art by =saintchase

Theoryland Resources

WoT Interview Search

Search the most comprehensive database of interviews and book signings from Robert Jordan, Brandon Sanderson and the rest of Team Jordan.

Wheel of Time News

An Hour With Harriet

2012-04-30: I had the great pleasure of speaking with Harriet McDougal Rigney about her life. She's an amazing talent and person and it will take you less than an hour to agree.

The Bell Tolls

2012-04-24: Some thoughts I had during JordanCon4 and the upcoming conclusion of "The Wheel of Time."

Theoryland Community

Members: 7611

Logged In (0):

Newest Members:johnroserking, petermorris, johnadanbvv, AndrewHB, jofwu, Salemcat1, Dhakatimesnews, amazingz, Sasooner, Hasib123,

Theoryland Tweets

Forums

Home | Chat | Old Forums(Yuku)


Go Back   Theoryland of the Wheel of Time Forums > THEORYLAND STEDDINGS > Non WoT Discussion
User Name
Password

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 03-08-2017, 11:41 AM
Southpaw2012 Southpaw2012 is offline
Youngling
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 689
Southpaw2012 is a jewel in the roughSouthpaw2012 is a jewel in the roughSouthpaw2012 is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Davian93 View Post
Hey Southpaw, you fucking moronic troll:

https://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs...-reversal-rate

Now go get your fucking shinebox.

http://www.factcheck.org/2009/05/sotomayor-overturned/

Quote: Our search for appellate opinions by Sotomayor on the LexisNexis database returned 232 cases. Thatís a reversal rate of 1.3 percent. 3 reverses out of 232 decisions made. Of 232 decisions, only 5 ever made it to SCOTUS to review...thus you get 60% of her cases reviewed by SCOTUS. Ignoring the 227 cases that never made it there because there was no logical appeal or SCOTUS refused to even look at it as it was established law.

So once again, stop quoting bullshit fake news. How the fuck will you ever be an attorney if you can't do legitimate research? I mean, that's kinda a big part of the profession. You do realize that, right?

Or...you do know and you're just a fucking pathetic loser troll.


BTW, for those not aware, that 60% figure was made popular by the great Rush Limbaugh...I'm guessing when he wasn't on one of his Oxy fueled underage boy sex trips to the Dominican. Or maybe it was...i'm not 100% sure where he broadcasts from these days.
lol you mean the information I got from Washington Post? I agree, not a very prominent site, but I am very well aware of the amount of cases she authored that were reversed (the article states exactly what you just listed). I don't just post shit to post, contrary to what the 99% liberal populace on this site claim. It's a true number, and she was wrong in many many other cases that were beyond egregious. The amount of cases actually reversed doesn't change the fact that she's an awful jurist, as is Ginsburg, as was Souter, and as many other justices in the past have been. I was using an example of the times her authored opinions actually went up and were reversed. Want me to research the amount of times she's been wrong on the law? That she's sided with the government to further federal overreach? Let me get back to you after the Bar in a few months, when I may actually have a bit more time (but likely not), and I'll answer.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 03-08-2017, 11:58 AM
Davian93's Avatar
Davian93 Davian93 is offline
Hero of the Horn
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 20,079
Davian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Southpaw2012 View Post
lol you mean the information I got from Washington Post? I agree, not a very prominent site, but I am very well aware of the amount of cases she authored that were reversed (the article states exactly what you just listed). I don't just post shit to post, contrary to what the 99% liberal populace on this site claim. It's a true number, and she was wrong in many many other cases that were beyond egregious. The amount of cases actually reversed doesn't change the fact that she's an awful jurist, as is Ginsburg, as was Souter, and as many other justices in the past have been. I was using an example of the times her authored opinions actually went up and were reversed. Want me to research the amount of times she's been wrong on the law? That she's sided with the government to further federal overreach? Let me get back to you after the Bar in a few months, when I may actually have a bit more time (but likely not), and I'll answer.
By Post, you mean Times, the right wing rag I use to clean up my dog's excrement with.

Or you simply don't know how to read.

Also, 3 overturns out of 232 cases is hardly high...nor is 3 of 5 reviewed (also well below the SCOTUS average overturn rate). But then, you would already know that.
__________________
Bonded to Brita

"We caught them in an alley on skid row in downtown Philly and brought them down with Uzi's and dogs. I beat the shit out of one of the guys for resisting arrest. After that, I went home, fried up some tofu with strawberry preserves and melon sticky rice, laid down on the couch with my snuggie and ate rose petals in sweet daisy wine sauce and watched Mamma Mia on DVD and then cried myself to sleep."

Theoryland: Just Some Crazy In A Pot

Last edited by Davian93; 03-08-2017 at 12:00 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 03-08-2017, 09:17 PM
Southpaw2012 Southpaw2012 is offline
Youngling
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 689
Southpaw2012 is a jewel in the roughSouthpaw2012 is a jewel in the roughSouthpaw2012 is a jewel in the rough
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Davian93 View Post
By Post, you mean Times, the right wing rag I use to clean up my dog's excrement with.

Or you simply don't know how to read.

Also, 3 overturns out of 232 cases is hardly high...nor is 3 of 5 reviewed (also well below the SCOTUS average overturn rate). But then, you would already know that.

Was it 60% or not? All I said was she was overturned 60% of the time. I don't like her judicial philosophy, period.

And I frankly don't give a damn whether it was the Washington Times, Post, New York Times, etc. etc. They are all shit, though I'm guessing you'd disagree as the media is quite experienced with skewing it's information in a false direction that would appeal to people like you. In other words, another of many reasons we have the Trump phenomenon. If the media reported news, and not opinionated bs they try to cloak behind what they call "facts," the face of this country would look much different.

This anger and annoyance coming from you is quite typical nowadays. Triggered? Going to be burn shit and destroy the businesses you don't own? Not one thing I posted was false, other than misstating Washington Times as the Post. Apparently a little reading comprehension would go along way for you, as you seem to dwell on my point of the percentage of how much she was overturned.

Last edited by Southpaw2012; 03-08-2017 at 09:22 PM.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 03-08-2017, 09:35 PM
Davian93's Avatar
Davian93 Davian93 is offline
Hero of the Horn
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Colorado, USA
Posts: 20,079
Davian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond reputeDavian93 has a reputation beyond repute
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Southpaw2012 View Post
Was it 60% or not? All I said was she was overturned 60% of the time. I don't like her judicial philosophy, period.

And I frankly don't give a damn whether it was the Washington Times, Post, New York Times, etc. etc. They are all shit, though I'm guessing you'd disagree as the media is quite experienced with skewing it's information in a false direction that would appeal to people like you. In other words, another of many reasons we have the Trump phenomenon. If the media reported news, and not opinionated bs they try to cloak behind what they call "facts," the face of this country would look much different.

This anger and annoyance coming from you is quite typical nowadays. Triggered? Going to be burn shit and destroy the businesses you don't own? Not one thing I posted was false, other than misstating Washington Times as the Post. Apparently a little reading comprehension would go along way for you, as you seem to dwell on my point of the percentage of how much she was overturned.
Overturning 3 out of 232 cases is not 60% last I checked...but then I wasn't a Maths major so what do I know.

Everything you post is utter bullshit and the worst part is you know it. You're a troll to be blunt. You know damn well just how misleading it is to try and say 60 as if its some big scary number that shows how bad a judge she is...because its completely out of context and meaningles as I've shown and as everyone with half a brain already knew. You knew it too but you pretend to not so you can make your point...whatever that point might be. Its pathetic and disgusting and frankly, I'm sick of it.

The only honest thing you said here was "You don't like her judicial philosophy". Fine, that's fair. Nobody is asking you to like it. But making up BS stats (or in your case parroting BS stats from a fringy discredited source) to try and defend your rationale is just sad.

I didn't like Scalia's viewpoints but I never made up crap to malign him. Same with Alito for that matter. I think their "founders intent" methodology is garbage but that's their right as Justices. Just as its ok for Justices like Sotomayer, Kagan or Stevens (when he was active) to interpret the law from a more activist flexible intent given that our entire system of government was based on the theory that the Founders weren't perfect and it needed to be flexible with the times. Why the Right places all the founders on a pedestal as if they were Gods is beyond me when they were men. Great men in some cases but horribly flawed in many ways despite that.

Ben Franklin: One of the most brilliant men of his generation but also a habitual cheater and terrible father.

Thomas Jefferson: Brilliant legal mind and visionary but also a man that thought it was okay to own other humans as property as much as he tried to claim he was a victim of Southern society who had no choice but to own them.

Alexander Hamilton: Brilliant mind as well who was critically important (more so than many realize) in solidifying our country but who also had very strong dictatorial tendencies that thankfully never got acted upon successfully before he was killed.

etc etc etc.

None of them were these perfect gods that the Right seems to think they were nor should they be worshipped as infallible like Scalia and Alito did and do. I won't even bother with Thomas since he's probably the weakest Justice we've had in 50 years. Like you, he makes a decision and then works backward to try and justify that initial decision.

You don't like Sotomayor so you start reaching for some sort of rationale or logical argument that would justify your hatred of her. And you do what you did in this thread.

Here's a suggestion, overcome your background and upbringing and constant far rightwing talking points and actually try thinking for yourself. For gods sake, do it before its too late and you wake up as a 40 year old and realize you just had your head in the sand for a couple decades.
__________________
Bonded to Brita

"We caught them in an alley on skid row in downtown Philly and brought them down with Uzi's and dogs. I beat the shit out of one of the guys for resisting arrest. After that, I went home, fried up some tofu with strawberry preserves and melon sticky rice, laid down on the couch with my snuggie and ate rose petals in sweet daisy wine sauce and watched Mamma Mia on DVD and then cried myself to sleep."

Theoryland: Just Some Crazy In A Pot
Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.