Comments on: AmeriKan-Dream, American Dream

By: admin

admin — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 19:55:47 +0000

OK, fixed

By: VictoriaMorales427

VictoriaMorales427 — Mon, 08 Feb 2010 17:43:15 +0000

I’ve been trying to subscribe to your rss feed but it’s telling me “XML-RPC not enabled”. Please let me know when it’s fixed. Thanks!

By: MMH

MMH — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:44:58 +0000

Here’s a link to the petition for certiorari:
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/07-1428_pet.pdf
You’ll notice that it was filed with the clerk’s office in May 2008.

That’s a full year before Sotomayor was nominated to SCOTUS.

Then, there was a second petition for certiorari:
http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/wp-content/uploads/2008/11/08-328_pet.pdf
You’ll notice that it was filed in September 2008.

That’s more than 6 months before Sotomayor was nominated.

By: admin

admin — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:40:24 +0000

I am not aware of any other justice who claimed that he chooses which facts to see. I am not aware of any other justice who declared that its impossible to be objective. I am not aware of any other justice who makes racist remarks in the way that she did.
She was overturned what, I think 100% of the time on the case that she wrote opinions 60% on cases that just slithered under her desk and refused to write opinions, or is it the other way around, I don’t remember.
So wait as far as the LSAT goes if you don’t know how she did why did you assume that she doesn’t do well on standardized tests? Perhaps you are prejudiced?
Anyway don’t feel bad but we’ll call it a night I have to do more important stuff like write a Harry Potter review and complain about all the gay movies that opened this weekend, see if I can finish the “Public Enemies Review” ( a little late but who cares the movie was nothing to write about ), write about the racism of Obamacare and other stuff. See you tomorrow.

By: MMH

MMH — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:32:55 +0000

Alright. So I’ll post it again (although I’m sure I saw that it was “awaiting moderation” just before it disappeared).

The fact that SCOTUS reversed the 2nd Circuit’s opinion during Sotomayor’s nomination is that appeals take a long time. I’m 99% certain that the petition for certiorari was filed before Sotomayor’s nomination was made. (And I’ll look up dates if that will make you believe me.)

By: MMH

MMH — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:29:46 +0000

“So she can’t speak properly, admits that she got her grades because of her race, stands by her racist remarks, tell us that she chooses which facts to see, tells us that she finds it just about impossible to be impartial, gets overturned by the SCOTUS as a matter of course and tanked the LSAT!”

She didn’t admit to getting her grades because of her race–she admitted to getting ADMITTED into Princeton because of her race.

I think you’d find that all judges “choose which facts to see.” Sometimes you just can’t tell which side is telling the truth, and there is a lot of lying that goes into court briefs!

I think you’d also find that all judges have a hard time being impartial. That’s the human condition.

Getting REVERSED (”overturned” is when a new case has opposing law to an old case; the old case is “overturned”) by SCOTUS is going to happen to any appellate judge. First, there’s not another court that’s going to review the case; the only place to go is SCOTUS. Second, how do you define “matter of course”?

We don’t know what her score on the LSAT was so I don’t think you can say she “tanked” it with any more authority than I can say she didn’t.

By: admin

admin — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:28:20 +0000

I’m pretty sure you only posted such a thing in your own mind. ,. Heck if you want and it makes sense you can publish an entire article with credit ( Or a nom de plume if you so wish)

By: admin

admin — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:25:26 +0000

OK lets have it your way. It kinda makes you wonder why law schools place such a big emphasis on it6. They should listen to you and only admit people who score under 160
But yeah its true if you can’t get a decent score on the LSAT you are either an idiot or didn’t study.

By: MMH

MMH — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:21:25 +0000

Where did my completely logical description of why the 2nd Circuit decision would be overturned during her nomination to SCOTUS go?
I was willing to look up dates and everything!

Too many facts for this website?

By: MMH

MMH — Fri, 17 Jul 2009 00:20:01 +0000

Your argument is: “I don’t know any dummies that do well on the LSAT”

My argument is: there are smart people who do not do well on the LSAT

Those are two entirely different, and uncomparable, points. Why?
Your point starts with those people who do perform well on the LSAT and your conclusion is then that none of the ones you know are dummies.
My point starts with people who are smart and my conclusion is that you can be smart and not do well on the LSAT.

I believe what you’re trying to jump to is that only smart people do well on the LSAT, therefore, if you don’t do well on the LSAT you’re not smart. And that is a logical fallacy.