; they support the policies and politicians who want nothing to do with them and consider them second-class citizens. They are, respectfully, idiots. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
This Larry King show reminds me of the 360 show where Anderson had Falwell on and accidentally outed himself. CNN promptly edited the transcript. :laugh: |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I think it is best for gays to refuse debating religious conservatives. It's impossible to have a real debate: the religious wingnuts have entrenched beliefs that are based on hocus-pocus. I'd rather they just get as ignored as possible.
Ah, here's the snippet from CNN.com >>The debate over gay love and marriage heats up with "Brokeback Mountain's" big night. Gays face off with religious conservatives.<< See, this is totally ridiculous. First of all, there is nothing to debate about "love". How insulting. And it's a bit of a stretch to think that BB Mountain is restirring the debate about gay marriage. I'm dying to know which self-absorbed gay "leader" will come on and play this game. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I think what would really be interesting is to have it be one of the typical raving nutsack religious fanatics debating someone like Kristin Chenoweth.
As others have said, there is no controversy over Brokeback. The only conflict has been two theatres dropping it. The only people hooting and hollering about it are reporters who evidently have nothing else to hoot and holler about. |
Maybe Fred Phelps will show up. Now that'd be a riot..:laugh:
|
Of course NO one and I mean NO ONE would be allowed to overshadow The King. he might be the only person with a bigger ego than John Holmes dick...:lol:
|
I turned on the telly to see who was on King and as I was typing channel 202 into my remote, I said to myself "Just watch, that bitch Janet Parshall will be staring back at me," but it was at a commercial break. As soon as they came back, whose fugly mug do I see? Janet ****ing Parshall.
|
Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:36 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
© 1995-2003 Martin and Lisa Adelson, All Rights Reserved