Serious Question for Leftists

[miso@sushi.com]

On May 27, 11:46 am, Tim Wescott <t...@seemywebsite.com> wrote:

On 05/26/2011 08:34 AM, Jim Thompson wrote:

Serious Question for Leftists...

There are literally thousands of judicial decisions out there, by
left-leaning judges, who decided cases based on "warm-and-fuzzy"
rather than the law.

I'd like citations of right-leaning judges twisting the interpretation
of the law.

Really!

No fuzzy-mouthed statements of your own opinion, quote me real
judicial decisions.

I can't tell you the case numbers, but there were two guys in Texas,
both charged with pulling the trigger in a murder case.  Went to trial
separately.  First guy got convicted, second guy's lawyer said "you've
proved that my client's finger wasn't on the trigger, you can't say that
again".  No go -- judge let it happen, then it was upheld.  IIRC, all
the way to the Supreme Court.

Two guys.  One bullet.  One trigger.  Two 1st-degree murder convictions,
gained by putting the suspect's finger on the trigger.  The SAME DA in
both cases.  One of those convictions was obviously bogus.

But that's OK -- no prosecuting attorneys or judges had _their_ rights
diminished.  Only the rest of us.

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Serviceshttp://www.wescottdesign.com

Do you need to implement control loops in software?
"Applied Control Theory for Embedded Systems" was written for you.
See details athttp://www.wescottdesign.com/actfes/actfes.html

From a state where your public defender can sleep during your trial,
but that doesn't count for a death sentence appeal.

Somebody please, mess with Texas.

 

[Greegor]

On May 26, 10:58 am, linnix <m...@linnix.info-for.us> wrote:

On May 26, 8:34 am, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-

Web-Site.com> wrote:
Serious Question for Leftists...

There are literally thousands of judicial decisions out there, by
left-leaning judges, who decided cases based on "warm-and-fuzzy"
rather than the law.

I'd like citations of right-leaning judges twisting the interpretation
of the law.

Really!

No fuzzy-mouthed statements of your own opinion, quote me real
judicial decisions.

1985 NY Fed vs. TX State.  The purpose was to protect NY based Texaco
business.  So, i guess it qualify as right-leaning action.

http://articles.latimes.com/1985-12-19/business/fi-30544_1_texaco-par...

How is that Right leaning?
Favoring one OIL COMPANY vs. Another OIL COMPANY??

The best you could do was TWENTY SIX YEARS AGO?

 

[linnix]

On May 27, 1:30 pm, Greegor <greego...@gmail.com> wrote:

On May 26, 10:58 am, linnix <m...@linnix.info-for.us> wrote:



On May 26, 8:34 am, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-

Web-Site.com> wrote:
Serious Question for Leftists...

There are literally thousands of judicial decisions out there, by
left-leaning judges, who decided cases based on "warm-and-fuzzy"
rather than the law.

I'd like citations of right-leaning judges twisting the interpretation
of the law.

Really!

No fuzzy-mouthed statements of your own opinion, quote me real
judicial decisions.

1985 NY Fed vs. TX State.  The purpose was to protect NY based Texaco
business.  So, i guess it qualify as right-leaning action.

http://articles.latimes.com/1985-12-19/business/fi-30544_1_texaco-par...

How is that Right leaning?

The NY DC were very pro-business, big business. Carter appointed two
or three judges, the rests are Reagan, Bush, Nixon or earlier. In
this case, they are leaning toward bigger business, Texaco. In fact,
the SC said Texaco cannot be exempted from full bond, just because
they can afford to file in NY DC, AC against TX court. Most little
guys can't afford to do that.

Right leaning judges lean more in the direction of bigger businesses.

Favoring one OIL COMPANY vs. Another OIL COMPANY??

The best you could do was TWENTY SIX YEARS AGO?

But it's such a classic and import case. Justice is blind and
ageless.

 

[Glenn Gundlach]

On May 27, 2:07 pm, Tim Wescott <t...@seemywebsite.com> wrote:
<snip>

And why, exactly, does wanting to live in a country where I can
enjoy
life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness make me a "leftist"?

--

Tim Wescott
Wescott Design Serviceshttp://www.wescottdesign.com

You're only a leftist if you want ME to pay for your life liberty and
pursuit of happiness. You don't want that do you?

G˛

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Sat, 28 May 2011 18:50:21 -0700 (PDT), "miso@sushi.com"
<miso@sushi.com> wrote:

On May 27, 9:39 pm, Glenn Gundlach <stratu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 27, 2:07 pm, Tim Wescott <t...@seemywebsite.com> wrote:
snip
 > And why, exactly, does wanting to live in a country where I can
enjoy
 > life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness make me a "leftist"?
 
 > --
 
 > Tim Wescott
 > Wescott Design Serviceshttp://www.wescottdesign.com

You're only a leftist if you want ME to pay for your life liberty and
pursuit of happiness. You don't want that do you?

G˛

One suspects a newsgroup frequented by engineers has a fair amount of
high wage earners, hence they are contributing to the public trough
way more than those old tea baggers.

What makes you think "those old tea baggers" aren't engineers ?

Although, considering that most leftists are queer, I guess we're even
on insults ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[miso@sushi.com]

On May 27, 9:39 pm, Glenn Gundlach <stratu...@yahoo.com> wrote:

On May 27, 2:07 pm, Tim Wescott <t...@seemywebsite.com> wrote:
snip
 > And why, exactly, does wanting to live in a country where I can
enjoy
 > life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness make me a "leftist"?
 
 > --
 
 > Tim Wescott
 > Wescott Design Serviceshttp://www.wescottdesign.com

You're only a leftist if you want ME to pay for your life liberty and
pursuit of happiness. You don't want that do you?

G˛

One suspects a newsgroup frequented by engineers has a fair amount of
high wage earners, hence they are contributing to the public trough
way more than those old tea baggers.

 

[Jim Thompson]

On Sun, 29 May 2011 14:35:06 -0700 (PDT), "miso@sushi.com"
<miso@sushi.com> wrote:

On May 28, 6:53 pm, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-
Web-Site.com> wrote:
On Sat, 28 May 2011 18:50:21 -0700 (PDT), "m...@sushi.com"









m...@sushi.com> wrote:
On May 27, 9:39 pm, Glenn Gundlach <stratu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 27, 2:07 pm, Tim Wescott <t...@seemywebsite.com> wrote:
snip
 > And why, exactly, does wanting to live in a country where I can
enjoy
 > life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness make me a "leftist"?
 
 > --
 
 > Tim Wescott
 > Wescott Design Serviceshttp://www.wescottdesign.com

You're only a leftist if you want ME to pay for your life liberty and
pursuit of happiness. You don't want that do you?

G˛

One suspects a newsgroup frequented by engineers has a fair amount of
high wage earners, hence they are contributing to the public trough
way more than those old tea baggers.

What makes you think "those old tea baggers" aren't engineers ?

Although, considering that most leftists are queer, I guess we're even
on insults ;-)

                                        ...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    mens     |
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
| Phoenix, Arizona  85048    Skype: Contacts Only  |             |
| Voice480)460-2350  Fax: Available upon request |  Brass Rat  |
| E-mail Icon athttp://www.analog-innovations.com|    1962     |

I love to cook with wine.     Sometimes I even put it in the food.

I've seen those videos of you in the gay free parade. Seriously,
wearing a pocket protector any carrying a slide rule does not go well
with your naked ass showing from those leather chaps you wear.

Regarding tea baggers, they are way to too stupid to have engineering
degrees, though I have met some real dolt engineers from Arizona.

Gawd! You're straining so hard you're about to shit a Larkin ;-)

...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO | mens |
| Analog Innovations, Inc. | et |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus |
| Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | |
| Voice480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat |
| E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 |

I love to cook with wine. Sometimes I even put it in the food.

 

[miso@sushi.com]

On May 28, 6:53 pm, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-I...@On-My-
Web-Site.com> wrote:

On Sat, 28 May 2011 18:50:21 -0700 (PDT), "m...@sushi.com"









m...@sushi.com> wrote:
On May 27, 9:39 pm, Glenn Gundlach <stratu...@yahoo.com> wrote:
On May 27, 2:07 pm, Tim Wescott <t...@seemywebsite.com> wrote:
snip
 > And why, exactly, does wanting to live in a country where I can
enjoy
 > life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness make me a "leftist"?
 
 > --
 
 > Tim Wescott
 > Wescott Design Serviceshttp://www.wescottdesign.com

You're only a leftist if you want ME to pay for your life liberty and
pursuit of happiness. You don't want that do you?

G˛

One suspects a newsgroup frequented by engineers has a fair amount of
high wage earners, hence they are contributing to the public trough
way more than those old tea baggers.

What makes you think "those old tea baggers" aren't engineers ?

Although, considering that most leftists are queer, I guess we're even
on insults ;-)

                                        ...Jim Thompson
--
| James E.Thompson, CTO                            |    mens     |
| Analog Innovations, Inc.                         |     et      |
| Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems  |    manus    |
| Phoenix, Arizona  85048    Skype: Contacts Only  |             |
| Voice480)460-2350  Fax: Available upon request |  Brass Rat  |
| E-mail Icon athttp://www.analog-innovations.com|    1962     |

I love to cook with wine.     Sometimes I even put it in the food.

I've seen those videos of you in the gay free parade. Seriously,
wearing a pocket protector any carrying a slide rule does not go well
with your naked ass showing from those leather chaps you wear.

Regarding tea baggers, they are way to too stupid to have engineering
degrees, though I have met some real dolt engineers from Arizona.

 

[Lawrance A. Schneider]

By far and away the most egregious was the decision to appoint President
George Bush. The Constitution clearly makes elections a state issue.
The Supreme Court ignored the Constitution and repeatedly interfered in
the election process. Clearly showing their right wing bias and
willingness to ignore both "Stare decisis" and the Constitution.

The second most extreme example is the "Citizens United" decision. As
the standard joke goes: I'll believe a corporation is a person when I
see Texas execute one. Again, the ignoreing both "stare decisis" and
the Constitution.

The first decision gave us an incompetent who started one war and failed
to finish it; though the military knew where to find the rest of the
Taliban and Mr. Bin Laden, he let the VP talk him out of finishing the
job. He then proceeded to start a totally useless conflict costing more
than a trillion (not paid for) dollars and incurring two trillion
dollars in VA benefits.

The second gave us the Tea Baggers. They are paid for by the Koch
brothers and have destroyed civil discourse between persons of different
views.


Larry


In article <8dsst6ln3jiju9vbip95t1d47hi15ogcqp@4ax.com>,
Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon@On-My-Web-Site.com>
wrote:

Serious Question for Leftists...

There are literally thousands of judicial decisions out there, by
left-leaning judges, who decided cases based on "warm-and-fuzzy"
rather than the law.

I'd like citations of right-leaning judges twisting the interpretation
of the law.

Really!

No fuzzy-mouthed statements of your own opinion, quote me real
judicial decisions.

Thanks!

...Jim Thompson

 

[hifi-tek]

"Lawrance A. Schneider" <llaassllaaass@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:llaassllaaass-B0B6C0.08220908082012@east.AltBinaries.com...

By far and away the most egregious was the decision to appoint President
snip Liberal Bullshit

gmail, indeed!
Electronics content please?
Tom

 

[spamtrap1888]

On Aug 8, 5:22 am, "Lawrance A. Schneider" <llaassllaa...@gmail.com>
wrote:

By far and away the most egregious was the decision to appoint President
George Bush.  The Constitution clearly makes elections a state issue.
The Supreme Court ignored the Constitution and repeatedly interfered in
the election process.  Clearly showing their right wing bias and
willingness to ignore both "Stare decisis" and the Constitution.

When the newspaper chains (Knight-Ridder was one) recounted the votes
the way Gore wanted, Bush won Florida anyway. (Although Gore still won
the popular vote across the country.)

The second most extreme example is the "Citizens United" decision.  As
the standard joke goes: I'll believe a corporation is a person when I
see Texas execute one.  Again, the ignoreing both "stare decisis" and
the Constitution.

Judicial overreach. The right-wingers took a decision applicable to a
closely-held corporation, where the opinions of the corporation and
the shareholders were one, and applied it to giant corporations with
hundreds of thousands -- if not millions -- of shareholders, like IBM
and GM.

The first decision gave us an incompetent who started one war and failed
to finish it; though the military knew where to find the rest of the
Taliban and Mr. Bin Laden, he let the VP talk him out of finishing the
job.  He then proceeded to start a totally useless conflict costing more
than a trillion (not paid for) dollars and incurring two trillion
dollars in VA benefits.

When the votes were recounted for the umpteenth time, Bush would have
won anyways. And we would have enjoyed several months of being led by
President Denny Hastert. (third in the line of succession). Because
Clinton was limited to two terms by the Constitution. (Could Gore have
been named acting President during the interim? Interesting question.)

The second gave us the Tea Baggers.  They are paid for by the Koch
brothers and have destroyed civil discourse between persons of different
views.

The Teabaggers were a spontaneous movement, although surely the Kochs
were glad to see them emerge. Karl Denninger and his ilk are no more
destructive of civil discourse than the Occupy movement.

 

[spamtrap1888]

On Aug 8, 3:04 pm, "hifi-tek" <t.hoeh...@insightbb.com> wrote:

"Lawrance A. Schneider" <llaassllaa...@gmail.com> wrote in messagenews:llaassllaaass-B0B6C0.08220908082012@east.AltBinaries.com...> By far and away the most egregious was the decision to appoint President

snip Liberal Bullshit
gmail, indeed!
Electronics content please?
Tom

Exactly what kind of electronics content did you expect from a thread
titled "Serious question for leftists"?

 

[Silly Rabbit]

On 08/08/2012 03:39 PM, spamtrap1888 wrote:

When the votes were recounted for the umpteenth time, Bush would have
won anyways.

Not according to
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Florida,_2000>

It appears more likely that Gore, and not Bush, would have won if the U.S. Supreme
Court hadn't halted recount efforts.

 

[Bill Sloman]

On Aug 9, 12:39 am, spamtrap1888 <spamtrap1...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Aug 8, 5:22 am, "Lawrance A. Schneider" <llaassllaa...@gmail.com
wrote:

<snip>

When the votes were recounted for the umpteenth time, Bush would have
won anyways.

Except that there had been a serious and persistent effort to get
people likely to vote Democrat off the electoral rolls. Jeb Bush had
subverted the electoral process, and got away with it.

<snip>

The second gave us the Tea Baggers.  They are paid for by the Koch
brothers and have destroyed civil discourse between persons of different
views.

The Teabaggers were a spontaneous movement, although surely the Kochs
were glad to see them emerge. Karl Denninger and his ilk are no more
destructive of civil discourse than the Occupy movement.

They are a lot more irrational than the Occupy movement. There's a
whole lot of evidence that level of inequality in income and wealth in
the US is high enough to damage US society - anybody with more
inequality than Denmark does worse than Denmark on a whole range of
measures, and the US has a lot more inequality than Denmark and most
other advanced industrial countries - and to that extent the Occupy
movement is entirely rational.

The Teabaggers wouldn't recognise evidence if it bit them.

--
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

 

[spamtrap1888]

On Aug 8, 9:48 pm, Silly Rabbit <5...@trix.com> wrote:

On 08/08/2012 03:39 PM, spamtrap1888 wrote:



When the votes were recounted for the umpteenth time, Bush would have
won anyways.

Not according to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_F...

It appears more likely that Gore, and not Bush, would have won if the U.S.. Supreme
Court hadn't halted recount efforts.

Your wikipedia cites the Knight-Ridder study I mentioned. By the
"intent of the voter" standard urged by Gore, Bush wins Florida. Only
by the standard Gore rejected -- a complete clean punch through the
ballot -- does Gore win:

Lenient standard. Any alteration in a chad, ranging from a dimple
to a full punch, counts as a vote. By this standard, Bush won by 1,665
votes.
Palm Beach standard. A dimple is counted as a vote if other races
on the same ballot show dimples as well. By this standard, Bush won by
884 votes.
Two-corner standard. A chad with two or more corners removed is
counted as a vote. This is the most common standard in use. By this
standard, Bush won by 363 votes.
Strict standard. Only a fully removed chad counts as a vote. By
this standard, Gore won by 3 votes.

 

[Jim Yanik]

Silly Rabbit <5@trix.com> wrote in news:jvvfen$5h4$1@speranza.aioe.org:

On 08/08/2012 03:39 PM, spamtrap1888 wrote:

When the votes were recounted for the umpteenth time, Bush would have
won anyways.

Not according to
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_election_in_Flo
rida,_2000

It appears more likely that Gore, and not Bush, would have won if the
U.S. Supreme Court hadn't halted recount efforts.

even the liberal Florida newspapers now admit that Bush legitimately won
the 2000 election.

Wiki is run by leftists. and anyone can edit a Wiki article.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik
at
localnet
dot com

 

[hamilton]

On 8/9/2012 7:42 AM, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:

If it weren't for the Tea Party this country would be lost already.

I can't say about your area, but here in Colorado the Teabaggers are the
anarchists who never filled taxes and wanted to abolish the IRS.

Today they are saving the country.

OK, I am not happy with the IRS either, but how did a bunch of hooligans
become Americas savior ??

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

hamilton wrote:

On 8/9/2012 7:42 AM, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:

If it weren't for the Tea Party this country would be lost already.

I can't say about your area, but here in Colorado the Teabaggers are the
anarchists who never filled taxes and wanted to abolish the IRS.

Today they are saving the country.

OK, I am not happy with the IRS either, but how did a bunch of hooligans
become Americas savior ??

The 'bunch of hooligans' is OWS. They can't bath, let alone save
America.

 

[hamilton]

On 8/9/2012 9:10 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:

hamilton wrote:

On 8/9/2012 7:42 AM, dagmargoodboat@yahoo.com wrote:

If it weren't for the Tea Party this country would be lost already.

I can't say about your area, but here in Colorado the Teabaggers are the
anarchists who never filled taxes and wanted to abolish the IRS.

Today they are saving the country.

OK, I am not happy with the IRS either, but how did a bunch of hooligans
become Americas savior ??


The 'bunch of hooligans' is OWS. They can't bath, let alone save
America.

So, its easier to change the subject then it is to answer a simple
question ?

What were the Teabaggers like in your area, before they became Americas
savior ?

Did you even know they existed before they hit the world stage ??

 

On Aug 8, 6:39 pm, spamtrap1888 <spamtrap1...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Aug 8, 5:22 am, "Lawrance A. Schneider" <llaassllaa...@gmail.com
wrote:

By far and away the most egregious was the decision to appoint President
George Bush.  The Constitution clearly makes elections a state issue.
The Supreme Court ignored the Constitution and repeatedly interfered in
the election process.  Clearly showing their right wing bias and
willingness to ignore both "Stare decisis" and the Constitution.

When the newspaper chains (Knight-Ridder was one) recounted the votes
the way Gore wanted, Bush won Florida anyway. (Although Gore still won
the popular vote across the country.)



The second most extreme example is the "Citizens United" decision.  As
the standard joke goes: I'll believe a corporation is a person when I
see Texas execute one.  Again, the ignoreing both "stare decisis" and
the Constitution.

Judicial overreach. The right-wingers took a decision applicable to a
closely-held corporation, where the opinions of the corporation and
the shareholders were one, and applied it to giant corporations with
hundreds of thousands -- if not millions -- of shareholders, like IBM
and GM.



The first decision gave us an incompetent who started one war and failed
to finish it; though the military knew where to find the rest of the
Taliban and Mr. Bin Laden, he let the VP talk him out of finishing the
job.  He then proceeded to start a totally useless conflict costing more
than a trillion (not paid for) dollars and incurring two trillion
dollars in VA benefits.

When the votes were recounted for the umpteenth time, Bush would have
won anyways. And we would have enjoyed several months of being led by
President Denny Hastert. (third in the line of succession). Because
Clinton was limited to two terms by the Constitution. (Could Gore have
been named acting President during the interim? Interesting question.)

Florida wasn't obeying its own election laws, as they allowed Gore to
file protest long after their own deadline.

Gore couldn't protest in a timely manner because he was busy trying to
bias the results, enforcing recounts only in districts he thought
helpful, while suppressing non-helpful districts.

None of it mattered anyhow. In contested cases the decision is made
constitutionally in U.S. House of Representatives. They were
Republicans. Who do you think *they* would've chosen?

The second gave us the Tea Baggers.  They are paid for by the Koch
brothers and have destroyed civil discourse between persons of different
views.

What nonsense. This from a President who accuses doctors of
unnecessarily cutting off feet, for the money.

The Teabaggers were a spontaneous movement, although surely the Kochs
were glad to see them emerge. Karl Denninger and his ilk are no more
destructive of civil discourse than the Occupy movement.

At bottom, Obama and his democrats want to run people's lives down to
the minutest detail, to impose their own morals and dictates--ones
which they themselves don't follow--on an unwilling populace. Free
people don't like that.

And, their dictates are idiotic, such as all this stimulus nonsense
they keep insisting on long after its total, complete, and abject
failure has been abundantly demonstrated.

Last year they spent $3.6T on $2.3T revenues. That's $1.57 in
spending for every dollar taken in. And, they want to spend more.

If it weren't for the Tea Party this country would be lost already.

--
Cheers,
James Arthur