I have come to realize...

[El Kabong]

You post was 100% biased bullshit....FACT

[Kirkland Laing]

You post was 100% biased bullshit....FACT

This is coming from the man whose sum total of political and economic knowledge comes from a four hundred pound drug-adicted radio broadcaster.

I'm sure you can find a link to a copy of the study on the .edu homepage of the Yale law professor who wrote it. Why don't you read through it and then point out where you believe he's incorrect.

[El Kabong]

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

[Trainer Monkey]

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

So wha?,It appeared in the New York Times,so did the report of Ernhardts death. Dale return from the grave and win some races I dont know about?

[El Kabong]

So wha?,It appeared in the New York Times,so did the report of Ernhardts death. Dale return from the grave and win some races I dont know about?

So the Times has a slant ont heir stories as most papers do these days.....which is why they are losing money.

But that is beside the point of the stats being insignificant

[Trainer Monkey]

So wha?,It appeared in the New York Times,so did the report of Ernhardts death. Dale return from the grave and win some races I dont know about?

So the Times has a slant ont heir stories as most papers do these days.....which is why they are losing money.

But that is beside the point of the stats being insignificant

Lyle,hate to break it to you,most papers are losing money,they all were behind the curve on the internet,and didnt figure out how to set up their sites to maximize advertising revenue.
If I can get the AP,Reutars,and AFP newswires,all for free,why would I pay to have the same story in newsprint?

[El Kabong]

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

[Kirkland Laing]

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

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.

[El Kabong]

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