Comments on: The Times Uses the R Word http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/ In defense of the sanctimonious women's studies set. Sun, 21 Mar 2010 15:03:55 +0000 hourly 1 By: Meaghan http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29555 Meaghan Tue, 24 Jan 2006 17:41:32 +0000 http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29555 <blockquote>I know people have complained that he got through the Judiciary Committee hearings relatively unscathed. But so did Bork — he went down in the full Senate after public outcry. So there’s some reason for hope. </blockquote> Yes, HOPE! Come on, folks, let's use the other "f-word" - FILIBUSTER. If we want our reps in the Senate to show a little backbone, we need to give them the legs to stand on. Call them. Write them. Submit letters to the editor. This is the time for the public outcry!

I know people have complained that he got through the Judiciary Committee hearings relatively unscathed. But so did Bork — he went down in the full Senate after public outcry. So there’s some reason for hope.

Yes, HOPE! Come on, folks, let’s use the other “f-word” – FILIBUSTER. If we want our reps in the Senate to show a little backbone, we need to give them the legs to stand on. Call them. Write them. Submit letters to the editor. This is the time for the public outcry!

]]> By: Thomas http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29507 Thomas Tue, 24 Jan 2006 12:34:24 +0000 http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29507 Robert, I linked above to my prior piece on Alito's commerce clause jurisprudence. On my account, he's signalled an intention to roll back sixty years of jurisprudence that extends to Congress the power to do lots of stuff. Robert, I linked above to my prior piece on Alito’s commerce clause jurisprudence. On my account, he’s signalled an intention to roll back sixty years of jurisprudence that extends to Congress the power to do lots of stuff.

]]> By: ginmar http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29504 ginmar Tue, 24 Jan 2006 11:28:20 +0000 http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29504 At least Dilbert doesn't pretend to have never done any of those things himself while lecturing people to avoid them while then posting on blogs that espouse a different political outlook than one's own. Huh. At least Dilbert doesn’t pretend to have never done any of those things himself while lecturing people to avoid them while then posting on blogs that espouse a different political outlook than one’s own. Huh.

]]> By: Robert http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29496 Robert Tue, 24 Jan 2006 07:10:06 +0000 http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29496 At least Scott Adams is willing to get into the dirt instead of trying to endlessly score points off of an adversary's linguistic error; nor does he generally attempt to use argument from authority as a debating tactic; nor is he under the impression that ideas gain or lose validity because of the identity/profession of their holders. Also, he knows the difference between a blog discussing ideas and a comic strip. But none of that is material. This is material: Do you have any legal insight into or support of the theory that Alito's view of executive authority is radically broad, or that his view of Congressional power is radically narrow? At least Scott Adams is willing to get into the dirt instead of trying to endlessly score points off of an adversary’s linguistic error; nor does he generally attempt to use argument from authority as a debating tactic; nor is he under the impression that ideas gain or lose validity because of the identity/profession of their holders. Also, he knows the difference between a blog discussing ideas and a comic strip. But none of that is material.

This is material: Do you have any legal insight into or support of the theory that Alito’s view of executive authority is radically broad, or that his view of Congressional power is radically narrow?

]]> By: zuzu http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29483 zuzu Tue, 24 Jan 2006 05:37:26 +0000 http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29483 You're quoting <em>Dilbert</em> as your knockout point? You’re quoting Dilbert as your knockout point?

]]> By: Jon C. http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29482 Jon C. Tue, 24 Jan 2006 05:34:53 +0000 http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29482 <blockquote>As was your argument as to why the Times should have been held to some sort of summary-judgment standard for its editoral about Alito. </blockquote> I'm just going to sign off in this thread by <a href="http://dilbertblog.typepad.com/the_dilbert_blog/2006/01/more_knockouts.html" rel="nofollow">linking to this,</a> and quoting from it, as I think it neatly summarizes our exchange: <blockquote>...I identified a new type of Internet debating “knockout.” It’s when someone attacks the hypothetical part of your argument as if that’s the point. Example: YOU: “If you traveled back in time, you would see that the atmosphere on earth was very different.” IDIOT: “It’s impossible to travel back in time!” That’s a victory by knockout for you. (Bonus points if the idiot also argues that you can’t “see the atmosphere.”)</blockquote>

As was your argument as to why the Times should have been held to some sort of summary-judgment standard for its editoral about Alito.

I’m just going to sign off in this thread by linking to this, and quoting from it, as I think it neatly summarizes our exchange:

…I identified a new type of Internet debating “knockout.” It’s when someone attacks the hypothetical part of your argument as if that’s the point.

Example:

YOU: “If you traveled back in time, you would see that the atmosphere on earth was very different.”

IDIOT: “It’s impossible to travel back in time!”

That’s a victory by knockout for you. (Bonus points if the idiot also argues that you can’t “see the atmosphere.”)

]]> By: zuzu http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29475 zuzu Tue, 24 Jan 2006 05:10:46 +0000 http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29475 The weather today was shitty. As was your argument as to why the Times should have been held to some sort of summary-judgment standard for its editoral about Alito. The weather today was shitty.

As was your argument as to why the Times should have been held to some sort of summary-judgment standard for its editoral about Alito.

]]> By: Jon C. http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29473 Jon C. Tue, 24 Jan 2006 05:02:11 +0000 http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29473 Uh, I haven't made any new substantive statements in this thread since your 11:41 post, so I'm not sure what you're responding to, zuzu. I think at this point it might be best to move on, as we're just going around in circles- I would like to discuss the merits of the "radical" charge against Alito, while you're content to torch straw men about me "mixing up" editorials with legal issues, even after I've said at least twice that A) yes, of course, there are two different applicable standards, and B) that's not really my point. So, crappy weather we had today, yeah? Uh, I haven’t made any new substantive statements in this thread since your 11:41 post, so I’m not sure what you’re responding to, zuzu. I think at this point it might be best to move on, as we’re just going around in circles- I would like to discuss the merits of the “radical” charge against Alito, while you’re content to torch straw men about me “mixing up” editorials with legal issues, even after I’ve said at least twice that A) yes, of course, there are two different applicable standards, and B) that’s not really my point.

So, crappy weather we had today, yeah?

]]> By: zuzu http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29472 zuzu Tue, 24 Jan 2006 04:55:58 +0000 http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29472 Jon. Quit mixing up legal and editorial concepts. The burden of proof in a legal case is one thing. Editorial responsibilty is another. Jon. Quit mixing up legal and editorial concepts.

The burden of proof in a legal case is one thing. Editorial responsibilty is another.

]]> By: Lauren http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29467 Lauren Tue, 24 Jan 2006 04:48:06 +0000 http://www.feministe.us/blog/archives/2006/01/23/the-times-uses-the-r-word/#comment-29467 <blockquote>That’s my point- that the Times owes its readers and Judge Alito a little intellectual honesty, and should back up its intemperate rhetoric.</blockquote> Don't shoot the messenger, write a letter to the editor.

That’s my point- that the Times owes its readers and Judge Alito a little intellectual honesty, and should back up its intemperate rhetoric.

Don’t shoot the messenger, write a letter to the editor.

]]>