Jenksismyhero

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 4, 2012 -> 09:19 AM) Link And you don't think that has something to do with the nature of the star decisis system? That after 150 years of interpreting the Constitution there's going to be some more narrow questions about the law as applied to more specific facts? I'm sure the number of decisions per year has greatly increased over time too.

I'll add too that in the vast majority of cases (like 75-80%) the court doesn't have that 5-4 split. They're normally unanimous decisions. I think people assume that more coverage=happening all the time.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 4, 2012 -> 08:59 AM) Apparently a lot of them, since you yourself just said that a lot of votes were predicted "Geographically". Because geography often dictates political views, especially in the past, less so now. Has the Court gotten more attention for "political decisions?" Yes. Is this some new trend that justices have tendencies to rule the same as their political beliefs? No.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 4, 2012 -> 08:53 AM) But was it a political unit specifically aligned with the parties, to the point where you could predict every key vote based on which President appointed a justice? I can't say with certainty when it was a 5-4 split court like this, but yes, you could very easily predict opinions based on some kind of political leanings, normally geographic in nature to start. As I said before, during FDR's terms he wanted to amend the Constitution because the Court kept rejecting a lot of his policies and he knew they'd continue to do that. I don't see why this is so surprising. The President nominates a justice. What President is going to nominate someone with different political beliefs?

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 3, 2012 -> 04:27 PM) That might have been the standard when a 5-4 decision didn't mean "Democrats on one side, Republicans on the other". A 5-4 decision used to mean a lot more about the law being in dispute. Now it means a lot more about politics. Balta - I really urge you to go read some history books about the Court. You've made this point repeatedly that the Court is somehow just NOW becoming a political unit. That's just not true. It's been political basically since the beginning.

QUOTE (RockRaines @ Apr 4, 2012 -> 08:12 AM) How come OSU's young guys are question marks but everyone else's are expected to be contributors immediately as freshman? OSU has just as many McD's AA's sitting on the bench about the make the leap towards their second year than any of the other teams in the conference have coming in. Second, the top recruit of last class didnt join the team until halfway through the year and got zero run. This was the youngest team in the conference this year, and in 2 years should be VERY good. Now if Tony Parker picks OSU this is all a whole new ballgame. Stats say IU was top 20. But once again 158th in defense. Bringing in young players doesnt really help teams on defense typically unless they are Davis or Craft type players. Rock what's the feeling on Thomas declaring? Any chance of that?

QUOTE (southsider2k5 @ Apr 3, 2012 -> 11:20 AM) Just think of it as a mandatory colonoscopy.

The Killing is the same as last year, though maybe a little better. The size of this conspiracy has reached cartoon-like proportions though. I'm pretty sure the writers consider YOU a suspect.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 3, 2012 -> 08:51 AM) I just wanted to point out that the person at the center of this case was, in fact, a law abiding citizen who had done nothing wrong. Thanks to a computer glitch, he was flagged as not having paid a fine seven years previously and so a bench warrant was issued. He had paid the fine. Police-State Logic He had a copy of the paid receipt in his glove compartment too I read. Not sure why he was even arrested in the first place.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 3, 2012 -> 08:37 AM) A separate thought: what powers do the states possess that make the mandate ok that the federal government doesn't possess? Probably depends on Mass.'s constitution.

Physical game so far. Wonder if the refs will reign it in.

Wow, worst anthem ever?

Kentucky at 16? And no MSU in the top 20 but NW and MINN are? What the heck kind of metric did they use for this thing?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 2, 2012 -> 01:39 PM) You sound paranoid. I also live in the suburbs. In fairness I live on a dead end street, so it's a little different than most blocks. But still, there are a ton of kids on my block that play outside and my 1st is about to be one of them in the coming years. I don't think it's all that unreasonable to want to know what happens in your neighborhood.

I think they limited it to situations where they're put into the general population too. So if you're picked up for a misdemeanor and booked and put into a holding cell you can't be searched. So I think in practice it's going to require more than just a simple offense to get to that point.

QUOTE (Y2HH @ Apr 2, 2012 -> 01:22 PM) The last 6 weeks there was a string of burglaries in my neighborhood (Clearing, IL...not far from Midway), two "dark skinned" males were said to be robbing houses and using a non descriptive "green van" to get away. No make, no model...just a green van. Rumor around my "hood" was that they'd first case the street they were looking to hit, separately, on foot before returning on a weekday when people were at work and hit a house when they knew nobody was home. A few weeks ago I saw a dark skinned Latino walking down my street...and I know, I'm a f***ing racist...but I grew suspicious as to why! OMG, I know...how low and racist of me to profile like that. After he walked past my house, I walked out there and watched him walking about, seemingly aimlessly...and I asked him what he was looking for. So he turned around and it turns out he was looking for a specific address, because his family lived there...who shortly after spotted him and came out to greet him and me... You know what would have made me REALLY suspicious? If he suddenly put his hood up when I asked that question and started walking faster, you know...to get away from me. AGAIN, as a final disclaimer. I'm NOT defending what Zimmerman did. I'm simply trying to tell you how and/or why Zimmerman had the right to be suspicious, DESPITE your claim he had no reason to be. Yes, he did. Just like I did. I would have simply called the police (and went to get my brother who lives across the street, who is the police), rather than arming myself and chasing him down...but I'm not Zimmerman, and I don't live in a place that let's me carry. EDIT: Oh, last week, police caught the guys burglarizing a house a few blocks away from here, it turns out it was two black guys driving a light green minivan. This is all unreasonable. For shame, sir. For shame.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 2, 2012 -> 01:11 PM) I wouldn't be suspicious of someone walking down the street in front of my house. People do it all day, every day. I've never stopped anyone to question why they were in the neighborhood. Zimmerman never approached or questioned Martin until the final altercation, though. He followed him around the neighborhood for several minutes, which, from Martin's point of view, is reasonably suspicious behavior. I know I'd be looking for alternative escape routes if someone was following me around. TOTALLY depends on the neighborhood, which is why I find it hilarious that you're supplanting your own assumptions onto what Zimmerman was doing/thinking at the time. When I lived in the city, sure, I wouldn't think twice about it. I live in the burbs now where it's rare to see any random person walk down the street. And I know everyone on my block. So if I saw someone I didn't know walking down my street, I'd sure as hell wonder what the deal was and I'd be watching him/her, regardless of color or dress. If my neighborhood had an increase in crime, including a shooting, I'd do more than just watch. I'd do exactly what Zimmerman did, especially if the cops weren't patrolling the area as frequently as I would like them to.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 2, 2012 -> 10:59 AM) You're simply deferring to Zimmerman's judgement, which is assuming your conclusions that he acted reasonably. I do not see anything reasonable about stopping the teen to question him in the first place to be honest, let alone following him through the neighborhood with a loaded firearm. It's not really Zimmerman's business who's walking around the public sidewalks in the neighborhood. God forbid I try to remain neutral and see it through Zimmerman's eyes instead of just assuming that he's a dirty, gun-toting racist looking to kill a black kid! Do gated communities have "public" sidewalks?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 2, 2012 -> 10:56 AM) We're discussing Zimmerman's actions here. Is it reasonable to chase a teen through your neighborhood with a loaded weapon simply because he "doesn't belong" in the area as far as you are aware? Him carrying a gun, which is probably something he does all the time, is completely irrelevant to whether his actions with regard to Martin were reasonable.

My issue with the Betty stuff is that they've written her into a corner. There are zero redeeming qualities about her now, so I don't see the point in hitting us over the head with what kind of person she is. In the beginning you could toss aside a lot of what she did and blame it on her being spoiled and young (or because of how she had to deal with "Bad" Don). Then it sorta turned into her never growing up and having the social age of a child. But now it's just...nothing. Now she's just Betty -- a cold, selfish b****. I don't even feel sorry for her now because Weiner hasn't given us any scene where Betty actually realizes who she is and feels somewhat remorseful about it. Watching her go through a struggle like potentially having cancer, and then to have her reaction be so self-centered... while consistent, it's just boring. Ok, we've gotten 2-3 seasons now establishing that Betty is who she is. Now what? If there's no point then why continue to put her in those situations that cause people to dislike her even more? It's beating a dead horse and the dead horse isn't every entertaining for 30 minutes of a 52 minute show. And yes, I agree Harry and Don's white castle scene was good, as was the Peggy/Roger scene.

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 2, 2012 -> 10:52 AM) How is it reasonable to chase a teen around the neighborhood with a loaded weapon when you have no knowledge of a crime being committed and no reason to suspect the teen? why does the gun have anything to do with this? is there evidence that Martin knew that Zimmerman was armed?

QUOTE (StrangeSox @ Apr 2, 2012 -> 10:49 AM) There was no reasonable suspicion of Martin having committed a crime unless being young, black and wearing a hoodie is sufficient. Perhaps the whole mindset behind a GATED community is part of the problem. Have you seen the logs of his calls? No s*** they didn't do anything to stop crime, he wasn't actually reporting any criminal activities. The guy lives in a gated community and has taken over the neighborhood watch program. If anything seemed out of the ordinary, he would know it, and that's what raised his suspicions. Whether or not those were prejudicial or flat out racist is irrelevant. He has every right to see what was going on in his neighborhood and to watch what people are doing if he feels it is out of the ordinary. Merely following someone isn't instigating conflict. Nor is it, as Balta apparently believes, the first step towards inevitable murder.

QUOTE (Balta1701 @ Apr 2, 2012 -> 10:02 AM) Which is why calling 911 was the appropriate response. No one here has begrudged him doing that. Even if he made the decision because the kid was black and wearing scary outfits as judged by him, he has the right to call the police in that neighborhood. Following the kid, scaring him to the point that he began running and hiding, then getting out of the car and resuming pursuit on foot...that's where he crossed the line from following the rules, from neighborhood watch, and became a vigilante with few options other than killing the kid. I love how this has flipped so much in your mind that there's no possible reason for Zimmerman to do what he did. Maybe he saw a suspicious looking kid he hasn't seen before in his GATED community. He called the police, but clearly his calls haven't done jack to prevent the recent uptick in crime the prior year. So he, being the guy in the neighborhood that wants to curb the problem (since the cops clearly haven't), decides to tail the guy AND call the police in case he needs them. Then he sees the kid run away. So he chases after him again. He could, very reasonably, have believed that Martin had already committed a crime and wanted to keep an eye on him. He could have, reasonably, felt it MORE suspicious that the kid ran away after Martin saw him (as people that are caught doing something wrong tend to do that sort of thing). Pursuing him on foot to see where he went isn't some crime or instigation of conflict that you think it is. If his story is true, up to the actual conflict and eventual shooting his actions are 100% reasonable. And that's not to say Zimmerman should get away with murder, if that's what the evidence eventually shows. And LOL at the "few options other than killing the kid." You have seriously become delusional about what happened in this case.

QUOTE (flavum @ Apr 2, 2012 -> 09:49 AM) That's a little harsh. I'm a huge fan of the show, and even I have come away a little disappointed so far. It's just missing something so far for me, but I'm sure the season will turn out just as good as the first four. Yeah, that's how I feel too. I think it's that normally the show is driven by the characters making bad choices. Then you get to see the characters deal with the fallout. So far nothing like that has happened. There hasn't been much drama (though i'm sure it'll come soon enough).

QUOTE (Steve9347 @ Apr 2, 2012 -> 09:33 AM) Do you consider yourself a fan of the show? What are you expecting? This has been definitive Mad Men these first two episodes of the season. If you don't like those, I have zero idea how you made it through the 4 seasons prior. I thought it was fantastic again last night. Yes, I'm a fan. But the first 3 episodes have been just ok, nothing spectacular. Last night was Betty-centric, so I knew right away it was going to be a bore.