So it begins.

[Msterbeau]

Thus, the problem with partisan journalism.  Leave out a little information here and a little there and you have a whole new inflamatory story.

Well.. yes. But I went and read the whole court opinion too. There was nothing in there alluding to the problem of lack of signitures.

[The_Dark]

Because that didn't happen in court. It happened in the state legislature and was covered by local media. You would really have to dig into news sources from someplace other than liberal outlets. The local papers for the region covered it.

[Blackmail]

Thus, the problem with partisan journalism.  Leave out a little information here and a little there and you have a whole new inflamatory story.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

When I first read the article I was appalled, then I read a few articles from different newspapers online and the story changed a bit for me, the article in question did in fact leave a few major details out.

Whoever wrote it should be ashamed of themselves. This does happen on all sides of the political coin though. Which sucks because it makes finding the truth that much harder.

[The_Dark]

They are most likely very proud that thier disinformation has garnerd the results they wanted... Liberals up in arms over a percieved injustice, to upset to question what really happend.

[Der Nister]

Leave out a little information here and a little there and you have a whole new inflamatory story.

This is what carbon based life forms do when they have their own agendas. It would be nice to include all info but, then that would be the right thing to do.

[Shade Everdark]

...and, of course, only liberal outlets engage in that sort of thing.

[Blackmail]

...and, of course, only liberal outlets engage in that sort of thing.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

nope, conservatives do it as well, look up David Horowitz for someone intelligent who does it.........look up Rush Limbaugh for someone stupid who does it. Actually scratch that, Rush just outright lies.

[phee]

correct.... edited for content

[torn asunder]

i kinda figured shade was being *sarcastic*, like "yeah, and only liberals blah, blah, blah..." (i picuted a *rolls eyes* smilie just after that, but maybe i'm wrong...)

[Marblez]

Correct....edited for content.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

You rock Phee.

[Msterbeau]

Because that didn't happen in court. It happened in the state legislature and was covered by local media. You would really have to dig into news sources from someplace other than liberal outlets. The local papers for the region covered it.

I don't understand how something like that wouldn't come up in court. It seems like a key piece of the story.

[phee]

He didn't say that only liberals do it, did he?  Just like that article left out facts - so did he.  He was talking about THIS instance in which it would be considered liberals providing the misleading information.

Might wanna read that again, I know I did.

correct edited for content

[The_Dark]

Marc,

The only reason I can come up with for why it didn't come up in court is that it would not have helped the Pro-Abortion group if it had. See, it would help thier case to say that they were not allowed, no matter the reason, to have a specialty plate, BUT, big but here.... but the fact that they were not allowed to have the plate because they could not meet the states requirments... that would have been bad for thier case. Infact, it may well have had the whole case tossed.

So, they didn't really even try that angle. They tried to prove that the "Choose Life" plate was un-constitutional. They failed. They had no compelling reason for the Court to distiquish between this plate and any of the other Politically charged specialty plates.

[Msterbeau]

Marc,

The only reason I can come up with for why it didn't come up in court is that it would not have helped the Pro-Abortion group if it had. See, it would help thier case to say that they were not allowed, no matter the reason, to have a specialty plate, BUT, big but here.... but the fact that they were not allowed to have the plate because they could not meet the states requirments... that would have been bad for thier case. Infact, it may well have had the whole case tossed.

So, they didn't really even try that angle. They tried to prove that the "Choose Life" plate was un-constitutional. They failed. They had no compelling reason for the Court to distiquish between this plate and any of the other Politically charged specialty plates.

OK... But wouldn't the "evidence" of non-compliance with requirements been introduced by the defendent/state? Maybe it was in the lower courts ruling but it doesn't show up at the higher court level? Bah...

[The_Dark]

OK, make me flex my logic abilitys...

The Pro-Abortion/ACLU case was not to get thier own plate. They sued to stop the Pro-Adoption group from getting the plate. Thier case was built around the concept that the Pro-Adoption/Life plate was not constitutional. There was no need, in either partys case, to bring up the failed attempt by the Pro-Abortion group to get a plate. If the Pro-abortion group/ACLU brought that up, it could be defended against by pointing out the lack of public support. This would have been an instant loss. If the Pro-Adoption/Life group brought it up, it would not help thier case at all and could possibly bring up grounds for an appeal.

[phee]

"Pro-Abortion"???? you mean "Pro-Choice" right? Unless we want to start calling "Pro-life" the "Anti-Choice/Anti-woman" group

[The_Dark]

I was trying to differentiate the Pro-Adoption group from the Pro-Abortion. Both are Pro Choice.

[phee]

I see

[kellygrrrrrl]

they need to just not have either of those plates and shut up about it already. Why not have a plate that says .... "Pit Bitch" or "Hot Grandma on Board"

I can't believe so much effort and time is going into something that should not have even been brought up....(not on the board) in the Courts

No. People should not be allowed to have a pro-choice plate, or a pro-life or whatever......

Cripes already

the use of a confederate flag I think has the same symbolic baggage as a swastica (sp?)

This kind of reminds me of that whole "commandments in stone" at the federal building thing a while back...

BTW...I never stayed on top of that. Did they have to remove that monumnet?

Or did it stay?

just wondering

[phee]

they need to just not have either of those plates and shut up about it already.  Why not have a plate that says .... "Pit Bitch" or "Hot Grandma on Board"

I can't believe so much effort and time is going into something that should not have even been brought up....(not on the board) in the Courts

No. People should not be allowed to have a pro-choice plate, or a pro-life or whatever......

Cripes already

the use of a confederate flag I think has the same symbolic baggage as a swastica (sp?)

This kind of reminds me of that whole "commandments in stone" at the federal building thing a while back...

BTW...I never stayed on top of that.  Did they have to remove that monumnet?

Or did it stay?

just wondering

I agree

[Marblez]

Doesn't the license plate (like money) always belong to the state anyway and we are only really paying for it's use?

[The_Dark]

Sort of... and thats what won them the case. Custom plates are considered protected free speech. Precedence has shown that a state can have a political view and has the right to express it. The plates show a certain political view shared by the state and the owner of the vehicle.... brain hurts... need to stop thinking...