LawTalkers - Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss.

Page 40 of 334

« First

140

Last »

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page

LawTalkers (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/index.php)

- Politics (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/forumdisplay.php?f=16)

- - Is Ted Cruz Satan? Discuss. (http://www.lawtalkers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=875)

Tyrone Slothrop

12-05-2014 08:11 PM

Re: You've got to speak out against the madness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 491717)

Hold your computer up to the mirror and read what you just wrote. You are the one responding. I'm the OP.

Respectfully, that's fine. Not sure why I tried. Knock yourself out.

Adder

12-05-2014 08:13 PM

Re: Yeah.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch (Post 491704)

I don't think that judges can decide to keep a proceeding, especially a criminal proceeding, secret. (And more and more they are realizing, especially in the federal courts, that they can't be so loose about letting parties in civil cases keep stuff secret.) There would have to be a statute mandating that the proceedings are kept secret.

Okay, but a statute is possible.

Hank Chinaski

12-05-2014 08:19 PM

Re: You've got to speak out against the madness.

done

Tyrone Slothrop

12-05-2014 08:24 PM

Re: You've got to speak out against the madness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 491723)

seriously, have you ever asked yourself why you should be the one who decide conversational direction? there are aspects of your internet persona that are delusional in your egotism. but i like you the person very much:D

Unlike everyone else, I actually responded to what you posted. If you're not interested in responding to what I said, that's fine. I'll get over pretty quickly. Oh look! I already did. Meanwhile, Adder says a statute is possible. That's a whole different conversational direction. Feel free to chase it.

Hank Chinaski

12-05-2014 08:36 PM

Re: You've got to speak out against the madness.

done

Hank Chinaski

12-05-2014 08:37 PM

Re: You've got to speak out against the madness.

done

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

12-07-2014 11:57 AM

Re: You've got to speak out against the madness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 491699)

if you really believe this you should off yourself to rid the world of one white person....

So this is how it ends, not with a bang but with a whiffer?

Sidd Finch

12-07-2014 07:30 PM

Re: You've got to speak out against the madness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 491728)

done

How long are you going to stick with this stupid gag? I'd like to know how long I should stay off the board.

You seem like a smart guy. When you do stuff like this, do you actually think it's funny? Or witty? Or clever? If so, you seem like a much less smart guy.

Hank Chinaski

12-07-2014 07:47 PM

Re: You've got to speak out against the madness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch (Post 491734)

I'll do this, then off PB forever. I posted that Mark Wahlberg, who apparently beat two asian men near to death as a kid, cost one an eye. he served time but he is looking for a pardon. I posted that he really should not get a pardon, what with the guy missing his eye and all.

Earlier I had posted the RS apology about the UVA thing. GGG implied my RS post was an attempt to excuse Bill Cosby. honestly, he did.

Ty took after me on the Mark Wahlberg thing. Maybe he was pushing my buttons, don't know, but i had simply posted that Wahlberg asking for a pardon, when a person has no eye, was pretty vile. Ty disagreed and pretty soon he was calling me a troll.

This board is pernicious generally, but when a post arguing that Mark Wahlberg asking for a pardon was wrong, gathers insults, I'm just done. No offense to anyone here, you are all perfect. I am just done with this board.

edit: maybe i just don't get something about this board, but if saying Mark W's beating of 2 men, 1 losing an eye, should not be erased makes me a troll then i just should not post here. I know most of you and like you as people, so it is better i just avoid this board.

sebastian_dangerfield

12-08-2014 08:07 AM

Re: You've got to speak out against the madness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 491736)

edit: maybe i just don't get something about this board...

You harbor the delusion this place is more honest debate than games.

IRL, people have to compromise and acknowledge all sides of an issue. Nobody likes doing that, particularly lawyers, as this robs them of the ability to run arguments to their absurd yet technically logical and defensible conclusions.

This, and pretty much every other forum in which there's argument in a vacuum, is a place where people come to fight to the death... a magical land where all the tricks you can never employ in the actual world can be used. Catharsis for the demented.

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

12-08-2014 11:07 AM

Re: You've got to speak out against the madness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 491736)

Dude, you were the one who posted UVA as a reply to Cosby. I implied nothing. I asked if you were inferring something. You may have missed this, but you do that sometimes.

As to Mark W, ultimate justice, isn't it, that his mostly forgotten crimes are remembered and become big news because he goes looking to have them pardoned?

Sidd Finch

12-08-2014 11:11 AM

Re: You've got to speak out against the madness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 491736)

I was criticizing your stupid "done" posts. If you had a substantive post about Mark Wahlberg, I didn't see it. Maybe you should try not to drown out your substance so much?

Greedy,Greedy,Greedy

12-08-2014 11:12 AM

Re: You've got to speak out against the madness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sidd Finch (Post 491734)

Someone made the holiday list!

Did you just call me Coltrane?

12-08-2014 12:06 PM

Re: You've got to speak out against the madness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by ThurgreedMarshall (Post 491672)

This is not exactly false and it is not completely true.

I will surely concede (and I already posted about it today) that people in power act like assholes and tend to want to remain in power. But white people are the ones who decided that they wanted to conquer the entire world and build empires. And they were the ones who actually did it. Hell, the UK only gave Hong Kong back in fucking 1997!

Slavery existed in lots of places, but in many places (including Africa) it was more like indentured servitude. It served as a punishment for crimes or was the result of being a captive of war. White people in this country took it to a whole different level.

All of this aside, what's your point exactly? That white people aren't inherently evil? Yes. We know. That Chris Rock is wrong? Because I don't really see it. The simple fact is, white people in this country have acted crazy. That statement doesn't change because another race in another country also acted crazy. To say that whites here only did so because they were in power and that other races act similarly horrible in other places when they are in power misses his point entirely and really just seems like a defensive reaction to the fact that in this country white people have acted crazy.

The clear takeaway is that a black person's success in this country should not be attributed to progress blacks have made, but the progress white people have made in not completely standing in the way of people they have traditionally treated as subhuman. What's interesting about what he said is that he has taken a perspective that all of us have internalized (i.e., black people are progressing, look at Obama!) and turned it on its head by pointing out that it's white people's attitudes that have progressed by accepting, and actually voting for, a black man to be a leader.

TM

I just drafted a detailed response to this, clicked submit, and then lawtalkers said that I wasn't logged in (which makes no sense since you have to be logged in order to get to the page that lets you post!). I browsed back and my response was gone.

I will try again later on today.

ThurgreedMarshall

12-08-2014 01:11 PM

Re: You've got to speak out against the madness.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Hank Chinaski (Post 491736)

I feel like you're seeing shit that isn't really there, but I've been guilty of that, so no judgment there. I didn't follow the GGG thing, but it seemed like Ty just wanted to discuss the pardon request.

I tend to think that Wahlberg should suck a large bag of dicks if he wants a pardon, but I didn't think it was really worth talking about. And you're right. Rich people with access get pardons. Poor people who have been wrongly imprisoned for years and have had famous lawyers or Innocence Project-type organizations (or both) completely expose the bullshit evidence against them get pardons. Sometimes. No one else gets pardons as far as I know.

TM

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:42 PM.

Page 40 of 334

« First

140

Last »

Show 40 post(s) from this thread on one page