Spike Lee « Thread Started on Mar 30, 2012, 8:55am »
I was just reading about the "Settlement" reached by Spike Lee's attorneys, to pay off the family who's address was tweeted by African American Celebrity Spike Lee. It was, of course, the wrong George Zimmerman. What was the purpose of tweeting the address of a man with a New Black Panther Bounty on his head to begin with?
I just have to wonder, what if Ted Nugent had tweeted the wrong address of some old black folks in connection with a shooting by a black man. Would the media just let it go, as easily as Spike Lee will be dismissed, as an over Zealous Nicks fan? I think know the answer.
On a separate note, George Zimmerman of men's warehouse, should roll out a new line of Men's hoodies. Those things would fly off the shelves. I Guarantee it.
Re: Spike Lee « Reply #1 on Mar 30, 2012, 9:52am »
Spike Lee is another one of those panderers who lives up on the hill in the fancy house and drives the fancy cars but yet still wants to buy his "steet cred" so he talks the talk and acts the act but never walks the walk. He just wants to make sure all the homies think he is still one of them. So they will then go see his stupid movies so he can make more money to live even better.
The Nugget comparisson was right on and so true. To be honest is all roles were reversed in this not a word would be said, they call that social justice.
Re: Spike Lee « Reply #2 on Mar 30, 2012, 10:40am »
Spike Lee and Ted Nugent are both assclowns although Nugent is the bigger one. What Lee did was wrong but he's admitted it. The only error I've ever heard Nugent admit to was smoking a cigarette once while in HS, for which his father made him write something Bart Simpsonian to rectify. Mr. "Kill It and Grill It" is a real piece of work.
I was just reading about the "Settlement" reached by Spike Lee's attorneys, to pay off the family who's address was tweeted by African American Celebrity Spike Lee. It was, of course, the wrong George Zimmerman. What was the purpose of tweeting the address of a man with a New Black Panther Bounty on his head to begin with?
I just have to wonder, what if Ted Nugent had tweeted the wrong address of some old black folks in connection with a shooting by a black man. Would the media just let it go, as easily as Spike Lee will be dismissed, as an over Zealous Nicks fan? I think know the answer.
On a separate note, George Zimmerman of men's warehouse, should roll out a new line of Men's hoodies. Those things would fly off the shelves. I Guarantee it.
Re: Spike Lee « Reply #5 on Mar 31, 2012, 2:29am »
The problem in America today is reverse racism.
The lamestream media only focuses on news stories that portray white people in a racist manner, and similar cases involving black perps are not covered the same way.
Spike Lee and Ted Nugent are both assclowns although Nugent is the bigger one. What Lee did was wrong but he's admitted it. The only error I've ever heard Nugent admit to was smoking a cigarette once while in HS, for which his father made him write something Bart Simpsonian to rectify. Mr. "Kill It and Grill It" is a real piece of work.
It's George ZIMMER, not Zimmerman.
Show me your thinking on this. Just what has Nuggent ever done to top Spikes aiding or trying to aid the bounty hunters? I think I see some of that real reverse bias sticking out of your post. Is "AssClown" a relative term or an absolute?
Show me your thinking on this. Just what has Nuggent ever done to top Spikes aiding or trying to aid the bounty hunters? I think I see some of that real reverse bias sticking out of your post. Is "AssClown" a relative term or an absolute?
I'm not sure what tops what but, in concert, he has suggested that Obama and other Democrats suck on his machine gun. I think that qualifies as assclown.
"The religious factions will go on imposing their will on others unless the decent people connected to them recognize that religion has no place in public policy. To retreat from that separation would violate the principles of conservatism."
Show me your thinking on this. Just what has Nuggent ever done to top Spikes aiding or trying to aid the bounty hunters? I think I see some of that real reverse bias sticking out of your post. Is "AssClown" a relative term or an absolute?
I'm not sure what tops what but, in concert, he has suggested that Obama and other Democrats suck on his machine gun. I think that qualifies as assclown.
Yoda out...
.
Sure does qualify for "assclown" but not even close to Spike Lee. I mean really? Giving an address to bounty hunters!
I'm not sure what tops what but, in concert, he has suggested that Obama and other Democrats suck on his machine gun. I think that qualifies as assclown.
Yoda out...
.
Sure does qualify for "assclown" but not even close to Spike Lee. I mean really? Giving an address to bounty hunters!
I'd say that it kind of depends upon your politics.
"The religious factions will go on imposing their will on others unless the decent people connected to them recognize that religion has no place in public policy. To retreat from that separation would violate the principles of conservatism."
Re: Spike Lee « Reply #11 on Apr 2, 2012, 1:49pm »
The media is proven itself once again he composed of intellectually bankrupt ratings whores. Last year and Air Force veteranin Florida who was white were shot to death on a playground in front of his eight year old daughter by a Black bus driver who lived across the street. It was all about an argument over whether someone can skateboard on the playground . So the bus driver pulls out again and murders the guy in front of his 8 year old daughter and claims self defense. He was back at work the next day, and under Florida law we have little or no chance some convicting him. The best the family can do this year for wrongful death. I think that shows without a doubt the reverse bias in the media.
I'm not sure what tops what but, in concert, he has suggested that Obama and other Democrats suck on his machine gun. I think that qualifies as assclown.
Yoda out...
.
Sure does qualify for "assclown" but not even close to Spike Lee. I mean really? Giving an address to bounty hunters!
Having thought it over, win is correct. Although Spike Lee apologized, that doesn't mean what he did isn't worse than all of The Motor City Madman's "kill 'em and grill 'em" stuff and the fact the loser has fathered half a dozen kids out of wedlock and until the last decade or so made no effort to be a parent to them. Both ARE assclowns.
Giving the address itself isn't necessarily such a problem. After all, as they say, (and the logic of which I finally see), where there there is no justice, there shall be no peace.
Now not being DAMN sure it isn't the right address---that's a huge problem.
While I would agree with your justice...peace comment, I am hard pressed to understand how giving out the Zimmerman's address advances justice. Vigilantism maybe -- the same sort of vigilantism that Zimmerman may have been guilty of. But not justice and certainly not peace.
Inexcusably stupid idea on Lee's part -- made all the more so by the fact that he gave out the wrong address.
"The religious factions will go on imposing their will on others unless the decent people connected to them recognize that religion has no place in public policy. To retreat from that separation would violate the principles of conservatism."
As sad as it is, the system generally doesn't respond to much other than violence.
There are myriad examples, the most obvious being Hitler. Another one (one that is politically incorrect to even bring up) is the radical Muslims. Anyone who really thinks we're gonna "nice" our way out of their beef with us is nuts.
Although I don't disagree, that doesn't mean the U.S. shouldn't try to "make nice" with Muslim countries. Treating them like crap is exactly what Al Qaeda wants since so doing does far more to radicalize other Muslims than Al Qaeda's 72 virgins in heaven BS.
While I would agree with your justice...peace comment, I am hard pressed to understand how giving out the Zimmerman's address advances justice.
I know what you mean and I understand it because I used to feel the same way.
Then came Rodney King. Ya know, those people had been pushed around by LAPD, asking for citizens' review boards for years and years to absolutely no effect.
About a week after the riots...voila! A citizens' review board.
As sad as it is, the system generally doesn't respond to much other than violence.
There are myriad examples, the most obvious being Hitler. Another one (one that is politically incorrect to even bring up) is the radical Muslims. Anyone who really thinks we're gonna "nice" our way out of their beef with us is nuts.
Human nature is what it is.
This isn't Rodney King and this isn't 1991. Likewise, Hitler is dead and nobody is suggesting being "nice" to violent religious radicals.
In King, virtually the entire police department needed to be rebooted. Racism was institutionalized and violence probably did help bring about change. In this case, the police apparently acted properly while a couple of attorneys believed a neighborhood watch captain when, perhaps, they shouldn't have. And it is getting another re-look by both state and federal governments without anybody having to resort to violence.
In King, the system was the problem. Here, despite a hiccup the night that it happened, the system seems to be working. The institutions did not directly commit the violence and they are not rallying around those who did. Violence now wouldn't further the right result and it wouldn't further change.
I guess I just disagree with you on a fundamental level. In LA in 1991, there was a need for huge change and, while I don't necessarily agree, I see your point about violence helping to bring about huge change. I have to say, however, that if he had one, Gandhi would be rolling over in his grave at the idea.
But I don't see a need for change on that scale here. The law will probably be changed and the incident is getting a very necessary second look. I'm guessing that the attorneys in question, and their counterparts throughout the state, will be more careful in the future about rushing to judgment and blindly siding with a neighborhood watch captain. But absent the need for huge change, even if violence may have a role in bringing about change, it has no role here.
No, I'm sorry. Giving out the address, even if it had been the correct address, was massively stupid and irresponsible.
"The religious factions will go on imposing their will on others unless the decent people connected to them recognize that religion has no place in public policy. To retreat from that separation would violate the principles of conservatism."
In King, virtually the entire police department needed to be rebooted. Racism was institutionalized and violence probably did help bring about change. In this case, the police apparently acted properly while a couple of attorneys believed a neighborhood watch captain when, perhaps, they shouldn't have. And it is getting another re-look by both state and federal governments without anybody having to resort to violence.
In King, the system was the problem. Here, despite a hiccup the night that it happened, the system seems to be working. The institutions did not directly commit the violence and they are not rallying around those who did. Violence now wouldn't further the right result and it wouldn't further change.
You make a good point about the King thing being "institutional" whereas Martin may not be. As I said on the thread I started, it looks to me like the problem here is just one person and perhaps two.
I don't think it was "attorneys" plural which erred. It appears to be just one attorney, Norm Wolfinger. Although Wolfinger has dozens of deputy state attorneys under him, it appears to have been him alone who dictated that Zimmerman be released. Although Chief Lee said the day after the shooting there was reason to think Zimmerman acted in self defense, it's not clear Lee wasn't just summarizing Wolfinger's position in so stating.
Was there insufficient evidence to hold Zimmerman? Well, some members of the media continue to occasionally say Zimmerman was released because Wolfinger opined they didn't have enough evidence to "get a conviction." I will once again point out that isn't the standard Wolfinger would have used. The quantum of proof required for a conviction is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt. However, the evidence required for a mere arrest is PROBABLE cause.
Since day one it's been apparent to me that even viewing Wolfinger in the most favorable light, he was culpable of bad judgment bordering on incompetence since word was and the police report now tends to confirm Zimmerman said Martin pushed or "bashed" his head against concrete but it was apparent their scuffle occurred solely on the grass. That's aside from Zimmerman improperly carrying a gun and leaving his car to follow Martin when the dispatcher told him they didn't want Zimmerman to do so. So as the investigating officer obviously thought, Zimmerman's story was questionable from the get-go.
To return to the "institutional" issue, reading up on Wolfinger's counterpart state attorney who is now in charge, I have a feeling she isn't the type of person to cover up for the guy. In fact, she's a hard charger who was fired by her predecessor for allegedly being a loose cannon but who then ran against and defeated her former boss as the state attorney for that district. So I have a feeling Wolfinger will end up looking as bad in the public eye as Darryl Gates did as a result of Rodney King.
This isn't Rodney King and this isn't 1991. Likewise, Hitler is dead and nobody is suggesting being "nice" to violent religious radicals.
In King, virtually the entire police department needed to be rebooted. Racism was institutionalized and violence probably did help bring about change.
1. The year is immaterial. 1991 wasn't all that long ago anyway.
2. I was using the word "nice" in a trite sense, but certainly you know that there are lots of people who think we need to take a conciliatory approach to terrorists. The president is one of them. The thinking is that our collective behavior brought about terrorism in the first place and that if we change then they'll come around to our side. We tried the "nice" approach before and we were rewarded with 9/11.
3. Good point about the "institutionalized" stuff, but any state that has a law like this "Stand Your Ground" bull$#!+ has an institutionalized problem of its own.
I was just wondering, John, was the President being nice when he ordered the death of bin Laden? Is he nice when drones take out al Queda? Just wondering.
How selfish soever man may be supposed, there are evidently some principles in his nature which interest him in the fortune of others, and render their happiness necessary to him, though he derives nothing from it except the pleasure of seeing it. Adam Smith
any state that has a law like this "Stand Your Ground" bull$#!+ has an institutionalized problem of its own.
Maybe, maybe not.
I'm not familiar enough with that law to outright oppose it, although I probably would since I think Dingleburger or whatever the doofus state attorney's name is will probably rely on it in justifying his order (if it can be called that) that Zimmerman be released by the local police. That would presumably be because Zimmerman reportedly told investigator Serino that Martin jumped out at him from behind a wall so the SYG law would have allowed Zimmerman to not have to run away. Of course, Zimmerman also claimed Martin bashed his head against the concrete sidewalk and broke his nose whereas the forensic evidence (to say nothing of eye witness statements) is to the effect the two scuffled entirely on the grass and although Zimmerman's nose may have bled a bit, the bleeding wasn't close to what happens when one has a broken nose.
![[Home]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/home.png "[Home]")
![[New Topics]](http://images.proboards.com/menu/topics.png "[New Topics]")
![[Help]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/help.png "[Help]")
![[Search]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/search.png "[Search]")
![[Login]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/login.png "[Login]")
![[Register]](http://images.proboards.com/new/menu/register.png "[Register]")
![[Search This Thread]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/search2.png "[Search This Thread]")
![[Share Topic]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/share.png "[Share Topic]")
![[Print]](http://images.proboards.com/new/buttons/print.png "[Print]")
Author
Logged
![[avatar]](http://i325.photobucket.com/albums/k387/aztecwin/th_Annoyer-1.jpg "[avatar]")
![[avatar]](http://www.surpluslines.com/yoda.gif "[avatar]")