Why are we more upset over the O. J. trial, than what's done in Iraq, over five years?

If detained guilt is assumed, but if you have not been detained by the law, than still innocent. Or are we scared to question the gifted in the white house, because of security and the rightous fear mongering thing, and gets the benefit of the doubt, common good, christianity over federal law? Just trying to better understand media and why we also seem to back up , one story over another, trusting one story, but not another story, how we as a people assume truth in one story, but not another story, it seems to me the media hype takes over and sells us the answer with repetition and mass confusion, and we all become judge, jury, does religion think they trump the court room law , of waiting for the verdict...........the police law of guilty before proven, assumed guilt of the impatient american society of no time , any thoughts on american rightousness and who is right, who's got the better act, and the better symbolism game going?Help me understand.

becuase americans care more about celebrities and popular culture than the politics and the direction there country is going in

It's all bull... The police has to find something to make them look as though they are doing their job. Christianity has nothing to do with it. To me it all has to do with selling papers and what they think that people want to know. Media hype causes more problems than is necessary. But all in all it seems that thats what everyone is interested in. "dirt"....

You are making a lot of assumptions here. Many people are "upset" over the war in Iraq, which is one reason that GW Bush has the lowest approval rating of any modern president.

I don't really see where you are going with the "Christianity" angle, since many Christians would say they have lost one battle after another in the legislature and the courts. For example, in the area of abortion rights, prayer in schools, etc.

You also misstate the role of the police and the US police view of the law. It is not "guilty before proven" in the minds of US police, but neither is it their job to decide who is guilty and who is not. Their job is to determine whether a crime has occurred and who is most likely to be responsible for it. After that, it is up to the courts and our juries to determine guilt.

I think you have a point about the media jumping on a story and leading us all down paths that frequently a dead end or are plain wrong. That is why a smart citizen reads widely and considers the many points of view that are out there on most topics, if one cares to look.