ADVERTISEMENT

Maurice Washington pleads not guilty to both charges...

Status
Not open for further replies.
Again you are arguing a point no one is making. I am not aware of any females that are sending revenge porn to males. If you are aware of a case where an 18 year old female sent a 3 year old video of her ex, having sex as a minor with another minor, to that ex with a comment similar to what Washington sent to the female in his case, share it with us. Until then, you are making unsubstantiated claims with regards to the law being applied unfairly toward men.

I will offer a guess however. Similar to why there are more reported female victims of sexual abuse and rape, males are typically reluctant to come forward. Again I assume it is because the don't want to look weak or appear emasculated. Not many men, that I know, are going to come forward and present to police, a video of them having sex, as a minor or as an adult, wanting to press revenge porn charges.

But that is a completely different argument than the one you appear to be making where there are a bunch of females sending child/ revenge porn to their exes, the men are pressing charges but the females are getting away with it. I am not aware of this epidemic. Again if you have some case law that you want to share, I would be willing to change my mind.
OK let me ask this. If Sally has a picture of Jenny who is seeing Sam and Sally sends it to Jenny because she wants Sam back is that revenge porn?
 
Most of your weird AOC "facts" come from, upon google searches, News Max and hyper-partisan blogs. It's kind of hard to find actual news stories about them (other than her flubbing the FDR answer, which she did appear to mis-speak, but she's also correct that Congress passed the two term limit amendment in reaction to FDR, in 1947 after he had died, and also that the New Deal was very popular). I wonder why that is? News Max is trash, and blogs and other right-wing crap "media" outlets are, too.

Could it be because that's a bunch of ad-hominem bullshit that doesn't really mean anything? She's a progressive congresswoman representing her district and her beliefs; why there has to be a perverse focus on her, rather than, I dunno, the jackass Republican from Kentucky today who tried to call John Kerry's political science degree from Yale "pseudoscience" and was laughed at for most of his ridiculous questioning, is up to people like you to answer.
LOL, those facts are exactly what she said, did and talked about. They're not made up and I didn't hear about them from some "crappy right-wing media outlet".

You asked a very specific question about AOC, I answered it with multiple examples and now you're trying to dismiss my multiple examples by saying "they're not actual news stories" (I never said they were). Then you use phrases like "crappy right-wing media outlets" to try and further dismiss my multiple examples.

No, it's not ad-hominem. It's people calling out her actual position on issues and calling out her hypocrisy. It's also pointing out she has very little clue on what she's actually talking about because when she tries to explain her position she's constantly makes mistakes or just flat out lies.

Most politicians are going to say some dumb things (like the Kentucky Representative), but more focus is on AOC is because she says a lot of really dumb things quite often. Trump gets blasted for saying wrong & dumb things all the time (as he should), AOC is on par with Trump so they're both deserving of criticism. It's hilarious you believe she doesn't say dumb things or you try and justify it somehow.
 
LOL, those facts are exactly what she said, did and talked about. They're not made up and I didn't hear about them from some "crappy right-wing media outlet".

You asked a very specific question about AOC, I answered it with multiple examples and now you're trying to dismiss my multiple examples by saying "they're not actual news stories" (I never said they were). Then you use phrases like "crappy right-wing media outlets" to try and further dismiss my multiple examples.

No, it's not ad-hominem. It's people calling out her actual position on issues and calling out her hypocrisy. It's also pointing out she has very little clue on what she's actually talking about because when she tries to explain her position she's constantly makes mistakes or just flat out lies.

Most politicians are going to say some dumb things (like the Kentucky Representative), but more focus is on AOC is because she says a lot of really dumb things quite often. Trump gets blasted for saying wrong & dumb things all the time (as he should), AOC is on par with Trump so they're both deserving of criticism. It's hilarious you believe she doesn't say dumb things or you try and justify it somehow.

You are wasting your time. The freaks on either side believe whatever they want, and will justify it however they can, even if completely lame. The disturbing part is that they can't recognize that they are freaks.
 
OK let me ask this. If Sally has a picture of Jenny who is seeing Sam and Sally sends it to Jenny because she wants Sam back is that revenge porn?

So you are presenting me a hypothetical situation as evidence that the laws are being applied unfairly?

Is Jenny naked? Did Jenny send the picture to Sally? If Sam didn’t get a copy of the picture, how does this affect sally getting Sam back?

I guess I was looking for some real life examples or case studies
 
You are wasting your time. The freaks on either side believe whatever they want, and will justify it however they can, even if completely lame. The disturbing part is that they can't recognize that they are freaks.

Bingo. It's funny that the problem for the folks who like to crap all over non-political message boards with political garbage is always someone on the "other side".

Newsflash to that: you are equally "the other side" and a huge part of the problem.

Not sure if the above opinion will be labelled by a threadcrapper as "thought
programming" from either Fox or MSN.

However, I'm sure that if it is, threadcrapper will spout a viewpoint seen recently from whichever of those outlets they prefer to watch in order to point out just how small minded and programmed by the media I have become.
 
It's rather apparent you and chicolby have not read much about how the Smollett case came to an end. It's hardly a right-wing conspiracy when the outside influence with Obama ties, prosecutorial stupidity coupled with her aspirations to replace Durbin as US Senator, and the concurrent mayor's race where her political benefactor was a run-off finalist was all reported, in depth, in literally every newspaper in town. Who the hell in Chicago and Cook County can gather enough "zany right wingers" to form a conspiracy with any clout anyway. You two might want to leave politics out of it until you know something factual about the subject.
The OP was right. And the proof of it is your meer mention of Obama, which guarantees we’ll also hear a bunch of new conspiracy theories. Polarized politics inevitably devolves this board into name-calling, rather than a place where great fans can exchange opinions and ideas.
 
I wouldn't exactly call Maurice Washington a "high profile" person in the eyes of most people in CA. Most likely people other than here in Nebraska have never heard or give two shits about him.
The story made national news. The average child porn cases never get outside of local. Maybe not him specifically but since he plays at Nebraska the story/he automatically turns to high profile.
 
The OP was right. And the proof of it is your meer mention of Obama, which guarantees we’ll also hear a bunch of new conspiracy theories. Polarized politics inevitably devolves this board into name-calling, rather than a place where great fans can exchange opinions and ideas.

wrong, it appears you and others were triggered by the "meer" mention of Obama.
 
The story made national news. The average child porn cases never get outside of local. Maybe not him specifically but since he plays at Nebraska the story/he automatically turns to high profile.

The story made national news because it was a football player. If this was a player from almost any division 1 program in America it would have made national news.
 
The story made national news because it was a football player. If this was a player from almost any division 1 program in America it would have made national news.
Agree, My point was it was a high profile, player, university, story. Doesn't necessarily matter the school. Although I bet since it is Nebraska it makes a bit more headlines. Prosecutors and courts tend to take advantage of "higher profile" cases to use as setting an example. I just hope that isn't the case here. As I have said the kid made a stupid mistake, but it isn't so horrible he should be punished his whole life for it.
 
LOL, those facts are exactly what she said, did and talked about. They're not made up and I didn't hear about them from some "crappy right-wing media outlet".

You asked a very specific question about AOC, I answered it with multiple examples and now you're trying to dismiss my multiple examples by saying "they're not actual news stories" (I never said they were). Then you use phrases like "crappy right-wing media outlets" to try and further dismiss my multiple examples.

No, it's not ad-hominem. It's people calling out her actual position on issues and calling out her hypocrisy. It's also pointing out she has very little clue on what she's actually talking about because when she tries to explain her position she's constantly makes mistakes or just flat out lies.

Most politicians are going to say some dumb things (like the Kentucky Representative), but more focus is on AOC is because she says a lot of really dumb things quite often. Trump gets blasted for saying wrong & dumb things all the time (as he should), AOC is on par with Trump so they're both deserving of criticism. It's hilarious you believe she doesn't say dumb things or you try and justify it somehow.

Yeah, but you didn't do that (argue against her positions). You just blathered on about some weird pseudo-controversies from her life. I searched for a few, and I told you where they came from.

Most politicians do say dumb things. And, I will even grant you that, if you don't like AOC's positions, you can call some of them dumb. I don't agree, but I get it and would call that "in-bounds" for arguing about politics.

I would have to say, though, that you clearly do not seem to understand how there are degrees of "bad." To you, she may be bad, and as I said, that's fine. However, she is not Trump; Trump says bigoted, nonsensical, bullying things all the time, and he has for years. Do you remember how he first inserted himself into politics? BIRTHERISM.

He's clearly got some sort of observable mental problem, and he's engaged in sleazy, illegal behavior for decades. His policies are stupid and/or cruel, and he just got elected by being the loudest, weirdest, most click-bait friendly candidate on the stage (and the fact that the Dems ran a candidate that had too much baggage and didn't run the best campaign AND the election was interfered with).

One just does not equal the other, at all.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Huskerpro
You are wasting your time. The freaks on either side believe whatever they want, and will justify it however they can, even if completely lame. The disturbing part is that they can't recognize that they are freaks.

That's indeed a very big problem.
 
Agree, My point was it was a high profile, player, university, story. Doesn't necessarily matter the school. Although I bet since it is Nebraska it makes a bit more headlines. Prosecutors and courts tend to take advantage of "higher profile" cases to use as setting an example. I just hope that isn't the case here. As I have said the kid made a stupid mistake, but it isn't so horrible he should be punished his whole life for it.

Or if Washington's dad was the president of a Silicon Valley corp it would have made headlines. It isn't the prosecutors and courts taking advantage of this.

The fact that the press is only writing about the case that involves the athlete doesn't necessarily mean that the prosecutor is only prosecuting this case. Just because we all know about Johnny Manziel's troubles doesn't mean that others aren't being investigated for beating their girls or drunk driving.
 
This thread is getting away from the OP..and has nothing to do with Football or Basketball lock it up..
 
Yeah, but you didn't do that (argue against her positions). You just blathered on about some weird pseudo-controversies from her life. I searched for a few, and I told you where they came from.

Most politicians do say dumb things. And, I will even grant you that, if you don't like AOC's positions, you can call some of them dumb. I don't agree, but I get it and would call that "in-bounds" for arguing about politics.

I would have to say, though, that you clearly do not seem to understand how there are degrees of "bad." To you, she may be bad, and as I said, that's fine. However, she is not Trump; Trump says bigoted, nonsensical, bullying things all the time, and he has for years. Do you remember how he first inserted himself into politics? BIRTHERISM.

He's clearly got some sort of observable mental problem, and he's engaged in sleazy, illegal behavior for decades. His policies are stupid and/or cruel, and he just got elected by being the loudest, weirdest, most click-bait friendly candidate on the stage (and the fact that the Dems ran a candidate that had too much baggage and didn't run the best campaign AND the election was interfered with).

One just does not equal the other, at all.

So who's fault is it that the Democrats chose Hilary Clinton? She ran a bad campaign and still won the nomination. She had a bunch of baggage and democrats still voted her to represent them. How is that any different than what happened with Trump? It is the same double speak, over and over again by both parties. The democrats were all over Cavanaugh, but defend Biden to the death. The republicans are the same way, jump all over Biden but defend Cavanaugh to the end.

It is equal, it just isn't the equal you want.
 
So who's fault is it that the Democrats chose Hilary Clinton? She ran a bad campaign and still won the nomination. She had a bunch of baggage and democrats still voted her to represent them. How is that any different than what happened with Trump? It is the same double speak, over and over again by both parties. The democrats were all over Cavanaugh, but defend Biden to the death. The republicans are the same way, jump all over Biden but defend Cavanaugh to the end.

It is equal, it just isn't the equal you want.
Thats why I hate politics. Both sides too blinded by hating the other to see their side is just as bad and equally part of the problem.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
ADVERTISEMENT