No morals what-so-ever...

Lila Boffins said:
For those who decided to make this a president bashing thread, take it somewhere else. That's a stupid hi-jack.
Lila
Yes.
You are right...



__
__
__
 
I just love the way some people read selectively and then twist the information to suit their own purpose. Also appreciate the personal attacks, being called stupid and all that (is that the best you can do? Well you're a poopyhead...).

*To all of you contributing to this discussion on moral decline (whether on this particular topic of the VT case or in general) with valid points and suggestions kudos (and I am not going to make judgements on what is "valid", unlike some of you who are apparently omniscient).

To those of you who are resorting to personal attacks and focusing on your own predjudiced opinions instead of contributing something, guess what? You're coming off like the whiny complacent ignorant couch potato media spoon fed morons you are (and if I just offended you, re-read the above (*) and think about what that says about who you are!).
 
Graphic, you decided you needed to defend yourself. You found offense in what was said. And you're the one who has been offensive in your 'defensive' posts. *Sigh*

The thread was about injustice served by a judge. I see your point about complancency and it's a good one. But yet, you moved on to do more attacking defensive posting by attaking anyone who is not in the same political party as you.

My post was purely on the fact that bringing Bush into this thread was making it a stupid hi-jack. Did I say you are stupid for this hi-jack? No, I didn't.

It's a stupid hi-jack because of the fact that it is against GCC rules and guidelines, and it has been said time and time again not to discuss politics and religion in here.

So, to keep this thread on track, the political views of Bush/B Clinton/H Clinton and who ever else, should be kept out of the thread unless they actually have something directly to do with the case in discussion.

Maybe I'd like to see updates and any news on this case/judgement in VT. I won't be able to see it if people continue to argue their biased political views of the presidency/President. Why? Because the mods will lock it.

Please consider this? Thank you.
 
hmm ok that guy needs life cause that girl was 6.

but theres a problem with the system when you get into older aged girls between the ages of 12-42

there seems to be 2 catagories

real rapist (peopel that need dealt with)
and victims of girls that want attention

i know some of you are gonna disagree and as americans that your right but ive seen more than a few people get caught up in schemes by some girls that have serious psychological problems probably stemming from thier family life

example 1 . a guys dating a girl and finds out shes insaine. he breaks up with her and she tells the cops he raped her out of spite. he goes to jail without question till a hearing where she tries to say its a misunderstanding after his life job and reputation are ruined. (knew the guy)

yes i know theres real rapist out there and they need dealt with.
 
Last edited:
nursie said:
I couldn't agree more.

You have a problem with Bush? Well who else was there to vote for? Yep..war is hell, and the civillians where it takes place are unfortunately killed. Happened in our own country during our civil war. Did that make Lincoln a civillian murdered? Hmmmm....

I guess it depends on what your definition of better is. Yes. people need to get off their butts and be proactive and advocate for change. Who defines what the change for the better is?

I think we can all at least agree that 6 yr olds shouldn't be raped and the perpetrators get away with it. I'm personally hopin the guy is the principle entertainment at a gang tea party and has a banging' good time every night in prison. I hear they have a soft spot for baby rapers in the slammer...justice may indeed be served before it's all over.


who else was there to vote for. good point. im glad you pointed out that our democracy is an illusion . we dont choose who to vote for we get to pick between 2 maybey 3 evils all owned by the same coorperation. and even then our vote is merely a sugestion for the electorial college to choose wether or not they want to follow popular vote.

rights are an illusion too. in the constitution theres a thing that says the government cant take your money or personal stuff.but the lowest level of goverment (the city) can take your house giving you bare minimum property value based on the whole area you live in no matter how nice your house is

and the government can levey your bank account for impossible sums of money if they get the sligtest notion, they dont even have to send you notice of it.

im not bitter i hardly care our country is much too far gone to save it anyhow we might as well enjoy the ride down the toilet. im just stating facts.

i leave politics to the rich cause its only about money anyway.
 
Lila Boffins said:
Graphic, you decided you needed to defend yourself. You found offense in what was said. And you're the one who has been offensive in your 'defensive' posts. *Sigh*

Yes. Offending you all is my mission here, that much is obvious. That is why I singled people out and personally addressed my posts to them.

Lila Boffins said:
The thread was about injustice served by a judge. I see your point about complancency and it's a good one. But yet, you moved on to do more attacking defensive posting by attaking anyone who is not in the same political party as you.

I did what? I defensively attacked? Sounds like aikido to me... I am sorry I did not see any objective criticism of my statement, all criticisms sounded more like "F you buddy, how dare you make this statement" and "You're a jerk for doing/saying this". Funny how one statement leads to all this political garbage when I'm just saying that evil begets evil and complacency leads to idiots in a position where their idiocy can cause the most damage. People don't want to focus on the point, they want a fight, and they want to stay complacent and ignorant.

Lila Boffins said:
My post was purely on the fact that bringing Bush into this thread was making it a stupid hi-jack. Did I say you are stupid for this hi-jack? No, I didn't.

Stupid is as stupid does ma'am.

Lila Boffins said:
It's a stupid hi-jack because of the fact that it is against GCC rules and guidelines, and it has been said time and time again not to discuss politics and religion in here.

So, to keep this thread on track, the political views of Bush/B Clinton/H Clinton and who ever else, should be kept out of the thread unless they actually have something directly to do with the case in discussion.

Maybe I'd like to see updates and any news on this case/judgement in VT. I won't be able to see it if people continue to argue their biased political views of the presidency/President. Why? Because the mods will lock it.

Please consider this? Thank you.

Sure. I will now post something bland and completely without any debate so everyone can agree with me and clap me on the back for being so insightful and wise:

Rapists are bad. The act of rape is unforgivable whether it is a child or an adult. I once heard rape called "murder of the mind", and I agree. It leaves people forever damaged, and I speak from experience. That this rapist was released 2 months after incarceration is unforgivable. He should still be in jail.

The judge who is responsible should be impeached and disbarred from ever again polluting our legal system with his presence. He should also be criminally charged if possible.

I hope our society's morals can get better soon. This is outrageous, although it must be an isolated incident because I can think of no other outrageous things happening anywhere in recent memory that make me think our civilization is heading in the wrong direction.

:bowing: I hope this is better for you. I will go to another forum if I want to have an honest and intelligent discussion and make sure everything I post on AC is vanilla so that no one gets offended ever again.
:Angel: (jk!!)
 
Lila Boffins said:
For those who decided to make this a president bashing thread, take it somewhere else. That's a stupid hi-jack.

We are talking about a little girl that was raped. We are talking about the judge that failed to do justice

Lila


isnt complaining about the hijack a hijack also , not to mention fighting with that other guy for like 12 post.

dont get me wrong cause i really dont care, just figured id point that out. as for the thread getting locked, i think at this point thats what would be best for it.
 
The whole problem is having this d*mn arguement about politics started in the first place. Politics should have NEVER been brought into this discussion. Period. I am trying to tell some people about a horrible wrong done to an innocent 6yo girl in Vermont. This could have been a nice discussion, but NO. Politics HAD to be brought in, because no matter what, people HAVE to bring in THEIR opinion.

This is neither the place nor the time to share your political opinions. I respect both major political parties, and try to keep an open mind. However, bringing in a obvious hit&run insult on the major leader of our country that over 50% of the country voted for is simply NOT acceptable.

A more appropriate figure would be Adolf Hitler simply for the reason that (and any intelligent person would agree) he was an evil man. He willingly murdered over 6,000,000 people in the holocaust.

This is not opinion. This is FACT.

So leave your %$@#*&! political opinions in your mind where they belong.
 
The only way to stop stupid a$$ judges from handing out candy-assed f'd up sentences like this is to have elections for EVERY SINGLE JUDGE SEAT in the US. I already emailed the governor, and the board of bar (and dammit I can't find the address... google got it for me .)

I think if the 6-year old girl was this judge's granddaughter, he'd think differently about that sentence...

edited twice: i'm so upset about this it throws my grammar for a loop...
 
echoofformless said:
There are people doing more than 60 days in prison for getting caught with pot! :rant:
I believe I recently heard about a guy who got 55 years for selling a couple of hundred dollars of pot. I want to say that was his first offense, but I'm not 100% sure.

I simply can't believe the 60 day sentence. I wonder if the perpetrater had "the goods" on someone with influence.

Peace...
 
AquariaCentral.com