Political Satire and Political Jokes - Part 3

IP is the place for boisterous political discussion, but please remember, the Rules still apply, especially with regards to Personal Attacks. These and other inappropriate posts will be removed without notification.

Moderators: Mick, TheGingerMan

Forum rules
IP is the place for boisterous political discussion, but please remember, the Rules still apply, especially with regards to Personal Attacks. These and other inappropriate posts will be removed without notification.

Re: Political Satire and Political Jokes - Part 3

Postby Winston Smith » 21 May 2012, 08:01

Tigerman wrote:
Winston Smith wrote:Which one would you rather be following you on a dark street at night giving you stink eye and carrying a concealed weapon?


Both would sort of spook me out. But, of course you are aware that the pic of GZ used above is at least 7 years old and that GZ now is a mere shadow of his former self, in terms of size? I dunno? Ms. Warren there, why, she's a Cherokee! I wouldn't want her stalking me!


Did you see this one T-man? Things aren't looking good for homeboy. You should be thinking about advising "your client" to seriously consider taking a plea bargain right about now:

Marissa Alexander had never been arrested before she fired a bullet at a wall one day in 2010 to scare off her husband when she felt he was threatening her. Nobody got hurt, but this month a northeast Florida judge was bound by state law to sentence her to 20 years in prison.

Alexander, a 31-year-old mother of a toddler and 11-year-old twins, knew it was coming. She had claimed self-defense, tried to invoke Florida’s “stand your ground” law and rejected plea deals that could have gotten her a much shorter sentence. A jury found her guilty as charged: aggravated assault with a deadly weapon. Because she fired a gun while committing a felony, Florida’s mandatory-minimum gun law dictated the 20-year sentence.


That's 25-to-life under Florida law if you kill someone with a deadly weapon while committing a felony.
"If you were smart in 1807 you moved to London, if you were smart in 1907 you moved to New York City, and if you are smart in 2007 you move to Asia."
-- Jim Rogers
Winston Smith
Sidewalk Geomancer (lù biān suàn mìng tān)
Sidewalk Geomancer (lù biān suàn mìng tān)
 
Posts: 1067
Joined: 24 Sep 2011, 09:44
Location: Room 101
5 Recommends(s)
50 Recognized(s)



Re: Political Satire and Political Jokes - Part 3

Postby Tigerman » 21 May 2012, 08:43

Winston Smith wrote:Did you see this one T-man? Things aren't looking good for homeboy. You should be thinking about advising "your client" to seriously consider taking a plea bargain right about now


What is your problem? None of these people is my client.
As it is, we seem to regard it as a positive objection to a reasoner that he has taken one side or the other. We regard it (in other words) as a positive objection to a reasoner that he has contrived to reach the object of his reasoning. We call a man a bigot or a slave of dogma because he is a thinker who has thought thoroughly and to a definite end.

From: All Things Considered - The Error of Impartiality
Forumosan avatar
Tigerman
Guan Yin (Guānyīn)
 
Posts: 17539
Joined: 17 Sep 2002, 12:09
248 Recommends(s)
181 Recognized(s)



Re: Political Satire and Political Jokes - Part 3

Postby Winston Smith » 21 May 2012, 10:01

Tigerman wrote:
Winston Smith wrote:Did you see this one T-man? Things aren't looking good for homeboy. You should be thinking about advising "your client" to seriously consider taking a plea bargain right about now


What is your problem? None of these people is my client.


You're right. That quip did cross the line. My apology.

My problem is with neo-vigilanteism. The world has seen enough of lynch mobs and people taking the law into their own hands and appointing themselves judge, jury and executioner. There should be no place in the 21st century for a revivalism of that dark side of history.

I like the way Superman put it last year when he decided he wasn't going to be seen as part of an international lynch mob any longer:

Great Caesar's ghost! The world's most famous champion of truth, justice and the American way says he intends to renounce his US citizenship.

Superman makes the shocking pronouncement in this week's Action Comics No. 900.

"Truth, justice and the American way - it's not enough anymore," the Man of Steel tells the president's National Security Advisor.

"I intend to speak before the United Nations tomorrow and inform them that I am renouncing my US citizenship."

And no, he's not giving up his citizenship because of health care reform or high taxes. He made the declaration after his protection of protestors in Iran becomes an international incident.

"I'm tired of having my actions construed as instruments of US policy," he says, explaining that he wants to help wherever and whenever he's needed. "I've been thinking too small. I realize that now."


Image
"If you were smart in 1807 you moved to London, if you were smart in 1907 you moved to New York City, and if you are smart in 2007 you move to Asia."
-- Jim Rogers
Winston Smith
Sidewalk Geomancer (lù biān suàn mìng tān)
Sidewalk Geomancer (lù biān suàn mìng tān)
 
Posts: 1067
Joined: 24 Sep 2011, 09:44
Location: Room 101
5 Recommends(s)
50 Recognized(s)



Re: Political Satire and Political Jokes - Part 3

Postby Tigerman » 21 May 2012, 10:59

Winston Smith wrote:My problem is with neo-vigilanteism.


The prosecution will need to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that this was a case of 2nd degree murder. IMO, the prosecution will have a very difficult time doing so. IM further O, I am very happy that we place such a burden on the prosecutor.

If neo-vigilanteism is bad, I think a state with too much power is worse.

I also like that we are permitted to defend ourselves. Have been since Roman times. Rome. A long time ago. There has never been a suspension of this right.
As it is, we seem to regard it as a positive objection to a reasoner that he has taken one side or the other. We regard it (in other words) as a positive objection to a reasoner that he has contrived to reach the object of his reasoning. We call a man a bigot or a slave of dogma because he is a thinker who has thought thoroughly and to a definite end.

From: All Things Considered - The Error of Impartiality
Forumosan avatar
Tigerman
Guan Yin (Guānyīn)
 
Posts: 17539
Joined: 17 Sep 2002, 12:09
248 Recommends(s)
181 Recognized(s)



Re: Political Satire and Political Jokes - Part 3

Postby Winston Smith » 21 May 2012, 12:50

Tigerman wrote:
Winston Smith wrote:My problem is with neo-vigilanteism.


The prosecution will need to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that this was a case of 2nd degree murder. IMO, the prosecution will have a very difficult time doing so. IM further O, I am very happy that we place such a burden on the prosecutor.

If neo-vigilanteism is bad, I think a state with too much power is worse.

I also like that we are permitted to defend ourselves. Have been since Roman times. Rome. A long time ago. There has never been a suspension of this right.


Under Florida law if he's simply convicted of aggravated assault it's a mandatory 25-to-life sentence:

The state’s “10-20-life” law was implemented in 1999 and credited with helping to lower the violent crime rate. Anyone who shows a gun in the commission of certain felonies gets an automatic 10 years in prison. Fire the gun, and it’s an automatic 20 years. Shoot and wound someone, and it’s 25 years to life.
"If you were smart in 1807 you moved to London, if you were smart in 1907 you moved to New York City, and if you are smart in 2007 you move to Asia."
-- Jim Rogers
Winston Smith
Sidewalk Geomancer (lù biān suàn mìng tān)
Sidewalk Geomancer (lù biān suàn mìng tān)
 
Posts: 1067
Joined: 24 Sep 2011, 09:44
Location: Room 101
5 Recommends(s)
50 Recognized(s)



Re: Political Satire and Political Jokes - Part 3

Postby Tigerman » 21 May 2012, 13:21

Winston Smith wrote:Under Florida law if he's simply convicted of aggravated assault it's a mandatory 25-to-life sentence


The state is going to have to overcome GZ's argument that he acted in defense of his self. That will not be easy.
As it is, we seem to regard it as a positive objection to a reasoner that he has taken one side or the other. We regard it (in other words) as a positive objection to a reasoner that he has contrived to reach the object of his reasoning. We call a man a bigot or a slave of dogma because he is a thinker who has thought thoroughly and to a definite end.

From: All Things Considered - The Error of Impartiality
Forumosan avatar
Tigerman
Guan Yin (Guānyīn)
 
Posts: 17539
Joined: 17 Sep 2002, 12:09
248 Recommends(s)
181 Recognized(s)



Re: Political Satire and Political Jokes - Part 3

Postby Icon » 15 Jun 2012, 17:52

A page about Shell's drilling the Artic. Fight fire with humor -or sarcasm, in this case. have a look:

http://arcticready.com/social/gallery
"Lo urgente no deja tiempo para lo importante". Mafalda

"Nice guy? Who gives a shit? If you want to work here, close."
Forumosan avatar
Icon
Maitreya Buddha (Mílèfó)
 
Posts: 14695
Joined: 09 Feb 2006, 18:03
Location: Xindian
630 Recommends(s)
501 Recognized(s)



Re: Political Satire and Political Jokes - Part 3

Postby Tigerman » 15 Jun 2012, 22:00

Image

Fauxcahontas
As it is, we seem to regard it as a positive objection to a reasoner that he has taken one side or the other. We regard it (in other words) as a positive objection to a reasoner that he has contrived to reach the object of his reasoning. We call a man a bigot or a slave of dogma because he is a thinker who has thought thoroughly and to a definite end.

From: All Things Considered - The Error of Impartiality
Forumosan avatar
Tigerman
Guan Yin (Guānyīn)
 
Posts: 17539
Joined: 17 Sep 2002, 12:09
248 Recommends(s)
181 Recognized(s)



Re: Political Satire and Political Jokes - Part 3

Postby BigJohn » 16 Jun 2012, 02:20

Tigerman wrote:
Winston Smith wrote:My problem is with neo-vigilanteism.


The prosecution will need to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that this was a case of 2nd degree murder. IMO, the prosecution will have a very difficult time doing so. IM further O, I am very happy that we place such a burden on the prosecutor.

If neo-vigilanteism is bad, I think a state with too much power is worse.

I also like that we are permitted to defend ourselves. Have been since Roman times. Rome. A long time ago. There has never been a suspension of this right.


Really? A slave had the right to defend himself from his owner? A non-citizen had the right to defend himself from a citizen? Or only certain people had the right to defend themselves against certain people? Such as a citizen from another citizen, a citizen from a non-citizen etc.

I'm just saying, ancient Rome was no bastion of liberty, by modern standards at any rate. :2cents:
Forumosan avatar
BigJohn
National Security Advisor (guójiā ānquán gùwèn)
National Security Advisor (guójiā ānquán gùwèn)
 
Posts: 4618
Joined: 25 Jun 2005, 01:45
Location: Lost in time, lost in space...and meaning
107 Recognized(s)



Re: Political Satire and Political Jokes - Part 3

Postby Tigerman » 16 Jun 2012, 09:01

Tigerman wrote:
Winston Smith wrote:My problem is with neo-vigilanteism.


The prosecution will need to prove, beyond a reasonable doubt, that this was a case of 2nd degree murder. IMO, the prosecution will have a very difficult time doing so. IM further O, I am very happy that we place such a burden on the prosecutor.

If neo-vigilanteism is bad, I think a state with too much power is worse.

I also like that we are permitted to defend ourselves. Have been since Roman times. Rome. A long time ago. There has never been a suspension of this right.


BigJohn wrote:Really? A slave had the right to defend himself from his owner? A non-citizen had the right to defend himself from a citizen? Or only certain people had the right to defend themselves against certain people? Such as a citizen from another citizen, a citizen from a non-citizen etc.

I'm just saying, ancient Rome was no bastion of liberty, by modern standards at any rate. :2cents:


BJ, of course slaves didn't have many rights. Obviously I am remarking on the fact that the concept of the right of self defense has existed since Roman times and that as far as I know, all common law nations have long adopted the same.
As it is, we seem to regard it as a positive objection to a reasoner that he has taken one side or the other. We regard it (in other words) as a positive objection to a reasoner that he has contrived to reach the object of his reasoning. We call a man a bigot or a slave of dogma because he is a thinker who has thought thoroughly and to a definite end.

From: All Things Considered - The Error of Impartiality
Forumosan avatar
Tigerman
Guan Yin (Guānyīn)
 
Posts: 17539
Joined: 17 Sep 2002, 12:09
248 Recommends(s)
181 Recognized(s)



FRIENDLY REMINDER
   Please remember that Forumosa is not responsible for the content that appears on the other side of links that Forumosans post on our forums. As a discussion website, we encourage open and frank debate. We have learned that the most effective way to address questionable claims or accusations on Forumosa is by engaging in a sincere and constructive conversation. To make this website work, we must all feel safe in expressing our opinions, this also means backing up any claims with hard facts, including links to other websites.
   Please also remember that one should not believe everything one reads on the Internet, particularly from websites whose content cannot be easily verified or substantiated. Use your common sense and do not hesitate to ask for proof.
PreviousNext




Proceed to International Politics



Who is online

Forumosans browsing this forum: No Forumosans and 4 visitors

Live every day as if it were your last and then some day you'll be right -- HH "BREAKER" MORANT