Originally Posted By cape cod joe I guess that's to be interpreted as nice as you can be? Meawhile BB after 3 olive branches I've thrown to him NOTHING The abused get no succor.
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder joe, you've GOT to start posting in complete sentences. This E and BB stuff and whatever other abbreviations only you seem to know make your posts unintelligible.
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder And please, you're being calm? The title of this thread has an exclamation point in it, for heaven's sake. Meaning, you started out loudly. You've peppered numerous posts with caps and more exclamation points. For the love of all things grammarian, please dial it down.
Originally Posted By cape cod joe I do apologize for yelling Pass but no one seems to be listening. You continue NOT to address how BB (I don't have time to memorize people's full names here) abused me and why you took his side. It is not intelligible. Why you continue not to say ONE thing agreeing with me or giving me any credit even though I'm all over the map. Then you calmly eschew your dodging the aforementioned issue by adding more criticism to me even my acronyms. I'm a man of motivation i.e I figure out where a person is coming from and I thing I know the case with you but I am trying to keep an open mind. Read your e's to me. Very damming. I give people the intellectual credit that they can follow incomplete sentences so live up to that hope I have Pass. Okay? No !!!!!!!!!!!! Anything else I should say to placate you as my posts should conform to what you want them to be, right?
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder "Anything else I should say to placate you as my posts should conform to what you want them to be, right?" I find it somewhat puzzling that you would it an imposition to write in complete sentences. The following quote from you is very vexing: "I give people the intellectual credit that they can follow incomplete sentences" That has to be one of the most unusual things I've ever read here and believe me, there have been some unusual posts here over time. If your sentence is incomplete it would naturally follow your idea or thought is as well, and I would think the last thing you want is for anyone to put words in your mouth and presume what you meant. To that end, I'm not going to try and guess who or what you mean by BB or any over such thing. Unless you think we're psychic, it would just lead to more acrimony. Speaking of which, I'm sorry you feel you're not getting any credit, but for what, anyway? Tom Sawyer in post 248 put it as succintly as anyone could. If you can't grasp that concept, I can't help you, nor grant you any "credit". Simply because we apparently don't see eye to eye doesn't mean me or anyone else is "bashing" you. Frontier justice went away a long time ago. We don't send posses out to grab a guy from jail and string him up because the menfolk want to protect their wimmen. We're a nation of laws and the judge in Vermont followed them. Fine, you don't like what he did. Likely, he doesn't either, but he's not create new law from the trial bench. That's what appellate courts and the legislatures are about. As I said much earlier, vent your anger at the Vermont lawmakers for giving that judge a pellet gun instead of a rifle. Getting all bent at that judge does absolutely nothing.
Originally Posted By ADMIN <font color="#FF0000">Message removed by an administrator. <a href="MsgBoard-Rules.asp" target="_blank">Click here</a> for the LaughingPlace.com Community Standards.</font>
Originally Posted By FaMulan I give people the intellectual credit that they can follow incomplete sentences so live up to that hope I have Pass. << Then you obviously never took a class in newpaper writing. When I was working on my Bacheler of Arts in Newspaper Journalism, I was told that reporters needed to write to a *sixth grade* level in order for readers to understand their stories. I've since heard that has decreased. Complete sentences and following a train of thought will more clearly get your point across than run-ons, incomplete sentences and poor grammar will. That said, I echo STPH, that we are a country of laws and if you don't like the law of the state you live in quit griping about it on the internet and do something to change the law.
Originally Posted By cape cod joe I'm trying and I received a D in my writing class in college but my mensa scores were a bit better. My medium is verbal.
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder Post 258- you two go and enjoy yourselves. Immensely. Your posts make my head hurt.
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder "I'm trying and I received a D in my writing class in college but my mensa scores were a bit better. My medium is verbal." Must not respond, must try and behave......
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder joe, for some reason, has decided to expand the thread he started into something more.
Originally Posted By Beaumandy <<I thought we were talking about Vermont and the O'Reily factor?>> What more is there to talk about? We have people on here who think giving a child rapist parole after a whole big 2 months in jail is perfectly fine. I rest my case with liberlism being a mental disorder.
Originally Posted By JeffG >> "What more is there to talk about? We have people on here who think giving a child rapist parole after a whole big 2 months in jail is perfectly fine." << I haven't seen anyone say any such thing. What several people here have pointed out is that the Vermont laws currently have serious limitations when it comes to dealing with this type of crime. This particular judge had to make a very difficult choice with the tools that were available to them. He may very well have felt that it would be best to lock this guy away forever, but the law doesn't allow him to do that. I really see this thread as a prime example of what is wrong with sensationalist pundits like O'Reilly. Here is a very serious issue that is very much in need of some thoughtful and rational debate and reform. There is a definite need for study and discussion of the question of punishment versus rehabilitation and how to find the right balance between the two in the law. Instead, though, we are getting nearly hysterical ranting that is much more focused on casting blame than on actually taking a serious look at the issue. We have O'Reilly fanning the flames by trying to villainize not only the judge, but even the entire state of Vermont. Of course, as is par for the course with O'Reilly and his type, we are also seeing a healthy dose of the nonsensical attempts to blame everything on "liberals", particularly ironic since the judge in question is a highly conservative Republican appointee. I think what is most disturbing of all about this is the fact that O'Reilly is pretty blatantly sensationalizing a serious issue in order to generate more attention for himself and higher ratings for his TV show and network. In this very thread, we have seen this pretty clearly reflected by his fans. O'Reilly's constant emphasis on himself as the only guardian of the "truth" results in this constant argument that those who don't watch his show can't truly understand the issue. In this thread, people who have based their interpretation of the facts on original sources such as the actual court documents and the text of Vermont law are getting dismissed as uninformed simply because they determined those sources to be more reliable than O'Reilly. -Jeff
Originally Posted By cape cod joe O'Reilly Jeff, is the only one who got people to move unlike the cumbuya Kennedy Gore crowd who want to discuss it and help the rapist reform. We need O'Reilly for action and both sides. Relentlessly he presents BOTH sides of every issue. Give me an example when he doesn't? Oh I forgot, no one watches the truth, I mean, the Factor.
Originally Posted By StillThePassHolder Jeff, I know we don't always agree, but thank you for that. A much needed injection of common sense.
Originally Posted By cape cod joe As usual pass NO examples just generic balogna. I'm waiting for e.g.'s of how Bill doesn't show both sides? I can't wait till tomorrow as all H E double hockey sticks broke out this weekend in Vt. over this "very serious subject" JEFF. Don't watch the show as maybe you may have to say "Yes Bill did produce positive action." You people who criticize the factor with no eg's are people I don't take seriously at all.
