I have come to realize...

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

If those newspapers were still a good product people would still buy them. AP and Rueters still have that distinct lefty slant on things.

---

Oh bull,The New York Post,and The Washington Times,and The Wall Street Journal use the same news wires
And if you think Rupert Murdoch,and Paul Gigot are lefties,you really have spun in to the stratosphere of weird

That is true, however, those publications have conservative writers working specifically for them and AP and Rueters do not.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

That is true, however, those publications have conservative writers working specifically for them and AP and Rueters do not.

---

Your right,AP and Reutars are just basic,heres the story services,without any real editorializing,thats why I stick to those

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lyle

I'm not saying his stats are incorrect (they are just insignificant) I'm saying that just by the way the justices you mentioned view the Constitution then it is not surprising at all that they would be the ones saying we need fewer laws instead of more laws it is by definition the way they view the Constitution but I am wasting my time telling you that you are wrong much less pointing out the fact that that story appeared in the New York Times :rolleyes:

---

Yet another irrelevant argument. One again : it's irrelevant which laws they struck down, what's relevant is that they struck them down -- or "legislated from the bench" -- to change legislation that had been democratically enacted. What part of this don't you understand?


Secondly, it isn't a "story", it's a peer-reviewed academic study. The NYT is a publication that's full of facts and evidence every day. You might try reading it once in a while.

:cwm33:



....excuse me, what was that again?