Re: Californians seem to like the idea of Gay Marriage

Bibon <bibon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:

> On 2008-06-25 00:02:45 -0400, No One <noone@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> said:
> 
> > Bibon <bibon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> >
> >> On 2008-06-24 18:47:46 -0400, No One <noone@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> said:
> >>
> >>> Bibon <bibon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> writes:
> >>>
> >>>>>>> Another dishonest statement from "Bibon".  In reality, the
initiative
> >>>>>>> was drafted and most of the signatures were gathered *before*
the
> >>>>>>> California Supreme Court ruling.  They simply finished up at
about
> >>>>>>> the same time as the ruling, and that was a coincidence.
> >>>>>> You choose the most mundane topics to lie about.
> >>>>> Oh, just to back up Craig Chilton's statement that the likes of
you
> >>>>> would never apologize for your lies including your current false
> >>>>> accusation, I'll simply point any interested reader to
> >>>>> <http://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/elections_j.htm#2008General>,
> >>>>> a web page on the California Secretary of State's web site, which
> >>>>> states the following:
> >>>>> Limit on Marriage. Constitutional Amendment.
> >>>>> Summary Date: 11/29/07 Qualified: 06/02/08 Signatures
> >>>>> Required: 694,354
> >>>>> Proponents: Dennis Hollingsworth, Gail J. Knight, Martin
> >>>>> F. Gutierrez, Hak-****ng William Tam, and Mark A. Jansson c/o
> >>>>> Andrew Pugno (916) 608-3065
> >>>>> Note the date 11/29/07.  Also see
> >>>>>
<http://ag.ca.gov/cms_pdfs/initiatives/i737_07-0068_Initiative.pdf>,
> >>>>> which shows letters from ths sponsers of the initiative to the
> >>>>> Initiative Coordinator, Office of the California Attorney General,
> >>>>> received on October 5, 2007 and dated October 1, 2007.
> >>>> You poor babeeeeeeeee! You were never taught the difference between
> >>>> 'signature' and 'signatures'.
> >>> Are you really too stupid to realize that people who filed an
> >>> initiative in early, October2007, would start gathering signatures
> >>> immediately and not wait 6 months before getting started?
> >>> As I said, they were collecting these all along, and fini****ng
> >>> at about the time of the court ruling was merely a coincidence.
> >>> Now, why don't you surprise us, try to act like an adult, and
> >>> apologize for your false accusations?
> >> You let your alligator mouth over load your hummingbird ass (AGAIN)
> >> and now you're trying to save face by ignoring the fact that I called
> >> attention to your stupid allegation.
> >> That dog don't hunt, rube.
> >

<forgery snipped>

Leroyblue, aka bibon, aka Bill Taylor is a bigot who posts regularly
on a variety of newsgroups, and is noted for his lack of manners, his
hatred, his dishonesty, and a characteristic redneck patois that
creeps in every so often.  Of course, he denies his real identity (and
the large number of aliases he's used).  Since "leroyblue" is simply
his latest identity, most of his real gems will appaer under his
"bibon" and former identities.

This guy is completely shameless.  In a post with message ID
<ustel318uigdheu19u3ab6n5r4rn4b4fj2@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, he fallsified a citation
- a reply to his statement showed how (see the post with Message ID
<87r6i0mmsy.fsf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> for the details).

See Message-ID <n5tn72l8p74cfv8vcb8uu848b6ibuav57v@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> for a post
in which bibon accidentally identified himself as Bill Taylor and
Message ID <m3d5dvpb61.fsf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> for details about how
he identified himself. Basically, he claimed that "Bill Taylor" never
received a phone call from some individual, something only "Bill
Taylor" could know, with the phone number in question belonging to
"our" "Bill Taylor".  Others, of course, have reached the same
conclusion.

The really interesting question is why he is so sensitive about "Bill
Taylor" so much more so than all his other numerous identities. :-)

Some of his rantings are just comical. For example,
in Message ID <2iell25bqiqgv16irm0ui3a048r8kjeaec@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, one of
Bill Taylor's aliases "bibon@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
 (with a '^' over the 'a')
posted an inadvertent admission that he is gay enough to hire a
male prostitute (whether or not he intended to say that).

However, he's shown his dishonesty time and time again. For one
example, in Message ID <skmio2d2lukbv2gkt5q0nqhk230e022r9s@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
Bill Taylor (aka bibon) was caught forging headers,changing "LC" to
"LA" and "LB" in headers he cut and pasted to pretend that "LC" was
posting under multiple identities.  You can cross check this claim by
using Google to search for the message IDs. LC's post with Message ID
<embjih02o3h@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> was attributed by Bill Taylor to "LA"
(but Taylor suppressed part of the message ID by giving it as
<embjhn02...@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> to make tracing it difficult).

He also doesn't learn even when called on his behavior.  In Message ID
<016tu2d0ksk24dsucsvpr22uq4nh2a80br@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, bibon (aka Bill Taylor)
pretends a phrase in quotes was written in
<87ps7kj3oy.fsf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> yet it does not appear there
(<87ps7kj3oy.fsf@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> is the message ID of the post
that he was responding to, as is clear from the headers for his post).
In message ID <dp22v21m779nvfjdch92nurepkr5ct88vl@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> he tried to
cover it up by claiming it wasa "mistake", even though the "mistake"
occurred in quoted text (lines starting with '>') that were
automatically inserted by his newsreader.  His claim of a "mistake"
is as believable as "my dog ate my homework".  Then in a post with
message ID <s4d4v29mamrmrstjirqler18libhomhl93@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>, he tried
to pretend that he had merely snipped a post incorrectly, even
though the text in question never was in the one he quoted.

Such behavior gives zero credibility to any statment Bill Taylor (aka
bibon, aka ...) makes.  You really have to wonder about someone who
would post such a lie when it is so easily checked: just go to
<http://groups.google.com/advanced_search?q=&>
and copy a message ID
(do not include the '<' and '>') in the search string at the bottom of
the page, and click the "Lookup Message" button to find an original
post.