Ted Kennedy Dead.
- Thread starter Calabrio
- Start date
and.. someplace there is a young girl that can finally "rest in peace" and stop "turning over in her grave".
and countless scottish folks who are going to be laid off from work as the Chivas Regal factory cuts production.
DING DONG the wicked drunk is dead
and countless scottish folks who are going to be laid off from work as the Chivas Regal factory cuts production.
DING DONG the wicked drunk is dead
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Does his death represent the high-water mark for the Kennedy family?
Can we now freely elect someone to his office or are we going to change the rules again so a Democrat Governor can name his successor after we changed the law in 2004 so Romney, a Republican Governor, couldn't name a successor to Kerry who ran for office?
welll it's definateley a high water mark for Chappaquiddic (sic)
Any "heroism" brought forth by the kennedy familly was easily overshadowed by Ted Kennedy's COWARDICE.. when he left that girl to die.
The kennedy family was little more than a "mob family"...
JFK won america's heart because he was killed, he didn't DO ANYTHING.. other than die.
JFK was an adultorous bastard...
the whole "kennedy legacy" is a farce at best.
taylor414ce2003
Dedicated LVC Member
Instead of a life in prison he spent life serving the public helping thousands,including getting Veterans help and care that they otherwise would not have gotten.For any 1 bad thing you can say against him there are 100s of postive good deeds he has done.He truly stood up for the little guy and would go the extra mile to help anyone.
and your giving him credit for how badly our veterans are treated?
obviously YOU haven't been to a VA hospital lately...
Ask the vets how they feel about their health care AND ted kennedy..
i'll bet it'd be a EYE OPENER
obviously YOU haven't been to a VA hospital lately...
Ask the vets how they feel about their health care AND ted kennedy..
i'll bet it'd be a EYE OPENER
Exactly!!
No amount of good deeds ever justifies a bad deed, especially on the scale of negligent homicide.
As far as I am concerned, today Mary Jo Kopechne's family got as close as they ever will get to justice for her unnecessary and tragic death.
I would imagine that any justice served by Senator Kennedy's death is a hollow reminder of the daughter/sister/friend that the Kopechne's lost that night.
There is no justice here, just an old man dying. He has to deal with his gods, just as I am sure the Kopechne family has come to terms with the death of Mary Jo.
Both can now be laid to rest. It isn't for us to judge any longer.
There is no justice here, just an old man dying. He has to deal with his gods, just as I am sure the Kopechne family has come to terms with the death of Mary Jo.
Both can now be laid to rest. It isn't for us to judge any longer.
...hence the whole, "as close as they ever will get to justice" part.
They can never have true justice, even if Kennedy were convicted. But this move the ball about as close to true justice as they can reasonably hope to get.
People don't get to redefine justice as they see fit. How about, instead of trying to define justice down to the point of meaninglessness, we actually look at what justice is, instead?
I was referring to justice in the traditional ideal, "cosmic" sense of the term and placing it, as best as it can be applied, to this situation. In that sense (the sense in which the entire criminal justice system and our government is founded on), the death of Teddy would afford some minor degree of justice for that situation, however incomplete or inadequate it may be after all this time. Weather or not the family views that as justice is irrelevant to that fact.
Shag - you made it personal. You were the one that took it beyond the 'cosmic' sense of justice, to the very personal sense of justice for the family. You didn't say society, or America, or any other general terms, you very succinctly placed it within the circle of 'family'.
Justice does exist in many forms. Here you had obviously taken it to a personal justice.
Neither of us knows how MaryJo's family and friends define that very real sense of personal justice. It could be a life for a life, or it could be a life defined in public service. It could even be an old man dying of cancer.
Our old testament sense of justice, 'eye for an eye', often is at odds with personal ideals of forgiveness and understanding.
Once again, I haven't any clue of how the family and friends felt about this, but to assume that they would feel some sense of justice served, because an old man died, in any degree, is overstepping Shag.
Last edited by a moderator:
cammerfe
Dedicated LVC Member
He lived out his life. She died an untimely death. He was a coward.
KS
KS
to "myself" that would be a travesty that he lived that long, and lived in the lap of luxury, immune to reproach of any kind.
Oh, since he's dead.. he cannot be judged for his crime against a human life?
By that logic Hitler should be a HERO in 2009, since he's been "long dead" and cannot be judged.
No, there are not "many forms" of justice. Justice has always been a rather consistent ideal with the various "forms" simply being how that ideal is applied to certain types situations and/or rectified with other ideals. Only in recent times has justice started being "redefined" (through, basically, equivocation) by the likes of Rawls into a political tool called "social justice".
Weather or not Mary Jo's family felt they gained any type of justice or not is irrelevant to weather or not they did receive some degree of justice in Teddy's death because justice is not a feeling and is not based in feelings.
Again, irrelevant. Unless you can show that the feeling/perceptions of Mary Jo's family are somehow relevant to the ideal of justice, you are simply citing a red herring that only serves to mischaracterize and falsely frame what I said.
You obviously have no clue what you or I am talking about. Maybe you should educate yourself and make sure you understand what I am talking about before you try and critique it. To do anything less is intellectually dishonest.
See, no good faith with you. I NEVER implied that they "felt" ANYTHING! You are either ignorant about what you are responding to (my original claim), or you are intentionally LYING (likely to fit in with your false premise of justice being based in a "victim's" feelings/perceptions; basically equating it with vengence).
Critiquing a claim or idea you don't fully understand and/ or intentionally distorting that claim/idea is overstepping (among other things).
cant believe someone would actually "Defend" Ted fuggin Kennedy.... that's ludicrous at best.
proves in itself we are a completely BRAINWASHED society.
that man should have been LYNCHED 30 years ago, not allowed to LIVE, and PROFIT..until he finally withered away and died.
what a bunch of redwhiteandbluebull:q:q:q:q
proves in itself we are a completely BRAINWASHED society.
that man should have been LYNCHED 30 years ago, not allowed to LIVE, and PROFIT..until he finally withered away and died.
what a bunch of redwhiteandbluebull:q:q:q:q
MonsterMark
Dedicated LVC Member
Instead of suffering the ravages of cancer, maybe waterboarding him may have been more appropriate.
So justice is a constant ideal across ideologies, families, creeds, etc., Shag?
It isn't, justice isn't only ingrained, it is learned as well. Do you really believe that justice is the same to a Buddhist as it is to a Southern Baptist, Shag? Is it the same to a philosopher in his ivory tower as it is to a mother whose child was brutally slain? You initially talked 'small picture' justice, and now you are trying to claim 'big picture' justice. Once again in your black and white world justice is easy to define, however in the real world where justice 'really' happens the grays are far more prevalent. Big picture and small picture justice overlap all the time. If MaryJo's father had taken a shotgun and killed Ted Kennedy would that have been 'better justice served'? If Ted had gone to trial, but been acquitted, would that have been 'even better justice served'? Perhaps if he had gone to trial and found guilty, and sentenced, would that have been 'best justice served'?
A man dying of natural causes when he is 77 years old is somehow justice shag? He lived out his life, MaryJo did not (as Ken pointed out). He never went to trial, never served a sentence. So, anyone who commits a crime, even though they may never serve time or even go to court for the crime, or heck, just perhaps he is just implied, then eventually when they die of natural causes, can be shown as justice served?
Obviously you have no clue what I am talking about Shag - your arrogance apparently has no bounds. You believe that an old man dying of natural causes is some form of belated justice for the taking of a young woman's life? Really shag - death by natural causes, after a life lived in relative luxury and ease, is a form of justice?
Well, we all will be afforded justice at some time I guess, for all the misdeeds we have committed or may be committed against us. We all will die. How convenient, justice will forever be served.
No justice was served by Kennedy dying a natural death - not even 'close' as you claim Shag.
Show me where justice was served.
Don't forget to use the word 'arrogance' in your next post Shag -
hell yea...
just substitute Chivas Regal for water, and I'd volunteer to pour the first glassfull!
yea my 82 year old grandmother got the same punishment as Ted Kennedy.
and..she never killed no one.
she was one of the kindest gentle people you'd ever met...just seems horribly unfair if you ask me.
"well said" and the answer is HELL NO!
Yes, and there is no reason to inject different religions into it. Do you even understand where the idea of justice comes from? How it evolved?
What would your definition/explanation of justice be?
No, that would be emotion based; vengence. Can you explain the distinction?
Why don't you go back and read what I said instead of distorting it.
If I thought you would treat my claims with honest consideration and good faith, I would be happy to clarify things (I have already shown where justice has been served to a small degree in this case). However, your history on this forum (and pattern in this thread) shows that engaging in these discussions with you is a waste of time and energy. All that will result is a 5(+) pages of your distortions and my corrections.
Don't you ever have any interest in understanding a point of view instead of just critiquing it and propagandizing? You have said you do, but your actions consistently show that you don't. Which should be believed; your words or your actions?
Don't forget to use the word 'arrogance' in your next post Shag -
Dishonest would be more accurate, but your actions have already well established that. It doesn't need to be said at this point...