Kennedy has acknowledged being treated for cocaine use during his teenage years. In 2000, Kennedy was accused of pushing a security guard at LAX. City prosecutors ultimately decided not to bring criminal charges against him and he paid an undisclosed civil settlement to the alleged victim almost two years later. His critics have called this incident a "triple hate crime", as the security guard was an elderly black woman. In 2000, Atlantic Navigation Company of Mystic, CT, claimed that a boat they rented to Kennedy was found abandoned off Martha's Vineyard and required $28,000 to repair. In 2000, the Coast Guard was dispatched to Kennedy's yacht after he and his date became embroiled in an argument on his yacht off Martha's Vineyard. In 2003, drew fire from his critics when he declared that "I have never worked a [bleeping] day in my life." On May 4, 2006, Kennedy crashed his car into a barricade on Capitol Hill.
Career Future
All told, Kennedy has shown throughout his career a desire for increased political power. At this point, his young age of 38 and committee assignments make it likely that he will remain a House member, presumably assuming the very powerful role of House Appropriations chair when he becomes the most senior Democrat on the committee and the Democrats find a way to regain control of the House. If Kennedy is elected to the Senate while his father, Ted Kennedy, is still a senator from Massachusetts, they would become the second father and son to serve in the Senate together.
Finally, a gutsy defense of the Scion of the Kennedys from an admirer! I was wondering what gambit will that be -- I see it now, it's the "nothing to see here, just move on" one, of Bubba fame. Let the Tribune of the People do the work for the children -- he's our last line of defense against the evil Kapitalists! As long as he's mumbling standard Socialism 101 mantras, he can do whatever he wants, yesiree.
Nah - i don't really care, although the finger-wagging at anyone drinking any amount of alcolhol in this silly country is plain ridiculous. But I wonder how quickly, in all honesty, you would jump to post on the same story if it were say dubbyah hitting the bottle de nuevo.
Hypothetical, hypotheticals. I jump on the stories that happen, or those which are relevant to what's going on.
And, by the way, if Kennedy Jr wants to drink a liter of bourbon every night before going to bed, that's his business. The story is not the drinking per se, but driving a car after drinking, and subsequent coverup. Or are the Kennedys the nodern-day Bourbons, and not subject to the law of the land?
Si Paris etait en beurre, il fondrait. Yeah, sure, if Dubya started hitting the bottle, driving randomly through DC in the wee hours of the night, and hitting concrete barriers, surely I'd be out there, finding excuses, denying everything, and accusing the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy of dastardly plots. Not! There is such thing as intellectual honesty, or even more quaintly, honor.
Honor is a hard concept to define - you know it when you see it. Here is an example of what I mean by honor: Sergeant Paul Smith, KIA in Iraq in 2003, the only recipient so far of the Medal of Honor in that war. Ten classes above the pampered, drugged-out scion of the Kennedy clan, who brags about not having worked a [bleeping] day of his life. A chacun son gout.
There is honor, and then there is the honor of aristocrats. The first has to be earned through character, work, intelligence, and even the spending of one's own blood. The latter is the sport of Versailles....
>>Honor is a hard concept to define - you know it when you see it kinda like porn ?
>>The first has to be earned through character, work, intelligence, and even the spending of one's own blood. right, and let's not forget the honor of the numero dos here that i wouldn't mind tearing to shreds. I wonder if using your tirade with a little tremolo in the voice would work as a pick-up line.
Absolutely. Adopt your best Versaillian pose, sport sufficiently small pants to make your small "virtues" appear more robust, wear enough finery to shame Villepine,and bedeck yourself with enough emblems of munificence to ensure the lass that you, certainement, at least in the family vaults, are no mere petit bourgeois. Then hit her with a bouquet of scornful roses, a bottle of your finest Lese' Majeste', a soupcon of sneer, and Le Pew will go where many a man has gone before.
good - at last we are going somewhere with this honor thing. my small "virtues", he ? obviously we met and i don't even remember it - what were you wearing, honey ?
I hate to enter a barroom in such a ferment, but I thought I should point out that I think you two, AA and Pepe did not meet but came damn close on a dozen occasions of running into one another at Kaldi's in New Orleans. I met Pepe a little after AA bugged out to drier pastures. Pepe is probably the only person in the world guilty of bringing a copy of Fetter & Walecka into Kaldi's. Most of the reading material there was charts, artporn, and the Times-Picayune.
A shame you never met. Fistfights in coffeehouses are more fun than in bars: punches land.
I think we got way off topic and could have teased apart the question a little better with a couple recent examples.
First, Cynthis McKinney, famed moonbat progressive, got into trouble for having a bodyguard impersonate a police officer and for scuffling with the Capitol Police. Pepe's view was that she should be cited for picking her nose. I thought congressmen should be held to a certain standard of dignity and that she deserved censure.
Second, Cheney was probably drunk whe he shot his buddy while on a quail hunt. No one goes birdhunting without a beer in his hand in Texas. Ain't kosher. No breathalyzer. It's illegal. That's different, though. His buddy could try to make a stink about it but didn't.
I think the cops screwed up a little too nicely, though.
Kennedy was also not given a breathalyzer, incidentally, but no one was hurt, either. Pepe's view is that this is no problem, but the fact that drunk driving is (inexplicably) illegal makes this a problem, indeed. He broke the law and it looks like he'll get away scot-free after some rehab.
NA made the vicious (and hilarious) joke that he'll be at the Betty Ford Clinic in a show of bipartisanship.
If you guys want to start arguing points a froid, it might be a good time now.
I suggest you start out by calling one another assholes.
I had intended in the last comment to bring up Rush Limbaugh's recent brush with the law. He also got away scot-free. When the story first gained traction, I thought it wonderful that such a bloviating ass be brought down. Then I was informed that his back hurt a lot and so doctor-shopping isn't that bad...
Let's be tough on this, then AI. How come no posts abotu Rush getting away scot-free and some diatribe or another about why this bastion of conservative identity can get away with being a doper while the rest of conservatism favors getting tough with people very similar and throwing keys away?
Bad example, JJ - I do understand what back pain is, you don't (lucky you!) So I'll give a pass to Rush on that, not because of his politics, or anything, just on humanitarian grounds. (I would do the same with Teddy Kennedy, if that's all he'd be ingesting -- pain killer for his back.)
At any rate, the idea of having some more-or-less uniform standards by which to judge the foibles of the rich-and-famous is a good one, but inevitably a dose of prejudice will seep in. Let's try at least to make an effort at being even-handed.
So, let's see, can we at least agree on this proposition: OJ was guilty as charged? Note that here we're not talking about taking back-pain killers, crashing a police barrier while DUI, or peppering a buddy while quail hunting -- I'm talking premeditated, bloody double murder. I can't wait for the "glove don't fit" defense, and the Moussaoui-type excuses involving a stressed-out chilldhood.
Well, OK. But then, what does it say about our jury system, when it fails to convinct in such an obvious case? Perhaps not much -- no system is perfect, and I'll take this system over any putative competition -- but still, it clearly shows the system can be manipulated, especially when a circus-like atmosphere is established, and a premium is put on lawyerly shenanigans, instead of quest for truth. While in the big scheme of things this is not that important when it comes to run-of-the-mill criminal trials (though it can, and does, corrode the necessary trust in the system), to expand the OJ-like circus to trials pertaining to national security and military matters is ludicruous, I submit.
20 comments:
Some cheery thoughts from Wikipedia:
Kennedy has acknowledged being treated for cocaine use during his teenage years.
In 2000, Kennedy was accused of pushing a security guard at LAX. City prosecutors ultimately decided not to bring criminal charges against him and he paid an undisclosed civil settlement to the alleged victim almost two years later. His critics have called this incident a "triple hate crime", as the security guard was an elderly black woman.
In 2000, Atlantic Navigation Company of Mystic, CT, claimed that a boat they rented to Kennedy was found abandoned off Martha's Vineyard and required $28,000 to repair.
In 2000, the Coast Guard was dispatched to Kennedy's yacht after he and his date became embroiled in an argument on his yacht off Martha's Vineyard.
In 2003, drew fire from his critics when he declared that "I have never worked a [bleeping] day in my life."
On May 4, 2006, Kennedy crashed his car into a barricade on Capitol Hill.
Career Future
All told, Kennedy has shown throughout his career a desire for increased political power. At this point, his young age of 38 and committee assignments make it likely that he will remain a House member, presumably assuming the very powerful role of House Appropriations chair when he becomes the most senior Democrat on the committee and the Democrats find a way to regain control of the House. If Kennedy is elected to the Senate while his father, Ted Kennedy, is still a senator from Massachusetts, they would become the second father and son to serve in the Senate together.
oh my. bad drinking liberal. bad, bad, bad.
Finally, a gutsy defense of the Scion of the Kennedys from an admirer! I was wondering what gambit will that be -- I see it now, it's the "nothing to see here, just move on" one, of Bubba fame. Let the Tribune of the People do the work for the children -- he's our last line of defense against the evil Kapitalists! As long as he's mumbling standard Socialism 101 mantras, he can do whatever he wants, yesiree.
Nah - i don't really care, although the finger-wagging at anyone drinking any amount of alcolhol in this silly country is plain ridiculous. But I wonder how quickly, in all honesty, you would jump to post on the same story if it were say dubbyah hitting the bottle de nuevo.
Hypothetical, hypotheticals. I jump on the stories that happen, or those which are relevant to what's going on.
And, by the way, if Kennedy Jr wants to drink a liter of bourbon every night before going to bed, that's his business. The story is not the drinking per se, but driving a car after drinking, and subsequent coverup. Or are the Kennedys the nodern-day Bourbons, and not subject to the law of the land?
sure, but still - can you hypothesize on what you think your reaction would be ?
A comment from Sploid.
Si Paris etait en beurre, il fondrait. Yeah, sure, if Dubya started hitting the bottle, driving randomly through DC in the wee hours of the night, and hitting concrete barriers, surely I'd be out there, finding excuses, denying everything, and accusing the Vast Left Wing Conspiracy of dastardly plots. Not! There is such thing as intellectual honesty, or even more quaintly, honor.
honor ? like you mean the knights of the round table
with damzels being violated by barbarians ?
Honor is a hard concept to define - you know it when you see it. Here is an example of what I mean by honor: Sergeant Paul Smith, KIA in Iraq in 2003, the only recipient so far of the Medal of Honor in that war. Ten classes above the pampered, drugged-out scion of the Kennedy clan, who brags about not having worked a [bleeping] day of his life. A chacun son gout.
straw man city there, dude.
There is honor, and then there is the honor of aristocrats. The first has to be earned through character, work, intelligence, and even the spending of one's own blood. The latter is the sport of Versailles....
>>Honor is a hard concept to define - you know it when you see it
kinda like porn ?
>>The first has to be earned through character, work, intelligence, and even the spending of one's own blood.
right, and let's not forget the honor of the numero dos here that i wouldn't mind tearing to shreds. I wonder if using your tirade with a little tremolo in the voice would work as a pick-up line.
Absolutely. Adopt your best Versaillian pose, sport sufficiently small pants to make your small "virtues" appear more robust, wear enough finery to shame Villepine,and bedeck yourself with enough emblems of munificence to ensure the lass that you, certainement, at least in the family vaults, are no mere petit bourgeois.
Then hit her with a bouquet of scornful roses, a bottle of your finest Lese' Majeste', a soupcon of sneer, and Le Pew will go where many a man has gone before.
good - at last we are going somewhere with this honor thing.
my small "virtues", he ? obviously we met and i don't even remember it - what were you wearing, honey ?
I hate to enter a barroom in such a ferment, but I thought I should point out that I think you two, AA and Pepe did not meet but came damn close on a dozen occasions of running into one another at Kaldi's in New Orleans. I met Pepe a little after AA bugged out to drier pastures. Pepe is probably the only person in the world guilty of bringing a copy of Fetter & Walecka into Kaldi's. Most of the reading material there was charts, artporn, and the Times-Picayune.
A shame you never met. Fistfights in coffeehouses are more fun than in bars: punches land.
I think we got way off topic and could have teased apart the question a little better with a couple recent examples.
First, Cynthis McKinney, famed moonbat progressive, got into trouble for having a bodyguard impersonate a police officer and for scuffling with the Capitol Police. Pepe's view was that she should be cited for picking her nose. I thought congressmen should be held to a certain standard of dignity and that she deserved censure.
Second, Cheney was probably drunk whe he shot his buddy while on a quail hunt. No one goes birdhunting without a beer in his hand in Texas. Ain't kosher. No breathalyzer. It's illegal. That's different, though. His buddy could try to make a stink about it but didn't.
I think the cops screwed up a little too nicely, though.
Kennedy was also not given a breathalyzer, incidentally, but no one was hurt, either. Pepe's view is that this is no problem, but the fact that drunk driving is (inexplicably) illegal makes this a problem, indeed. He broke the law and it looks like he'll get away scot-free after some rehab.
NA made the vicious (and hilarious) joke that he'll be at the Betty Ford Clinic in a show of bipartisanship.
If you guys want to start arguing points a froid, it might be a good time now.
I suggest you start out by calling one another assholes.
I had intended in the last comment to bring up Rush Limbaugh's recent brush with the law. He also got away scot-free. When the story first gained traction, I thought it wonderful that such a bloviating ass be brought down. Then I was informed that his back hurt a lot and so doctor-shopping isn't that bad...
Let's be tough on this, then AI. How come no posts abotu Rush getting away scot-free and some diatribe or another about why this bastion of conservative identity can get away with being a doper while the rest of conservatism favors getting tough with people very similar and throwing keys away?
This sounds kinda bad, huh?
Bad example, JJ - I do understand what back pain is, you don't (lucky you!) So I'll give a pass to Rush on that, not because of his politics, or anything, just on humanitarian grounds. (I would do the same with Teddy Kennedy, if that's all he'd be ingesting -- pain killer for his back.)
At any rate, the idea of having some more-or-less uniform standards by which to judge the foibles of the rich-and-famous is a good one, but inevitably a dose of prejudice will seep in. Let's try at least to make an effort at being even-handed.
So, let's see, can we at least agree on this proposition: OJ was guilty as charged? Note that here we're not talking about taking back-pain killers, crashing a police barrier while DUI, or peppering a buddy while quail hunting -- I'm talking premeditated, bloody double murder. I can't wait for the "glove don't fit" defense, and the Moussaoui-type excuses involving a stressed-out chilldhood.
Now you've distilled all the controversy out of this barroom. Of coursse we all agree OJ was guilty. Nicole was cute. He should hang.
Well, OK. But then, what does it say about our jury system, when it fails to convinct in such an obvious case? Perhaps not much -- no system is perfect, and I'll take this system over any putative competition -- but still, it clearly shows the system can be manipulated, especially when a circus-like atmosphere is established, and a premium is put on lawyerly shenanigans, instead of quest for truth. While in the big scheme of things this is not that important when it comes to run-of-the-mill criminal trials (though it can, and does, corrode the necessary trust in the system), to expand the OJ-like circus to trials pertaining to national security and military matters is ludicruous, I submit.
Post a Comment