I guess I'm not sure anyone thinks this is going to change people's views. My impression is more that people find this especially tone deaf on Wahlberg's part. YMMV I guess.

I would love it if Mark Wahlberg would use this experience to advocate for loosening post-conviction punishment across the board. If it's true that he can't get a restaurant license in CA for a 30 year old crime that was committed when he was a minor, that's fucking ridiculous and that law should be changed.

FWIW, pardoned and expunged are different things. If his record was expunged, it would be completely sealed as though he had never been convicted in the first place. A pardon preserves the record, but he is officially forgiven for his crime by the state.

I didn't think he would do Moon River, but then bam! Second encore!

(Killer-Dem-GA)

Should have blamed Obama more.

Derp.

I think Dikachu was referring to the prosecutor, not Darren Wilson.

Yup. In 2014, in one of the more liberal states in the country, my blue-collar boyfriend is regularly called a slur for gay people that starts with F* by his coworkers because he likes to read. READING, YOU GUYS.

I guess it's like the English Hooligans gang.

We're getting them in Minneapolis! The stupid police union is pretty pissed about it and kicked some ridiculous story about our lily white female mayor being in a gang (seriously) but it's still happening.

You should start a Ruiner's Club. Oh wait, you'd probably ruin it.

It's not, though. There was a really, really depressing piece on OTM a few weeks ago about how elected judges tend to be tougher on the accused and far less likely to protect their constitutional rights, because it makes it harder for them to get reelected.

Don't forget gerrymandering! Some of those pesky people of color are going to vote no matter what (usually olds) so you gotta make sure they're concentrated in one district.

Maybe he thinks it's a jury who's daughter had a baby.

He was first accused publicly in the 90s, which is what I was thinking of, but it appears that was settled out of court. There was a formal investigation, though, which could have been safely reported on. But anywhoo, there's probably no way to really know if the press would have taken the Cosby allegations as…

One other thing occurs to me - Brawley didn't name anyone in her accusation, so there was no risk of libeling anyone in covering her claims. Were the Jackson allegations covered before he was actually sued?

I didn't read the OP as saying the press would ignore any rape case in 1987, but that they wouldn't take this kind of case seriously. YMMV I guess.

One of my favorite classic Onion articles: http://www.theonion.com/art…

I mean, that part of Revenge of the Nerds is definitely rapey, but the movie is 30 years old. I expect better from a movie released now.