« ROUND Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next

Re: clo... 

By: Decomposed in ROUND | Recommend this post (1)
Tue, 27 Mar 12 7:19 PM | 42 view(s)
Boardmark this board | De's Test Board
Msg. 40000 of 45510
(This msg. is a reply to 39999 by Decomposed)

Jump:
Jump to board:
Jump to msg. #

BTW, I raised this issue of you being too quick to condemn people on 7-1-2011, right here on Round:  
#msg-634583


'By 5/16/2011, clo had already passed judgement, writing "The judge held this scumbag without bail!" Wow! Only two days after his arrest, and what ever happened to innocent until proven guilty??'


Old habits obviously die hard. 




Avatar

Gold is $1,581/oz today. When it hits $2,000, it will be up 26.5%. Let's see how long that takes. - De 3/11/2013 - ANSWER: 7 Years, 5 Months




» You can also:
- - - - -
The above is a reply to the following message:
Re: clo...
By: Decomposed
in ROUND
Tue, 27 Mar 12 7:09 PM
Msg. 39999 of 45510

Here's an interesting article: 

"The media is getting the Trayvon Martin story wrong," Michael Brendan Dougherty wrote on BusinessInsider.com, comparing it to the 2006 Duke lacrosse case, in which three members of the lacrosse team were accused of rape, resulting in a media firestorm and public outcry. The accuser's case unraveled, and the charges were eventually dropped.
http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/cutline/trayvon-martin-shooting-details-emerge-facebook-twitter-accounts-180103647.html


I hadn't thought about the Duke case. But the Trayvon Martin case definitely reminds me of last year's Strauss-Kahn case. Part of why I'm giving you such a hard time, in fact, is that your recent posts are yet another example of a PATTERN OF BEHAVIOR you have, one that I've pointed out to you before.

Do you remember writing the following? 

The judge held this scumbag without bail! clo 

You wrote that on May 16, 2011, about Dominicque Strauss-Kahn, a scant three days after THAT story broke. Not much was known yet. The public certainly hadn't heard Strauss-Kahn's side of things. And the police were still investigating. Yet you'd already branded him a scumbag. Why would you do that?? Because you presumed guilt: White man. Black woman. He's obviously a scumbag.

That's how you apparently operate.

You're biased, almost always against "white" (ha!) males and for your political slant du jour. That's your problem. You do this over and over, and it makes it very difficult for those of us who know you... who even LIKE you... to take your opinions seriously. Over time, after watching you overreact - and INCORRECTLY, no less - to a few things like Trayvon Martin or Dominque Strauss-Kahn, it plays hell with your credibility.

I just wonder . . . WHY? 


« ROUND Home | Email msg. | Reply to msg. | Post new | Board info. Previous | Home | Next