Lucky...

Yeah, but keep bitching about how horrible it is in the U.S. Every time you do, you make some of us laugh good and hearty. And see you support my point, as obviously this was pointed at me. You have to go to the ME or Asia to find worse countries, try Western Europe, Canada, some SOuth Pacific Islands, etc... As well, can we talk Chapaquidic? You guys can't get enough throwing a 40-year case up, so let's do it again. Altho it appears not to be malicious, it was covered up and the question of her pregnancy and affair was also present, so was it a hit? Can we talk Marylin Monroe? Iran-Contra? SOme things are partisan, others the dichotomy is class, so to try to justify the corrupt nature of our country by pointing to one of the nastiest regions of the world only supports the claims of others.

But I'll bet you'd piss and moan if a bunch of fucking MORONS showed up to jury duty if YOU were on trial. If you ever want to complain about the quality of the people who make jury decisions like in the OJ Simpson or Robert Blake trials, remind yourself that you like it when smart people can get out of jury duty, and that you think jury duty is beneath you and people should be able to say "fuck you" to doing this civic duty. Trial by a jury of your peers is one of the blessings of a democracy, and you are taking a big shit on it. Nice. As much as I hate the verdict, the OJ verdict was the right one....with that said, of course he was guilty.

Auotmatic excusal, don't worry dude.

Maybe you're a problem child Naw, I have voted, every chance I get, registed with DMV and do everything I can to be public, yet me either. My GF, who works for the cops, gets summoned evry 2-3 years, I don't think it's random. I did get summoned once for lower court, I was working/going to school so I got out of it.

As I watch the cancer fund drive on TV, I can't stop thinking that the US could be the world's hero, instead of the world's villian. We spend >1/2 trillion every year on military operations, if we took 1/2 that, or even 10% of that money and spent it on cancer research we would sooner than later find a cure or at least a stopper to buy time. SO instead of bringing life to the world, we bring death and wonder why we aren't loved....

You guys take things too litterally.

It's great for the Republican Party, as it boosts the Limbaugh GOP fat cat Republicans. If the GOP didn't have the RR, they would not win a lot of elections today.

Not to mention the prpensity of juries to convict at all costs. I witnessed a beer run gone bad, gave witness reports, arrests were made..... 3 or 4 years went by and the prosector called me the day before appearance and asked me to show up the next day, so I did. It had been several years, so I forgot exactly what he looked like. The prosecutor told me to walk into the courtroom and see if I recognized the defendant. He then said, "Oh, and he's the Mexican guy." I walked in to the front, turned around and walked out and on the way saw 1 Hispanic guy there who did look like the same body type, face looked somewhat familiar. So I walked out and said I'm about 80% sure that was him, but I can't be positive. He said OK, I left and no doubt he went to the defense and told him that his witness positively ID'd the defendant.

Automatic disbarment. Watch, "And Justice for All" with Al Pachino.... he does just that with a judge as a client. "...and the judge should go straight to fucking hell......."

The same place the guy who wrote that Palin's views were not 20% of American societies, as I posted several sites claiming poll results to support that.

Short of the actual shooter confessing in open court, would the hearsay of an unrelated lawyer overcome 3 witnesses? They were going to try if Logan received the death penalty because it would be ok to prevent a death. In my mind, if it's ok to prevent a death then it's ok to prevent an innocent man being imprisoned for life. BUT the ethics committee sees it differently and I'm no lawyer. Just seems backwards to me. When we start making exceptions, we lose all integrity. It's a tough one, but I guess the only answer is to give everyone immunity from that crime and move on.

You still have the 8th, 5th, 6th, 14th etc. Confidentiality extends to at least the natural life of the client.

http://earthhopenetwork.net/bush%20art/satans_pet_monkey_bush.jpg

Like last time Yea, for sure...last 2 times...

Right, so all the pro-capital punishment guys saying that we need to expedite the process are really saying we need to execute more innocent people. As well, their standard of 3 people testifying that they personally saw the shooter, hence beyond any doubt as a new standard of proof has been once agin shot in the ass here.

The flip side is that if you retained these guys, paid them to be confidential, then you would want all correspondence kept secret. I'm not saying I agree with what happened, but something has to give. OTOH, let's talk about yet another group of hillbilly trash we call a jury that loves to convict; they seem to get a good feeling when they do.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.i know that congress didn't make the prices but they haven't done anthing to help the situation. What can they do, give us another $600 gift and run the debt up another 100+B? >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>.when Clinton wouldn't allow Anwar drilling, because it would take to long to see results and the dem's won't allow offshore drilling, these have helped condem us to higher prices and more dependancy on foriegn oil. The Republicans act as if we have othr planets to invade, kill the inhabitants and takeover. The ecological damage could be catastrophic. As well, I think the idea is to use everyone else's oil first. >>>>>>>>>>>>>this has caused alot of problems with deficits in the economy. Really? Clinton inherited 290B/yr annual deficit and left 236B surplus, which Bush then immediatley gave it back and then cut taxes and will increase the national debt by 4 1/2 trillion $ in 8 years and Clinton's oil policy is to blame? Yea.....ok. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>drilling won't solve the problems but they will ease the problem until new technology can take over. Parking SUV's would help a lot, I drive a GEO. There are a lot of things we can do, just drilling isn't the answer.

And the conservatives, the ones affraid of change, back then would say the same kinds of things about liberalism. Liberalism hasn't changed as a concept, just that the parties who subscribe to it have changed.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>Probably a good thing for your. But, your description of a "conservative" missed the target. In fact, it's quite stereotypical. And quite correct. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>You mean in the same way the environmentalists say the "debate is over"? The same way the liberal press asks if Sen. Barack Obama is "black enough"? The same way the anti-illegal-immigration crowd are a bunch of racists? Sorry, man, I think I understand the point you were seeking to make, but damn if you didn't just spout a bunch of Howard Dean talking points... HUH? It's not about an idividual, it's about a general concept of change versus tradition. Can you show examples of how the Republicans, in a general sense, want change?

You don't get it. Around the time or Ronald Regan, the GOP began a campaign to vilify the word "liberal" so it became an insult. Now all these years later, you have people on the right equating it to evil! It's good to see the sheep can be led off the cliff still. Yea, I think it was fascist Ronnie who said, "there you go again" in response to Carter and taxes. Then fascist Ronnie went on to get elected and tripple the debt. WHat a POS, him and his conservative politics, or so they fooled people to that accord.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>Now, which of these issues requires an individual to take responsibility for their actions, and which has the government assumming responsibility? And which has the will of the people prevail while the government acts as regulator, as in Socialism?

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>(3) Op-ed: less formal, more conversational. This most closely resembles the majority of my writing style used on SC. Right, that's my stance. I spend waaaaaaaaaaaay too much time here as it is, I'm not going to essay the deal too. >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>My biggest grammar objection/peeve (constrained to usage in the first two styles) is insertion of commas before conjunctions connecting dependent phrases (as opposed to independent clauses). Comma over-use is rampant. No way, I, for one, totally disagree. In fact, I think, commas, as a punctuation tool, are way under-used, that is, in a grammatical sense.

You demand the use of exacting language in every forum of life. If you're at the ballpark, try being fussy franny and see which brother relocates your face. If you're writing a workplace memo, I agree, use proper grammar, punctuation, etc. On posting boards I am relaxed in most cases and use, "tho" as a replacement to, "though." So you need to less anal in certain forums and exacting in others. In this forum you place as much precedence with grammar/punctuation as you do substance, sometimes more and that is ridiculous. You think fat-fingerring and not catching it means the other poster's message is void, which is plain lame. But I hate to hear people using lame language in everyday life, all the time too. I dislike constant slang, ridiculous drawls and accents. The Texas Hillbilly thing is pathetic, East Coast Bwoston dorky and California Cowabunga Dude a joke. Oh, did I forget the Louisiana, 'Who Dat' just plain weird? But lighten up, this is not a term paper and you don't win people over by being a grammar Nazi. As I've said before, I've written legal docs where I spend 1 or 2 hours screening for flow, sequence, syntax and all the goodies. I'm just not going to do that for a forum like this and you pointing it out to try to make people look illitterate comes off as pathetic on your part to most.

Hmm...which President lied so he could send our men to war? Blues, Dave But did he perjure himself in doing so? Not that I'm aware of. Which is worse, lying to a judge in a civil case over a blowjob? Or lying to Congress so you can get permission kill thousands of Americans? Blues, Dave Or lying about revealing the name of a federal agenmt cause her husband made of the dirty chimp.

Which president commutted a guy who lied for him? You don't really want to go there do you? Absolutely and if you go to presidential pardons, be sure to visit youyr beloved fascist Ronnie who pardoned about as many as Clinton. All I'm saying is that Libby lied under oath about something important, was convicted in a CRIMINAL COURT and Bush commuted him, full pardon comming to a theatre near you in mid January. Clinton was indicted in a political proceeding and not convicted....you are out of gas.