Obviously, quite a few folks think Rose is deserving in this case. Her statements were clearly off-base, but it’s just rare to see a non-serial offender being attacked on a personal level ’round these parts. Kinda like one of those message vs. messenger kind of things.

Or maybe I’m just biased by her ‘body of work’. ;)

Having said that, and given the subject matter and theme of the thread:

‘Jawbreaker’ Google it!

Here is why I think she was not in the “out” crowd. It’s not just her looks, but her attitude. Speaking as a person who was in that crowd and considering that “we” were often the ones blamed when something went wrong, it was common for “us” to give people the benefit of the doubt knowing what it feels like to be labeled as guilty just due to our appearence.

Gene Splicer on April 13, 2007 at 12:35 PM

Yeah, but that’s also part of what makes me think she was in that group. The outcasts were judged for looking different. I’ve known several from those groups who are more than glad when someone who doesn’t look different has a finger pointed at them.

Rose seems to be saying that because these kids don’t look like the type to do this thing, it’s actually better that they were charged. To me, that sounds like a jealous punk kid who never grew up, the kind who watched “jocks” get away with things she was never able to get away with.

Anyway, one day a discussion ensued in the class on an off-topic (not electronics) subject wherein the guys sitting in prison began to berate ME for being a “goodie-two-shoes”.

I reminded them that at the end of the day, I could go home and this place WAS their home until they served their time. One finally quipped, “Well, we all do bad things. It’s just that some of us get caught, and some do not.”

His implication was that we’re all bad people at heart, we all do criminal things (you know, rape, robbery, murder, car theft, like that…) and some of the UNLUCKY ones get caught doing it while the rest of us remain scott-free on the street.

That’s precisely what the bimbo next to Rosie was trying to say. All “boys” are bad. Those guys “just got caught”.

Well… wait, let me say something. Our legal system presumes innocence, which means that legally speaking, even the obviously guilty are treated as though they are innocent, until they are proven otherwise.

Those young men got no such treatment, and for people like these… BIMBOS to go on live television and imply that they “must have done something somewhere else” just SMACKS of discrimination.

Warning: This is a rant. If you’re one of those whiny peeps who just can’t handle it when IMAO gets……

Maybe not though. She seems like she could have been one of those girl who chose to hang out with the out-crowd.

And I can believe she was an outcast in high school. There were a lot of very beautiful punk-rock and cutter girls in my high school.

Here is why I think she was not in the “out” crowd. It’s not just her looks, but her attitude. Speaking as a person who was in that crowd and considering that “we” were often the ones blamed when something went wrong, it was common for “us” to give people the benefit of the doubt knowing what it feels like to be labeled as guilty just due to our appearence.

What other show can anyone try to portray someone as being stereotypical racist, while exuding class warfare playing, stereotyping, racism themselves. Rose McGowan says “I’m sure they were probably guilty of something at one point in their lives”. Why? Because they were white and have rich parents?

Your right Rose! Maybe we should find all rich, white boys and hang them from the nearest tree branch we can find because we know they are all scum, they’re guilty of something and don’t deserve the presumption of innocence. Does this sound familiar?

I love liberals and their tolerances…;-)

So let me get this straight. SHE was “persecuted” in high school? Not buying that. With her appearance and attitude, she was most likely part of the “in” crowd doing the persecution.

Maybe not though. She seems like she could have been one of those girl who chose to hang out with the out-crowd.

We had them at my school, girls who could have been popular for their looks alone but prefered hanging out with “punks” instead.

A lot of analysis for such a stupid show, I grant you, but I wouldn’t have bothered with it if I didn’t think this reflected a much wider body of thinking.

I’m sure it does, and I think it’s actually good that she said it. She just admitted that this was never about those boys but about their physical bodies, their whiteness, their preppie look and hypothetical wealth but not them personally.

She admitted that she wanted them to be guilty. They were white frat boys. It wouldn’t have mattered if all three were supported by scholarships that were lost because of this lie. And now we’ve got the proof.

Nice dismissal, BTW. “They’re guilt of something” and “They’re all white.” Sort of ties into the nonsensical lectures being made about the destructive power of “whitness” and how it must be stopped.
I notice how they brushed over the very real crime of false accusation made by the stripper.

Remember the good ol’ days, when actors were considered just slightly above carnies in the social order?

If you go a little further back, “actress” and “courtesan” were pretty much synonomous. Such people weren’t even received in polite society, much less looked to as thought leaders. Ah, the good ol’ days.

Rose McGowan was shoveling some heavy duty manure, and some extremely faulty logic!

Is it a trend that total morons become “actresses?” (Carmen Diaz, Scarlet Johanssan, etc., etc.), while intelligent people, like Dianne N. Irving – Ph.D, MA, Marilyn vos Savant, Michelle Malkin, Condaleezza Rice, and others become physicians, Ph.Ds in Biology, Human Embryologists, college professors, University provosts, Security Secretary, Secretary of State, computer network engineers, midwives, and so on?

I think “The View” deserves name change.

Perhaps “The Distortion of Reality!”

William

Seriously, the people who are saying “something happened” are going to get taken to the woodshed on 60 minutes on Sunday. I can’t believe that I’m plugging the show, given its history, but they’ve got an interview (linked from this site) with AG Cooper who goes into more detail on exactly how and why this never happened and the LAX 3 are INNOCENT. The AG is also going to release evidence next week further explaining exactly what they found and why they believe that the players were unjustly accused.

Sure some people will never learn and keep protesting, but the multiple press conferences and 60 minutes appearances are going a long way to restore things. Nifong’s apology, while idiotic and unacceptable, is useful in this regard too. You don’t throw the accuser under the bus when you have insufficient evidence, but when you’re looking at Federal and State criminal prosecution, never mind a torrent of civil lawsuits, blaming the accuser for lying about innocent boys does show that there never was a case.

I’m gleefully looking forward to the school of flesh eating piranhas that the families are about to loose on all involved. Nancy Grace is going to wear this, the NYT is going to wear this, Duke is going to wear this, the 88, Durham and especially defendant Nifong. You NEVER get into a lawsuit with a lawyer, nevermind a partner, nevermind a former head of practice, never mind when the lawyer in question is part of a major politically connected K street firm. If you do, you really, really, really don’t want to piss off his (powerful and connected in her own right) wife, especially by going after their child! Revenge is best served in Federal court!

No; sue her. Sue Nifong, sue Terry Moran, sue Rose McNobody and Joyless Beanhead, sue Duke, sue the 88, sue the Black Pansies…Sue.Everyone.

Jaibones on April 12, 2007 at 6:52 PM

Yup ! ! And sue Sharpton and Jackson

McGowan’s got the Innsmouth Look

Lovecraftian insults flung at a chick that plays a witch on tv? Good one. Very appropriate. That is how you insult someone.

And Hasslebeck is no better. Tonight, Hannity had the opportunity to skewer her for her PC responses, and he did challenge her, but ultimately he accepted her shallow silly view of what conservatism really is and let her off the hook. She deserves every bit of grief she gets on that show.

What a stupid witch to say such a thing. I hate the View..it is a really stupid show and makes women look mindless. You know, if someone is stopped by a cop for speeding, I can see that comment being said. And the reason why people would laugh at that comment dealing with a speeding ticket, is cause we all have probably been there and not got caught.

HOWEVER, to say that in a rape case is just showing her intellect is very low. Not everyone has the impulse to rape or push themselves on a woman. That is sexist of her not to mention just downright on the witchhunt side of her.