A little comfort on a really bad day...

[Pat]

Some days are great, others not so much and sometimes it's easy to feel really down. But my friends, I have a point for you to ponder if you ever have one of those everything goes wrong, the job sucks canal water, your neighbors are jerks and the cat pooped on the floor-again kind of days.

No matter how bad things may be, unless your last name is Burton, at least you can say, "My daughter isn't marrying Charles Manson".

News from The Associated Press

 

[Keith]

Dear Lord above, what can y'all say about that?

Why why why do they do it? She's not the first by a long chalk.

The old saying that "nice guys finish last" must simply be true...

 

[Jack]

She must make her parents proud!

 

[Pete McCluskey.]

WTF, how can a convicted murderer be allowed to marry and invite ten guests?
what a F**cked up society we live in.
Don't tell me he'll be allowed to consummate it.

 

[Larry L.]

WTF, how can a convicted murderer be allowed to marry and invite ten guests?

...the same way an inmate over here can demand a sex change operation and have taxpayers pay the tab.

That's the kind of stuff that results from 40+ years of politicians constantly bowing to faaaaaaaaar left liberal-led, "p.c.-driven", radical social/governmental agendas lest they be labeled "BIGOTS!", or "RACISTS", or, God forbid, "HATERS!"............the spineless cowards. :evil2:

 

[Jim Rosenthal]

Here's hoping he doesn't knock her up. (for our English friends, this does NOT mean waking her up in the morning)

Anyway, he's eighty and she's 26. So maybe she wants to inherit the rights to his story etc. The law won't allow him to profit from it- but it might not be able to stop her from doing so.

With any luck the little bastard will die soon in jail. He's already lived WAY too long.

 

[Doug S.]

...the same way an inmate over here can demand a sex change operation and have taxpayers pay the tab.

That is absolutely NOT TRUE, Larry. I know because I worked for TDCJ for almost 2 years and I was in charge of responding to "offender" (PC BS prohibits us from referring to them as "inmate") grievances as well as third party complaints from such organizations as those supporting rights for gay, bisexual, lesbian and trans-sexual parties. I have plenty of experience answering both "offender" complaints and lawyers' demands.

The bottom line is that "Gender Dysphoria", the term now in use per the DSM-V, is the only "disorder" afforded ANY treatment by the Texas Department of Criminal Justice, and that is limited to only those individuals who were already on hormone treatments when they were incarcerated. They are entitled to the continuation of those hormones, but there is ZERO entitlement to any of the gender reassignment procedures....and if an offender with GD attempts to "take things into his own hands" and remove HIS genitals, he is reclassified to "Trans-sexual" diagnosis and is therefore no longer even entitled to the hormones.

That is the truth...I have no idea what sources you are using to make such statements, but you really ought to check them for veracity...else, your veracity is questionable for repeating the inaccuracies of your sources.

Your hard earned tax dollars are safe from the liberals in this matter, at least.

Cheers!

Doug

 

[Larry L.]

...the same way an inmate over here can demand a sex change operation and have taxpayers pay the tab.

That is absolutely NOT TRUE, Larry...there is ZERO entitlement to any of the gender reassignment procedures....That is the truth...
Doug

Really.

Massachusetts judge approves taxpayer-funded sex change for inmate | Fox News

 

[Doug S.]

Larry, Larry, Larry...you are just not clear on the concept.

A link to Fox News? network?

If you think of that as an unbiased source of information....i.e. a source with veracity...then you are more blinded than even I realized.

"There are none so blind as those who WILL NOT see" has never rung more true.

GEEZ.....

Doug

 

[Larry L.]

Larry, Larry, Larry...you are just not clear on the concept.

A link to Fox News? network?

If you think of that as an unbiased source of information....i.e. a source with veracity...then you are more blinded than even I realized.

"There are none so blind as those who WILL NOT see" has never rung more true.

GEEZ.....

Doug

So, you're claiming FOX LIED?

Really? Seriously? That judge DIDN'T rule as FOX reported? It NEVER HAPPENED?

And you claim I'M "just not clear on the concept"!!!

'Unbelievable...


Are these people LYING too, Doug?:

Mass. appeals court upholds inmate

Appeals court upholds inmate's right to have taxpayer-funded sex change surgery ? RT USA

Federal appeals court upholds sex change surgery for Mass. inmate Robert Koselik | Daily Mail Online

"There are none so blind as those who WILL NOT see" has never rung more true.

GEEZ.....

No kidding.

...you really ought to check (your sources) for veracity...else, your veracity is questionable for repeating the inaccuracies of your sources.

How's my "veracity" looking now, Doug? 'Better question: How's yours?

I'm done here...

 

[Doug S.]

How's my "veracity" looking now, Doug?...

Here, Larry...I'll try once more to help you understand...as long as you reference ANYTHING from the FN?N, your veracity will be questionable...end of discussion.

As for those other sources...I have no idea. However, I must admit I love the way the Brits use the "tongue-in-cheek" approach to humor and that always causes me to view those sources with caution, they are SO sly in their humor :thumbsup:

As for "Boston.com"...sure sounds like a great place for a Tea Party (pun intended...hoping you caught the historical significance).

BTW---ever hear of a lower court judge's ruling being overturned upon appeal? Happens all the time. You can bet a paycheck that whichever state correctional agency lost at the lower level has a whole army of lawyers just chomping at the bit to argue the issue of Policy vs."best practice". Policies are approved by state legislatures and all organizations such as LGBT can reference is the "best practice" quoted in some sympathetic organization's manifesto. There can be no doubt about who will prevail once the issue is moved out of some bleeding heart judge's lower jurisdiction.

The bottom line for me is that you can ( and, obviously, will) believe anything you want. As for me, I choose to believe the very policies it was my duty to enforce when I worked for one of the very institutions you used FN?N (really???) to indict. I know what our policies were...do you, or do you believe FN?N???

...veracity IS critical.

Doug

 

[Larry L.]

Oh, for cryin' out th' window, Doug. As USUAL, you're spinning, dancing, ducking, dodging and REFUSING to see reality for what it really is.

YOU have presented YOUR 'take' on things. I've presented mine.

The READER can decide who's telling it like it is.

So, like I said, I'm done here...

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

I wouldn't trust any news source, especially the alphabet ones.

 

[Jim Rosenthal]

What happened to Manson? Wasn't he in this thread someplace?

See- he can STILL make people argue and fight over stuff. Even from his max security cell.

 

[Pat]

I'm with you Jim.
Back on topic, I'm disappointed that Mr. Manson couldn't have met a nice young lady like Ms Omaima Nelson. Apparently she's single, a former model and best of all she's quite the cook!

Yahoo!

 

[Jack]

Perfect match Pat.

 

[Pat]

I wonder if she is incarcerated in a location near Mr. Manson. Perhaps she can cater the wedding.

 

[Jack]

I'd say something, but you're a clever guy!
Had a laugh earlier too, but the post has gone missing...

 

[Jack]

Not missing Pat, it's on a different thread. Sorry.

 

[Pat]

To update the original basis of the post, I'm afraid I have some sad news to report. This is especially difficult just before romance is to blossom for so many of you on Valentine's Day.

It appears the upcoming nuptial between Ms. Afton Elaine Burton a.k.a. "Star" and Mr. Charles Manson, a long-time resident of the California State Prison in Corcoran California, has been cancelled. Ms Burton is 27 years of age, Mr. Manson 80.

It seems that Mr. Manson discovered, through the insights provided by a member of the news media (probably Brian Williams but I'm not sure about that part) that Ms. Burton's genuine interest in him was corporal, not carnal.
Apparently under California law, the spouse of the deceased has the rights to claim the corpse of their dearly departed. Discovering this, Ms. Burton - ever the entrepreneur, decided on a business endeavor whereby she would, presumably after the passing of Mr. Manson, display his mortal remains in a glass case to the public for a fee. She envisioned that this would become a tourist attraction of some sort and provide her a Disney-like success in future years.

Upon hearing of the plot, Mr. Manson finally realized that he's been played for a fool.
No doubt disappointed, he reminisced on the events and indicated the that in hindsight it all really was a stupid idea to begin and quite ridiculous owing to the fact he is immortal.