On Sun, 07 Dec 2014 08:54:27 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 12/7/14 8:30 AM, Poco Loco wrote:
On Sun, 07 Dec 2014 07:29:53 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 12/6/14 11:14 PM, wrote:
On Sat, 06 Dec 2014 12:37:05 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

On 12/6/14 10:58 AM, wrote:
On Sat, 06 Dec 2014 07:42:55 -0500, F*O*A*D wrote:

I'm not "conflicted" at all. I don't suffer from right-wing rigid
personality, and I don't expect the world to be *my way* or no way. I'm
glad cops accused of crimes have access to decent counsel at little or
no cost beyond their union dues. My personal feelings about these cops
who have been in the news lately does not lead me to a right-wing lynch
mob mentality.

No, it is a left wing lynch mob.
You refuse to accept the actions of the justice system.


This is yet another in your famous string of attempts to argue your
point well beyond the onset of absurdity. You would have been a hoot in
college formal debate because you would have been disqualified or booed
off the podium.

I don't like the actions of grand juries that give cops a free ride when
they commit ultraviolence against unarmed civilians, but that doesn't
make me or others who feel as I do part of a lynch mob. I didn't like
the actions of the O.J. murder jury back in 1995, but I wasn't ready to
lynch anyone. I figured O.J. would get what was coming to him, sooner or
later, and I think the Missouri cop will, too, and so will your hero,
George Zimmerman.

You are like the mobs in the street who will accept nothing but an
immediate conviction and reject the verdict of a jury in the case of
Zimmerman and reject the grand jury in the cases of Wilson and
Pantaleo. You had made up your mind before there were any facts
established, simply based on media reports that are inaccurate.


There you go again, into hyperbole-ville, attempting to argue your
points beyond the onset of absurdity.

Instead of criticizing the author, show where he's wrong. You, and a
couple others, immediately jumped on the 'hang him' bandwagon, just
like you did in the Ferguson case.


No, dummy, I didn't. In fact, in the Missouri case, I said the cop
should have been indicted and then tried in an open trial, and if he
were found not guilty, the verdict would help quell any violent
demonstrations.


In the Ferguson case the grand jury had less information than you did,
I suppose.

So, once again, you are misrepresenting what someone else posted here.
That's what you righties seem to do best, eh?

Yes, my bad...I said 'hang him' when I should have said 'indict him'.
Either way, you weren't there.

As for Greg, I see no reason to respond to his off the charts hyperbole.
I don't have to like a verdict, and I am free to say so. That doesn't
make those of us who disgree with these verdicts "mobs" in the street. I
didn't like the OJ verdict in his murder trial. Did you?

Well of course not, he's backed you into a corner from which *you*
must hyperbolize.

Toad, you're a joke.
--

"When your argument has backed a liberal into a corner,
expect to be called a racist."