« Where Is Ross Perot? | Main | Conservative Litmus Test »
The Prince of Plop
By JBC | June 14, 2005
Are we now to assume that it is acceptable for strange middle-aged men to sleep with our children and provide them with alcohol and pornography? Following yesterday’s unsettling verdict in California, a person may be excused for thinking that America has fallen further from the tree of sanity. However, before you weirdoes book your trips to California to carry out your own preferred perversion, please realize that celebrity allows one to get away with murder (Orenthal James Simpson), and other atrocities.
Americans were once a very grounded and sensible lot. We held ourselves and others to a very high moral standard. Unfortunately our moral underpinnings have been removed through the best efforts of moral relativists and an evermore powerful media which only serves to provide the most prurient materials to an already weak and docile audience.
But the perverts should not fear, for these worshipped weirdoes of the west coast are groundbreakers. We can now expect this newly accepted Left Coast privilege to seep down to the masses. It is only right that in our egalitarian society that the masses should have the same rights as the privileged. Bob Smith in Topeka should have the same right as Wacko Jacko to sleep and party with small boys. Ain’t this country great?
God Bless America.
Topics: Culture Wars, Liberals, Crime and Punishment |
June 14th, 2005 at 5:57 am
Dear Jim:
On the Prince of Plop article: an astonishingly well-written article, with one moderate oversight on your part–the accused should always be presumed innocent until proven guilty. This practice is what separates us from the judicial system of the McCarthy era and the Salem witch trials. I know, I know, people come up to me all the time talking about how O.J. was the killer, there was no way anybody else could have committed such a crime, etc. I myself struggle with such thoughts from time to time. Then, I remember that I was the victim of false accusations, accusations which had no merit whatsoever. If it weren’t for people who knew me through and through, my reputation might never have been recovered.
I am a firm believer in giving the accused the benefit of the doubt, with exception to one thing–it has to be blatantly and patently obvious that the accused is the perpetrator and solely responsible for the actions taken. In order for this to happen, the perpetrator would have to incriminate himself (i.e. confess), not unlike what Saddam and Milosevic are doing/have done, in which they have no remorse for their actions and even attempt to justify them.
Good work on the Schiavo article, as well.