Why is Rocker having dinner in a Gay/Gay-Friendly restaurant in the first place? Dallas' gay district is in a small, but well known section of town, you can't tell me that he was unaware of the neighborhood being predominately gay! I know he was with his girlfriend/wife, but he may also have been there to check out guys, or maybe just curious about gay life in general. Could he be a bigoted, self-hating closet case or am I completely wrong??

That thought DEFINITELY crossed my mind as well.

I wish Rocker could be eliminated from baseball.

I thought the same thing!!! What is Rocker doing in a gay friendly resteraunt if he hates being next to "a queer with aids"? Yes I too think Marmaduke has something to hide. "Thou dost protest too loudly". Only problem is that when he does make his move on a guy, it won't come acoss very well because of his actions.

I was always taught that it is better to say nothing if you don't have anything nice to say at all. In that line of thought, my first reaction was..oh no here he goes again. But when I read the complete article posted, I rethought my reaction. Maybe John and his girlfriend went to the restaurant because the food was good. I've gone to some the biggest redneck places in eastern PA for a good steak. Also I can see many of the patrons there heckling him because of his stupid assinine remarks in the Sports Illustrated article. And losing his temper can be a natural reaction. I do know that as a gay man when I get hassled by the straight community (more so living in MT, than on the east coast), my first reaction was to fight back. But as maturity set in, I realized it was a losing battle. And my thought is, are we to believe the restaurant patrons strictly because they are gay and/or transgendered or because John is a big horse's patootie? I don't know. But I do think that this arguement and scene was created by both sides. Just my opinion

I don't think Mr. Rocker is particulary gifted when it comes to intelligence.

Oh my God! You mean they allowed straight people into a "predominantly gay" neighborhood?
What is the world coming to?

Shouldn't they have military checkpoints along the borders between "predominantly gay" and non-gay neighborhoods. Anyone entering should be forced to renounce their dirty little heterosexuality, and promise that they will redecorate their homes once they return.

...Or maybe Marmaduke and his chicklette just heard that the food was good at restaurant X, and had no idea that his mere presence there would disrupt the cosmic opera being played out in the minds of queens in Dallas.

Nimrod is a big boy. He gets hungry. He was bound to hit all the Dallas eateries at some point.

Reading the story, it seems there is some dispute as to whether his comments were provoked or not. Either way, he still hasn't learned to keep his mouth shut. Very stupid and quite pathetic.

He has to be gay because I absolutely refuse to believe that after his past comments and murder by effigy in the media that he could be this stupid.

That's was my first thought. Why was he in a predominately gay neighborhood? Cruising, perhaps?

And the story I read said he was with his girlfriend. Wasn't he married?

Well, the squeaky wheel is the one that wants to get greased.

[ August 06, 2002: Message edited by: PCC ]

Call me a self-loather but for the most part I support Rocker going off. From what I can tell from the story and from what I know about cynical queens, they're lucky he just didn't smack'em. The man made some hateful comments almost four years ago and we're still picking at the scab. No, he probably doesn't like gays still, but if we know this why bother the guy while he's trying to eat? I tend to not bother people that don't like me. Why those guys felt compelled to pick a fight, I don't know. As stupid as it was for Rocker to go off, it was equally as stupid for the couple to bother him. That situation is akin to Jesse Jackson making rude remarks to the leader of the KKK and running to the media because he used the N word in retaliation. What closeted pro-athlete is going to come out when some gays refuse to leave self- proclaimed straights like Piazza and Rocker alone?

Z

as they say, i guess you would'v had to have been there...to know the truth, but i will say this: dallas "queens" can be quite vicious and obnoxious, so who knows? i'm open to both sides of the argument.

Zman, your position makes sense only if you believe Rocker's story completely and disbelieve the several people who said otherwise. As it stands, there's apparently not enough strong evidence to know who's telling the truth. Rocker's past comments indicate that he might have initiated it. But that's not proof that he did. I'm withholding judgment on this one.

Who (other than Pete Rose) wants to bet that the restaurant's security camera tapes will soon end up on one of those tv tabloid shows???

[ August 06, 2002: Message edited by: Wurm ]

John Rocker is not an average heterosexual citizen. I hate to hear gay guys complain about the straight people hanging out in gay areas. In fact, I would love to see straight people here tell a few of the queens off when they get that attitude. However, I don't think those straight people should ever use epithets in their rebuttal. In addition, Rocker is in the public eye, he doesn't get the privilege of anonymity. he made a mistake, I can't stand him, and he's going to hear about it. Regardless of provoked or not, he has to take the higher road because of his position.

I agree with this guy
http://www.accessatlanta.com/ajc/living/cr...roft/index.html

The restaurant in question is 2 blocks from my office and I have eaten there many times. It is not a "predominatley gay" area or restaurant, it is very mixed.

John Rocker is an idiot. If he had a brain in his head he would have kept his mouth shut. You would think he has been in enough trouble about this kind of thing to learn a lesson.

I am generally pretty neutral about baseball - to me its so slow its like watching paint dry. When the Rangers acquired Rocker I became a fan of whoever they play. The Rangers suck.

Check out the poll on the same page as the article in the "Atlanta Journal-Constitution...apparently alot of people are siding with Rocker on this...or am I completely misreading it?

I would have voted "Totally Understandable", except for the "Go John" part. So I voted "Why does anyone still care".

I agree with Jay Croft too. Don't rattle his cage, it's cruelty to a dumb animal.

[ August 06, 2002: Message edited by: ATL Jock ]

God, if I keep making comments like I'm about to make, the Gay police are going to revoke my card. I agree with Z man. There is an element of our community that takes it upon themselves to "initiate" conflict in the name of homosexuals everywhere in order for us to advance the cause.
We have an eatery here in Bham that sounds similar to one in the article. I have heard things said at a table of gay guys that made me blush. I didn't want to hear it. I can only imagine how the straight people sitting around me felt.


I'm not going to say that I haven't had "words" in a restaurant before either. Just this past month, my partner and I were in Atlanta on business for his company and sitting at the bar at the Ritz-Carlton downtown (only saying this because it wasn't some dive bar). There was a group of exhibitors (men and women) sitting beside us getting a little obnoxious. One of the guys, in order to win favor with one of the skank women, kept telling her he was "gay" and harmless. Well, I endured about 20 minutes of this and I finally said something to him, very politely, telling him that we were gay, would possibly be buying from his company the next day and I asked for his name so I would be sure and ask for him in the showroom. He was dumbfounded, apologetic and quickly left.


Rocker was dead wrong in his reaction to these guys. He's an ass and he always will be and I could care less about him.

But, guys, whether we are gay, straight, transgendered, curious, confused, whatever new sexual segment we have this week....we should all act with a sense of decency when in public.

I would sympathize with John Rocker if not for the fact that he apparently initiated the enmity with his alleged comments on the NY subway denigrating just about anyone who wasn't..John Rocker.

BTW: Hope this issue fades fast, I'm not sure how long I can stand pulling up the Outsports front page and seeing that mug. Why can't..say..Andy Roddick do something contoversial?

[ August 06, 2002: Message edited by: sportinlife ]

[quote] The restaurant in question is 2 blocks from my office and I have eaten there many times. It is not a "predominatley gay" area or restaurant, it is very mixed.

---

Sorry, my mistake. I thought the restaurant might have been in the Oak Lawn area. Maybe I'm wrong about his sexual orientation, but I think we can all agree on his ignorance.

[quote]Originally posted by Zman:
From what I can tell from the story and from what I know about cynical queens, they're lucky he just didn't smack'em. The man made some hateful comments almost four years ago and we're still picking at the scab. No, he probably doesn't like gays still, but if we know this why bother the guy while he's trying to eat?

---

This is a matter for debate. It's alleged by people there that no one bothered him.

Zman, Let me get this straight (no pun intended), it's the "cynical queens" in the restaurant's fault that Rocker's an ass****? They should leave him alone to eat his meal? (Never mind their meal) And these "cynical queens" are lucky he didn't smack them? Hmmm, basically from reading all the same stuff we've all read, you've decided that these "cynical queens" should not only not speak but consider themselves lucky they weren't hit for speaking out of turn to the big macho baseball player? Is this correct?

First of all, how do you know what these guys were like? What level of homophobia exists in you that makes you instantly presume that these are so-called "cynical queens?" Same with you DC guy - you'd love to hear some straight people tell off the queens with attitude? Do you usually believe that violence both physical and verbal is the appropriate response to something you don't like?
And what the f**k does that mean anyway? That they're witty, that they're ass****s, that they speak with a lisp? How does a person make it on to your "cynical queen" list?

The point is you're both putting the same amount of stereotypical homophobia upon this situation as some ignorant right winger would...Of course, I know what a cynical queen is, and understand the reaction, but you don't know what happened there, and perhaps members of the gay community deserve the benefit of your doubt. Rocker is known to be aggressively homophobic...it's not hard to fathom his going off with little to no provocation.

Was what John Rocker said shockingly stupid?? Don't think you'll find anyone who disagrees, even Rocker himself (ex post facto). But what bothered me about the whole Rocker thing was how people dragged it out, over and over again, just on and on and on. The guy's a moron, and it was rather alarming that people would pay so much attention to such a moron.

But professional victims just l-o-v-e dragging John Rocker through the mud, over and over and over again. There is such tremendous solace in self-pity, and Rocker's stupidity gives the professional victim an "evil oppressor" to focus on. And crap if there isn't anything that gives professional victims a bigger hard-on than the opportunity to wear their victimhood on their sleeve.

IMHO, John Rocker is a low-grade moron who is about as significant as a gnat. Get over it, and move on.

[quote]Originally posted by BoSoxRudy:
IMHO, John Rocker is a low-grade moron who is about as significant as a gnat. Get over it, and move on.

---

AMEN, BROTHER!

How is being upset with someone making homophobic slurs in a public restaurant that gays frequent being a proffesional victim? Wouldnt a proffesional victim just be quiet and act like its okay to be a called a faggot in a public place? I agree that what rocker thinks or does is meaningless, unless it infinges on others rights to say maybe eat dinner without being called a faggot. Of course I dont know who started what but even if those customers started the incident, should the other gay customers have to listen to rocker's BS?

*sigh* Okay, time for me to weigh in my comments here.

A lot of different thoughts come to mind over this issue. I will try to make the logical (though that's difficult sometimes!)

1. If this area isn't "predominantly gay" as someone who works two blocks away says, the I dont' think we need to bother asking what Rocker was doing there. Besides, it's a resturant, and he needs to eat too! If it's a good resturant, all the more reason to go!

2. We don't at this stage of the game, REALLY know if Rocker was provoked or not. HOWEVER, that doesn't excuse his comments at all. He is a professional athlete in the public eye, and therefore should be more careful.


3. I do agree with Zman in one way. I think there are SOME people, in every minority group, that love to play the victim. Gays are just another group this happens for. And yes, I do consider Gay and Lesbians to be a minority, but that's another topic. Anyway, because of that, you are going get people who cry wolf at situations. But I don't know if we'll ever really find out if that applies in this case.

4. Does anyone think this is a ploy by Rocker to get attention? I'm kind of surprised it wasn't mentioned (or if it was, I misread). I mean, he's on the DL, I didn't think he'd been doing all that great (I've stopped following baseball), so maybe this is his way of getting some attention?


Trevor

Bryan D.
How you are able to make the latest Rocker incident a partisan issue is beyond me. There are a lot of democrats (fundamental African Americans for instance) that are anti-gay.

My earlier point was if the couple in question started it, then they shouldn't be surprised how Rocker finished it and given what we know of him, they got off easy (no pun intended). He's a jerk-- albeit a hot one-- but a jerk nonetheless. GLAAD didn't need to "reject" his apology; Texas doesn't need to issue a "this is unacceptable" statement; and we certainly don't need to pretend as if this is an outrage. An outrage is President Bush saying "f**k those faggots," comments from a twice-demoted closer on a last place baseball team should not be blown out of proportion.

One problem is that because of Rocker's track record, he is automatically assummed guilty. It is certainly possible that some smart-assed guys decided to provoke a reaction. Hell, maybe they were even trying to provoke a fight so they could sue.

Rocker is a idiot, bar none. But it doesn't mean he is the only idiot in this one.

[quote]Originally posted by Zman:
Bryan D.
How you are able to make the latest Rocker incident a partisan issue is beyond me. There are a lot of democrats (fundamental African Americans for instance) that are anti-gay.

---

There's nothing in Bryan's post making this a "partisan" issue or mentioning political parties. He merely took issue with the use of the term "cynical queens" and the depiction of people as such.

I take issue with those who think Rocker isn't deserving of any attention. On one level he's not, because not only is he just a ballplayer but he's turned out to be a pretty mediocre one at that.

However, he IS a public figure. A public figure who makes ignorant statements in public, provoked or not, should be challenged on them. And considering that Rocker never really apologized for the anti-gay portion of his original comments, I have no problem with his being challenged if he continues to make such remarks. This doesn't mean people should provoke him, however.

Hey Joe,
I believe the sentence "you're both putting the same amount of stereotypical homophobia upon this situation as some ignorant right winger would..." qualifies as politically charged :- )

Z

"Rocker apologizes for anti-gay remarks," from the Sporting News:

After reading this I'm (egad!) inclined to side with Rocker.

[quote]
DALLAS -- Texas Rangers pitcher John Rocker issued a written apology Monday for anti-gay remarks he made toward patrons of a popular eatery.

Rocker said he was with his girlfriend on Sunday at Breadwinners Cafe & Bakery when some customers began badgering and pestering him.

"It seemed as if they were trying to bait me with suggestive comments," Rocker said in the statement.

Richard Garcia, who waited on Rocker and his girlfriend, said the ballplayer was not provoked. Garcia said Rocker called a male couple sitting at a nearby table "fruitcakes" as he got up and left.

"That's nothing someone should hear from somebody who's supposed to be a role model," Garcia said in a story in The Dallas Morning News' Tuesday edition. "Just because you're a superstar, that still does not license you to say that."

---

I hate to correct the waiter, but John Rocker is neither "superstar" nor "role model."

[quote] "He's human but he should know better," Breadwinners manager Feletia Lee told Dallas-Fort Worth television station KDFW. "There are a lot of people here who aren't going to go to any Rangers games again.

"I'm not going to go. I can't support them. That is just uncalled for."

---

[ August 07, 2002: Message edited by: canmark ]

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
"He's human but he should know better," Breadwinners manager Feletia Lee told Dallas-Fort Worth television station KDFW. "There are a lot of people here who aren't going to go to any Rangers games again.
"I'm not going to go. I can't support them. That is just uncalled for."


Why would anyone go in the first place?

Z - you're nitpicking at a simple analogy which is a good way for you to avoid taking responsiblity for calling those folks 'cynical queens' without having any idea who they are, what they look like, or what was said....

Let's see, we know:

1) John Rocker is a homophobe.

2) There is a chance John Rocker maybe a latent homosexual.

3) There is a bigger chance that John Rocker is hetrosexual and a jerk.

4) John Rocker is a public figure who although its been awhile, has and can throw some verbal rage.

5) An unpleasant exchange of words occured between John Rocker and unnamed "gay men" and/or "queens" at a so called or"gay friendly" establishment (I wonder if said eating establishment gives gay men 10% or more disount on the bill of fare....Now that's being Gay Friendly." ) in Dallas, Texas.

Now,

1) Such behavior on both sides was detestable. Rocker being a public figure and given his past should have known and reacted better. The unnamed gay men and "queens" should have taken the higher road, but seems they opted for their fifteen minutes of fame with the "big macho baseball player." (mmmm what a discription , but I degress. )

2) I don't believe being a MLB player gives Rocker the right to be blantantly rude to anyone, but nor do I believe being gay gives anyone the license behave so shamefully. Leave such behavior to the less developed.

[quote]Originally posted by Zman:
Hey Joe,
I believe the sentence "you're both putting the same amount of stereotypical homophobia upon this situation as some ignorant right winger would..." qualifies as politically charged :- )

Z

---

You're right. I didn't pick up on that phrase.

Another thought--why is it that all of Rocker's apologies are obviously scripted statements? They're so obviously insincere.

[ August 07, 2002: Message edited by: Joe in Philly ]

With all the tax money that is being put into major league baseball, and all the money that we fans spend on merchandise, tickets, etc. In a way John Rocker is employed by us. He is a millionaire and as impossible as it may seem he should be held to a higher standard than two queens or whoever in a restaurant. He should be accountable to us. So I dont think anyone should have to leave him alone till he quits baseball and gets out of the Public eye. I support his right to go around making homophobic slurs, but he should also be accountable for his actions, his stupidity is not an excuse.

GP... I just flat out disagree with your posting. John Rocker does not work for us, the fans, he is employed by the owners of the Texas Rangers... Period.

It is they who sign John Rocker's paycheck and it is they who John Rocker is accountable to for any actions which are questioned when it affects his job.

Being a public figure opens himself up to public scrunity but even as such, John Rocker still does not answer to the public. He may very well have to answer in public. Like anyone, John Rocker's public behavior is expected to fall inline with acceptable public behavior. Just as the public behavior of those men who John's encounter brought so much attention should be expectged to be inline within acceptable behavior. From the accounts of the incident, it doesn't sound like either side have much to say for themselves. At least John or the Texas Rangers were smart enough to issue an apology. Sincer or fake, it was made, take the apology and John Rocker for what it and he appears to you.

I can tell you, in Texas, such behavior by it's sport's figures or gay men is not viewed with fondness. Frankly, I believe this incident is a private matter but open to public comment due to Rocker's public status. Otherwise, let it go....move on.... leave the guy alone.

[ August 07, 2002: Message edited by: satxbuddy1 ]

Every public figure is going to get unwanted attention. He all by himself got himself back into the news, he knows people will recognize him, he knows he hates gays and gays dont like him. He still decided to go to a restaurant that gays frequent and make a scene. He could have left quietly even if they were doing something to antagonize him. Every public figure doesnt go around calling people fags. It was his stupidity and own choice to get back in the news, if anyone is trying to play the helpless victim here it is rocker. Maybe all public figures should be "left alone" but they are not, and why is it special and different for rocker just because he is a homophobic bigot.

And if you bought a ticket to a Rangers game or if any tax money was used in the building of the Ballpark in Arlington then you are making it possible for the Rangers to sign over that paycheck to rocker

Frankly I could care less about this incident, the only thing that bothers me is how rocker is almost being made out to be a helpless victim, being tormented by gay people. He is just to stupid to defend himself and we're all being mean to him. Give me a break

[ August 08, 2002: Message edited by: gp43 ]

I also think that editorial in the (ajc) is quite idiotic. He thinks he has to tell ALL gay people to leave poor rocker alone, like rocker is really worth my time. And ALL gay people really give a crap about his haircut. And believe me I dont think his physique is all that, specially since its attached to a dopey stupid face of his. But since I'm gay I need this guy telling me how treat rocker.

[ August 08, 2002: Message edited by: gp43 ]

I think it's one thing to taunt a player on the field for his poor play or for his bad attitude... but let the guy have his meal in peace. He's still a human being. Maybe, gradually, he'll come around a little bit.

It's like movie stars being assaulted by paparazzi and autograph hounds and stalker fans. Can you blame them for becoming irate?

I don't think the gay patrons of that restaurant come looking so good, getting into a name-calling match with Rocker. If you think you're superior to someone, you don't prove it by stooping to their level.

[quote]Originally posted by gp43:
Every public figure is going to get unwanted attention. He all by himself got himself back into the news, he knows people will recognize him, he knows he hates gays and gays dont like him. ...

Reply: Who says gays don't like him, some gays don't like him, some gays enjoy disliking him, some of us take him for what he is and moved on.
_______________________________________________
"He still decided to go to a restaurant that gays frequent and make a scene. He could have left quietly even if they were doing something to antagonize him. ....

REPLY: Rocker isn't the only one who decied to be at the Breadwinners. Rocker is not the only party in this incident who decided to make a scene. Rocker is not the only one who could have shown a higher sense of character and left quietly and probably with more creditability and respect. Such behavior on both parties is detestable and inexcusable. Being gay doesn't mean making a public "scene" is acceptable.
_______________________________________________

"Every public figure doesnt go around calling people fags. It was his stupidity and own choice to get back in the news, if anyone is trying to play the helpless victim here it is rocker. Maybe all public figures should be "left alone" but they are not, and why is it special and different for rocker just because he is a homophobic bigot."

REPLY: Well, if all of us know how stupid Rocker is, then stupidity is taken to a new low when those gay men fell for Rocker's verbal garbage. Just because Rocker is a homophobic bigot and a public figure doesn't mean we have to stoop to his level. Those men reacted in worse possible way. It would have served themselves better if after being insulted, they would have stood up, picked up their beverage, and toasted everyone in the place with well wishes.

It works both way, GP. We already know Rocker isn't the best public figure to keep acceptable decourm. What excuse do the other guys have other than , the big bad macho baseball player called me a nasty name.... booo hoooo... They saw opportunity to make a scene with a known homophobe, so thus, lets grab some limelight.....huh. Detestable.
______________________________________________
"And if you bought a ticket to a Rangers game or if any tax money was used in the building of the Ballpark in Arlington then you are making it possible for the Rangers to sign over that paycheck to rocker"

REPLY: No different than any other city who's used public money to build their sport team's new homes. You still don't own the team nor is Rocker your employee. This is not a valid argument. Get rid of the Rangers if such ill feeling exsits, then, you'll have an empty ballpark.

_______________________________________________
"Frankly I could care less about this incident, the only thing that bothers me is how rocker is almost being made out to be a helpless victim, being tormented by gay people. He is just to stupid to defend himself and we're all being mean to him. Give me a break"....

REPLY: Give me a break when you are expecting me to believe those guys didn't know what they were doing by entering into a confrontation with John Rocker. Such an encounter could lead to only one outcome.... a media furry... and guess what... it happen.....

[ August 08, 2002: Message edited by: gp43 ]

---

Hi: Received this rather nasty letter from somone who saw the CNN show. This does unfortunately represent an element in our society:

People should be allowed to be who they are and no
one
should argue that. And, upfront let us clarify that gays and lesbians
have
nothing in common with the problems that people of color experience.
There
are greats and trash in every race and anyone who judges someone by
color is
obviously ignorant. Now, gays and lesbians, on the other hand, would be
more
easily compared to drug addicts and the handicapped. If they are born
with
this then they deserve equal rights, but no special rights. For
example, for
a couple who cannot naturally conceive children and want to
raise them should be thoroughly examined on a case-by-case
basis. This
example only covers one of many. For those who choose to be gay as a
lifestyle are certainly sick and obsessed with the most unnatural acts
of
sex. If they want to do this in private that is fine, but should it be
pushed
upon the public one should expect it to be met with great resistance.
For
example, you would not expect the public to greet a crack dealer with
open
arms. In reference to John Rocker he may speak a little too much for a
public
figure, but unintentionally he speaks for many. Moral: if you are going
to be
a freak, it is America and you can be!!! On the other hand if you do
not do
it in private be prepared to deal with the consequences.

That would almost be funny if it wasn't so horrifying, Jim.

MMMMMMMMM Don't know bout that one... seems he's the one who's needs "checking out" or maybe "checking into" the local lunney bin.

What a freak...

You know, none of us, including the Dallas Brunch queens should never take John Rocker or anything he says, umm , shouts or whatever grunt sounds the big mound of testosterone makes.seriously.

Given what we all know and maybe experienced ... there's a good chance today's verbal outrage will be John Rocker's verbal foreplay in a few years, after a night of shirtless, sweaty dancing at the local leather bar.....

I mean, come on guys, consider the source...
John Rocker....please... give me a break, then, give me something to get excited or angry about... I'm surprised the guy even knows how to eat in a public restaurant.

Opps,,, He doesn't.....scratch that one.


Now, if it was someone like the mayor of the Big D spewing such venom, then our Sunday Brunch Mambo Queens might have a Texas cow chip case.

Of course, getting into a screaming match with the macho diva of baseball gets more media attentnion.

Oh well, what else can get Dallas get talking about their Rangers... certianly isn't their performance on the field... what...27 1/2 games out to first...... Sad...

[quote]Originally posted by SeaMarFan:
Sorry, my mistake. I thought the restaurant might have been in the Oak Lawn area. Maybe I'm wrong about his sexual orientation, but I think we can all agree on his ignorance.

---

Last I checked, the entire Midtown/Oaklawn area was predominantly gay. Its also predominantly too damn expensive to live in now too. But thats not the issue. The issue is Rocker is still a moron and didnt learn his lesson in New York.

And true I agree with the above statement of, who would go watch the Rangers anyway??

[quote]Originally posted by DallasUNC:



And true I agree with the above statement of, who would go watch the Rangers anyway??

---

Rafel Palmeiro , Rusty Greer , Pudge Rodriguez , Frank Catalanotto Kevin Mecnch

Sigh....

[quote]Originally posted by Jim at Outsports:
In reference to John Rocker he may speak a little too much for a
public
figure, but unintentionally he speaks for many. Moral: if you are going
to be
a freak, it is America and you can be!!! On the other hand if you do
not do
it in private be prepared to deal with the consequences.

---

This is why what John Rocker does as stupid as it may be matters, he gives inspiration to people like this. Of coarse there's idiotic gay people who will help him get back in the news, just like theres idiots for every other type of person. The difference is when rocker gets it in the news he paints all gay people as faggots, fruitcakes or people who should die of aids. And it is different for him because if he was just a bigot working at the gas station making minimum wage it wouldnt be national news. I will never understand any defense of rocker or see him as a victim.