The World According To pms01
In post #39 pms01 says: "The simple fact is that youare waving your hands trying to do hocus pocus to obfuscate, misdirect, andgenerally ignore the context members here are talking about."
Analysis: pms01 draws such a conclusion because she has yet to understand or even remotely grasp the simple pernt that I have repeatedly made in this thread. When comprehension isn't your strong suit, things will tend to appear "obfuscated" and "misdirected." In regard to pms01's statement where I "ignore the context," that must be why she has yet to grasp what I am saying this entire thread, and somehow seems to think that I'm saying something else.
In post #48, pms01 said: "If he truly believes, andit's difficult to believe, that equal and fair means every person convicted ofthe same crime should rcv the exact same sentence, then one only needs acursory familararity with the legal system to see he is wrong and judges dont agreewith him. He injected himself into the thread and hijacked it. It is morelikely he's dancing."
Analysis: pms01, once again, has some "context problems" here, which I pointed out prior. However, the best part is that pms01 tries to sell herself as an attorney and that I don't even have a "cursory familiarity" with the legal system and that judges "don't agree with me." I believe that must be why the judge disagrees with pms01 and agrees with me in this case, eh, folks? pms01 also states that I have "injected myself into the thread" and "hijacked it." What ppms01 seems to be overlooking is that she has also injected herself into the thread, and hijacked it as well. How many times, you ask? At present count, pms01 has made 8 posts in this thread, but she hasn't injected herslef into the thread, NOR has she hijacked it! ONLY ban basketball has done that, folks!
In post 53, pms01 said: "He stubbornly clings tovague terms like "upstanding" which is relative and a valuestatement, as well as "treated the same" without ever defining whatthey mean. All while we've given specific examples/scenarios to illustrate ourposition. It seems apparent he either doesn't understand how the judicialsystem operates or he's too proud to merely agree with us and others."
Analysis: I'll just let pms01's little "stubborn clings" speak for themselves on this one: hocus pocus, obfuscate, misdirect, cursory familararity.
pms01 also must have missed my little definition of "treated the same," even though I've stated it on here 14,007 times: "Equal and fair treatment under the law. Unless I'm missing something, those are basic ideals of our justice system, right?" (Post #21, as but one example of where I clarified it).
pms01 also seems to play the part of attorney with his expertise of the legal system, witness her statement in the above of my lack of understanding how the justice system works, yet a JUDGE SIDES WITH ME IN THIS CASE, WHILE NOT SIDING with pms01. Gee, what an IDIOT I am!
The lesson to be learned, folks? Some may recall the old saying, "we hate in others what we hate in ourselves." Does anyone illustrate more self-loathing than our resident legal expert, pms01?