OJ Simpson

[Squeek]

OK, here's another post that probably should be in the off-topic section, but I can see social and political implications from all this -- so here goes.

Most of us have already heard that OJ Simpson was recently arrested and will soon be charged with robbery, assault, burglary and conspiracy. He's facing what could be decades in prison if he's found guilty. This comes right on top of news that his controversial book will be published after all and that the profits will be going to Ron Goldman's family.

I'm concerned about how black Americans will react if he's convicted. There's already some brew ha ha over Michael Vick and the trouble he's in over dog fighting. If Simpson gets convicted and receives a stiff sentence, I think the pot could boil over.

[magerette]

What is it with this man? If nothing else, that tasteless "book" being published is a crime against literacy. Whether he will ever be convicted of anything and what the effects may be is anyone's guess, though. Many sincerely believe he was framed.
AFA Michael Vick--dogfighting is a disgusting crime, but we all know if he wasn't a sports figure it wouldn't get three lines on page ten of his local paper.

[txa1265]

I have heard people getting up in arms about 'racism' being involved with the whole Michael Vick thing ... gimme a break!

[Squeek]

I've lived in Orange County for a while now, and I remember what it was like here when the OJ verdict was announced. It was surreal the way opinion divided along racial lines.

The Rodney King rioting occurred a few years before that, and it was the same way then. People you worked with for years and thought you knew suddenly surprised you by seeing the whole thing completely differently.

For a while I actually lived across the street and a couple of doors down from a beach house that OJ and Nicole owned in Laguna. That was a fun thing to mention in conversation until the murders occurred. Nobody would believe it after that.

[Corwin]

Simpson is an idiot studying to become a moron!! He got away with it once and hasn't learned a thing!! None of this is racial, it's criminal!!

[dteowner]

The spin-doctoring has already begun. Because there was a tape recorder handy for the incident (a convenient coincidence, admittedly), the cries of "set up" have begun. I just don't know that the black community really claims OJ anymore. Heck, Chris Rock has 5 minutes of OJ material in his show.

[Kayla]

Simpson is an idiot studying to become a moron!! He got away with it once and hasn't learned a thing!! None of this is racial, it's criminal!!

Very well said. I agree completely.

[mudsling3]

Shouldn't this combine with the Hilton thread :)

[zakhal]

He doesnt even have the money to hire top lawyers this time. Looks like hes going to go down this time for sure.

[Squeek]

Looks like hes going to go down this time for sure.I don't know what to think about his chances of being convicted. If you were to name the one place in the US where the law particularly frowned on armed robbery, it would have to be Las Vegas, Nevada. It's not hard to imagine why, either. So you would expect OJ to have the book thrown at him, regardless of his celebrity.

On the other hand, I was listening to a legal analyst on CNN last night who made it sound like the authorities might have a tough time convincing a jury to convict him.

It's the pictures of OJ handcuffed and escorted by police that I don't like. He's black, and they're white -- just like last time. I'm sure there are still black Americans who see OJ as a victim.

[Squeek]

Today thousands of protesters are in Louisiana, objecting to what they feel is unfair treatment of six black teenagers they’re calling "The Jena Six." It's the pot starting to boil over, and I don't think it's a coincidence. A CNN analyst (http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2007/09/20/roland.martin.jena.6.cnn)even referred to OJ today while explaining the dynamics of the issue.

Rowland Martin is exceptional, and I respect him deeply. But I don't think he quite understands the mixed view white Americans have of black Americans. Some American blacks are playing by an odd set of rules, especially ones for the way they deal with non-blacks. Until those change, blacks are going to remain stuck.

That's because the message they're sending isn't always the message others are receiving. Right now it's too easy for everyone to assume blacks are to blame whenever something occurs like what’s been happening in Louisiana.

Bill Cosby got it right. Today blacks need to step up to the plate and do their best. They need to accomplish that first. That would enable them to achieve the goals they're trying to achieve.

An obvious problem with that is that it isn’t exactly fair. All things considered, why should blacks have to watch their attitude? Why should they have to make an effort in order to be treated fairly? But the world isn't always fair, is it?

Al Sharpton and other black leaders are all about objecting to unfair treatment, and that’s simply the wrong thing to be putting their emphasis on at the moment. OJ is a magnet for that kind of thinking, and that's why I think it would be a disaster if he were sent to prison for the rest of his life.

[dteowner]

So you're saying he should get a free pass simply because he's black? Puh-leeze.

[Squeek]

Who said anything about a pass at all? I'm saying I think it could be a disaster in terms of race relations.

[elkston]

I'm concerned about how black Americans will react if he's convicted. There's already some brew ha ha over Michael Vick and the trouble he's in over dog fighting. If Simpson gets convicted and receives a stiff sentence, I think the pot could boil over.

Wow dude, you don't give us any credit at all for thinking critically and forming our OWN opinion about certain situations.

Do you really think every black american is ready to get up and riot at the drop of a hat? As if we don't have other things to concern us as just PEOPLE and not always thinking about the "black" thing.

If Simpson gets convicted this time then I won't lose any sleep over it.

Regardless of the facts at hand, he chose to put himself in this risky situation -- knowing that the public and law enforcement were waiting for just one slip-up to finally throw the book at him.


Bill Cosby got it right. Today blacks need to step up to the plate and do their best. They need to accomplish that first. That would enable them to achieve the goals they're trying to achieve.

An obvious problem with that is that it isn’t exactly fair. All things considered, why should blacks have to watch their attitude? Why should they have to make an effort in order to be treated fairly? But the world isn't always fair, is it?


Well unfortunately this is the truth. And I agree with Cosby as well. Your concern about our behaviour with respect to the OJ thing is a testament to the low opinion the general public (in America) has with black americans.

We always have to go the extra mile just to get the benefit of the doubt white people automatically have.

[Squeek]

Do you really think every black american is ready to get up and riot at the drop of a hat? As if we don't have other things to concern us as just PEOPLE and not always thinking about the "black" thing.No, Elkston. I really don't. I'm concerned that some might. Here in Southern California, they've done it twice before.

Right now there are folks working hard to raise awareness of the "black" thing. I'm saying I think we don't need another round of the OJ thing. It's right on the heals of the Duke University lacrosse thing and right in the middle of the Michael Vick and Jena Six things.

[Corwin]

Pardon my ignorance, but I just don't get this 'black' race thing. I watch and admire black athletes, I watch and admire black actors, they are people, no different to white, so why is it such a huge issue in the States?

[magerette]

I have to agree with Elkston that these issues are not just "black issues" but everybody's issues. My first reaction to the Jena Six activism was to think it misplaced and over-reactive (mostly because I have a knee-jerk reaction to Sharpton, et. al. that says they are glory-seeking MLK wanna-be's riding it for their own benefit ) but when I really look at the situation, isn't the plain and simple idea behind it all that this focus on automatic stereotyping be brought to the public eye and that excessive use of force or circumvention of normal legal protections be acknowledged as broken parts of our society? These people are marching and protesting lawfully, not burning down Watts. Hopefully those ugly pages in our history have been turned for good.

It's a difficult thing for many whites to see blacks outside of the ghetto stereotype; surely it's just as difficult for blacks to see whites outside the bigot stereotype as well. If the issues Squeek is raising cause some unrest in our society it's not necessarily a bad thing.This kind of activisim is part of the democratic process and can result in change that benefits everybody.

Hopefully, anyway. :) Just my $.02.

[Korplem]

Pardon my ignorance, but I just don't get this 'black' race thing. I watch and admire black athletes, I watch and admire black actors, they are people, no different to white, so why is it such a huge issue in the States?

Because people have always been and always will be fucking retarded. The image that the black community has is the 50 cent-G Unit-Bling Wearing-Gun Toting-Gangstas. The accuracy of that image is up for debate but it's the one that prevails. Some black people embrace it and alienate themselves from normal people. Some white people assume they all do and alienate black people from normal people.

What it boils down to is that not everybody lives cookie cutter lives but somehow this facet gets a spotlight.

[Corwin]

From my perspective, racism of any sort is simply moronic!! People are people and the colour of their skin, or the shape of their eyes, should mean no more than the colour of their hair!!

[Korplem]

I completely agree.

[YellowWing]

I feel sad that USA is still in "Black Race Issues"
Even sadder since the N word at times is used here,

When will that sort of pepole learn that Human are Humans they Bleed the same color they laugh and cry tears the same as we do

I say let the trail begian and let OJ face whats comeing to him,
That is if they can find a Jury??

[txa1265]

I feel sad that USA is still in "Black Race Issues"

It isn't just the USA nor is it just 'black race issues' ... there is a tendency to shun that which is different, and regardless of how we advance we continue to do it worldwide based on color, religion, race, gender, language, age, weight, and on and on ... and yes, it really is sad.

[dteowner]

Oh, boo-frickin-hoo. Racism goes both directions, but you don't see too many white people burning down LA over it. I don't minimize the legitimate complaints of the 60's. In this day and age, with the laws such as they are, racism is more about perception than systematic marginalization (is that a word?). The black community thinks whitey is out get them. The white community thinks every black guy is a thug and every black woman is a welfare mom. Sad and wrong, but doesn't really limit anyone.

I agree with magerette that a big part of the problem is the people the black community allows to speak for and represent them. Jesse and Al do blacks a disservice. By getting involved in stupid crusades like OJ and Duke Lacrosse, they make it far easier for whites to dismiss legitimate problems.

Edit-- So, I stumbled on an interesting question. Is the "Jena Six" thing a racial hate crime? 6 kids of one race beat the crap out of 1 kid of another race over racial problems. Sounds like hate crime fodder to me. Now, does it change your answer if I mention that the 6 guys were black and the 1 guy was white?

[magerette]

About Jackson and Sharpton: to me they ooze "con artist" out of every pore, but then so does Bill Clinton--we won't even talk about Dubyah. So in that sense the black community is as trapped with the hucksters as the white community.

AFA the real story on what happened in Jena, LA, who knows. The beating itself is tied into a series of incidents, described somewhat exhaustively here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jena_Six)in a wikipedia article that has disclaimers about bias--I can't tell from reading it in which direction the bias leans myself--but it's obvious there's more to the story than an unprovoked beating--not that there's ever a real moral excuse for any 6-on-1 beating.

I'd say there was plenty of hate going on from all parties involved. And I'd once again point my finger at the media for making this such a divisive cause celebre. As this heats up on the front burner of national news, it may indeed provide some fuel for the kind of explosion Squeek is talking about if people don't get a grip.

[Prime Junta]

You know what strikes me about this discussion?

Issues, policies, records of achievements are only mentioned in passing -- if even that. It's all about how someone "oozes 'con artist'" or "is made of cardboard" or "presented himself as a war hero" or "is incoherent" or what have you. If you're so focused on how a politician "comes across," why are you surprised you end up with slick con artists who can talk the hind leg off a donkey but can't govern worth a damn?

[magerette]

I think it's unrealistic to expect people not to judge others on "how they come across." And with a politician that's the cornerstone of his trade. If there's some deeper value or some significant accomplishment, it's usually quite evident in the person's life. No one judges Hawking by how he "comes across."

I think what's happened is that the occupation of public service no longer attracts statesmen. Instead we have careerists with no larger vision of the country or the world than how to best turn it to their personal advantage.

Do any of the people we've discussed actually have records of achievements? Did they create effective policies? Have they helped my country in some way? Have they been sincere public servants and benefactors? If so, I'd be happy to revise my opinion on their cardboard qualities. Curiously Undead listed an achievement of John Kerry's that is significant to me and if there are others for Gore, Sharpton or Jackson, I'd be happy to hear them and grateful to know I was wrong about them.

I don't deny the worthiness of the issues any of these men have embraced but I question their motives. Isn't this type of criticism an attempt to NOT invest in "slick con artists who can talk the leg off a donkey?" Don't the best con men pick the most surefire scams? Don't you have to separate them from the issues so that the issues themselves have their own integrity unmuddied?

As I age I find myself less trusting and more judgmental about public figures, and of course, I've seen a lot of lying go down. It's impossible not to be affected by it.

I'm not a historian or political analyst and I'm sorry if I come across that way in any of my statements. I don't have any answers-none at all.

..why are you surprised you end up with slick con artists who can talk the hind leg off a donkey but can't govern worth a damn?

The last thing I am is surprised, Prime J. It would be the opposite that would fill me with a very pleased surprise. :)

[Corwin]

Most slick con men these days either become politicians or televangelists!! I wouldn't trust either as far as I could spit into a hurricane!!

[Prime Junta]

I think it's unrealistic to expect people not to judge others on "how they come across." And with a politician that's the cornerstone of his trade. If there's some deeper value or some significant accomplishment, it's usually quite evident in the person's life. No one judges Hawking by how he "comes across."

In my neck of the woods, the discourse is 90% policy, 10% appearances.

I think what's happened is that the occupation of public service no longer attracts statesmen. Instead we have careerists with no larger vision of the country or the world than how to best turn it to their personal advantage.

Why do you think this has happened?

Do any of the people we've discussed actually have records of achievements? Did they create effective policies? Have they helped my country in some way? Have they been sincere public servants and benefactors? If so, I'd be happy to revise my opinion on their cardboard qualities. Curiously Undead listed an achievement of John Kerry's that is significant to me and if there are others for Gore, Sharpton or Jackson, I'd be happy to hear them and grateful to know I was wrong about them.

Well, one of the "con men" you mentioned -- Clinton -- *did* preside over the apogee of American power and influence, an economy that was running a triple surplus, low unemployment, a balanced budget, and so on.

I don't deny the worthiness of the issues any of these men have embraced but I question their motives. Isn't this type of criticism an attempt to NOT invest in "slick con artists who can talk the leg off a donkey?" Don't the best con men pick the most surefire scams? Don't you have to separate them from the issues so that the issues themselves have their own integrity unmuddied?

Perhaps it is -- but it's a completely wrong-headed attempt. If you stick to what kind of "vibe" you get from a politician, instead of examining what they've actually done, what the substance of their policies is, whether they vote like they talk, and so on, all you'll get is... a more convincing con-man.

For example, taking the current crop of presidential hopefuls, what do you know of their positions on healthcare, Iraq, fixing the infrastructure, balancing the budget, taxation, social policy, the growing gap in income inequality, and so on? I'm a media junkie, and I tell you it's unbelievably hard to find out *anything* about this -- all you find is how the "came across" to some "focus group." Nobody actually reports what they actually propose to do, or whether what they propose actually makes any kind of sense. And you, whom I've come to respect a fair bit here, do exactly the same thing!

So, re Sharpton, Jackson, and Gore -- why don't you do a bit of research yourself? These guys have quite long careers behind them. Surely there's *something* they've actually accomplished, other than just talk?

[Squeek]

Well, OJ was able to get out on bail.

[dteowner]

One wonders where OJ got $12,500 cash when he's supposedly so broke he can't pay a dime to the Goldmans.

[magerette]

@ Prime Junta. I have to admit that I'm so turned off to politics that I don't like to look "under the hood." It's like lifting a rock. I don't believe my vote means anything, and I've long felt we're on the downturn of civilization's spiral cycle, so what's the use. If we should happen to get a real leader, someone will most likely just come along and assassinate him/her.

And you're right, attitudes like this are not pro-active and don't help foster change. The problem I have with facts and research is that they really can be made to say anything, so I do go by the infamous "gut feeling" logic. And many times it's wrong. I had a really high opinion of Ross Perot for awhile. :)

However, your words are not in vain. Before I scurry out with the rest of the hive members in 2008, I promise you I will make an attempt to look more closely at the background and policies of those from whom I am allowed to select.

And after googling a bit about Sharpton I see that he has actually done quite a bit for civil rights besides just talk, especially in his early career, and is also against cruelty to animals and despite being a Baptist minister pro gay rights and marriage. Jackson's main claim to fame seems to be his association with Martin Luther King and friendship with the Clintons, though his 1988 presidential platform was progressive beyond its time. Still, the instances where he has chosen to exert influence are all high profile and look more like media candy than serious activism, not to mention the anti-semitic flavor of some remarks over the years. I give him brownie points for personally visiting and speaking up for Chavez after Pat Robertson's inflammatory anti-Chavez remarks, though.

And you can imagine my astonishment when I came across this:

Gore's 2007 book, The Assault on Reason, is an analysis of what he calls the "emptying out of the marketplace of ideas" in civic discourse, which, according to Gore, is due to the influence of electronic media, especially television, and which endangers American democracy; but he also expresses the belief that the Internet can revitalize and ultimately "redeem the integrity of representative democracy."[6] (wikipedia)

However, then there is this from Snopes.com (http://www.snopes.com/politics/bush/house.asp)(the Urban Legends website):
RE: Al Gore's residence: Status: True
A 20-room mansion (not including 8 bathrooms) heated by natural gas. Add on a pool (and a pool house) and a separate guest house all heated by gas. In ONE MONTH ALONE this mansion consumes more energy than the average American household in an ENTIRE YEAR. The average bill for electricity and natural gas runs over $2,400.00 per month. In natural gas alone (which last time we checked was a fossil fuel), this property consumes more than 20 times the national average for an American home. This house is not in a northern or Midwestern "snow belt," either. It's in the South.

According to the Associated Press, the Gore's 10,000 square foot Belle Meade residence consumes electricity at a rate of about 12 times the average for a typical house in Nashville (191,000 kwh versus 15,600 kwh). While there are mitigating factors (further discussed in our article about the Gore household's energy use), this is still a surprising number, given that the residence is approximately four times the size of the average new American home.


While I can't say that this research has totally altered my original instinctive opinions, I do now see at least one of these people a bit less two dimensionally.

Anyway, all this is quite off topic. Apologies to all. :)

[dteowner]

I burned a vote on H Ross all those years ago. Sure, the guy turned out to be a total nutjob, but he had more honesty about the state of the USA than the other guys combined (Slick Willie and Bob Dole?) and anyone since. He wouldn't have gotten any cooperation from Congress on either side of the aisle, so there would have been nothing accomplished had he gotten in office. It was still refreshing to have a national-level politician not spout "rainbows and unicorns" and blow smoke up my keister.

[Prime Junta]

@ Prime Junta. I have to admit that I'm so turned off to politics that I don't like to look "under the hood." It's like lifting a rock. I don't believe my vote means anything, and I've long felt we're on the downturn of civilization's spiral cycle, so what's the use. If we should happen to get a real leader, someone will most likely just come along and assassinate him/her.

Hey, *I'm* supposed to be the resident cynic here. Did you forget? :p

[magerette]

With only a 29% Combativeness score, (http://www.okcupid.com/tests/1532690756472625027/RPG-Class) I won't argue that one. I can only imagine how cynical you will be by the time you hit your fifth decade. ;) Of course, some say cynicism is just the defensive side of idealism... :meditate: but my Spirituality score limits my ability to identify the truth in that. :)

[Prime Junta]

With only a 29% Combativeness score, (http://www.okcupid.com/tests/1532690756472625027/RPG-Class) I won't argue that one. I can only imagine how cynical you will be by the time you hit your fifth decade. ;) Of course, some say cynicism is just the defensive side of idealism... :meditate: but my Spirituality score limits my ability to identify the truth in that. :)

To drop the pretenses for a moment (this is a role-playing game site, after all), I don't consider myself a cynic, nor an idealist. Cynicism is nothing more than an attempt at retaining some self-respect when admitting defeat, whereas idealism represents willful blindness to the facts.

I'm very, very big on facts. And I believe that change for the better is possible.

Whatever the question, my first attempt is to find out what the facts are, at least to a reasonable degree of precision. Only then do I form an opinion. If the facts or my understanding of the facts change, I change my opinion.

Two of my favorite sayings (the first one is a dead giveaway about my nationality to any of my compatriots here):

"The beginning of all wisdom is to accept the facts,"

and

"Politics is the art of the possible."

I don't have much patience for wonderful plans that have very little chance of success and a very high cost of failure (Communism, bringing democracy to the Middle East on the back of an M1A1, Libertarianism, Objectivism, Anarchism, or most other -isms for that matter). Nor do I have much patience or respect for pure pursuit of self-interest disguised as working for the common good.

OK, getting off soapbox again.

[magerette]

I'm assuming your latest clue to your country of origin is in translation, because I can't find it in several web searches. You would (well maybe not) be surprised at what antithetical notions constitute the beginning of all wisdom though:
Suspicion is the beginning of wisdom, and of madness. ATTRIBUTION:Mason Cooley (b. 1927), U.S. aphorist.
The fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom. ATTRIBUTION:Bible: Hebrew Psalms, 111:10....
You can't trust God to be unmerciful.There you have the beginning of all wisdom. ATTRIBUTION:Robert Frost (1874-1963), U.S. poet
To conquer fear is the beginning of wisdom...Bertrand Russell


I appreciate the concept you advocate of being fact-driven and using it positively. It's a difficult mission in life, but without that desire to see straight on, circumstantial myopia often turns into willing blindness.

EDIT Another thread totally hijacked. Sorry, Squeek. I'll shut up so we can see if anybody has anything to say about the Juice.

[Corwin]

EDIT Another thread totally hijacked. Sorry, Squeek. I'll shut up so we can see if anybody has anything to say about the Juice.

Moderate amounts of orange juice can be beneficial, but too much can cause medical problems!! :)

[Squeek]

This subject is dead, I guess, but I'll point out that The Juice is under arrest again (http://www.cnn.com/2008/CRIME/01/11/simpson.bail/index.html), and the details are sketchy.

Violating the terms of his bail might land him in jail for at least the duration of his trial, I think. He's in the custody of his bail bondsman at You Ring We Spring (and don't they sound classy?). I wonder if a bounty hunter nabbed him.

[txa1265]

You Ring We Spring

I thought you were joking ...

[magerette]

Like the old NYC mortuary slogan? "You Stab Em We Slab Em."

[txa1265]

Like the old NYC mortuary slogan? "You Stab Em We Slab Em."

I love Carrie Fisher's hair shop in 'Blues Brothers' - Curl Up & Dye :D

[Prime Junta]

How about Dick's Hot Dogs? "If you love hot dogs, you'll love Dick's!"

[dteowner]

Bob and Tom have a bunch of those sorts of things. Heck, they're not even allowed to play "Dickens Cider" anymore.