Trayvon / Media

[spence]

Originally Posted by RIJIMMY

uhh, unless Trayvon circled back and jumped him - which 100% backs up Zimmermans story.

Yea, cause a 17 year old kid who went to the store for Skittles and soda would just randomly attack someone? Happens all the time...

Or, Martin was being followed and felt threatened. If he was, and did attack Zimmerman it's still going to be manslaughter because Martin had every legal right to be doing what he was.

You're both assuming he followed him with no evidence. Please post evidence not speculation.

The evidence needs to show that Martin was committing a crime, not that he wasn't. You're asking for the prosecution to prove a negative here.

-spence

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by spence

Yea, cause a 17 year old kid who went to the store for Skittles and soda would just randomly attack someone? Happens all the time...

Or, Martin was being followed and felt threatened. If he was, and did attack Zimmerman it's still going to be manslaughter because Martin had every legal right to be doing what he was.



The evidence needs to show that Martin was committing a crime, not that he wasn't. You're asking for the prosecution to prove a negative here.

-spence

"Yea, cause a 17 year old kid who went to the store for Skittles and soda would just randomly attack someone? Happens all the time..."

Earth to Spence...you weren't there.

Spence, I'd love to know what you were saying in the first day or two after the Duke lacrosse rape case eploded onto the scene.

You liberals crack me up. You won't call the Ft Hood shooter an Islamic terrorist despite overwhelming evidence. But you have no problem rushing to judgment here.

As always, if it serves the liberal agenda, it must be true. It it spits in the face of the liberal agenda, it must be false.

By the way, I think Zimmerman is probably guilty of something here. But from where I sit, there's all kinds of ways to raise reasonable doubt. Zimmerman says he was attacked, the back of his head is covered in blood, that's a whole lot of reasonable doubt right there.

[likwid]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

"Yea, cause a 17 year old kid who went to the store for Skittles and soda would just randomly attack someone? Happens all the time..."

Earth to Spence...you weren't there.

Spence, I'd love to know what you were saying in the first day or two after the Duke lacrosse rape case eploded onto the scene.

You liberals crack me up. You won't call the Ft Hood shooter an Islamic terrorist despite overwhelming evidence. But you have no problem rushing to judgment here.

As always, if it serves the liberal agenda, it must be true. It it spits in the face of the liberal agenda, it must be false.

By the way, I think Zimmerman is probably guilty of something here. But from where I sit, there's all kinds of ways to raise reasonable doubt. Zimmerman says he was attacked, the back of his head is covered in blood, that's a whole lot of reasonable doubt right there.

And you were milking every last blame/attack on liberals you could muster when the kid who lost his crap lit up the afghanis.

Stay classy Jim! Stay classy!

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by likwid

And you were milking every last blame/attack on liberals you could muster when the kid who lost his crap lit up the afghanis.

Stay classy Jim! Stay classy!

I didn't say I was classy. I'm saying I'm correct. And when liberals stop talking about facts or relevent opinions and hurl insults instead, that's when I know I've won.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Spence, I'd love to know what you were saying in the first day or two after the Duke lacrosse rapecase eploded onto the scene. I guess b/c he's a liberal and all liberals think alike?

You liberals crack me up. [/COLOR]stereotyping?[/COLOR]As always, if it serves the liberal agenda, it must be true. It it spits in the face of the liberal agenda, it must be false.As always, if it serves the cons. agenda, it must be true. It it spits in the face of the cons.l agenda, it must be false. yadda yadda yadda

All your anger is gonna kill you.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

All your anger is gonna kill you.

Wrong as usual. I'm not brainwashed by either side. I have said before, I think liberals have great arguments when it comes to gun control and gay marriage. I voted for Bill Clinton and thought he was a pretty good president.

I can, and do, think for myself.

And unlike most liberals, I learn from my mistakes. Liberals still have egg on their faces from the Duke lacrosse debacle, and yet here they are, assuming this guy is guilty because the race issue (made up in this case, but don't let that stop you) has you all foaming at the mouth like a bunch of Hitler Youth shouting "Sieg Heil!".

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

assuming this guy is guilty because the race issue (made up in this case, but don't let that stop you) has you all foaming at the mouth like a bunch of Hitler Youth shouting "Sieg Heil!".

Putting words in our mouth again, huh... All liberals... huh?

I assume he is guilty of something because based on my interpretations Zimmerman put himself in a situation that culminated in him shooting an unarmed kid who Zimmerman thought was suspicious (But was not committing a crime). My take on this would be exactly the same if Zimmerman was white, black, Hispanic, Asian, liberal, republican, and if Trayvon was white, black, Hispanic, Asian, whatever! Ultimately it will be UP TO A JURY OF HIS PEERS to decide if he committed a crime or not. Either way, this is a tragedy for both sides.

I posted a link to a thread back to the Duke case where I (as a liberal) specifically decried what Jackson/Sharpton etc.. were doing in that case with race and guilt.

But then again, I'm a liberal, so you KNOW what we all think

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by RIROCKHOUND

Putting words in our mouth again, huh... All liberals... huh?

I assume he is guilty of something because based on my interpretations Zimmerman put himself in a situation that culminated in him shooting an unarmed kid who Zimmerman thought was suspicious (But was not committing a crime). My take on this would be exactly the same if Zimmerman was white, black, Hispanic, Asian, liberal, republican, and if Trayvon was white, black, Hispanic, Asian, whatever! Ultimately it will be UP TO A JURY OF HIS PEERS to decide if he committed a crime or not. Either way, this is a tragedy for both sides.

I posted a link to a thread back to the Duke case where I (as a liberal) specifically decried what Jackson/Sharpton etc.. were doing in that case with race and guilt.

But then again, I'm a liberal, so you KNOW what we all think

My position is that liberals, as a group, convicted the Duke lacrosse players before many facts were in. Today, most liberals, as a group, are doing the same thing here. That's my position, and I stand by it. If you are getting worked up because I didn't qualify my statement with "most liberals", or "nearly all liberals", I'm sorry. If I say "liberals think this", or "liberals think that", I don't mean every single liberal with literally zero exceptions. I'm talking about the group.

I think you knew what I meant, but hopefully that clears it up.

[RIROCKHOUND]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

My position is that liberals, as a group, convicted the Duke lacrosse players before many facts were in. Today, most liberals, as a group, are doing the same thing here. That's my position, and I stand by it. If you are getting worked up because I didn't qualify my statement with "most liberals", or "nearly all liberals", I'm sorry. If I say "liberals think this", or "liberals think that", I don't mean every single liberal with literally zero exceptions. I'm talking about the group.

I think you knew what I meant, but hopefully that clears it up.

Clarification not needed.

I think you equate what you see in the media with how 'Liberals' think... just like there is a spectrum of conservatives who don't all just watch Fox News with their heads nodding like a bobble head doll, there is a large % of liberals who can (and maybe do) watch MSNBC without accepting it all as gospel truth.

Just keep that in mind please.

[PaulS]

Originally Posted by Jim in CT

Wrong as usual. I'm not brainwashed by either side. I have said before, I think liberals have great arguments when it comes to gun control and gay marriage. I voted for Bill Clinton and thought he was a pretty good president.

I can, and do, think for myself.

And unlike most liberals, I learn from my mistakes. Liberals still have egg on their faces from the Duke lacrosse debacle, and yet here they are, assuming this guy is guilty because the race issue (made up in this case, but don't let that stop you) has you all foaming at the mouth like a bunch of Hitler Youth shouting "Sieg Heil!".

Seems like a lot of anger there. You say you don't sterotype but 50% of your posts have either "all" or "most" liberals (or some variation) and yet you say you think for yourself. Your actions don't match your perception of yourself.

[Jim in CT]

Originally Posted by PaulS

Seems like a lot of anger there. You say you don't sterotype but 50% of your posts have either "all" or "most" liberals (or some variation) and yet you say you think for yourself. Your actions don't match your perception of yourself.

I never said I don't stereotype, can you avoid making stuff up please?

Not all stereotypes are invalid.

I'm not angry, either. I'm just correct in this case. Let the justice system play out, and when this guy gets acquitted, hunker down and prepare for the typical liberal reaction - namely anarchist rioting. and feral mayhem.

When OJ got acquitted, I don't recall seeing conservatives burning cars and throwing bricks through windows. Why is that?