The RetrieverTraining.Net Forums The Retriever Academy
Total Retriever Training with Mike Lardy
Hawkeye Media Gunners Up Tritronics Outdoor Media
Page 5 of 20 FirstFirst ... 3456715 ... LastLast
Results 41 to 50 of 193

Thread: The peoples seat - Massachusetts

  1. #41
    Senior Member Uncle Bill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Rapid City, SD
    Posts
    4,289

    Default

    For those that haven't heard of Coakley before, here's an article penned recently by Ann Coulter that may be just 'another' reason some in that state find her repugnant. UB

    In Tuesday's primary election, Massachusetts Democrats chose as their Senate nominee a woman who kept a clearly innocent man in prison in order to advance her political career.

    Martha Coakley isn't even fit for the late Teddy Kennedy's old seat. (What is it about this particular Senate seat?)

    During the daycare/child molestation hysteria of the '80s, Gerald Amirault, his mother, Violet, and sister, Cheryl, were accused of raping children at the family's preschool in Malden, Mass., in what came to be known as the second-most notorious witch trial in Massachusetts history.


    The allegations against the Amiraults were preposterous on their face. Children made claims of robots abusing them, a "bad clown" who took the children to a "magic room" for sex play, rape with a 2-foot butcher knife, other acts of sodomy with a "magic wand," naked children tied to trees within view of a highway, and -- standard fare in the child abuse hysteria era -- animal sacrifices.

    There was not one shred of physical evidence to support the allegations -- no mutilated animals, no magic rooms, no butcher knives, no photographs, no physical signs of any abuse on the children.

    Not one parent noticed so much as unusual behavior in their children -- until after the molestation hysteria began.

    There were no witnesses to the alleged acts of abuse, despite the continuous and unannounced presence of staff members, teachers, parents and other visitors at the school.

    Not one student ever spontaneously claimed to have been abused. Indeed, the allegations of abuse didn't arise until the child therapists arrived.

    Nor was there anything in the backgrounds of the Amiraults that fit the profile of sadistic, child-abusing monsters. Violet Amirault had started the Fells Acre Day School 18 years before the child molestation hysteria erupted.

    Thousands of happy and well-adjusted students had passed through Fells Acres. Many returned to visit the school; some even attended Cheryl's wedding a few years before the inquisition began.

    It's one thing to put a person in prison for a crime he didn't commit. It's another to put an entire family in prison for a crime that didn't take place.

    In the most outrageous miscarriage of justice since the Salem witch trials, in July 1986, Gerald Amirault was convicted of raping and assaulting six girls and three boys and sentenced to 30 to 40 years in prison. The following year, Violet and Cheryl Amirault were convicted of raping and assaulting three girls and a boy and were sentenced to 8 to 20 years.

    The motto of the witch-hunters was "Believe the Children!" But the therapists resolutely refused to believe the children as long as they denied being abused. As the police advised the parents: In cases of child abuse, "no" can mean "yes."

    To the children's credit, they held firm to their denials for heroic amounts of time in the face of relentless questioning.

    But as copious research in the wake of the child abuse cases has demonstrated, small children are highly suggestible. It's surprisingly easy to implant false memories into young minds by simply asking the same questions over and over again.

    Indeed, the interviewing techniques in the Amirault case were so successful that the children also made accusations against three other teachers, two imaginary people named "Mr. Gatt" and "Al" and even against the child therapist herself -- the one claim of abuse that was provably true.

    But only the Amiraults were put on trial for any alleged acts of abuse.

    Coakley wasn't the prosecutor on the original trial. What she did was worse.

    At least the original prosecutors, craven and ambition-driven though they were, could claim to have been caught up in the child abuse panic of the '80s. There had not yet been extensive psychological studies on the suggestibility of small children. A dozen similar cases from around the country had not already been discredited and the innocent freed.

    Of all the men and women falsely convicted during the child molestation hysteria of the '80s, by 2001, only Gerald Amirault still sat in prison. Even his sister and mother had been released after serving eight years in prison for crimes that never occurred.

    In July 2001, the notoriously tough Massachusetts parole board voted unanimously to grant Gerald Amirault clemency. Although the parole board is not permitted to consider guilt or innocence, its recommendation said: "(I)t is clearly a matter of public knowledge that, at the minimum, real and substantial doubt exists concerning petitioner's conviction."

    Immediately after the board's recommendation, The Boston Globe reported that Gov. Jane Swift was leaning toward accepting the board's recommendation and freeing Amirault.

    Enter Martha Coakley, Middlesex district attorney. Gerald Amirault had already spent 15 years in prison for crimes he no more committed than anyone reading this column did. But Coakley put on a full court press to keep Amirault in prison simply to further her political ambitions.

    By then, every sentient person knew that Amirault was innocent. But instead of saying nothing, Coakley frantically lobbied Gov. Jane Swift to keep him in prison to show that she was a take-no-prisoners prosecutor, who stood up for "the children." As a result of Coakley's efforts -- and her contagious ambition -- Gov. Swift denied Amirault's clemency.

    Thanks to Martha Coakley, Gerald Amirault sat in prison for another three years.

    Remember all that talk about President Bush shredding constitutional rights? Overzealous liberal prosecutors and feminist do-gooders allowed Gerald Amirault to sit in prison for 18 years for crimes that didn't exist -- except in the imaginations of small children under the influence of incompetent child "therapists."

    Martha Coakley allowed her ambition to trump basic human decency as she campaigned to keep a patently innocent man in prison.

    Anyone with the smallest sense of justice cannot vote to put this woman in any office. If you absolutely cannot vote for a Republican on Jan. 19, 2010, write in the name "Gerald Amirault."
    When the one you love becomes a memory, that memory becomes a treasure.

  2. #42
    Senior Member subroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dover, New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,112

    Default

    brooming the Winfield child rape (with a curling iron) case might be her mosr egregious action.
    subroc

    Article [I.]
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
    Article [II.]
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

  3. #43
    Senior Member subroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dover, New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,112
    Last edited by subroc; 01-16-2010 at 08:49 PM.
    subroc

    Article [I.]
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
    Article [II.]
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

  4. #44
    Senior Member subroc's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Dover, New Hampshire
    Posts
    2,112
    subroc

    Article [I.]
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
    Article [II.]
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

  5. #45
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Georgetown, MA
    Posts
    926

    Default

    White House predicting Coakley defeat?????


    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eO-Sv9lASVE

  6. #46
    Senior Member YardleyLabs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Yardley, PA
    Posts
    6,639

    Default

    I've been receiving an average of three email messages per day from various Democratic groups asking for support for Coakley's campaign to help stave off defeat. Thus has been going on for two weeks now so I think the situation is seen as being very serious. An interesting aspect is that Gallup, which shows the Senate race neck and neck, shows the same voters as supporting Obama and the health care plan by pretty significant majorities. Coakley appears to have alienated a large number of Massachusetts voters.

  7. #47
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Georgetown, MA
    Posts
    926

    Default

    There have been virtually non stop negative ads on TV and radio the lsst week or so from Coakley. Extremely negative. Many people I've talked to say they are way over the line and would not vote for Coakley because of them. Lots of money is being spent in this last week, and it may be backfiring.

  8. #48
    Senior Member Jim Person's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Central Mass.
    Posts
    1,011

    Default

    If Brown loses by only a few points it will be a big wake up call. But when he wins, after Obama came to Coakleys side, It will be all over for Obama politically.Health care reform will be dead in it's tracks, No doubt he will be a 1 term wonder. I really can't wait until Weds, when I can start watching TV again without all the negative coakley ads, everyone I talk withhates the neg ads..and alot have made up their minds because of the ads Jim
    The mightiest oak was once a small nut that stood its ground

  9. #49
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    New England Great Marsh
    Posts
    104

    Thumbs up

    I held signs for Scott Brown yesterday, at a local restaurant in Newburyport, Mass, that Martha had on her schedule. There were approx. 50 - 60 Scott Brown supporters and maybe 1/2 dozen on her side.
    Again today, downtown Newburyport, 100+ very enthusiastic Scott Brown supporters and not a single Martha sign in the downtown area. There were two Martha supporters on a main road into the downtown, but that was all. The reception from drive bys, was by far, in support of Scott, judging by the signs, shouts, and thumbs up we recieved.
    Looking over the crowd of supporters, ages were from the young to the seniors, which tells us that it is not a single age group that is disgusted with the direction the people in Washington are taking this country. It was interesting to note that quite a few folks had driven from states such as New Hampshire and Maine to show their support for Scott.
    Personally, I don't think Scott is just going to squeak by. His WIN is going to send a STRONG message for those in D.C to smarten up and listen to those who elected them.

    Senator Scott Brown-the shot heard round the world!

    AllieCat
    In every walk with Nature one receives far more than he seeks.

  10. #50
    Senior Member road kill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    New Berlin, WI
    Posts
    10,660

    Default

    Here is my question.
    President Obama carried MA by 31%....31%!!

    Do you think that many people were bamboozled enough to vote for him and now realize it's all "hoax & chains?"

    If so....would you kindly ask those folks to think it through next time?

    Or, is Brown gonna get clobbered because there are just too many under the"Big tent?"



    BTW-Team Elvis sent Scott Brown $50, not much, but we hope it helps.



    rk
    Stan b & Elvis

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •