Wednesday, May 27, 2009
More Sotomayor linkage, and a thought
Two items worth reading if you are trying to decide whether to weigh in for or against Sonia Sotomayor: Damon Root, who finds much to dislike in the judge's record on affirmative action and the Second Amendment, and Andy McCarthy, who sees in the judge a disturbing attraction to judicial activism and "the rule of lawyers."
Now a thought. There is obviously much to dislike about Sonia Sotomayor's substantive opinions, and more will come out in the coming weeks. These positions and others certainly provide the basis for a principled opposition to her appointment. The danger, though, is that the left will no doubt attempt to characterize objections to Judge Sotomayor's appointment as racist, sexist, or otherwise ad hominum (attacks on her supposed "mediocrity" will not stick); unfortunately, there will inevitably be conservatives, however unimportant they may be, who will say things that the left and their allies in the press will exploit to establish the point. Too much of that, and the Republicans will lose more than this nomination battle.
48 Comments:
By 
davod, at
Wed May 27, 07:56:00 AM:
TH. You use a straw argument. The Liberals (To polite a word for them) will attack Conservatives unmercifully anyway.
Republicans should not place politics above the need to highlight problems with the nominee.
A good way to criticise the nomination is obliquely - Obama said X and did Y - can we believe him about Z.
By 
, at
Wed May 27, 08:01:00 AM:
The Republicans don't have the votes to block her, barring some surprising discovery. She's not so extreme to be worth picking an ugly fight over that will turn into a loser. I'm a critic of the only two Second Circuit opinions of hers I know of -- New Haven firefighters, Port Chester takings -- but two other judges voted with her on those decisions. Better to score a few points on principled positions in her hearings and move on. Within a bound of reason, it is Obama's choice.
"False in one thing, false in all." I can't believe some are suggesting she's dumb ... and is she really a more difficult personality than Scalia? It would be a mistake to attack her with coded messages about her being a woman, single, not white, and working class.
Link, over
By Anthony, at
Wed May 27, 08:44:00 AM:
The Democrats and their "progressive" allies are going to slag as racists anyone who opposes Sotomayor, no matter what. So, we might as well launch a principled opposition to her and try to make the case to the public as much as possible. We can still make plain why we think she's a bad choice. FWIW, I think her overall judicial philosophy (which seems to be nothing but identity politics) and her decision in New Haven firefighters disqualifies her, though I expect she'll still be confirmed.
By Dan Kauffman, at
Wed May 27, 08:55:00 AM:
We are going to get a Liberal Judge, but whoever it is will be replacing a judge who usually votes with the Liberal Bloc, so this is not going to change anything.
We don't have the votes
The balance on the Court is not going to change,
So there is no reason to get worked up that much
Now if the new judge starts coming up with some way out in Left Field opinions that might scare more voters away from the Democrats in 2010 and 2012
By Dan Kauffman, at
Wed May 27, 08:57:00 AM:
Anthony has IMO the correct attitude make our case, but accept it's inevitable and if the appointment is toxix politically down the road for the Democrats?
Mwa Ha Ha HA
By Pyrus, at
Wed May 27, 09:24:00 AM:
I think she's a shoe-in. Judicial activism is a bad thing (e.g., penumbra arguments) but a microscopically close reading of an ambiguous text is no better. It's "ad hominem", by the way.
By , at
Wed May 27, 09:43:00 AM:
Just think of the folks he could have named. What if he had appointed Garafolo, Blago, maybe, Richard Gere and so on.
The thought that comes to my mind is how this same woman would have been savaged by the anti-Americans had she been appointed to the same job by George Bush. They would have treated her just as they treated Palin.
By davod, at
Wed May 27, 09:50:00 AM:
"We don't have the votes
The balance on the Court is not going to change, So there is no reason to get worked up that much"
Now there is a principled statement. Don't worry, be happy.
When do conservatives stand up for their values. At every opportunity.
Start from the position of whether Sotomeyer's record represent the values of conservatives.
Remember - Liberals are at war and the enemy is conservatism.
Read the comments below taken from the RNC website:
"Dean: "Alito's record suggests an activist judicial philosophy bent on rolling back the rights and freedoms that all Americans value."
DNC Chair Howard Dean On Roberts Nomination: "It is disappointing that when President Bush had the chance to bring the country together, he instead turned to a nominee who may have impressive legal credentials, but also has sharp partisan credentials that cannot be ignored."
Dean: "Democrats take very seriously the responsibility to protect the individual rights of all Americans and are committed to ensuring that ideological judicial activists are not appointed to the Supreme Court.
Steel: Michael Steele Urged A "Thoughtful Discussion" Immediately Following Sotomayor's Nomination.
By Anthony, at
Wed May 27, 10:21:00 AM:
Dean: "Democrats take very seriously the responsibility to protect the individual rights of all Americans and are committed to ensuring that ideological judicial activists are not appointed to the Supreme Court.It could make for interesting political jiu-jitsu to turn the former Chairman's words against Sotomayor's nomination.
By , at
Wed May 27, 10:22:00 AM:
Too much of that, and the Republicans will lose more than this nomination battleWhy do the Republicans always "lose more"?
Look what was said about Clarence Thomas, Miguel Estrada, and Janice Rogers Brown by the Democrats.
What did they "lose"?
By davod, at
Wed May 27, 12:46:00 PM:
WRT to the first Sotomayer being the first Hispanic on the court. I read a number of arguments suggesting that Cardozo doesn't qualify and have just found one that provides a reasonable indication that he was the first Hispanic.
Shelomo Alfassa, a Sephardic Jew, of the Center for History and New Media, George Mason University says the folowing:
(May 26, 2009) - The media is making a huge mistake reporting that Sonia Sotomayor, chosen by President Obama, will be the first Hispanic to be chosen for the US Supreme Court. Yet, Benjamin Nathan Cardozo (1870-1938) was the first Hispanic Justice in the US Supreme Court. Cardozo, a Sephardic Jew, served on the Supreme Court from 1932 until his death. He was born in to a Jewish family which immigrated from Portugal via the Netherlands and England to America. He was a long time member of the 'Spanish and Portuguese Synagogue' in New York City, home to 'Congregation Shearith Israel,' which was founded in 1654. Cardozo was a cousin of the poet Emma Lazarus whose poem "...Give me your tired, your poor, your huddled masses yearning to breathe free ..." resides on the Statue of Liberty as a symbol of legal immigration into the United States of America.
Problems with the NY Times response:
1) Prof. Mair Jose Benardete, the first Sephardic scholar in America, authored "Hispanic Culture and Character of the Sephardic Jews" in 1952. Throughout his scholarly book, he uses the word Hispanic to refer to Iberian Jews, Jews from Spain and Portugal (living in New York). Hispanic can certainly refer to Jew from Iberia, meaning both Spanish and Portuguese.
2) Tens if not hundreds of thousand of Spanish Jews were sent into Portugal during the Spanish Inquisition. Many of the Jews in Portugal later escaped, this includes the Cardozo family who has a tradition that their ancestors were secretly forced to convert to Christianity--but did escape religious persecution in the 17th century. The Cardozo family took refuge first in Holland and then in London. Later members of the family emigrated to the New World."
This of course forgets entirely the main criteria for being first at anything - A Liberal must be the nominator.
By , at
Wed May 27, 01:14:00 PM:
Get used to Justice Sotomayor. Begin now to think differently, to think in terms of how we Americans can mobilize to fight the collectivist dream that President Obama is forcing down our throats and how we can use this nomination discussion to demonstrate the threat this administration represents to America and Americans. Sotomayor is just another tool in Obama's bag of tools, albeit an important one.
It's Obama's utopian dream itself that is the real problem, and that must be defeated because the harvest of all his work will be a terrible one. Our children will have only a weak, state-cronyist economy in which to beg some bureaucrat for work, the world will inherit only war from the president's weaknesses and naivete, and the constitutional republic we are so proud of will have been undermined. Nutcases like CC or the Wheeler monstrosity will come to dominate the nation's politics. Sotomayor's nomination gives conservatives a chance to talk about the political threat she and her ilk represent to the rights of every American. The Didden case about which Richard Epstein wrote is a perfect example.
All Americans will understand that case, and why her contempt for the property rights of average Americans when confronted by government douchebags needs to be fought tooth and nail.
By , at
Wed May 27, 02:00:00 PM:
Your G.O.P. is D.O.A. making all of the comments above irrelevant.
It all reeks of sour grapes.
It is your own fault for being racist buttholes who supported Fascism and cheered oily war criminals.
I guess all I really want to say to all of you is...well... never mind...your time is over.
Can you say Dinosaur?...as in extinct?
The too easily duped eventually disappear.
It is a law of Nature.
Good riddance!
You will not be missed...but you will be remembered in infamy...as complicit in war crimes.
Yes, you will !
Eric K. Johnson
By , at
Wed May 27, 02:19:00 PM:
When do conservatives stand up for their values. At every opportunity. - davod lost in a dream world?
You can't possibly be serious?
Before you can "stand up" you must first arise from your bushCo.bootlicking knees and wipe the copious lickspittle from your bootlicking crusty chin.
This is a comedy site?
It reads like a Saturday Night Live bit...but not nearly as funny...quite pathetic is closer to reality than you may ever recognize...although in your Heart you know I am right.
Eric K. Johnson
By , at
Wed May 27, 02:20:00 PM:
We're nice people around TH's site, reasonably intelligent, and engaged in serious talk by and large with respectful attitudes towards each other. Why is it then that we attract these kooks here? Eric Johnson, Wheeler, CC.. the list goes on. I wonder sometimes if they aren't all the same kook, posting their nutty comments under sock puppetry troll names...
By , at
Wed May 27, 03:55:00 PM:
TH syas: The danger, though, is that the left will no doubt attempt to characterize objections to Judge Sotomayor's appointment as racist, sexist, or otherwise ad hominum....Heh? The left will attempt to characterize the objections as racist? LOL. Is that before or after listening to the moronic mouthpieces who call themselves Conservatives?
Pass the Popcorn.
By joe buz, at
Wed May 27, 04:02:00 PM:
Consider the ruling regarding Didden v. Village of Port Chester.
By Dawnfire82, at
Wed May 27, 04:10:00 PM:
"The left will attempt to characterize the objections as racist? LOL."
Do you honestly not understand the point, or are you just a partisan hack?
By , at
Wed May 27, 04:52:00 PM:
Oh, I understand the point, Dawnfire. I suggest you watch the clip that I linked to and tell me that you *understand* the point.
By Escort81, at
Wed May 27, 05:51:00 PM:
The clip Syd links to has talking heads focusing on one impolitic remark that Judge Sotomayor made (and she may have made others) regarding how one's race and background might have some effect on perspective and legal judgment. This view comports with the underlying reasoning in Grutter v. Bollinger -- that in the view of many law school professors, having ethnic and racial diversity in the class was an essential teaching element, because the differing life experiences of students would be instructive when looking at certain cases (though query whether skin color is always an indicator, or should be the primary indicator for a different life experience for people in their early twenties in this decade). Sotomayor is not saying anything that outrageous, in the sense that pretty much every university in the country subscribes to that view, so racist is probably the wrong word to use, because of its extreme connotation. If she had said that black judges or white judges are inherently inferior to hispanic judges, that would be clearly and overtly a racist remark, and she would be in some trouble.
She is also being criticized from the left (at least, I think Jonathan Turley is considered coming from that side, since he wants members of the Bush administration indicted, although he did favor Clinton's impeachment -- he's a "hanging" law prof!) -- in this clip, he states that he believes that Judge Sotomayors's written decisions (at least those that he has read) "lack intellectual depth." If a righty had said that, it would be considered code language that she is not that bright, which we know is not the case (you don't win the Pyne Prize at PU without Major League smarts). Turley's other point is that she is apparently not a liberal Scalia -- a Justice who will build an intellectual foundation to move the SCOTUS to the left.
So maybe a few Republican Senators rough her up a bit, almost like an initiation ritual. She is a slam dunk for at least 70 votes. Keep your powder dry for fights that you can win. If the next nominee is not someone like Elena Kagan (who is somewhat more moderate than Sotomayor, in my opinion), you may need that powder.
By , at
Wed May 27, 06:49:00 PM:
From Newt "who has time to be ethical?" Gingrich's TwitterBerry an hour ago:
"White man racist nominee would be forced to withdraw. Latina woman racist should also withdraw."
What were you saying TigerHawk about the left characterizing objections to Ms Sotomayor as racist???
By davod, at
Wed May 27, 07:16:00 PM:
"Keep your powder dry for fights that you can win."
So we do nothing until the Republicans have at least how many seats in the Senate?
By , at
Wed May 27, 07:17:00 PM:
There goes Florida. And Arizona. And you might as well kiss Texas good bye in the general, too. Nice job, boys.
By , at
Wed May 27, 07:54:00 PM:
Dr. David Yeagley, a Comanche conservative, just wrote a piece on the Sonia appointment and his take---
Republicans must die....
I would have to agree with him.
By JPMcT, at
Wed May 27, 08:35:00 PM:
Almost two thirds of her decisions have been reversed by higher courts...I suppose this represents a pure case of REVENGE OF THE NERDS!!!
I agree with Glen Beck...why are we screaming from the hilltops about the first Hispanic nominee? Isn't that supposed to be irrelevant? Kind of like demanding that the nominee have a colostomy so that they can be the first one with a stoma!
It's all political hash. Nobody has any basic respect for the constitutional system of government anymore...so what the hell does it matter.
This is probably the LEAST STUPID of Obama's initiiatives since elected. I guess that makes it a relatively smart move.
By , at
Wed May 27, 09:59:00 PM:
Yikes, JPMcT, you're quoting Glenn Beck???
Makes me want to cry
By JPMcT, at
Wed May 27, 10:14:00 PM:
Hmmmm....was that a jab at Glenn Beck, me...or both?
By Dan Kauffman, at
Thu May 28, 12:24:00 AM:
"Your G.O.P. is D.O.A. making all of the comments above irrelevant.
It all reeks of sour grapes.
It is your own fault for being racist buttholes who supported Fascism and cheered oily war criminals.
I guess all I really want to say to all of you is...well... never mind...your time is over.
Can you say Dinosaur?...as in extinct?
The too easily duped eventually disappear.
It is a law of Nature.
Good riddance!
You will not be missed...but you will be remembered in infamy...as complicit in war crimes.
Yes, you will !
Eric K. Johnson "
Which exlains why the Progressive Liberal Democrats have lost ALL their edge in Generic Ballots even when leaning Independents are included? ;-))))
PS Facism is a form of SOCIALISM and I don't think too many here are in favour of that form of polity, withe exception of you possibly
"
By Dan Kauffman, at
Thu May 28, 12:26:00 AM:
""We don't have the votes
The balance on the Court is not going to change, So there is no reason to get worked up that much"
Now there is a principled statement. Don't worry, be happy.
When do conservatives stand up for their values. At every opportunity.
Start from the position of whether Sotomeyer's record represent the values of conservatives.
Remember - Liberals are at war and the enemy is conservatism."
I am well aware what the War is about. I just am not all that supportive of Light Brigade Charges.
Better to be thought lacking in principles than Stuck on what the Raging Cajun accused the Media of
By Dan Kauffman, at
Thu May 28, 12:31:00 AM:
Of course maybe this is the Hill you are prepared to die on?
I don't think we have a ghost of a chance of blocking this or maintaining a Fillibuster.
That said if we have to accept that the next Supreme Court Justice will alway vote Liberal, let it be a Toxic Progressive, instead of a seemingly Reasonable one.
Let the American Public get sick to their stomach and look at the Senators who confirmed her and make them nervous about their next elections
Yes we DO have to get our licks in and put on record for the Public WHY this is a BAD choice for the SCOTUS, but I prefer a holding action and regroup rather than a banzais charge ending by going out in a blaze of glory and leading the troops to slaughter.
you see? I want to WIN this war not just keep my conservative principles shiny and untarnished
By , at
Thu May 28, 03:39:00 AM:
BREAKING NEWS
G.O.P. ridden out of town in last Pontiac.
I am guessing this site attracts kooks like me for karmic reasons...and ,upon reflection, possibly because water seeks it's own level?
This is one desperately funny blog...and I am a fun lovin' guy!
The main stumbling block most of you who post here are struggling with is your inability to admit that no (growing ever smaller in number) "Corporate Rich Elite Ruling Class" can exist without a (growing ever larger in number) "Working Poor Class" working harder and longer for less compensation in order to keep the Rich Rich in perpetuity.
Change is coming whether you like it or not.
It will sting for a little while having to give up your third Audi or trading your Yacht in for a smaller craft...but you will get used to it...those in the Working Poor Class have been forced to "get used to it" for too long.
We want our rightful fair share of the pie now...not when we die ...in the sky...that's a damnable lie!...pass the pie you selfish pricks!...Jesus may be holding our(Working Poor Class) pie up in the sky somewhere over the rainbow...but many are hungry and suffering from want and unmet needs many of you take for granted in your privileged, entitled, narcissistic, increasingly impotent/failing Class....as in Rome Redux.
Capitalism is an unwholesome system that depends on a certain segment of our fellow Citizen's suffering from the negative effects of under/unemployment at all times.
The Human hunger and Human need are right here in Reality... not in some intellectual ivory tower where many of you seem to reside.
Give it a think...in Reality mode?
In closing, let me say I firmly believe some of you were born with a Heart two sizes too small.
More's the pity!
Eric K. Johnson
P.S. Mark Twain was referring to many of you when he stated," No man extols the virtues of Capitalism more than the man who has inherited the Family Farm or business".
By , at
Thu May 28, 04:07:00 AM:
BREAKING NEWS
G.O.P. ridden out of town in last Pontiac.
I am guessing this site attracts kooks like me for karmic reasons...and ,upon reflection, possibly because water seeks it's own level?
This is one desperately funny blog...and I am a fun lovin' guy!
The main stumbling block most of you who post here are struggling with is your inability to admit that no (growing ever smaller in number) Corporate Rich Elite Ruling Class can exist without a (growing ever larger in number) Working Poor class working harder for less compensation in order to keep the Rich Rich in perpetuity.
It will sting for a little while having to give up your third Audi or trading your Yacht in for a smaller craft...but you will get used to it...those in the Working Poor Class have been forced to "get used to it" for too long.
We want our rightful fair share of the pie now...not when we die ...in the sky...that's a damnable lie!...pass the pie you selfish pricks!...Jesus may be holding our(Working Poor Class) pie up in the sky somewhere over the rainbow...but many are hungry and suffering from want and unmet needs many of you take for granted in your privileged, entitled, narcissistic, increasingly impotent/failing Class....as in Rome Redux.
Capitalism is an unwholesome system that depends on a certain segment of our fellow Citizen's suffering from the negative effects of under/unemployment at all times.
The Human hunger and Human need are right here in Reality... not in some intellectual ivory tower where many of you seem to reside.
Give it a think...in Reality mode?
In closing, let me say I firmly believe some of you were born with a Heart two sizes too small.
More's the pity!
Eric K. Johnson
P.S. Mark Twain was referring to many of you when he stated," No man extols the virtues of Capitalism more than the man who has inherited the Family Farm or business"
By JPMcT, at
Thu May 28, 07:08:00 AM:
To Eric the Red:
Every so often it's actually nice to look directly into the maw of somebody who is a product of our failed educational system...so, please, Eric, by all means keep posting!
I know you think you're pretty clever. The world has dealt you a stiff blow, having to work and all...pay some taxes possibly...but you have probably not been born with TRUE victim status, have you. You're probably not a minority, gay, disabled, Latino or an illegal...are you? So you don't get the free ride.
I know, it's sad. We're sorry...really we are.
Your only hope was to be a radical liberal syncophant, eschew everything that your country stands for and hope that Obama whould take you into the fold, pay your mortgage, give you a "Tax Refund" (wink, wink) and you would be on your way to a life of liesure while all of us on this board continued to work to support your sorry ass.
But it didn't quite work out that way, did it?
In the game of Obama versus reality...Obama is losing. He literally is running our of our money before he even got a good head of steam.
Basically, Eric, you've been a useful idiot all your life for nothing.
We understand. You will always have a home here.
We empathize.
Sorry, that's all I can say...I have to go to work.
By , at
Thu May 28, 08:00:00 AM:
Sorry, that's all I can say...I have to go to work.You should have left earlier....
By Georg Felis, at
Thu May 28, 11:44:00 AM:
Heres an idea. I am hoping that when the nominee arrives at the Supreme Court, she turns into the most partisan left-wing activist we have ever seen.
Why? I would think that would be obvious. Picture yourself in a room with 8 other people, arguing a point. One of the people is a loon, and has taken your side. Wouldn't you be tempted to take the other side, just to distance yourself from the loon?
If so, we may see a number of 8-1 decisions start coming out of the SC, where they used to be 5-4.
By , at
Thu May 28, 02:14:00 PM:
Obama is losing. He literally is running our of our money before he even got a good head of steam.-JCToo pitifully timid to sign his own name to his own opinion
Do you proof read your inane comments?
Whose money?
It's apparent from your slip that you really mean to say Obama is ruining (y)our money!
Dr. Freud will see you now... to interpret/ tell you what you are struggling to say but so desperately want to hide is the fear you experience at the thought of losing your Wealthy Class status... born of an unwholesome, corrupt, inherently unfair, exploitative rapidly failing (once again) system.
Goodbye G.O.P.!
Goodbye Corporate "Capitalism"!
Hello Democratic Socialism and welcome...it's about time our Nation's Citizen's awakened and are rejecting your racist class based economic Scheme/Scam.
As I said above,you don't have to like it but you will learn to live with it!...You have no other choice except to move to another successful Capitalistic Country...but where is that Country??
Who are the "We" to which you refer?
Are you the spokesperson for the TigerHawk weblog?
Get up a little earlier and you won't have to rush to work...at the Family Business?
If not, then you are an exploited fool working for your Corporate Masters.
Idiot is a strong offensive word and sends a strong message revealing your character or lack thereof.
You are quite wrong about my minority status.
I am sane and believe we as a Nation have the responsibility to care for every member of our Country.
That makes me a minority of one on this crackerjack blog.
You are going to have to learn how to share...let's start with a piece of pie.
FYI We personally have everything we need (and a little extra) of which my Wife and I gladly share when able.
Confucius said, "The inferior man knows what will sell,the Superior man knows what has value"
Give it a think?
Is it Money or Love?
"In the end ,the love you take is the love you make"
Who do you love besides your money and yourself?
Who loves you?
Money can't buy you love.
It can't even rent any.
Try again?
No Cigar!
Eric K. Johnson
By , at
Thu May 28, 02:35:00 PM:
Every so often it's actually nice to look directly into the maw of somebody who is a product of our failed educational system
Sonny, I am a 57 year old ex- convict who spent many years in Federal Prison for Marijuana Trafficking.
If you ever mustered the guts to look into my eyes, much less my maw,you would lose your mud in your pants and change your tune to the key of respectful attention.
Eric K. Johnson
By JPMcT, at
Thu May 28, 04:46:00 PM:
Methinks there are those who should not be allowed internet access if they fail to take their medication.
The prisoner fantasy explains alot.
Troll...
By , at
Thu May 28, 11:40:00 PM:
Mr Fantasy Put "Eric K. Johnson" or 08411026 into the Federal Inmate Locator(search Goggle) and turn fantasy into reality.
Eric K. Johnson
P.S. the attempt at mental health wellness medication offers further insight into your seemingly maladjusted personality.
One out of four people in our Country will suffer from a mental health disorder.
How do you know you won't be the unfortunate "one" out of the next four?
Your arrogance causes me to believe you are quite insecure.
You lack the skills needed to debate me.
You are boring,
Anyone want to debate based on facts?
Eric K. Johnson
By JPMcT, at
Thu May 28, 11:51:00 PM:
By , at
Fri May 29, 12:13:00 AM:
http://bulk.resource.org/courts.gov/c/F2/924/924.F2d.714.90-1492.90-1491.html
Eric K. Johnson
By , at
Fri May 29, 12:20:00 AM:
Feh???...do you need toilet tissue or a mop?
Feh?...my mistake You are an artful debater.
You are effective with three letters?
You are a goofy punk,Punk.
Amuse me!
Eric K. Johnson
By , at
Fri May 29, 12:43:00 AM:
If you ever mustered the guts to look into my eyes, much less my maw,you would lose your mud in your pants and change your tune to the key of respectful attention.
Eric K. Johnson
Now you know my name and location.
Just so you know, I am a Bounty Hunter and can know yours in short order with a Court Order if you are foolish enough to risk playing with my name.
You need to re-read the above and get some respect and quick or shut your piehole and scat,Sonny.
Eric K. Johnson
By JPMcT, at
Fri May 29, 08:59:00 PM:
Dear Mr. Johnson:
I am pleased to review the details of your criminal record.
I am extremely impressed that you were apprehended for trying to purchase drugs from a federal agent wearing a wire in some hotel room in the middle of nowhere.
I am also very impressed that you are a bounty hunter.
Do you have a mullet?? Do you ride a motorcycle and wear leather underwear?
That would REALLY impress me!!
I am heartfully sorry if I have offended you.
Sincerely,
JPMcT
PS.
LOSER!!!!
By , at
Fri May 29, 10:38:00 PM:
HAHA... FYI you couldn't get a 'Court Order' to release a members identify even if you offered to let three supreme court judges sword-fight in your mouth. You would have to prove some sort of illegal activity, then get a subpoena to BlackHawk to release the IP address of the memeber THHHEENN... file ANOTHER court case and get a subpoena to that persons ISP (internet service provider) to release the personal information connected to that IP address..... All of this is assuming that the poster isn't using a proxy.... but that is probably over the head of a mullet-wearing socialist inmate, huh?
PS- Just because you smoke pot does not mean you lived through the 60's, regardless of what "interfibs" you choose to tell... Why don't you let your Mommy and Daddy explain the 60's a lil better for you and you might realize that what was once considered Liberal is now called Conservative... the ideas don't change- just the titles!!!
By , at
Sat May 30, 12:39:00 AM:
You are a punkass sissy and I do ride a motorcycle coast to Coast.
Have you heard of the term "Hacking"?
Do you for one monent believe Internet anonymity is actually possible?
Are you as foolish as you appear?
I have associates in nearly every state in America.
None of them favor the mullet.
You must be a gambler at heart.
I think your heart is pumping koolaid.
Time will tell.
So don't look for that.
By , at
Sat May 30, 12:52:00 AM:
In June, a subpoena was issued to Yahoo on behalf of the company to obtain the ISP addresses of the harassers, said Philip spokeswoman Linda Kuhn. Philip then went to a local court to obtain the court orders to track down on the individuals via the ISPs.
Yahoo has since removed the more defamatory messages from the boards, saying they violated the boards' terms and conditions agreement, Kuhn said. Kuhn also added that Yahoo did not provide the names of the email subscribers, but provided the IP addresses after the subpoena was served. The IP address would enable Philip to find the ISP from which the message originated.
"Our singular and primary interest is stopping the defamation," said Kuhn. "This has nothing to with criticism of the company. There are over 2,300 messages on the board and most of them [are] related to the company's affairs and [contain] a lot of criticism, and that's all a part of civil liberties and freedom of speech. And those kinds of messages are not in any way involved in this action."
The issuance of the court orders underscores the fact that the Net has evolved from a once free-wheeling environment to a more mainstream medium where users are held accountable for their actions. For example, a California man was convicted in February of federal civil rights violations for sending a threatening email message to Asian students at the University of California at Irvine. The man claimed during the trial that the messages were intended as a joke.
It also illustrates that the Net no longer a haven for people who want to express their opinions anonymously
Jmpsissy
You are quite mistaken and obviously have no knowlege of the law but I will cure you,shortly.
Eric K.Johnson
By JPMcT, at
Sat May 30, 07:09:00 AM:
Well, we are getting WAAAYYY off topic here, but let me sign off on this "discussion" by summarizing a few points:
1. I don't really know whether this guy is a pock-marked, hardened desperado or just a chubby, acne infested 15-year-old who knows how to cut-and-paste somebody else's information on the internet. I suspect the latter.
2. It's not illegal to insult somebody, especially a fictional, anonymous somebody...but it IS illegal to make threats on the internet.
3. You don't need a court order to track down somebody's identity - just the correct software routines.
So...out of respect for the moderator of this blog, I am going to let this boob rant on as he pleases, but will not post any replies. Since I actually log on the these boards, I can be legally tracked and am responsible for everything that I say.
4. But...if you log on as an anonymous entity, dont think that you cant be found...because you can. So..."Eric"...don't make veiled threats against people unless you want your mother and father (or...emmm...your "parole board") to get very angry at you.
Adios.
