If they OD and kill themselves, there won't be a drug problem.

We could solve this whole drug abuse issue in 72 hours and have plenty of
materials for biofuel or fertilizer.

Let's get it done.

On 9/16/24 01:29, Progress wrote:
> If they OD and kill themselves, there won't be a drug problem.
>
> We could solve this whole drug abuse issue in 72 hours and have plenty of
> materials for biofuel or fertilizer.
>
> Let's get it done.

That is about the dumbest solution to a real problem that
I have read. It goes right along with the Filipino dictator who
had dealers shot on arrest and mere users jailed.
The assumption on your part is that the drugs of choice
are deadly. Most are not. The purvyers of illegal drugs have
made them mode deadly by dilution with Fentanyl. If pharmeceutical
companies were to supply the drugs they would provide measured
doses which is how before the Harrison Narcotic Act of 1917
people addicted dure to illness or war wounds were treated.
Most of these folks worked for a living at a trade or profession.
the HNA/1917 created the class of junkies.

bliss

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

Bobbie Sellers <blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>On 9/16/24 01:29, Progress wrote:
>
>> If they OD and kill themselves, there won't be a drug problem.
>>
>> We could solve this whole drug abuse issue in 72 hours and have plenty of
>> materials for biofuel or fertilizer.
>>
>> Let's get it done.
>
> That is about the dumbest solution to a real problem that
>I have read. It goes right along with the Filipino dictator who
>had dealers shot on arrest and mere users jailed.
> The assumption on your part is that the drugs of choice
>are deadly. Most are not. The purvyers of illegal drugs have
>made them mode deadly by dilution with Fentanyl. If pharmeceutical
>companies were to supply the drugs they would provide measured
>doses which is how before the Harrison Narcotic Act of 1917
>people addicted dure to illness or war wounds were treated.
>Most of these folks worked for a living at a trade or profession.
>the HNA/1917 created the class of junkies.

The drugs I use aren't fatal in the doses I use them. Maybe
"Progress" wants me to take twice as much (which I have) DXM or more,
but I like living.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Joel wrote:
> Bobbie Sellers <blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com> wrote:
>> On 9/16/24 01:29, Progress wrote:
>>
>>> If they OD and kill themselves, there won't be a drug problem.
>>>
>>> We could solve this whole drug abuse issue in 72 hours and have plenty of
>>> materials for biofuel or fertilizer.
>>>
>>> Let's get it done.
>>
>> That is about the dumbest solution to a real problem that
>> I have read. It goes right along with the Filipino dictator who
>> had dealers shot on arrest and mere users jailed.
>> The assumption on your part is that the drugs of choice
>> are deadly. Most are not. The purvyers of illegal drugs have
>> made them mode deadly by dilution with Fentanyl. If pharmeceutical
>> companies were to supply the drugs they would provide measured
>> doses which is how before the Harrison Narcotic Act of 1917
>> people addicted dure to illness or war wounds were treated.
>> Most of these folks worked for a living at a trade or profession.
>> the HNA/1917 created the class of junkies.
>
>
> The drugs I use aren't fatal in the doses I use them. Maybe
> "Progress" wants me to take twice as much (which I have) DXM or more,
> but I like living.
>
i have more than anything you have ,
including good looks , charm and money

"Bobbie Sellers" <blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message
news:vc9i8e$2ti7j$1@dont-email.me...
> On 9/16/24 01:29, Progress wrote:
>> If they OD and kill themselves, there won't be a drug problem.
>>
>> We could solve this whole drug abuse issue in 72 hours and have plenty of
>> materials for biofuel or fertilizer.
>>
>> Let's get it done.
>
> That is about the dumbest solution to a real problem that
> I have read. It goes right along with the Filipino dictator who
> had dealers shot on arrest and mere users jailed.
> The assumption on your part is that the drugs of choice
> are deadly. Most are not. The purvyers of illegal drugs have
> made them mode deadly by dilution with Fentanyl. If pharmeceutical
> companies were to supply the drugs they would provide measured
> doses which is how before the Harrison Narcotic Act of 1917
> people addicted dure to illness or war wounds were treated.
> Most of these folks worked for a living at a trade or profession.
> the HNA/1917 created the class of junkies.

Well since the drugs serve absolutely NO benefit.. there is absolutely no
reason to contribute to getting people hooked on them.
Na, I see absolutely no reason why such additive drugs should be either
legalized or normalized.

>
>If they OD and kill themselves, there won't be a drug problem.

Free drugs? Sounds like the Trump White House!

White House clinic handed out medications with little oversight during
past administrations, new investigation shows
By Brenda Goodman, CNN
Updated 4:58 PM EST, Wed January 24, 2024

During previous presidential administrations, the White House Medical
Unit
operated a pharmacy where staff members freely distributed prescription
and non-prescription drugs � including controlled substances � without
adequate record-keeping and sometimes to people who weren�t legally
eligible to get them, according to a report released this month.

The report � from the independent Office of the Inspector General of the
US Department of Defense, which oversees the Military Health System and
thus the White House Medical Unit � says the clinic also misused taxpayer
funds by dispensing brand-name drugs instead of less expensive generics
and providing free medical care to staff who weren�t allowed to get it.

The Office of the Inspector General said in a news release that the
problems it uncovered in the White House clinic were �severe and
systemic.�

The report is based on reviews of records from the White House Medical
Unit, including prescriptions, from between 2017 and 2019. In addition,
investigators interviewed more than 120 officials, including hospital
administrators, military medical providers and pharmacists. The office
also reviewed the transcripts of 70 previous interviews with former
members of the White House Military Office who served there between 2009
and 2018.

Related article With menthol cigarette ban still uncertain, American Lung
Association calls for White House to act �swiftly� to save lives

The interviews indicated that medication was often dispensed without any
written records. Before �we would get ready for a big overseas trip,�
staffers were directed to make �prepacks� that consisted of plastic
sandwich bags containing the sleeping drug Ambien as well as the
stimulant
Provigil, which is meant to help people stay awake. Both are categorized
as controlled substances, meaning they require special handling and
record-keeping by pharmacies because they carry a risk for dependence and
abuse.

These prepacks would often be handed out to senior staff or their
assistants without any record of who was ultimately getting them, the
testimony said.

The directive to give medication, �including all controlled substances,�
to patients� representatives �without the need to present the patient�s
ID
card� was also found by investigators on a handwritten note dated March
21, 2014.

In one case, according to the excerpted testimony, a doctor in the
medical
unit asked a staffer if they could �hook up� someone with some Provigil
�as a parting gift for leaving the White House.� Sloppy records and no
oversight, among other problems

The report, published January 8, found that the �White House Medical
Unit�s controlled substance records did not accurately reflect the unit�s
procurement, inventory, or disposal of controlled substances.�

The report says the practices it documents did not comply with guidance
from the government or the Department of Defense. Rather, it says, the
problems occurred because officials in the medical unit �did not consider
their operations to be a pharmacy,� despite the fact that the medications
were kept and dispensed behind a door marked �pharmacy� and that
medications were handed out in pill bottles that bore the logo of the
White House Medical Unit.

However, there was no pharmacist on staff at the medical unit, although
officials said controlled substance audits are performed quarterly,
according to the report. Staff members testified that they submitted a
request to get a pharmacy technician assigned to the White House, but it
still had not been filled during the period of the investigation.

The unit�s lax prescribing practices were allowed to go unchecked because
the office lacked oversight, according to the report. None of the senior
Military Health System leaders interviewed for the report could identify
which division was responsible for the medical office. Complaints lead to
a second inquiry

The investigation was launched after the Defense Department received
complaints that a senior military medical officer assigned to the unit
had
�engaged in improper medical practice,� the report says.

In May 2018, the Office of the Inspector General began a separate inquiry
into complaints about Dr. Ronny Jackson, who had previously served as
physician to the president and head of the White House Medical Unit.
TOPSHOT - US Secretary of Defence Lloyd Austin looks on during a joint
press conference with Israel's defence minister, in Tel Aviv on December
18, 2023. (Photo by Alberto PIZZOLI / AFP) (Photo by ALBERTO PIZZOLI/AFP
via Getty Images)

Related article Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin asked to testify before
lawmakers about his failure to notify leaders of his hospitalization

Several of the complaints alleged improper medical and pharmaceutical
practices as well as problems with Jackson�s behavior. They also called
into question the eligibility of some patients to be seen at the
executive
medical facilities in the National Capital Region.

Jackson, who is not named in the new report, was director of the White
House Medical Unit from 2010 through 2014 and served as physician to the
president for both Barack Obama and Donald Trump.

He stepped back from his role as physician to the president in March
2018,
after Trump nominated him to helm the Department of Veterans Affairs. But
he withdrew from consideration for that role after the Senate Committee
on
Veterans� Affairs interviewed 23 current and former colleges of Jackson�s
who alleged that he led a hostile work environment and allowed
overprescribing of medications.

He was named chief medical adviser to the president in February 2019.

Asked whether he participated in the activities described in the report
or
was aware of them, a spokesperson for Jackson � who is now serving in
Congress as a representative from Texas � noted in a statement that �Dr.
Jackson was not the Director of the White House Medical Unit during the
timeframe mentioned in the report (2017-2019). He was Physician to the
President and later Chief Medical Advisor. The Chief Medical Advisor is a
policy role, not clinical. This healthcare policy role had no association
or involvement with the White House Medical Unit�s clinical delivery of
care.�

According to a review of the clinic�s medical records detailed in the
report, staffers dispensed brand-name medications instead of
less-expensive generics in violation of Defense Department policy. Over
the three years from 2017 through 2019, the brand-name drugs Ambien and
Provigil cost taxpayers $144,520, but generic versions of those drugs
would have cost $2,064, the report found.

The White House Medical Unit cost taxpayers in another way too, the
report
says: by routinely treating people who weren�t legally eligible for care
through the Department of Defense. This was done at the direction of
senior leaders of the medical unit, the report says.

According to the Code of Federal Regulations, people who can access care
through the Military Health System include the president, the vice
president, their spouses and their minor children; members of the
Cabinet;
officials of the Department of Defense who were appointed by the
president
and confirmed by the Senate; assistants to the president; the director of
the White House Military Office; and former presidents and their spouses,
widows and minor children. Anyone needing emergency care can get it
through Military Health Services, but they have to pay for their care.

According to the report, the White House Medical Unit has about 60
patients enrolled in its clinic but provided �health care by proxy� to
6,000 White House and other government and employees and contractors,
many
of whom were ineligible to receive it. These employees were given urgent
care including the provision of cold medications, antibiotics or sleep
aids, the report says, but this care was not tracked and couldn�t be
billed. Records show that the Department of Defense waived nearly
$500,000
in care for senior US officials over three years, according to the
report.

The report says that the Department of Defense�s assistant secretary for
health affairs agreed with all the recommendations and that they would be
implemented, although it noted those tasks haven�t yet been completed.

The White House did not immediately offer comment to CNN on the report�s
findings or any changes made in the medical unit made since the
investigation was completed.

On 9/16/24 10:01, Scout wrote:
>
>
> "Bobbie Sellers" <blissInSanFrancisco@mouse-potato.com> wrote in message
> news:vc9i8e$2ti7j$1@dont-email.me...
>> On 9/16/24 01:29, Progress wrote:
>>> If they OD and kill themselves, there won't be a drug problem.
>>>
>>> We could solve this whole drug abuse issue in 72 hours and have
>>> plenty of
>>> materials for biofuel or fertilizer.
>>>
>>> Let's get it done.
>>
>> That is about the dumbest solution to a real problem that
>> I have read. It goes right along with the Filipino dictator who
>> had dealers shot on arrest and mere users jailed.
>> The assumption on your part is that the drugs of choice
>> are deadly.  Most are not. The purvyers of illegal drugs have
>> made them mode deadly by dilution with Fentanyl. If pharmeceutical
>> companies were to supply the drugs they would provide measured
>> doses which is how before the Harrison Narcotic Act of 1917
>> people addicted dure to illness or war wounds were treated.
>> Most of these folks worked for a living at a trade or profession.
>> the HNA/1917 created the class of junkies.
>
> Well since the drugs serve absolutely NO benefit.. there is absolutely
> no reason to contribute to getting people hooked on them.
> Na, I see absolutely no reason why such additive drugs should be either
> legalized or normalized.

The drugs relieve pain. That is why Fentanyl is a good anesthetic.
It was decided to criminalize drug and drug users over 100 years ago
when the Harrison Narcotic Act of 1917 was passed. Exactly what the
reasoning behind criminalizing war veterans and people suffering from
very painful diseases is difficult to figure out at this distance.
Part of it was racism or xenophobia because the Chinese were using
smoked opium and laws against were passed in San Francisco. The
Chinese and some European derived people smoke opium because they
were in pain. Cocaine, a stimulant and very habituating drug was
outlawed a few years later. It was said that heroin had no medical
use in the USA but in the UK it was available in an oral preparation
to deal with severe pain.

However the fact remains that drugs that kill pain were
criminalized in the USA possibly for the same defective reasoning
that drove the Prohibition of Alcohol.

Outlawing murder and robbery makes some sense but outlawing
pain relief is sadistic in my humble opinion.
By the way I have used opiate drugs as presecribed at several
points in my 87 years and have never been addicted to them so I suppose
that they are not as addictive as presumed.

You should read some real history of the use of drugs in the
USA and in the Colonies that became the USA. First of course was
alcohol and the Puritans were habitually drunken. Then there is caffeine
in Tea and in Coffee. Coffee houses by the way were dens of rebels
We do not know exactly why Geo.Washington, prominent slave owner and
1st President of the Republic, grew hemp but i think it was not strictly
for rope and paper. We know from the accounts of Fitz Hugh Ludlow that
cannabis was used for the relief of pain and ennui before the Civil
War. Oh yes tobacco was introduced to the world from the Colonies so we
were and are a drug-based state and while nicotine is a short acting
stimulant it is highly addictive. The big noise about tobacco smoking
and nicotine was cancer of the lungs and Upper Respiratory System but
in actuality it messes with the circulatory system as well.
bliss - who when younger educated herself about these
matters since she is a retired and very tired nurse(LVN).

--
b l i s s - S F 4 e v e r at D S L E x t r e m e dot com

% <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:

>i have more than anything you have ,
>including good looks , charm and money

But I have a GF.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

Walz Is No leader, Just a Liar & Quitter Listen to the rest on Straight Talk With Bill Frady https://www.audacy.com/989word Straight Talk with Bill Frady Follow us on Social Media Join our Live Stream Weekdays - noon to 3pm Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/989word Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-2031096 X: https://twitter.com/989word Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/989word/ "Red Meat, Greenville." 08/08/24

https://www.audacy.com/podcasts/straight-talk-with-bill-frady-468032/walz-is-no-leader-just-a-liar-quitter-1584116549

CF Robinson <cfrobinson@vote4trump.com> wrote in
news:20240917.102132.c559eff9@remailer.frell.eu.org:

> Walz Is No leader, Just a Liar & Quitter Listen to the rest on
> Straight Talk With Bill Frady https://www.audacy.com/989word Straight
> Talk with Bill Frady Follow us on Social Media Join our Live Stream
> Weekdays - noon to 3pm Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/989word
> Rumble: https://rumble.com/c/c-2031096 X: https://twitter.com/989word
> Instagram: https://www.instagram.com/989word/ "Red Meat, Greenville."
> 08/08/24
>
> https://www.audacy.com/podcasts/straight-talk-with-bill-frady-468032/wa
> lz-is-no-leader-just-a-liar-quitter-1584116549
>

CF Robinson and others are scared shitless of Walz - so they post lie after
lie.

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:kb6iejtstk9np5hp03o5f8c8k65oj7b27k@4ax.com...
> % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>i have more than anything you have ,
>>including good looks , charm and money
>
>
> But I have a GF.

No you don't, by your own admission all you could afford is a cheap fake.
Some dud in a dress.

[Default] "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> typed:

>
>
>"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:kb6iejtstk9np5hp03o5f8c8k65oj7b27k@4ax.com...
>> % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>i have more than anything you have ,
>>>including good looks , charm and money
>>
>>
>> But I have a GF.
>
>No you don't, by your own admission all you could afford is a cheap fake.
>Some dud in a dress.
>

Geez, is he *still* fantasizing about having a girl friend?

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com> wrote
in message
news:7v0mejl0ctkk556kqv18iddvk34ecnatgs@Rudy.Canoza.is.a.forging.cocksucking.dwarf.com...
> [Default] "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> typed:
>
>>
>>
>>"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:kb6iejtstk9np5hp03o5f8c8k65oj7b27k@4ax.com...
>>> % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>i have more than anything you have ,
>>>>including good looks , charm and money
>>>
>>>
>>> But I have a GF.
>>
>>No you don't, by your own admission all you could afford is a cheap fake.
>>Some dud in a dress.
>>
>
> Geez, is he *still* fantasizing about having a girl friend?

Well, when fantasy girl friends are all he can get......

Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com>
wrote:
>[Default] "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> typed:
>>"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:kb6iejtstk9np5hp03o5f8c8k65oj7b27k@4ax.com...
>>> % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>i have more than anything you have ,
>>>>including good looks , charm and money
>>>
>>> But I have a GF.
>>
>>No you don't, by your own admission all you could afford is a cheap fake.
>>Some dud in a dress.
>
>Geez, is he *still* fantasizing about having a girl friend?

If I see her as a woman, what difference does it make that she has a
dick?

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

On 9/18/2024 1:49 PM, Joel wrote:
> If I see her as a woman, what difference does it make that she has a
> dick?
>
> -- Joel W. Crump

Makes you a pretend faggot, or a pseudo-straight oaf.

citizen winston smith <sss@example.de> wrote:

>> If I see her as a woman, what difference does it make that she has a
>> dick?
>
>Makes you a pretend faggot, or a pseudo-straight oaf.

Or a guy with a different taste and an open mind. My GF is a person,
our friendship is just like it would be with any person.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

[Default] Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> typed:

>Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>[Default] "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> typed:
>>>"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>news:kb6iejtstk9np5hp03o5f8c8k65oj7b27k@4ax.com...
>>>> % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>i have more than anything you have ,
>>>>>including good looks , charm and money
>>>>
>>>> But I have a GF.
>>>
>>>No you don't, by your own admission all you could afford is a cheap fake.
>>>Some dud in a dress.
>>
>>Geez, is he *still* fantasizing about having a girl friend?
>
>
>If I see her as a woman, what difference does it make that she has a
>dick?

The difference is that he's not a woman.

[Default] Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> typed:

>citizen winston smith <sss@example.de> wrote:
>
>>> If I see her as a woman, what difference does it make that she has a
>>> dick?
>>
>>Makes you a pretend faggot, or a pseudo-straight oaf.
>
>
>Or a guy with a different taste and an open mind. My GF is a person,
>our friendship is just like it would be with any person.

He's still a male, not a woman.

Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com>
wrote:
>[Default] Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> typed:
>>citizen winston smith <sss@example.de> wrote:
>>
>>>> If I see her as a woman, what difference does it make that she has a
>>>> dick?
>>>
>>>Makes you a pretend faggot, or a pseudo-straight oaf.
>>
>>Or a guy with a different taste and an open mind. My GF is a person,
>>our friendship is just like it would be with any person.
>
>He's still a male, not a woman.

That's transphobic ignorance.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.

[Default] Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> typed:

>Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com>
>wrote:
>>[Default] Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> typed:
>>>citizen winston smith <sss@example.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> If I see her as a woman, what difference does it make that she has a
>>>>> dick?
>>>>
>>>>Makes you a pretend faggot, or a pseudo-straight oaf.
>>>
>>>Or a guy with a different taste and an open mind. My GF is a person,
>>>our friendship is just like it would be with any person.
>>
>>He's still a male, not a woman.
>
>
>That's transphobic ignorance.

That's scientific fact.

o He's never been a woman
o He's not a woman now
o He'll never be a woman.

This might help you.
https://i.imgur.com/O0zSve9.jpg

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:vbcmej5mni5l661q6er1d69g1tmsviiq2c@4ax.com...
> citizen winston smith <sss@example.de> wrote:
>
>>> If I see her as a woman, what difference does it make that she has a
>>> dick?
>>
>>Makes you a pretend faggot, or a pseudo-straight oaf.
>
>
> Or a guy with a different taste and an open mind. My GF is a person,
> our friendship is just like it would be with any person.

So your delusions are a regular thing then?

"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:c4dmej14552795p71gkj15igigvc3sqokv@4ax.com...
> Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>[Default] Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> typed:
>>>citizen winston smith <sss@example.de> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> If I see her as a woman, what difference does it make that she has a
>>>>> dick?
>>>>
>>>>Makes you a pretend faggot, or a pseudo-straight oaf.
>>>
>>>Or a guy with a different taste and an open mind. My GF is a person,
>>>our friendship is just like it would be with any person.
>>
>>He's still a male, not a woman.
>
>
> That's transphobic ignorance.

So according to you reality = transphobic ignorance?

Then you wonder why we consider you delusional.

The ONLY person here who can't accept him as he is seems to be..... Well..
YOU!

Hardly sounds like a good basis for a lasting relationship....

"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com> wrote
in message
news:uecmejh9tblpa27h0h2n1ech8en34g4759@Rudy.Canoza.is.a.forging.cocksucking.dwarf.com...
> [Default] Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> typed:
>
>>Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com>
>>wrote:
>>>[Default] "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> typed:
>>>>"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>news:kb6iejtstk9np5hp03o5f8c8k65oj7b27k@4ax.com...
>>>>> % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>i have more than anything you have ,
>>>>>>including good looks , charm and money
>>>>>
>>>>> But I have a GF.
>>>>
>>>>No you don't, by your own admission all you could afford is a cheap
>>>>fake.
>>>>Some dud in a dress.
>>>
>>>Geez, is he *still* fantasizing about having a girl friend?
>>
>>
>>If I see her as a woman, what difference does it make that she has a
>>dick?
>
> The difference is that he's not a woman.

But remember Klaus, we are then expected to accept his other delusions about
reality without question and to blindly accept such delusions of his..

[Default] "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> typed:

>
>
>"Klaus Schadenfreude" <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com> wrote
>in message
>news:uecmejh9tblpa27h0h2n1ech8en34g4759@Rudy.Canoza.is.a.forging.cocksucking.dwarf.com...
>> [Default] Joel <joelcrump@gmail.com> typed:
>>
>>>Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com>
>>>wrote:
>>>>[Default] "Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> typed:
>>>>>"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>news:kb6iejtstk9np5hp03o5f8c8k65oj7b27k@4ax.com...
>>>>>> % <pursent100@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>i have more than anything you have ,
>>>>>>>including good looks , charm and money
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But I have a GF.
>>>>>
>>>>>No you don't, by your own admission all you could afford is a cheap
>>>>>fake.
>>>>>Some dud in a dress.
>>>>
>>>>Geez, is he *still* fantasizing about having a girl friend?
>>>
>>>
>>>If I see her as a woman, what difference does it make that she has a
>>>dick?
>>
>> The difference is that he's not a woman.
>
>But remember Klaus, we are then expected to accept his other delusions about
>reality without question and to blindly accept such delusions of his..
>
>

Imagine his disappointment.

"Scout" <me4guns@verizon.removeme.this2.nospam.net> wrote:
>"Joel" <joelcrump@gmail.com> wrote in message
>news:c4dmej14552795p71gkj15igigvc3sqokv@4ax.com...
>> Klaus Schadenfreude <klaus.schadenfreude.Zwergentöter.@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>>He's [a transgender woman] still a male, not a woman.
>>
>> That's transphobic ignorance.
>
>So according to you reality = transphobic ignorance?
>
>Then you wonder why we consider you delusional.
>
>The ONLY person here who can't accept him as he is seems to be..... Well..
>YOU!
>
>Hardly sounds like a good basis for a lasting relationship....

She is trans and I accept her as that, what is the problem with "basis
for relationship"? You might not accept that she's trans, I do.
You're basically talking nonsense.

--
Joel W. Crump

Amendment XIV
Section 1.

[...] No state shall make or enforce any law which shall
abridge the privileges or immunities of citizens of the
United States; nor shall any state deprive any person of
life, liberty, or property, without due process of law;
nor deny to any person within its jurisdiction the equal
protection of the laws.

Dobbs rewrites this, it is invalid precedent. States are
liable for denying needed abortions, e.g. TX.