Re: Re: Martha 's return to Society is Outragous

[Guest guest]

I just happened to catch this one as I got my email today...

M Wilkins wrote:

> Martha is a slap in the nads to everyone in this country,

> especially those of us living the life as law abiding citizens, as

> well as other thugs not getting the same fair justice

Other thugs? Meaning that Martha is a thug?

Lying to an agent of the government makes you a thug?

> Let's think on this, only for a moment.

>

> O.J. Simpson was aquitted of the charges of murder. Ms. was

> convicted in Federal Court of a Felony Charge that prison time was

> sentenced. Mr Simpson dosen't have a TV show and other endorsements

> today. Just facts of these two high profile cases.

Martha was convicted of lying to a government agent during an

investigation of insider trading. I don't think she did anything

wrong... if the police can lie to us, we can lie to them. When we start

sending cops to prison for telling a suspect that their friend rolled

over on them when they didn't, then I will start considering it

unethical to lie to " authorities. " Until then, all the power to people

who want to lie to the police.

She went to prison for doing what police do nearly every time they open

their mouths during an investigation. O.J. Simpson killed 2 people and

got away with it. They are not exactly the same thing.

I do not mistake legal or illegal for right or wrong, and I do not

mistake convictions for what someone actually did. O.J. was acquitted

and he is not in prison; that is as it should be, and all that his

acquittal means. We are not required to believe that he didn't do it.

Being acquitted does not mean that TV producers or advertisers need to

embrace him... they have the right to free expression just as you do,

and they can shun anyone they want, or hire anyone they want. He would

have a TV show or endorsements if people wanted to see him. He is

unpopular because of the common view that he got away with murder, and

that is why he is not a talk show host.

> Its just wrong for her to be in our face as she is, Kmart, an NBC TV

> show daily, its wrong.

No, it's liberty. She did her time for the trumped up charges they had

her on, and now she is done. She _should_ be free to do anything she

was ever free to do (including being CEO of any company she wishes). If

she was unpopular like O.J. is, she would not continue to do shows and

be a spokesperson.

> US justice is not always as it was meant to be

> " Justice For All " , as per our plege of allegance.

What is so unjust about a person who was accused of lying having a TV

show? She got a rather harsh penalty for lying as it is. I would have

given her a $6 fine and sent her on her way.

> And every time I see the misfit's (Ms. ) name or picture

> anywhere I will exercise my US constitutional right to speak my

> opinion.

But TV stations who think she is a desirable figure should not express

theirs?

You might want to watch how you use the word misfit here. A lot of us

are misfits by society's definition.

> Too many of us are working and cannot get ahead to save our assets.

> When someone shows me the proof Ms is a major contributor for

> Autism, I will shut up then, but not before.

If she was, then there is a good chance I would agree that having her

around is destructive. Not all autism-related charitable donations

actually benefit autistics. I would rather have her spend her money on

a yacht than give it to a charity that wants to eradicate people like me

by any means necessary.

> I too am affected with Asperger's and if I was known of it before I

> married my daughter's mother, I would not have had a child, she has

> much more signs of Autism than her diagnosis of Asperger's.

So having a name for what you have always been would have changed your

mind about reproducing?

> So when I see Ms. 's name in a good light it enrages my anger

> of how the system works or does not work.

I find it an example of how the system failed, but in the other

direction-- I think she was railroaded. I have the same response when

anyone mentions her name in a bad light just because the US government

chose to make an example of her because of her celebrity. I never cared

for her before, but I see her as a sympathetic figure now, although I

still have no use for her boring show.

> The best thing Ms. could do to right herself with America, I

> believe, is to donate much to this research. Until its is thoroughly

> proven she is , I will continue to voice my opinion far and wide.

Umm... okay. You are certainly free to do so.

[Guest guest]

Truthfully, I was comparing conviction vs. non convition. Fact vs. Fact, .

If you did what she did, time included, would you get the good life she is? Come

on, of coarse you wouldn't !.

The conviction is what I'm basing my tangent on and I'm sticking to it.

I challenge Ms. to do good for us, she can't even vote anymore.

Ky

Re: Re: Martha 's return to Society is

Outragous

I just happened to catch this one as I got my email today...

M Wilkins wrote:

> Martha is a slap in the nads to everyone in this country,

> especially those of us living the life as law abiding citizens, as

> well as other thugs not getting the same fair justice

Other thugs? Meaning that Martha is a thug?

Lying to an agent of the government makes you a thug?

> Let's think on this, only for a moment.

>

> O.J. Simpson was aquitted of the charges of murder. Ms. was

> convicted in Federal Court of a Felony Charge that prison time was

> sentenced. Mr Simpson dosen't have a TV show and other endorsements

> today. Just facts of these two high profile cases.

Martha was convicted of lying to a government agent during an

investigation of insider trading. I don't think she did anything

wrong... if the police can lie to us, we can lie to them. When we start

sending cops to prison for telling a suspect that their friend rolled

over on them when they didn't, then I will start considering it

unethical to lie to " authorities. " Until then, all the power to people

who want to lie to the police.

She went to prison for doing what police do nearly every time they open

their mouths during an investigation. O.J. Simpson killed 2 people and

got away with it. They are not exactly the same thing.

I do not mistake legal or illegal for right or wrong, and I do not

mistake convictions for what someone actually did. O.J. was acquitted

and he is not in prison; that is as it should be, and all that his

acquittal means. We are not required to believe that he didn't do it.

Being acquitted does not mean that TV producers or advertisers need to

embrace him... they have the right to free expression just as you do,

and they can shun anyone they want, or hire anyone they want. He would

have a TV show or endorsements if people wanted to see him. He is

unpopular because of the common view that he got away with murder, and

that is why he is not a talk show host.

> Its just wrong for her to be in our face as she is, Kmart, an NBC TV

> show daily, its wrong.

No, it's liberty. She did her time for the trumped up charges they had

her on, and now she is done. She _should_ be free to do anything she

was ever free to do (including being CEO of any company she wishes). If

she was unpopular like O.J. is, she would not continue to do shows and

be a spokesperson.

> US justice is not always as it was meant to be

> " Justice For All " , as per our plege of allegance.

What is so unjust about a person who was accused of lying having a TV

show? She got a rather harsh penalty for lying as it is. I would have

given her a $6 fine and sent her on her way.

> And every time I see the misfit's (Ms. ) name or picture

> anywhere I will exercise my US constitutional right to speak my

> opinion.

But TV stations who think she is a desirable figure should not express

theirs?

You might want to watch how you use the word misfit here. A lot of us

are misfits by society's definition.

> Too many of us are working and cannot get ahead to save our assets.

> When someone shows me the proof Ms is a major contributor for

> Autism, I will shut up then, but not before.

If she was, then there is a good chance I would agree that having her

around is destructive. Not all autism-related charitable donations

actually benefit autistics. I would rather have her spend her money on

a yacht than give it to a charity that wants to eradicate people like me

by any means necessary.

> I too am affected with Asperger's and if I was known of it before I

> married my daughter's mother, I would not have had a child, she has

> much more signs of Autism than her diagnosis of Asperger's.

So having a name for what you have always been would have changed your

mind about reproducing?

> So when I see Ms. 's name in a good light it enrages my anger

> of how the system works or does not work.

I find it an example of how the system failed, but in the other

direction-- I think she was railroaded. I have the same response when

anyone mentions her name in a bad light just because the US government

chose to make an example of her because of her celebrity. I never cared

for her before, but I see her as a sympathetic figure now, although I

still have no use for her boring show.

> The best thing Ms. could do to right herself with America, I

> believe, is to donate much to this research. Until its is thoroughly

> proven she is , I will continue to voice my opinion far and wide.

Umm... okay. You are certainly free to do so.

[Guest guest]

M Wilkins wrote:

> Truthfully, I was comparing conviction vs. non convition. Fact vs.

> Fact, .

You may want to look only at whether she was convicted of something, but

no one else is. This is about popularity, and she has more popularity

than O.J. Simpson, and that is because she is seen as a sympathetic

figure and OJ is not. That's a fact. I like her more now that our

government screwed her over than I did before.

> If you did what she did, time included, would you get the good life

> she is? Come on, of coarse you wouldn't !.

I didn't have the life she did before the government screwed her.

Jealousy does not suit me, so I really don't care what her life is like

for her. Whether others suffer or not has absolutely no bearing on how

happy I am. I don't begrudge anyone happiness. Why would you?

> The conviction is what I'm basing my tangent on and I'm sticking to

> it.

Yes, you keep saying that.

> I challenge Ms. to do good for us, she can't even vote

> anymore.

I don't think that voting really does anything but select one of two

candidates cut from the same cloth, in order to make people think they

have some say in the way things are run, and to give false credibility

for what those candidates do to us on our behalf.

She has no obligation to do good for anyone. She made the best of a bad

situation. There is little use in resenting her for it (and repeatedly

telling everyone that you will keep doing so).

[Guest guest]

wrote:

>You may want to look only at whether she was convicted of something, but

>no one else is. This is about popularity, and she has more popularity

>than O.J. Simpson, and that is because she is seen as a sympathetic

>figure and OJ is not. That's a fact.

Popularity is a fact, yes. Alas. Popularity based on a lot of things

that many autistics don't/can't have (e.g., the ability to be " seen

as a sympathetic figure " ).

I'm not " taking sides " here. Celebrities generally don't interest me,

and I've never had any interest at all in either of the two currently

under discussion. Just struck me that the conversation has moved from

" misfit " to " popularity " / " sympathetic figure, " which could be seen as

two sides of the same coin.

Jane

[Guest guest]

Jane Meyerding wrote:

> wrote:

> > You may want to look only at whether she was convicted of

> > something, but no one else is. This is about popularity, and she

> > has more popularity than O.J. Simpson, and that is because she is

> > seen as a sympathetic figure and OJ is not. That's a fact.

>

> Popularity is a fact, yes. Alas. Popularity based on a lot of things

> that many autistics don't/can't have (e.g., the ability to be " seen

> as a sympathetic figure " ).

Being sent to prison for a bogus charge would do it for me no matter who

the person is. All she had to do to become a sympathetic figure was to

be convicted on charges the government trumped up because someone wanted

to " get " a high profile celebrity to brag about.

I am demurring with the idea that a person should not have anything good

happen in her life once she has been convicted of anything. Conviction

is not the same as doing wrong, and lack of a conviction is not proof of

not doing wrong. That is my point here.

> I'm not " taking sides " here. Celebrities generally don't interest me,

> and I've never had any interest at all in either of the two

> currently under discussion. Just struck me that the conversation has

> moved from " misfit " to " popularity " / " sympathetic figure, " which could

> be seen as two sides of the same coin.

I hopefully have explained why I see her as a sympathetic figure. It is

a fact that in a commercial society like this one, a person who is

popular is likely to have opportunities to host shows, endorse product

lines, et cetera, and that is what is happening here. O.J. does not

have that opportunity, because he is seen as a man who got away with

murder. I simply do not see why someone should be so angry that Martha

is still a celebrity... she really didn't do anything. But even

if she had, I still don't care that people like her. It is their

prerogative to like her, even if her show is about as dull as a fishing

show where no one catches anything.

[Guest guest]

The way I see it, she did her time in jail for her part in the nasty

business.

She got what she deserved and was an example to everyone that even the

famous aren't above the law.

I wouldn't judge her now, I don't really care, now that she's done her time.

OJ is another matter because its murder and he saw NO time incarcerated.

That said, I watch anything involving crafty ideas, and I don't seek Martha

out,. but she ends up on shows that I'm watching as a guest.

It seems she's got some kind of cognitive problem going on, something seems

very different. Either the jail experience made her so sick she got some

sort of neurological episode or she's about to be diagnosed with something

nasty.

K

>

> Re: Martha is back...

>

> Martha is a slap in the nads to everyone in this country,

> especially

> those of us living the life as law abiding citizens, as well as other

> thugs

> not getting the same fair justice.

>

> Let's think on this, only for a moment.

>

> O.J. Simpson was aquitted of the charges of murder.

> Ms. was convicted in Federal Court of a Felony Charge that prison

> time was sentenced.

> Mr Simpson dosen't have a TV show and other endorsements today. Just facts

>

> of these two high profile cases.

>

> Its just wrong for her to be in our face as she is, Kmart, an NBC TV show

> daily, its wrong. US justice is not always as it was meant to be " Justice

> For All " , as per our plege of allegance.

>

> And every time I see the misfit's (Ms. ) name or picture anywhere I

>

> will exercise my US constitutional right to speak my opinion.

>

> Too many of us are working and cannot get ahead to save our assets. When

> someone shows me the proof Ms is a major contributor for Autism, I

>

> will shut up then, but not before.

>

> I too am affected with Asperger's and if I was known of it before I

> married

> my daughter's mother, I would not have had a child, she has much more

> signs

> of Autism than her diagnosis of Asperger's.

>

> I was so high functioning that I was holding a job in Law enforcement, my

> career ended after 15 years after an injury of Gross negligence, and I am

> still waiting for an answer from the State Appeals court for determination

>

> of my hazardous duty retirement pension.

>

> So when I see Ms. 's name in a good light it enrages my anger of

> how

> the system works or does not work.

>

> The best thing Ms. could do to right herself with America, I

> believe, is to donate much to this research. Until its is thoroughly

> proven

> she is , I will continue to voice my opinion far and wide.

>

> I welcome rebuttals to my opinion as I my not be fully informed of all

> facts. I further want to express that I wish to offend no one but only to

> inform how I am offended and how.

>

> All too often business overrides human interests that can result in

> lifetime

> effects.

>

> We have one live to live as we know it here and now, putting aside

> politics

> and religion shouldn't we just show human compassion for mankind everyday?

>

> I think it would help up rest better in our sleep, and live happier per

> day.

>

> My oppinion.

> I'm thankful for the awesome right I have to voice it.

>

> Thank You for reading.

>

> M. Wilkins

> Lexington, Ky.

>

> Re: Martha is back...

>

> At 09:40 AM 12/23/2006, Clay wrote:

> >'Course I'm kidding. Pickle pudding pie is fun to say, but

> >kinda disgusting to think about. I often amuse myself (and

> >my clients) by thinking up unlikely combinations of foods,

> >like, have you ever had a peanut butter and baloney sandwich?

>

> Heh. I know for a FACT my kids tried that one. It didn't begin appearing

> on

> the lunch request list thereafter, so I concluded it probably wasn't very

> good.

>

> >Happy Holidays, everyone!

>

> Likewise.

>

> Z

>

> http://zola.livejournal.com/

>

> " What are we going to do tonight, Brain? "

> " The same thing we do every night, Pinky. We're going to try to take over

> the world!! " ---Pinky and the Brain

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Folks you are missing the point, conviction of a felony offence, where is

justice?

Too many of us, I included have Asperger's as an adult, and I am her to tell

you, this is not fair. Whether or not we believe Mr. Simpson is guilty or not

has not the bearing of my reasoning.

We that are capable of doing very well in society and even more capable of

walking the straight and narrow are labled as strange or odd.

Am I making more sence now?

I also don't always communicate the clearest.

I like so many other decent working folks, want a fair shot at lifetime

happiness.

If we don't stand for what we belive in, we could fall into most anything!

I don't want to talk about this subject anymore, it's discustin!

Merry Christmas All !

Hope you got more in your sock than my piece of Coal, Stampted 'Kmart' !

Ky

Re: Martha is back...

>

> At 09:40 AM 12/23/2006, Clay wrote:

> >'Course I'm kidding. Pickle pudding pie is fun to say, but

> >kinda disgusting to think about. I often amuse myself (and

> >my clients) by thinking up unlikely combinations of foods,

> >like, have you ever had a peanut butter and baloney sandwich?

>

> Heh. I know for a FACT my kids tried that one. It didn't begin appearing

> on

> the lunch request list thereafter, so I concluded it probably wasn't very

> good.

>

> >Happy Holidays, everyone!

>

> Likewise.

>

> Z

>

> http://zola.livejournal.com/

>

> " What are we going to do tonight, Brain? "

> " The same thing we do every night, Pinky. We're going to try to take over

> the world!! " ---Pinky and the Brain

>

>

>

[Guest guest]

Hello, everybody!

I'm " Delila " (an on-line name I've used for almost a decade) and I just got

approved as a member of this group. This is the first email I've gotten, so

let me add my two cents worth.

>

> >

> > Re: Martha is back...

> >

> > Martha is a slap in the nads to everyone in this country,

> > especially

> > those of us living the life as law abiding citizens, as well as other

> > thugs

> > not getting the same fair justice.

> >

> > Let's think on this, only for a moment.

> >

> > O.J. Simpson was aquitted of the charges of murder.

> > Ms. was convicted in Federal Court of a Felony Charge that

> prison

> > time was sentenced.

I agree that OJ should've been convicted and Steward should not have been. I

don't give a damn about her or her endeavors, and I never watch her shows,

etc. but she didn't need to be in jail for something I'm sure every single

corrupt politician in Washington, DC does, insider trading.

> > I too am affected with Asperger's and if I was known of it before I

> > married

> > my daughter's mother, I would not have had a child, she has much more

> > signs

> > of Autism than her diagnosis of Asperger's.

My son has it, too, and worse than I do. He's a smart young man with many

quirks and social problems. I'm sure he'll find his niche.

D.

[Guest guest]

> >... because she is seen as a sympathetic

> >figure and OJ is not. That's a fact.

>

> Popularity is a fact, yes. Alas. Popularity based on a lot of things

> that many autistics don't/can't have (e.g., the ability to be " seen

> as a sympathetic figure " ).

I respectfully disagree on that one. " Sympathetic " in this case

means that the extent of Martha's crime is lying about receiving

insider trading information. The " NT " part of it is that people

liked her more, plus a tendency to protect business associates

even though the associates are doing wrong.

O.J. and Martha may have been just as likable, but the

respective crimes made a difference there. O.J.'s crime

offended people far more than Martha's, especially from a

" likability " standpoint.

The " That's a fact " part is Martha's crime being one of becoming

a party after-the-fact to an insider trading deal. Compare that

with all of the gore that O.J. was implicated with, plus public

resentment that he got off (except for people who considered him

innocent).

I don't think Martha was sympathetic in the sense of being an

extremely likable person (the NT value), but rather in the sense

of, " she made a criminal mistake, and didn't go to extremes in

blaming everyone else. "

- s