Palin should be in jail. The Right bias.

#1
utgibbs

utgibbs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
7,394
Likes
0
#1
Were Sarah Palin in the Animal Rights movement - instead of a moose "hunter" - she would already be in jail for her website.

Doubt it?

This case is being appealed to the US Supreme Court:

U.S. v. SHAC 7 | Center for Constitutional Rights

The crime? "Animal Enterprise Terrorism" (my bold) - hosting a website listing the names and addresses of people associated with Huntingdon Life Sciences that might influence others.

Sarah Palin should be in jail - plain and simple.

Let's not talk about the 800lbs gorilla in the parlor; the bias is absolute. The Bill of Rights is in tatters. We have earned history's censure.
 
#2
#2
I haven't even mentioned the abortion clinic websites, MG.

The Right is ascendant. Why is it angry?
 
#3
#3
utgibbs said:
I haven't even mentioned the abortion clinic websites, MG.

The Right is ascendant. Why is it angry?
Click to expand...

What is wrong with you? Did you eat paint chips as a child?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#5
#5
San Diego Vol said:
What is wrong with you? Did you eat paint chips as a child?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Help me understand the difference between what Sarah Palin has done, and what these animal cruelty activists have done (and several abortion clinic webmasters).

Was the SHAC-7s internet crime not putting a rifle scope over the names of the HLS employees? Did they fail to cross out the name of a murdered doctor with an animated jpg of champagne popping?

I hope the Supreme Court hears this. They don't have the guts though - and with PS gone, it is a Kangaroo Court at best. But we suffer as our precious Bill of Rights lay in tatters.
 
#6
#6
krugmantucson.jpg
















reagan_to_palin_logo.jpg
 
#9
#9
so you want to put people in jail for what they say on their websites? i don't get it.
 
#10
#10
I actually see what you are trying to say utgibbs, but you've communicated it in such an inflammatory way that the staunchly conservative are immediately on defense and thus will just act like it's just insane banter.
 
#11
#11
volinbham said:
so you want to put people in jail for what they say on their websites? i don't get it.
Click to expand...

He's trying to say the opposite. He just communicated very poorly. He's saying the 1st amendment isn't being applied evenly (I think), and these animal rights folk are getting treated very differently than some typically conservative groups.
 
#12
#12
IPorange said:
He's trying to say the opposite. He just communicated very poorly. He's saying the 1st amendment isn't being applied evenly (I think), and these animal rights folk are getting treated very differently than some typically conservative groups.
Click to expand...

I get that but he's presenting along the lines that everyone should be jailed rather than none of them should be jailed.

To see if they are not being treated equally I'd have to be more familiar with the cases. I kinda doubt they are apples to apples comparisons.
 
#13
#13
It seems the difference is that the animal website people seemed to have intimate and immediate knowledge of things, thus implicating them... But no evidence was presented so I do think their first amendment rights were violated.
 
#14
#14
Without Palin's website there is no way the shooter could have figured out who voted for the healthcare bill. No way at all.
 
#15
#15
Even if this were a crime are we really going to act like a politician getting away with something is result of "right bias"?
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#17
#17
But I don't think there was any sort of crime possible in any of the examples he listed, including the animal cruelty folks.
 
#18
#18
IPorange said:
But I don't think there was any sort of crime possible in any of the examples he listed, including the animal cruelty folks.
Click to expand...

They might have made some threatening calls and done some not so peaceful protests. If they encouraged or spoke openly about it, that might be construed as the "conduct" the AEPA refers to.

I didn't read much of the article, though.

Upon further glancing, it appears the AEPA does not differentiate between lawful and unlawful protest? Seems odd.
 
#19
#19
utgibbs said:
Were Sarah Palin in the Animal Rights movement - instead of a moose "hunter" - she would already be in jail for her website.

Doubt it?

This case is being appealed to the US Supreme Court:

U.S. v. SHAC 7 | Center for Constitutional Rights

The crime? "Animal Enterprise Terrorism" (my bold) - hosting a website listing the names and addresses of people associated with Huntingdon Life Sciences that might influence others.

Sarah Palin should be in jail - plain and simple.

Let's not talk about the 800lbs gorilla in the parlor; the bias is absolute. The Bill of Rights is in tatters. We have earned history's censure.
Click to expand...

You have the reasonability of a rabid dog. I'm glad so many on this board see you for what you are.
 
#20
#20
A number of the GOP-leaning board regulars have been saying for awhile now that Palin is the best thing that could ever happen for Obama 2012.

I am starting to see real merit to that contention.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#21
#21
lawgator1 said:
A number of the GOP-leaning board regulars have been saying for awhile now that Palin is the best thing that could ever happen for Obama 2012.

I am starting to see real merit to that contention.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

She will guarantee an Obama 2nd term. I think some powerful interests are keeping her afloat just for that reason.

Although I would disagree with you on the reasons for this.
 
#22
#22
azVolFan said:
You have the reasonability of a rabid dog. I'm glad so many on this board see you for what you are.
Click to expand...

Didn't know defending the Bill of Rights was "rabid dog reasonability." I suppose the board knows EXACTLY where you stand now.
 
#23
#23
lawgator1 said:
A number of the GOP-leaning board regulars have been saying for awhile now that Palin is the best thing that could ever happen for Obama 2012.

I am starting to see real merit to that contention.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

If she wins the primary, I would be wholeheartedly shocked. I don't doubt, though, that she would be offered the position of VP, again, in order to placate the Tea Party members.

I would be surprised, as well, if she were offered a cabinet position.
 
#24
#24
IPorange said:
He's trying to say the opposite. He just communicated very poorly. He's saying the 1st amendment isn't being applied evenly (I think), and these animal rights folk are getting treated very differently than some typically conservative groups.
Click to expand...

You've nailed it, IP. I didn't think it was too hard to make connections, but you know this forum better than I do. :hi:

I'm not sure I'm outside the tenor of the board though, to be fair. Some of the OP titles on this page inspired mine.
 
#25
#25
utgibbs said:
She will guarantee an Obama 2nd term. I think some powerful interests are keeping her afloat just for that reason.

Although I would disagree with you on the reasons for this.
Click to expand...

My reasoning is that the people who would vote for her are the super motivated right wing of the GOP, who will definitely be voting and voting against Obama no matter what. Basically the same people who would vote for her today would vote for her then, but no more people would. And so she can't expand her base at this point.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top