Why are liberals so g-d d-mn st00pid sometimes?

Page 3 of 5 [ 69 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5  Next

TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

19 Sep 2012, 7:09 pm

Leftists tend to be from the school of "the important thing here is to protect the evildoer".



puddingmouse
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Apr 2010
Age: 34
Gender: Female
Posts: 8,777
Location: Cottonopolis

19 Sep 2012, 7:15 pm

AspieRogue wrote:
visagrunt wrote:

I disagree with you entirely.

Before trial, the state had the opportunity to transfer these cases to adult court. It either decided not to do so, or it failed to do so. Once the trial took place in juvenile court, the legal protections around these two offenders remained solidly in place.


It decided not to do so because these white boys came from rich families that were highly respected and hired defense attorneys with inside connections who were able to convince the DA to try them in juvenile court. If there were black boys from the ghetto, do you REALLY think they'd be tried in juvy court? HELLS NAW! The gag order was knowingly imposed by the judge for the benefit of the rapists whilst the victim herself had no benefit from it whatsoever simply because these boys came form families with more money and more power than hers! People need to know what these boys did in order for other girls to avoid becoming victims like Savannah Dietrich.That's the whole point of exposure in cases like this.


Quote:
And bear in mind--it is not these two offenders who are silencing their victim. It is the legislature and the courts that have mandated her silence. If you are going to advocate for a change of the law, you are going to have to do better than get angry about a single case. You're going to have to demonstrate a pattern of perverse outcomes.



If you were better informed, you'd realize that less than 50% of reported rapes result in a successful conviction and prison sentence. Even with forensic evidence! Many rapists never even make it to court even when their victims report the rapes to the Police. Victim blaming is a dirty trick that trial lawyers use to help rapists get off, or at least get light sentences. And this attitude results in victims being punished instead of rapists. This case happens to have gotten a lot of publicity but thousands of rape cases like this DO NOT because the victims are too ashamed or scared to speak up.


I agree with you, which is...odd.


_________________
Zombies, zombies will tear us apart...again.


TheBicyclingGuitarist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,332

19 Sep 2012, 7:15 pm

TM wrote:
Leftists tend to be from the school of "the important thing here is to protect the evildoer".


What about those on the right who apparently see nothing wrong with bribing or buying politicians to rewrite the laws so the rich get very unfair breaks and can exploit the poor and poison the planet without legal consequences? Just because something is not illegal does not mean it is not unethical or just plain bad. That is a form of evil too.

I do not see leftists as wanting to protect evildoers. I see them as advocating equal justice for ALL, including the rich who for now seem to get away with things that, if they were poor, they would never get away with. That seems to be part of the problem here according to the OP, that the criminals came from rich white families and were treated differently than if they had been black kids from the ghetto.

Sadly though, since we are dealing with human beings here, unfairness, hypocrisy and corruption may be inevitable. I can agree with some of the principles of limited government and individual freedom of the conservatives, just not the way they interpret or implement those principles. Some on the left go too far in my opinion where they say that everybody MUST share things equally with everybody else. That destroys any incentive for anyone to work harder or do better, if they can get a free handout from the suckers foolish enough to work when the fruits of their labor will be forcibly taken away from them and given to the lazy.


_________________
"When you ride over sharps, you get flats!"--The Bicycling Guitarist, May 13, 2008


TM
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 3 Feb 2012
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 2,122

19 Sep 2012, 7:21 pm

TheBicyclingGuitarist wrote:
TM wrote:
Leftists tend to be from the school of "the important thing here is to protect the evildoer".


What about those on the right who apparently see nothing wrong with bribing or buying politicians to rewrite the laws so the rich get very unfair breaks and can exploit the poor and poison the planet without legal consequences? Just because something is not illegal does not mean it is not unethical or just plain bad. That is a form of evil too.

I do not see leftists as wanting to protect evildoers. I see them as advocating equal justice for ALL, including the rich who for now seem to get away with things that, if they were poor, they would never get away with. That seems to be part of the problem here according to the OP, that the criminals came from rich white families and were treated differently than if they had been black kids from the ghetto.


I love how this argument went from "These assholes raped a girl, yet their names cannot be made public because they have to be protected thanks to leftist assholes" to "Rich people are c****".



TheBicyclingGuitarist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,332

19 Sep 2012, 7:28 pm

Hey, like it or not, whether or not you're willing to admit it, that does seem to be the way the world works, not just in America but wherever humans live. Those better off have more power than those less well off, and can use or trade that power to make things even better for themselves at the expense of everyone else even if that might be considered unfair by many people, even if it makes the whole world worse for everyone in the long run including themselves.

What surprised me early in this thread was when I posted my personal definitions of the differences between liberals and conservatives, and instead of challenging those definitions the OP self-defined himself as more of a liberal, when the title of this thread seemed to indicate this was to be a liberal-bashing thread. I think it is all about definitions. To me, liberal is NOT a bad word but represents the highest ideals of humanity and goodness, even Christian values (although I am not a Christian). Obviously, others see it differently, possibly because of the way their brains are built, or from their own life experiences, or if they rely on sources of information such as Fox News that may distort the truth more than some other sources.


_________________
"When you ride over sharps, you get flats!"--The Bicycling Guitarist, May 13, 2008


19 Sep 2012, 7:47 pm

TheBicyclingGuitarist wrote:
Hey, like it or not, whether or not you're willing to admit it, that does seem to be the way the world works, not just in America but wherever humans live. Those better off have more power than those less well off, and can use or trade that power to make things even better for themselves at the expense of everyone else even if that might be considered unfair by many people, even if it makes the whole world worse for everyone in the long run including themselves.

What surprised me early in this thread was when I posted my personal definitions of the differences between liberals and conservatives, and instead of challenging those definitions the OP self-defined himself as more of a liberal, when the title of this thread seemed to indicate this was to be a liberal-bashing thread. I think it is all about definitions. To me, liberal is NOT a bad word but represents the highest ideals of humanity and goodness, even Christian values (although I am not a Christian). Obviously, others see it differently, possibly because of the way their brains are built, or from their own life experiences, or if they rely on sources of information such as Fox News that may distort the truth more than some other sources.


I don't think that liberal is a bad word at all. But what I find is that I often clash with people who define themselves by that label and with what many people(on the political left) regard as liberalism. I actually chose the title words to get peoples attention as they are rather sensationalist and meant to read like a provocative headline.... :lol:




As for you visagrunt, WHAT do you as a Canadian actually know about American law?

You see, not only was the judges court ruling unfair to Dietrich, it violated her constitutional rights. The inclination of judges to rule in favor of those who are higher status and have more money is part of the motive for legal guidelines that put limits on judicial rulings and at the bare minimum require that they abide by the constitution. If a court order against someone tramples on their constitutional rights and this can be demonstrated, then there needs to be a clause that automatically dismisses any contempt of court charges that might be filed.



thewhitrbbit
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 May 2012
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,124

19 Sep 2012, 11:36 pm

We need to stop focusing on labels like R and D and start calling out ignorant behavior.

This judge should be impeached and put in the unemployment line for his ruling.



Inuyasha
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Jan 2009
Age: 37
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,745

19 Sep 2012, 11:40 pm

TheBicyclingGuitarist wrote:
TM wrote:
Leftists tend to be from the school of "the important thing here is to protect the evildoer".


What about those on the right who apparently see nothing wrong with bribing or buying politicians to rewrite the laws so the rich get very unfair breaks and can exploit the poor and poison the planet without legal consequences? Just because something is not illegal does not mean it is not unethical or just plain bad. That is a form of evil too.

I do not see leftists as wanting to protect evildoers. I see them as advocating equal justice for ALL, including the rich who for now seem to get away with things that, if they were poor, they would never get away with. That seems to be part of the problem here according to the OP, that the criminals came from rich white families and were treated differently than if they had been black kids from the ghetto.

Sadly though, since we are dealing with human beings here, unfairness, hypocrisy and corruption may be inevitable. I can agree with some of the principles of limited government and individual freedom of the conservatives, just not the way they interpret or implement those principles. Some on the left go too far in my opinion where they say that everybody MUST share things equally with everybody else. That destroys any incentive for anyone to work harder or do better, if they can get a free handout from the suckers foolish enough to work when the fruits of their labor will be forcibly taken away from them and given to the lazy.


Uh last I checked, Chicago is ran by Democrats, not Republicans...

Fact of the matter is that you really need to stop drinking the Kool-aid, while there are some corrupt Republicans, there are a lot more corrupt Democrats.



19 Sep 2012, 11:48 pm

thewhitrbbit wrote:
We need to stop focusing on labels like R and D and start calling out ignorant behavior.

This judge should be impeached and put in the unemployment line for her ruling.



I agree about unseating this judge, but what's more important is that there be changes to law to prevent this from continuing to happen. ENOUGH IS ENOUGH! However, I happen to know that the Democratic party is in bed with the criminal justice system. >>50% legal professionals vote democrat. And it's not necessarily because they're liberal.



TheBicyclingGuitarist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,332

20 Sep 2012, 1:24 am

Inuyasha wrote:
Fact of the matter is that you really need to stop drinking the Kool-aid, while there are some corrupt Republicans, there are a lot more corrupt Democrats.


Corruption is common to humans regardless of whatever politics. However many may or may not be corrupt in whichever party, it seems the Democrats are closer to my ideals than the Republicans. As I said earlier in this thread:

Quote:
I was interested in the news from a couple years back about liberals and conservatives having different brain structures, with conservatives apparently having a larger "fear center" of the brain than liberals do. That makes a lot of sense! On one hand it's kinda scary that supposedly free will choices may be very deterministic after all. On the other hand, it does explain a lot.

In general it seems the more education one has the more likely one is to have liberal views. Conservatives claim it is because of liberal bias in the schools, but maybe, just maybe, reality has a liberal bias. Maybe the more information one has (as long as it is not bogus or distorted like Fox News), and the better one is able to reason critically, the more likely one is to be liberal. Maybe as Santorum recently said, the smart people will never be on the conservatives' side!

What I see are conservatives denying science (sometimes for religious reasons, sometimes to protect their greed, sometimes both), favoring the rich in what seems to me to be unfair ways, exploiting the poor, raping and poisoning the planet to make a quick buck, and not caring about anyone else but themselves. I see liberals trying to help everyone (including rich people and conservatives, just not letting them take unfair or unethical advantages), and protect the planet, and being more fair about everything, not about being selfish greedy and mean. Of course that's my opinion and you may see things differently than me. It might be because our brains might be wired differently from each other.


I really have no interest debating with you Inuyasha, based on what I remember from our past disagreements. While some of what you say makes sense to me and I admire your perseverance, a lot of what you say seems to me to be based on misinformation. Are you still taking things said by Glenn Beck to be accurate descriptions of reality? Do you still think Fox News is one of the better sources of information? If so, I strongly suspect your brain has a larger "fear center" than mine.


_________________
"When you ride over sharps, you get flats!"--The Bicycling Guitarist, May 13, 2008


Last edited by TheBicyclingGuitarist on 20 Sep 2012, 1:38 am, edited 1 time in total.

20 Sep 2012, 1:37 am

TheBicyclingGuitarist wrote:
Inuyasha wrote:
Fact of the matter is that you really need to stop drinking the Kool-aid, while there are some corrupt Republicans, there are a lot more corrupt Democrats.


Corruption is common to humans regardless of whatever politics. However, at least I recognize that Fox News is more often WRONG than right, and I recognize that Rush Limbaugh and Glenn Beck are ignorant blowhards. It also seems that Democrats at least TRY to help the poor, protect the environment, and play fair, while Republicans have a long track record of doing the opposite.

I really have no interest debating with you Inuyasha. Are you still taking things said by Glenn Beck to be accurate descriptions of reality? Do you still think Fox News is one of the better sources of information? If so, I strongly suspect your brain has a larger "fear center" than mine.


In the 19th century, this was very much the opposite. You shouldn't assume that the Democratic party has always been the party of liberals and always will be. At the present time, the Republican party is the party of big business, the new rich, and the working class.



TheBicyclingGuitarist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,332

20 Sep 2012, 1:41 am

AspieRogue wrote:
In the 19th century, this was very much the opposite. You shouldn't assume that the Democratic party has always been the party of liberals and always will be. At the present time, the Republican party is the party of big business, the new rich, and the working class.


I am going by the way things are now, not the way they may have been more than a hundred years ago. The Republican Party has been growing more and more extreme towards the EVIL side (in my opinion) for the past several decades, while at the same time pretending or claiming to have the moral high ground. That is what makes it even more EVIL in my opinion.

As I said earlier, I agree with some Conservative principles regarding smaller government and individual freedom. But I don't agree with how they interpret or implement those principles. It seems to me that in order to embrace the Right nowadays one must either be brain dead, or a greedy selfish bastard, or both.

edit added: I notice that my post prior to this one was quoted by AspieRogue after I first posted it but before I was done editing. Dang, I really need to learn to do my editing BEFORE posting. lol


_________________
"When you ride over sharps, you get flats!"--The Bicycling Guitarist, May 13, 2008


ruveyn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Sep 2008
Age: 84
Gender: Male
Posts: 31,502
Location: New Jersey

20 Sep 2012, 12:31 pm

TheBicyclingGuitarist wrote:

I am going by the way things are now, not the way they may have been more than a hundred years ago. The Republican Party has been growing more and more extreme towards the EVIL side (in my opinion) for the past several decades, while at the same time pretending or claiming to have the moral high ground. That is what makes it even more EVIL in my opinion.



I agree somewhat. The Republican Party has been hijacked by Christian fanatics and idiots.

Mixing religion and politics is a bad idea.

ruveyn



visagrunt
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 16 Oct 2009
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 6,118
Location: Vancouver, BC

20 Sep 2012, 12:37 pm

Quote:
It decided not to do so because these white boys came from rich families that were highly respected and hired defense attorneys with inside connections who were able to convince the DA to try them in juvenile court. If there were black boys from the ghetto, do you REALLY think they'd be tried in juvy court? HELLS NAW! The gag order was knowingly imposed by the judge for the benefit of the rapists whilst the victim herself had no benefit from it whatsoever simply because these boys came form families with more money and more power than hers! People need to know what these boys did in order for other girls to avoid becoming victims like Savannah Dietrich.That's the whole point of exposure in cases like this.


How do you know why the Court decided to proceed as it did? Did the prosecution apply to move the trial to adult court and fail? Or was the court left with no option because the prosecution made no such application? Would the law even have allowed for adult proceedings in this case? Was the gag order imposed on the judge's discretion, or does state law require a gag order? Does state law permit exemptions from mandatory gag orders?

You don't know. You've done no analysis and you presume to know the reasons but you have not one shred of evidence to support your prejudices.

Quote:
If you were better informed, you'd realize that less than 50% of reported rapes result in a successful conviction and prison sentence. Even with forensic evidence! Many rapists never even make it to court even when their victims report the rapes to the Police. Victim blaming is a dirty trick that trial lawyers use to help rapists get off, or at least get light sentences. And this attitude results in victims being punished instead of rapists. This case happens to have gotten a lot of publicity but thousands of rape cases like this DO NOT because the victims are too ashamed or scared to speak up.


And so the remedy for this is to tear down the protections that exist for young offenders? How do you make that mental leap?

You are outraged at the crime--rightly so. You are outraged that the victim's revenge is legally prohibited. But your outrage is not a sound basis on which to form public policy.

If the prosecution of rape is hampered by unfair proceedings, then it is the responsibility of the law to take down the barriers that prevent people (and women in particular) for reporting sexual assaults. Empowering victims to take the law into their own hands does not accomplish that end--it merely countenances lawlessness.

Your outrage is commendable. But your foresight is sorely lacking.


_________________
--James


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,671
Location: Seattle

20 Sep 2012, 12:42 pm

visagrunt wrote:
We wouldn't countenance her pulling out a firearm and shooting them.


Speak for yourself. :wink:


_________________
Murum Aries Attigit


20 Sep 2012, 12:51 pm

visagrunt wrote:
Quote:
It decided not to do so because these white boys came from rich families that were highly respected and hired defense attorneys with inside connections who were able to convince the DA to try them in juvenile court. If there were black boys from the ghetto, do you REALLY think they'd be tried in juvy court? HELLS NAW! The gag order was knowingly imposed by the judge for the benefit of the rapists whilst the victim herself had no benefit from it whatsoever simply because these boys came form families with more money and more power than hers! People need to know what these boys did in order for other girls to avoid becoming victims like Savannah Dietrich.That's the whole point of exposure in cases like this.


How do you know why the Court decided to proceed as it did? Did the prosecution apply to move the trial to adult court and fail? Or was the court left with no option because the prosecution made no such application? Would the law even have allowed for adult proceedings in this case? Was the gag order imposed on the judge's discretion, or does state law require a gag order? Does state law permit exemptions from mandatory gag orders?

You don't know. You've done no analysis and you presume to know the reasons but you have not one shred of evidence to support your prejudices.

Quote:
If you were better informed, you'd realize that less than 50% of reported rapes result in a successful conviction and prison sentence. Even with forensic evidence! Many rapists never even make it to court even when their victims report the rapes to the Police. Victim blaming is a dirty trick that trial lawyers use to help rapists get off, or at least get light sentences. And this attitude results in victims being punished instead of rapists. This case happens to have gotten a lot of publicity but thousands of rape cases like this DO NOT because the victims are too ashamed or scared to speak up.


And so the remedy for this is to tear down the protections that exist for young offenders? How do you make that mental leap?

You are outraged at the crime--rightly so. You are outraged that the victim's revenge is legally prohibited. But your outrage is not a sound basis on which to form public policy.

If the prosecution of rape is hampered by unfair proceedings, then it is the responsibility of the law to take down the barriers that prevent people (and women in particular) for reporting sexual assaults. Empowering victims to take the law into their own hands does not accomplish that end--it merely countenances lawlessness.

Your outrage is commendable. But your foresight is sorely lacking.





Actually, your understanding of the American criminal justice system, and in particular how OUR justice system deals with sexual assault, is sorely lacking. Reporting a crime is nothing more than the first step, far too many reported rapes never make it to trial and result in the rapist going free. As I've said before, this is not an isolated case! It is simply one that has gotten a lot of media coverage. Most cases like this you never even hear about. It is the responsibility of the law to remove loopholes that allow rapists to escape justice. Progress has been made, but it's not enough. But what definitely needs to happen is a law that forces judges to abide by the constitution when issuing court orders.

To answer your prior questions, the gag order was indeed imposed at the judges discretion. And in fact, it was also at the court's discretion that the rapists be tried in juvenile court. Not all defense attorneys are created equal. And some of them in particular have relationships with judges and prosecutors and so the judges are more willing to negotiate than they are willing to with a public defender.