Many people are capable of murder, and IMO your posts in the death penalty thread proved that you are capable of murder, since you don't believe all human life is valuable. The fact that you are capable of murdering baby killing, raping democrats doesn't make you a threat to everyone.

The ones who have not murderered are maybe even more dangerous then the proven ones, because you don't see them coming.

Yawns.....Yes I'll admit I don't consider Simpson's a valuable life. And that makes me more dangerous than he is, or something like that.

I don't think you understand "not guilty" well enough. It simply means that by law the jury felt there is not enough evidence to convict. "Not guilty" has nothing to say about being innocent. And that's based solely of what the jury were allowed to see, whatever fraction that may be.

Would you advertise your product during a commercial break for that program? They probably couldn't give the commercial time away.

They could have run some commercials for that other man of honesty, O'Reilly. I'll bet even Geraldo left skid marks running from that crap.

Hearing O'Reilly's and Rivera's comments reminded me of Spinal Tap: "At this point, both Sears and K-Mart stores have refused to handle the album..."

I'm not against the death penalty. In fact, I believe it should be expanded to encompass repeat offenders of all sorts of violent crimes, or any case where "rehabilitation" isn't possible and the convict is just going to rot in prison anyway, sucking up taxpayer money. Better he be executed, just done away with in my opinion.

But that is a different issue, for a different thread.

Things I am against are the following:
(a) Double Jeopardy - This should include criminal AND civil cases.
(b) Treating someone as if they were guilty after the trial has ended - The people had their chance to find him guilty and failed. Now the people should shut the hell up.
(c) People dumb enough to release how-to books on murder.

I really don't understand wrong direction everyone has taken here. OJ is what he is, and has been for quite some time. He probably needs money for his attorney fees as well as his prior life style. Factor in plain old greed and you have what is clearly a pattern that has not changed much.

What should be noted is the person who made all this possible. The person who saw no limit, ethical or otherwise, to ways of making money, like the people of his party. In the 2004 election his "newspapers", and boy you need to use that term really loosely, because they were hell bent on getting the village idiot relelected, posted over a years of editorializing in the front pages of his tabloids (sorry to insult the tabloids here) as facts.

Here's to the crown prince of money an any cost, your typical republican, I'll say anything for a buck scum, Rupert Murdoch.

Forums are screwy this morning eh?

a) Agreed if the criminal case calls for full restitution, otherwise no. Restitution is what civil cases are about. You can libel a company, hurt their sales, and what criminal law did you break? Actually the feds should have prosecuted OJ for civil rights violations, like they have with other murders that got off scott free.

b) The verdict only means not enough evidence presented.

c) Rupert Murdoch, amoral republican.

"Welcome Back Kotter" was initially banned in Boston. "NYPD Blues" also had some initial bans, then everyone got used to hearing AH on TV.

I thought initially that I had an invalid character in my text and there was a failure to insert the message. It was later I discovered every attempt was actually successful. I appreciate the ADMIN for deleting my redundant redundant redundant posts.

A A A A A A A A A A

(a) Criminal cases probably should call for full restitution.
(b) Perhaps "not guilty" verdicts should be reached with stronger meaning... Worth a thought at any rate.
(c) Good point.

Well at least Rupert Murdoch was able to stop publication of that "how to commit murder" book......due to public pressure no doubt.

Simpson, Democrat no doubt, on the other hand is unable to undue any of his crimes. Why is he a Democrat you ask....everyone facing a possible death sentence, everyone on death row is a Democrat. Facing eminent death, everyone turns religious and becomes a democrat......been that way for a long time. I guess they're trying to escape punishment in this life, and the next. Simpson knows where he belongs.

Have you got any other interesting sociopolitical theories you'd like to share with the internets?

qviri, maybe it is me but it looks like you are a little bit displeased with the latest of Bluefront't political statements. Don't look at it as some political rant against democrats but as a description of human nature. People who are diagnosed an incurable disease suddenly become more receptive to the "alternative therapies" and resort to forms of medicine they would normally laugh at. When you are young, socialism looks nice but as you have to work and pay your bills, you change your mind about the "poor" and "disenfranchised" who make a living out of your taxes.

I don't want to imply everything is relative and there are no rights and wrongs but people's opinions are strongly influenced by their personal interest. So O.J. suddenly became an enemy of the death penalty: that is so predictable as it is that the victims families all of the sudden became pro death penalty. And surely religious too, since that would give them the comfort of an afterlife justice the murderer can't cheat.

1. Book sales looked bad.

2. Public outcry to boycott sponsors.

3. Without sponsors the show would not have been in the Neilsen ratings, it's purpose was to raise Fox's November ratings.

All in all, there was no profit in it. That's the only reason the repub pulled the plug. Please don't tell us he all of a sudden had an attack of conscience. It just doesn't happen.

End of story.

Oh, I'd love to see some references to that "fact". Probably from the same place that talked about all those Clinton murders. Wonderful guffaw.
But I keep forgeting, if it came from a repubs mouth it must be true. Bush, Ken Lay, Abramoff, Tom Delay, blah, blah, blah.

Because the other party does what Cheney did, they defer any law enforcement that applies to them.

Example: Nixon's Pardon, and Cheney's lack of service.

"Only the little people need to deal with the law". And hypocrisy rules.

For sale - US Constitution, low miles, seldom used.

the fact is that the country in general is *&^$ed up. I have been in jail for something that I didnt do. I was not considered innocent, I did not get a trial or even get to talk. But then again im not black so I can say that people were just being racist. Also I have been thrown out of a store for no reason, but again im not black so I cant get any money out of it. If all men are created equal then maybe they should start treating everyone equal, and not giving blacks extra points on standardized tests and letting them get away with murder.
Also lawyers should be removed from the system all together, its crap when there is a huge amount of evidence and lawyers find little loop holes to let murderers and childmolesters free. I say give them a bullet to the back of the head. Cheap and efficient. And my tax dollars dont have to go to pay to keep all these repeat criminals fed in prison. If you keep going to prison, and you cant be "reformed" bullet to back of head

And at the time of the killing, they were republicans...

" its crap when there is a huge amount of evidence and lawyers find little loop holes to let murderers and childmolesters free"

But people are also convicted routinely based soley on eyewitness testimony, which DNA tests later show is completely wrong. What about those convicted people?

Here we have the Bush definition of "I'm a uniter, not a divider."

See how all the criminals are united into one group.

We now resume to our regularly scheduled fear and war mongering.