Yet another example of the system not working. The poor get railroaded and the rich get a pass.

Quote:
Yet another example of the system not working. The poor get railroaded and the rich get a pass.

You have to be rich to think like that in the first place. Wait-a-minute, I didn't write that. Oliver Stone did...

No plagiarism allowed:

Quote:
Chris Taylor: Didn't make much sense, I wasn't learning anything. I figured why should just the poor kids go off to war and the rich kids always get away with it.

King: Oh, I see, what we got here is a crusader.

Crawford: Sounds like it.

King: Shiiit, you gotta be rich in the first place to think like that. Ever'body know, the poor are always being fucked over by the rich. Always have, always will.

Lamont,

What exactly is the point you're trying to make? Are you saying that people with prior arrest records are fair game for being accused of crimes they didn't commit? Are you saying that Peanut company is more responsible than the wrongly accused man who died in prison or less?

What exactly is your stance on this whole thing?

Quote:
Lamont,

What exactly is the point you're trying to make? Are you saying that people with prior arrest records are fair game for being accused of crimes they didn't commit? Are you saying that Peanut company is more responsible than the wrongly accused man who died in prison or less?

What exactly is your stance on this whole thing?

I'm saying shit happens to good people. I'm saying that the media tells you who a victim might be without giving the full story. Shocking, huh? Example, The New York Times "single mother" endorsements. These women aren't victims of society. Hell, according to the New York Times they are quite successful, "...college educated. Many in their 30s, 40s, and 50s." Well, that is bullshit. 9 out of 10 of them are on welfare and cost you $112 billion dollars a year. Enough to bailout Wells Fargo and then some. Compare and contrast that to smoking, which costs the taxpayer $92 billion dollars a year and getting lower with all the hysteria about smoking killing harmless people, including single mothers and their juvenile delinquent offspring. I'm saying people need to pull their heads out of their asses and pay attention and stop acting like they are a spokesperson for the media every time shit hits the fan on some poor asshole you didn't give a shit about in the first place and still don't give a shit about. The odds were against the poor dead Mr. Cole to begin with. If he hadn't have gone to prison the odds were in his favor that he would have ended up in prison anyway or worse killed by another young black man. Mr. Cole was not working or striving towards providing anything to society. He won't be missed. Except by liberals who will forget all about him as soon as the next idiot gets a bad break. Funny how liberals never get a bad break. It is always somebody else. Somebody that they can blame on something else at no opportunity cost to themselves. Sort of along the line of Democrats using the media to bring a Republican gay politician out of the closet to ruin him but praising their own rank and file of gay politicians and absolutely not tolerating Republicans bringing a gay Democrat out of the closet to ruin him. The media teaches liberals to think in those terms.

The Texas judicial system convicted an innocent man through a jury of his peers based on the best available evidence at the time. He died of natural causes in prison. The Peanut Corp. of America ended up killing at least 8 people of bacterial poisoning, mainly the very young and the elderly. Yet, for liberals, the greater victim is the poor dead Mr. Cole. Why? Because the deceased Mr. Cole fits their ideological model of exploitation to attack mainly the government. It has nothing to do with actual death and killing of individuals. That is just a byproduct of their platform. It's total bullshit.

Quote:

The Texas judicial system convicted an innocent man through a jury of his peers based on the best available evidence at the time. He died of natural causes in prison. The Peanut Corp. of America ended up killing at least 8 people of bacterial poisoning, mainly the very young and the elderly. Yet, for liberals, the greater victim is the poor dead Mr. Cole. Why? Because the deceased Mr. Cole fits their ideological model of exploitation to attack mainly the government. It has nothing to do with actual death and killing of individuals. That is just a byproduct of their platform. It's total bullshit.

Ok, let me try to address some of these issues...

We can grieve the deaths of people who died of various causes and various circumstances. However, grief for lost lives is a separate issue from injustice.

People die of old age, diseases, accidents, crime and so on. Some of those deaths are tragic, some of those deaths are sad and some of those deaths are just normal part of a life cycle.

We can grieve for all of them, we can empathize with most of them, we can offer our best wishes to the survivors, their families and loved ones.

However, certain deaths, ruined lives and tragedies are caused not by individuals, not by the course of nature and not by tragic circumstance. Certain deaths are caused by the failures within the justice system, the unfulfilled or broken promises of equality before the law, the overzealousness, corruption or personal ambitions of those whose role it is to oversee the workings of the judicial system, to ensure that the promises of equality, justice and the spirit of due process (rather than the perception of due process) are fulfilled. It is in the wake of those failings that we, "the liberals", "the bleeding hearts" get outraged, try to galvanize (sometimes successfully and sometimes not) to change the system, to tweak the system, so that those things do not happen again.

The way we find out about these injustices are through the media. Does the media fulfill its own agenda? Sure. Is it truly impartial? No. Is it perfect? No. Is it fair? No. Unfortunately, we're stuck in the imperfect world with imperfect set of mass communication, driven by the promises of a perfect world, of a just world. It is the struggle to achieve the perfect world to fulfill the promises, to do better that is the driving force.

If you're looking for perfection in mass media, in liberal agenda or in the methods used in changing the system, you won't find them. The liberals are prone to corruption, duplicity and hypocrisy just like the conservatives, moderates and communists. It is the nature of humanity. We are subject to that nature. However, we strive to do better. We try to address the wrongs and to correct them (in our own image of right and wrong). So, if you're looking for consistency and model behavior, you won't find it here. We're flawed, we're faulty, we're imperfect. But we try to do better.

You guys catch any of that validation in Alex's post? See what I mean?

Quote:
You guys catch any of that validation in Alex's post? See what I mean?

No, I don't see what you mean.

I thought Alex's response was very articulate and well reasoned.

It stands in sharp contrast to your rather murky rant.

Anyone should be alarmed at a miscarriage of justice.

Just because we have an imperfect system doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to have a perfect one.

Quote:

Quote:
You guys catch any of that validation in Alex's post? See what I mean?

No, I don't see what you mean.

I thought Alex's response was very articulate and well reasoned.

It stands in sharp contrast to your rather murky rant.

Anyone should be alarmed at a miscarriage of justice.

Just because we have an imperfect system doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to have a perfect one.

You guys catch any of the validation in tom's post? See what I mean?

Quote:

Quote:

Quote:
You guys catch any of that validation in Alex's post? See what I mean?

No, I don't see what you mean.

I thought Alex's response was very articulate and well reasoned.

It stands in sharp contrast to your rather murky rant.

Anyone should be alarmed at a miscarriage of justice.

Just because we have an imperfect system doesn't mean we shouldn't strive to have a perfect one.

You guys catch any of the validation in tom's post? See what I mean?

Did anyone catch any lack of a succinct point in Lamont's posts? See what I mean?

Personally, I don't think anyone really gives a shit. I've noticed that.

Looks like we agree! Wow look at this! Coming together of the minds and ability to work together on a common cause - ambivalence.

Quote:
Looks like we agree! Wow look at this! Coming together of the minds and ability to work together on a common cause - ambivalence.

I'm apathetic about your ambivalence.

Quote:

Quote:
Looks like we agree! Wow look at this! Coming together of the minds and ability to work together on a common cause - ambivalence.

I'm apathetic about your ambivalence.

We need to be in Washington. I'm already sick of the new change. If Obama keeps campaigning I think I'm going throw up. Where is he today?

BTW, The New York Times is up to their own same old shit. This time women are dreaming about having sex with B. Hussein Obama. At least according to Judith Warner and the rest of her undersexed friends. So much for Sex and The City.

http://warner.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/05/sometimes-a-president-is-just-a-president/

Lamont,

I think you secretly wish you could have sex with Barak Obama. No one has that much stuff up his ass about a newly elected anyone, who hasn't had time to do anything unless there's some itch that just needs to be scratched. Why don't you just fess up to it, take a number and stand in line along with the rest of the women from NY Times.