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

Post Reply New Topic

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.





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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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

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.



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.