Elizabeth Edwards afraid of her neighbor

RollingSkull

RollingSkull

Banned
http://www.charlotteobserver.com/112/story/79067.html

Elizabeth Edwards says she is scared of the "rabid, rabid Republican" who owns property across the street from her Orange County home -- and she doesn't want her kids going near the gun-toting neighbor.Edwards, the wife of Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards, particularly recalls the time neighbor Monty Johnson brought out a gun while chasing workers investigating a right of way near his property. The Edwards family has yet to meet Johnson in person.

"I wouldn't be nice to him, anyway," Edwards said in an interview. "I don't want my kids anywhere near some guy who, when he doesn't like somebody, the first thing he does is pull a gun out. It scares the business out of me."

But Johnson defended the occasion he brandished a gun, saying those on his land didn't have the proper approval.

"I use the gun for protection, and I considered that an appropriate time," Johnson said. "Sometimes you have to take drastic measures."
Edwards views Johnson as a "rabid, rabid Republican" who refuses to clean up his "slummy" property just to spite her family, whose lavish 28,000-square-foot estate is nearby on 102 wooded acres.

Johnson, 55, acknowledges his Republican roots. But he takes offense to the suggestion he has purposefully left his property, including an old garage he leases for use as a car shop, in dilapidated condition.

Johnson said he has lived his entire life on the property, which he said his family purchased before the Great Depression. He said he's spent a lot of money to try and fix up the 42-acre tract.

"I have to budget. I have to live within my means," Johnson said. "I don't have millions of dollars to fix the place."

Johnson, who has posted a "Go Rudy Giuliani 2008" sign on a fence just 100 feet from the entrance to the Edwards' driveway, has criticized Edwards for the scale of their nearby home. The property and home, which includes an indoor basketball court, an indoor handball court and an indoor pool, is valued at $5.3 million.
Click to expand...
I don't know what's worse here: The total whitewash the story was, the bigotry displayed by Mrs. Edwards in extrapolating a single incident into a habit of "pulling out a gun whenever you don't like someone," or that posting a Rudy Giuliani sign counts as being a "rabid, rabid Republican" to Mrs. Edwards' delicate sensibilities.

Or, hell, that a gun owner posts a Giuliani sign!

Still, I love this story. It shows the general vapidity of the progressive mindset. See, the Edwards family is all for poor people... you know, theoretical poor people. Heaven forbid they actually have to deal with a real poor person. That just won't do at all.

One would expect that a saavy businessman like Edwards would have at least checked out the neighborhood before building his lavish estate there, just to make sure it would set squarely within the realms of only one of the two Americas.
 
"I wouldn't be nice to him, anyway," Edwards said in an interview. "I don't want my kids anywhere near some guy who...."

No no, kids, that's a Republican. and a Gun-owner. We don't talk to those people. And we're definitely not nice to them.

"Johnson, 55, acknowledges his Republican roots."

Horrors!

Apparently John Edwards' hypocritical elitism has spread to his wife.
 
Exit Question: Assuming no ill intent on my part other than trespassing and exploration, how long could I last wandering about on the Edwards estate without being introduced to gentlemen wielding firearms who don't approve of my presence?
 
[quote name='RollingSkull']Heaven forbid they actually have to deal with a real poor person. That just won't do at all.[/QUOTE]

To be fair, they won't be finding a real poor person living in Orange County.

42 acres in OC =/= poor.

Now, although none of us know the circumstances in which Johnson brandished a gun, I think it's a reasoned response to not want your children anywhere *near* that dude's yard. He has a right to do some things (dunno about brandishing the gun), and Edwards has a right to be fearful of him. It's overreacting to say he's a rabid republican (rabid =/= Giuliani, that's for certain), just as it's overreacting to think he's a perfectly rational neighbor.

Chances are he's been a fucking slob his whole life, so it's rather unlikely that the mess is done just to spite Edwards. You can bet your ass it isn't going to get any better now that she's complained about it, of course.
 
Bah, he's had that land for generations. Could be that he didn't exactly have the cash to buy it.

Still, "rabid, rabid Republican" is an infantile means of characterizing this individual.

Edwards may have a right to be fearful, but I also have a right to mock her for her nigh-bigoted pigeonholing of this man.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']Saying "Rabid Republican" is childish, but calling all progressives "vapid" is good?[/quote]

Yeah, sure, why not? Demonizing someone you have never met as some hobgoblin monster Republican worthy only of your scorn and demonstrating behavior characteristic of vapidity and characterizing it as such? The exact same thing.
 
I dunno man, if my neighbor ran around waving a gun at anyone who crossed their yard, I wouldn't let my kids near him either. It's not bigoted, it's common sense. More people are killed by accidental gunshots then purposeful ones, so to be better safe then sorry, I'd rather they just avoid guns all together.

What is a 'right of way' anyway? Is that like a traffic sign or something? So some guys are installing, or repairing or doing some kinda thing like that, with a township truck with markings and shit on it, digging a hole for a traffic sign and you come running out of the woods waving a gun around and chase them off. That sounds reasoned? That sounds like a situation where you need to take drastic measures? For a couple of guys installing a ONE WAY sign?
 
[quote name='Cheese'] if my neighbor ran around waving a gun at anyone who crossed their yard, I wouldn't let my kids near him either. It's not bigoted, it's common sense.[/quote]


That's pretty much what it boils down too... Why would anybody find this bigoted?
 
I think it is a safe bet that, much like Iranian "diplomats" in Iraq and French rioting "youths," we're getting euphemisms and half of the truth.

"Waving a gun at anyone" implies more than one incident, kids, which certainly would have been mentioned had there been multiple incidents. "Rabid, rabid Republican" and absolutely ruling out ever being civil to a man you've never met is where the real bigotry lies.

Besides, in most states, waving a gun to threaten someone is a crime. The fact that this man has not been charged directly implies that we don't have the entire story.
 
[quote name='RollingSkull']I think it is a safe bet that, much like Iranian "diplomats" in Iraq and French rioting "youths," we're getting euphemisms and half of the truth.

"Waving a gun at anyone" implies more than one incident, kids, which certainly would have been mentioned had there been multiple incidents. "Rabid, rabid Republican" and absolutely ruling out ever being civil to a man you've never met is where the real bigotry lies.

Besides, in most states, waving a gun to threaten someone is a crime. The fact that this man has not been charged directly implies that we don't have the entire story.[/QUOTE]


it really doesnt sound right about complaining about half-truths when you were the one sharing the story. Also all it takes is one time for someone to take out his gun to get people off his property for a gun accident to occur.
 
[quote name='RollingSkull']Bah, he's had that land for generations. Could be that he didn't exactly have the cash to buy it.[/QUOTE]

Could be. But you're drawing conclusions you don't know much about at that point. Despite buying the land during the depression, 42 acres in OC does not equal poor in the modern era. Hell, all we know about the guy is that he is a slob and owns 42 acres in OC - why should we assume he is poor based on *that*?

[quote name='RollingSkull']Yeah, sure, why not? Demonizing someone you have never met as some hobgoblin monster Republican worthy only of your scorn and demonstrating behavior characteristic of vapidity and characterizing it as such? The exact same thing.[/QUOTE]

I don't think you're realizing that the problem you're bumping up against is the reification of stupidity in politics. That sort of "I can't believe those dumb fuckers try to generalize with insults!" The absurdity of your outrage becomes obvious, and the phony nature of your outrage ever more so.

I also think you're *vastly* overstating the "never met" aspect of the relationship here (and, of course, overstating the "rabid, rabid Republican" influence. You're taking two momentary incidents mentioned in the article, and assuming that they are the entirety of Edwards' viewpoint, and reflect how she consistently feels and acts. Moreover, in a show of your bias, you do not provide the same services to Johnson - if you did, you'd find someone brandishing a firearm at any opportunity as well as someone who went out of their way to make their yard unsightly and untenable, just as a means of pissing off Edwards. As it stands, you're overstating the frequency and consistency of what descriptors are used about Edwards in the story, and rationalizing away as momentary anomalies those used about Johnson. It's a misinterpretation of the article, and a disservice to both people.

You know who I've never met? Sharmell Sullivan. That's someone who I've never met. I'd tell you more about her, but, well...you know. You know who I can *semantically* say I've never met? That old-ass hippie up the block. The one who rides his bicycle everywhere and has no respect for traffic laws (but gives dirty looks to motorists as if to say "bikes are vehicles too, man!" The same one who drives a Toyota Sequoia that's roughly the size of a space shuttle (with an ironic license plate featuring cyclists and the quaint phrase "share the road"). Yeah. I've "never met" him before. Let's be honest, people. Plenty of us never meet, if you want to argue about it - but not meeting and not knowing anything about someone are two separate things. Don't tell me Edwards and Johnson have "never met," and so they know nothing about each other, because it's a load of crap.
 
There's a difference between "bringing out" a gun and "brandishing" a gun.
One specific instance is not "every opportunity".
Being concerned about people you don't know on your property has nothing to do with "not liking" people.
Sorry, upon rereading the article, I still think Elizabeth is more wrong; even more so upon a second reading.
 
[quote name='dtcarson']There's a difference between "bringing out" a gun and "brandishing" a gun.
One specific instance is not "every opportunity".
Being concerned about people you don't know on your property has nothing to do with "not liking" people.
Sorry, upon rereading the article, I still think Elizabeth is more wrong; even more so upon a second reading.[/QUOTE]

Well, of course *you* think so. You're doing the same kind of deliberate overstating and understating that I said RollingSkull was doing. You're making Edwards' select comments represent the entirety of her feelings for her neighbor, and providing strictly assumed caveats about Johnson's behavior in order to reinforce that you think Edwards is wrong.

In other words, you're filling in blanks to this story that (1) fit the political bias you brought with you before reading the article, and (2) aren't provable given the confines of the article.
 
Just to show how completely safe & sane Monty Johnson is, we should have a post-Easter egg hunt on his vast 42 acres next weekend. We can invite all the junior republicans to wander around looking for treats. But nobody tell Monty - it's a surprise.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']I don't think you're realizing that the problem you're bumping up against is the reification of stupidity in politics. That sort of "I can't believe those dumb fuckers try to generalize with insults!" The absurdity of your outrage becomes obvious, and the phony nature of your outrage ever more so.[/quote]

Well said :D
 
There are plenty of people I have never met but I already have an opinion of because of their actions and beliefs. I don't know Fred Phelps, The GOD HATES FAGS preacher, and y'know what? I'm pretty sure I can safely say, he's a fvcking loony bird and I don't want my children around him. That doesn't make me a bigot. I'm pretty sure you don't know what a bigot is.
 
Could be. But you're drawing conclusions you don't know much about at that point. Despite buying the land during the depression, 42 acres in OC does not equal poor in the modern era. Hell, all we know about the guy is that he is a slob and owns 42 acres in OC - why should we assume he is poor based on *that*?
Click to expand...

Theoretical != conclusion.

With all due respect, Myke, I disagree with your analysis. I've had personal experience with the mindset of individuals like Mrs. Edwards, in that I used to think and feel exactly like her. Mrs. Edwards distaste for Johnson is perfectly in character for the progressive mindset whose choice of epithet is "rabid, rabid Republican."

I'm not extrapolating many incidents off of a single one. I feel I am coming to a reasonably well-supported conclusion.
 
[quote name='mykevermin']Well, of course *you* think so. You're doing the same kind of deliberate overstating and understating that I said RollingSkull was doing. You're making Edwards' select comments represent the entirety of her feelings for her neighbor, and providing strictly assumed caveats about Johnson's behavior in order to reinforce that you think Edwards is wrong.

In other words, you're filling in blanks to this story that (1) fit the political bias you brought with you before reading the article, and (2) aren't provable given the confines of the article.[/QUOTE]

No, I'm using the article alone, and the terms/phrases used in it.

scared of the "rabid, rabid Republican"
she doesn't want her kids going near the gun-toting neighbor
the time neighbor Monty Johnson brought out a gun while chasing workers
"I wouldn't be nice to him, anyway," Edwards said.
"I don't want my kids anywhere near some guy who, when he doesn't like somebody, the first thing he does is pull a gun out. (first thing? we only know of one incident, and it said nothing about 'liking' somebody)
But Johnson defended the occasion he brandished a gun,
Edwards views Johnson...."slummy" property

Those comments, both Elizabeth's and the ones from the most likely anti-gun/anti-Republican press agency who wrote the article, stand pretty well on their own.
I really had no opinion on Elizabeth other than on her choice of husband before now, since I knew little about her other than her having cancer. And since it's obviously to generalize based on what little this article tells us ("
Chances are he's been a ing slob his whole life,"), I generalize that chances are Elizabeth is a hypocritical intolerant closedminded bigot about one of the few demographics it's somehow accepted to be bigoted about.
 
Well, if memory serves, Mrs. Edwards actually is a regular at prominent hard left blogs Kos and DU, if that is worth anything.

Anyway, Myke, I do see where you are coming from, I merely disagree on where you place the neutrality flag.
 
[quote name='dtcarson']No, I'm using the article alone, and the terms/phrases used in it.

scared of the "rabid, rabid Republican"
she doesn't want her kids going near the gun-toting neighbor
the time neighbor Monty Johnson brought out a gun while chasing workers
"I wouldn't be nice to him, anyway," Edwards said.
"I don't want my kids anywhere near some guy who, when he doesn't like somebody, the first thing he does is pull a gun out. (first thing? we only know of one incident, and it said nothing about 'liking' somebody)
But Johnson defended the occasion he brandished a gun,
Edwards views Johnson...."slummy" property

Those comments, both Elizabeth's and the ones from the most likely anti-gun/anti-Republican press agency who wrote the article, stand pretty well on their own.
I really had no opinion on Elizabeth other than on her choice of husband before now, since I knew little about her other than her having cancer. And since it's obviously to generalize based on what little this article tells us ("
Chances are he's been a ing slob his whole life,"), I generalize that chances are Elizabeth is a hypocritical intolerant closedminded bigot about one of the few demographics it's somehow accepted to be bigoted about.[/QUOTE]

Wow, did you just blame the media? That's AWESOME.

So, John Edwards, born to a poor millworker, put himself through lawschool, became a millionaire, raised three kids, gave up his law firm because he decided he wanted to devote the rest of his life to public service, served in the US Senate and has stuck by her side through two bouts of cancer was a bad choice for her to marry? I wonder, if that's your idea of a bad choice for a husband, what would a good choice be?

Yes, I agree, it's horrible that in today's society the somehow accepted bigotry against GUN WAVING LOONS has been able to continue. How will America survive!?!
 
Thanks, I like to be awesome! It's really easy to blame the media so don't think I'm that special.

I "blamed", in part, the 'media', as in that portion of the media that wrote that article, other than the direct quotes.
Let me rephrase: as a husband, he might be superb. I'm not married to him, and I certainly wish them the best in dealing with her disease http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=394284&highlight=edwards
So I can't comment on his husbandary skills...although while I haven't had to deal with it, I would like to think my focus upon finding out my wife and the mother of my children has a potentially lifethreatening disease, might be to focus on her instead of my presidential ambitions.
What I know of him as a lawyer helps reinforce the stereotype of lawyers to me; what I know of him as a homeowner helps reinforce my belief in his hypocrisy; and yes, it looks like you've bought into the bigotry against Second Amendment supporters (and again, the choice of words is very telling--in the original article, she is quoted as saying the guy "brought out" a gun, whereas both the author and you use considerable more loaded (pun not intended) terms of "brandishing" and "waving".
Anyway, back to the article and only the article, I still haven't seen any counter argument (other than Republicans who own guns and dare to actually carry one when encountering strangers on his property are "gun waving loons") to say why Liz *isn't* being bigoted/stereotyping/intolerant, all those things loyal "progressives" are not supposed to be.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']It is your blanketing of all progressives (or leftists, or whatever the fuck word you want to apply to people you dislike regardless of how well it fits) that is the main problem here. I don't really care what you think about either Edwards, or people similar to them. But your "progressives are brainless" is just as bad as her "gun-owners are rabid Republicans", and no, I don't care how many times you've run into assholes of the leftist/progressive/whateverist persuasion.[/quote]
If 100% of people encountered with qualities X, Y, and Z fit pattern A because of well-understood reasoning B, it is racist to assume the next person encountered with qualities X, Y, and Z fits pattern A for reasons B.

So, John Edwards, born to a poor millworker, put himself through lawschool, became a millionaire, raised three kids, gave up his law firm because he decided he wanted to devote the rest of his life to public service, served in the US Senate and has stuck by her side through two bouts of cancer was a bad choice for her to marry? I wonder, if that's your idea of a bad choice for a husband, what would a good choice be?
Click to expand...
I'm not going to talk about Mr. or Mrs. Edwards' quality as spouses or human beings. I'd still enjoy having dinner with them because, hell, they probably are very interesting people. Still, I kinda dispute the rags-to-riches story on some levels. Mr. Edwards was the son of the mill foreman. That ain't exactly the poorest boy in the neighborhood. Plus, how do lawyers get rich? Through scumbag lawyerness, that's how! :p

Still, though, I'd love to have him over for dinner one day. I'm sure he's got a hell of a story to tell.
 
[quote name='The Crotch']Anyway, I'm going to guess your sample is flawed. The people most likely to be out there as "progressive/leftist" types (which we really have to define, as I'm getting tired of putting them in quotation marks and using them interchangeably) are also the most rabid. Therefore, you are not running into a broad spectrum, merely the most extreme end. Happens everywhere.[/quote]

I could make up a new word, because I am only shooting for subsets of progressive/leftist mindsets here. Maybe 'progg?'

I refuse to concede that my characterization does not match a pattern, a pattern that not only described how I acted in my younger years but nearly everyone of similar mindset I met. I could be dead wrong, but the paradigm I have matches up so well, I am not wanting to throw it away without more proof.

How does confirmation bias pertain to Warrior Within?
 
This is why reading/watching/listening to news is pretty much useless. It says a lot of nothing and only leads people to confirm whatever viewpoint they already had.

First of all it's obviously slanted in favor of Johnson. It's obvious that the person who wrote it didn't like Edwards and/or agreed with Johnson's viewpoint. Bad reporting, but where is there good reporting really? But I digress.

There is a total of 1 direct quote from Edwards along with some selective word quotes added in with a large helping of the reporter's interpretation (which is a good indicator that Edwards didn't say things in a way that the reporter felt was good enough for their article). Johnson gets 4 direct quotes and 3/4 of the article dedicated to his opinion.

So, the only thing we can really learn from this article is that the reporter had no intention of accurately representing the situation and that Republicans and Democrats don't necessarily get along. How informative.
 
I actually disagree with you. Had the reporter REALLY been pro-Johnson, he or she would have described the gun-waving incident in a bit less vague and scary statements.
 
[quote name='RollingSkull']I actually disagree with you. Had the reporter REALLY been pro-Johnson, he or she would have described the gun-waving incident in a bit less vague and scary statements.[/quote]

Meh, maybe if they were trying to be extra obvious, but they had to say something about it or else Edwards' comments wouldn't make any sense. It seemed to me that they used the other 3/4 of the article justifying why Johnson had the gun and why Edwards and her family are horrible people.
 
[quote name='RollingSkull']If 100% of people encountered with qualities X, Y, and Z fit pattern A because of well-understood reasoning B, it is racist to assume the next person encountered with qualities X, Y, and Z fits pattern A for reasons B.


I'm not going to talk about Mr. or Mrs. Edwards' quality as spouses or human beings. I'd still enjoy having dinner with them because, hell, they probably are very interesting people. Still, I kinda dispute the rags-to-riches story on some levels. Mr. Edwards was the son of the mill foreman. That ain't exactly the poorest boy in the neighborhood. Plus, how do lawyers get rich? Through scumbag lawyerness, that's how! :p

Still, though, I'd love to have him over for dinner one day. I'm sure he's got a hell of a story to tell.[/QUOTE]

Using your equation, it's 'racist' to believe all lawyers are scumbags.

Edwards was a personal injury attorney specializing in representing women and children in malpractice and corporate liability cases, his largest against a pool filter company whose product sucked the guts out of a kid and was settled out of court.

Personally, I'd go to their place for dinner as I'm sure they'd afford a better meal then my almost-as-good-as-my-moms meatloaf recipe.

315-reg-1600690-1025298.embedded.prod_affiliate.3.jpg


Monty Johnston.

From the description of his property, he sounds kinda sloppy. A car strewn front yard, a rundown abandoned house facing the Edwards and check out that sign, classy, no? Sure he has the right to put it there, but c'mon, it's obviously put there for no other reason then to piss off the Edwardses.

Also note how Inside Edition tells him what to say, and like a parrot, he says it.
 
[quote name='SpazX']Meh, maybe if they were trying to be extra obvious, but they had to say something about it or else Edwards' comments wouldn't make any sense. It seemed to me that they used the other 3/4 of the article justifying why Johnson had the gun and why Edwards and her family are horrible people.[/quote]

Actually, the way they described it seemed to me as fear-mongering against Johnson, that he waved his gun at harmless government workers who were merely doing routine inspections. That's the way the passage seemed to read to me. Take that and that his defense of his actions didn't really justify himself against government worker types, and I'm not seeing the pro-Johnson angle.
 
[quote name='Cheese']Using your equation, it's 'racist' to believe all lawyers are scumbags.[/quote] Do I need to start applying a sarcasm tag? Is it not obvious enough?

Edwards was a personal injury attorney specializing in representing women and children in malpractice and corporate liability cases
Click to expand...
Reminds me of the fictional NYT headline: "WORLD ENDS; Women and minorities affected most"

his largest against a pool filter company whose product sucked the guts out of a kid and was settled out of court.
Click to expand...
I don't know about you, but THAT SOUNDS AWESOME! I want a pool filter that can suck the guts out of children! So, I just put them in the pool and let it go to work?

From the description of his property, he sounds kinda sloppy. A car strewn front yard, a rundown abandoned house facing the Edwards and check out that sign, classy, no? Sure he has the right to put it there, but c'mon, it's obviously put there for no other reason then to piss off the Edwardses.
Click to expand...
I didn't see "rundown abandoned house" in the article, but maybe I missed that...
 
[quote name='Cheese']

315-reg-1600690-1025298.embedded.prod_affiliate.3.jpg


Monty Johnston.
[/quote]

LoL - someone spraypainted "NOT" under his incredible sign.

Seriously though - for anyone defending him - would you like to live next door to this dude? Does he have some shining quality worthy of praise that I am missing?
 
[quote name='camoor']LoL - someone spraypainted "NOT" under his incredible sign.

Seriously though - for anyone defending him - would you like to live next door to this dude? Does he have some shining quality worthy of praise that I am missing?[/quote]
I could think of worse.

Also:

GUN OWNER: CHECK
REPUBLICAN: CHECK

NO QUALITY WORTHY OF PRAISE FOUND. IMMEDIATELY DISMISS AS LOWER LIFE FORM.

:p I kid, I kied.
 
[quote name='RollingSkull']Actually, the way they described it seemed to me as fear-mongering against Johnson, that he waved his gun at harmless government workers who were merely doing routine inspections. That's the way the passage seemed to read to me. Take that and that his defense of his actions didn't really justify himself against government worker types, and I'm not seeing the pro-Johnson angle.[/quote]

I think if the goal of the article was fear mongering they would've spent more time talking about it. At first it's the gun thing, followed by his defense, but no other detail. Then the rest is basically the "everyman" vs. the rich elite. How his family had their land since the Depression, how he has to live within his means, and then descriptions of the Edwards' "lavish" home with details of how big it is, how much it cost, and what's inside of it.

Compare it to the article in camoor's post. His article is considerably longer and has more detail about things relevant to the story. Even compare the headlines for the stories. I don't know the political leanings of either of those sites, but the one camoor linked to seems like a more informative article to me that takes a more even-handed approach even though Johnson still comes out more positively to me in the end.
 
[quote name='RollingSkull']I could think of worse.

Also:

GUN OWNER: CHECK
REPUBLICAN: CHECK

NO QUALITY WORTHY OF PRAISE FOUND. IMMEDIATELY DISMISS AS LOWER LIFE FORM.

:p I kid, I kied.[/quote]

Hilarious. :lol:

But I'm actually a big gun rights supporter.

Maybe I don't like him because he looks like a retarded Jackie Gleason.

buford_t_justice.jpg
 
[quote name='SpazX']I think if the goal of the article was fear mongering they would've spent more time talking about it. At first it's the gun thing, followed by his defense, but no other detail. Then the rest is basically the "everyman" vs. the rich elite. How his family had their land since the Depression, how he has to live within his means, and then descriptions of the Edwards' "lavish" home with details of how big it is, how much it cost, and what's inside of it.[/quote]

Johnson's defense was worthless as a defense, though, if he was waving his gun at government workers. Unless the OC has a squatter problem that I have been unaware of to date...

I concede, though, that they were playing up the rags vs. riches aspect of it all in traditional news fashion.
 
[quote name='RollingSkull']Johnson's defense was worthless as a defense, though, if he was waving his gun at government workers. Unless the OC has a squatter problem that I have been unaware of to date...

I concede, though, that they were playing up the rags vs. riches aspect of it all in traditional news fashion.[/quote]

And I concede that his defense was worthless :p. It seems to me that it was reported as if it was a legitimate defense, but then again all it really says is "he said this" and then it's over, so it could just be me.

Anyway, what a nice example of how people can get different things from the same article.
 
Boy, I could only get through the first page of posts before getting tired reading them. I'm a Republican but as I got older and had kids, I see things much LESS as black and white and more as shades of gray. I thought the article made Mrs Edwards sound pretty bad but I can tell you that I would warn my children about someone who showed a gun once when investiagting an incident on their property.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
bread's done
Back
Top