Roxxxanne wrote:Closet cases are going to continue to think that homosexuality is shameful and detestable. That is their problem, not mine.
In attempting to malign people by insinuating that they are homosexuals, you imply that homosexuality is shameful and detestable.
That is your problem.
Roxxxanne wrote:Are you seriously trying to tell me that you think EVERYONE in the Bush Administration is hetero-sexual???
No, I'm not seriously trying to tell you that. I'm not even humorously trying to tell you that. I have absolutely no interest in the sex lives of the members of the Bush administration, and I can imagine no reason to become interested.
Roxxxanne wrote:That is almost a statistical impossibility especially when one considers that lashing out at gays is a sure sign of latent homosexuality.
Freudian nonsense, not to mention logically suspect.
Roxxxanne wrote:Then we need to consider the Gannon-Guckert factor. Where there is a smoke there is fire.
No, sometimes where there's smoke there's just smoke. Or, in the words of Freud, sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.
Roxxxanne wrote:The speculation that Gannon-Guckert was involved with someone in the WH is, by no means, baseless.
Of course it is, otherwise you wouldn't call it "speculation."