How is that hypocritical? I am safer because people accused of crimes get defense attorneys. My family is safer because people accused of crimes get defense attorneys.
Do you honestly not see how keeping pedophiles out of jail can be considered to be the antithesis of keeping families safe? Plus there’s the fact that the latest ad makes no mention of keeping families safe. Somebody within her campaign must have thought that was a problem.
No, I don’t see it as the antithesis of keeping families safe. I see strong defense work as a sign of a functioning court system.
As for the campaign, so what? Yes, there are a lot of idiots in the world who don’t believe in defense attorneys. Those people are stupid.
So you don’t believe in a fair judicial system then. People can just be accused of horrible crimes and we lock them away forever with no defense, no hope. Right?
Wrong.
Lots of people who are accused of crimes are actually innocent. And a pedophilia charge is an often-used hand grenade in divorce battles.
In the McMartin PreSchool ClusterFuck, was it the defense team or the prosecution that hurting families?
See, one can say ‘he’s keeping pedophiles out of jail’ and that gets an emotional reaction. But the the truth is often not that cut and dried.
Black people put the white people up to it, donchaknow! Y’up!
American political campaigns seem to be an extremely poor choice of time to argue the necessity of defense attorneys to uphold the ideas of Justice. “Tough on crime” is what plays to the average voter.
There may be an opportunity to use the “defending the little guy” angle… but that’ll lose its cachet once your opponent mentions that was a pedophile you were defending.
Actually giving your opponent an opportunity to point that out is probably a stupid idea for an election campaign.
Aw, crap. I turn 50 next year. It’s me, isn’t it? I’m not very grizzled, but guess I should start working on some good final words…
May I suggest the immortal
[QUOTE=Danny Glover]
I’m gettin’ too old for this shit.
[/QUOTE]
Puppy.
First time I heard that Glover line, I chose to think maybe the shit stops happening, you get old enough. No, the shit keeps happening, your already to old for it, and getting older.
I thought Sgt. Hulka said that.

American political campaigns seem to be an extremely poor choice of time to argue the necessity of defense attorneys to uphold the ideas of Justice. “Tough on crime” is what plays to the average voter.
There may be an opportunity to use the “defending the little guy” angle… but that’ll lose its cachet once your opponent mentions that was a pedophile you were defending.
Actually giving your opponent an opportunity to point that out is probably a stupid idea for an election campaign.
Aw, crap. I turn 50 next year. It’s me, isn’t it? I’m not very grizzled, but guess I should start working on some good final words…
“Don’t eat… the clams…”

Aw, crap. I turn 50 next year. It’s me, isn’t it? I’m not very grizzled, but guess I should start working on some good final words…

May I suggest the immortal
[QUOTE=Danny Glover]
I’m gettin’ too old for this shit.
[/QUOTE]
I’ve been using this mantra since my last child was born seven years ago. “Murtaugh Moments,” I call them.
No, I don’t see it as the antithesis of keeping families safe. I see strong defense work as a sign of a functioning court system.
As for the campaign, so what? Yes, there are a lot of idiots in the world who don’t believe in defense attorneys. Those people are stupid.

So you don’t believe in a fair judicial system then. People can just be accused of horrible crimes and we lock them away forever with no defense, no hope. Right?
Wrong.

Lots of people who are accused of crimes are actually innocent. And a pedophilia charge is an often-used hand grenade in divorce battles.
An accused pedophile who is, in fact, innocent and whose innocence will come out in trial? Sure, they need defending.
One who has been defended and whose attorney is not disputing whether or not a pedophile was her client, then said attorney’s political campaign claims she keeps families safe? Something’s wrong there.
BTW: the pedophile singled out in the Cloonan ad? His victim was a five-year-old girl; no mention of any relation between the victim and the defendant.

American political campaigns seem to be an extremely poor choice of time to argue the necessity of defense attorneys to uphold the ideas of Justice. “Tough on crime” is what plays to the average voter.
There may be an opportunity to use the “defending the little guy” angle… but that’ll lose its cachet once your opponent mentions that was a pedophile you were defending.
Come to think of it, the ads for Parkhurst also claim she’s tougher on crime than the incumbent.

An accused pedophile who is, in fact, innocent and whose innocence will come out in trial? Sure, they need defending.
One who has been defended and whose attorney is not disputing whether or not a pedophile was her client, then said attorney’s political campaign claims she keeps families safe? Something’s wrong there.
We appear to be at odds here. It is the ethical duty of a defense attorney to vigorously defend his\her client. That’s kind of what is behind our whole justice system. Pedophiles out pedophiling is a big problem. A government that can just lock up people by claiming pedophilia and those people having no one to defend them is a much bigger one. If the government can do that, then no family is safe.
Recall Paul LePage, the Republiopathic Governor of Maine who blathered about his binder full of drug dealers, 90% of them black. He released the binder. Most of the drug dealers were white.

recall paul lepage, the republiopathic governor of maine who blathered about his binder full of drug dealers, 90% of them black. he released the binder. Most of the drug dealers were white.
#31374
Newt Gingrich and Rudy Giuliani, two serial philanderers, went on th’ teevee this morning to congratulate serial philanderer Trump for not attacking Bill Clinton as a serial philanderer during the debate. Which allowed them all to remind everyone Bill philandered.

We appear to be at odds here.
Not really. You’re missing a big, fat “and”.
As in putting children in danger by keeping at least one pedophile out of jail and claiming to keep families safe. Perhaps the families she’s keeping safe don’t have children younger than 16.

Newt Gingrich and Rudy Giuliani, two serial philanderers, went on th’ teevee this morning to congratulate serial philanderer Trump for not attacking Bill Clinton as a serial philanderer during the debate. Which allowed them all to remind everyone Bill philandered.
And apparently Giuliani (according to Yahoo), is urging Trump to skip the next two debates if he can’t get the moderator to stop acting like a big meanie. Or something.
Goddamn it, America. Why is this even a horse race?