Pensacola Discussion Forum
Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

This is a forum based out of Pensacola Florida.


You are not connected. Please login or register

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Graham booed over Gorsuch vote

Graham booed over Gorsuch vote

+5
PkrBum
RealLindaL
knothead
2seaoat
Telstar
9 posters

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3

Go down  Message [Page 3 of 3]

Telstar

Telstar

Let Gorsuch supporters freeze in hell where they will be comfortable.


Sal

Sal

Neil Gorsuch - plagiarist ...

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/gorsuch-writings-supreme-court-236891

2seaoat



Total bull chit. The example given is laughable. This is Rachel Maddow type of minutia without a bit of context or common sense. Where original footnotes properly source the material, and where there are changes in how another author presented the same original material, there is as they said not even smoke here. I have never seen such desperation. Is anybody familiar with some of the other judges which were on President Trump's announced list......some were certified lunatics, yet he chose a main stream jurist and this character attack continues. I wrote my thesis properly sourcing original footnotes and I most certainly borrowed other people's finding those sources and just like Gorsuch changed the presentation from the original author of the secondary sources. I would agree if there was no language change, but there was certainly borrowing, but to call the same wrong is academically as dishonest as what they are accusing Gorsuch of the same.

Floridatexan

Floridatexan

2seaoat wrote:Total bull chit.  The example given is laughable.  This is Rachel Maddow type of minutia without a bit of context or common sense.  Where original footnotes properly source the material, and where there are changes in how another author presented the same original material, there is as they said not even smoke here.   I have never seen such desperation.   Is anybody familiar with some of the other judges which were on President Trump's announced list......some were certified lunatics, yet he chose a main stream jurist and this character attack continues.  I wrote my thesis properly sourcing original footnotes and I most certainly borrowed other people's finding those sources and just like Gorsuch changed the presentation from the original author of the secondary sources.   I would agree if there was no language change, but there was certainly borrowing, but to call the same wrong is academically as dishonest as what they are accusing Gorsuch of the same.

Thanks for the crash course on writing a bibliography. What does "failed to cite" mean? Please don't compare this federalist to Trump's other nominees; they have been consistently chosen from the bottom of the slime barrel. Gorsuch is no different, but his appointment would be. Garland was a superior nominee, and the only reason he was blocked, a full 10 months before the election, was the GOP's vow to trash any Obama nominee or program. Your party is a bunch of hypocritical treasonous hacks, with no morals and no regard for human life, except their own. And your party's president is an emotional 2-year-old.

del.capslock

del.capslock

2seaoat wrote:  I wrote my thesis properly sourcing original footnotes and I most certainly borrowed other people's finding those sources and just like Gorsuch changed the presentation from the original author of the secondary sources.  

What on earth does YOUR thesis have to do with anything. If you wrote a thesis, you should be able to understand the logical fallacy inherent in the use of anecdotal evidence.

What's worse is that the anecdotes you cite in almost every post are always about YOU! You seem to be incapable of writing a post without the first personal pronoun.

Yo, sparky, it's not always all about you.

So, not only are you incapable of logical reasoning, you are an insufferable egotist.

Besides, you miss the entire point--imagine that--about the opposition to Gorsuch. It's not about his qualifications, it's about Garland. Gorsuch is going to get elevated to the Supreme Court but to do it, the Republicans are going to have to nuke the Senate rules and that is going to come back around to bite them when the Dems get the chamber again.

This is a brilliant strategic move on the part of the Dems and the Republicans, who have fallen right into the trap, are incapable of stopping them. The smart Republicans--all three of them--understand that. The rest of them think they're winning.

"Things are seldom what they seem
Skim milk masquerades as cream"

The worst thing is: Your writing is TERRIBLE! If your thesis is anything like your posts, I'd love to get a copy of it. I'd distill it down to its essence and market it as a universal soporific.

What a waste of an education.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/btraven/

RealLindaL



PkrBum wrote:Cite a specific law that overrides Gorsuch's ruling.

Thank you for proving my case. You and Gorsuch are two of a kind. No humanity, just anal technicality.

PkrBum

PkrBum

RealLindaL wrote:
PkrBum wrote:Cite a specific law that overrides Gorsuch's ruling.

Thank you for proving my case.  You and Gorsuch are two of a kind.  No humanity, just anal technicality.

As opposed to judicial activism and extra constitutionalism.. then call me what you want.

Telstar

Telstar

PkrBum wrote:
RealLindaL wrote:
PkrBum wrote:Cite a specific law that overrides Gorsuch's ruling.

Thank you for proving my case.  You and Gorsuch are two of a kind.  No humanity, just anal technicality.

As opposed to judicial activism and extra constitutionalism.. then call me what you want.


Okay.

Graham booed over Gorsuch vote - Page 3 Steroi15

2seaoat



Group think is fun to watch. The American Bar association has recommended the judge. He has a stellar record. Democrats lost the election because they abandoned the middle class and had Rachel Maddow as the thermometer of the American mainstream. The democratic party has no young people as standard bearers. I listened for six months of CNBC crowing about how the Republican Party has disintegrated, and how Trump would never be President. What the Republicans did in the senate was wrong. However, there is a way to have stopped the same. Run qualified candidates for senate who address what people need. I listened to MSNBC for a year talking about how Senator Johnson from Wisconsin was losing by a landslide......the same people who said that Walker would be recalled, yet when walker did not get recalled, the hubris did not stop, and Hillary did not make one campaign stop in Wisconsin.....a state with a Republican governor who is a wimp, but the people did not vote to recall him.....how many messages do the democratic party need to get to understand that they need to have policy which addresses issues which matter to folks who vote. I am all for gender equality. Gay marriage. Trans using whatever bathroom they want, but none of those address the fear of a family which is one paycheck from eviction and being on the streets. If anybody thinks the majority of Americans are behind this circus in the senate, they have lost their mind.

Guest


Guest

I don' care how good a judge he is. It's a stolen seat and he should not have it.

2seaoat



I don' care how good a judge he is. It's a stolen seat and he should not have it.


They won the senate. How was it stolen? They could have voted him down, which would have been honest. They chose to ignore him. I think he should have been voted up or down. However, elections have consequences. I just wish the Democratic Party had grown some gonads since the election, but they have become whiny wussies where strength of character and mission have left the building. Fighting a battle they will lose without any upside.....utter miscalculation. They project impotence, while a flim flam man projects false strength....you just cannot make up this horrible story.

Sal

Sal

2seaoat wrote:However, elections have consequences.

Good gawd, you're losing it, man.

Obama was elected twice, and the Repukes came up with some bizarre notion that Obama should not be allowed to pick a replacement in the last year of his Presidency.

without any upside.....utter miscalculation.

Actually, there's no downside to this strategy for the Democrats.

The changing demographics of this country heavily favor Democrats in presidential elections, so getting rid of the filibuster likely will result in the Court, overtime, moving sharply to the left.

del.capslock

del.capslock

Sal wrote:
The changing demographics of this country heavily favor Democrats in presidential elections, so getting rid of the filibuster likely will result in the Court, overtime, moving sharply to the left.
[/b]

Bingo!

http://www.flickr.com/photos/btraven/

othershoe1030

othershoe1030

This came out today.  

Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch copied the structure and language used by several authors and failed to cite source material in his book and an academic article, according to documents provided to POLITICO.

The documents show that several passages from the tenth chapter of his 2006 book, “The Future of Assisted Suicide and Euthanasia,” read nearly verbatim to a 1984 article in the Indiana Law Journal. In several other instances in that book and an academic article published in 2000, Gorsuch borrowed from the ideas, quotes and structures of scholarly and legal works without citing them.

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/04/gorsuch-writings-supreme-court-236891

2seaoat



read nearly verbatim to a 1984 article in the Indiana Law Journal.

I did the exact same thing on my thesis. I properly footnoted original references, and changed some of the wording which introduced those original references, and yes I got some things from European Economic journals when writing on the Latin American Free trade association. An author had gathered those original footnotes, I used them in the same sequence, but changed some of the wording. All my original footnotes properly referenced the original thoughts of an author, and in presenting those thoughts, I....Like the judge changed some of the wording of the introductions. The closer you get to the exact wording of the secondary source the closer you get to running into problems, but that is not what he did.....I have read what he did and it is academically sound, but did he use that law review article which opened the portal to the original cites.....he sure did....and there is nothing wrong in the same. This has become stupid.

RealLindaL



2seaoat wrote:
I did the exact same thing on my thesis.  I properly footnoted original references, and changed some of the wording which introduced those original references, and yes I got some things from European Economic journals when writing on the Latin American Free trade association.   An author had gathered those original footnotes, I used them in the same sequence, but changed some of the wording.   All my original footnotes properly referenced the original thoughts of an author, and in presenting those thoughts, I....Like the judge changed some of the wording of the introductions.   The closer you get to the exact wording of the secondary source the closer you get to running into problems, but that is not what he did.....I have read what he did and it is academically sound, but did he use that law review article which opened the portal to the original cites.....he sure did....and there is nothing wrong in the same.   This has become stupid.

So you DIDN'T do "the exact same thing" at all.   Again:

"Gorsuch borrowed from the ideas, quotes and structures of scholarly and legal works without citing them."

Telstar

Telstar

Senate GOP triggers nuclear option to break Democratic filibuster on Gorsuch

The Senate Thursday triggered the so-called "nuclear option" that allowed Republicans to break a Democratic filibuster of Supreme Court nominee Neil Gorsuch.

The chamber is now expected to vote to confirm Gorsuch Friday.




http://www.cnn.com/2017/04/06/politics/senate-nuclear-option-neil-gorsuch/index.html

Sponsored content



Back to top  Message [Page 3 of 3]

Go to page : Previous  1, 2, 3

Pensacola Discussion Forum » Politics » Graham booed over Gorsuch vote

Permissions in this forum:
You cannot reply to topics in this forum