Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Something must be in the water in San Francisco.
S.F. MAYOR’S CONSULTANT ALLEGEDLY HAD SHOCKING CHILD RAPE VIDEOS
Details revealed in the arrest of Enrique Pearce, 41, a campaign consultant who up until a week ago was making $5,000 a month working for San Francisco Mayor Ed Lee, indicate that Pearce allegedly owned photos and videos of infants and young children being raped and sexually violated, including photos he allegedly took himself of young boys.
Deputy District Attorney Alexis Fasteaus said that the children were unaware they were being photographed, according to the San Francisco Chronicle.
Fasteau revealed that law enforcement had started investigating Pearce after another man reported chatting online with someone using the screen name “redentice” who wrote “sharing a boy with another man is really hot.” She also said that Pearce had 4,902 images on one of his laptop computers; over 600 included minors engaged in sexual conduct, at least 10 showed “prepubescent minors” under the age of 12, and many photos apparently showed men hurting children.
S.F. Mayor s Consultant Allegedly Had Shocking Child Rape Videos - Breitbart
You implied that by comparing Elvis to Milk. Only problem is Milk was a criminal, Elvis was not.So was Elvis, but what the hey - he got a stamp anyway
What law did Elvis violate?
Please provide the criminal code?
Where did I say he violated the law?
Does this logic thing not compute with you?
You implied that by comparing Elvis to Milk. Only problem is Milk was a criminal, Elvis was not.So was Elvis, but what the hey - he got a stamp anyway
What law did Elvis violate?
Please provide the criminal code?
Where did I say he violated the law?
Does this logic thing not compute with you?
OK so the answer to my queston is Yes, this logic thing is hard for you.You implied that by comparing Elvis to Milk. Only problem is Milk was a criminal, Elvis was not.So was Elvis, but what the hey - he got a stamp anyway
What law did Elvis violate?
Please provide the criminal code?
Where did I say he violated the law?
Does this logic thing not compute with you?
No one (including you) gave a damn about whether or not he was a "criminal" - until just this moment. Your entire angle was in painting him as a pedophile and using that to claim it was inappropriate to have a stamp. So now that we know another American icon, who has a stamp in is honor, did the same thing with a 16 yr old (and, in fact, might have started at 14 according to some accounts) - you need to move the goalposts.
OK so the answer to my queston is Yes, this logic thing is hard for you.You implied that by comparing Elvis to Milk. Only problem is Milk was a criminal, Elvis was not.So was Elvis, but what the hey - he got a stamp anyway
What law did Elvis violate?
Please provide the criminal code?
Where did I say he violated the law?
Does this logic thing not compute with you?
No one (including you) gave a damn about whether or not he was a "criminal" - until just this moment. Your entire angle was in painting him as a pedophile and using that to claim it was inappropriate to have a stamp. So now that we know another American icon, who has a stamp in is honor, did the same thing with a 16 yr old (and, in fact, might have started at 14 according to some accounts) - you need to move the goalposts.
Milk was a pedophile and a criminal on the one hand, and lacking any substantive achievement on the other. Both of those suggest that honoring him with a stamp is due to PC rather than reality.
16 pages and I still haven't read where Milk deserves a stamp
Your lack of reading comprehension is nothing new- or perhaps more particularly- your blindness when it comes to anything you don't want to read.
Harvey Milk is honored for his fight for civil rights.
And I can see why that would offend you.
You must have missed the part about how they were sexual prior to marriage. Nice to see you making excuses though. OH the hypocrisy when hetero icons are involved
Speaking of excuses, how about, "Well, what about Elvis?" in a thread about Harvey Milk, in which no one else had mentioned Elvis? It's not like the OP said, "Why is Harvey Milk getting a stamp, instead of someone wonderful like Elvis or Edgar Allan Poe?" What is this allergy you people have to discussing the actual person in question, instead of diverting and deflecting off onto anyone and everyone else? And why do you all have the same weird delusion that, "Well, so-and-so did such-and-such" is somehow a mitigation?
And they all trot in here with the exact same talking point and deflections. What a coinky dink.
Apparently we all enjoy pointing out the hypocrisy of homophobic bigots.
No charge for the English lesson, pisshead.
What dictionary did you find 'pisshead' in exactly?
And yes- I enjoy pointing out your hypocrisy.
OK so the answer to my queston is Yes, this logic thing is hard for you.You implied that by comparing Elvis to Milk. Only problem is Milk was a criminal, Elvis was not.So was Elvis, but what the hey - he got a stamp anyway
What law did Elvis violate?
Please provide the criminal code?
Where did I say he violated the law?
Does this logic thing not compute with you?
No one (including you) gave a damn about whether or not he was a "criminal" - until just this moment. Your entire angle was in painting him as a pedophile and using that to claim it was inappropriate to have a stamp. So now that we know another American icon, who has a stamp in is honor, did the same thing with a 16 yr old (and, in fact, might have started at 14 according to some accounts) - you need to move the goalposts.
Milk was a pedophile and a criminal on the one hand, and lacking any substantive achievement on the other. Both of those suggest that honoring him with a stamp is due to PC rather than reality.
16 pages and I still haven't read where Milk deserves a stamp
Your lack of reading comprehension is nothing new- or perhaps more particularly- your blindness when it comes to anything you don't want to read.
Harvey Milk is honored for his fight for civil rights.
And I can see why that would offend you.
Basically, Sassy, leftists think the only accomplishment that ever needs noticing is running one's gums and being loud and obnoxious . . . which, come to think of it, tells you a lot about their posting style.
Speaking of excuses, how about, "Well, what about Elvis?" in a thread about Harvey Milk, in which no one else had mentioned Elvis? It's not like the OP said, "Why is Harvey Milk getting a stamp, instead of someone wonderful like Elvis or Edgar Allan Poe?" What is this allergy you people have to discussing the actual person in question, instead of diverting and deflecting off onto anyone and everyone else? And why do you all have the same weird delusion that, "Well, so-and-so did such-and-such" is somehow a mitigation?
And they all trot in here with the exact same talking point and deflections. What a coinky dink.
Apparently we all enjoy pointing out the hypocrisy of homophobic bigots.
No charge for the English lesson, pisshead.
What dictionary did you find 'pisshead' in exactly?
And yes- I enjoy pointing out your hypocrisy.
Well, crazy people often sit around, giggling at nothing whatsoever, so go on with yourself if that works for you.
It's a simple compounding of two very basic words, Brain Trust. Your lack of creativity and language facility is really not my problem, and I'd appreciate it if you didn't depress me with it any more than absolutely necessary.
I guess repeating a lie is all you've got.OK so the answer to my queston is Yes, this logic thing is hard for you.You implied that by comparing Elvis to Milk. Only problem is Milk was a criminal, Elvis was not.So was Elvis, but what the hey - he got a stamp anyway
What law did Elvis violate?
Please provide the criminal code?
Where did I say he violated the law?
Does this logic thing not compute with you?
No one (including you) gave a damn about whether or not he was a "criminal" - until just this moment. Your entire angle was in painting him as a pedophile and using that to claim it was inappropriate to have a stamp. So now that we know another American icon, who has a stamp in is honor, did the same thing with a 16 yr old (and, in fact, might have started at 14 according to some accounts) - you need to move the goalposts.
Milk was a pedophile and a criminal on the one hand, and lacking any substantive achievement on the other. Both of those suggest that honoring him with a stamp is due to PC rather than reality.
Kim Kardashian deserves her own stamp.
when they get a famous "bootie" category, you may see her there.....Kim Kardashian deserves her own stamp.
I can see there is no IQ test to become a Mod here.OK so the answer to my queston is Yes, this logic thing is hard for you.You implied that by comparing Elvis to Milk. Only problem is Milk was a criminal, Elvis was not.What law did Elvis violate?
Please provide the criminal code?
Where did I say he violated the law?
Does this logic thing not compute with you?
No one (including you) gave a damn about whether or not he was a "criminal" - until just this moment. Your entire angle was in painting him as a pedophile and using that to claim it was inappropriate to have a stamp. So now that we know another American icon, who has a stamp in is honor, did the same thing with a 16 yr old (and, in fact, might have started at 14 according to some accounts) - you need to move the goalposts.
Milk was a pedophile and a criminal on the one hand, and lacking any substantive achievement on the other. Both of those suggest that honoring him with a stamp is due to PC rather than reality.
You're grasping at straws now aren't you - trying to see if you can make anything stick?
1. Milk was not a pedophile, we've established that by any number of definitions.
2. Milk was never arrested or convicted of any crime so he is not a criminal.
3. Lacking any substantive achievement - that *might* stick depending on who you argue with.
I can see there is no IQ test to become a Mod here.OK so the answer to my queston is Yes, this logic thing is hard for you.You implied that by comparing Elvis to Milk. Only problem is Milk was a criminal, Elvis was not.Where did I say he violated the law?
Does this logic thing not compute with you?
No one (including you) gave a damn about whether or not he was a "criminal" - until just this moment. Your entire angle was in painting him as a pedophile and using that to claim it was inappropriate to have a stamp. So now that we know another American icon, who has a stamp in is honor, did the same thing with a 16 yr old (and, in fact, might have started at 14 according to some accounts) - you need to move the goalposts.
Milk was a pedophile and a criminal on the one hand, and lacking any substantive achievement on the other. Both of those suggest that honoring him with a stamp is due to PC rather than reality.
You're grasping at straws now aren't you - trying to see if you can make anything stick?
1. Milk was not a pedophile, we've established that by any number of definitions.
2. Milk was never arrested or convicted of any crime so he is not a criminal.
3. Lacking any substantive achievement - that *might* stick depending on who you argue with.
Milk was certainly fucking underage boys, no matter how you want to term that.
That is certainly a crime, making him a criminal. The definition of criminal is someone who commits crimes.
No one has been able to point to any achievement he had, other than being killed and being gay at the same time.
16 pages and I still haven't read where Milk deserves a stamp
Your lack of reading comprehension is nothing new- or perhaps more particularly- your blindness when it comes to anything you don't want to read.
Harvey Milk is honored for his fight for civil rights.
And I can see why that would offend you.
Basically, Sassy, leftists think the only accomplishment that ever needs noticing is running one's gums and being loud and obnoxious . . . which, come to think of it, tells you a lot about their posting style.
Wait- are you talking about Elvis right now?
I guess repeating a lie is all you've got.OK so the answer to my queston is Yes, this logic thing is hard for you.You implied that by comparing Elvis to Milk. Only problem is Milk was a criminal, Elvis was not.What law did Elvis violate?
Please provide the criminal code?
Where did I say he violated the law?
Does this logic thing not compute with you?
No one (including you) gave a damn about whether or not he was a "criminal" - until just this moment. Your entire angle was in painting him as a pedophile and using that to claim it was inappropriate to have a stamp. So now that we know another American icon, who has a stamp in is honor, did the same thing with a 16 yr old (and, in fact, might have started at 14 according to some accounts) - you need to move the goalposts.
Milk was a pedophile and a criminal on the one hand, and lacking any substantive achievement on the other. Both of those suggest that honoring him with a stamp is due to PC rather than reality.
And they all trot in here with the exact same talking point and deflections. What a coinky dink.
Apparently we all enjoy pointing out the hypocrisy of homophobic bigots.
No charge for the English lesson, pisshead.
What dictionary did you find 'pisshead' in exactly?
And yes- I enjoy pointing out your hypocrisy.
Well, crazy people often sit around, giggling at nothing whatsoever, so go on with yourself if that works for you.
It's a simple compounding of two very basic words, Brain Trust. Your lack of creativity and language facility is really not my problem, and I'd appreciate it if you didn't depress me with it any more than absolutely necessary.
Don't blame your depression/mental illness on me- I am sorry that you suffer from it, but its your problem not mine.
Let me add...."a raging homophobic bigot" one year behind the times.OK so the answer to my queston is Yes, this logic thing is hard for you.You implied that by comparing Elvis to Milk. Only problem is Milk was a criminal, Elvis was not.What law did Elvis violate?
Please provide the criminal code?
Where did I say he violated the law?
Does this logic thing not compute with you?
No one (including you) gave a damn about whether or not he was a "criminal" - until just this moment. Your entire angle was in painting him as a pedophile and using that to claim it was inappropriate to have a stamp. So now that we know another American icon, who has a stamp in is honor, did the same thing with a 16 yr old (and, in fact, might have started at 14 according to some accounts) - you need to move the goalposts.
Milk was a pedophile and a criminal on the one hand, and lacking any substantive achievement on the other. Both of those suggest that honoring him with a stamp is due to PC rather than reality.
Except of course- there is not even a suggestion that Milk was a pedophile- except for folks like you.
And of course there is no evidence that Milk ever had sex with a minor.
And as far as 'substantive' achievement' that is purely subjective- Elvis' big accomplishment was selling lots of records- is that a 'substantive' enough achievement to be on a stamp- its purely subjective.
If Milk had not been gay- and known for promoting equal rights for gays- none of you would know- or care.
The stamp was released a year ago- why a thread about Milk's stamp now?
Because the poster is a raging homophobic bigot.
