America 2012: ‘In Nothing We Trust’?
Ron Fournier and Sophie Quinton, writing in National Journal, have produced a thoughtful piece about the current state of affairs in the American culture, using Muncie, Indiana as their prime illustration:
Here’s what journalists call the “nut graf” of the piece:
“Muncie is a microcosm of a nation whose motto could be, “In Nothing We Trust.” Seven in 10 Americans believe that the country is on the wrong track; eight in 10 are dissatisfied with the way the nation is being governed. Only 23 percent have confidence in banks, and just 19 percent have confidence in big business. Less than half the population expresses “a great deal” of confidence in the public-school system or organized religion. “We have lost our gods,” says Laura Hansen, an assistant professor of sociology at Western New England University in Springfield, Mass. “We lost [faith] in the media: Remember Walter Cronkite? We lost it in our culture: You can’t point to a movie star who might inspire us, because we know too much about them. We lost it in politics, because we know too much about politicians’ lives. We’ve lost it—that basic sense of trust and confidence—in everything.”
Tell us what you think about the site
Customer Care »
Vacation stops, manage subscriptions and more
AJC Services
Sections
Other Editions
Visitor Agreement | Privacy Statement
© 2013 The Atlanta Journal-Constitution
399 comments Add your comment
JamVet
April 20th, 2012
11:15 am
I contend that George Wallace was a DEM-O-CRAT.
Because you are afraid to contend the other even bigger truth about him being a conservative and not a liberal.
He hated liberals.
Just like virtually all of the GOPers turned Democrats do now.
Own it.
But it’s all good, because everybody over the age of eight already knows that…
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
11:15 am
Joseph @ 8:40
They should take from it that they should be honest with the American people and admit that they have done an atrocious job governing on a national level the last 3 years.
You should admit that this country was on a fu*ked up trajectory long before Jan 19, 2009. Trying to lay blame on Obama only makes you look like a partisaned jackass who’s too damn stubborn to realize that he’s part of the problem himself.
———————-
Paul @ 9:27 am
Amen!!!!!
————————
dB @ 10:09
Am I the only one sick and tired of that dopey “failing schools!” business repeated ad nauseum and rarely attached to any meaningful metric for support?
Nope, I’m tired of that crap as well. The easiest way to cure that problem is to get politicians and politics out of the school system. Politicians f**k up everything they get involved in. We should all ask for “less government interference” and demand that politicians keep their asses out of things they should not be involved with.
———————-
Reading the comments up to about 10:40 reveals that not very many read the article that Bookman linked. Most of the problem with the government that was stressed in that article appeared to be on the local level. As a matter of fact, the whole article focused on dissatisfaction and distrust on the local level. However, some took a small snippet to go all in on their Obama/Bush bashing.
I guess that should be called the Bookman Knee Jerk Reflex from now on. Post something on pregnant Great White Sharks and Obama/Bush gets blamed. Post something on Goodyear tires versus Hoosier tires and Obama/Bush gets blamed. I really feel sorry for y’all that can’t seem to do anything other than knee jerk reactions.
They BOTH suck
April 20th, 2012
11:15 am
Zoso: I live in a two way street…. try it sometime…….. I caution you, you might have to use your brain
If you were not being so one sided, you would note that I didn’t absolve either Party or anyone, unlike you, I am being “Fair, Balanced and Unafraid”
Earlier this week, RNC Chairman Michael Steele told a group of 200 students at DePaul University that African-Americans “don’t have a reason” to vote for Republican candidates.
During his remarks he also acknowledged that for decades the GOP pursued “‘Southern Strategy’ that alienated many minority voters by focusing on the white male vote in the South.”
Steele was asked to explain why an African-American should vote Republican at a university-sponsored discussion on the conservative movement. The RNC chairman’s response: “You really don’t have a reason to, to be honest — we haven’t done a very good job of really giving you one. True? True.”
Steve Atl
April 20th, 2012
11:15 am
Between the corrupt media on both sides, corporate greed, and corrupt politicians…all we can really do is vote…all of the rest is noise.
td
April 20th, 2012
11:16 am
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
10:28 am
I am glad you are so certain of the facts in this case and can read a juries mind so well. From just reading this board. I can see around 20 to 30% of the people that already see reasonable doubt and can tell you honestly that, with just the evidence I have seen and read about, then I would say there is reasonable doubt and I would not convict.
They BOTH suck
April 20th, 2012
11:17 am
Jamvet
Zoso either can’t understand or refuses to acknowledge that while “left/ right” might mean Dem or Repub in today’s polarized political world; that was not always the case………
There was a time when LIBS were in the Republican Party and Cons in the Democrat Party
williebkind
April 20th, 2012
11:18 am
“If improving the economy appears slow now, with Rebublican obstruction a major factor, just wait if they win the Presidency and the Senate”
If the republicans control the house, senate and the executive branck, how would that obstruct solutions. Oh I see you betting on the liberals like OWS to create chaos, destruction, and murder a person or two. You are infering the liberals, the minority, will terrorize the majority with civil unrest. This will not stop the conservatives from creating jobs, voiding obamacare, and reduce government. It that means you will have to help your parents buy groceries, a new car, go to vegas then sobeit.
Becky
April 20th, 2012
11:19 am
Apparently bond has been set. I hope Mr. Zimmerman will be kept safe and allowed to have a fair trial.
ZoSo
April 20th, 2012
11:21 am
JamVet, yes he was a conservative Democratic. Still, he was a member of the Democratic party and a bunch more like him. Own that.
BTW, I ain’t skeered.
ZoSo
April 20th, 2012
11:21 am
Zoso either can’t understand or refuses to acknowledge that while “left/ right” might mean Dem or Repub in today’s polarized political world; that was not always the case………
rubbish
They BOTH suck
April 20th, 2012
11:22 am
Was Barry Goldwater a Democrat?
williebkind
April 20th, 2012
11:22 am
Becky
April 20th, 2012
11:19 am
Do you really?
ZoSo
April 20th, 2012
11:23 am
Goldwater was a Republican. Just the facts.
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
11:24 am
Didn’t wanna get into the Martin thing, but…
In reading your responses this AM, it seems you are letting emotion get in the way of reason. It was not illegal for Zimmerman to get out of his truck, approach Martin, and ask him what he was doing, in spite of what the 911 operator may or may not have said. And as long as he made no threatening statements or threatening actions, he was within his rights as a citizen to walk through the complex.
Bruno
How would you defend Zimmerman’s actions, if you were his lawyer, of going up to Trayvon and questioning him when he told the police the reason he got out of his vehicle was to get the street address? He was allegedly attacked when he was returning to his vehicle from doing that. The problem comes in due to the fact that the altercation/shooting happened BETWEEN buildings and not where one would be if they were trying to get the address of their location.
———————-
I contend that George Wallace was a DEM-O-CRAT like Robert Byrd of KKK fame. They had D’s next to their names, not R’s.
And that matters how? Contrary to current trends, there were conservative (D)’s and liberal (R)’s throughout the history of this country. Recent purging of the parties does not remove that fact from the history books. Ideology had more to do with racial politics than party membership did.
Gator Joe
April 20th, 2012
11:24 am
Williebekind @ 11:18 “If the republicans control the house, senate and the executive branck, how would that obstruct solutions.”
Answer: By doing what they did in the eight years prior to President Obama taking office, which caused the recession and the mess President Obama inherited.
Becky
April 20th, 2012
11:24 am
williebkind-absolutely, don’t you want the same thing?
They BOTH suck
April 20th, 2012
11:25 am
Glad you know about Goldwater
Now go look up his record on race relations and who he joined with in attempts to maintain the status quo………..
Was he not one of the most influential conservative Republicans of the 1950s and 60s?
Bruno
April 20th, 2012
11:25 am
As usual much chest beating by the resident wingnuts who are collectively afraid of their own shadows (and anyone with pigmented skin).
Troll–Don’t you think you’ve worn out the race card a little bit?? The problem with crying “wolf” over and over, is that no one will listen when a real wolf finally appears.
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
11:26 am
G$ — ““If I was lawfully proceeding through a neighborhood where my family member lived (and where I was staying at the time) and you stalked and pursued me and confronted me, demanding to know why I was there, I’d do worse than that to you.”
“Seems like you are a big tuffy! Threatening people like that!”
Seems like you are a big illiterate. Where’d I threaten anyone?
Let’s go back to high school for the slow readers among us:
If I was lawfully proceeding
and you stalked and pursued me
and confronted me
I’d do worse than that to you
Did you catch all that? In this case, “do worse than that to you” is pretty clearly a *response* to provoking actions on *someone else’s* part. Feel free to ask politely for clarification if that’s still not clear to you.
“What would you do how much worse tuffy?”
See my 10:48. And feel free to ask politely for clarification if that’s still not clear to you.
“Answer for those”
Who do you think you are, demanding that I answer to you?
“Amazing that you would rather “do worse than that to you” instead of simply answering where you were going.”
If you don’t have a badge and you accost me in my neighborhood after dark, then I’m not answering your questions. Especially if you run up to me and *demand* that I answer you. Who was George Zimmerman that Trayvon Martin should answer to him? And who are *you* that I should answer to you?
“I used get asked all the time by folks in my neighborhood growing up.”
Did any of them run up to you in the night and *demand* that you answer them? Frankly, I think you’re soft-pedaling the situation in your ‘made up example.’
“So see you are a tuffy as according to you in your own words you would do more than break a nose and bang someone’s head. Exactly what would you do tell us all!”
Well, Mr. Zimmerman, you don’t speak for “us all,” and you can go jump in a lake.
“You want people to ask u things respectfully maybe you should presnet yourself in a respectful fashion.”
Or what? You’ll shoot me?
Is that why Trayvon Martin got shot? Some arrogant, demanding SOB like you came running up to him in the night and demanded that he answer for his presence — and now Martin’s dead because he didn’t kiss Zimmerman’s butt? Is that what you’re asking for? People should kiss your butt or else they deserve to be shot dead?
“And not tell other bloggers how tuff you are and how much more violence you would commit.”
I’m not the one *demanding* that others answer to me. Looks to me like you’re *excusing* violence if people don’t respond to you the way you want, you big tuffy. Is that what it is? Do you identify with George Zimmerman because you’re on some kind of power trip and you think that people should have to answer to you?
“So guess I’m not wrong!”
Oh, I think I’ve learned a *lot* more about you than you’ve learned about me. (laughing)
They BOTH suck
April 20th, 2012
11:26 am
Zoso
But keep holding on to the past and not learning from it……..
Seems to be working for you
Peace out
Becky
April 20th, 2012
11:26 am
As I recall, Goldwater was a fine man and would be ashamed of the Republican party as it is today.
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
11:28 am
williebkind — “The question is if I am following you and you confront me, then punch me, then continue beating me, I have the right to stop you anyway I can. That is the law that is a fact.”
Actually, no, it’s not. The use of deadly force in response to a fistfight isn’t permissible by law in FL.
willie lynch
April 20th, 2012
11:28 am
williebkind
April 20th, 2012
11:03 am
You’re right feelings are not facts. Facts are:1. George Zimmerman prolfiled and the pursued Trayvon Martin 2. He disobeyed instructions from law enforcement. 3. He was in possession of a firearm. 4. At some point he exited the safe haven of his vehicle. 5. Trayvon Martin was shot dead. These are facts. Zimmerman’s account is no more factual than the account being offered by that nut job in Norway. Zimmerman is the only one telling HIS version of events.
Why did he follow Trayvon Martin in the first place? Why did he disregard law enforcements directive? What was his mindset when he said “these —– they always get away.”? Why did he leave the safety of his vehicle? And after having determined in his mind that these “——-” always get away”, the one he views as this (whatever he called them) ends up dead.
To be reasonable about this case requires nothing but a sincere approach to finding the truth. When one of the parties is not able to speak for himself the circumstances that lead up to the chain of events must be fully explored before a conclusion can be reached.
If a jury finds Zimmerman innocent so be it but we can’t believe that the pursing, rights violating killer is the one who is presenting facts.
JamVet
April 20th, 2012
11:28 am
Zo, framing the argument in terms of Dem vs. GOP is piffle.
Framing it in terms of conservatism vs. liberalism is paramount.
Those first seven white people on that first Freedom Rider bus were all liberals.
The Alabama sheriff – Bull Connor – and cohorts who kicked their heads in, were all conservatives.
And nosy northern (often Jewish) liberals are still trying to keep modern day southern white male conservatives from updating their Jim Crow agenda.
Word.
ZoSo
April 20th, 2012
11:29 am
They BOTH suck
April 20th, 2012
11:25 am
And guess what, racism was alive and well on both sides of the aisle then. But somehow they were all secretly Republicans according to revisionist history by the left.
They BOTH suck
April 20th, 2012
11:30 am
“As I recall, Goldwater was a fine man and would be ashamed of the Republican party as it is today.”
Well he wasn’t to hip in the evangelicals trying to to use religion to influence the Republicans, however on racial issues, for the most part he was a dude.. failure…….. nothing, nada, zero
RB from Gwinnett
April 20th, 2012
11:30 am
Joe. You weren’t there. You don’t know what happened. The rest of you posturing is made up noise, dude. Get over yourself already.
They BOTH suck
April 20th, 2012
11:31 am
“And guess what, racism was alive and well on both sides of the aisle then”
Took all that crying from you to acknowledge that
But thanks for coming around to “just the facts”
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
11:31 am
Doom — “At that point if and its a big IF Z is telling the truth it is then a clear cut case of self defense. He had lost T and was walking back to his truck- away from a defused situation.”
True. But it still doesn’t give him a pass on the use of deadly force in the ensuing fight.
“Did you not know these things? Or did you leave them out on purpose?”
Neither, because none of it is exculpatory with respect to the use of the firearm. Even if the prosecution were to stipulate to it all, Zimmerman still used disproportionate force.
ZoSo
April 20th, 2012
11:33 am
The ONLY argument I was making was that they were Democrats and they had a sordid history along with Republicans who felt the same way.
Piffle indeed.
Bruno
April 20th, 2012
11:34 am
How would you defend Zimmerman’s actions, if you were his lawyer, of going up to Trayvon and questioning him when he told the police the reason he got out of his vehicle was to get the street address? He was allegedly attacked when he was returning to his vehicle from doing that. The problem comes in due to the fact that the altercation/shooting happened BETWEEN buildings and not where one would be if they were trying to get the address of their location.
Brosephus–I’m far from a legal expert, but I still think the case hinges on the legal concept of “proximate cause”. Here’s the link again, it’s worth a read by everyone here today because it is the basis for all liability claims.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Proximate_cause
Just because Zimmerman’s action of ignoring the 911 operator preceded the confrontation, that doesn’t automatically qualify it as meeting the legal definition of “proximate cause”. From the link again:
“Since but-for causation is very easy to show and does not assign culpability (but for the rain, you would not have crashed your car – the rain is not morally or legally culpable but still constitutes a cause), there is a second test used to determine if an action is close enough to a harm in a “chain of events” to be a legally culpable cause of the harm. This test is called proximate cause.”
As stated above, if I were his lawyer, I would argue for “Concurrent causes” in which Martin’s attack made him at least as responsible as Zimmerman’s. But again, I’m not an attorney.
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
11:36 am
RB — “Sorry joe, I didn’t realize you were there. Shouldn’t you call the Sanford PD and let them know TM was “accosted” “in his own neighborhood”. Idiot.”
Meltdown! I win! (laughing)
ZoSo
April 20th, 2012
11:36 am
They BOTH suck
April 20th, 2012
11:31 am
Crying? Who’s crying? I have only stated facts here.
willie lynch
April 20th, 2012
11:37 am
So according to some here every woman should stop when a strange man is approaching her to ask her where she is going. Every child that is approached by a person driving a vehicle along side them as they walk should stop and answer any question this benevolent stranger may wish to pose.
Just think people, Trayvon Martin didn’t know his killer form the man on the moon. Who was standing their ground really?
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
11:38 am
td — “I am glad you are so certain of the facts in this case and can read a juries mind so well.”
I haven’t spoken to what a jury would or would not do. I’ve spoken to what FL law says.
“From just reading this board. I can see around 20 to 30% of the people that already see reasonable doubt and can tell you honestly that, with just the evidence I have seen and read about, then I would say there is reasonable doubt and I would not convict.”
Seems like you’ve already formed an opinion on the case then. Good thing neither of us are on the jury, then, because Zimmerman clearly wouldn’t get a fair trial.
They BOTH suck
April 20th, 2012
11:39 am
Zoso
Fair enough……. so to that extent we can agree that both Parties had policies and individuals who wanted status quo.
Let’s be glad there were enough courageous people that knew status quo wasn’t working
Becky
April 20th, 2012
11:39 am
Sounds like a closing argument to me.
willie lynch
April 20th, 2012
11:37 am
So according to some here every woman should stop when a strange man is approaching her to ask her where she is going. Every child that is approached by a person driving a vehicle along side them as they walk should stop and answer any question this benevolent stranger may wish to pose.
Just think people, Trayvon Martin didn’t know his killer form the man on the moon. Who was standing their ground really?
275 more days
April 20th, 2012
11:39 am
Warning Conservative Bloggers
Joe Hussy Mama is like an old woman, he will never admit he is wrong, and will always get the last word (zinger) in, in an arguement.
Man it must be lonely up at the top as he is. Ever notice how he “talks down” to people? Kinda like he thinks he is better than you, but in reality he is nothing but an old blow hard trying to impress you with his knowledge of all things in the world. If you don’t beleive me, just ask him.
Now I await his smart a$$ remark………. 3….2…..1…………Bingo
Gator Joe
April 20th, 2012
11:40 am
Racism (including slavery) was alive and well in Europe during colonization of the Americas, and once colonization was complete, wealthy white Europeans didn’t miss a beat on racism and slavery. The effects of both are still haunting us to this day.
I recommend reading: “A People’s History of the United States” by Howard Zinn.
ZoSo
April 20th, 2012
11:41 am
They BOTH suck
April 20th, 2012
11:39 am
Let’s be glad there were enough courageous people that knew status quo wasn’t working
You could not have said it better.
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
11:43 am
Willie Lynch — “These are facts. Zimmerman’s account is no more factual than the account being offered by that nut job in Norway. Zimmerman is the only one telling HIS version of events.”
I’ve actually seen two different maps of the crime scene, but I don’t know which one is accurate, or if possibly both are inaccurate. One map has Zimmerman in a front yard, but off to the side — so it might support Zimmerman’s story. Another shows Zimmerman *between* houses, and clearly contradicts Zimmerman’s story. Obviously, they can’t both be right. Maybe neither one is right; I don’t know.
I presume that there will be some wrangling over that as well, and that the investigators and responding officers will have to testify as to that part of things.
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
11:44 am
Doom: What Zimm testified as happening to the police is that he lost Trayvon who went behind a row of townhouses or buildings. Zimm walked up to a townhouse get the number of the townhouse and write it down to go back and call it in to the police. He then started walking back to his truck. Allegedly when he got back to his truck Trayvon had come around a sidewalkk on the other side and confronted him and allegedly asked Z “Do you have a problem” to which Z responded no to which t responded “you do now” and attacked Z. At that point if and its a big IF Z is telling the truth it is then a clear cut case of self defense. He had lost T and was walking back to his truck- away from a defused situation.
Take that testimony and then compare it to the layout of the neighborhood and see if his story is plausible.
http://bcclist.files.wordpress.com/2012/03/trayvon-martin-george-zimmerman-path.jpg?w=510&h=342
Ignore the alleged paths that each took. The only things that were verifiable based on the report and 911 tapes are the approximate position of Zimmerman’s vehicle and where the altercation took place. Walking from the position of the vehicle to the building to get the address and then heading back to the vehicle would not require one to go behind the building don’t you think? If Martin came from behind the building, as your post indicates Zimmerman stated as much, would the confrontation not have happened IN FRONT of the building facing the vehicle position and not behind it?
That’s why I stated to you numerous times that I didn’t buy Zimmerman’s story. Things just don’t add up to the physical evidence.
willie lynch
April 20th, 2012
11:44 am
Gator Joe
April 20th, 2012
11:40 am
Good recommendation.
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
11:44 am
RB — “Joe. You weren’t there. You don’t know what happened. The rest of you posturing is made up noise, dude. Get over yourself already.”
If you don’t want to read what I have to say, you’re certainly free to scroll right past it.
In fact, take the afternoon off and enjoy a long weekend. Maybe you’ll feel better when you come back and stop calling people idiots.
Bruno
April 20th, 2012
11:45 am
Some arrogant, demanding SOB like you came running up to him in the night and demanded that he answer for his presence — and now Martin’s dead because he didn’t kiss Zimmerman’s butt? Is that what you’re asking for? People should kiss your butt or else they deserve to be shot dead?
Why did he follow Trayvon Martin in the first place? Why did he disregard law enforcements directive? What was his mindset when he said “these —– they always get away.”? Why did he leave the safety of his vehicle? And after having determined in his mind that these “——-” always get away”, the one he views as this (whatever he called them) ends up dead.
willie and Joe–Is there any special reason you two keep telling only half the story??
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
11:46 am
W. Lynch — “So according to some here every woman should stop when a strange man is approaching her to ask her where she is going. Every child that is approached by a person driving a vehicle along side them as they walk should stop and answer any question this benevolent stranger may wish to pose.”
“Just think people, Trayvon Martin didn’t know his killer form the man on the moon. Who was standing their ground really?”
My point to G$ exactly, Mr. Lynch. Well-said.
RB from Gwinnett
April 20th, 2012
11:46 am
Joe, you’re making a fool of yourself and claiming you win… What was the contest?
Jay
April 20th, 2012
11:46 am
I suspect that part of the reason Zimmerman was indicted is because the physical evidence contradicts the narrative he gave cops.
Doesn’t mean he’s guilty necessarily. But if that surmise is true and the evidence says he lied about something …
We shall see in due time. Whatever happens from here on out is fine with me, because justice will have been served.
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
11:47 am
As stated above, if I were his lawyer, I would argue for “Concurrent causes” in which Martin’s attack made him at least as responsible as Zimmerman’s. But again, I’m not an attorney.
I could see that. My issue is that his defense attorney had better do a damned good job of getting Zimmerman’s own statements to the police thrown out, or his job of defending them will be very difficult. Read my post to Doom, and you’ll understand why I say that. The physical evidence does not match the story given. Why would you give a false story if you were acting in the interests of your own personal survival and did nothing wrong?
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
11:48 am
I suspect that part of the reason Zimmerman was indicted is because the physical evidence contradicts the narrative he gave cops.
I’d say that’s the major reason. If you are acting with good intentions, you don’t lie to cover up your actions.
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
11:50 am
Timestamp — “Joe Hussy Mama is like an old woman, he will never admit he is wrong”
Well, that’s not true at all. I’ve said many times that “I stand corrected.” And when others admit they’re wrong to me, I take it with good grace. Just ask 0311; we just had an instance of that this week.
“and will always get the last word (zinger) in, in an arguement.”
Not my fault if you don’t have any staying power. (snicker)
“Man it must be lonely up at the top as he is. Ever notice how he “talks down” to people? Kinda like he thinks he is better than you, but in reality he is nothing but an old blow hard trying to impress you with his knowledge of all things in the world. If you don’t beleive me, just ask him.”
No one can make you feel inadequate without your consent, Timestamp. I post how I post, and if you don’t like it, too bad.
“Now I await his smart a$$ remark………. 3….2…..1…………Bingo”
Would you like to hit me with your purse? Would that make you feel better?
Thulsa Doom
April 20th, 2012
11:50 am
“Is that why Trayvon Martin got shot? Some arrogant, demanding SOB like you came running up to him in the night and demanded that he answer for his presence — and now Martin’s dead because he didn’t kiss Zimmerman’s butt? Is that what you’re asking for? People should kiss your butt or else they deserve to be shot dead?”
Joe Mama,
Again. You are making an assumption. You weren’t there. You do not know if what Zimm said is true or not- namely that he was on his way back to his truck when he was then confronted and attacked by Trayvon. We don’t know if this is true or not but it is certainly plausible.
“True. But it still doesn’t give him a pass on the use of deadly force in the ensuing fight.”
I disagree. If Z is telling the truth he had walked away from a defused situation. He was then attacked and according to the eyewitness and consistent with Zimm’s injuries Trayvon was on top of him kicking his ass and “pounding his head” into the ground according to the eyewitness. If someone is on top of you pummeling you and you are in fear for your life do you not have the right to defend yourself??? Most people believe you do in a situation like that. And from what some people have stated about Florida law the law apparently would agree if Zimm is telling the truth and that is how it went down.
Bottom line is that if the situation was defused Trayvon does not then have the right to come back around the other side and then attack Zimm and pummel him. And of course that’s a big IF Zimm is telling the truth. 2 sides to every story Joe and it seems to me you have absolutely no interest in hearing the other side of the story and have already made up your mind and convicted Zimm based upon what you think happened.
Bruno
April 20th, 2012
11:51 am
So according to some here every woman should stop when a strange man is approaching her to ask her where she is going. Every child that is approached by a person driving a vehicle along side them as they walk should stop and answer any question this benevolent stranger may wish to pose.
In addition to being approached by security guards in the past, I’ve also been approached by thugs and beggars numerous times while working in some bad neighborhoods around Atlanta. I usually try to give some cursory acknowledgment, but most certainly keep walking. Under no circumstances would I launch a pre-emptive attack. In other words, the Bush Doctrine doesn’t apply in personal situations most of the time.
Do any of you have any credible evidence that Martin truly feared for his safety, to the point that a pre-emptive physical attack on his part was justified?? Being asked what you’re doing doesn’t meet that standard in my book.
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
11:54 am
Bruno — “willie and Joe–Is there any special reason you two keep telling only half the story??”
I can’t speak for willie, but in the portion of my post you cited, I’m trying to make a point to G$, who seems to think that he deserves to have people bow and scrape to him, and answer his rudely-phrased questions. If you’ll look back earlier in that post, you’ll see clearly that I’m talking about a conjectural example that G$ directly asked me about.
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
11:55 am
RB — “Joe, you’re making a fool of yourself and claiming you win… What was the contest?”
It was the Who Can Melt Down And Flame Out The Slowest contest, RB. (laughing)
Thulsa Doom
April 20th, 2012
11:58 am
Timestamp — “Joe Hussy Mama is like an old woman, he will never admit he is wrong”
Well, that’s not true at all.I’ve said many times that “I stand corrected.”– Joe mama
Perhaps. But I’ve not seen it once.
They BOTH suck
April 20th, 2012
12:01 pm
How close was Zimmerman to Trayvon when he shot him?
RB from Gwinnett
April 20th, 2012
12:03 pm
Joe, just curious, what should any neighborhood do if someone is walking through at night who doesn’t appear to belong there? Call the police? Ignore them? What?
You do know there are breakins in lots of neighborhoods and neighbors are expected to look out for people who don’t belong there, suspicious behavior,etc, right? There is a reason there was a neighborhood watch dude. They weren’t organizing an effort to shoot skittles eating kids, you know. But something was causing them to form a watch program.
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
12:08 pm
G$ — “Again. You are making an assumption.”
No, I’m not. I’m clearly asking you a question about your own nasty attitude and asking if you think the same attitude would have been justifiable in Zimmerman’s case. You seem to expect that you can be a jackass to me and still get polite answers; if so, it’s not unreasonable to ask you if you think that Zimmerman could be a jackass to Martin and still expect to recieve polite answers.
I don’t think you realize it, but you set up a pretty ugly dynamic — and defended it — in the same way you’re defending George Zimmerman. You might want to ask yourself how far this ‘kiss the butt of the people asking you questions’ arrangement should go, particularly in light of Mr. Lynch’s earlier post.
“You weren’t there. You do not know if what Zimm said is true or not- namely that he was on his way back to his truck when he was then confronted and attacked by Trayvon. We don’t know if this is true or not but it is certainly plausible.”
You also were not there. And, as Brosephus continues to point out, Zimmerman’s statements to police don’t match up well with the physical evidence — which means that Zimmerman’s statements are not especially plausible.
“I disagree. If Z is telling the truth he had walked away from a defused situation. He was then attacked and according to the eyewitness and consistent with Zimm’s injuries Trayvon was on top of him kicking his ass and “pounding his head” into the ground according to the eyewitness. If someone is on top of you pummeling you and you are in fear for your life do you not have the right to defend yourself???”
Defending yourself and using deadly force are two different things. Many states’ laws are written with that in mind. I’m not trying to be directive here, but look it up for yourself. If you Google ‘Florida Criminal Code,’ you can probably find it in 5-10 minutes. Don’t take my word for it, have a look yourself.
“Most people believe you do in a situation like that.”
Well, I trust that you recognize that we’re talking about the law, not what most people believe.
“And from what some people have stated about Florida law the law apparently would agree if Zimm is telling the truth and that is how it went down.”
Again, it’s not established that Z is telling the truth.
“Bottom line is that if the situation was defused Trayvon does not then have the right to come back around the other side and then attack Zimm and pummel him. And of course that’s a big IF Zimm is telling the truth.”
That’s a very big if, IMO.
“2 sides to every story Joe and it seems to me you have absolutely no interest in hearing the other side of the story”
Well, that’s not true at all. I’m quite interested in discussing it. I just think you were a jackass in how you approached me and demanded answers. I’ll always answer polite questions politely, but you and your demands can pucker up and kiss it. If you want a polite discussion with me, then be polite and you’ll get one. I return what I get, even if I disagree with the person I’m talking to.
“and have already made up your mind and convicted Zimm based upon what you think happened.”
No, but I think Z is in a *very* difficult situation and is going to get prison time. I think that even if he didn’t precipitate the situation and was completely without blame up until the moment he pulled his weapon and fired it, that he still stands to serve time based on my reading of FL law.
Again, don’t take my word for it; Google “Florida criminal code” and have a look. Maybe you’ll see it differently than I do and we can talk about that.
td
April 20th, 2012
12:08 pm
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
11:48 am
It all depends on the jury selection.
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
12:08 pm
Doom — my mistake, I responded to your post as if you were G$. Please read it in that light.
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
12:10 pm
Bruno — “Do any of you have any credible evidence that Martin truly feared for his safety, to the point that a pre-emptive physical attack on his part was justified?? Being asked what you’re doing doesn’t meet that standard in my book.”
I don’t think we have any evidence that Martin *launched* a pre-emptive physical attack, so aren’t you putting the evidentiary cart before the legal horse?
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
12:11 pm
Doom — “Perhaps. But I’ve not seen it once.”
Careful, Doom. I’m pretty sure you don’t want this standard applied to you.
I did say it earlier this week, but I can’t recall the thread.
Bruno
April 20th, 2012
12:14 pm
We shall see in due time. Whatever happens from here on out is fine with me, because justice will have been served.
Jay–Though you appear to be backpedaling on the racial angle at this point, you made it front and center from the outset, to your discredit. Ditto for the vast majority of the Lib posters here. Special praise to Brosephus and TBG for not falling into that trap.
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
12:16 pm
RB — “Joe, just curious, what should any neighborhood do if someone is walking through at night who doesn’t appear to belong there? Call the police? Ignore them? What?”
Call the cops, like Zimmerman did. I have no problem with that at all.
Some folks might say ‘yeah, but the suspect was going to get away.’ Sure, but didn’t the dispatcher say that uniformed officers were on the way? If the officers swung through the neighborhood and maybe knocked on a few doors to alert people, wouldn’t that address the situation? Even if there *was* an actual perp, he’d probably leave for greener pastures once he saw an actual patrol car moving around in the neignborhood.
“You do know there are breakins in lots of neighborhoods and neighbors are expected to look out for people who don’t belong there, suspicious behavior,etc, right? There is a reason there was a neighborhood watch dude.”
Sure, and he did the right thing in calling the cops. It’s what came *after* that that is the issue here. No one’s faulting Zimmerman AFAIK for calling the cops.
“They weren’t organizing an effort to shoot skittles eating kids, you know. But something was causing them to form a watch program.”
It’s my understanding that they didn’t have a formal NW group, and that Z was self-appointed. Is that the case, or does someone have other information?
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
12:17 pm
td
Jury selection has nothing to do with the differences between the story that Zimmerman gave the police versus what the physical evidence shows. From my perspective, that would be like asking the jury to believe the impossible.
Generation$crewed
April 20th, 2012
12:18 pm
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
11:26 am
Again you apparently feel that without anyone doing anything physical to you, it is your claim that you would do worse to anyone who questioned you about who you were and why you were there, than Trayvon is claimed to have done to Zimmerman. If he did or didn’t I do not know.
However you are on record as giving a threat to any and all who may question you as to why you are and who you are. Your choice would not be to ignore them or simply give them your name and where you were going. Nope
You claim you would do worse to any of us out there who may question you.
Then for me pointing out maybe that is not the best logic, you go the classy way and call my mother a B*tch. Nice! Then go onto compare me to Zimmerman, I have never shot anyone. Shot a bird once when I ws young but got a spanking for that.
You are the only one who has made any mention of ones self committing violence on another, once by your own claim to do worse, then u jump to asking if I am going to shoot you? Really, that’s where your mind goes?
Why do you go to acts of violence as a way to settle a disagreement?
From my life experience in people who think like that it is usually one of two things….the person is actually dangerous and a disturbed individual, or they are kinda soft and are not a threat to ANYone for ANY reason usually a person living in fear of something or someone usually also having feelings of vicitimzation.
If the later is your case I feel for you and will be hoping things improve for you.
They BOTH suck
April 20th, 2012
12:18 pm
Bruno
No problem you can leave me out
jk
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
12:21 pm
Though you appear to be backpedaling on the racial angle at this point, you made it front and center from the outset, to your discredit.
When the national media picked up on the story, race was being used to get the attention of the media to actually pay attention to the case. You can’t fault the media for portraying race when that was the magnet used to attract their attention. It took the national media 3wks or so before they even reported on this case. Facebook and other social media outlets caused a big enough signal fire that the media eventually started looking into things. The only part that race played in this incident is that Martin was a Black kid wearing a hoodie. That’s it.
Becky
April 20th, 2012
12:26 pm
I think all of you should go to Law School that are still arguing this case.
williebkind
April 20th, 2012
12:31 pm
“willie and Joe–Is there any special reason you two keep telling only half the story??”
I cant speak for Joe; but there is only on side of the story, thats GZ, the other side is speculation and third party say-so.
Thulsa Doom
April 20th, 2012
12:31 pm
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
12:11 pm
Doom — “Perhaps. But I’ve not seen it once.”
Careful, Doom. I’m pretty sure you don’t want this standard applied to you.
Joe mama,
Actually its kinda ironic but I freely admitted that I was very wrong on this very topic. When the news first hit I was one of the first to say Zimm was guilty as hell. But then as the facts of the case started to emerge I had to publicly reverse myself and admit error. The fact that the media purposefully distorted the truth NBC doctoring the 911 call and CNN/ABC reporting that Zimm said “effing coon” when he actually said “its effing cold” helped to compound my error.
Generation$crewed
April 20th, 2012
12:32 pm
Becky
April 20th, 2012
12:26 pm
Well I think anyone who would sih for another human to die a slow death should not be in the advice giving business.
williebkind
April 20th, 2012
12:33 pm
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
12:21 pm
Bull$hitt!
td
April 20th, 2012
12:33 pm
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
12:17 pm
Just in the high profile cases I can remember what juries believe does not make common sense to most people. OJ was guilty as sin and he was acquitted. Michael Jackson molested those children and we all know it and in Florida that lady last year (can not remember her name) killed her daughter and we all know it and she was let go. What do all of these cases have in common with this case. The Judge will allow the defense (in the name of defendants rights ) to pick the dumbest most uninformed citizens on this jury.
williebkind
April 20th, 2012
12:37 pm
td
April 20th, 2012
12:33 pm
Being guilty and proven guilty is two different things regarding law.
Becky
April 20th, 2012
12:40 pm
G$I bet you vote for the death penalty don’t you?
williebkind
April 20th, 2012
12:41 pm
Thulsa Doom
April 20th, 2012
12:31 pm
I had the same feelings too. But I kept them to myself for once. Now after all that is happened if I sat on the jury GZ would walk and if I were GZ I would sue the black panthers, Al Sharpten, and two members of congress. I would also sue some reporters and their bosses. Their intent was malicious.
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
12:43 pm
Actually its kinda ironic but I freely admitted that I was very wrong on this very topic. When the news first hit I was one of the first to say Zimm was guilty as hell.
Who says you were wrong besides you? You still never answered my question about the location of the fight based on Zimmerman’s story.
Generation$crewed
April 20th, 2012
12:48 pm
Joe again that is not what you are making your argument.
You have stated that your response would be to do worse. In no way did you offer leaving the situation and continuing home, running away. Simply telling Zimmerman to f-off and continue on your way.
No you said you would do worse. I happen to feel you should avoid violence at all cost. Usually meaning to strike second, or in reaction.
I ain’t saying to kiss anyone’s butt. Never has been my argument. I told what I did as a child roaming thru different hoods. Did,kt always sometimes said smart @zz comments and ran home.
But you only go to violence. How very GWB of you. And for that you call me arrogant and my mom a b*tch!
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
12:49 pm
td
It still comes down to evidence. I don’t think Zimmerman’s attorney will have the same benefit of screwed up investigative work that OJ benefitted from. The one trump card that Zimmerman’s legal team has is that the city of Sanford placed way too much information on their website. They have a good claim for appealing a conviction based on that. Outside that, I don’t think they have an easy case to defend at all.
————————–
williebkind
How so? Do you have proof otherwise? If so, then produce it. Otherwise, you’re just pissing in the wind here. I listened to Michael Baisden talk this case up constantly almost from the day it happened. Between his site, his social site, and facebook, that’s how word of that case spread out of Florida. ABC News was the first major outlet to do a story on the case, and that story was 2-3 weeks AFTER the shooting. Go back and research for yourself and prove me wrong if my statement is bullsh*t. I’ll wait all day for you to prove me wrong.
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
12:50 pm
G$ — “Again you apparently feel that without anyone doing anything physical to you, it is your claim that you would do worse to anyone who questioned you about who you were and why you were there”
Once again, I’ve clarified myself despite your attempts to revise my comments for me. If you don’t like what I’ve said, then I’d appreciate you asking clarifying questions rather than attempt to revise my position for me. Just FYI, Kyle Wingfield throws people off his blog for doing that.
“However you are on record as giving a threat to any and all who may question you as to why you are and who you are.”
Wrong. Your dishonest and continued attempts at revision have been noted.
“Your choice would not be to ignore them or simply give them your name and where you were going.”
False binary. There are other possible choices. There are also choices that the *questioner* can make that will play into the dynamic. Interestingly, you ignore those.
“You claim you would do worse to any of us out there who may question you.”
Lie. Once again, “If I was lawfully proceeding through a neighborhood where my family member lived (and where I was staying at the time) and you stalked and pursued me and confronted me, demanding to know why I was there, I’d do worse than that to you.”
For someone who objects to others ‘leaving out’ pieces of the Martin-Zimmerman story, you certainly do seem bent on leaving out parts of mine.
“Then for me pointing out maybe that is not the best logic, you go the classy way and call my mother a B*tch. Nice!”
I said no such thing. Where do you believe that I did that?
“Then go onto compare me to Zimmerman”
Again incorrect. I asked you, quite clearly, if your arrogant, demanding attitude might possibly be shared by Mr. Zimmerman. You seem to believe that you deserve answers from me, no matter how nasty and impolite you’ve been, so is it unreasonable to believe that Mr. Zimmerman might have felt that *he* deserved answers from Martin, no matter how nasty and impolite he was in demanding those answers?
“You are the only one who has made any mention of ones self committing violence on another, once by your own claim to do worse, then u jump to asking if I am going to shoot you? Really, that’s where your mind goes?”
You’ve rudely demanded answers from me and claimed that the only choices are to comply or leave. I wonder if George Zimmerman did the same thing to Trayvon Martin?
“Why do you go to acts of violence as a way to settle a disagreement?”
Pathetic. Absolutely pathetic.
It’s not a disagreement if you confront me in my neighborhood after dark and demand to know who I am and where I’m going. And if you do that — just as I said earlier — “If I was lawfully proceeding through a neighborhood where my family member lived (and where I was staying at the time) and you stalked and pursued me and confronted me, demanding to know why I was there, I’d do worse than that to you.”
Please pay attention to detail, G$.
“From my life experience in people who think like that it is usually one of two things….the person is actually dangerous and a disturbed individual, or they are kinda soft and are not a threat to ANYone for ANY reason usually a person living in fear of something or someone usually also having feelings of vicitimzation. If the later is your case I feel for you and will be hoping things improve for you.”
From my life experience, people who — like you — dishonestly misrepresent others can’t be relied on to be truthful and honest.
Shrug.
Generation$crewed
April 20th, 2012
12:58 pm
Becky
April 20th, 2012
12:40 pm
If that’s your instinct….. I would stay away from Vegas and online gambling sites. Best you just stay here at ole Bookman’s place, every bet can be hedged and later denied.
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
12:58 pm
G$ — “Joe again that is not what you are making your argument.”
I don’t recognize your authority to speak for me.
“You have stated that your response would be to do worse.”
Again you lie. Why can’t you be honest about what I said?
“In no way did you offer leaving the situation and continuing home, running away.”
Because I quite clearly posited someone *confronting* me. Did you not read that part, or are you just messing with me?
“Simply telling Zimmerman to f-off and continue on your way.”
Again, I don’t recognize your authority to speak for me. I said no such thing.
“No you said you would do worse.”
And you are dishonestly misrepresenting me as advocating that in *every* case, not in the *specific* case I gave you and which you quoted.
“I happen to feel you should avoid violence at all cost. Usually meaning to strike second, or in reaction.”
I see. So are you saying that you don’t feel that it is provoking someone if you confront them?
“I ain’t saying to kiss anyone’s butt. Never has been my argument. I told what I did as a child roaming thru different hoods. Did,kt always sometimes said smart @zz comments and ran home.”
Well, if you’re going to be a jackass to me and then demand that I answer your questions, you certainly appear to be arguing that that’s exactly what I should do. Once again, who the heck are you that I should have to answer to you, as you demanded?
“But you only go to violence. How very GWB of you.”
Again you lie. Why must you continue to misrepresent what I wrote? Is your position really so weak?
“And for that you call me arrogant and my mom a b*tch!”
You *are* arrogant. But I did *not* bring up your mother.
Generation$crewed
April 20th, 2012
1:12 pm
Joe, so your saying if stopped and asked questions, cause ya never said poo about being attacked or even touched, you would do worse? Or would you like to change that statement?
Cause if you still agree with the first then I think you are wrong as it is never the best solution to be the initial physical strike. If you don’t we agree. I am all for protecting ones self, have found myself in sketchy situation a time or two before, but it is always better to use violence after it has been attempted or has been a threat that is reasonable to believe would be carried out.
Maybe you are a strike first kinda person
Thulsa Doom
April 20th, 2012
1:13 pm
Brocephus,
I didn’t say I was wrong about Zimm’s guilt or innocence. Just that I was wrong to jump to the conclusion that he was guilty based on media reports which as we know turned out to be grossly inaccurate.Or do you think I should have stuck to my initial error and just convicted the man without trial.?
Incidentally I’m watching Fox news and its just showing a newly released photo of the back of Zimm’s head from a witnesses I-phone. Not one but 2 lacerations on the back of his head and also a 3rd injury a welt on the back of his head. Seems his case that he was attacked by Trayvon just got a wee bit stronger.
Brocephus,
In regards to the location of the fight its kinda hard to see exactly what happened. Now what I have heard happened came in an explanation by Zimm’s father of what he was told by his son. It was on tv so I wasn’t able to write down what he said. But it seemed to make a lot of sense. Hard to reconcile that with your location of the fight and how it allegedly went down. But if it makes sense or not we will find out later during the trial.
Generation$crewed
April 20th, 2012
1:20 pm
Joe,
Can’t let it slide you did bring up my mother. You called me an SOB. An Arrogant SOB if I recall now what would those three letters stand for?
Fine if you think I’m arrogant, I think you are violence obsessed.
But you don’t know my mom, so therefore you can’t know if I’m an SOB or not. Unless you just wanted to take a cheap dig at me by invoking my mom
Thulsa Doom
April 20th, 2012
1:23 pm
“It took the national media 3wks or so before they even reported on this case.”
Why in the hell should this have been reported at all? 15,000 people willl be murdereed in the U.S. this year alone. Why the hell is this case any more damn important when for all we know it may have even been a case of self defense?
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
1:24 pm
Doom
The location of the fight that I use is the one from the police report. I don’t know what Zimmerman’s father said, but what dad wouldn’t fight for their child. I would not use any info from his dad because it’s heresay, regardless to if it’s exact word-for-word from an involved party. It’s hard to see the location now, because the city of Sanford took all the stuff down off their website. However, weeks ago when I first asked you to look at that information for yourself to check Zimmerman’s story, the information was available to the public.
IF/When this goes to court, I’ll bet that the prosecution is going to hammer Zimmerman’s story and his credibility based on the actual location of the fight/shooting versus what he told to the police. Even the eyewitnesses and 911 calls back up the location being between the buildings and not in front of the building where the address would be located.
I’m not convicting Zimmerman, as he may have a self defense claim if the two of them were fighting over the gun or something like that. I heard the judge mention something about stippling this morning, but I can’t find the transcript to see exactly what was said. That would show whether the shot was from point blank, close, or a distance away.
Brosephus™
April 20th, 2012
1:32 pm
Why in the hell should this have been reported at all? 15,000 people willl be murdereed in the U.S. this year alone. Why the hell is this case any more damn important when for all we know it may have even been a case of self defense?
It was reported because of the uproar on social media outlets. That’s why. News is sensational nowadays. THis case is more important because the family members of Trayvon Martin made it that way. If you don’t like it, tough. If you want every murder highlighted, then I suggest you gin up social media uproar like they did. Just because YOU don’t see it as something important does not extrapolate to the rest of this country, contrary to how important you think YOUR personal views are.
willie lynch
April 20th, 2012
1:46 pm
Here again, what I’m getting is that I can initiate contact with a stranger, contact I had no business establishing, then when I am on the losing side of an altercation I caused to happen I should be able to kill that person and claim self defense.
“Those —— they always get away”. I don’t know what his intent was but it sounds to me that he had already made up his mind about who or what Trayvon was and that he felt as though there had not been sufficient punishment meted out to those he determined were guilty. With that mindset he then dispensed his own justice.
Now you can believe Zimmerman’s version, but again, there’s his version, Trayvon’s version and the truth. And Zimmerman has eliminated any alternate version from the other involved party from being offered.
I can’t believe Zimmerman’s version because I don’t have Trayvon’s version. Until that version is presented (as best it can be by the prosecution) I can’t say I know. My belief based on what I have read and the fact that he has been arrested and charged, is that his story is weak and the prosecution has seen reasonable doubt in what they have heard from him. So we shall proceed and let the chips fall.
willie lynch
April 20th, 2012
1:47 pm
Thulsa Doom
April 20th, 2012
1:23 pm
You have to start somewhere.
Joe Hussein Mama
April 20th, 2012
2:09 pm
G$ — “Joe, so your saying if stopped and asked questions, cause ya never said poo about being attacked or even touched, you would do worse?”
Didn’t say that. Didn’t say anything *about* that, and you didn’t ask.
“Or would you like to change that statement?”
Why would I have to change it? I never made it. I made a statement about what I’d do in a specific set of circumstances, and you’ve dishonestly misrepresented it as being what I’d do in ALL circumstances since then.
“Cause if you still agree with the first then I think you are wrong as it is never the best solution to be the initial physical strike. If you don’t we agree.”
That’s strange. Now you sound like you don’t know what I think. That’s very odd considering how *certain* you seemed just a paragraph earlier.
“I am all for protecting ones self, have found myself in sketchy situation a time or two before, but it is always better to use violence after it has been attempted or has been a threat that is reasonable to believe would be carried out.”
Once again, if you stalk me, pursue me and confront me (as I posited earlier), don’t you think that’s a ‘reasonable threat’ and worth responding to? I do.
“Can’t let it slide you did bring up my mother. You called me an SOB. An Arrogant SOB if I recall now what would those three letters stand for?”
I sure did, and if you think that colloquialism was intended as a dig at your mother, then IMO you’re just looking for more fight material.
“Fine if you think I’m arrogant, I think you are violence obsessed.”
Excellent. Shame you don’t have anything to base your supposition on but your own repeated misstatements of my position. (laughing)
“But you don’t know my mom, so therefore you can’t know if I’m an SOB or not. Unless you just wanted to take a cheap dig at me by invoking my mom”
Are you a professional hair-splitter, or do you just do it for a hobby? (laughing)
It’s pretty clear in the passage to which you refer that I am speaking about YOU and not your mother:
“Is that why Trayvon Martin got shot? Some arrogant, demanding SOB like you came running up to him in the night and demanded that he answer for his presence — and now Martin’s dead because he didn’t kiss Zimmerman’s butt? Is that what you’re asking for? People should kiss your butt or else they deserve to be shot dead?”
Now that’s pretty clearly about YOU, and not your mother. Any other spin you want to put on it is irrelevant to me.
Tom Middleton
April 20th, 2012
5:02 pm
It’s perfect, Jay. I mean, what should “We The People” do to remedy the “nothing to trust” world around us, become ourselves what we’re looking for in others? Wait, this is the Golden Rule, isn’t it? Yup, and it’s right on time.
Standby for an America better, stronger, and more liberating of the unlimited human spirit (freedom) than even our beloved Founders thought possible. The best of our existence is still ahead of us for sure ad infinitum, and it should be starting just about… NOW!
Tom Middleton
April 20th, 2012
6:52 pm
Halleluy’all,,,lol!
independent thinker
April 20th, 2012
8:06 pm
and now we can’t trust the secret service to keep their you know what in their pants while protecting the president. It is all Bill Clinton’s fault.
ld
April 20th, 2012
8:59 pm
It was not “lost” it was shredded by reality.
In Nothing We Trust – Ron Fournier and Sophie Quinton – NationalJournal.com « Ye Olde Soapbox
April 23rd, 2012
12:40 pm
[...] America 2012: ‘In Nothing We Trust’? (blogs.ajc.com) [...]
Pam
April 24th, 2012
8:26 pm
Voters don’t vote their conscience. Voters vote for people they don’t like hoping their candidate will defeat someone they like even less. So we elect people we don’t like who have no conscience. Vote your conscience.