Some stupid air head liberal girl marries hippy murderer Charles Manson.

[ricechickie]

Take it how you're going to take it. I have no problem calling a racist a racist. I don't need to imply.

But, hey, your thin little skin is all itchy and ouchy.

And your honesty is non-existent.
And for FYI, I'm a guy. As if it matters.

Only that it makes talking about you easier.

But I don't lie.

Okay, we'll call it a tendency for mendacity.

You have burn-ward sensitivity.

No, I know we can't afford to take care of the rest of the planet by ourselves. Some of these countries need to pitch in.

I haven't disagreed.

 

[Two Thumbs]

Sad.

Why do women do this?

And no, it has nothing at all to do with being liberal.

It's always leftist that want to get convicted killers off.

Well GOP has got a lot of Corporation killers off... Do you want a list of various actions GOP have tried to get them to pay as little as possible.... The party of Big Corp...

And there is nothing to suggest this woman is a Dem or GOP... She is just crazy, actually being crazy is a GOP trait...

knock yourself out

idc about the gop

 

[Billo_Really]

CORCORAN, Calif. (AP) — Mass murderer Charles Manson plans to marry a 26-year-old woman who left her Midwestern home and spent the past nine years trying to help exonerate him.


Afton Elaine Burton, the raven-haired bride-to-be, said she loves the man convicted in the notorious murders of seven people, including pregnant actress Sharon Tate.

No date has been set but a wedding coordinator has been assigned by the prison to handle the nuptials, and the couple has until early February to get married before they would have to reapply.

The prospective bride and groom have near-matching carvings on their foreheads. Hers is an "X'' and his is an "X'' that was turned into a swastika after he carved it during his trial to show he was "X'ed out of society."

The Kings County marriage license, viewed Monday by The Associated Press, was issued Nov. 7 for the 80-year-old Manson and Burton, who lives in Corcoran — the site of the prison — and maintains several websites advocating his innocence.

Burton, who goes by the name "Star," told the AP that she and Manson will be married next month.

"Y'all can know that it's true," she said. "It's going to happen."

"I love him," she added. "I'm with him. There's all kinds of things."

However, as a life prisoner with no parole date, Manson is not entitled to family visits, a euphemism for conjugal visits.

So why would Burton marry him under those conditions?

She said she is interested in working on his case, and marrying him would allow her to get information not available to non-relatives.

"There's certain things next of kin can do," she said without elaborating.

Burton gave an interview a year ago to Rolling Stone magazine in which she said she and Manson planned to marry. But Manson, who became notorious in 1969 as the leader of a roving "family" of young killers, was less certain about tying the knot.

AP Exclusive Charles Manson gets marriage license - Yahoo News

-----------------------------------

Just when you thought you could not possibly hate liberals more........

I heard she was a member of the Tea Party?

 

[protectionist]

charles manson didn't murder/kill anyone.

Go look it up for yourself.
He's crazy...but he's not a "murderer".

Do you know that if you drive a getaway car to a bank robbery and sit in the car and your friend goes in to rob the bank and kills someone, YOU are guilty of murder?
Absolutely true.

Yes, I do know that.

..but if I "tell" you to go kill someone and you....(an adult with a mind of your own and free will)..... actually kill that person...I should go to prison for it?

What's the logic? "He told me to do it. I couldn't help it"?

But was it ever really shown (ie. proven) that Manson told anybody to go kill anybody ?

 

[protectionist]

Yes...he was convicted of first degree murder .....but who did he personally kill?

Do you think I'm going to go look this stuff up for you or something? Google it!

manson didn't personally kill anyone.
You look it up.

Okay, so apparently, you must think they should release this man immediately. Lol! Whatever.

What?..now you resort to distraction, too? We aren't talking about what I "apparently" think ...and I never commented on whether he should or shouldn't be released.

What I said was, he didn't personally kill anyone.

I think you would be wrong about that, but it's really not important enough for me to look it up to prove it to you, so I don't care. Lol. He's in jail probably for conspiracy to commit murder, and I don't have a problem with that. I think he's exactly where he belongs. If you want to go about proving his innocence, then by all means, do the research.

The burden of proof is not on the accused (Manson). It is on the accuser (state of California) How did they prove Manson to be guilty of conspiracy to commit the murders of seven people ? And to warrant a death sentence from it (later changed to life in prison).

 

[Esmeralda]

Because, dimwit, there were those who were involved in it who testified to his involvement.

 

[protectionist]

Because, dimwit, there were those who were involved in it who testified to his involvement.

AND, Double Dimwit, the only one of those was Linda Kasabian, who was offered 100% immunity from prosecution, to testify against Manson, or the death penalty if she didn't.

So now DD, put yourself in Linda's shoes. You're 23 years old, you're pretty, you have a college degree, you have a child, you have a great life ahead of you, and you're offered full freedom or a painful, tortourous death in the San Quentin gas chamber. Which do you choose ? Do you even think about whether your testimony is going to be true or not ?

 

[auditor0007]

I'd like to return the diagnosis of "brainwashed" to you if you think that taxes are meant to punish you or impoverish you.

Don't like the things your taxes go toward? Elect new representatives. I don't like some of those things, either.

I'm not taking sides between you, but some taxes are meant to punish, or at least dissuade use.

Look at all the "sin taxes". Higher taxes on alcohol, cigarettes and such are meant to punish users or dissuade people from using them.

So it is a bad thing to dissuade people from smoking cigarettes, a product that cigarette companies have lied to the public about for decades? BTW, the real reasoning behind the high cigarette taxes is not to stop those who already smoke; it is to keep young people from starting, and guess what? It is working.

I have no problem trying to keep people from smoking. But taxation should only be used to fund the gov't, not for social engineering.

So how do you suggest we keep people from smoking? I smoked for 30 years. The cigarette companies were allowed to lie to me and every other smoker about the effects of smoking. They used advertising to lure people into smoking by making it look glamorous, and by directly lying when they knew they were lying. While everyone dies eventually, the cigarette companies have been complicit in seeing to it that hundreds of millions of people have died early deaths, with many suffering greatly the final years of their life. In fact, my sister in law just died a couple of weeks ago from lung cancer. She suffered with COPD and emphysema for the past ten years. She was 47 when she died.

Sorry to hear that, but unless you started smoking before they put warning labels on the cigarettes by the surgeon general, then yes, you are responsible for whatever you have decided to take into your own body.

Kids get addicted to nicotine before they are even legally permitted to purchase cigarettes. Making cigarettes excessively expensive prevents many young kids from starting, because the cost is just not worth it to them. In the 70's, when I started smoking, approximately 40% of Americans smoked. Today it is down to 18%. The reason behind this great drop in the smoking rate is based on many factors, one being that cigarette prices have gone up so much. When I started smoking, I was making $5.00 per hour and a pack of cigarettes cost $.75. I could pay for a week's worth of smokes with one hour of work. Today, most kids make around $7.00 per hour, and in many states a pack of cigarettes is close to $7.00, so a kid today has to work 7 hours to pay for a week's worth of smokes, or almost one full day's pay.

 

[protectionist]

I'm not taking sides between you, but some taxes are meant to punish, or at least dissuade use.

Look at all the "sin taxes". Higher taxes on alcohol, cigarettes and such are meant to punish users or dissuade people from using them.

So it is a bad thing to dissuade people from smoking cigarettes, a product that cigarette companies have lied to the public about for decades? BTW, the real reasoning behind the high cigarette taxes is not to stop those who already smoke; it is to keep young people from starting, and guess what? It is working.

I have no problem trying to keep people from smoking. But taxation should only be used to fund the gov't, not for social engineering.

So how do you suggest we keep people from smoking? I smoked for 30 years. The cigarette companies were allowed to lie to me and every other smoker about the effects of smoking. They used advertising to lure people into smoking by making it look glamorous, and by directly lying when they knew they were lying. While everyone dies eventually, the cigarette companies have been complicit in seeing to it that hundreds of millions of people have died early deaths, with many suffering greatly the final years of their life. In fact, my sister in law just died a couple of weeks ago from lung cancer. She suffered with COPD and emphysema for the past ten years. She was 47 when she died.

Sorry to hear that, but unless you started smoking before they put warning labels on the cigarettes by the surgeon general, then yes, you are responsible for whatever you have decided to take into your own body.

Kids get addicted to nicotine before they are even legally permitted to purchase cigarettes. Making cigarettes excessively expensive prevents many young kids from starting, because the cost is just not worth it to them. In the 70's, when I started smoking, approximately 40% of Americans smoked. Today it is down to 18%. The reason behind this great drop in the smoking rate is based on many factors, one being that cigarette prices have gone up so much. When I started smoking, I was making $5.00 per hour and a pack of cigarettes cost $.75. I could pay for a week's worth of smokes with one hour of work. Today, most kids make around $7.00 per hour, and in many states a pack of cigarettes is close to $7.00, so a kid today has to work 7 hours to pay for a week's worth of smokes, or almost one full day's pay.

What the hell does this have to do with Charles Manson getting married ?

 

[Judicial review]

So it is a bad thing to dissuade people from smoking cigarettes, a product that cigarette companies have lied to the public about for decades? BTW, the real reasoning behind the high cigarette taxes is not to stop those who already smoke; it is to keep young people from starting, and guess what? It is working.

I have no problem trying to keep people from smoking. But taxation should only be used to fund the gov't, not for social engineering.

So how do you suggest we keep people from smoking? I smoked for 30 years. The cigarette companies were allowed to lie to me and every other smoker about the effects of smoking. They used advertising to lure people into smoking by making it look glamorous, and by directly lying when they knew they were lying. While everyone dies eventually, the cigarette companies have been complicit in seeing to it that hundreds of millions of people have died early deaths, with many suffering greatly the final years of their life. In fact, my sister in law just died a couple of weeks ago from lung cancer. She suffered with COPD and emphysema for the past ten years. She was 47 when she died.

Sorry to hear that, but unless you started smoking before they put warning labels on the cigarettes by the surgeon general, then yes, you are responsible for whatever you have decided to take into your own body.

Kids get addicted to nicotine before they are even legally permitted to purchase cigarettes. Making cigarettes excessively expensive prevents many young kids from starting, because the cost is just not worth it to them. In the 70's, when I started smoking, approximately 40% of Americans smoked. Today it is down to 18%. The reason behind this great drop in the smoking rate is based on many factors, one being that cigarette prices have gone up so much. When I started smoking, I was making $5.00 per hour and a pack of cigarettes cost $.75. I could pay for a week's worth of smokes with one hour of work. Today, most kids make around $7.00 per hour, and in many states a pack of cigarettes is close to $7.00, so a kid today has to work 7 hours to pay for a week's worth of smokes, or almost one full day's pay.

What the hell does this have to do with Charles Manson getting married ?

I don't have a fucking clue not a fucking clue man. All that I know and care about in this entire thread is that photo of the girl. In need a full body shot. Manson always had a thing for skinny woman, but I need to know if she's full figured hell even average would do. Fuck.

 

[JoeB131]

Was he convicted of these "alleged" crimes?

Look, I'm not defending him..he's crazy but being crazy shouldn't be an excuse to blame/charge/convict him for what OTHER people did.

Wow, I used to just think you were a crazy racist douchebag. But defending Manson's innocence has upped your game to a whole new level of batshit crazy.

 

[Rotagilla]

Was he convicted of these "alleged" crimes?

Look, I'm not defending him..he's crazy but being crazy shouldn't be an excuse to blame/charge/convict him for what OTHER people did.

Wow, I used to just think you were a crazy racist douchebag. But defending Manson's innocence has upped your game to a whole new level of batshit crazy.

Save your histrionics and hyperbole...

How many people did manson personally kill?

Go ahead....It's not a hard question.

 

[ChrisL]

I'm not taking sides between you, but some taxes are meant to punish, or at least dissuade use.

Look at all the "sin taxes". Higher taxes on alcohol, cigarettes and such are meant to punish users or dissuade people from using them.

So it is a bad thing to dissuade people from smoking cigarettes, a product that cigarette companies have lied to the public about for decades? BTW, the real reasoning behind the high cigarette taxes is not to stop those who already smoke; it is to keep young people from starting, and guess what? It is working.

I have no problem trying to keep people from smoking. But taxation should only be used to fund the gov't, not for social engineering.

So how do you suggest we keep people from smoking? I smoked for 30 years. The cigarette companies were allowed to lie to me and every other smoker about the effects of smoking. They used advertising to lure people into smoking by making it look glamorous, and by directly lying when they knew they were lying. While everyone dies eventually, the cigarette companies have been complicit in seeing to it that hundreds of millions of people have died early deaths, with many suffering greatly the final years of their life. In fact, my sister in law just died a couple of weeks ago from lung cancer. She suffered with COPD and emphysema for the past ten years. She was 47 when she died.

Sorry to hear that, but unless you started smoking before they put warning labels on the cigarettes by the surgeon general, then yes, you are responsible for whatever you have decided to take into your own body.

Kids get addicted to nicotine before they are even legally permitted to purchase cigarettes. Making cigarettes excessively expensive prevents many young kids from starting, because the cost is just not worth it to them. In the 70's, when I started smoking, approximately 40% of Americans smoked. Today it is down to 18%. The reason behind this great drop in the smoking rate is based on many factors, one being that cigarette prices have gone up so much. When I started smoking, I was making $5.00 per hour and a pack of cigarettes cost $.75. I could pay for a week's worth of smokes with one hour of work. Today, most kids make around $7.00 per hour, and in many states a pack of cigarettes is close to $7.00, so a kid today has to work 7 hours to pay for a week's worth of smokes, or almost one full day's pay.

Look, if kids and people want to smoke, they are going to find a way to do it. The best bet is that responsible behavior (and the risks of smoking, etc.) is taught at HOME. We don't TAX people into behaving. I am completely against that.

 

[ChrisL]

Was he convicted of these "alleged" crimes?

Look, I'm not defending him..he's crazy but being crazy shouldn't be an excuse to blame/charge/convict him for what OTHER people did.

Wow, I used to just think you were a crazy racist douchebag. But defending Manson's innocence has upped your game to a whole new level of batshit crazy.

Save your histrionics and hyperbole...

How many people did manson personally kill?

Go ahead....It's not a hard question.

As has been explained. It's the same if you planned a robbery, and your buddy pulls out a gun and kills the victim. YOU will also be charged with murder because it happened during the commission of a crime. Do you get it yet? This is not anything new, unusual, nor is it rocket science buddy. What the hell is wrong with you?

 

[Theowl32]

Was he convicted of these "alleged" crimes?

Look, I'm not defending him..he's crazy but being crazy shouldn't be an excuse to blame/charge/convict him for what OTHER people did.

Wow, I used to just think you were a crazy racist douchebag. But defending Manson's innocence has upped your game to a whole new level of batshit crazy.

Save your histrionics and hyperbole...

How many people did manson personally kill?

Go ahead....It's not a hard question.

As has been explained. It's the same if you planned a robbery, and your buddy pulls out a gun and kills the victim. YOU will also be charged with murder because it happened during the commission of a crime. Do you get it yet? This is not anything new, unusual, nor is it rocket science buddy. What the hell is wrong with you?

I wonder how many Jews hitler actually killed? None, from the logic that is being used here.

 

[Rotagilla]

Was he convicted of these "alleged" crimes?

Look, I'm not defending him..he's crazy but being crazy shouldn't be an excuse to blame/charge/convict him for what OTHER people did.

Wow, I used to just think you were a crazy racist douchebag. But defending Manson's innocence has upped your game to a whole new level of batshit crazy.

Save your histrionics and hyperbole...

How many people did manson personally kill?

Go ahead....It's not a hard question.

As has been explained. It's the same if you planned a robbery, and your buddy pulls out a gun and kills the victim. YOU will also be charged with murder because it happened during the commission of a crime. Do you get it yet? This is not anything new, unusual, nor is it rocket science buddy. What the hell is wrong with you?

I know all of that. I knew it before you "explained" it to me.

All I asked was how many people he personally murdered.
You will NOT answer that simple question and it's comical.

 

[Rotagilla]

Was he convicted of these "alleged" crimes?

Look, I'm not defending him..he's crazy but being crazy shouldn't be an excuse to blame/charge/convict him for what OTHER people did.

Wow, I used to just think you were a crazy racist douchebag. But defending Manson's innocence has upped your game to a whole new level of batshit crazy.

Save your histrionics and hyperbole...

How many people did manson personally kill?

Go ahead....It's not a hard question.

As has been explained. It's the same if you planned a robbery, and your buddy pulls out a gun and kills the victim. YOU will also be charged with murder because it happened during the commission of a crime. Do you get it yet? This is not anything new, unusual, nor is it rocket science buddy. What the hell is wrong with you?

I wonder how many Jews hitler actually killed? None, from the logic that is being used here.

I wonder why you want to change the subject.

originally I was just making a peripheral point that manson didn't kill anyone...but now we're talking about jews and hitler and geez...ANYthing but the fact that manson didn't kill anyone.

At this point everyone who cared checked for themselves and know what I said was true...It's like pavlov's dog with some topics...you've been trained to react a certain way...all good though. Point made.

 

[ChrisL]

Was he convicted of these "alleged" crimes?

Look, I'm not defending him..he's crazy but being crazy shouldn't be an excuse to blame/charge/convict him for what OTHER people did.

Wow, I used to just think you were a crazy racist douchebag. But defending Manson's innocence has upped your game to a whole new level of batshit crazy.

Save your histrionics and hyperbole...

How many people did manson personally kill?

Go ahead....It's not a hard question.

As has been explained. It's the same if you planned a robbery, and your buddy pulls out a gun and kills the victim. YOU will also be charged with murder because it happened during the commission of a crime. Do you get it yet? This is not anything new, unusual, nor is it rocket science buddy. What the hell is wrong with you?

I wonder how many Jews hitler actually killed? None, from the logic that is being used here.

I wonder why you want to change the subject.

originally I was just making a peripheral point that manson didn't kill anyone...but now we're talking about jews and hitler and geez...ANYthing but the fact that manson didn't kill anyone.

At this point everyone who cared checked for themselves and know what I said was true...It's like pavlov's dog with some topics...you've been trained to react a certain way...all good though. Point made.

He's in jail for conspiracy to commit murder/murder, just like anyone else would be. Duh. What the hell do you keep whining about? Do you have a problem with Charlie Manson's prison sentence or something? He didn't just "tell" someone to commit a murder. He was actively involved in the planning, etc.

 

[Rotagilla]

Wow, I used to just think you were a crazy racist douchebag. But defending Manson's innocence has upped your game to a whole new level of batshit crazy.

Save your histrionics and hyperbole...

How many people did manson personally kill?

Go ahead....It's not a hard question.

As has been explained. It's the same if you planned a robbery, and your buddy pulls out a gun and kills the victim. YOU will also be charged with murder because it happened during the commission of a crime. Do you get it yet? This is not anything new, unusual, nor is it rocket science buddy. What the hell is wrong with you?

I wonder how many Jews hitler actually killed? None, from the logic that is being used here.

I wonder why you want to change the subject.

originally I was just making a peripheral point that manson didn't kill anyone...but now we're talking about jews and hitler and geez...ANYthing but the fact that manson didn't kill anyone.

At this point everyone who cared checked for themselves and know what I said was true...It's like pavlov's dog with some topics...you've been trained to react a certain way...all good though. Point made.

He's in jail for conspiracy to commit murder/murder, just like anyone else would be. Duh. What the hell do you keep whining about? Do you have a problem with Charlie Manson's prison sentence or something? He didn't just "tell" someone to commit a murder. He was actively involved in the planning, etc.

I'm not whining. Why do you try to misconstrue?

He didn't personally murder anyone. That's just a simple fact. Nothing more. Nothing less.

 

[Theowl32]

Was he convicted of these "alleged" crimes?

Look, I'm not defending him..he's crazy but being crazy shouldn't be an excuse to blame/charge/convict him for what OTHER people did.

Wow, I used to just think you were a crazy racist douchebag. But defending Manson's innocence has upped your game to a whole new level of batshit crazy.

Save your histrionics and hyperbole...

How many people did manson personally kill?

Go ahead....It's not a hard question.

As has been explained. It's the same if you planned a robbery, and your buddy pulls out a gun and kills the victim. YOU will also be charged with murder because it happened during the commission of a crime. Do you get it yet? This is not anything new, unusual, nor is it rocket science buddy. What the hell is wrong with you?

I wonder how many Jews hitler actually killed? None, from the logic that is being used here.

I wonder why you want to change the subject.

originally I was just making a peripheral point that manson didn't kill anyone...but now we're talking about jews and hitler and geez...ANYthing but the fact that manson didn't kill anyone.

At this point everyone who cared checked for themselves and know what I said was true...It's like pavlov's dog with some topics...you've been trained to react a certain way...all good though. Point made.

My question was rhetorical and it very much relates to your comments about Manson. You tell me how it relates.

How many Jews did hitler actually kill? Any?