Advertisement

Previous   Next

Would you ever go on a court TV show to settle a legal dispute?

Asked at Massachusetts Street on November 8, 2004

Browse the archives

Photo of Ben Wilkins

“No. It just seems so absurd. It’s almost more for show than it is to settle the dispute. Besides, I wouldn’t want to put my business out in public like that.”

Photo of Cathy Cordova

“No, absolutely not. I just don’t feel like those things need to be put in front of the rest of the world.”

Photo of Troy Caskey

“Sure. They pay for it. You waive your rights, and they pay the judgment, so why not?”

Photo of Becke Farha

“No. I think that court TV shows are pretty tasteless.”

Comments

Hi_Jinks 10 years, 1 month ago

Hey! That's not fair, Redneckgal! You beat me with your "Springer comment"!!

:( !!!

Carmenilla 10 years, 1 month ago

Did Lulu call you a name, Fanghorn? The only name-calling I see is from Hugh Jassole (and, oops, me!)

missmagoo 10 years, 1 month ago

what this forum needs is less posts from lulu

missmagoo 10 years, 1 month ago

yeah well we won't even go with what you sound like lulu

Lulu 10 years, 1 month ago

I think having a day in court televised is great. I think the recent arresting of the peace loving war protesters should have a televised trial to show that their cause is just. Who doesn't want peace?

I think that television is a good thing for trials. Ojay Simpson was wrongly accused and had a televised trial because he is a movie star. It made me smile when the jury found him innocent.

Bryan Wilcox 10 years, 1 month ago

Does anyone take you seriously anymore? I think any shred of credibility you ever had left was just whisked away with that comment.

Hi_Jinks 10 years, 1 month ago

I read the article that this question is in relation to. Gee, no mention of Jerry Springer should all else fail for this little girl and her family?! Hmmm...what a shame! Jerry Springer would give both parties involved a good tongue-lashing! And if a fist-fight broke out, and/or chairs were thrown, not to worry! Jerry's off-camera beefy bodyguards would jump right in and pull everyone apart! Nobody would get hurt!

LuLu...."Ojay"??

ive_got_my_ascot_n_my_dickie 10 years, 1 month ago

Those TV judges are retired, so I think it would be fun to appear and give Judge Judy a taste of her own medicine. You could "back-sass" all day and the most she could is is have you escorted from the TV studio. Plus it makes for good TV.

craigers 10 years, 1 month ago

I would definitely not go on Judge Judy. She thinks she is all powerful and full of wisdom, but she really isn't. It is funny when she chews people out on TV though. Now that I think about it though, Judge Judy and Paula Martin looking strikingly similar. Does anybody else see the similarity?

nicegirl 10 years, 1 month ago

I think we should file a class action lawsuit against Lulu and take her to a TV Judge for subjecting us to her absurd stupidity.

Savage 10 years, 1 month ago

Yes... We should tri lulu for her war protests publicly and ask her the last 50 ljworld questions. That way all the world could hear her rampant outrageous absurdities.

Lulu 10 years, 1 month ago

Fangorn, Only the truly enlightened and open minded notice how close minded you are in regards to these worldly and peaceful protesters who are acting locally to bring a better life globally.

Peace on Earth, Good will towards Womyn and Men.

Just because I do not beleive in this fable regarding some ghost in the sky, does not make me a disbeleiver in peace.

Fangorn 10 years, 1 month ago

On the question of TV courts, Ben Wilkins' answer above is exactly right.

It's seriously disturbing that there is anyone left who believes in the innocence O.J. (that's "Orinthal James", Lulu, OK? Or is it "okay"?) Television "trials" are a farce. In any situation, the presence of cameras alters everyone's behavior. In court, cameras could possibly alter the outcome of the trial. Is that justice? If you want to televise the "trial to show that their cause is just", then you'll just cause a show trial.

There are those, exercising their First Amendment rights, who peaceably assemble to protest the war. But has anyone noticed that when right-wing extremists (i.e. mainstream Americans) protest, the community remains intact? When left-wing extremists gather to air their grievances, watch out! From 1968 Chicago to 1999 Seattle (remember $2.5 million of damage?) to enviro-terrorists destroying property in the West. Not all, but too many on the Left can't seem to be up set about an issue without burning or blowing something up.

"Who doesn't want peace", Lulu? The naivete packed into those four words could fill a planet! (And I'm talking one of the gas giants, not any of those little frozen rocks out past Neptune.) It takes two parties to want peace. We are at peace with France (for the most part) and Brazil and Japan (and Australia and Canada and Vanuatu, etc.) because each of these countries also wants peace with us. Radical Islam also wants "peace" but only in the sense of Tacitus, who said of the Romans "Ubi solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant". (They make a desert and call it peace.)

Radical Islam has declared war on the United States, and indeed the entire Western world. It happened years before 9/11. That's just the date when the United States finally decided to fight back. As a member of the military, I want nothing more than peace. It's our lives on the line first when we go to war. But peace is not achieved through surrendering when threatened. We don't need to "understand" the Islamo-fascists, or negotiate with them. We need to defeat them. And protesting, while a great civics lesson, is a lousy history lesson.

Back to the original question, giving these "peace loving war protesters" a television trial would only give them a forum to spout their drivel to a larger audience. Their trial(s) should be conducted in the same as other trials. Those who are found guilty of violating the law should be fined and/or incarcerated. They may claim to want peace, but what they'll get is justice.

badger 10 years, 1 month ago

Fangorn said:

"There are those, exercising their First Amendment rights, who peaceably assemble to protest the war. But has anyone noticed that when right-wing extremists (i.e. mainstream Americans) protest, the community remains intact?"

Fangorn, I submit to you the 'Summer of Mercy', Wichita, 1991, in which a firestorm touched off by right-wing anti-abortion activists resulted in almost 3000 arrests, countless injuries, and significant property damage. I offer as evidence abortion clinic bombings and the death of doctor Benjamin (? not certain of the first name) Gunn, as examples of right-wing extremist violence.

I am in no way defending violent protest on the side of the Left, merely refuting your statement that it is solely their province.

I watched the protest and arrests Saturday from the time they turned onto Ninth until most of the protestors appeared to disband. Those kids broke most of the accepted rules of nonviolent protest. The cops escalated the situation, and the protestors played right along. Swings were taken on both sides, and neither one looked particularly good, really.

When you carryin' pictures of Chairman Mao, You ain't gonna make it with anyone anyhow...

Hugh, you spelled 'dweeb' wrong. I might suggest that if you're correcting the spelling of others, your own be correct.

Fangorn 10 years, 1 month ago

Lulu, your "ghost in the sky" remark is a complete non sequitur. Nowhere in my post did I refer to a deity or religious belief. Radical Islam is mentioned only in regards to its earthly/terroristic goals. You may need to grind that ax somewhere else.

I disagree with you about the protestors, although I do appreciate you conceding the point to me. You see, when you must resort to ad hominem you have essentially declared that my argument was correct. You failed to address the substance of anything I wrote, choosing instead to call me "close minded" while proclaiming yourself "enlightened and open minded". I propose a simple question to demonstrate whose mind is opened or closed on this matter. Conservatives understand that there are times when military action/intervention is not appropriate. Would any of your "worldly and peaceful protesters" ever concede that there are occasions when a military response is warranted? Probably not. For me, there can be debate or discussion on the matter. For many of these protestors, their minds are already made up, or in other words "closed".

And what did any of them do to "better life globally" for the Afghan or Iraqi people before the American military moved it? I could probably list their contributions on the space available on my toenail clippings. This type of person is very accurately described by Dr. Thomas Sowell in his book "The Vision of the Anointed: Self-Congratulation As a Basis for Social Policy". What they do is based more on how it makes them feel about themselves for "doing something" about a problem than it is on whether their actions correct/alleviate the problem.

And a remark and a suggestion to everyone: the name-calling (misspelled or otherwise) greatly detracts from the discussion. Most "misspellings" are more likely typos. We all work to get our thoughts out in a timely fashion. Fingers sometimes slip. If it means that much to you, write your post in MS Word (or Wordperfect if the mention of Bill Gates makes you break out in hives), spell-ckeck it and then copy and paste it to the Journal World website. You can even use the tools to get a word count so you don't go over the allowed limit (although I'm probably the only one for whom this is an issue!).

Carmenilla 10 years, 1 month ago

Try as you might Fanghorn, we will never get rid of the name-calling and senseless BS that goes on on this forum. Rome is the mob, lest you forget and this nation's people love a good reality based hate-fest. As long as there is a place for people to anonymously bash one another, things won't change. Sad but true!

Fangorn 10 years, 1 month ago

Badger, I stand partially corrected. You have offered a valid counterexample. I should have done this myself. I considered mentioning Timothy McVeigh, whose views are (were) considered right-wing, as an example of right-wing violence. But I tend to write more at length and was trying to keep my post shorter, so I omitted this point. Having done that, I should have written that during right-wing protests, the community tends to remain intact.

That is why I say "partially" corrected. Not all left-protests are violent, and not all right-protests are peaceful. Most left-wing protests are peaceful. We've had a number of them here in Lawrence. I will refine my point to say that the preponderance of occasions when protest turns to riot and destruction are left-wing. I know you are not defending violence from either side of the aisle. But unfortunately left-wing violence and destruction are often defended by "progressives". And when the perpetrators of violence are caught and convicted, many of their less extreme fellow travelers urge lenience in sentencing. Those of us who are truly pro-life condemned the murder of Dr. David Gunn. And given the opportunity, many right-wingers (including me) would have injected McVeigh themselves.

But when you talk about destruction Don't you know that you can count me out

Lulu: a point. Did you see how Badger responded to the substance of what I wrote? He/she cited specific information to refute my assertion. And at no point did he/she feel the need to call me names. This is disagreement without being disagreeable. And it is what makes this forum interesting and enjoyable. You (and a few others) might want to try it sometime.

Fangorn 10 years, 1 month ago

Carmenilla, I consider calling someone "close minded" without further remark to be in the realm of name-calling. If someone were to call me close minded and then back that up with something (points that I've made, my receptiveness to new information, etc.), that could merely be a description or assertion. But simply to call someone "close minded" because they disagree with you seems very grade school. An unwarranted adjective can be name-calling just as much as a noun. I don't take this personally. I just want to elevate the tone of the discuss a bit. I know it's like fighting the tide, but if my remarks cause one person to post more thoughfully it will have been worth it.

Carmenilla 10 years, 1 month ago

I'll give you this, Fanghorn......You're a dreamer! I have seen this forum erupt into the worst kind of mudslinging. It gets pretty ugly around here. But the reality is that when the Lulus of the world come out to play they are fair game for ALL. I consider myself a Liberal but find Lulu moronic, whereas someone like Hugh Jass or Hoof_Hearted gets no condemnation for bad behavior from people who agree with their sentiment. Maybe you should address the name-calling ding-dongs on either side.

ms_canada 10 years, 1 month ago

what this forum needs are a few more intelligent posts by people like fangorn (notice i got the spelling correct) and larry. way to go, guys!!! a little, no a lot less of the ridiculous name calling. who cares if the spelling is a o k. ciao, ragazzi! adios muchachos!! (so long, fellows)

Lulu 10 years, 1 month ago

Can't we all get along? Gee! Miss Magoo wants to censor me. You sound like the fascists that took down the peaceful protesters with force.

Fangorn 10 years, 1 month ago

Carmenilla, "dreamer" may be the most accurate term, but I prefer to set high standards. Especially for myself. So if you catch me name-calling or making sweeping generalizations, etc., please call me on it. As for admonishing name-calling by those who may be more inclined to agree with me, I have done this. Most recently last Friday (or was it Saturday?). And I will continue to do so. I would prefer to nudge the posts gently away from name-calling and toward substantive discussion. Only very occasionally is it desirable to smack someone up side the head with a big stick. Like someone who claims to have (or perhaps even be) a "large posterior".

As for "censoring" Lulu, I don't think that's a good idea. Honestly, I'm not sure her musings help the causes she supports. Would it surprise anyone to learn that she's actually a right-wing mole sent to make the left look bad? It's probably Karl Rove's doing! ;-)~ And, Lulu, language has to mean something. Abuse of terms like "fascist" reduces their impact. I use the term "Islamo-fascist" because it accurate distinguishes these terrorists and their goals from the vast majority of Muslims in the world. But to call all law enforcement you don't like "fascism" merely robs the word of any meaning. If you really want a perspective on fascism, read a book about the German or Italian social and political climate of the 1920s and 30s.

nicegirl 10 years, 1 month ago

Okay, is it just me or is Fangorn getting on anyone else's nerves?? Seriously, nobody speaks the way that this guy writes. Quit trying to be all zen and politically correct. Just say what you want (in as few words as possible please) and quit trying to appease everyone.

Lulu: Those protesters deserved to be arrested. They have a right to protest until they start blocking traffic and walking down the middle of the street. Also, my husband is a law enforcement officer and I can say first hand he is not a fascist.

And speaking of protests, did anyone else catch the nuts protesting the treatment of chickens in fron of KFC this weekend? Get a life people.

Larry 10 years, 1 month ago

Hey - welcome back Hoofy or is it hugh_Jass?

Lulu - win well this cichology studie of the Intranet be concluded. It is realy geting old listening to yourr post. You ur not a wreal person and u no it. :o) You do make me laugh though!

Was my spelling in terms that you could understand? Come on Lulu - I called it two or three months ago. All your pinhead (one for hoofy) classmates up on the hill can't believe that someone caught on so soon. You're entire class is paranoid now and you're all trying to figure out who the mole is that let the cat out of the bag.

Larry 10 years, 1 month ago

I just got home from work and had a great laugh reading all of these posts. The question was "Would you ever go on a court TV show to settle a legal dispute?" My wife had to come find out why I was laughing so hard. Half way through the post, the whole thing veered towards Lulu. Good job guys! It is nice to see that you are all kicking and in true form. It was a fun way to end a long day! One question for ms canada. Is it getting cold up there? Maybe Lulu can come up and keep you guys warm.

As for letting court TV settle my disputes. No - I'd rather be the judge that gets to shoot everyone down and speak his true opinion at all the idiots who come into court with ridiculous claims. That would be GREAT!

Have a great evening. I'm going downstairs to snuggle up with my wife in front of the television. Opps - could it be possible that I want to show my wife some attention if I'm part of the Promise Keeper organization. Hmmmmmm. Let's see. I cooked her dinner last weekend, rubbed her back, took her out to dinner, did some laundry (mine, she won't let me do her laundry :o) and you know what - she's worth every bit of it.

Hi_Jinks 10 years, 1 month ago

".........nobody speaks the way that this guy writes......."

nicegirl, you make me laugh! And you're right, when people start protesting out in front of KFC, well.......that's just plain sad! What a waste of time!

Hoofy.......you're back from the dead, I see! (Under a different moniker, of course!) I just knew you couldn't stay away too long!

ms_canada 10 years, 1 month ago

yes larry it is getting cold up here. when i looked out my front window this morning it was snowing and i thought about the offer of the $1200/mon. condo. i will have to work out the math on the conversion of the can$ to the us$ i believe a us $ will cost me $1.20 at this time. 2 weeks ago before i went to montana i bought $200us and it cost me 250 something. that is the best it has been for years. once it was 57 cents. one thing about lulu coming up here, her $$ will go pretty far. how about it lulu, want to come. i have a spare room. i live in wayne gretzky country. at least it was his country a few years back. comprende?

nicegirl 10 years, 1 month ago

Sorry Fangorn. I'm usually a little tamer than I have been tonight. I think I have a touch of some kind of icky virus or something. I'm just not myself today.

What is up with this Scuddy character?? Did Lulu get a second moniker just so she could pose as another insane looney?? It's not like anyone else could really agree with her.

Fangorn 10 years, 1 month ago

nicegirl, I don't mean to bug ya. But accusing me of being politically correct! You wound me. I know the "he/she" pronoun is awkward at best, but I didn't want to make assumptions about Badger's sex. Speaking in person, I'd (hopefully) know which to say. btw, how was I being "zen"?

Actually, I do speak the way I write. And so do most of my friends, both right and left. Sloppy writing often flows from sloppy thought processes. I try to avoid both. And I don't believe asking for civility is an attempt to appease.

And although some points of discussion almost demand thorough refutation or elucidation, I'll try to make future posts brief. Just don't call me "politically correct" again. If anyone else hears that, they'll revoke my membership in the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy!

scuddy 10 years, 1 month ago

Hi Lulu,

I just wanted to thank you for the compliment the other night when I was on the board. I am glad to know that there are still a few sane people left in the world. I have read some of your comments also and completely agree with you. I am also scared of the Christian taliban (very clever). Have a nice night and peace!

I do honk for hemp!!

Larry 10 years, 1 month ago

Nicegirl,

Funny that you should ask that about scuddy and Lulu. If you go back a few days (question about the voting process and whether or not it went smoothly), you'll see that a debate continues to go on between scuddy and myself. Earlier this evening, I made reference to scuddy about his similarities to Lulu and within an hour, he posts the above compliment to Lulu. Hummmmm!

Fangorn 10 years, 1 month ago

No offense taken, nicegirl, so no need to apologize. I was actually trying to be a bit tongue in cheek in my last post. Perhaps I'm not good at it? I honestly don't want to be an annoyance to anyone who is genuinely interested in discussion. (On the other hand, I wouldn't mind flaming some of the more. . . conversationally challenged people who post.)

I do hope you start feeling better. Get lots of fluids and vitamin C. Rest well, everyone. Good night.

scuddy 10 years, 1 month ago

Larry,

So we meet again. I was hoping I was through with you. I don't really care if you compare me to Lulu. Lulu has said some clever things. I think your pissed because you know some of what I have said is true and you are intimidated and by the way I am a woman. Lets get that one straight. You are so insecure its pathetic. If it weren't for "liberals" you would have absolutely no life. When I got on this board tonight, I was writing to Lulu not to you or anyone else. I would expect a response from Lulu maybe but it seems my name is popping up everywhere now. I think you started everyone hating on Lulu because that is what you are best at- gossiping and spreading hate. Being the great Christian that you are, you have tunnel vision and see things from your point of view only. I hope that attacking me,Lulu and Ms canada and I am sure many others has filled you up tonight Larry. I hope you will sleep better knowing that you may have insulted some people this evening.

Larry 10 years, 1 month ago

scuddy - why yes thank you, I did sleep well tonight. Knowing George W. Bush is in charge of our military and in charge of our country is of great comfort. As for insulting people, I'd say that anyone that I addressed must have razor thin skin if they felt that I insulted them. Good grief, if you don't want to debate, don't make ridiculous statements that you can't back up. Then, when someone calls you on it, don't "FLIP FLOP" and try to make that person out to be the bad guy. Face it scuddy - you are class A liberal. You have no point, but you get personal with every attack on me. I don't intend to be mean with the liberal comment, but it seems to me that every liberal that I've spoken with will do the same exact thing. Okay scuddy - have you given up yet or do you want to debate some more. If so, let us discuss the issues and avoid the personal attacks. Fair? I promise not to call you a liberal and discuss ONLY the issues as I am still waiting on valid reasons for your stance(s). You can call me conservative, neo Christian, selfish, full of hate (as you have in the past) whatever - it doesn't bother me as I know it is part of the debate. A strategy used to get the other person off balance and mad.

Commenting has been disabled for this item.