Merged SCotUS nominee - Neil Gorsuch

[eeyore1954]

What are the odds that this guy will have been to plagiarize something?

I mean, it seems that a lot of Trump's people have done that at some point

If you look hard enough and accept a small enough sample of text to be considered plagiarism it can be found for most anyone who does any writing.

 

[Belz...]

If

Copycat!

 

[logger]

Why wouldn't I? Unlike you I accept the results of the test.

And the results say you're left, I do accept the results.

Everything not like you is left. That's not what "the left" is.

No, there are center right, center, center left, extreme left.

Course you did. Right here:

Responding to what you've said in the past isn't really a hypothetical.

Since I have not done this to your knowledge, you are building a hypothetical in which I would.

Psst, its because you're not being honest?

It's a computer program. Take the test and see where you land. You might learn something. I know, learning isn't very conservative.

I've taken the test, I'm far right as you already know.

 

[Belz...]

No, there are center right, center, center left, extreme left.

Think you forgot extreme right, here.

Responding to what you've said in the past isn't really a hypothetical.

None of this answers anything I've said in the past. You're just being argumentative.

Psst, its because you're not being honest?

Unlikely. I've never lied on this forum. I've been wrong, but I've not lied, and you can't find an single instance of me lying, ever.

I've taken the test, I'm far right as you already know.

Then perhaps it's time for you to realise that, being an extremist, you don't have a particularily well-balanced view of the world.

 

[eeyore1954]

Wouldn't you agree that he pretty much fits the narcissistic personality disorder exactly?

No.

I do agree he has an large ego ( as do many politicians, businessmen etc at his level). I doubt if he has fragile self esteem. Fighting back doesn't necessarily mean that.

I don't know if he cares how much he is admired. At least any more than most people do.

From the Mayo Clinic
"Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for admiration and a lack of empathy for others. But behind this mask of ultraconfidence lies a fragile self-esteem that's vulnerable to the slightest criticism."


"A narcissistic personality disorder causes problems in many areas of life, such as relationships, work, school or financial affairs. "

He has done very well in business and other endeavors. He has been divorced a couple of times but seems to have a good relationships with his family (including in-laws and ex wives).

 

[Belz...]

I doubt if he has fragile self esteem. Fighting back doesn't necessarily mean that.

He fights back against every single perceived slight.

I don't know if he cares how much he is admired.

You must be joking.

He has done very well in business and other endeavors.

Sinking several casinos doesn't strike me as "doing well".

 

[BobTheCoward]

So you are not an "originalist", then.

I don't think you know what originalism is. Here is the originalist question: Did the legal meaning of the second amendment at the time mean that if the first clause ever becomes obsolete then the second clause is no longer operative?

An originalist can actually arrive at a yes, no, or maybe answer to that question based on evidence. I think it is no.

 

[eeyore1954]

So it was entirely a partisan move, then. It had nothing to do with the good of the country or the rule of law or anything principled like that.

What makes it an entirely partisan move? Couldn't it have also been what others thought was for the good of the country?

What was done that was against the rule of law?

Personally I believe it had more to do with what they believed was good for the country than partisanship.

 

[Resume]

No.

I do agree he has an large ego ( as do many politicians, businessmen etc at his level). I doubt if he has fragile self esteem. Fighting back doesn't necessarily mean that.

I don't know if he cares how much he is admired. At least any more than most people do.

From the Mayo Clinic
"Narcissistic personality disorder is a mental disorder in which people have an inflated sense of their own importance, a deep need for admiration and a lack of empathy for others. But behind this mask of ultraconfidence lies a fragile self-esteem that's vulnerable to the slightest criticism."


"A narcissistic personality disorder causes problems in many areas of life, such as relationships, work, school or financial affairs. "

He has done very well in business and other endeavors. He has been divorced a couple of times but seems to have a good relationships with his family (including in-laws and ex wives).

Read this transcript:
https://mobile.twitter.com/ddale8/status/826822342961745922

Something ain't right.

 

[Belz...]

I don't think you know what originalism is.

I readily admit that I have only a passing notion of it.

Did the legal meaning of the second amendment at the time mean that if the first clause ever becomes obsolete then the second clause is no longer operative?

Given that the first is given as justification for the second, I don't see how it could be interpreted differently except by using tortured logic.

What makes it an entirely partisan move?

The fact that the decision was made, according to logger, because the judge didn't have the correct political leanings.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Given that the first is given as justification for the second, I don't see how it could be interpreted differently except by using tortured logic.

Really? I would say the consequences of laws are so often vastly different from their justification that justification only serves to make me laugh.

 

[Belz...]

Really? I would say the consequences of laws are so often vastly different from their justification that justification only serves to make me laugh.

Then the amendment is badly written. If the two clauses aren't related directly, the first shouldn't have been put there at all.

 

[BobTheCoward]

Then the amendment is badly written. If the two clauses aren't related directly, the first shouldn't have been put there at all.

That is why originalism is original meaning and not original intent. If they wanted the first to be a test on the second clause, they failed at ratification.

But it isn't unheard of. The whole Constitution has a preamble. None of it has ever been legally binding.

 

[eeyore1954]

He fights back against every single perceived slight. Honestly, you don't know that.
You just admonished another poster for pretending to know what you think and yet you believe you know what he thinks.

You must be joking.

No I am not. He might care but it is also possible he has enough self confidence that he doesn't. Do you really think you know him well enough to make that judgement?

Sinking several casinos doesn't strike me as "doing well".

He has been in probably thousands of ventures and has failed in some of them (probably more than we know). Others have been very successful. Whether you or I consider it to be "doing well " is subjective.

 

[Fast Eddie B]

He lost by 2.8 million votes.

No, he won.

Where it actually counted.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

As a then Republican, I accepted Obama as the next POTUS on the evening of November 4th 2008. He won fair and square and there was no reason to believe otherwise either then, or now.

Let me guess, you also accepted Obama's right to appoint a SCOTUS justice to replace Scalia.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Not really. A reasonable definition of judicial activism is that it is the overturning of precedent. With that definition one can almost objectively measure activism. By such a measure, Thomas turns out to be the most activist judge.

Yes really. The right claimed everything the SCOTUS decided they did not like was activism. And I agree with your assessment of Thomas.

Regardless of facts, eye of the beholder still defines the term.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

Thank you Dr.

Also so far there hasn't been a smidgen of evidence of corruption. Oh sorry that was the previous president.

Nurse Practitioner, thank you and Trump's diagnosis has been thoroughly covered in another thread.

As for the corruption, if you haven't seen the evidence, you aren't looking. But note I said, "almost certain", allowing for the fact conclusive evidence is pending.

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

If you look hard enough and accept a small enough sample of text to be considered plagiarism it can be found for most anyone who does any writing.

Sounds familiar, .... where have I heard something like that before? Oh yeah, it was in the alternative facts presented by the Trumpettes before Melania admitted she did it and her friend too the fall.

Stuff like this from CNN, however, looks like someone answered the questionnaire like it was an open book test:

"Opening a complaint for investigation in no way implies that the Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has made a determination about the merits of the complaint," DeVos wrote in response to a question about publishing the list of schools under Title IX investigations.
The Department of Education guidance reads, "Opening a complaint for investigation in no way implies that OCR has made a determination with regard to the merits of the complaint."

 

[Skeptic Ginger]

No, he won.

Where it actually counted.

Yes, to the election, no to a mandate.