Timothy3 wrote:

I thought you might be the one to ask for advice on how to acquire a mail-order bride.

Wishful thinking - you'll have to find takers elsewhere for your commission.

I really need someone to slap around.

------------------------------

I think you're shrink is the one who should be hearing about your violent fantasies.

Because of this I have voted for men and women in sex

Putting your political beliefs into your choice of sex partners is going way above and beyond the call of duty. I command your stick-to-it-iveness.

omooex wrote:

Tigerman

Because of this I have voted for men and women in sex

Putting your political beliefs into your choice of sex partners is going way above and beyond the call of duty. I command your stick-to-it-iveness.

--------------------------

You can commend it by all means but try commanding it and you'll find you have a problem on your hands! lol

The USSC was actually unanimous in rejecting the Sotomayor panel's specific holding, which was that New Haven's decision to spurn the test results must be upheld based solely on the fact that highly disproportionate numbers of blacks had done badly on the exam and might file a "disparate-impact" lawsuit -- regardless of whether the exam was valid or the lawsuit could succeed.

GINSBURG, writing for the USSC liberals, also said that the lower courts should have ordered a jury trial to weigh the evidence that the New Haven's claimed motive was a pretext. Sotomayor is clearly at cross-purposes with Ginsburg.

So why did you not say that months ago? Do you also want to retract all the racist comments about the founding fathers?

Seems to me, that rather than all the name-calling(*) you could have just said you did not vote for the man because he was black and that any words of yours to that effect that are in the archives were "misspoken" by you.

Now, was that not easy?

------------------------

(*) I have been "talking" to folks via computer since before the Internet was widely available. Your personal insults are not very effective. No personal insults are really --- it is fun sometimes, but often offends the lurkers.

I'll gladly defy you - I vote for the person whose policies and opinions are the most aligned with my own - period! Because of this I have voted for men and women in sex, white and brown in race, Christian - Muslim in religious faith and another whose religion (if any) I didn't know.

Oh by the way - by YOUR myopic views you would probably call me a 'redneck' or some such because I mainly vote conservative (but not always!) but if so this 'redneck' is far less hamstrung with racism than yourself.

I don't know enough about you at this point to characterize you. But based on how you responded to my comment, I don't believe I care to learn anything about you. Sorry you're just not that important to me today and surely never will be.

By the way, based on your answer, it appears you don't have a clue about the basis of my challenge. You might want to try reading what I wrote again and reflect on it a moment before you answer (or not). Either way I could care less.

This leads us back full circle. Your only goal here is to be a nuisance. And its probably the only goal you've ever attained. Your annoying obtuseness is incredibly hard to ignore, I'll give you that. Its your calling, such as it is.

How was the liberal media supposed to report this? That the Supreme Court upheld the previous decision?

Do you consider me a racist based on what I said in my comment earlier? Because I considered race a factor in how I voted, does that make me a racist? Did my action defy what many would consider to be the acceptable norms of society? (And please don't ask me what the acceptable norms of society are, you're smart enough to interpret that correctly.)

-------

I told you or some other fella just a comment or two ago that one would need more information than simply the one act of voting on one occasion to call someone a racist.

We consider all factors we are aware of in all decisions. That is human nature for you.

I will say that voting for a man based primarily on the color of his skin rather than the content of his character is a racist act. I am not so sure one act brands a man forever. If, on the other hand, race is an important issue to you every time you go to the polls then you may well be a racist.

Oh no! A two-bit racist twit called me names! How will I go on?

I'm one of those loons who believes that, in the abscence of significant statistical evidence, the actual content of the promotion test should be examined for evidence of racial bias.

Imagine that -- actually looking at the fucking content of the fucking test. What a crazy person I am for even thinking of such an idea.

So you don't actually have any idea how to create an unbiased exam, or really know what sample sizes would suffice, or how to test the exam for bias, but you'll gladly criticize the method that had been created for doing so, using a bunch of "statistical sounding" language. Great. At least thanks for sharing that you didn't know what you were talking about.

has TigerMan:

Irrelevant response from an irrelevant liberal... I think you're shrink is the one who should be hearing about your violent fantasies.

Frankly, I thought the line should've been "Irrelevant response from an irreverent liberal."

But about my therapist, yes, regarding violent fantasies, she once asked me about my online screen-names and I told her, "Well, Timothy3 is usually what I go by, but I thought--hey, what about TigerMan?" and she retorted, "that's just plain sick. What, are you in the market for a mail-order bride or something?"

Ah, the beauty of therapy, eh?