[timzerofive]

I think they should put M.J., O.J., Martha Stewart, and iron mike together in one house for the next sureal life.

[xspeedy]

Martha would scare Michael off the set with her looks.

[timzerofive]

I'd watch it.

[YYimports]

that's great tim!!

[arnie]

guys don't throw stones, it might be a boomerang you let go of

[timzerofive]

... what???

[ogrady]

LOL good job on that photoshop

[silverado]

I know this is the lighter side and all, but Martha really doesn't belong in this crowd, at least not according to what she has been accused and convicted of. She made a phone call about stocks, the others are accused of rape, murder, molestation. Big difference.

[timzerofive]

Originally Posted by silverado

I know this is the lighter side and all, but Martha really doesn't belong in this crowd, at least not according to what she has been accused and convicted of. She made a phone call about stocks, the others are accused of rape, murder, molestation. Big difference.

Haha but if you want to compare severity, martha and mike tyson are the two bad ones, because they were actually CONVICTED, while others were not.

[ogrady]

http://gorillamask.net/triumphjacko.shtml



Comic dog messing with Jackson supporters!

[silverado]

Originally Posted by timzerofive

Haha but if you want to compare severity, martha and mike tyson are the two bad ones, because they were actually CONVICTED, while others were not.

Yeah... but being convicted of selling your stock vs for rape. HUGE difference in my book.

[timzerofive]

Originally Posted by silverado

Yeah... but being convicted of selling your stock vs for rape. HUGE difference in my book.

Crime is crime. How do you know that by her action, Martha didn't ruin a family or two? There's a reason insider trading is regulated upon so heavily. Rape is essentially a more brutal crime out right, but when you're a criminal, you're a criminal. Now of course I'm not saying Martha is as bad of a person as Mike Tyson is (or maybe she is), but the general theme here, if you haven't figure it out, is celebrities that have been through accusation of committing a crime - whether convicted or not.

In reality, you probably should worry about Martha f*cking you over more than Tyson. She couldn't have gotten to where she is in life (owning an empire) without screwing over a few people, scheming some evil plan, or "side stepping a few land mines". As long as you stay outside of Mike Tyson's reach, you'll be ok. With Martha, you never know.

[silverado]

I get the Theme (it's obvious). But just as there are leagues in sports, there are leagues in crime. "Crime is crime" is very simplistic. Martha and Tyson are miles apart in my book. There is a reason for the distinction between violent crimes and other types of crime.

[RedStripe]

I think the whole "Surreal Life" idea of this thread is hilarious because of the wildly different personalities and characters of the people mentioned. But since the topic of conversation has turned to something else, I wanted to add my two cents.

I think it is validly debatable on which type of crime is worse (violent attack of a single individual due to anger/rage VS manipulative and remorseless deception fueled solely by greed), obviously, depending on how you define worse. So I won't go there. But I did want to say that in general, white collar crime is not nearly, not even remotely as fairly punished as compared to other more "common types" of crime. And as we have seen in the last few years, people's complete disregard for proper ethical behaviour and sound judgement has caused a tremendous loss hurting many many people.

So I personally wouldn't call their transgressions miles apart. Moreover, what Martha did wasn't even remotely as bad as what people like Kozlowski, Ebbers, Skilling, and Scrushy. Now those guys in my book were just bad, bad, bad.

[timzerofive]

Originally Posted by RedStripe

I think the whole "Surreal Life" idea of this thread is hilarious because of the wildly different personalities and characters of the people mentioned. But since the topic of conversation has turned to something else, I wanted to add my two cents.

I think it is validly debatable on which type of crime is worse (violent attack of a single individual due to anger/rage VS manipulative and remorseless deception fueled solely by greed), obviously, depending on how you define worse. So I won't go there. But I did want to say that in general, white collar crime is not nearly, not even remotely as fairly punished as compared to other more "common types" of crime. And as we have seen in the last few years, people's complete disregard for proper ethical behaviour and sound judgement has caused a tremendous loss hurting many many people.

So I personally wouldn't call their transgressions miles apart. Moreover, what Martha did wasn't even remotely as bad as what people like Kozlowski, Ebbers, Skilling, and Scrushy. Now those guys in my book were just bad, bad, bad.

Agreed

Originally Posted by silverado

I get the Theme (it's obvious). But just as there are leagues in sports, there are leagues in crime. "Crime is crime" is very simplistic. Martha and Tyson are miles apart in my book. There is a reason for the distinction between violent crimes and other types of crime.

Now if you understand the "theme", then your suggestion that Martha does not belong to this group is invalid. I've never said that what Martha did is just as horrendous as what Tyson did, I never said it's not either. What I'm saying is your argument of that Martha should not be included in this show because her crime was not that bad, is not an valid point, as the degree of the crime is not why all these people are selected. In addition, lets say because of what Martha did, her company's stock's value changed (in whichever way). And lets assume hypothetically that your brother invested his life saving into this company's stock, and due to the value change, he lost a lot of money. Money that he needs desperately. And because of this, he decided to take his own life. Now would you say your life is not dramatically effected because the little white collar crime martha conducted? Would you not view her just as bad of a person as Tyson?

Ok so that might be a big stretch, but the point is, when you commit a crime, there's usually a victim, and to that victim, you just might be the most horrible person in the world. So who are you to judge whether the crime someone committed is bad or not?

In addition, personally I believe everyone in this group did what they were accused of, convicted or not. Notice I didn't put Kobe in there, as I believe he's innocent!!!!

[RedStripe]

Originally Posted by timzerofive

Notice I didn't put Kobe in there, as I believe he's innocent!!!!

"Why did Kobe have to hit that raw?"
-Jadakiss, Why from the Kiss of Death album

[timzerofive]

Originally Posted by RedStripe

"Why did Kobe have to hit that raw?"
-Jadakiss, Why from the Kiss of Death album

It was concentual!!!!!!!!

[silverado]

Originally Posted by timzerofive

Now if you understand the "theme", then your suggestion that Martha does not belong to this group is invalid.

I simply offered an opinion on how good this potential viewer thinks your show setup is. My opinion was that it is lob-sided. You can't say that my opinion of your show is invalid. It is an opinion supported by a plausible argument. We may disagree, but it's not invalid

I've never said that what Martha did is just as horrendous as what Tyson did, I never said it's not either. What I'm saying is your argument of that Martha should not be included in this show because her crime was not that bad, is not an valid point, as the degree of the crime is not why all these people are selected. In addition, lets say because of what Martha did, her company's stock's value changed (in whichever way). And lets assume hypothetically that your brother invested his life saving into this company's stock, and due to the value change, he lost a lot of money. Money that he needs desperately. And because of this, he decided to take his own life. Now would you say your life is not dramatically effected because the little white collar crime martha conducted? Would you not view her just as bad of a person as Tyson?

Ok so that might be a big stretch, but the point is, when you commit a crime, there's usually a victim, and to that victim, you just might be the most horrible person in the world. So who are you to judge whether the crime someone committed is bad or not?

Correction: HUGE stretch! Notice that I didn't say that all white collar criminals are miles apart from all rapists. I was talking about what Martha did. What she did couldn't begin to have the effects you are talking about. Now if we are talking about Kozlowski, Ebbers, Skilling, or Scrushy (RedStripe's list), I would tell you that they did is ranks up there with some nasty violent crime.

Who am I to judge? I am a free person with a brain Just as you are free to lump them up in one category, I am free to make distinction. I have news for you, we all do it!

[timzerofive]

Originally Posted by silverado

What she did couldn't begin to have the effects you are talking about.

Who am I to judge? I am a free person with a brain Just as you are free to lump them up in one category, I am free to make distinction. I have news for you, we all do it!

So you are 100% sure what she did ABSOLUTELY could not have effect anyone else at all? Please explain this. Also, in no way, can you judge how her action effects someone else, unless that person is you. How can YOUR judgement be accurate as to how her action/crime effects me? Please explain this also.

[EmmettBrown]

Originally Posted by timzerofive

I think they should put M.J., O.J., Martha Stewart, and iron mike together in one house for the next sureal life.

not possible considering MJ is DEAD

[c0nstant]

ARE YOU KIDDING MEdsl;kgfla;skjfkjf;a'ispha;podfgyhuir

[Seminole]

Originally Posted by EmmettBrown

not possible considering MJ is DEAD

Good trolling.