Tony - Welcome to the Post-Dispatch.

And to Jane Cunningham, if you can’t look your enemy in the eye you will never pass the Commander-in-Chief threshold test.

More of that “Compassionate Conservatism”. Bain and Langston should have offered Cunningham a campaign contribution. It’s about time for a new car….isn’t it Jane?

WWJD?

“WWJD?”

Well, according to Jane Cunningham, Jesus would say “Ooh, yuck. You lepers are too gross. Go away before I get nauseous. No miracles for you. Ick!”

Tony, how is this an anti-gay/lesbo issue? I don’t see it that way at all. I find it refreshing that Mrs. Cunningham would be honest about being offended by someone’s horrendous appearance. I have been in that situation myself and have almost gotten physically ill by someone else’s grotesque appearance and I have no idea what their sexual orientation is. On the other hand, I have many gay/lesbo friends and relatives who are perfectly lovely and decent looking people who don’t feel like they have to exploit their sexuality by being walking freak shows.

Perhaps these two idiots can take this as a “teaching moment” and realize that they will have trouble one day getting jobs for their outrageous appearances, which is perfectly fine and legal, but it is something they will have to deal with. This is simply a fact of our culture. Perhaps they might think of moving to San Fransisco where this is more acceptable. My taxes will probably be supporting these two idiots some day because they are also probably frying their brains as we write.

Again, this was not about their sexual preference. I applaud Mrs. Cunningham for her courageous behavior. Thanks for the info and I will be sending her a campaign donation for doing so even though she is not my state senator, but I hate mine (Joan Bray) so I will support Mrs. Cunningham.

No doubt your “friends’ love it when you call them “lesbos”.

But hey, at least you’re open-minded enough to assume that a 16-year-old girl taking time to lobby the legislature is probably on drugs, is an “idiot” and ought to just move to San Francisco.

How truly “Centrist” of you.

Centrist is right to a point. That their orientation should not have been an issue. But, who is Jane Cunningham to throw someone out of a taxpayer paid office because she doesn’t like their physical appearance?!

What if this was a grotesquely disfigured victim of a drunk driver who wanted to lobby for stiffer DUI/DWI penalites?

What is this was a special needs child whose mother was there to lobby for more funding for such children?

All may be unpleasant to look at, but what really is the difference? Yes, these two young adults made the choice to look the way they do. But, aren’t conservatives about free choice on various issues. Oh wait–but maybe that is only when they like the choices people have made.

I’ve seen Jane Cunningham. She is noone to kick out anyone for their looks, as some seem to have just as much disrepect for older, wrinkled women as pierced teens. Though I am sure folks like Centrist will applaud her for showing disrespect to Missouri citizens–justified because they are different in some sort of way.

Centrist -

So you applaud someone in her capacity - the Chair of the Education Committee - making a statement which is essentially bullying to a student - merely because she didn’t like their appearance?

Sometimes I think you write things like that in order to do nothing but rile people. You can’t tell me you honestly believe a legislator should tell students that they make her physically ill?

And as far as the two students go - come on, just because they don’t meet your standard of appearance doesn’t mean they are not of value to society. They were there lobbying their legislator - when was the last time you cared enough to haul your butt down to Jeff City and actually spend time walking the halls to talk with the people making the decisions?

Centrist,
if you are in the center you might want to rethink that donation. Jane Cunningham is to the right of all the other Republicans running for that seat.
So far as her being honest, if she was honest she would have said, I know this is a lobby day by PROMO and I want to have nothing to do with you. I was in Jeff City that day with a union lobby day and she made it clear that she wants nothing to do with us. I can only imagine what sort of reception Paraquad, who does disability rights advocacy, had from her that day (they were lobbying too). That is fine. But one must wonder, if she wants nothing to do with the people of Missouri, why does she want to be a legislator?

Suzyjax - it would be great if Democrats like you could actually take a course in comparison - your analogy is not comparing apples to apples - this is what you democrats typically do. Someone who chooses to make their body a sideshow is hardly the same as someone who is disfigured in an accident or whatever. Common - you must be ashamed of yourself by now.

Shecky - I’m a centrist and not a PC’r. That is what is great about being a centrist - one is allowed to be a realist and call it the way I see it. I would have said the same thing if it were Jeff Smith. Unfortunately, Democrats are gross panderers. But then again, that’s why they are democrats.

Centrist,
My point was that they were all may be considered “hard to look at”. I even pointed out that the two students had like done their peircings by choice. You know the problem with you non-Democrats is that you never read, or at least fail to comprehend what you read (if we are going to make such broad-based generalizations like you do “centrist”).

You say I’m not comparing apples to apples, I say it is NOT apples to oranges but perhaps Granny Smiths to Red Delicious. Admittedly different, but still apples.

It is noted that you don’t bother to address the point of a state legislator in a taxpayer paid office booting out two Missouri citiizens there to address their government. Which is really the underlying point of this blog post.