I wouldn't BET a dime on it. But, it's still my hunch that they'll do pretty well. I could certainly be wrong. They've got enough very loyal fans to make plenty of money even if they did lose a lot of the more casual fans.

But we'll see -- like I said, it's just a hunch -- I wouldn't put any money on it.

Shoot, we used to execute traitors.

She got off easily, IMO.

Right. We used to call black people ******s and make them ride in the back of the bus, too. And then we grew up into a (more) civilized world.

Apples and oranges.

Just in case some here haven't seen it, here's one of the infamous pictures:

"KC Man spits on Jane Fonda "

Damnit Gaz, I told you to stay away from KC yesterday!

I guess rappers haven't been so quick to catch on and grow up????

Hey, it was one time, and I thought it was a woman. Damn those transvestite hookers! Damn them!

It is Apples and Oranges, you're right. But still -- just because we USED to execute people doesn't mean we still should do anything of the sort.

That picture is ****ed up. This chick definitely comes off as a traitor. I certainly don't blame anyone who feels a hatred towards her.

http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg...books&n=507846

Read it. It's the most interesting book I've ever read in my life.

I don't really defend hip-hop artists or any black folks for using that word, but you and I both know they are using it to take the power away from us white people, so them using it is totally different than us using it. Not saying it's right, but it's, again, apples and oranges.

Similarly, the n-word is so far beyond almost every other racial slur out there. Comparing it to most others is completly absurd.

Read the book, it's interesting.

Oh, I don't know. I think that giving aid and comfort to the enemy during time of war is one of the better justifications of executing someone.

That and not washing one's legs with any relative frequency.

Well, I guess we'll just have to agree to disagree, then. I'm personally not a fan of execution except in very, very rare circumstances (which at least have to include breaking the law).

Wow, in a sea of generally benign regurgitation of old gripes, we get this exchange. Leaving aside the argument whether or not Jane IS a traitor, please tell me, jcroft, that you don't feel that our outlook on traitors should evolve as our collective outlook on blacks have over the past century. Traitors are condemned for good reason due to actions completely at their own agency. Completely the opposite of blacks, who were condemned without good reason for an inborn distinction completely out of their control, and completely irrelevant to boot.
A call to evolve into a more 'civilized' metrosexual outlook on traitors is not called for at all, IMO. They purposely, and of their own free will, act at odds to our basic societal safety and security, and for that they deserve to die.

Whew. Donger dodges the noose yet again.

But, I would like to add to the list those that insist on using repeating commas in their posts; AKA, a commatard.

That has got to be the longest definition of 'apples and oranges' that I've ever seen.

After spending a few hours watching On Golden Pond I wanted to spit chew on her as well.

Are you under some kind of notion that there are no laws against treason?

Weren't there Jane bewbies somewhere in there?
Haven't seen it since it was at the. . . would you believe, . . drive-in. But I thought the mentioned bewbies in 'I Love the 80's.'

No, I definitely don't feel our outlook on traitors should evolve. However, I do feel that our outlook on execution should.

You are 100% correct here. No argument from me.

I believe almost no one deserves to die for a crime. I'm generally opposed to the death penalty, although I do hold out a few exceptions to that. In any case, I am in no way suggesting our feelings for traitors should evolve, and the comparrison to racisim was probably uncalled for. I am, though, suggeting that our feelings towards the death penalty should evolve.

That, however, is another thread and I don't really feel like fighting over it here. :)

And, as someone who can probably be considered "metrosexual," I'd just say that I don't think political beliefs have anything to do with that term. "Metrosexuality," if you wish to call it that, has only to do with style and vanity.

No, but I am under the notion that Jane Fonda was never convicted or even charged with such a thing. Am I incorrect (it's quite possible -- this is the first I've ever really heard of what she did)?

Exactly right. I still can't believe the gubment didn't prosecute her for that.

No!

Nope. Of course, it was 'hip' to be part of the anti-war movement back then. There was no way that even our government would have been stupid enough to try to prosecute her.

As to her being guilty of treason, read this:

The Wall Street Journal (August 3, 1995) published an interview with Bui Tin who served on the General Staff of the North Vietnam Army and received the unconditional surrender of South Vietnam on April 30, 1975. During the interview Mr. Tin was asked if the American antiwar movement was important to Hanoi's victory. Mr. Tin responded "It was essential to our strategy" referring to the war being fought on two fronts, the Vietnam battlefield and back home in America through the antiwar movement on college campuses and in the city streets. He further stated the North Vietnamese leadership listened to the American evening news broadcasts "to follow the growth of the American antiwar movement."

I'm still operating under the "[l]eaving aside the argument whether or not Jane IS a traitor" assumption. . .

Well, no matter what anyone believes, if she wasn't convicted of treason, then she wouldn't have even been executed back in the times you remember so fondly.

Alright. But I told you my feelings on that -- a convicted traitor should definitely get a very harsh punishment. However, I personally don't believe it should be death.

In the case of Jane specifically, if she wasn't convicted of a crime, I don't see how anyone could expect her to get a punishment (other than being spit on, I guess).

Haha. :D

That's precisely my point. Back in the good ole days, we would have charged her, tried her, found her guilty and whacked her.

She directly gave aid and comfort to the enemy during time of war.

You may call that she wasn't "progressive;" I call it weakness on the part of the US government.

Horseshit, too.

Heh. Is BL a lawyer? Most lawyers I know will always use 100 words when three will suffice.

No, I wouldn't call that progressive at all. I'm in agreement with you here. Sounds like she definitely should have been tried, if what you all are saying is true.

The only place we disagree is in what should have happened to her after she was tried and found guilty.

I was supposed to read it? Shit.

First the cop tells me that those "speed limit signs" are NOT suggestions, and now this.

So, with this new information, do you think that getting spat upon is rather lenient punishment? Hell, she was part of the group (FTA) that routinely spat upon our soldiers returning home from Vietnam.

Again, she got off easy, IMO.

You remember that?

I think it's a pretty damn harsh punishment for someone who wasn't charged with a crime. Besides, even if she had been charged with a crime and found guilty, was it this guy's job to punish her?

But that was never my point. I said long ago in this thread it sounds like she deserved it. My point was that the guy who did it showed no class, whether she deserved it or not, and I don't like like seeing national stories that make the KC area look like a place full of classless people.

The fact that she wasn't charged doesn't mean she didn't commit treason.

Yes, but the fact that a few rightwingers say she committed treason doesn't mean she did, either.

I'm not doubting what you say, though. I'm just saying that this guy (the spitter) wasn't within his rights to try her himself (in his head) and punish her himself (by spitting on her). But my original point didn't even go that far -- I was just saying it was classless, and that's all.

Is it classless if you use another form of male fluid on her face... There are thousands of female porn stars that would disagree with you...

Those female porn stars (and your girlfriend) WANT me to cum on their face. Apples and oranges.

:D

Rightwingers didn't create the picture of her on a North Vietnamese AA gun during a time of war when that same gun was being used to shot at our aircraft.

Nor did rightwingers make up this:

This is Jane Fonda. During my two week visit in the Democratic Republic of Vietnam, I've had the opportunity to visit a great many places and speak to a large number of people from all walks of life- workers, peasants, students, artists and dancers, historians, journalists, film actresses, soldiers, militia girls, members of the women's union, writers.

I visited the (Dam Xuac) agricultural coop, where the silk worms are also raised and thread is made. I visited a textile factory, a kindergarten in Hanoi. The beautiful Temple of Literature was where I saw traditional dances and heard songs of resistance. I also saw unforgettable ballet about the guerrillas training bees in the south to attack enemy soldiers. The bees were danced by women, and they did their job well.

In the shadow of the Temple of Literature I saw Vietnamese actors and actresses perform the second act of Arthur Miller's play All My Sons, and this was very moving to me- the fact that artists here are translating and performing American plays while US imperialists are bombing their country.

I cherish the memory of the blushing militia girls on the roof of their factory, encouraging one of their sisters as she sang a song praising the blue sky of Vietnam- these women, who are so gentle and poetic, whose voices are so beautiful, but who, when American planes are bombing their city, become such good fighters.

I cherish the way a farmer evacuated from Hanoi, without hesitation, offered me, an American, their best individual bomb shelter while US bombs fell near by. The daughter and I, in fact, shared the shelter wrapped in each others arms, cheek against cheek. It was on the road back from Nam Dinh, where I had witnessed the systematic destruction of civilian targets- schools, hospitals, pagodas, the factories, houses, and the dike system.

As I left the United States two weeks ago, Nixon was again telling the American people that he was winding down the war, but in the rubble- strewn streets of Nam Dinh, his words echoed with sinister (words indistinct) of a true killer. And like the young Vietnamese woman I held in my arms clinging to me tightly- and I pressed my cheek against hers- I thought, this is a war against Vietnam perhaps, but the tragedy is America's.

One thing that I have learned beyond a shadow of a doubt since I've been in this country is that Nixon will never be able to break the spirit of these people; he'll never be able to turn Vietnam, north and south, into a neo- colony of the United States by bombing, by invading, by attacking in any way. One has only to go into the countryside and listen to the peasants describe the lives they led before the revolution to understand why every bomb that is dropped only strengthens their determination to resist. I've spoken to many peasants who talked about the days when their parents had to sell themselves to landlords as virtually slaves, when there were very few schools and much illiteracy, inadequate medical care, when they were not masters of their own lives.

But now, despite the bombs, despite the crimes being created- being committed against them by Richard Nixon, these people own their own land, build their own schools- the children learning, literacy- illiteracy is being wiped out, there is no more prostitution as there was during the time when this was a French colony. In other words, the people have taken power into their own hands, and they are controlling their own lives.

And after 4,000 years of struggling against nature and foreign invaders- and the last 25 years, prior to the revolution, of struggling against French colonialism- I don't think that the people of Vietnam are about to compromise in any way, shape or form about the freedom and independence of their country, and I think Richard Nixon would do well to read Vietnamese history, particularly their poetry, and particularly the poetry written by Ho Chi Minh.

Well, I haven't read all that yet, but I can see you missed the point. I BELIEVE you that she was a traitor. I've been convinced of that since the first page of this thread.

But, even so, I still think it was classless of some random guy to spit on her. Perhaps a judge should have sentenced her to being spit on (or worse), but it wasn't this guy's job to take it under his own control.

Plus, it was classless (have I mentioned that?).

Okay, I have no read all of that, and I didn't find anything in it that would make her a traitor. I'm not saying she wasn't a traitor -- just that nothing in that post says so.

Everything she said there would be protected by her freedom of speech, I would think. Just like Natalie Maines had a right to speak out aganist the war, so did Jane.

Now, if she did something to aid the enemy, that could be a different story. I'm not sure what the definition of treason is, exactly (as far as the law is concerned), but I know just visiting a country we are fighting with and speaking out aganist a war wouldn't qualify.

What else did she do?

Oh no. I heard you. I was just trying to give you some context of what the spitter went through thanks to the actions of this silly gash.

Heh. I wonder what kind of brand he used.

Article 3 of the Constitution thus provides that treason shall consist only in levying war against the United States or in giving aid and comfort to its enemies.

Considering that a large part of the NV strategy was to fight a tw-front war (one in Vietnam and one with the anti-war folks in the USA), I'd argue that she met the second criteria.

Hmm, perhaps you are right. I guess it just depends how "comfort" is defined.

Anyway, I'm out -- got shit to do. Been a good discussion. As always, I respect all of you guys opinions and any disagreement is in no way personal!

Thanks for the good debate. :)

This has the makings of a "Who's on first?" parody.

I once convinced a really hot, but unbelievably stupid, gal in HS that the stop signs with the white borders around them were optional/yield signs. She figured it out after the second ticket.

"They ALL have white borders!!!"

IIRC, I mentioned this story on CP once. Hence, my question.

Like I said, she was (and almost certainly still is) unbelievably stupid. I'm talking about a level of stupidity bordering on not being able to walk and breathe at the same time.

Man if he said.. That will be a great ad for some tobacco company...

The guy that spat on her was no doubt outraged by the governments lack of action on this issue so he used as violent of a deed as he could perform without sacrificing years of his life in prison to do so. Given this understanding of how the man feels do you condone what he did?

No. I hope this question is a joke, and you don't really think it's okay for any man to take the law into his own hands and serve up whatever punishment he thinks is fair. That's called a lack of control in my mind.

If I'm pissed that OJ was aquitted does that give me a right to knock the dude out if I see him? If I think Natalie Maine should have been reprimaned by the government for her comments, do I get to shoot a blowdart at her from my fourth row seats? If I'm annoyed that the Kansas marriage ammendement passed, does it give me to spit on those who voted for it and call them ignorant homophobes? If I don't think Bush should have been going after Saddamm, does it give me the right to murder him? If I'm pissed that a registered sex offender is living in the house behind me, do I have the right to cut his dick off?

Sorry, but you don't have the right to take the law into your own hands, no matter how much you'd like to. Please don't tell me you agree with vigilante justice by anyone who deems it necessary.

Not much of a parallel between those situations and a Vietnam vet spitting tobacco juice on a communist sympathizer. It's not murder or castration, and not letting Bob and Earl enjoy marital privileges isn't exactly committing treason.

First of all, we all know the Kansas marraige ammendment will affect a lot more hetrosexual couples than gay ones. But that's another thread, too.

You picked two of my examples, took them out of context, and totally ignored the point. The point is, it's not okay for someone to take the law into their own hands just because they think the justice system didn't do it's job.

Are ya with me, or not?

I think the rub is in two different ideas of the term 'condone.'
If you do not absolve the man for spitting, do you at least empathize?

I too, do not absolve, but I have to admit I empathize.

I refuse to read all of this, thought about it and decided nada..........Dartgod I didn't mean to pick you but after a few of what I read I just stopped and hit your response.

My question/questions.........As a born again Christian ( Jane Fonda ) is forgiven by whom I count is the only one that matters.....Again, Dartgod it is not you that I am pointing out, please understand.

What she did was wrong........hurtful............you name it. It happened. She knows that now, but she stands by what she feels is right at this time. Haven't we all done things and said things we wish we could take back? (Here)? :shake::shake: Give the lady a break.........Finally we as a Nation USA are finally giving our vets what they should have gotten during and after the war. To hold bitterness that many years and not see what finally is coming to them finally is wrong.

You have to have forgiveness to move on, I see from this articale this man has not reached that point. I stand behind all vets!!! I am finally thankful that the vietnam vets are getting what they deserved~

Sorry for the rant........but all people.......the Vietman vets deserve their rights and finally it happened.:thumb: But so does Jane Fonda.< Forgivness

Yeah, I empathize. I lived in Topeka for 10 years. Every time I saw that **** Fred Phelps on my street corners I had fantasies of running his bigoted ass right over. But, I know better -- it's not my job to punish him for what I think are crimes.

So sure, I empathize. I understand why he wanted to do it. But still, he shouldn't have.

I'll respect the social compact or whatever you choose to call it. The parallel between the situations you mentioned is what got my skirt up.

Jane Fonda was in Barbarella and agreed to 3 way sex with her husband.

She's awesome !

How 'bout it folks? Does this keep the hounds at bay? :thumb:

I intentionaly tried to include some that paralleled well, and some that showed the extremes that could happen if we were to allow people to take the law into their own hands at will.

since when is spitting impersonating an officer? vigilante justice? Guy was charged with disorderly conduct. CONDUCT. That's the core of your point. His conduct offends you. He was arrested and will be fined, as he should be. That's why they have laws.

As bad as it sounds, I sort of tend to agree that this is the way we ought to judge our feelings towards actors. We don't know them personally. They're mostly not smart enough to provide worthwhile takes on solical issues and politics. If I'm deciding if I like an actress or not, there are only a few factors at play:

1. Does she act well?
2. Do I like the movies she's been in?
3. Would I hit it?

"What are her political, social, and economic values?" is NOT on the list.

Yeah, you're right. His conduct offends me. But, as has been well established in this thread, his conduct was almost certainly a response to the fact that he felt she committed crimes and she was not prosecuted for them. He chose to prosecute her himself. That's taking the law into your own hands, any way you look at it.

BS, he chose to SPIT on her. That's it. He knew the consequences, and glady ACCEPTS HIS punishment. He is the one who is accountable, no matter how much you try to take the law into your own hands, acting like he isn't.

Next thing you'll tell me is someone needs to persecuted for giving a dirty look.

So what you are saying now is that it's okay to do anything we want, as long as we accept the punishment? Is that right?

And second, if someone spits in your face, do you expect them to receive no punishment in return?

1) Don't be so dramatic, I said HE accepts HIS punishment. Of course it's not ok to do whatever we want, but that doesn't stop people, now does it?

2)Is the guy not being punished for his actions? i think your problem is that you think the law isn't being enforced to your liking.

Have you read this thread? You have missed my point completly.

1. No, it doesn't stop people. But it should.
2. Yeah, he's being punished. I think the small fine he'll get is a totally appropriate punishment and I have no objection to the way the police handled it at all.

My ONLY point when I started discussing this is that this guy is CLASSLESS and that bugs me because he's now created a national news story that shows off how we have classless people in KC. I have NO problem with the law's handling of the situation whatsoever, and I've never said anything in this thread that would suggest otherwise.

Bed? No. Behind the QT at 103rd and Whatever? Yes.

I see. You're claiming his actions. Good luck with that.

I guess Al queda represents all Muslims.

Dude, you are again, missing my point. Listen carefully while I make it very clear for you.

Of course Al Queda doesn't represent all Muslims. But plenty of Americans think it does. Why? Because they're stupid. Most of the rest of the world thinks Kansas is a crazy place because we "don't teach evoloution." Of course, that's not really accurate -- but that's what they hear. The rest of the country thinks Kansas just "banned gay marraige." Of course, we know that's not even close to being accurate -- but that's what they hear (either because of bad reporting or selective listening".

I read the article above as someone who knew NOTHING about Fonda's actions in Vietnam. The article above told me some dud spit in her face because of her protest. It didn't tell me a damn thing about what she did in protest. I assumed she held up some signs or something. Why should I have believed otherwise if the article doesn't tell me?

Now that I know more of the story, I understand why the guy spit on her. And I still think it was a classless thing to do. Nothing you can say will change my mind. Sorry.

Man, do you EVER run down?

Yeah. I'm definitely tired of this thread. Nice discussion, everyone. :)

If he had any class he would have wacked her is that what your saying?

lnobody is trying to change you're mind, you're being anal about it.

Go watch Jerry Springer, I'm sure there are plenty of people there who you can freak out over.

I'd understand your obssession if nothing happened to the guy. authorities took care of the situation, sorry that's not good enough for you, if it was, you wouldn't have wasted most of your night to proclaim over and over how much this bothers you.

I think he should have pissed in a Gatoraid cup and thrown that on her. Then again I am a pretty classless guy. :)

Who put our soldiers in harms way?
 

The war in Vietnam was not about defending any American interests or rights. It was about paranoia and an inability to accept the fact we were wrong. 100,000 American and French lives washed away. This is the same reasoning used by our government to stockpile over 28,000 nuclear weapons from 1959 to 1962. Vietnam and the cold war was a complete and total waste of economic and human resources. Don’t ask for a link, I’ve posted it before on this site.

I'm not reading through the whole thread, but as far as I'm concerned, the only thing the guy did wrong was to try to run after he did it (should have known one of her security nazis would nail him).

That fucking c#nt should have been executed as a traitor decades ago. Nothing that ever happens to her can be bad enough.

DIE YOU EVIL TRAITOROUS fuckING BITCH! :cuss:

Yep, she is a commy!

Perfect. :thumb:

Although, I'd have preferred a long prison sentence so the prison dykes could have reamed her a few times with large objects...

So we have the arbiter of Class right here in our midst. I will seek you out whenever I value your advice on being classy. Thanks

Hah. Rep. That was good. :D

As if we needed any further proof that you're a stupid f**king communist.

Vietnam was about keeping one country from taking over another. Pu**ies like you back here in the states putting pressure on the spineless politicians is why a war against a pissant country like North Vietnam cost 100,000 lives. We could have torched the North to the point where feeding themselves was as much work as they could do, then they wouldn't have been so anxious to fight.

As for the nukes, let's say we didn't build any while the Russians built their 30,000+. When they stepped up and said "surreneder or die", what would you have done there smart guy?