Comments by jablake (page 6)

For example, you blither on about this being the greatest country in the world or something like that and then you basically say the U.S. courts allow the MURDER of millions of babies every year. Sounds like a damn nasty country if you truly believed that it was MURDER. I guess all those MURDERED babies aren't too important after all. Just another joke for hypocritical so called conservatives, but unfortornately with real victims; MILLIONS OF MURDERED BABIES YEARLY. And, then you have the nerve to yap about accountably when a person allegedly violated the law some 3 decades earlier? Sad. :( You need to face a sentence ranging from 42 days if the judge likes you to 50 years if he doesn't. And, then I'd be eager to hear your opinion on so called "accountablity."

"I would expect no more of you." I would expect and lot more of you and am repeatedly disappointed.

"Just seeing if you would even comment on something so elemental! Not worth my time!" DUH! And, yes it was worth your time. :)

"I'm wondering if this guy would get the pass so many seem willing to extend to him were he say... a Catholic Priest or a school teacher or a police officer or a Doctor or a College athlete or your neighbor... I'm thinking not so much... " More of a pass. But, the more rural setting that I was raised age wasn't the big bugaboo assuming the "child" had reached puberty. The issue was more about family and an extended family at that. "Of course, I'm not a fan of 44 year old men who exploit, manipulate and then have sex with 13 year old girls-- but that's just me." I'm not a fan of people who lump all generational sex as being a crime. Not to say an old man or old woman having sex with a "child" couldn't be viewed as a crime in my community, but it would depend on the individual facts of each case. Apparently looking at individual cases is just too difficult so the "sexual predator" is created along with a fear frenzy. Brilliant, if you appreciate a prison state. Also, it seems almost impossible that an old woman having sex with a young male would ever be seen as a crime in my community. The young boy would typically be viewed as being lucky! In this sick society it now prison time for the older woman and a phoney label of "sexual predator." Oh and perhaps this gentleman actually comitted a real crime----I wouldn't presume it even if he pled guilty! Or even if he voluntarily admitted to sex with a 13 year old child----the relationship between him and the child would be very important, whether drugs were used would be very important, knowledge of the parents would be very important, etc. etc. etc. When the government is threatening a person with hundreds of years the best course maybe to do a plea even if innocent especially if it is doubtful a judge will allow a real defense.

"The sun will "rise" in the east tomorrow morning." That is like saying the Constitution is a joke.

"Try reading! I said, 'As a conservative, I can see right and wrong and I stand by my principals. I believe there is little gray area that liberals and moderates like to delve into.' That is MY OPINION!" I read and you jump to the law as some type of moral support. Makes absolutely no sense. You could get convicted on gun charges by a court and sentenced to 50 years. So because a court found that you violated the law, did the "crime," accountability means you serving 50 years? Or, even 30 days? To say he broke the law! As if that was bad is beyond absurd because the system is corrupt. He must be held accountable! Really? Since when did this corrupt courts gain such stature?

"I read this as him seeing the Constitution as an obstacle, and as an obstacle, then negative to his agenda, without doubt, since he wishes to change it! If it isn't static, then why bother? Make up the rules as you go along. Sad that some "think" this way." Interesting because I read it as the Constitution being NO obstacle because essentially you can make up the rules as you go along. It is like with the birth certificate issue---why should President Obama address the merits? The courts pretty much vindicated without saying anything substantive his tactic of avoiding getting to the truth; it's a game. The rules of the game pretty much dictate dishonesty and theft. Under that set of rules why would anyone give a crap what the law or the Constitution supposedly say? I think the Supreme Court has heard only two or some very insignificant number of Second Amendment cases in the last 75 years and essentially that Amendment offers people zero rights. It is a joke like the rest of the Constitution. So why would people respect the courts or the legislature or the executive. I guess they support wholesale fraud or are too stupid to see the non-stop fraud.

Oh well, my google search unfortunately gives President Obama a clean bill of health as to his viewing the Constitution as negative (he did mention something about negative liberties---that just means the individual is supposed to be protected *from* the government). Hopefully, how will ride to the rescue with some hard hit proof that President Obama sees the Constitution as negative and as an obstacle. Seems more like the Constitution is putty and meaningless.

"BTW, you wing-nuts would do well to just ignore jablake...he's been off his rocker for quite a while now. Just don't respond to him!" Sound advice, but do you need to insult 'em when giving it? :) Anyway, I think how was correct concerning President Obama's comments that "the constitution is 'negative' and an 'obstacle' to be overcome." Hopefully, how has the references for you although it is probably pointless. Worth a try at least, imo.

"Anyone who thinks the destruction of America is good is either ignorant, evil, or both." Or believes in good old fashioned moral values such as freedom of association and family and guns and disfiguring the mark of the beast and two wrongs may make right and the like in continuum. Or believes in diversity, peace, and just deserts. Or is religious and follows the will of God-----think save all the millions of babies that would be murdered under color of law; think protect the innocent villagers who wonder why the evil Satan destroys their homes, their families, their communities when as any child or even imbecile knows only the criminals themselves should see execution or other punishment after a fair and open trial. Sorry, but America is unclean in the extreme---but, President Obama being a great man may be able to clean up the filth.

Yes, I seem to recall something about President Obama considering the Constitution "negative" and an "obstacle" to be overcome---not sure where I read those tidbits. So your position and probably that of many who oppose President Obama is that at the very least he is ignorant. Well, that is possible. Even a highly educated and intelligent person can be ignorant. The nation already seems a good deal socialistic and the thing is once the foundation of the money was switched from a "hard to fiat debt" socialism seemed both inevetable and necessary. If new dollars are going to be created essentially out of thin air, then there should be a means to share all the new dollars. BTW, it would seem offhand that limiting a nation's productive capacity to its gold or silver stockpiles is not only old fashioned, but deranged. The currency switch changed the game and thus news rules and new moralities need be adopted or taken by force. Sure, creating lots of new money out of thin air allows for massive productivity, but those who don't have access or means to acquire these rapidily increasing number of dollars risk losing their real assets to the money creation game. They should just accept their fate? No, I think they should demand a reasonable share of the new money---at least enough so that the new money doesn't take their real assets.

Well, at the clubs I go to the rule is against being a prude. Rightfully there is hostility towards prudes. Enough of that filth type thinking in the general society----the last thing needed is for dancers to import it. Ideally, people should be free to open their own clubs and set different rules. A club without extras could, imo, be a lot of fun.

Hi how, So your position is that President Obama doesn't desire the destruction of America?

"Polanski had reached a deal with Los Angeles prosecutors to plead guilty to the sex charge and receive 42 days in prison for psychiatric tests -- time he had already served. But Polanski believed the judge might overrule the plea and sentence him to as much as 50 years in jail." http://movies.yahoo.com/news/movies.reuters.com/polanski-appeals-against-extradition-over-sex-case-reuters So accountablity means he could receive as little as 42 days (time he already served) or 50 years at the whim of a judge? Yes indeed this is a nasty vile country and Roman was smart and ethical to feel such so called "justice" and filth of law. Perhaps my faith in the legal process is misplaced, but this time Roman may actually get real justice.

"BTW, most people voted for him, ergo, he is the president." Clubber, imo, you need to get working on that gray area ASAP!!! The freaking entire country could have voted for him, but if he is not a natural born citizen, then NO in way shape or form should he be considered the President. Remember conservatives are supposed to believe not only in the rule of law, the more importantly the Constitution. Or maybe your a conservative like Scalia---the Constitution only applies if doing so doesn't do too much harm. IOWs. the Constitution is a joke.

Little gray area. Wonderful. Just wonderful. If the courts hold that there essentially are no 2nd Amendment rights, then well those rights don't exist---no gray area. And, if the court says yes there are 2nd Amendment rights, but they can be infringed---no gray area. If the courts hold abortion isn't murder---no gray area. If the courts hold abortion is murder---no gray area. If the courts hold that you don't have a right to fire a bullet into the ground to stop a rogue police officer from beating your son to death---then no gray area. If the courts hold that yes you can fire up to 2 shots into the ground to stop a rogue police officer from beating your son to death---then no gray area. Lawyers say don't cooperate with the police---then no gray area. Pretty pathetic way of thinking, imo.

"He broke the law and should 'pay' the consequences of his actions." His lawyers and a judge may see it far differently. :) Hell, he should get damages from the dimwitted taxpayers plus his lawyers' fees reimbursed in full.

Hi Clubber, And, I will eagerly await the next election. :) I assume by then he will "regain" his popularity in a landslide. Sounds like you are accusing President Obama and his pals of high crimes. He is an angel in my book and probably 99% of my stripper buddies and 70% of my neighbors would concur vociferously. :)

A neighbor had what I'd call a "domestic" problem with a young lady. He's pissed as all hell that I didn't call the police against her. I tell him that my eyesight ain't too good (true) and I have trouble walking (true) and he is this lil lunatic raging bull. Then he got really pissed when I explained it was "domestic." He is like what is domestic? I said your fucking the young lady and that makes it "domestic." Oops, now he is really flipping yelling that there is no such thing as "domestic"! He is going to tell the police and I'm totally crazy and sick and stupid, blah, blah, blah. What a nut job---he could almost be a relative he was acting so stupid. Anyway, I'm thinking the police given how nasty and vile the country has become will surely agree with him. And, they'll have their ears pinned to be busting the young lady to send her to a government prison. :( A very positive shock. The neighbor came and apologized. That was a wholly unexpected. Turned out both the male and female officers had values that were similar to mind as far as it being "domestic" and not a real crime. So 2 pleasant surprises. The neighbor can't comprehend that is should make any difference that he is fucking the young lady----nope, just send her thru the meat grinder of the justice system. I don't understand his values and really, I'd rather just avoid those type values. Oh, he threatened not to call the police when I needed 'em! I laughed and said that is a reward. He didn't comprehend. I said look, if there is a domestic problem and the police actually wanted to help i.e. cool everyone down and talk some sense into our heads wonderful, but that is a gamble I'd rather not take. Best they stay far away rather than create evermore misery via the justice system.

When I was young my mentor was a good ol' boy. The South please, remember. Anyway, I see this wild looking old man with these young babes about I'd guess 13 or 14. It wouldn't even occur to me any "crime" was being comitted by the old man to these "children." Nor did the police or anyone else seem to see a "crime." The whole idea was completely absurd because the young girls were looking very happy and the old man was definitely 100% happy---like he be in heaven. :) My immediate reaction to being informed that the wild looking old man was my mentor's father was NO WAY! Stop joking. Sure 'nough my mentor confirmed that it was his lovable old Dad. He was impressed by how much the ladies----women and girls who'd reached puberty---just loved his Dad. He was telling incredible stories about his Dad's sexual power. Even as a young stud---these stories impressed. Dad was a superman. Alas, my mentor confided that he didn't have nearly as much charm nor more importantly the sexual power. Now to those with your panties in a bunch about young girls enjoying sex with an old man---I have a bone to throw to you that should make you very happy. Happy, happy, happy. Sure his Dad never got abused with sex "crimes," but he did spend more years of life in prison than with the ladies. His Dad was a crazy crime wave---public brawling with his buddies, destruction of public property, tresspassing, extortion . . . and seemingly endless list of crimes. I asked doesn't your Dad learn? Mentor replied that his Dad didn't give a damn what the law said and he'd comit crimes right in front of the police. A true rebel. :) Not too bright, but a true rebel! We need more men like his father.

Hi how, I thought you'd appreciate it and composed it with you in mind. :)

"I claim no conspiracy on Obama's part." That is refreshing.

I sincerely hope that any crime victim, rape or theft or whatever, doesn't need my help. The answer, I'm fairly certain will be NO WAY, NO HOW, FORGET IT. Sad, but when in Rome a person pretty much needs to be doing as the Romans. It is like cooperating with the police----I found it depressing that lawyers seemed to be of the uniform opinion to take the 5th and not cooperate with the police even if you're innocent. Don't help the police is the very clear message and they are the experts. BTW, although I will follow that advice it isn't in my humble opinion always the best course of action for an innocent suspect. Having said that I'm 1) going to listen to the lawyers and 2) play the odds. In a free country, I'd be more than happy to blab non-stop to the police or to the judge or to the imbecile/evil doer who claims rape isn't about sex and further wishes to force such sickness unto me. By a free country that includes a public trial, by a jury of my peers, with full and unfettered right to present my defense and my evidence----these are just bare minimums. Let's add full accountablity from both the judge and prosecutor. No jury? Oh gee, it is just a game to generate lawyers' fees or keep the prison system well stocked. ***BTW, I'd would be very interested in any links to lawyers who advise cooperating with the police.*** I did a google search some time back and the results yielded a big zero. Police officers should be the good guys and you should be eager to cooperate with them---but, the game has become too corrupt to treat 'em as the good guys. Think you're going to get a jury trial? Think you're going to get a speedy trial? Think your going to get the truth? OK, cooperate and it may work at for the best.

Hi how, President Obama openly stating that he wants to FUNDAMENTALLY CHANGE this country doesn't seem like much of a conspiracy---sounds like a campaign promise. Sure a conspiracy could technically be done without secrecy, but that truly ain't how the word is used. It is like if I run for office on the platform of lower taxes with the assistance of like minded individuals and once elected I make good on my platform and lower taxes. It could be claimed that platform of lower taxes was a successful *conspiracy*. That is an abuse of the language---there wasn't any conspiracy, but rather an agenda that was successful. Furthermore, Clubber's words such as "to plot for an evil purpose" emphasizes this isn't a leader merely keeping his word, but of secrecy AND evil. In a similar vein, if President Obama actually *lied* about illegal immigrants and his health care bill----seems imperative that he be confronted--rudely so there is no mistake about the seriousness of the matter---and that definitely no apology be offered. If President Obama actually did *lie*, then he is the one who needs to be apologizing profusely and impeachment would a good idea.

"The only conspiracy involving obama that concerns me is his and his pal's that are conspiring to ruin the greatest country in the world. And before you ask, YES, I do believe the evidence points to his and his 'group of people' joining together to plot for an evil purpose." The sad and funny thing is your statements, supra, are more reasonable and more intelligent and more honorable, than those who push the agenda that rape isn't about sex. LOL! :) President Obama and "his 'group of people' joining together to plot for an evil purpose." Holy cow, those are very aggressive words after taking a few more looks. Maybe you would like to do a little revision to correct or clarify?