A New Nation, Conceived in Liberty Without Respect to Religion

Statue of LibertyOn this anniversary of our declaration of independence from Great Britain I stumbled upon two articles. The first, written by my friend Blackiswhite, Imperial Consigliere starts off looking like a reminder that our founding fathers associated liberty with a warning against government overreach and this notion would have been fine but then BiW had to go back to the historical revisionism of the Declaration of Independence being a “Christian document”. This is a sad trend in current political discourse from conservatives who would like to see prayer in the classroom and creationism replace evolution in the science curriculum.

So it was with great pleasure that I tripped over an article on CNN’s Opinion page by historian Kenneth C. Davis entitled, “Why U.S. is not a Christian Nation“. Some choice excerpts:

While president in 1802, Jefferson wrote: “Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man and his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, and not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should ‘make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,’ thus building a wall of separation between Church and State … ”

As president, Jefferson was voicing an idea that was fundamental to his view of religion and government, expressed most significantly in the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom, which he drafted in 1777.

Revised by James Madison and passed by Virginia’s legislature in January 1786, the bill stated: “No man shall be compelled to frequent or support any religious worship, place, or ministry whatsoever, nor shall be enforced, restrained, molested, or burthened (sic) in his body or goods, nor shall otherwise suffer on account of his religious opinions or belief …”

— In 1797, with President John Adams in office, the Senate unanimously approved one of America’s earliest foreign treaties, which emphatically stated (Article 11): “As the government of the United States of America is not in any sense founded on the Christian Religion, — as it has in itself no character of enmity against the laws, religion or tranquility of Musselmen (Muslims) …”

No one can argue, as “Christian Nation” proponents correctly state, that the Founding Fathers were not Christian, although some notably doubted Christ’s divinity.

More precisely, the founders were, with very few exceptions, mainstream Protestants. Many of them were Episcopalians, the American offshoot of the official Church of England.  …

But the founders, and more specifically the framers of the Constitution, included men who had fought a war for independence — the very war celebrated on the “Glorious Fourth” — against a country in which church and state were essentially one.

They understood the long history of sectarian bloodshed in Europe that brought many pilgrims to America. They knew the dangers of merging government, which was designed to protect individual rights, with religion, which as Jefferson argued, was a matter of individual conscience.

And that is why the U.S. Constitution reads as it does.

The supreme law of the land, written in the summer of 1787, includes no references to religion — including in the presidential oath of office — until the conclusion of Article VI, after all that dull stuff about debts and treaties: “No religious Test shall ever be required as a Qualification to any Office or public Trust under the United States.” (There is a pro forma “Year of the Lord” reference in the date at the Constitution’s conclusion.)

Original intent? “No religious Test” seems pretty clear cut.

The article goes on to discuss the Bill of Rights vis-a-vis establishing a secular government. Blackiswhite reminds us that our framers were Christians. But as I reminded him at his blog, if a Mexican runs a Chinese restaurant it does not mean you are going to find Mexican food there. A Christian who fully understands the danger of a new nation establishing an official religion will make sure this does NOT happen. It is the founder’s very experience with Christianity and discrimination that prompted them to establish a secular government.

To paraphrase Lee Greenwood, I’m proud to be an American where at least I know I’m free to practice whatever religion I want or no religion at all. I’m proud that in my country the government stays out of my spiritual life and sticks to governing. That is how we were founded. It is fundamental to our country and we must protect this tradition from all those who might hope to change it.

Happy 4th of July, my friends, and Happy Birthday, America!

Respectfully,
Rutherford

Image: Paul Martin Eldridge / FreeDigitalPhotos.net

WordPress.com Political Blogger Alliance

Advertisements

287 thoughts on “A New Nation, Conceived in Liberty Without Respect to Religion

  1. Rutherford’s phantom threat of Christian theocracy is as silly as poolman’s 9/11 fiction.

    Uh….dude. When Christians aren’t being doormats they do paper drives and pancake breakfasts for the poor.

    WTF?

    Why do you feel the need to have your sophomore-in-college-I-just-grew-my-first-beard-and-I-mock-Christianity-lecture every other month.

    You’re kind of like the closet homosexual homo-phobe except with you its religion.

  2. As the Christian revisionists (Are you listening, Ms. Bachmann?) have been lately trying to recast America, and in particular the Founding Fathers, as a Christian nation, there have been several articles debunking same, and I see Rutherford has found one of them.

    The usual refrain the revisionists start with is the Declaration of Independence, penned almost entirely by my Boy Jefferson. They correctly note that it refers to “God” in several places. But of course the supreme law of the land – the Constitution – does not, and that is because they are two very different documents. The Declaration is a list of grievances and reasons justifying a split from Great Britain. The Constitution is a governing document. Two very different things.

    None of the Founding Fathers were atheists. Many of the Founders were Deists, which is to say they thought the universe had a creator, but that he does not concern himself with the daily lives of humans, and does not directly communicate with humans, either by revelation or by sacred books. They spoke often of God, (Nature’s God or the God of Nature), but this was not the God of the bible. They did not deny that there was a person called Jesus, and praised him for his benevolent teachings, but they flatly denied his divinity. Jefferson, using a razor, rearranged the Bible to make it a chronicle of the teachings of Jesus – almost completely excluding passages referring to magic. He regarded Jesus as a real man, but not divine.

    While the Declaration is a historical document, the Constitution is a governing one, and makes no mention of gods. This is not an accident, the Fathers having learned quite well what happens when you mix church and state. Make no mistake; there are also those alive today who too are well aware and will meet every attempt to insinuate the evil of religion into our governance head-on and aggressively. No, it won’t happen here.

    Now, of course, as is typical from any bully who fails by using force, we can look forward to the whining: “You are picking on me! You’re being mean to me because I am a Christian” No, nobody is picking on the Christians, but that doesn’t mean we are going to let them defile the Constitution by insinuating their particular brand religion into our laws. It just ain’t gonna happen.

    Believe what you want. Just have enough respect for your fellow man to allow him to do the same.

  3. R, BiW’s post and actual analysis deserves better treatment than you’ve resigned yourself to giving them. It’s straw man central here or you really are too ignorant to engage on this topic. In either event, shame on you.

  4. You’re kind of like the closet homosexual homo-phobe except with you its religion.

    Rabbit, you remind me of my mother who used to say when I was a kid that I would wind up some rabid bible thumping devout something-or-other because I was so violently anti-religious. Even though she herself was not religious she predicted a major course correction because she felt I was too extreme and the pendulum was bound to swing back in the other direction.

    Well, believe it or not, I’ve MELLOWED since those days. In my teens you couldn’t tell me anything about religion. I now fully accept your paper drive, charity breakfast thesis and I have as much as said so in these comments in the past. Much good is done in the name of religion.

    But that is not what this post is about. This post is about folks (namely Bachmann’s target audience) trying to turn this secular government into a religious one. Truth be told, had I not read BiW’s post earlier in the day, I would never have written mine (or to be more honest … I would never have featured Mr. Davis who wrote the bulk of this post).

  5. BTW, Rabbit if you think I am paranoid, try reading Matt Taibi’s piece on Michele Bachmann in Rolling Stone. Laugh at the source all you want, the irrefutable stuff he reports about her should make you worry. Example: Can’t teach Aladdin in school cos it’s about witchcraft. I kid you not.

    Pay attention brother. While you’re afraid of being forced to pray to Allah three times a day, folks like Bachmann will be forcing you to pray to their God … don’t know how often. Have to wait for God to tell them. 😐

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/michele-bachmanns-holy-war-20110622

  6. In either event, shame on you.

    Ahhhh shame, flame, blame in on the rain (h/t to Milli Vanilli).

    Tigre, I’m sorry dude but folks like BiW pull all this obscure stuff out of their history books, triangulate like hell, and fool themselves and others into believing falsehoods. If their premise was true, they wouldn’t have to make loads of obscure references to defend it.

    The truth is and always has been that this country’s primary premise is keeping religion out of government. You can quote obscure crap until the cows come home. It ain’t gonna change. And if I have anything to do with it, no government of mine is going to become corrupted by this religious revisionism.

  7. What kind of shit do you have to be smoking to believe that Obama has been “playing nice” with Republicans?

    As for this post. I scanned that CNN.com piece and thought of the crowd here. Quickly realizing I would be out of my depth taking on BiW on this issue (which is not to admit that he is correct), I chose not to dive in, and clicked on something else to read.

  8. If that chick actually cuts the government in half and saves America, I will say the Hail Mary 10 times a day while wearing a hair shirt.

    lol…. Aladdin.

    I suppose you know Obama has become an utter failure when his faithful supporters are busting out Aladdin.

    Dude. You are clueless.

    http://www.usdebtclock.org/

  9. Damn it Rutherford. You don’t even pause to understand what BiW is actually saying. You are champion of nothing. Shame on you for your intellectual dishonesty and laziness. And keep on arguing against theocratic rule — since everyone is obviously on board, I guess we should all be grateful you were here to quash it. 🙄

    I’ll let BiW put you in your place since it’s his post, but I’m embarrassed for you (and a little aggravated that you’re such a douche about it). Let us know what MSNBC tells you to say to advance this little meme of yours. 🙄

  10. Christianity is at the heart of this nation, but governance was intentionally established as “religion neutral”. The founders knew that spiritual ideology and doctrine was as varied as the individual. They also did not have the difficulty we experience defining the intent and meaning of words. A man’s word was his bond and character was paramount. The monarchy that was Britain was embroiled in its own form of religious rule, not based on the strict and unyielding teachings of Jesus.

    Fast forward to today where Christianity is split into hundreds of factions, many foreign to the very Author of the faith, few of which have any intent to compromise in the least iota to “play nice with others”. Compound that with the fact that the meanings of words have been altered and much of our language has morphed into a form of double-speak. The English language has been continually under attack and, as is common place today, lawyers are employed to navigate these increasingly murky waters.

    And yes, the word “liberty” did have a clear and concise meaning to the founders. But it’s meaning was no different within the church or outside of it. Just as the mostly ignored stated right to “the pursuit of happiness” means just that, a right – not relegated to the status of mere privilege in the same way a license to drive has been.

  11. “the pursuit of happiness”

    My understanding is that this part was originally supposed to say, “that among these are life, liberty and property” not “pursuit of happiness.” Not sure why it was changed.

  12. So it was with great pleasure that I tripped over an article on CNN’s Opinion page by historian Kenneth C. Davis entitled, “Why U.S. is not a Christian Nation“. Some choice excerpts:

    A facetious conclusion that would have been foreign to Jefferson himself.

    Anyone who has devoted a careful reading to Jefferson should understand that he was a complex figure, who considered himself to be a follower of Christ, yet denied his divinity, so much so that he created the “Jefferson Bible”, in which he labored to remove all passages concerning his divinity.

    That said, there is a “the rest of the story”, in which Jefferson speaks in his own words, through his correspondence to several people, in his characteristic manner, which was careful of phrase, and laborious in choice of words, such as this passage from his letter to Peter Carr, written from Paris in August 10, 1787:
    “You will naturally examine first the religion of your own country. Read the bible then, as you would read Livy of Tacitius.”

    When the body of Jefferson’s work and correspondence on the subject is studied, the evidence is clear that Jefferson, a Unitarian, possessed none of the hostility to Christianity that Christophobes like Rutherford project on to him. He did harbor objections to the sectarianism that characterized the colonies, and later states, which did accord favored status to specific denominations of Christianity, as well as tax money to pay for the support of those denominations. It was this practice that Jefferson opposed, and worked to change in Virginia, and why he wrote the letter he did to the Danbury Baptists, containing that phrase that has been so perverted and misapplied in the intervening centuries to support decisions that Jefferson himself did not countenance, as Jefferson described a suggestion that he, with others, made to the Virginia Legislature regarding the University of Virginia, a suggestion that by the standards currently promulgated by the courts, would violate the Constitution’s non-existent “wall of separation between church and state”:

    In our university you know there is no Professorship of Divinity. A handle has been made of this, to disseminate an idea that this is an institution, not merely of no religion, but against all religion. Occasion was taken at the last meeting of the Visitors, to bring forward an idea that might silence this calumny, which weighed on the minds of some honest friends to the institution. In our annual report to the legislature, after stating the constitutional reasons against a public establishment of any religious instruction, we suggest the expediency of encouraging the different religious sects to establish, each for itself, a professorship of their own tenets, on the confines of the university, so near as that their students may attend the lectures there, and have the free use of our library, and every other accommodation we can give them; preserving, however, their independence of us and of each other. This fills the chasm objected to ours, as a defect in an institution professing to give instruction in all useful sciences. I think the invitation will be accepted, by some sects from candid intentions, and by others from jealousy and rivalship. And by bringing the sects together, and mixing them with the mass of other students, we shall soften their asperities, liberalize and neutralize their prejudices, and make the general religion a religion of peace, reason, and morality.

    Thomas Jefferson to Dr. Thomas Cooper, Novermber 2, 1822.

  13. BiC,

    I find the militant deism of the French Revolution kind of fascinating.

    Was there any radical departures of that sort in the colonies/states during the late 1700’s?

  14. “Christianity that Christophobes like Rutherford…”

    I must have missed that. Can you help me find a post that would mark Rutherford as a “Christophobe?” (Isn’t English a wonderful language? You can coin your own words at will!)

    “and why he wrote the letter he did to the Danbury Baptists, containing that phrase that has been so perverted and misapplied in the intervening centuries”

    I am so dull! I missed that one too! Can you help me find somewhere where it has been “perverted?” I think its meaning, like that found in other of Jefferson’s writings, is quite clear – which is to say it means exactly what it says. To wit:

    “To messers. Nehemiah Dodge, Ephraim Robbins, & Stephen S. Nelson, a committee of the Danbury Baptist association in the state of Connecticut.

    Gentlemen

    The affectionate sentiments of esteem and approbation which you are so good as to express towards me, on behalf of the Danbury Baptist association, give me the highest satisfaction. my duties dictate a faithful and zealous pursuit of the interests of my constituents, & in proportion as they are persuaded of my fidelity to those duties, the discharge of them becomes more and more pleasing.

    Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should “make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof,” thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties.

    I reciprocate your kind prayers for the protection & blessing of the common father and creator of man, and tender you for yourselves & your religious association, assurances of my high respect & esteem.

    Th Jefferson
    Jan. 1. 1802″

    I don’t see any wiggle room in there, and there has certainly been no creative editing on my part. Anybody see any duplicity or equivocation?

  15. I must have missed that. Can you help me find a post that would mark Rutherford as a “Christophobe?”

    You could start with the blazing strawmen he left in the comments to my latest post, but I forget that you’re new here, and haven’t been treated to his ongoing “theocracy!!!” paranoia, as he expels more of his bile on Palin (and other conservative women). Archives. In the bar to the left.

    (Isn’t English a wonderful language? You can coin your own words at will!)

    If you’re implying that I have somehow maligned the longua franca,I suggest that you type the word into a search engine, and confine your snark to those who really did commit this heinous and awful desecration of the language.

    As for your quotation of the letter, you have mastered one of the necessary keys to understanding…you can obviously read, but do you understand the context?

    Regarding the twisting and misapplication, when you have rulings that demand removals of crosses from war memorials, or forbidding a prayer at graduation, or prior to a football game, or upholding the denial of the right to play an instrumental version of “Ave Maria” in student-programmed recitals, yes, it has been twisted and perverted into something that Jefferson himself never comprehended when he penned the phrase.

    You have also made the blanket assertion that “Many of the Founders were Deists, which is to say they thought the universe had a creator, but that he does not concern himself with the daily lives of humans, and does not directly communicate with humans, either by revelation or by sacred books.”

    Who, exactly, were these men, and what is your proof to support this assertion?

  16. re: founding fathers who were deists
    Ben Franklin
    Tom Jefferson
    George Washington
    Tom Paine
    Ethan Allen (founder? I think so…)

    Does that qualify as “many?” Prolly not, but like Mercutio’s little scratch, ’tis enough…a quick google of each will “prove” to whatever depth you desire.

    “Regarding the twisting and misapplication, when you have rulings that demand removals of crosses from war memorials, or forbidding a prayer at graduation, or prior to a football game, or upholding the denial of the right to play an instrumental version of “Ave Maria” in student-programmed recitals, yes, it has been twisted and perverted into something that Jefferson himself never comprehended when he penned the phrase.”

    How do you know that? That might be exactly what he had in mind. It is certainly exactly what *I* have in mind.

    You see, religion is like the Musselman’s proverbial camel: once it gets its nose under the tent, pretty soon the whole camel is in. We just can’t have that.

  17. Sorry BiW but you level an unfounded accusation. I never said Jefferson had an aversion to Christianity. Nor did I make that claim of any of the founding fathers. I claimed, accurately, that they had the wisdom to keep religion separate from government. They had the wisdom, as John Adams stated, to make sure this was not called “a Christian country”. Your note from Jefferson to Cooper only proves that he thought religion had a place in University curriculum and he carefully chooses the words “confines of the University”. I don’t see how that proves any point against separation of church and state.

  18. As for your quotation of the letter, you have mastered one of the necessary keys to understanding…you can obviously read, but do you understand the context?

    PF, please don’t get snagged on this argument. This is the DoI-as-Bible … the Constitution-as-Bible method of arguing history. The problem is that unlike the Bible, full of contradictions and readily pliable for misuse by any who wish to misuse it, the DoI and Constitution are pretty straight forward. Not much context is needed. What you see is pretty much what you get.

    In fact I’d go so far as to say the Constitution so avoids the ambiguity of the Bible that by necessity it had to make allowances for “Amendments” so that the very strict and clear language of the original document could be altered to reflect changing times and values.

    PF do you think it is a coincidence that those who can speak with authority about Jesus’ intent have no problem speaking with the same authority about Jefferson’s? Hell, we are dealing with a contingent who claim to know the mind of God. And then people wonder why Michele Bachmann scares the living sh*t out of me. 😦

  19. I sure am glad I have at least minimally followed the Casey Anthony case or I would have no idea who the “c*nt” was who got off and now gets to date again. LOL

    Well there may be hope folks. They found a way to put OJ’s ass in prison. Maybe Casey will do something stupid again and off the hoosegow she goes.

  20. “Michele Bachmann scares the living sh*t out of me.”-R

    I know, she scares me too. What if God talks her into a stimulus bill that costs 15% more then the entire Iraq War, at a time when we are in absolute deficit hell? What if the upshot of this was MORE unemployment?

    Holy shit, that would cripple our country and enslave the future.

    Wow.

  21. “The problem is that unlike the Bible, full of contradictions and readily pliable for misuse by any who wish to misuse it, the DoI and Constitution are pretty straight forward. Not much context is needed. What you see is pretty much what you get.”

    Can someone please pass that information along to President Barack Obama and his party friends in congress?

    Because I am having trouble finding the exact words that gives the government the power to force me into purchasing a product or service.

  22. Dude…what if God talks her into the most flawed and expensive health care bill imaginable….AFTER her failed stimulus……Oh my God…..it would cripple America……nah….I’m going to far.

  23. Do has your told Hucking. Enrich the insurance companies and pay the same premiums as a known crack head would.

    Don’t question your master, comrade.

  24. I have absolutely zero faith in our jury system and have had little or no faith for quite sometime.

    A two year old girl is dead and will receive no justice this side of heaven because twelve people are too stupid to understand the difference between beyond a reasonable doubt and beyond a shadow of a doubt. This is the CSI nation of jury TV standards, talking about DNA evidence or the lack thereof. The only biological forensic evidence they understand is the semen stains of their wet dreams….

    It’s the same people that vote for Obama for President, believe America was intended to be an atheistic nation with no semblance of worship in the public square, that our founding fathers were “deists” (I doubt they understand what a deist is), deny America’s Christian roots though there are literally hundreds of huge Christian churches that dot the corners of our original 13 colonies predating the formations of our country, etc…

    Rutherford is a nice guy cut out of the same cloth as Jim Dougan – I like them both but realize how foolish they are. Obama voters and God deniers – a pattern of irrational and misguided thinking, bordering on mental illness, with no deep thoughts other than their own basic needs. Amoeba…

    ~ Tex from Florida

  25. “It’s the same people that vote for Obama for President, believe America was intended to be an atheistic nation with no semblance of worship in the public square, that our founding fathers were “deists” (I doubt they understand what a deist is),”

    How do you know that? It’s a pretty long stretch to conflate the Casey Anthony acquittal with separation of church and state, I have to say. The only thing that *I* can see connecting the two is that you are opposed to both.

    It could be that the prosecution did not make its case. I wasn’t there, of course – but the jury was – and that seemed to be their take on it.

    Make me king for ONE day. Just ONE. One of the first things I would do is to adopt the British law that absolutely NO particulars of a criminal case may be reported by the press until a trial has occurred and is concluded. It is impossible to get a fair trial in America now – and by fair, I mean fair to both the prosecution AND the defense – thanks to these bubble-headed-bleach-blondes (apologies to Don Henley) like Nacy Grace. Personally, if she were offed and I were on the jury I’d vote for a medal for the perpetrator.

  26. R said, “I don’t see how that proves any point against separation of church and state.”

    I thought it was theocracy you feared. Do you not see the distinction between recognition, adoption and suppression? You and PF are giving me a headache with your misdirection.

    Rutherford, check your room for carbon monoxide.

  27. Tex, glad to see you didn’t choke on tarballs. The (very) few lawyers that claim to have followed the trial say that the prosecution never made their case. I don’t have a clue since I had to Google it when someone here asked me about the trial, but it might be possibelt eh jury got the verdict right. “Not guilty” is not the same thing as “innocent” either.

  28. “absolutely NO particulars of a criminal case may be reported by the press until a trial has occurred and is concluded.” -PF

    Agreed. These media driven trials are train wrecks. In most instances though, the right of public access (media) is an important one that should be protected to ensure fairness. It’s the Nancy Grace’s of the world that call that into question.

    One thing that many often don’t detect is the liberties that the prosecution has in speaking/making their case with the press in advance of trial. It is not the same for the defense based upon differing rules for each side when it comes to pretrial disclosure of evidence and theories. In other words, be careful in prejudging cases based on preceeding coverage/press conferences.

  29. Oh, don’t matter to me about Casey whatever her name. She means no more to me than Pfesser does. I didn’t really follow the case. But there is no doubt the mother assisted in killing her child and obviously lied every step of the way while doing it.

    I’ve gotten to the point, who cares? Perhaps we should be encouraging more of that behavior. Wall them in and let them kill each other. Like a good plague. 🙂 Got myself a few ideas while sitting on the beach watching the deviants.

    Our courts are just a microcosm of a seriously sick country and willingly blind people. I’ve decided instead of being fortright and honest, I’m going to start capitalizing on society’s profound stupidity. Why not? I don’t expect this to last much longer because we aren’t even functioning anymore as a civilized society. You should have seen Mobile, AL over the weekend – complete decay and rot. I’ll capitalize by letting themselves cannibalize themselves.

    So I’ll play the game – I should have done this years ago. I could have been a very rich man by now by playing one side of rejects against the other. Manipulate the masses in now my creed.

  30. This is the way I see it El Tigre.

    When a mother waits 31 days to even report her child missing, when the child’s skeletal remains are found with duct tape around her mouth, when the mother’s trunk smells like decomposition and she abandons the car, when she is seen partying on tape in a drunken stupor four days after child goes missing….

    It doesn’t take an understanding of particle physics to recognize that mother is a monster perfectly capable of murdering her child. I mean, how much more evidence does one need when there is an obvious child murdered?

  31. Here is another example which I don’t believe I’ve mentioned recently about why I have no faith in the our system of justice. So people excuse this verdict as the jury worked? Our presumed innocence sometimes allows the guilty to go free? Uh huh.

    In Oklahoma recently, a pharmacist was convinced of premediated murder. His crime? Emptying six bullets into the head of the “hood.”

    The pharmacist was robbed at gun point with only one of the “hood” holding a gun. The pharmacist drew his own, shot one of the perpetrators, chased the one holding the gun outside but missed. The pharmacist comes back into the store recognizing that he has only wounded the young thug. So he shoot him four more times.

    The verdict in the case? The pharmacist found guilty of first degree murder – life in prison. No shit…that’s the verdict. If he had shot the little bastard in home, he would have been covered under Oklahoma’s make my day law. But because it was a public place of business, now he’s declared murderer.

    We ought to be giving the pharmacist a medal for removing this piece of shit he killed from our midst, and instead, our fine system of jurisprudence sends the man to prison for the remainder of his days.

  32. “One thing that many often don’t detect is the liberties that the prosecution has in speaking/making their case with the press in advance of trial. ”

    Mike Nifong comes to mind. Those Duke players, although no angels, were subjected to the grossest of mistreatment, based on an ambitious prosecutor with a big mouth who thought nothing of trampling on due process in his quest for fame. Personally I think the whole lacrosse team should get an hour to “interview” him – with a jar of vaseline and a gross of condoms in the room.

    Well, maybe not the vaseline.

  33. Tex, the “he-needed-killing” defense only works in the Deep South.

    I don’t know about the particulars. Really. But if this Casey Anthony was charged with murder (requires malice aforethought — premeditation) it’s got to be proved. Same with actually doing the killing. To my knowledge, she wasn’t charged with “participating in twisted shit” or for being “the type of person that would commit murder” (the Rutherford crime and standard of proof, ala Palin).

    I don’t think the justice system Is “broke.” even though it doesn’t always get it right.

    Frankly, it sounds like the prosecutors here fucked up by overestimating the strength of their case and perceptions of the jury. The almost always do when called to task. It’s the nature of bringing slam-dunk cases against underfunded, incompetent defense lawyers and obtaining prosecution verdicts 99.999% of the time.

    But I could be wrong. This might be another O.J. jury.

    And here, I’m told the defense lawyer was la laugh-out-loud, first rate dumb-ass. I am also told the prosecution team had some real ass-clowns too. I watched the Judge in the contempt hearing for the little-shit that lifted the finger. He’s a dumb-ass too.

    Maybe you’re right Tex. 😆 Never mind. . .

  34. PF, Duke is a good example. But I’m talking about something much more insidious that occurs on far-less publicized trials without prosecutorial political motivations.

  35. Here is a good case-in-point. I have seen this judge in court. He is nasty and vindictive and is more interested in handing down long sentences than dispensing justice.

    http://truthinjustice.org/peatross.htm

    He sentenced an eighteen year-old to 32 years in prison, when the sentencing guidelines were 8-11 years. But that is not the half of it; the original sentence was 132 years, with all but 32 suspended. Guidelines 8-11 years. In Virginia there is no parole, so if you get sentenced to 32, that’s what you will serve.

    This guy regularly voided plea agreements – to the point the Commonwealth and defense attorneys would not try cases before him. His brag was that before he retired his goal was to sentence a million years. That is not a misprint.

    But it is almost impossible to deal with rogue judges effectively. They are a law unto themselves. It has completely soured my respect for the law. I bought all my six kids and stepkids videos on how to deal with police if stopped and have urged them to always record any police encounters on their iPhones. My next project is to put dash cams in all my cars.

    When somebody as mainstream, law-and-order as I am resorts to that kind of stuff there is a problem, IMHO. And I’m not alone.

  36. Rogue judges are a real tough problem. Not all conduct at trial can be fairly reviewed by an appellate court. The scope of the JQC (judicial qualifications committee of the state bars) is limited. And since most jurisdictions elect their judges political motivations infect the process too.

    PF, truth be known, competency poses a larger threat than rogue jurists.

  37. Maybe you’re right Tex. 😆 Never mind.

    Actually Tigre you’ve pointed out deficiencies in the defense and prosecution neither of which reflect on the jury. I tend to agree with the view that since none of us sat through the trial we are in no position to judge the jury.

    I’m sorry but I’m in the camp that says better to let ten guilty men go free than send one innocent man to jail or worse, to his death.

  38. There’s also the problem of human nature when immature lawyers take the bench (like immature politicians ascend to the presidency). Lawyers refer to the syndrome here as “robe-itis.” IMHO, most doctors suffer from a similar malady.

  39. “IMHO, most doctors suffer from a similar malady.”

    I plead the fifth.

    God, when I finished residency I had so much pent-up energy from being indoors for so many years. All I could think about was pussy and getting a dirt bike so I could ride every weekend. Glad I didn’t have any kids.

    Had a good time, though. What I remember of it…

  40. I can imagine. I felt the same way out of law school. Only my start as a lawyer was twice the work. I felt somewhat robbed of some good coming-of-age years working through the extended academic rigors.

    Robe-itis, though, is marked by the casual over-assertion of authority to feed the Judge’s ego rather than dispense actual justice. By contrast, doctors just think they’re born better than everyone else! 😆

    When you’ve been around for a while and are worth a shit, you get (genuine) respect voluntarily and because you’ve earned it. You don’t want the other kind.

  41. Rutherford – what you might be more concerned with is justice being served. And more often than not, I don’t see it being served to any capacity. No knock on attorneys – but the system is broken and has been for some time.

    Rogue police, rogue judges, liberal federal judges overturning 70% majority votes. We need to kill them all and impale them on the steps of the court house as reminder. Let me administer judgment for these flash mobs, and I guarantee I’ll stop them dead in a day.

    We’ll use flame throwers on them and watch them burn while we dance around them. I’m beginning to think these “rogue” Muslims could teach us a thing or two.

    Watching dolphins frolick while plastering screed on the R.L. blog – doesn’t get any better than this. Sand in the keyboard is a bitch, though.

  42. Honest to God Rutherford. I’m beginning to wonder if there really is any good in you. A two year old lies dead of a hideous murder by her mother, and you’re giving me the bullshit of presumed innocence.

    Unbelievable. I think the next time some liberal politician gets shot in the head, I’m going to stand up and talk about Jerod Laughner’s “presumed innocence.” Maybe he was just misunderstood? His daddy molested him. Maybe even root for him to be found not guilty and be elected President.

    Couldn’t be any worse than Obama.

  43. R, I also took a shot at the judge. There’s no way of knowing what the jury was thinking unless interviewed. I will say this, the O.J. jury was piece of work. The comment I remember most was in response to a question about how they were able to overlook all of the blood and DNA evidence connecting O.J. to the crime. The response from one of the resident geniuses: “since when is it a crime to bleed in your own house?”

    I’ll wager she voted for Obama.

  44. Yeah Palin’s fault. That’s right. Twelve Rutherford’s on a jury plus to grow on, and I’m convinced you could hang Sarah Palin for Gifford’s head shot.

    Ah Tigre, you’re a smart guy. You would do the right thing and so would BIC. But a prosecutor, no matter how talented and honest is only as good as the twelve potential imbeciles sitting in jury box. When I served, ten of the twelve jurors had some criminal record – one had a former husband serving life time for murder. Nominated foreman was a chronic alcoholic and had a couple of DUIs. It was a joke – a three-ring circus. The entire week I walked in, it’s like I had entered the Twilight Zone.

    It’s partially all of our fault. Nobody worth anything wants to serve on some murder trial for weeks at a time. I still like the idea of professional juries – 12 people smart enough say to not vote for Obama. That’s the first prerequisite. 🙂

  45. Damn Poolman. I’m sure that crap goes on here too. After vacationing a couple of times this summer now and seeing “the real world”, I feel like Brooks in the Shawshank Redemption. I walked out unto the world of secluded adult life, and found the world went out and got in a big damn hurry to go to hell. It got there.

    Last night, I walked into a liquor store to buy some booze for about fifteen people and this Obama voting deviant was pouring booze into shot glasses so we could “taste.” I could see her about half of her sagging left nipple. That’s how I knew she was an Obama voter. Straight tequila. Since when did that become legal? 😆

    I asked her, “how many of these things could I down before it becomes impossible to find the causeway to cross?

  46. “and you’re giving me the bullshit of presumed innocence.”

    It’s not bullshit. It’s the law of the land. It’s what makes this country the greatest on earth.

    You don’t agree with the policy of presumed innocence?

    It’s my understanding that the prosecution bit off more than they could prove, not that the defense did anything special.

    I don’t think it’s a case of an OJ-like jury. That jury had a lot of pressure on it to come back with an innocent verdict with people waiting to riot outside if they didn’t like the outcome. The fervor in which they celebrated the given verdict gives an indication of what would have followed otherwise.

  47. Look Huck. This one is worse than the O.J. trial. O.J. was simply racist jury nullification – blackey hates whitey. We get that.

    Kaylee’s trial was the twelve sardine abject idiocy on display. You would have to be an utter moron (and they are legion) to not know this wicked bitch killed her child. It seems to me that some of you presumed innocent supporters need to start explaining a few things. Like an entire month without the child being reported missing. Like a car trunk owned by the mother that stunk of death, that was then abandoned. Like 84 internet searches to induce sleep. Like a mother that was filmed out partying while her child was missing but only she and the parents knew. The child was clearly murdered, found with duct tape around her mouth. We were anything but fair to a two year old little girl whose blood cries out from a swamp in Florida. And a murderer walks…

    Did we forget justice someplace? I thought that was the purpose of our judicial system? Justice. At the very least, the accused murderer should have been forced to take the stand and answer the hard questions.

    If we hadn’t presumed the murdering mother’s innocence, she wouldn’t have received a more than fair trial on our dime. The evidence was overwhelming against the mother three days into the trial.

    The bottom line is that once again, justice was not served. And it makes me sick to think we as society pat ourselves on the back for our ingenuity and “fairness” of presumed innocence as our highest calling. I say justice should be our highest virtue. Justice was administered to neither the victim nor the perpetrator. The system once again has clearly failed.

  48. Get off your high horse, Hucking.

    The cum dumpster didn’t report her daughter missing for weeks. Her trunk reeked of human remains.

    You pull some shit like that I will see to it that you hang too.

  49. Tex, I only know the few details being reported ex post facto. But how and why did she murder her daughter? Putting her to sleep isn’t consistent with premeditated murder. Was it an accident and a cover up? What was the evidence? Obviously this woman’s fucked up beyond belief. Put you can’t dispense with proof of the crime charged — ever. Those dumbshit jurors (or, more properly, the representative cross section of the community) also convict. So do complete dumb ass judges, including our own Eleventh Circuit Judge Camp who was just convicted for possession of drugs and firearms when caught with a prostitute.

    And Huck, I couldn’t agree more. Presumed innocence is what makes our system of justice great. Have any of you watched lying police officers in the courtroom? I mean, in many instances they’re worse than the criminals by a mile. Unethical prosecutors? Plentiful. If you don’t think people are wrongly convicted, you are sorely mistaken. It happens all the time. Even with the presumption.

  50. I say justice should be our highest virtue.

    Amen to that. But where are you going to find that OS this side of paradise? Our system requires a buy in. Like Dylan says,

    “We living by the golden rule, whoever got the gold rules”

    We already judge these people “criminals” and “deviants” in the public forum based entirely on the media’s narrative. Why waste more time and resources? They are scarred for life. Stone ’em!

    You won’t see justice until the King of kings brings it. Come, Lord Jesus! 😎

  51. Putting her to sleep isn’t consistent with premeditated murder. Was it an accident and a cover up? What was the evidence?

    How do you figure? Putting a child into a comatose state makes it that much easier to administer putting duct tape over the child’s mouth, throwing her in the car trunk, throwing her in the swamp.

    Putting the daughter to sleep is the clearest evidence that it was indeed premeditated. Why would anybody need cloroform to put a two year old to sleep, if it wasn’t to induce a child comatose? Which by the way, cloroform is lethal in a large enough dose – ask those fruit flies we all messed with in high school biology.

    For all we know, the dumb bitch killed the baby trying to induce lethargy. She’s certainly no physics graduate.

    But even if the intent was not initially murder, the end result was. Am I to be excused if I grab a shovel and smash Rutherford’s skull, telling a judge my intent was to only render Rutherford quiet?

    Come on guys. This is cold blooded murder of a baby.

  52. “For all we know, the dumb bitch killed the baby trying to induce lethargy. She’s certainly no physics graduate.”

    Tex, that’s my point.

    Homocide is not the same thing as murder. Intent is everything, regardless of admission.

    As the judge in My Cousin Vinnie said, “I know you are in the unique position of representing a defendant that claims he didn’t do it, but how does your client plead?”

  53. My point on the consistency is that there are better, painless ways to do her in, especially if you’re just going to dump the body somewhere anyway. Shit, just poison her or shoot her in her sleep. Leave her in the car int he garage. Again, I don’t know what the facts were, but it’s just a strong evidence of an accidental death with a cover up.

    How are the beaches Tex. Are they still combing for oil/tar balls? One of my partners just got back fro Pensacola and said there’s nothing out of the ordinary.

  54. I’m with you, El Tigre. That’s the whole purpose of the law: to have rules to go by when emotions are running high.

    IANAL, but my understanding is that they were never able to establish that the child was murdered, only that she was dead. The body was so decomposed that there was no forensic evidence that unequivocally said how she died, so it seems to me that there is no way to establish that she was murdered. Applying a shovel to Rutherford’s head would leave marks in the bone, so you would have a case THERE. but speculation (“C’mon, you KNOW she killed the baby!”) is not evidence. Thwarting those with strong feelings but no evidence is as I understand it the whole purpose of having laws.

  55. I’m on Navarre Beach in this mansion looking thing on stilts. Very nice, I guess – no tarballs. I’ll bet half of these homes on this strip are for sale. Ha ha ha. It’s pretty nice – it ought to be for $4,000 a week. I preferred Kona, HI, with no people but my immediate family. I’ve been shooting the bull with total strangers while fishing on the beach. You ought to hear some of these bullshit conversations. Shameless. I’ll bet I could screw some of these “beer gut” beauties if I could find the place and time. Maybe I should invite Rutherford down. 😀

    My extended family is fine – for Thanksgiving Day or something like that. Not for a week. This is for my wife, as I grin and bear it. She’ll probably run me off when I get home for being a smart ass last night. I’d had about enough of one know-it-all-blowhard there and made some smart ass comment, which you could hear the TV room gasp.

    There are 23 guests here, myself included, with two babies, six kids under 13, eight teenagers or young adults (my two included), and seven adults – five who are staying in hotel.

    Yesterday, I played doctor administering care for jellyfish stings. Dumbass here didn’t know that fresh water is one of the worst things you can use after acetic acid. 😳 You’re supposed to use “heated” salt water.

    Roasting in the sun and snorkeling for shells lasts about 30 minutes before I get bored out of my mind, so I came looking for some Rutherford ass to pick on, which doesn’t cost me my lifeline (wife). 😈

    I did swim with about a 30″ shark yesterday, which was kind of cool.

  56. The body was so decomposed that there was no forensic evidence that unequivocally said how she died, so it seems to me that there is no way to establish that she was murdered.

    I find this hard to believe.

    I’m discussing how we have lost our way with an established radiologist, and they are questioning if a two year old, gagged with duct tape and hands tied found in a swamp was murdered? Are you shitting me?

    What in the FUCK do you think happened to her?

  57. Thanks PF. You made me look up IANAL. 😆

    I am surprised they didn’t charge her with manslaughter without better proof. It sounds like they didn’t really prove that the bitch even did it either (other than “who the hell else did”). O.J. however was a slam dunk.

    First degree murder is hard to prove — as it should be.

    Tex, you swam with a 30 inch shark? Is that a metaphor?

  58. Why would mom need to gag and bind to kill her?

    (Tex, these are sincere questions — I didn’t even know those were facts — I thought there was evidence that the baby drowned in a neighbor’s pool).

  59. “if a two year old, gagged with duct tape and hands tied found in a swamp was murdered? Are you shitting me?”

    I have not been able to find any CREDIBLE references that the child’s hands were bound. I have seen arguments on multiple forums as to whether they were or not. I didn’t follow the trial at all, so you have me at a disadvantage there. Does the trial transcript say they were bound or is that just speculation?

    As I understand it, the duct tape was “on her head” and there were multiple short strips, not a long strip all the way ’round as one would expect. Where it came from has not been established and with the decomposition it was not established to my knowledge that it was “on her mouth.” It was kind of stuck “on her head.” Those are two very different things.

    I also understand that the ME said that he would give approx 50/50 for asphyxiation or drowning. Again I did not follow the trial.

    You and I can argue until WE are asphyxiated (blue in the face) but neither of us in the final analysis knows a damned thing. The jury does; they heard all the evidence and they acquitted. That’s all we need to know. IMHO it is silly to try to second guess twelve people who had all the evidence and ALL voted to acquit, and pretend to sit in judgement of them when in reality neither of us has the slightest idea what we are talking about.

    Shit you? Never. You’re my favorite turd.

  60. I just caught the highlights every night because you couldn’t get away from them. But if this is the mindset of the smart guys in America, I am certainly beginning to understand how the rubes are fooled in a jury to announce “not guilty.”

    Guys. We have a dead baby, a baby who went missing for 31 days without being reported as missing. Mom never bothered to report it, but did go out and obtain a life is beautiful tattoo and partied during the month which is well documented on film. The grandmother finally reported the baby missing. A convicted pathological liar for a mother, whose initial story that she dropped off the baby with a non-existent baby sitter didn’t hold water.

    We have an abandoned car belong to the mother, the car trunk smelling of decomposition. We have a dead baby gagged and bound, found in a swamp, the body so decomposed they can’t even obtain forensic evidence. We have overwhelming circumstantial evidence. What ever happened to preponderance of evidence?

    Let’s say that Casey Anthony didn’t intend to kill the baby but to drug her. Let’s say the mother killed the child accidentally, panicked, lied about it. What was her end game?

    Are you tell me that because it was just an accident and the original intent wasn’t to murder (what else would it be?), because after some time, the finger prints no longer available, even assuming every preponderance of evidence that mother is the perpetrator, that the mother is somehow less guilty of the daughter’s death? That somehow, the mother’s penalty should be less severe, “because well, maybe she didn’t intend to kill the baby?” Because the fact is, the mother’s actions led directly to the baby’s horrific death, no matter the intent. This was no accident, it was planned and it was facilitated by the mother.

    What justice has been served for Caylee Anthony? What justice administered to Casey Anthony?

    If you tell me the legalese of “well, it wasn’t a premeditated murder”, I’m going so say “then the law is an ass…the woman, whether ill intention or not, is clearly a pathological liar and killer who at the very least deserves to be behind bars for the rest of her days.”

    And Tigre, though you are one of my favorites and obviously a smart guy, it is this twisted type of semantics, legalese, and game playing by corrupt defense attorneys more interested in making a name for themselves than invoking justice, that has rendered my opinions of judicial jurisprudence as a rigged game and a kangaroo court. I have absolutely no faith in our judicial system, no faith in our jury selection system, and no faith from the police to our court process to administer justice.

    And when that fails, society has failed. Though I do not solely blame our courts for our demise, it has played no small part in lending support to the cause.

  61. Shit you? Never. You’re my favorite turd.

    Har har har. Smooth move Exlax? You should forgo the flaccid attempts at sixth grade quality humor Pfesser. You may have talent – being funny isn’t one doc. I can see why you made radiologist. Your personal skills are null and void.

    And by the way, I can see where a sap like you might believe duct tape, no matter where it found on a child, would be normal behavior for a parent. GOD help your own children. They’re going to need it.

  62. “And by the way, I can see where a sap like you might believe duct tape, no matter where it found on a child, would be normal behavior for a parent. GOD help your own children. They’re going to need it.”

    I always just put my kids in the refrigerator. It lowers their metabolism and they calm right down. You should try it.

    (That’s a joke.)

  63. What ever happened to preponderance of evidence?

    Nothing. That’s a civil standard. Criminal is “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

  64. Tex –

    I just want to get this straight for the record.

    Are you saying that you, having heard almost none of the evidence according to your own statement, are more qualified to judge a case than twelve individuals who heard every word?

    And in addition, you are qualified to judge THEM and call them the equivalent of rubes or saps or whatever your current term is, even though you don’t know a single thing about any one of the jurors…is that what you are saying?

    And the fact that those twelve people – who heard all the evidence – voted unanimously to acquit has no persuasive force at all?

    Are you really saying that, or am I misapprehending your position?

  65. Tex, again, homicide is not “murder.” And murder is not “manslaughter.” It sounds like the prosecutor didn’t charge properly with the evidence that was adduced. But I could be very, very, very wrong. Maybe this jury is too fucking stupid to find guilt, or didn’t want to believe that mother could do it, or thought the baby had it coming to her or whatever. I really don’t know. But what I do know is that what I’ve said here is not “just semantics.”

    And what else I know is that you can’t fault a defense lawyer for doing their job (ethically). We’re in a world of shit when it’s the defense lawyers job to determine guilt rather than the prosecutor, the judge or the jury.

    Obviosuly mom is a psycho. But you can’t say “maybe it was an accident what difference does it make because the baby’s dead and mom played a part in it at a minimum.” If you’re going to put someone in jail for murder, they have to actually have committed murder — not manslaughter.

    As I said, “not guily” is not the same thing as “innocent.”

  66. For if you are, sir, I would submit that you are exactly the kind of extreme individual that the law is there to protect us all from. And exactly why we will never allow any kind of religious dogma to dictate policy or have the force of law, for that kind of unreasonable, unreasoning, one hundred percent confident absolutist POV is IMHO the MOST dangerous kind of thinking there is.

  67. PF, who are you talking to? Witnesses still swear on a bible in many courtrooms here in Georgia. Is that an abomination?

    But I find “unreasonable, unreasoning, one hundred percent confident absolutist POV” among atheists and deniers of the religious underpinnings in the formation of our country more prevalent. Rutherford, Exhibit “A.”

  68. I find liberals unwilling to assign fault or responsibility to anyone the MOST dangerous. All actions justified and excused depending on who it is . . .

  69. FWIW, I have handled a couple very high-profile cases. One in particular with dozens of cameras in the courtroom and the rows filled with reporters. I was literally followed into the bathroom by them. With all of the coverage, video and audio, I continue to be amazed at what was reported after the fact. More frequently than not it was completely divorced from what had actually happened. Laughably so, even when it worked to my advantage.

    The media’s desire to sensationalize at the expense of accuracy knows no limits. To think you know what happened based on the media’s take is enormously misguided.

  70. I always just put my kids in the refrigerator. It lowers their metabolism and they calm right down. You should try it.

    You’d be better to put them in the frig than the sheer hell you’ll be putting them into. (And that’s no joke). Live it up doc – you’re going to need it.

    Are you saying that you, having heard almost none of the evidence according to your own statement, are more qualified to judge a case than twelve individuals who heard every word?

    And in addition, you are qualified to judge THEM and call them the equivalent of rubes or saps or whatever your current term is, even though you don’t know a single thing about any one of the jurors…is that what you are saying?

    And the fact that those twelve people – who heard all the evidence – voted unanimously to acquit has no persuasive force at all?

    Are you really saying that, or am I misapprehending your position?

    Perhaps insipid doctor, you haven’t seen the reaction across the nation yesterday or today. And perhaps you haven’t understand that much finer legal minds than mine were as equally aghast at the verdict. And perhaps you weren’t aware that the trial was broadcast live. And perhaps as is almost always the case, you’re in the minority opinion. But then while you call me an extremist, I call you the worst kind of nihilist and a fucking blot on America. Consider us even and enemies.

  71. Tigre,

    Unlike the Insipid and ignorant doctor, the same rube who helped put Obama in office then noticed much too late he was a Marxist and has the unmitigated gall to bitch about it, but only when it suits him, I’ll try to reason with a reasonable man.

    But you can’t say “maybe it was an accident what difference does it make because the baby’s dead and mom played a part in it at a minimum.” If you’re going to put someone in jail for murder, they have to actually have committed murder — not manslaughter.

    We are left with a dead baby that was obviously killed, intention beside the point. Every sign indicates it was the mom’s intent to be rid of the responsibility of caring for the baby. What would you suggest as punishment? Serious question.

    As I said, “not guily” is not the same thing as “innocent.”

    Maybe not in a legal sense, but the end result is the same. Whether innocent or “not guilty”, a mother who killed her baby walked free without penalty. That is the only thing that counts with respect to real justice.

    However, just like I said about O.J. and later was proven right, I will say the same now. Reasonable people understand that this whore killed her baby. After the hubbub dies down, the killer will be scorned by a fickle society, branded with the invisible but visible “M” for murderer on her forehead.

    Eventually, it will drive this reprehensible excuse for a human slowly insane. And she will slip. And society, recognizing the egregious lies that this woman got away with the first time, will be more than happy to administer severe justice to feel it somehow compensated injustice the first time.

    The women is clearly guilty, whether insidious excuses for humanity like Pfesser recognize it, or not. Remember Tigre, Pfesser marched his own niece down to the mill to abort her children without the parent’s consent. Pfesser is cut from the same cloth as Casey Anthony – a man with no redeemable or edifying qualities besides pure intellect.

  72. Tex,
    I’m going to tell you a story I heard in law school from my Crim Law/ Crim Pro professor, James Peden, who had been a public defender in the state of Ohio for many, many years.

    One day, a very bad man came into his office. By bad, I mean “enjoys carving up young ladies and leaving a trail of their entrails” bad. He needed an attorney, because allthough he had been out of prison for a short time, he was a suspect in a grisly (even by his standards) murder.

    He was charged with the murder, and the papers were sensational, and he proceeded to defend his client.

    When the prosecution rested its case, in its now characteristic arrogant flourish, he realized that the prosecution had also failed to prove one of the elements that was required for conviction. He immediately moved for an acquittal based on the prosecution’s failure to do its job, and it was granted.

    Over the weekend, his client was caught red-handed carving up another young lady. Monday morning, the prosecutor he had beaten the previous Friday stormed into his office, flung the newspaper down on his desk and screamed “See what you did!!!” while pointing at the headline.

    The professor put down the documents he had in his hand, looked the sanctimonius prick in the eyes, stood until he was face to face with him, and said “No. I see what YOU did, counselor. I did my job. It isn’t my duty to do yours too, and when you don’t do it, you lose. And when you screw up the simple stuff, YOU allow things like this to happen.”

    Defense attorneys play a role in our system of law Tex, and its an important one. And if they get away with the “baffle ’em with bullshit” manuver, its because the prosecutors are too arrogant or incompetent to effectly counter it, or put a stop to it.

    And while Mommy may be a scumbag, you seem to have lost faith in the judgment that no one escapes. Man isn’t perfect, Tex. It would be foolish to expect his justice to be something he isn’t, which is why “beyond a reasonable doubt” is the standard for any case that could cost you your liberty or your life. Its supposed to be hard to get that conviction. And if she is truly deserving of the horrors that real judgment can bring to her, then you and I both know she can’t escape them forever.

  73. Sorry BIC,

    IMO, You have put occupation before justice. You have reverted to man’s law over God’s law. God said vengeance is mine – he did not make provisions for those of us seeking truth and justice this side of heaven that we should simply leave it all to Him. You, as a professed Christian, are to pursue first what is right in God’s eyes – not American jurisprudence.

    The prosecutor was exactly right – the defender shared in guilt and the death, and I guarantee you on the Word of God I am right. You care to believe differently, that is your prerogative. But you walk on sand.

    Yes, I have lost complete faith in our system. Your position above only confirms for me why I have lost faith. It’s not my argument that a vigorous defense should be provided. I don’t argue even argue that an innocent found guilty is worse than the guilty found innocent. But even a proper defense should seek truth first – and in your example, the truth did not win out. Loopholes, hubris or ineptness are no excuse in God’s eyes. Your example is one that perverted justice through perhaps a clever attorney or series of mishaps, and in turn, another innocent life was lost. Sins of commission or omission carry equal guilt, and just because one attorney more clever than the other it does not change the definition of justice.

    This Anthony case was beyond reasonable doubt – and sometime, someplace the truth will win out. It won’t bring a dead baby back, but it might help to restore some semblance of order; some sense of justice, even if late.

    In fact, it is an example such as yours that defines a profession for me that I once admired, even envied. No more…

  74. “What would you suggest as punishment? Serious question.”

    I dunno. I gotta know what she did, Tex. If she did what she was accused of doing, the death penalty is far too kind.

    In any event, intent is everything. A mother that fails to pull the parking break allowing the car to roll into a body of water and drown her babies is an idiot but not a murderer — even if she tries to cover it up after the fact. One that deliberately drowns her babies by strapping them into their car seat then walking away as the car slides form a boat launch and disappears into the water is something entirely different. You’ve asked me an imponderable.

    I know she was convicted of lying to law enforcement. Of course, Clinton did too, and R said since it was brought to light he was punished. She’s been in jail for a few years as I understand it, and Clinton was treated to some time away from Hillary. That was a reward.

  75. Man, this has been the windiest year I ever remember. I don’t know about the rest of you, but this has been almost nonstop all year. We had some major dust yesterday, reminded me of west Texas. Tasted about the same for several hours…

  76. Poolman, saw on Drudge that Phoenix was enveloped by a dust cloud yesterday. Will say, on my trip from Houston to Destin, it was mostly bone dry. Parts of Oklahoma and Texas are burning up – LA and MS not so bad. Florida looked pretty lush.

  77. Hey, I see Flake dropped in and left me a stinking pile while I was gone. She’s always so brave when I leave.

    Too late Flake – I’m here and driving over to deliver you a cheap bottle of Hag Spreader Stink – straight uric acid, mixed with fermented M&H jizz; perfect lubricant for your stretched spread of parched flower.

    I noticed the Panhandle of Florida has been overridden with Mississippians, Cajuns and Roll Tide types.

    No wonder I like the Panhandle better than Tallahassee. 😉

  78. “Regarding the twisting and misapplication, when you have rulings that demand removals of crosses from war memorials, or forbidding a prayer at graduation, or prior to a football game, or upholding the denial of the right to play an instrumental version of “Ave Maria” in student-programmed recitals, yes, it has been twisted and perverted into something that Jefferson himself never comprehended when he penned the phrase.”

    How do you know that? That might be exactly what he had in mind. It is certainly exactly what *I* have in mind.

    Gee, I don’t know.

    Could it be the fact that shortly after finalizing the letter, and sending it off, he started to attend church services in the Capitol Building (OMG!!!! Violation of the wall between church and state!!!!111!!!!Zomg!)
    http://www.loc.gov/exhibits/religion/rel06-2.html
    But what would they know about it? After all, they’re only the Library of Congress.

    Or could it be this curious passage from his Second Inaugural?

    I shall need, too, the favor of that Being in whose hands we are, who led our forefathers, as Israel of old, from their native land, and planted them in a country flowing with all the necessaries and comforts of life; who has covered our infancy with his providence, and our riper years with his wisdom and power; and to whose goodness I ask you to join with me in supplications, that he will so enlighten the minds of your servants, guide their councils, and prosper their measures, that whatsoever they do, shall result in your good, and shall secure to you the peace, friendship, and approbation of all nations.

    Refer to the God of Israel? Ask the public to join him in prayer?
    Doesn’t sound much like someone who believes that God doesn’t take and interest in or participate in human affairs, does it?

    Just wait until Michael Newdow hears about this! I’m sure he’ll step right up and defend the interpretation that *you* have in mind. Especially as it is so well informed, and all.

    I didn’t forget the rest of your deism claims. Its just that the proof refuting it is a bit much, and it will actually require its own post. And Il” conceed Thomas Paine to you right now. I have issues with the categorization that would include Ethan Allen, for reasons that you’ll see when I’m finished, and I suspect that when you read them, you just might agree, but I don’t think you’ll like it.

  79. Well he might have “said” that, but you don’t know what he was really “thinking,” now do you BiW? 🙄

  80. Next up: Davis has credentials and stuff that you don’t have, so my selective quotation of him is irrefutable proof that my interpretation is true.

  81. I believe it was Tex who introduced this “CSI effect” into this thread and then lo and behold what did I hear on Hannity tonight … you guessed it … the CSI effect. ROTFL … guess we’ve been getting our talking points from Faux News lately heh? 🙂

    Well you all now have your ultimate revenge. In this hotel hell I have no MSNBC (except on the laptops) and I do have CNN and Fox. CNN is so insipid I finally broke down and watched a bit of Fox tonight. Hannity had some horse’s ass of a radio host saying we need “professional jurors”. Since we all know the country leans right (right Tex and Tigre?) then the Anthony jury were probably mostly conservatives. The prosecution blew it …. just face it boys. They could have nailed her on lesser charges that were truly a slam dunk but they got greedy. Now she gets the equivalent of a slap on the wrist.

    By the way, when this month of torture is over, I will be a friggin expert on finding shows over the net when I can’t get them on the boob tube. For starters, I point you to http://www.clicker.com. Very sweet for anyone who enjoys television.

  82. “PF, who are you talking to? Witnesses still swear on a bible in many courtrooms here in Georgia. Is that an abomination?

    But I find “unreasonable, unreasoning, one hundred percent confident absolutist POV” among atheists and deniers of the religious underpinnings in the formation of our country more prevalent. Rutherford, Exhibit “A.””

    I swore to God when I got married – both times. It’s just an expression and I don’t get exercised about it. I’ve testified in several trials – actually I am a bit of a child-abuse forensics expert – and I swear, too. It’s just what the court wants and I don’t get wrapped around the stump over it.

    As for underpinnings, et al: no doubt most folks throughout American history were in fact, religious and Christian. No problem there. But the government CAN NOT be. It must be 100% secular. We don’t need to reinvent the wheel here; there are many examples of where mixing religion and govt leads.

    re: Exhibit A: you guys should pick on me more than Rutherford. I think he is eminently reasonable – most evidenced by his allowing some of you guys to show him – the blog owner – the most egregious disrespect, including making fun of his disability. That kind of irks me, but I am a newcomer and assume you have a special relationship with him so it’s none of my business.

    The “unreasonable, unreasoning, etc” thing actually has a name: bigotry. I hate to bring that word up, but it is the right one. Most folks think it means something racial, but it means someone who will not look at or show any respect for any opinion other than his own. I think that kind of lack of self-examination to be extremely dangerous, for it removes that natural thing called conscience that says, “am I really doing the right thing?” If you never ask yourself that question or consider that the other fella just might have a point, then you are DANGEROUS. Just my opinion.

  83. In any event, intent is everything.

    Hey Tigre, could you or BiW weigh in on this? I heard on the news today that the DA does not need to prove “motive” when prosecuting. Aren’t intent and motive very closely linked?

  84. “Perhaps insipid doctor, you haven’t seen the reaction across the nation yesterday or today. And perhaps you haven’t understand that much finer legal minds than mine were as equally aghast at the verdict. And perhaps you weren’t aware that the trial was broadcast live. And perhaps as is almost always the case, you’re in the minority opinion. But then while you call me an extremist, I call you the worst kind of nihilist and a fucking blot on America. Consider us even and enemies.”

    That’s nice.

    You didn’t answer my questions – any of them. Do you or do you not think that you, who heard NONE of the testimony – are more qualified to render a verdict than twelve people who heard it all and agreed unanimously? And please don’t puss out and get into that “reactions of brilliant legal minds” bullshit again. Yes or no will do quite nicely.

  85. Refer to the God of Israel? Ask the public to join him in prayer?

    BiW why can’t you see how juvenile this line of argument is? Jefferson was religious … fine we get it. It says nothing about whether or not the GOVERNMENT was architected to be secular.

    Maybe I missed something but I don’t recall Jimmy Carter, one of the most devout men we’ve ever had in the Oval Office calling for prayer in public schools.

    Why do you want to toss out the one characteristic above all others that has attracted people to this country for centuries, namely the right to believe what you wish and not have government encroach on your spiritual life? Why don’t you get it that the separation of church and state is what guarantees your freedom to be a Christian in this country? Truly man, you confound me.

  86. Davis has credentials and stuff that you don’t have, so my selective quotation of him is irrefutable proof that my interpretation is true.

    Well Tigre I wasn’t going to go there but for as much as you mention it …. yeah I’d like to see what the majority of respected historians have to say on the subject and take that over the word of anyone who has cherry picked sources to satisfy his world view.

  87. Tex, I really do sympathize with your disgust at the verdict … truly I do. But I also heard that there was NO evidence of prior abuse introduced into trial. The prosecution could not paint Casey as anything but a good mother while the kid was alive. It was only during that month of the child being “missing” that Casey’s behavior was shown to be abnormal. It does help a jury reach a verdict if they have evidence of prior abuse.

    I understand some legislatures are already drafting a Caylee law that makes it a crime not to report your child missing after 24 hours. I think that’s a pretty good outcome of this tragedy.

    P.S. At least one juror is already telling the press that she felt sick to her stomach rendering the verdict. This was not OJ style jury nullification. This was a group of people with conscience hung out to dry by a lousy prosecutor. I also heard tonight that the defense attorney’s closing was a masterpiece of stagecraft.

  88. Hats off to Rabbit also for his Bachmann-as-Obama sarcasm.

    Keep laughing dude …. in fact please go vote for her. Obviously you long for dumber than “57 states” and “corpsemen”.

    The only reason I want to see Bachmann as our next POTUS, on my less charitable days, is to watch you guys pass around the poison Koolaid when you see what a colossal mistake you’ve made. 👿

    P.S. Rabbit, believe me, if we were moving to Michigan, I’d track you down just for the assistance in moving my yuppie sh*t into the new apartment … hell we already know we can’t fit it all based on downsizing by two thirds. So, you might even get a few takeaways in the process. 🙂

  89. R, with all of the outrage, have you figured out how to tie Palin to the little girl’s death?

    Mmmmm, come to think of it what WAS Sarah doing three years ago when Caylee went missing? 😉

  90. Gorilla thought his Van Jones video was laughable (that can be the only reason he posted it). So Jones oversimplified the economic might of Germany? Big deal. He still points out facts that should trouble all of us. Corporations doing better than they have in years while folks are being forced onto the street. That alone was worth the nine minutes invested in watching him.

    His other master stroke … when he talked about children living in poverty, he showed the picture of a little white girl … just so folks in the audience wouldn’t dismiss the point as “typical black poverty”. It also took any racial agenda out of his comments. I say bravo to Jones even if he didn’t score a complete knockout punch.

  91. I didn’t forget the rest of your deism claims. Its just that the proof refuting it is a bit much, and it will actually require its own post. And Il” conceed Thomas Paine to you right now. I have issues with the categorization that would include Ethan Allen, for reasons that you’ll see when I’m finished, and I suspect that when you read them, you just might agree, but I don’t think you’ll like it.” – BiW

    I do believe this conversation was occuring here.

  92. Besides, how can you not see the overall premise is faulty? Jones claims we’re not broke, in the face of a 14+ TRILLION dollar debt.

    Some advice: don’t take financial advice from Jones…

  93. I believe it was Tex who introduced this “CSI effect” into this thread and then lo and behold what did I hear on Hannity tonight … you guessed it … the CSI effect. ROTFL … guess we’ve been getting our talking points from Faux News lately heh? 🙂

    Perhaps FAUX News are getting their talking points from me “R”? I think you forget I’m on vacation. I turned on CNN and watched Nancy Grace (gag), so like the jury, you’ve come to a false conclusion. 😉

  94. R asks, “[a]ren’t intent and motive very closely linked?”

    Yes in one sense, but from a legal perspective they’re different. It’s a little subtle.

    Motive is the reason someone may have committed an act. In other words, motive explains conduct and therefore consideration on the question of relevancy of evidence. If you saw man run from his house (and nothing more), you might assume he had commited a crime, was in a rush etc., but you would have to speculate absent more info. If you were told that the house was on fire you would understand a possible motive (so that phone call from his neighbor moments before might have been the one warning of the fire and what was said relevant/admissible rather than some kind of hearsay satetemtn).

    Intent is the “state of mind of the person who committed the act” to commit that act. It as a (near) universal element of all crimes. You must intend to commit the act and in some instances, such as murder, act with malice aforethought (premiditate). That’s why I gave the example of the mom that negligently allowed her car to roll into the pond drowning her babies from the one that planned and intended that her babies died when she caused the car to roll into the water. The difference is that intended outcome.

    The guy you heard was right about the need to prove intent but not motive. However, “motive” is generally evidence of intent.

  95. “Well Tigre I wasn’t going to go there but for as much as you mention it …. yeah I’d like to see what the majority of respected historians have to say on the subject and take that over the word of anyone who has cherry picked sources to satisfy his world view.”

    Pot meet kettle.

    The problem Rutherford is that you still don’t understand the premise or just contnue to deliberately mistate it. You’re just pissing on BiW’s shoes. It’s aggravating to someone objective like myself who neither wrote it nor advocates theocracy as you so recklessly contend. Your concept of what constitutes sepration of church and state is flawed. Advocay, tolerance and suppresiion are different things notwithstanding your intentional desire to conflate them to refute an arguement that was never made. Cut the shit.

    BTW, if you think you got a lick in with the “country is generally right leaning, therefore the jury was conservative” no wonder you spouted your observation about people from Texas being dumb because they have alow HS graduation rate. Wouldn’t the communtiy and available jurors from the pool play a part? By your logic, the OJ jury was conservative. I almost never draw a conservative jury in Atlanta (and oh yes I do ask questions in voir dire to find out the bent without straight up asking).

  96. You didn’t answer my questions – any of them. Do you or do you not think that you, who heard NONE of the testimony – are more qualified to render a verdict than twelve people who heard it all and agreed unanimously? And please don’t puss out and get into that “reactions of brilliant legal minds” bullshit again. Yes or no will do quite nicely.

    Hey Rube – I answered all your questions. You asked how I could possibly know. I answered. You asked how I came to my conclusions in disagreement with the twelve jurors (which apparently is no disagreement now). I answered. And since I answered the above question in the very first post I presented, I’ll repeat it in detail.

    I don’t think the jurists or you have a clue to what “beyond a reasonable doubt” means. I don’t think prior motive is necessary to prove the case. I don’t think the means of death or weapon is absolutely necessary to prove the case.

    You seem to put a greatest emphasis on the why, the how.

    We have a dead baby who was obviously murdered and abandoned. All I really need to know is the who. I believe the lies and the immediate actions of the mother during an extended period of time, along with very credible, very damaging circumstantial evidence clearly point to the murderer.

    It’s rigid assholes like you and a series of confusing, legal guidelines that go way beyond protecting the innocent and leave massive sums of solid circumstantial evidence clearly pointing to the obvious perpetrator, which leave killers on the street. It’s “expert witnesses” like you, those who will happily trot their asses up to the box to bloviate about their own genius, when your responsibility should be to get to the truth and nothing else.

    Somehow in our haste to pat our wonderful legal system on the back about protecting the innocent, we’ve apparently forgotten that the judicial system is first and foremost to seek truth, then administer justice.

    I’ll say it again for the room. The justice system once again, undisputedly failed – and that seems to be a pattern in high profile cases; many of which later proved the inherent weaknesses of how we facilitate these cases. Even the jurors know it in this case – but because it didn’t reach these stringent set of measures of mumbo jumbo made by those “defenders on high”, they were instructed and decided, “nope, though we believe the lady a murderer of her child, it didn’t reach this particular guideline, so we have to find her not guilty.”

    In our process of making sure we have followed the letter of the law, we have forgotten the spirit of the law. A two year old girl is dead and nobody suffers the consequences. Lady Justice once again weeps. What this really shows is how twisted our nation has become, how muddled our thinking, our dearth of common sense. And that too shows in our schools, our work places, our communities.

    Obviously, life has become cheap.

  97. Tex –

    It is axiomatic that the longer the dictation, the less sure the radiologist is. If you get a full-page report on a chest x-ray, you’d better ask for a second opinion, because he’s lost and has no idea what’s going on.

    Along those lines, you say you have answered my questions and then head out cross-country on a rambling walkabout which I, for one, cannot make heads or tails of.

    I will try to condense your voluminous post. Tell me if I am mistaken: You are saying in the final analysis that yes, you do believe that you – having heard none of the evidence in the Anthony case – are more qualified to render a verdict than twelve people who heard it all and voted unanimously for acquittal.

    Does that summarize it fairly? Once again, a simple yes or no would be most appreciated.

  98. The few of the jury members themselves are saying they believed Casey Anthony murdered her daughter. Did you miss that one too expert? Or is that too much of a walkabout? One said it made her sick to her stomach to let the wench slip out the door with a Cheshire cat grin on her face.

    See 😕

    http://abcnews.go.com/US/casey_anthony_trial/casey-anthony-juror-sick-stomach-guilty-verdict/story?id=14005609

    Deny as you wish – excuse if you must – justice was not served. You respond as if I’m the only one aghast at this decision. So yeah. If a simple answer is all you understand doctor, the answer is a definitive YES DOC. Or are two words too obtuse?

    And please make a footnote to your axiom my explanation was in response to your inability to understand my complaint is not just with the decision itself, but the entire system of perverted twisting of justice due to the of requirements including the legal technicalities, required motive, need for the murder weapon(s) that lets proven lying, pathetic parents kill their children without penalty. Absolute proof is seldom garnered, and that is exactly what our system, with the right lawyers and jury of course, requires.

    I thought you might have the capacity Pfesser to understand the degree of my complaint. Your requirements are not beyond reasonable doubt, but beyond shadow of a doubt. Taking your requirements to their logical conclusion, the only thing that will do is an admission of murder.

    Big difference….

    Now, I have a one word question for you.

    Was justice served in the Caylee Anthony trial?

  99. I do believe this conversation was occuring here.

    The difference being that I’ve read more of Jefferson’s papers since then, G. I’m not willing to lump him in with the deists anymore, and I know he wouldn’t have placed himself in that category.

  100. P.S. – I’m using a child’s old Dell Computer to do this. Yes, Rutherford, I’m not making lame excuse – besides I’ll be the first to admit my proofreading sucks.

    So if there’s a bunch of typos this week, more than the ordinary numerous typos, once I reached maximum number of words in the visible comment box, the comment box disappears and jumps around.

    I just keep typing hoping what I meant to appear, does appear. 🙂

    It’s this or unplug a stool. And I’m having little luck unplugging the stool at this moment. Happy Birthday. 😡

  101. Absolute proof is seldom garnered, and that is exactly what our system, with the right lawyers and jury of course, requires.

    1. I missed your years of legal experience that allows you to draw this conclusion. I apologize for that.

    2. And yes, the prosecution’s burden IS high…as it should be when your liberty or your life is at stake.

  102. I agree with you. I don’t believe him to be a Deist, certainly not one on par with Payne. Though, he may have had some Deist tendencies, I connect that more to the Enlightenment mentality of the time than to a real disbelief in Jesus.

  103. Tex –
    “Deny as you wish – excuse if you must – justice was not served. You respond as if I’m the only one aghast at this decision. ”

    I said no such thing, and I have denied nothing. Once again you are responding only to the voices in your head.

    “…not just with the decision itself, but the entire system of perverted twisting of justice due to the of requirements including the legal technicalities, required motive, need for the murder weapon(s) that lets proven lying, pathetic parents kill their children without penalty. Absolute proof is seldom garnered, and that is exactly what our system, with the right lawyers and jury of course, requires. etc, etc….”

    That little missive – most of which is a gross distortion and some of which is just not true – demonstrates precisely why we need laws with concrete requirements – what you call “legal technicalities.” When one is angry he can come up with a thousand justifications for jailing or executing someone. That is the beauty of the law – it is unflinching, unemotional and inexorable. What we DON’T need is people running around with venom dripping out the corners of their mouths, screaming “You KNOW she did it, just execute her!” That would be you.

    No, the next time the defendant could be you – or me. I think your diatribes are the perfect example of how dangerously out of control people can get when they are upset – and why laws, with all their “technicalities” are necessary. It is to protect people like all of us from people like you.

    And to answer your question, at least by my definition of justice, I say yes – it was served. Is she guilty? Only she knows. But the LAW doesn’t know and the jury doesn’t know, so our system – unlike the Napoleonic code – gives the benefit of the doubt to the defendant. That is my preference by a long shot.

  104. No legal expertise at all BIC. I wouldn’t know where to pay a parking ticket, wouldn’t have an idea of a lawyer to call. Never needed one and pray to never need one. I grant you that. You win.

    Nonetheless, a two year old lay dead and her murderer still roaming free. If that’s your idea of real American jurisprudence, well…I’ll leave it to your capable hands to discern and arbitrate truth and justice for all.

    Except me. 😉 I reserve that right to determine justice. I may need to bend your rules a bit without your permission, if the need arises and the situation becomes personal.

  105. Pfesser,

    Protection from me? From the radiologist who feels the biggest threat to America is a Christian theocracy? That’s rich. Paranoid, self-serving and delusional.

    From the man who assisted in killing his niece or nephew over the wishes of the grandparents. And you want to preach to me about morality and twisting of truth? Your inner goodness, ey?

    From the doctor who thinks porn the highest calling and lending itself to the “smartest” people?

    Yeah, you’re another I think totally qualified to cast judgment about matters of importance. Like Margaret and Helen.

  106. Tex, you continue to presume it was murder. They didn’t even prove cause of death, let alone intent. Save your ire for the prosecutor. They are the ones who didn’t fullfill their calling. Everyone has a role to play in this system, and it is isn’t the duty of each one to “bat cleanup” when someone else screws the pooch.

  107. Tex –
    “Yeah, you’re another I think totally qualified to cast judgment about matters of importance. Like Margaret and Helen.”

    We’re not at Margaret’s and Helen’s.

  108. But Tex, Palin did it. Maybe Bush.

    Tex, I love your rants, but you’re missing it on this one entirely if you mean what you say. Justice requires proof and due process. Since I know you know that, I’m doubting that you really mean what you say.

    Now go watch the greatest movie ever made, My Cousin Vinnie. It’s got all the bases covered. The jury selection scene captures this.

  109. My Cousin Vinny – great movie.

    My favorite line is by the judge (Fred Gwynne – the ex Herman Munster)

    “What is a yute?”

  110. You’re right BIC. Why should I presume it was murder? I know a lot of two-year olds that go missing for 31 days and nobody notices or bother’s to report it. The little girl could have wrapped herself in duct tape, hitched a ride to the swamp, and committed suicide for all we know.

    Even better, there’s probably a lot of “loving” mothers that would go get a “Life is Beautiful” tattoo and party removed from that burden to cheer their spirits, or maybe Casey just forgot to call the authorities. So, she’s a liar. We all lie. Doesn’t make us a murderer, right?

    Probably by the legal definition, that’s adequate parenting too. I mean, can we even prove that Casey wasn’t fit to be a mother?

    I see my inadequacies of logic and I’ll defer it to our all mighty, all knowing, “experienced” legal profession to decide who fills out the lineup.

    Hell, there’s no need to even vote anymore, or raise our children. You guys should be doing it for us.

    I think I’ll vote for Obama this time. It will make it so much easier to drop all pretense of rational thought – only for me instead of gov’t, I’ll let you attorney’s manage all my affairs.

    But wait! Obama is an attorney. I’ll let him bat cleanup.

  111. We’re not at Margaret’s and Helen’s.

    Really? You could have fooled me. I had to do a double take.

    ———–

    Tigre and BIC, I have appreciated your input in the past. Good guys. We can disagree and still be friendly. Hell, I don’t agree with Rutherford about anything and he’s a friend. I’ve argued with everybody on this board at one time or another. Don’t take this personally.

    But now you both will no longer be surprised or need explanation when I say I have zero faith in our legal system. That’s not a shot against either one of you personally. It’s obvious from a simple bystander the system is falling apart and overwhelmed – just like society.

    Cynical? You don’t know the half of it.

  112. No, actually, Obama isn’t an attorney, at least not one licensed to practice law, although he still is an honorary member of the Illinois State Bar.

    http://threesurethingsoflife.wordpress.com/2010/01/29/a-professional-ethical-and-legal-problem/

    Tex,
    Circumstances in the absence of PROOF simply aren’t enough. I’ve seen just enough wierd shit in the course of my career to look at the actual facts here and say “Yeah, that’s pretty messed up, but is it PROOF?” and the answer has to be “No.”

  113. I do believe the point of our legal system is that it is better for one guilty person to go free than it is for one innocent person to go to jail.

    Sucks, but handy when you’re the one in the pinch…

  114. Guys, it is my birthday and I’m underwhelmed by Navarre Beach so far, so I am going on a sojourn (by myself) this afternoon to drive around. The house is beautiful, even the kids are sweet, but I can float in the ocean for about 30 minutes a time before I grow really bored.

    It’s torture when you are a loner by nature surrounded by 22 other people for a week at a time. I watched Jeremiah Johnson the other night and thought, “I could do that.” 🙂

    So that you didn’t think I ran from a good fight, I will come out swinging at a later date.

    Maybe tonight – if not, next week.

    xxoxx,

    Tex

  115. Rutherford,

    Well, you jinx, I’m in for a losing week.

    And to think I was going to donate this weeks profits to the blog, too.

  116. Happy birthday, ye olde farte!

    The last time I was in Florida, I spent time in the keys. That was cool. And then we did the Everglades, ate fried gator and had a beer bash on an airboat flying through swampland at dusk – surprised we all made it back after that. 😯 I think our “tour guide” was more toasted than we were. He knew all the gators by name. Talk about a “deliverance” experience…

  117. I thought I knew what let the dead bury the dead meant, but I re-familiarized myself with it after reading this latest article and it means so much more than I had previously understood. It fits in any case.

    “The prosecution blew it …. just face it boys. They could have nailed her on lesser charges that were truly a slam dunk but they got greedy. Now she gets the equivalent of a slap on the wrist.” -Rutherford

    Rutherford, what lesser charge would that be? What provable slam dunk of a lesser charge – based on the evidence in this case – are you referring to?

    Maybe that worked with Al Capone, but what could she have been charged with that would have insured or even given hope for a stronger punishement than what she will get for lying to the cops?

    Before you say “manslaughter” or anything, make sure you know that – based on the evidence – you yourself could be convinced beyond a reasonable doubt to convict her of it.

    What do the prosecution – or anyone else for that matter – know about exactly, precisely what Casey Anthony did to that little girl? We all know she did something, don’t we? IANAL either but I also know that you can’t charge someone with “something.”

    The prosecution made mistakes for sure, and the defense was a bad joke. Jose Baez’s closing may impress Geraldo but he seemed pretty green and bumbling to me. His risen star is almost as galling as that alley cat of a mother’s. It is a travesty, but not of justice. Probably more of the media than anything.

    You pile the lies high enough, you can climb out of reach. She did. She was out of reach and she got away.

    BiC I liked the #96 story.

    —–

    Happy Birthday Tex. Enjoy the vacation. Keep an eye out for vacationing politicians and give them some shit. Wear sunblock. Don’t stalk fakename.

  118. “We all know she did something, don’t we?”

    No. We don’t.

    According to “Juror #2,” the prosecution could not even prove if the mother or the grandparents were the ones caring for the child at the time of her death.

    For all we know it was the child-molesting father that did it or had the accident and covered it all up. His wife is torn between loyalty to her husband and loyalty to her daughter, so she does stuff like call the cops and report stench from the daughters car and later says in court she was who did the Googling of certain words.

    Don’t get me wrong. I am not saying she didn’t do it. I kinda think she did. But it boils down to what many here have said…the people blaming her for stuff couldn’t prove it….not any of it.

    That’s really the bottom line.

  119. Happy birthday, Tex –

    I just got back from VA Beach after a three-day vacation and believe me it wasn’t enough.

    Drink some toddies, kick back and forget the bullshit. Just enjoy life a little.

  120. Huck, I concede your point and agree that’s the bottom line. I’d ammend my comment to include the family or at least to swap the word ‘know’ for ‘believe.’

    “she (the mother) later says in court she was who did the Googling of certain words.”

    She said so in her depo too. The prosecuters didn’t believe her and offered compelling proof otherwise (IMO). It was, I thought, a point gained for the prosecution. I haven’t heard anything from the jurors yet about what they thought of Cindy Anthony’s various stories, but I can say that beyond a reasonable doubt in my mind – her testimony regarding the computer searches was false. She was either at work or setting her daughter up for murder with the recorded search strings, work records and testimony that were presented in rebuttal.

    They did prove that one to me. I’m even more curious now about the things that the prosecution did prove beyond a reasonable doubt. A lot of their weaker moments came in refuting (sometimes unecessarily) the craziness coming from the defense. Some of that stuff might have been better left unchallenged it was so out there.

    As for the father, I always got the feeling that they were playing a complicated game of muddying up the water enough to clear the daughter, then planned on saying it never happened if they tried to pin it on the dad at a later date. I half expected him to admit to the abuse or the cover up. Just supposin’.

    Very weird story. You couldn’t make this one up but if you did it’d be a best seller.

  121. Yeah, I don’t really believe that stuff about the father, either. And I have not followed it enough to know what did or didn’t come out other than the snippets that got my attention here and there.

    A very weird and unfortunate story, indeed.

  122. I’m back from my sojourn.

    I detoured the drive and headed to the beach with my pretty daughters dressed in what appeared to me to be the smallest possible bikinis that still cover the unmentionables. When did they grow up to be women?

    Unbelievable how beautiful these two are – and I do mean beautiful. I had total strangers tell me that on the beach today. I waffled between, ” Thank you, and keep your eyes at neck line and above or
    I will drown you.” One was a woman so I felt safe. Complete blessings, these two.

    What is most amazing is you look in the mirror and think, “There must have been a mix up at the hospital.”

    Thank you to all of my friends here for wishing me a Happy Birthday. It’s been a long time since I have actually been on vacation while on a birthday and it’s been both uneventful and still fun. I’ve seen both the Gulf and the Pacific this summer and once again reminded of the awesome majesty of this earth. We are all blessed.

    And thanks for letting me rant on the R.L. blog. I’ve obviously missed the commentary…I’m an internet addict. I can think of worse habits to have.

  123. I just bought “Debt, Deficits and the Demise of the American Economy” and am a few pages in.

    It is pretty sobering stuff. We may disagree here about everything from soup to nuts, but one thing we DO agree on is that our magnificent country on a hellbound train and that it is the fault of bastards who get their mail in Washington, DC. Some of the politicians are beginning to get the word, too. I really think it is too late, but we’ll see.

    Thank God I didn’t sell my Dad and Mom’s little farm in West Virginia. We may need it.

  124. In answer to your question Muffy, I’d like to think the 31 day gap before reporting her daughter missing could have been turned into a child endangerment charge by the DA. That’s what I mean by a lesser charge.

    By end of month she’ll be out on the street. Truthfully, I do hope she’s just a supreme dingbat and truly not guilty of killing her little girl. 😦

  125. Gorilla,

    You know what the best part of that trailer was?

    But what her vicious, little detractors don’t recognize is how many of us Mark Levin and Andrew Breitbart just spoke for.

    I mean, do you and I really give a shit what “the establishment”, the dinosaur media, Pfesser, or even Rutherford really think? I give them a hard time in return for entertainment value in this venue, but truth be known, I don’t give a tinker’s damn what they think.

    Why?

    What Andrew Breitbart just said: They’re the idiots that gave us what we got right now. Doesn’t get more inept than that.

  126. Actually, Palin is not the joke. She just looks like the joke.

    Who is it really? Well, I’ll give you a couple of quotes and see if you can figure it out.

    “It is immoral for a sucker to keep his money.” – W. C. Fields

    “If you’ve been in a poker game for a half hour and you still don’t know who’s the patsy – you’re the patsy.” – Warren Buffet

    So who’s the patsy? Not Rutherford or I; I haven’t sent her a dime, and I’ll wage neither has R. Do you really, really think she cares a “tinker’s damn” about principle – or do you think her game is to bilk her “followers” out of as much money as possible?

    Bah. Humbug. Just Tammy Bakker with better makeup.

  127. “So who’s the patsy? Not Rutherford or I; I haven’t sent her a dime, and I’ll wage neither has R”

    Ya know….we keep telling you guys this same thing, yet you refuse to understand.

    You and Rutherford are Palin’s patsies. If it were not for the outrage you and yours display towards this woman, she’d have disappeared into nothingness a long time ago. Every slam by you folks and your sheepish media further emboldens her and her supporters. She couldn’t write Facebook slams against anyone if nobody gave her the ammunition to do so.

    If you truly want Sarah Palin to go away…then quit talking about her. It really, really is that simple, regardless of what your invisible Alaskan blogging friends say.

  128. Where in the hell is Brother Rutherford? I reserved time to spar with my arch nemesis while he toadstooled in a hotel room and I wasted time on a beach with a Corona in my hand (even have the limes), and he is hiding in the weeds again.

    Rutherford, what could you possibly be doing to fill your entire day and night? Sitting at the pool? Helping in the kitchen? Cleaning rooms? Treat this as a vacation.

    This is my last day to screw around before driving 1,100 miles again. Get your sorry ass back to your own house now! Are you lurking?

    P.S. – I saw the Blue Angels flying in formation yesterday. If I had it to do over again, knowing then what I know now, I might make the attempt at flying jets. Probably wash out, but one never knows…. 😀

  129. “If you truly want Sarah Palin to go away…then quit talking about her. It really, really is that simple, regardless of what your invisible Alaskan blogging friends say.”

    She’ll go away, all right. And the most likely scenario is that she will do it with her coat pulled over her head and her hands cuffed behind her back. The only bad thing is that she will probably take Frank Bailey with her.

  130. “Our accounting is unconventional because in some places we count what has happened, in some places we project what’s likely to happen, and in some places we’ve done our own numbers because no others exist.”

    Which adds up to a whole lot of made up numbers. The same kind of government counting that tries to convince us that the Stimulus worked and that ObamaCare will work.

    It’s all bullshit.

  131. I posted this at Fat Grannies where math, statistics and facts aren’t generally understood but by a handful, but they will be here. I agree with Huck. If there’s been a big payoff, where?

    There are 2 million fewer private-sector jobs now than when Obama was sworn in, and the unemployment rate is 1.6 percentage points higher.

    • There are now more long-term unemployed than at any time since the government started keeping records.

    • The U.S. dollar is more than 12% weaker.

    • The number of Americans on food stamps has climbed 37%.

    • The Misery Index (unemployment plus inflation) is up 62%.

    • The national debt is about 40% higher than it was in January 2009.

    Obama has managed to produce the worst recovery on record.

    So where’s the beef?

  132. Tex thanks missing me but I’ve been around. You missed my birthday greeting, admitedly a needle in a haystack, and my reply to Muffy.

    Last night we had a farewell dinner of sorts with an old friend, actually the guy who took me off the street and put me in corporate America 28 years ago. He was one of the good guys. More like him and corporate life would not have started to suck so bad.

  133. Huck I guess my only problem with you is that you believe the GOP economic numbers but not the liberal ones. So you don’t really believe it’s all sh*t. I am so disenchanted right now that I truly believe it’s ALL sh*t. Either no one is telling us the truth or no one really knows the truth.

  134. It is clear whether it is his fault or not that things must change or Obama will lose in 2012. It is the GOP’s election to lose. With the current crop they could blow it but replace Romney with a strong candidate and Obama is toast.

    By the way I dropped hints at a political wind change for me personally that disturbed my wife and almost got me stabbed with a dinner knife by my liberal friend last night. 🙂

  135. “Huck I guess my only problem with you is that you believe the GOP economic numbers but not the liberal ones.”

    Bush did TARP, which was the topic of the article. And last time I checked he was a Republican.

    I meant what I said…it’s all bullshit. The main difference is that the liberal bullshit is the most recent bullshit that has proven itself to be bullshit.

  136. By the way I dropped hints at a political wind change for me personally that disturbed my wife and almost got me stabbed with a dinner knife by my liberal friend last night.

    😯

    I know you’re not converting to Conservative Bible toter, moderation apparently is not copacetic in your crowd, and you still defend Vann Jones.

    You’re not going full Commie on us, are you?

  137. I liken economics to chemistry. We have all of these variables, like stimulus, monetary policy, and so-on that get mixed like elements on the periodic table. But unlike chemistry, these variables don’t always act in predictable ways. That’s because of the powerful influence of the human element, which is largely unpredictable, no matter how much we’d like to believe otherwise.

    The main problem as I see it is that economics is too closely tied to politics. I don’t know of any alternative, but as long as that is the case, economic decisions will always place politics before economics.

    I think both sides have right ideas and wrong ideas and the real answers, as usual, are found somewhere in the middle. So with that said, I think we should mix our economic elements more conservatively. I don’t mean that ideologically, but literally. Add a little bit of stimulus and see how the economy reacts before spending a trillion. Cut a little bit of entitlements and see how the economy reacts before cutting everyone off at the knee.

    Because if we keep mixing this stuff by pouring in the entire beaker, we’re going to end up with a poisonous cloud that destroys us all.

  138. Not a bad suggestion Huck. As example, the argument over mortgage interest being eliminated.

    Since people purchased their home under the assumption of intent of deducting their interest, it would be simple mathematics to incrementally lower the percentile of deductible interest over some TBD period – possibly even 30 years. *

    Even Rutherford’s suggestion recently of raising the definition of “rich” to a million in income a year was reasonable. I agreed with him, if that is to be the starting point of the debate of raising taxes.

    Politics is seldom pragmatic in the economic sense.

    *

    Year 1 – 100%
    Year 2 – 96.7%

    Year 30 – 0%

  139. So now that we know mad spendulous money was spent on the BATFE’s (I still say its a great idea for a party store) Gunrunner project, does it mean that when we are demanding Eric “I know nothing” Holder’s resignation, that we can demand the same for “Sheriff” Slow Joe Biden….you know, because the Fresh Prez of Bill Ayers set him up to watch that spendulous cash LIKE. A. HAWK?

  140. “Who the hell thinks about how secure their job is and doesn’t think about the current rate of unemployment?”-Hucking

    Yeah….agreed.

    WTF?

    Do they really think we are so dumb that we can’t and don’t conceive of the most basic warning signs that we might be in deep shit?

    Even Joe Six Pack gets nervous when 1/3 the town is laid off.

    What an idiotic attempt at trying to “connect” with the people.

  141. “The Undefeated (Unless You Count the VP Election and the Half Term Governorship)” playing at select theaters (dumb enough to screen this foolishness) near you!

  142. Huck is absolutely right. Both Palin and Bachmann are nourished by the ridicule. The more folks like me moan, the bigger they get and the more their supporters love them.

    Huck, I WANT to ignore her. I really do.

    I
    JUST
    CAN’T 😥

  143. Who the hell thinks about how secure their job is and doesn’t think about the current rate of unemployment?

    Ehhh, how about fatcat CEO’s? If you’re cocksure your job is secure, you don’t give a rat’s ass about the unemployment numbers.

    From the kitchen table perspective, the unemployment rate is macroeconomics and no one cares. Daddy just lost his job … or many of his co-workers just did … that’s what folks around the kitchen table care about.

    It’s also why most folks don’t give a damn about the deficit. Can I feed my family? That is the ONLY question.

  144. Hey Rutherford, you know how your black and you every now and then reserve the right to speak as a black man?

    Growing up exactly here:

    http://maps.google.com/maps?q=cherry+hill+and+inkster&um=1&ie=UTF-8&hq=&hnear=0x883b4ba3de3db8b7:0xd088524a86f726e6,Inkster+Rd+%26+Cherry+Hill+Rd,+Dearborn+Heights,+MI+48127&gl=us&ei=WYYXTtf0HsjRiAK

    gives me at least a little street cred to speak for the unemployed, particularly in the auto industry.

    Now, we all have different views on why my people are unemployed.

    All I can tell you, is that the unemployment rate IS a topic of conversation at the dinner table.

    I can remember it being talked about it in the early 80’s, early 90’s and this entire last decade.

    After the failed Obama promises and (even worse) the billions of dollars pissed down the drain, for you to come at us with this new shit that things like the unemployment rate are just abstract figures that the common man is not in touch with is complete fucking poppy-cock.

    I’ve seen that unemployment rate reek havoc on families on a level I’m not sure you understand. My generation never got the jobs we thought we had by birth right.

    For them, staying in a hotel with a pool was considered a vacation.

    The higher the unemployment rate, the less cars are bought. Even us dumb fucks understand that, Dr. Harvard.

  145. “From the kitchen table perspective, the unemployment rate is macroeconomics and no one cares. ”

    You’re wrong, my friend.

    My youngest told me a couple weeks ago he wants to “take time off school and get a job for a while.” I informed him of the current rate of unemployment in our area and then asked him why would a company hire him over any of those other people looking for a job.

    Sure, that line of thinking works the same if unemployment is at 5% or 10%. But at 10%, the amount competing with you for that job is doubled. Which is something I also explained to him.

    Let’s just say he’s going back to school in the fall.

    I guess different things get discussed at your table….

    “Daddy just lost his job … or many of his co-workers just did … that’s what folks around the kitchen table care about.”

    Yep. And when they start talking about daddy finding another job is when the topic of unemployment levels comes up. It probably takes about 3 minutes to get there in the discussion, don’t you think?

    “It’s also why most folks don’t give a damn about the deficit. Can I feed my family? That is the ONLY question.”

    It seems like it was just yesterday that the only question was “can I afford my medicine,” and the only cure for such a thought was shoved down our throats under the guise that it would also lower the deficit.

    But now that it has passed, deficit reduction no longer matters. Medicine no longer matters. All that matters to today’s family is food on the table.

    I can’t wait until people start getting penalized for not having their government-mandated health insurance. I wonder how much food that fine will take off of tables.

    “After the failed Obama promises and (even worse) the billions of dollars pissed down the drain, for you to come at us with this new shit that things like the unemployment rate are just abstract figures that the common man is not in touch with is complete fucking poppy-cock. ”

    It’s because we are all too dumb, DR. Us lay-idiots don’t talk about macroeconomic indicators because we don’t understand them the way Obama’s Wiz Kids do. That’s why we should just trust them. After all, they averted the worst econo………..blah blah blah…..

  146. I’m proud to introduce a new Rabbit. My nephew was born via emergency C-section last night.

    It was such a close call the surgeon came into the room after he was deemed healthy and said a prayer with my brother and his wife. I’m told he started to weep half way through.

    A surgeon, with such real world precision and science behind his craft still gives room for the Big Guy upstairs.

    How can’t you respect that?

    In other news, I am having a tough time with that guy falling at the baseball game to his death in front of his 6 year old boy.

    Certain stories disturb me and throw me into mini bouts of melancholy.

    For me, God is like this fading transmission on the short wave from thousands of miles a way. Lonely, cold, usually not even audible. And then when I do make out the broadcast, I don’t even like what I hear half the time. So I turn the radio off only to turn it on the next night. And the next.

  147. uh….duh…. Psychedelic Punjabi music set to kids flying kites.

    Come on, man, follow my narrative. I forshaddowed the hell of that video my last few posts.

    Ok, Dr. Lollard says I have to leave the courtyard now.

  148. So libs…tell us again who the “party of ‘no'” is….

    If that minority-party-leading cunt (and since she supposedly represents me..I can call her that!) wants to play hardball, then let’s play ball.

    I say give democrats the taxes they want…and ALSO go big on entitlement reform. Then when Pelosi and her ilk balk, they can get blamed (as they should anyway) for the collapse of the debt ceiling and the subsequent Armageddon we are told will follow.

    Then we can take back all 3 sections of the government and make things RIGHT again.

  149. “It’s also why most folks don’t give a damn about the deficit.”

    Bull. Fucking. Shit.

    Mr. Out-of-Touch, people care deeply about the deficit and the fact that it’ll have to be repaid. Watch the campaign ads this fall and tell the deficit isn’t a conern to “most folks.”

    From the mouths of libs. . .

  150. After thinking about what he said, Rutherford is right about the deficit.

    People don’t care about the deficit if cutting it down entails their own sacrifice.

    Take the Bush Tax cut and its extension by Obama.

    Do you want to know how silly I was? Back when Bush signed it, I actually assumed a tax cut automatically means a cut in government.

    The tax cuts weren’t really tax cuts at all.

    He simply printed money and gave it to us, while the government grows.

    And, then, people like me, would argue the merits of
    limited government and tax cuts.

    Big Government vs Limited Government. What a joke.

    Instead, it all came down to monetary policy. Printing money and giving it to the masses. That’s what we conservatives call tax breaks now days.

  151. Rabbit said, “People don’t care about the deficit if cutting it down entails their own sacrifice.”

    Depending on where, cutting down expenditure is not a sacrifice to people, if by “people” you mean producers.

    While I agree most are shallow and short-sighted, hard-working people care, Rabbit. It looks like a tab that has to be paid from an empty wallet — just not to libs that generally view govrnment’s primary function to be resource re-distribution (provided it’s always taken from the other guy).

    Last Novemember showed how much people care about the liberals’ money fires.

  152. Ha. Producers.

    John Galt hit the road a long time ago.

    There aint enough “producers” to stop the mob.

    And the mob is sometimes made up of 75 year old conservative leaning fossils, swinging their canes over medicare and SS.

    “Our people cannot survive without Social Security, Medicare. No way,” says Scott Watts, President of Nevada Alliance for Retired Americans

    Bring cutting the military or NASA up to a bunch of Republicans and hear the hisses.

    Rutherford’s a fool if he thinks unemployment or the deficit isn’t the flash point for 2012.

    That being said, look at this blog.

    I’m a bureaucratic stooge. You are, for all practical purposes, an expensive parasite. Hucking don’t do shit. Tex don’t do shit. Rutherford don’t do shit.

    Only Poolman actually creates something, and he’s flat broke.

    At least Pfessor provides an integral service, but, alas, within a completely unsustainable system.

    Where are the true producers to voice these concerns? General Electric?

  153. Reading that article right now. Can you believe those dirty fucks were going for even more?

    My house loses 60% of its value and my own fucking government take debt out out on my son’s head to ensure the counterparties of credit default swaps get paid. My own government did this! How do you get over this kind of thing?

    Goldman Sachs cracks me up. They act as a middle man peddling horrid tranches of utter fucking poop and then bets against the poop.

    “Why did we do the bailouts?” she went on. “It was all about the bondholders,” she said. “They did not want to impose losses on bondholders, and we did. We kept saying: ‘There is no insurance premium on bondholders,’ you know? For the little guy on Main Street who has bank deposits, we charge the banks a premium for that, and it gets passed on to the customer. We don’t have the same thing for bondholders. They’re supposed to take losses.”

    I’m telling you. This country died the day Bush stepped aside and allowed the oligarchy to run amok on our own children.

    We had every right to rise up in violent protest that fall.

  154. Pfessor, whats the name of that book again?

    If you want an entertaining book on the people who were on the other side of the credit default swaps, essentially shorting the entire United States, read The Big Short.

    It’s hard not to like those guys, at least they were smart.

  155. “You are, for all practical purposes, an expensive parasite.”

    Blow me. I employee over 20, plus staff. You?

  156. lol…you lawyers take yourself so damn seriously.

    I knew you were going to say that. And, technically, the services you render add to GDP, as well as the 20 jobs you created. There is no doubt that you play a role in the money multiplier effect.

    But, you are a taker, not a creator.

    Creators make jobs out of thin air. You simply take from producers, sometimes very fairly, other times via total bull shit.

    Now, here is the part where I get to tell you how important you are and how there really is no price when it comes to justice.

    Ok…….we feeling big and strong again?

    Good… because here’s the part where I tell you that sometimes you fuck the economy over by wrongfully screwing people.

    Or better yet…..

    Why, over a short span of 3 decades, there are so many more of you motherfuckers. And, what a coincidence, look how much easier it is to sue people, now? Look at insurance costs. Can you believe it has risen with the added number of lawyers? Look at regulation and its burden on the producers? Again, can you believe it seems to correlate with the rising number of lawyers? Look at the number of pages in legislation? Etc. etc. etc.

    You guys fuck like rabbits or what?

    Are you sure your not a drag on the economy?

    I don’t expect any self reflection on this. After all, you lawyers and academics give one another reach rounds about the how great the system is when a mother walks free after obviously murdering her own child.

    Honestly, if our system was working the way I think it should, a fairly intelligent man should be able to usually represent himself in court. A pipe dream, for sure.

  157. “Blow me. I employee over 20, plus staff. You?”

    Object! Object!. Your honor, the defendant already answered that question when he referred to himself as a bureaucratic stooge!

  158. rabbit –

    I read The Big Short last winter. Jesus.

    I’m currently reading Debt, Deficits and the Demise of the American Economy. I am considering liquidating all my retirement and savings and buying gold. That is an amazing turn-about for me; I consider gold to have no appreciation value – it just maintains value. But of course if you own any of those paper dollars they REDUCE in value as they print more of them. Fucking assholes in Washington. I hope they starve to death before we do.

    My next in the queue is Shipler’s The Rights of the People – it’s about how the govt has frightened Americans into handing over most of their rights.

  159. Then you’d be better without your lawyers, eh Rabbit? Actually, the world would be better without any lawyers, right Rabbit? That is your point, right?

    Tell me how much easier it is to sue now. As far as I knew, it’s always been about $100 and a signature.

    Since you are the only one here I know suckling at the teet of our tax dollars, insisting on the need for public unions, you make an ironic observation as you ignorantly pass judgment there Rabbit. Feeling big and strong on your summer break?

    Did you see the link to our wonderful teachers and school system in Atlanta. Yeah, bow up. The product your noble profession produces hardly gives you the right to crow. Of course every bit of it is completey beside the point.

    Talk about taking oneself too seriously. 😆

  160. El Tigre –

    Ever read any of Olsen’s stuff about the lawsuit culture? It’s pretty interesting.

    These numbers are old, but one I remember is that Japan has one lawyer per two hundred engineers. America has one/one.

    I don’t want to get on the screw-the-lawyers bandwagon, but I think we really could use some birth control there and some lawsuit control. Lawsuits are a tearing-down process, not a building-up one, unlike engineering activity. No question cleaning up debris is necessary – witness the good done by bacteria and turkey vultures – but I would like to see a lot of the energy that goes into that shunted elsewhere. Every day of my life I see the resources that are wasted in medicine by doctors trying to cover their asses by ordering every x-ray they can think of. It’s made a good living for me, but sitting here every day, I can say that at least 80% of the x-rays I read are completely unnecessary.

    I take your point but something has to happen. Has to.

  161. Objection! Objection! Your honor, “these fairly intelligent men [that] should be able to usually represent [themselves] in court” are the same ones that sat on the jury that acquitted a murderer all confused by the lawyers and the laws and stuff looking at the same evidence that Rabbit did between penny stock trades.

  162. What do you propose PF? If people get sick, you don’t blame doctors. If the laws need changing, don’t complain about lawyers. Talk to your legislators. And frankly, I’ve seen first hand that you belong to a profession that will vigourosly defend the most indefensible acts of malpractice at profound expense. I assure you though denying a right of access to the courts is not a solution. Seriously, imagine if it were.

    Don’t get me wrong; I understand the point about the “lawsuit culture.” In fact, I believe Rabbit’s wife is a part of it. Because not all lawsuits are frivilous, let me hit the ball back into your court. I suspect curtailment of the “lawsuit culture” is not a broad reform of all “lawsuits.” The giant bucket of lawsuits are not fungible. Rabboit and others here might suggest that it should be much easier to go after the financial insitutions’s malfeasance (bit apprently not a defense to criminal charges for whatever reason). One size does not fit all.

    I assume you’re tuned into medical malpractice. What do you think about other areas?

  163. Oh, and since I’m already in — I’m all in favor of limiting the number of lawyers. I just think the analysis that causes someone to believe that’s the problem is foolishness. But if folks like Rabbit think restricting access to the bar would be a good start, I’m all for it!

    And Doc, I think the profit motive for the “unnecessary” testing you describe is overlooked (exacerbated by our third party pay system). what I do know is that the overall expense to the system from malpractice verdicts and settlements is extraordinarliy small. Defensive medicine is a tougher to get a handle on though.

  164. PF, I’ve never read Olsen. What’s the take on Japans sytem from a fairness/justice standpoint. In other dords, is it really better or are there folks left without redress from a system that [potentially] shields those with greater resources from liability?

  165. El Tigre –

    Point well-taken. I think as far as medicine goes, if we decide that people should be compensated for medical errors (and I think we have) then a better system would be that any claim go before a board composed of real experts – physicians (and anybody else you want, to keep it honest. But I think you would be surprised by how willing one physician is to criticize another.) Then the case could be looked at on its merits by people who can instantly spot bullshit from real issues. If an error caused an injury, then the patient is compensated and all medical expenses related to future treatment is covered as well.

    The most important part is that the board would have the authority to compel the doctor to acquire training in that area, if he hasn’t already, or if it is a one-off thing, do nothing. Repeat offenders could have their licenses restricted from doing certain procedures. I think you will find other docs very willing to do this.

    Lay juries are really, really bad; I’ve seen them completely confused and led astray by good theatrics and intentional obfuscation. An expert jury or panel won’t do that. When I was in engineering school an undergrad was just dazzled by the expertise of one of the profs. I told him, “You have no concept of the difference in knowledge base between a batchelor’s degree and a doctorate.” He just looked at me and said, “How do you know that?” I just stared at him; he realized what he had said and we had a good laugh.

    But of course the problem is that this idea eliminates the litigator and his access to a non-expert jury – and his access to a lot of personal wealth building, John Edwards case-in-point.

    Thoughts?

  166. How can’t you respect that?

    What I respect is that the doctor did his job BEFORE getting on his knees and praying. Nothing like retroactive thanks to God for what years and years of good and expensive training got you.

    Sorry Rabbit, the doctor delivered the baby and did a fine job of it and God had not a damn thing to do with it.

    Regarding your short-wave radio … how much would you be contemplating God’s blessings if the child and/or mother had died?

    Sorry dude, not in the mood for this kind of stuff today.

  167. As you know, I don’t practice med-mal or personal injury. However, I have sued lawyers (two now) for legal malpractice. In this area I have advantages and disadvantages. The advantage is that by its nature, lawyers are literally being judged and their cases screened by legal experts (at least intrinsically). The disadvantage is that lawyers and judges are generally willing to provide a wide berth for what constitutes acceptable practice. In any event, I don’t know enough about your profession to really make a fair comparison, but I think you proposition is dubious for the reason first stated.

    Now, I did have 3 medical doctors in my class at law school. All were there for the same reason: to practice med-mal. I was told by all 3 that they felt that the acts of malpractice in the medical profession tolerated and far broader than most would ever believe. They all said that most acts were undetected. A friend who is an ER doc confessed to covering up his malpractice — the details of which I would never mention here. Suffice it to say, I was horrified.

    Frankly, my experience with medical and psychiatric doctors is not one of a willingness to participate in the process of reviewing their peers’ performance to ascertain truth. In fact, my experience has been the exact opposite. Just to offer non-controversial testimony has been excruciating and always an opportunity for the doctor to line his pockets ($500-600 per hour to testify to assist their own patient) and resistance to providing the information for ANYONE to make a meaningful evaluation.

    Simply put, I personally have encountered extreme hostility from the majority of doctors to having themselves or another doctor’s conduct called into question. Surprise, surprise — they behave like all everyone when a member of their profession is being examined — actually much, much worse in my experience.

    Are you familiar with the Daubert standard for the introduction of expert opinion? It was intended to be a way to curtail untested conclusions by purported experts, i.e. convincing voodoo. The judge is to act as a gate keeper of expert testimony. The problem is that judges are usually the worst at understanding complex scientific concepts (I have even had the Daubert standard wrongly applied to accounting testimony in stock price manipulation cases). In other words, I do not find peer reviewing a panacea when it comes to fact finding.

    Although I can’t speak to it, I seriously doubt the efficacy of expert jurors. Professional arbitration panels operate in a similar fashion — and every lawyer knows they are biased in favor of the professional/corporation. While their understanding of the evidence may be superior, I just don’t believe that an expert juror is any less biased or error prone in its fact finding than a lay juror.

    As I typed, I wonder whether bifurcated proceeding might not be a better solution. Stage one being a pure assessment of the technical features.

  168. PF, in my haste, I jumped over a couple of concepts there because I take them for granted. I trust you got my point. If not, I’ll try and clarify. However, in a nutshell, I don’t have the same faith in the medical profession nor distrust of law juries when it comes to fact finding that you do. I am much more skeptical of judges and purported “experts” in any field when it comes to competency and bias, including medicine.

  169. “Regarding your short-wave radio … how much would you be contemplating God’s blessings if the child and/or mother had died?”-R

    You totally misunderstood me. I was using the short wave analogy in reference to the father falling out and dying in front of his kid at the game.

  170. “Then you’d be better without your lawyers, eh Rabbit? Actually, the world would be better without any lawyers, right Rabbit?”

    Uh ho…do I have to build your self esteem up again? I thought I addressed that.

    Pfessor said it best, “Lawsuits are a tearing-down process, not a building-up one, unlike engineering activity.

    I saw the link to the teachers in Atlanta. Its disgusting. Although, I found it hilarious that you threw that link out there at the peak of Tex’s rampage over the Anthony case.

    I’m not sure I’m really at the teet of the government, since my clients (the kids and parents) are thrilled with my services. However, I am part of one of the many inefficient government funded cluster fucks, so yeah, I have reservations about that, if that’s what your wondering. Hell, I say slash the entire Department of Education. If that means I lose my job, so be it.

    As far as collective bargaining, all I really said is that Americans have a right to do it any time they want to. It’s as simple as that. It takes two to sign a contract. Tell the union to fuck off!

    Oh, I forgot…..its the legislature’s fault when it comes to problems that you lawyers create but NOT the ones the unions create. You see any sort of hypocrisy in that statement of yours?

    As far as my own standing in the Union, I have opted out of the MEA. If your interested in why, I can tell you.

    Lastly, come on man, you’re better then that. Leave my wife out of this. If she is in fact involved in anything pending, it would be totally inappropriate for me to discuss that. That would be like us having a discussion about education and me talking about your kids’ grades and social skills. Lame.

    You lawyers sure have a narcissistic streak running through you. I’m shocked it doesn’t gush right out of your carcass, like ectoplasm, due to your think skin.

  171. “looking at the same evidence that Rabbit did between penny stock trades”.

    I just want to take the time to apologize for disregarding my standing in the caste system.

    For starters, I must be totally confused about the Anthony case because I am too distracted and don’t understand law.

    I play penny stocks, and that alone should have raised red flags about my competence to weigh in on justice when it comes to the Anthony case.

    Surely, I’m an example of populism run amok passing judgment where I have no business doing so.

    Plus, my grammar sucks.

  172. “Although, I found it hilarious that you threw that link out there at the peak of Tex’s rampage over the Anthony case.”

    Yeah. Funny. It was reported at the same time. Next time I’ll hold back to keep from apparently touching a nerve.

    Rabbit, as you were trying to blame me for being a lawyer, do you even remember my point?

    “its the legislature’s fault when it comes to problems that you lawyers create but NOT the ones the unions create. You see any sort of hypocrisy in that statement of yours?”

    None whatsoever. Is it the lawyers or the laws, Rabbit? Forget it. This comment tells me you don’t have a clue.

    I didn’t ask you to defend your wife’s suit. The “you lawyers” are responsible bullshit when you can’t articulate what we’re responsible for other than filing lawsuits on behalf of people like your wife is telling. I’ll go way out on a limb here and say that a sternly-worded letter from a “fairly intelligent man” like yourself wouldn’t cause the manufacturer of the equipment to roll over, admit liability, and seek to compensate your wife for her loss. It might also be a reason that I used her as a specific example in response to your generalized indictment of me as a member of the bar for the jury’s verdict in the Anthony case.

    You’re have twisted my comment about “producers” into “creators” into some kind of injustice that you are here to expose. You’re so far off base that you clearly have your own agenda. I feel really, really, really bad for being lawyer Rabbit. Happy now?

    As a so-called “tear downer” I am worried about the deficit that needs to be repaid and believe other “tear downers” are too. I am not a defender of the legal profession because I’m a lawyer no more than you are defender of the pathetic educational system that you belong to. You’re just sucking your own dick.

  173. “For starters, I must be totally confused about the Anthony case because I am too distracted and don’t understand law.”

    Apparently, you’re too distracted and don’t understand the comment. It’s the facts, not the law. It’s the jury, not the lawyers or the judge. My point was the EXACT opposite of what you divine. 🙄

  174. I simply said you are not a producer. That was the crux of my argument. You destroy, you don’t build. Sometimes, Shiva is needed. Other times you simply shake down producers.

    Your profession has grown exponentially over the last three decades. I belief this has been bad for our country.

    Your thin skinned reaction to this says it all. Many of you lawyers walk around like your shit don’t stink when your profession is PART of the problem just as much as mine is.

    I’m trying to wrap my mind around your dick sucking obsession. How am I sucking my own dick? I want to eradicate the Department of Education and I quit the Michigan Educational Association. I can point out exactly where public education is stealing your money. Hell, I have even questioned my own pension! Dude…your starting to look very insecure.

    Most of Congress don’t even READ the damn bills anymore. Why? Because they are written in a language more obscure then ancient Sanskrit. I would love to see a chart of the number of lawyers in America to the number of pages in legislation.

    Lawyers profit from this. And the people pay.

    So you say, “blame my Congressman”!

    Fair enough, I do.

    Yet, when elected government give into unions, THEN and only THEN is it the union’s fault.

    I find a certain amount of hypocrisy in this.

    Lastly, with the Anthony case, it’s the facts applied to the Constitution. In the Anthony case, they didn’t fuck the facts up. The fucked up the legal standard of proof. They applied the 5th amendment like a bunch of morons. Facts my ass.

    You can demean me all you want. I don’t give a shit. But, I told you to leave my wife out of this. I never said she did have a pending lawsuit. I don’t think I ever have. At least I hope not. This isn’t the forum and you are the LAST person on Earth I should ever be spouting about my wife’s situation and, as a lawyer, you know this.

    If your goal is to make me uncomfortable, you win.

    To say my wife is a part of some “culture” actually pisses me off.

    If you think my wife and I are the kind of people thinking about some pending lawsuit, if it so exists, and how we are going to eat at Olive Garden every night when we cash in your crazy.

    So, I’m going to say it one more time, leave my wife out of this. She’s not me.

  175. “It might also be a reason that I used her as a specific example in response to your generalized indictment of me as a member of the bar for the jury’s verdict in the Anthony case.”-T

    Total bull shit. My generalized indictment of you is that you are apathetic, if not defensive, over the fact a mother got away with obviously murdering her own child. I don’t give a fuck about you as a lawyer. Get over yourself.

  176. Is it the lawyers or the laws, Rabbit?

    Sometimes, I believe its the lawyers: Assholes hired by Congress to to purposely complicate legislation rendering it impossible to comprehend and fodder for manipulation by said lawyers at a later date.

  177. “I’m trying to wrap my mind around your dick sucking obsession. How am I sucking my own dick?”

    Your inability to distinguish between observation from advocacy. I am passionate about my cases, not apathetic. You seem to want atonement and you are disgusted that I won’t give to you.

    Your indictment of the legal profession in the abstract for an unjust outcome by poking me in the chest is what I’m talking about.

    You say that the quality of the student is tied to the home environment as much as the teacher is no different from the particular case you use a sounding board in you attack on lawyers.

    I assure you Rabbit, the prosecutor that didn’t get the guilty verdict was probably close to suicidal when he went home that night. Try reconciling that with your logic.

    One universal truth is that everybody hates lawyers except their own.

  178. While I don’t like most members of my own tribe very much, I never really thought of myself as a parasite. Probably because most of what I do in my practice is to help people, not hurt them.

    When I draw up estate plans for my “rich” (by the Democratic Party’s public standard, not the ones they apply to their own finances) clients, and help them to preserve more of what they have earned and obtained (and already paid taxes on) for the benefit of their families and loved ones, it isn’t a service that I have ever considered to be parasitical…not when it is the government trying to lay hands on and confiscate what they have worked so hard to earn. I guarantee you that the clients shure as hell don’t view it as parasitical.

    Likewise, I am outside counsel to about 75 small to mid-sized businesses. A lot of what I do for them helps them to be more efficient, and to NOT lose money either from lawsuits, or from poor business or tax planning practices. For a core group of 5 to 10 of these businesses, I am incredibly intimate with their day-to-day practices and planning, and am viewed as a vital member of their management. For one of these businesses, they do manufacturing type work that is absolutely vital to the safety of several businesses and professions, and I am both proud and honored any time I can do something for this company that allows its talented and incredibly hard-working management staff to concentrate more on their business and less on legal matters that detract from the day-to-day business of making MILLIONS of Americans safer every single day.

    And when I assist people in probating the estates of freinds and loved ones, I get to assist people at a very difficult time in making smart decisions, not breaking the law, and when the deceased had enough foresight to make a will or some other legal disposition of their property, to fulfill their friend’s or loved one’s final wishes. Do I get paid for this service? You bet your sweet bippy I do, but at the same time, all most every time, when we are done, I am sincerely and honestly thanked by people who know the happiness of having a great burden lifted from them as they are recovering from their grief and the responsibility that comes from wrapping up someone else’s final affairs.

    Maybe you’re right. Maybe I’m not a producer, but I am a facilitator, helping others complete the tasks that they have been charged with. Sometimes, that puts me in the middle of a lawsuit, but I am always very careful not to engage in “frivolous” litigation, and I know very few attorneys who do, since the professional and personal cost for doing so can be very high.

  179. BiW, I don’t either. Much of my practice involves a species of financial fraud and theft, and all manner of lying cheating and stealing. Enforcing contractual relations, property rights (intellectual included), corporate governance rights, redressing outright theft etc. is hardly parasitic. Unless you believe all lawsuits are frivolous (as many erroneously do because they struggle to comprehend the nature of the adversarial system) it’s the wrongdoer, not the lawyer, that is the parasite.

    My point about “producers” was directed at those ultimately responsible for repaying the deficit (i.e. those that would care, like employers and earners), rather than the ones contributing to it. Obviously that concept morphed.

  180. Lots of videos worth watching. I know R won’t address any of them, but they are there for public digest none the less.

  181. Rutherford:

    How’s the move going? I guess I missed all the explanations for why you are moving…did you say you were staying temporarily in a motel?

  182. Wonder about the economy?

    http://finance.yahoo.com/banking-budgeting/article/113086/bubble-destroyed-middle-class-marketwatch?mod=bb-budgeting&sec=topStories&pos=8&asset=&ccode=

    I don’t recall exactly, but didn’t somebody here talk about getting caught up in the housing bubble?

    I swear to God, my fantasy is to turn on my TV and see the screen split between news reports of the ten largest cities in America, zooming in to video of millions of Americans streaming out, pitchforks in hand, heading to Washington, DC. I would throw a party for my whole little town.

  183. It was me that got nailed. We bought in 05. My house lost over 60 percent of its value, our household income dropped 50 percent. So, this Spring, I walked. Smartest thing I ever did.

    Fannie Mae actually came after me on a deficiency for a figure substantially more then the house is worth. After negotiating with them for weeks, I got it down to pennies on the dollar. The thing that’s freaking me out is that they have yet to prove they are really the ones I owe. I don’t want to get conned, but I want to pay them off to get it over with.

    We don’t ever go out to eat. I don’t buy clothing. Don’t go on vacation. I’m not complaining, but I certainly am not helping this economy rebound.

    Actually, thanks to the dump this market took today I just might sell my puts and go out and eat some scrimps, as some black folk like to say.

  184. DR – bad lick, man. Really sorry.

    Every day that passes confirms my belief that I did the right thing in joining the Libertarian party. Their holding is that the only legitimate function of the government is to protect the weak from the strong.

    So what does the govt do? It has its nose up everybody’s buttcrack, trying to see if they might be having sex in a non governmentally-approved manner, and at the same time they blithely ignore the rapists on Wall Street and their protectors at the Treasury. To those guys, a few hundred thousand is just something to shrug at, but it is YOUR and MY house.

    I am really liking Elizabeth Warren, even if she is Bo’s girl right now. And the thing that tells me she is the right one is how much The Bernank, Geithner and Rubin positively hate her.

    I hope they drown in their own vomit. On camera. Would that I were Darth Vader, by God…

  185. The problem PF is that being a Libertarian is really just symbolic. This is a two party system where truly original voices get drowned out.

    I announced on my “radio show” last night that I am seriously considering registering as an Independent when I get to Illinois as both the GOP and the Democrats are an embarrassment right now. Government is broken. There are no adults in the room. But I recognize that even being an independent, I’ve got to vote for somebody in 2012 and there’s no use throwing the vote away on a third party candidate who can’t win. So I’ll stand on symbolism until I get in the voting booth and then pick the lesser of two evils. 😦

  186. Rutherford –

    Let me tell you what (I believe, at least) a real honorable man (Ross Perot) said about “throwing away your vote.” You only waste your vote if you do not vote your conscience.

    I believe you shouldn’t overanalyze it. Vote for what you believe and then let the system work. If you do it any other way, you are perverting the system and that is how we got where we are today, IMHO. Don’t game the system. Vote your conscience.

  187. “But I recognize that even being an independent, I’ve got to vote for somebody in 2012 and there’s no use throwing the vote away on a third party candidate who can’t win. So I’ll stand on symbolism until I get in the voting booth and then pick the lesser of two evils.”

    Of course, you are moving to Ill., so a vote for anyone but Obama is “throwing your vote away” anyway.

    And of course, you know that. But framing it this way gives you a defense to use later against our criticism for the vote we already know you are going to cast..and also gives you a defense when you have to look at yourself in the mirror every morning.

    If you are truly fed up with both sides, then make that your symbol and don’t give either of them your vote. But don’t make these BS excuses for what is obvious you are going to do anyway.

  188. The Libertarians would get my vote if only they could get real about foreign policy.

    I’m cool with drawing down the military, particularly in Germany.

    But, most of these Libertarians are either isolationists on a level that would create ridiculous vacuums or they are 911 Truthers, etc.

    Lastly, I do not see where the government is encroaching on your sexual positions. You want to put a cantaloupe in the microwave for 10 seconds and then fuck it? Go for it. Where is this threat?

  189. Gorilla’s video in comment 240 says it all. When the sell out Republicans vote to raise the debt ceiling, I’m done with them.

    I’m literally done with my country. I won’t break the law, but my relationship with this nation will be adversarial in nature. I will teach my kids to hate the government in the hope their generation will have the courage to break the chains.

    This is the first summer I didn’t put an American flag on my stoop. I stared at my flag for an hour and walked back inside.

    I hope one day I can fly those colors again. We can debate fiscal policy and national security all day long. But, there is no debate that screwing kids over, without their consent, is wrong. And that’s what my government does to protect the elite and to opiate the mindless masses.

    I am willing to live below the poverty line to fix this. I am willing to forgo my pension. I am willing to lose my job. I am willing to change my own oil, my own breaks, to never golf again, to always cook at home, to grow more plants from seeds etc. etc. etc. etc. Hard to believe I share a country with people who took TARP money and gave themselves bonuses.

  190. Driving from Florida, to Houston, to Tulsa is a drag. 1,100 fricking miles, only to find Oklahoma is 15 degrees warmer than Florida. I got home and my lawn is gone – 108 degrees here today.

    I’m too pooped to pop off. And where the hell is a new post?

    Rutherford, are you cleaning stools this week to meet the bar tab? I’ll bet you’re down at the Continental Bed & Breakfast bird dogging chicks, aren’t you?

    You Dawg.

    Get your sorry ass back to this board. Going Independent doesn’t give you the right to stiff your mooches for friends at the Rutherford Lawson Blog & Pub. We need a stiff one (post stiff, not drink stiff, not stiff stiff) 😀

    The beach is like sex. The reality is never as good as you remember it being. Fun, but the older I get, the more I prefer cool (like mountains).

  191. Prediction:

    Senator Marco Rubio will one day be President of the United States

    I really like this guy…let’s hope he’s smart enough to keep his meat in his pants. His wife is a little cutie too.

  192. Advice for Rubio’s wife if she wants to avoid embarrassment.

    It’s pretty simple: Women are complex; men are easy. Feed ’em, fuck’em and take care of their kids and they will never stray.

    Especially if, in number two, you are creative.

  193. Rubio is a Zionist yes man. You did notice he ran off to be with his masters as soon as he got elected. He could be over zealous or merely naive, but I don’t trust that one. He’s sold out and is rapidly losing the “base” he is supposed to represent. Latinos are not impressed. Even the Cubans are only 3 percent of the voting block.

    Rabbit, enjoyed the low-ya rant. I have often contemplated similar thoughts. That’s a group totally entrenched in maintaining job security, me thinks. I do know so many “nice” ones, too…

    Ever wonder why the plain language requirement has been so unpublicized and mired? It has taken decades to even make the news. Yeah. You’re not the first to find that this shit is complicated by design. Just like organized religion always complicates and clouds the simple and basic tenets of the faith, governments have done the same. Power over others, wealth, greed, always laced with massive measures of job security. I don’t care how you package it, it generally tends toward the self-aggrandizing folks.

    I’ve often wondered how things would be if we lost all power and structure and had to actually survive by our own skills and talents. Like one big continuous camping trip sans the ATVs, chainsaws, and other “toys”. That would tend to “separate the men from the boys” as the saying goes. 😀

    I want to strip guvmit down to it’s most basic components and whip those fundamentals into shape. And whip it good!

    The video in 240 needs to go further. Break the FED!!! It is the cancer that needs to be cut out. And that’s no anti-semite rant, either. I can’t help it that the hands that created, hold, and benefit from it, are mostly, well… never mind…

  194. “The beach is like sex. The reality is never as good as you remember it being. Fun, but the older I get, the more I prefer cool (like mountains).”

    I was about to ask what the mountains are like but then it occurred to me that I might not want to know….

  195. This is apparently Obama’s only answer to the deficit- increase taxes. Cut spending? Oh no, we can’t do that, then how would they buy votes?

  196. Rubio is a Zionist yes man. You did notice he ran off to be with his masters as soon as he got elected. He could be over zealous or merely naive, but I don’t trust that one. He’s sold out and is rapidly losing the “base” he is supposed to represent. Latinos are not impressed. Even the Cubans are only 3 percent of the voting block.

    Well, the kike vote will offset the boat people, and Rubio can work on the blue gums, dagos, krauts, beaners, and wops. Not sure about the zipperheads and slopes, as they seem firmly entrenched in the cracker, peckerwood and redneck camp. Rubio may not want the sand niggers and muzzies, being his kike masters pull his monetary strings.

    Sieg heil mein fuhrer!

  197. Hey “R”. Seriously this time.

    I sense the force telling me something ain’t kosher in the Lawson household.

    Though I know you’re cramped for time anymore, you always make a little time in the schedule for your fans.

    Let (me) us know that you are okay.

  198. You know that feeling one gets when their energy drink wears off?

    That must be the same feeling one gets when the luster of Obama wears off.

    Former Obama supporters are getting run down and losing energy.

    That’s my guess as to what has happened to Rutherford.

  199. Maybe so Huck. But I get the impression something is wrong with our pal more than just Obama fatigue. I’m sure Rutherford thought he was beyond the beans and wienies part of life. So did I. 😦

    Rutherford, please check in. I make my children do that and they are grown. I expect the same of my blog friends.

    Oh, and I’ll apologize for using the “N” word in a “different” context so you don’t have to threaten me with the boot. I had a point to make towards our resident Zionist schizophrenic and it seemed appropriate. At least I was an equal opportunity bigot… 🙂

  200. My father-in-law calls Mexicans “Smoked Polocks”.

    Outside of Chicago, he’s the last Polish people hater in America.

    Never fails, whatever ethnic group one hates on the most…..its Murphy’s Law….one’s Daughter will end up running off with.

    The guy is actually lucky its me, as I’m the last person who will hang out with him. He has early onset Alzheimer’s disease due to drinking whiskey and snorting coke for 30 years as a big wig Teamster. He’s like Joe Pesci with dementia.

  201. Never fails, whatever ethnic group one hates on the most…..its Murphy’s Law….one’s Daughter will end up running off with.

    Guess that means my daughters will be marrying liberals? 😥

  202. True story – my oldest brother is the most bigoted, arrogant self-important fellow you ever saw. He was such an asshole and treated his wife so badly that none of his five children – yes, five – had any kids of their own.

    That is except his youngest daughter – she had a little fling with a black fella who, in typical style, bagged his prize and bounced away to the next bed.

    So out of five kids, my brother’s only blood descendant is half black. And I thought there was no God…

  203. A half-black bastard. (No offense to the kid – it ain’t her fault. She’s a real gem. And, in his defense, my brother is deeply in love with her.)

  204. Moving sucks. So, I feel sorry for R, as I just went through it. God willing, I will die in this current house of mine. I aint moving unless I’m in a box.

    Wives make moving miserable. I pretty much owned a sea bag full of shit and golf clubs. Too bad I married a woman addicted to Target’s.

    I can’t even remember the different addresses I’ve had since I was 17. East Coast. West Coast. Iceland. All over Detroit and the Detroit area. I’ve bought 4 houses and I’m only 37 maybe 5 or 6 places I’ve rented?

    My wife’s friend bought a house in some wannabe hipster/border line shit hole, famous for it’s gay population (Ferndale) on the other side of 8 mile. She paid 170 for it. It’s worth 20 now. They walked. The deficiency will be 7 TIMES the house!

    I have another friend who bought his humble house in a not so good neighborhood for 100,000. The house across the street sold for 10 grand.

    Lastly, the pitcher on my softball team’s neighbor sold his house for a thousand bucks. A THOUSAND BUCKS!!!!!!

    You are either tied to the land like a serf or a dirt bag who walks.

    There are still tons of foreclosures going on. I swear the data on foreclosures is wrong.

  205. ha ha ha ha ha….THE FED TALKING ABOUT ATTACKING THE DOLLAR AGAIN……WHAT A SHOCK. Actually, I thought they would at least wait to fall to start talking shit. QE3…..I bet they will come up with a different name.

    Bring it on bitches, and, as another regular here has recently said, may you drown in your own vomit you thieving fucks.

    http://www.kitco.com/charts/livesilver.html

    Who knows, the Rabbit might luck out and get to pay MORE taxes AND get paid in devalued dollars.

  206. Feed ’em, fuck’em and take care of their kids and they will never stray.

    I’m sure a lot of women would say “if it were just that easy”. Sorry PF, some guys are bastards and it doesn’t matter what their wife does.

  207. Cut spending? Oh no, we can’t do that, then how would they buy votes?

    I am way behind on comments so I know I’m chiming in real late on some of these. G, hopefully in the time since you posted this nonsense you’ve found out that Obama is planning to play with social security and medicare and has progressives extremely pissed right now.

    I know you need someone to throw eggs at but you know what? I hate to admit it but Obama is largely irrelevant at this point. It’s the useless Dems against the useless GOPhers.

  208. BTW, I heard the dumbest-ass thing I’ve heard in a long time today. Some GOPher was talking about increasing employment, thereby broadening the taxpayer base and then bringing in more revenue. So far so good. But then they said, we would lower tax rates. Huh??? Please help me with that. I understand the concept of leaving rates where they are (i.e. no increases) and then pretending that job growth will appear out of no where and the revenue will come in. But DECREASING taxes offsets the gains made in the increased employment.

    This is simple arithmetic, not some Keynesian dogma. Anyone care to explain to me why we would LOWER taxes with record deficits?

  209. Good to “see” you back, Rutherford.

    So guys, tell me again about this great Middle East bastion of freedom called Israel.

    Save the comparisons to its neighbors. Freedom is not relative. You either have it…or you dont.

    Next thing you know they will be forcing Israelis to purchase particular products or services.

  210. To all who’ve expressed concern about me … no worries. Remember the old college days of time-sharing computers and standing around in the computer lab waiting to get a seat at a vacant terminal? Well despite having four laptops in this hotel room, the old college lab rules still seem to apply. My computer time is probably about 20% what it is under normal circumstances. 😦

  211. Tex, normally the N word really really bothers me but your comment to Poolman cracked me up. I don’t think I’ve seen that many ethnic expletives strung together in my life. 😆

  212. Never fails, whatever ethnic group one hates on the most…..its Murphy’s Law….one’s Daughter will end up running off with.

    Shades of “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner”. I love it.

  213. PF your comment about your brother reminds me of scenarios I’ve seen myself and i find them so sad. Guys who get really upset when daughter gets knocked up by a black guy … not simply that she got knocked up but by a BLACK guy (oh the humanity) but then treat the (half) black kid like a gem. You’d think that the realization that the black kid is ok might make it dawn on him that the black father ain’t bad just cos he’s black. He might be bad cos he f*cked and ran. But not because he’s black.

  214. That’s why I love you Rutherford, even if you’re a lib. 99 times out of 100, our sense of humor is pretty much the same.

    I’m still laughing about Pfesser’s story of his brother. That was great. Talk about poetic justice…reminded me of that All in the Family episode where Archie gets locked in the basement, gets drunk in and calls out to God to save him. He here’s a knock and a Thank You God before George Jefferson opened the door. 😆

What's on your mind?

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s