I wonder what the average africanamerican, hispanic or poor white kid would have gotten with so many drug cases and failures to comply with probation. Oh well. It reminds me of a cartoon I saw. There is this great enormous court bench with this judge sitting what looks to be about 20 feet above some small little guy standing in front of him. The judge says:I'm sorry, sir, but crime does not pay at your level!
I thought this BBS had established that neither Ms Bush's drug problem nor a man expiring after attempting to jump the Great Wall on a bicycle is funny. If only Ms Bush would try to jump the Great Wall on a bicycle after a good snort of coke, now THAT would be funny.
I didn't say she looked funny, I said she looked stoned... Now, if some people on the BBS happen to think that stoned people look amusing, then it's not MY fault!
She takes after her uncle. Noelle is off to a helluva start. At this rate, she'll be president in 25 to 30 years.
I thought she was in possession of crack cocaine. Doesn't that carry a mandatory sentence in Florida......unless your a bush of course.....
Liberals don't want harsh penalties. Libertarians don't want any penalties at all. But given that there ARE harsh penalties, all fair people would like to see those penalties handed down in an even-handed manner. There's been a great deal of debate regarding the harsh sentences for crack possession versus the light penalties for coke in powder form. The problem being that it's the same drug and that poor folks use the rock while rich folks use the powder, hence the appearance of unfair sentencing favoring the rich. In this case, a rich girl got a light sentence for rock. And people who believe that poor people are punished unduly harshly while rich people get off light are complaining. What's confusing?
I guess what I maen is that you have two convictions that would seem to call for opposite results. On the one hand you want her to go to receive the harsh penalties, since she is rich. On the other hand you do not want her to receive the harsh penalties because you think they are wrong. I guess I just found it interesting that the chance to bash a Bush outweighed the chance to say "good for them for not giving unduly harsh penalties." Myself, I say throw the book at her. Oh, and it was a joke. I am not really at all confused as to why the back-slapping cadre would want a Bush to be treated harshly.
Your attempts at catching us liberals in a hypocritical position are thus far unsuccessful. Try again, though. We do hold several hypocritical positions, as do our right wing brothers. Let me speak slower (and, incidentally, for myself only)... I am against any penalties at all for drug possession. Given that there ARE penalties for drug possession, I am against the unfair way these penalties are meted out. Do you find a contradiction there? I'm not happy when anyone who has done harm only to themselves goes to jail. I do, however, find a tiny silver lining if this incident does anything to expose the hyocrisy in current drug sentencing. And if Noelle Bush does ten days, it damn well better be the same sentence for a black man with a court appointed attorney.
