elle

Members
  • Content Count

    11,937
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    1

elle last won the day on March 3 2010

elle had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

84 Kiss-ass

About elle

  • Rank
    Super Anarchist
  • Birthday March 12

Profile Information

  • Location
    new orleans, louisiana

Recent Profile Visitors

17,691 profile views
  1. elle

    Birth Certificate Forgery

    Not obsessed with it, just commenting on it, I didn't start the thread, nor participate until now,IIRC. I am not sure of the time increment from the initial request to the time it was produced? All I can remember is that it was not made available for some time later? I wonder why the delay? "Denial"? Not sure if the certificate they finally produced is real or not? Only BO & his boys know. Why the delay? "Inquiring minds". Is it bad to "inquire"? Hillary & Nancy said "Dissent is patriotic", just following their lead. Anyway, it is a fun subject to discuss, really gets the folks on the left's attention, kind of like a dog whistle, great fun. Dabs The thread is from 2011, it was just reposted 5 days ago and you had no trouble jumping in. The birth certificate is a dead issue, everyone knows it except a few hardcore types who don't want to acknowledge any form of truth that a black man beat them fair and square. Dabs is just playing silly games. He pretends to be clueless. Unless, he really is clueless. Either way, he comes off like a fool. He doesn't want to discuss the BC. He just wants to foment division and stoke the fires of thinly-veiled partisan attacks. He got booted from one forum and has quickly established himself here as a perfectly partisan putz. I predict his schtick will wear thin and, in an attempt to continue to make himself seem relevant, will cross a line and get booted from here. I give it 6 months. archie bunker to huckleberry hound in whiplash speed…with less than nothing of interest or import to add. i don't even feel compelled to respond to even his most outrageous assertions….or are they questions? or opinions….he can't decide. dolt.
  2. elle

    Birth Certificate Forgery

    it does raise some interesting questions....i am not saying he did or did not, but at the very least the question should be asked and the topic open for discussion.
  3. so is this what you guys (you know who you are…) support? http://www.cnn.com/2015/03/25/politics/mike-pence-religious-freedom-bill-gay-rights/index.html?ts_pid=2
  4. with your 126 trolls on the thread, how could it possibly surprise you to see it still ongoing. My goodness, don't know how you counted them? Must have a whole lot of time on your hands? No derogatory name calling? , it is getting boring. BTW, I didn't bring up the subject of hate crime, which I don't think is closely related to the baker's situation, bit of a drift, eh? Dabs no, the website tells you how many times each person posted. you click on "replies". I certainly would not waste my time counting your drivel. if you do not think it is related, do not discuss it. your option, of course. it is a progression of events thing in addition to one of the aspects of hate crime laws are the civil cause of action…which speaks to your objection of law suits. troll
  5. Nope- cause the INTENT was different. I contend that intent is separate from the object of that intent. Others think differently. again...hate crimes are based on motivation. maybe this will help you to understand... Let's take the crime down a notch; let's say you spray painted some innocuous graffiti on the wall of a building. A crime, right? intentionally committing a crime Now, let's say you painted a swastika on a synagogue. Equal? intentionally committing a crime motivated by bias or hate.. further to the point.... man formulates a plan to off his neighbor and then follows though and kills neighbor till he's dead. first degree (intentionally committed) murder. not a hate crime. man formulates a plan to kill his neighbor because his neighbor is gay and he thinks gays are an abomination then follows through and kills the neighbor till he is dead. first degree (intentionally committed) murder motivated by hate or bias. hate crime. I understand - but, disagree. Hate crimes are a BS label affixed to make members of the protected classes feel more protected - they achieve nothing else. i was not arguing whether hate crime laws should exist…only what they are. what, if anything they achieve is obviously a point of contention. the goal, however, is a deterrent to biased based crime…through penalty enhancement, create civil cause of action (such as suing a baker, should the aggrieved party choose to do that), and define specific biased and hate motivated acts as crimes in and of themselves. i am sure somewhere there are numbers that show whether or not they have been successful in achieving that goal, as laws on reporting and collecting this info to try to help eliminate it is also a goal of hate crime laws.
  6. with your 126 trolls on the thread, how could it possibly surprise you to see it still ongoing.
  7. wrong...hate crimes are about motivation.
  8. Nope- cause the INTENT was different. I contend that intent is separate from the object of that intent. Others think differently. again...hate crimes are based on motivation. maybe this will help you to understand... Let's take the crime down a notch; let's say you spray painted some innocuous graffiti on the wall of a building. A crime, right? intentionally committing a crime Now, let's say you painted a swastika on a synagogue. Equal? intentionally committing a crime motivated by bias or hate.. further to the point.... man formulates a plan to off his neighbor and then follows though and kills neighbor till he's dead. first degree (intentionally committed) murder. not a hate crime. man formulates a plan to kill his neighbor because his neighbor is gay and he thinks gays are an abomination then follows through and kills the neighbor till he is dead. first degree (intentionally committed) murder motivated by hate or bias. hate crime.
  9. stop being obtuse... i am not suggesting anything. i am telling you that hate crimes/bias motivated crimes carry a strong penalty because of the motivation (hate/bias) of the perpetrator. it is not an increased value on the life of the victim it is the motivation of the perpetrator that increases the penalty. I understand your perspectifve, but, disagree. We won't see eye to eye on this. I think you're fucked, you think I am. this discussion is not about my perspective. it is the law. an argument over whether or not those laws should exist would be a perspective argument. i do not think you are fucked, i just think you are wrong and do not understand the law.
  10. No ma'am - it speaks to intent. The two are decidedly different. The law codifies WHAT you want to accomplish in doing something, not why you want to do it. I'll caveat:I'm an engineer w/a penchat for reading statute. I've not been trained in law school to properly understand all the factors that might affect an interpretation of statute. sorry, you are wrong in this case. while there are 4 levels of intent (intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, negligently). hate crimes are by definition motivated by hatred...or bias-motivated. So - you suggest that some descritpive attribute of the vctim warrants more severe penalties? stop being obtuse... i am not suggesting anything. i am telling you that hate crimes/bias motivated crimes carry a strong penalty because of the motivation (hate/bias) of the perpetrator. it is not an increased value on the life of the victim it is the motivation of the perpetrator that increases the penalty.
  11. penalties for murder are different depending on the circumstances of that murder. are you truly trying to claim otherwise? it has been stated more than once in this thread already. why are you trying to deflect? it is a very basic fact of law. you know this. there are different levels of homicide, different degrees or murder and they are charged and penalised differently. that is a fact. it is a fact that a pre planned murder does carry a higher penalty than a negligent homicide. any attempt to argue otherwise is ridiculous. You're absolutely correct. NONE of those things have anything to do with the demographics of the victim, nor should they. it speaks to motivation....as evident. No ma'am - it speaks to intent. The two are decidedly different. The law codifies WHAT you want to accomplish in doing something, not why you want to do it. I'll caveat:I'm an engineer w/a penchat for reading statute. I've not been trained in law school to properly understand all the factors that might affect an interpretation of statute. sorry, you are wrong in this case. while there are 4 levels of intent (intentionally, knowingly, recklessly, negligently). hate crimes are by definition motivated by hatred...or bias-motivated.
  12. of course it is....as eva dent. That says so much... go away - adults are talking. penalties for murder are different depending on the circumstances of that murder. are you truly trying to claim otherwise? it has been stated more than once in this thread already. why are you trying to deflect? it is a very basic fact of law. you know this. there are different levels of homicide, different degrees or murder and they are charged and penalised differently. that is a fact. it is a fact that a pre planned murder does carry a higher penalty than a negligent homicide. any attempt to argue otherwise is ridiculous. You're absolutely correct. NONE of those things have anything to do with the demographics of the victim, nor should they. it speaks to motivation....as evident.
  13. Point? Is the behavior of someone motivated by hate more legally objectionable/actionable than the same behavior motivate by something else? of course it is....as eva dent. That says so much... go away - adults are talking. penalties for murder are different depending on the circumstances of that murder. are you truly trying to claim otherwise? it has been stated more than once in this thread already. why are you trying to deflect? it is a very basic fact of law. you know this. there are different levels of homicide, different degrees or murder and they are charged and penalised differently. that is a fact. it is a fact that a pre planned murder does carry a higher penalty than a negligent homicide. any attempt to argue otherwise is ridiculous.
  14. Point? Is the behavior of someone motivated by hate more legally objectionable/actionable than the same behavior motivate by something else? of course it is....as eva dent.