Saturday, 05/23/09 Public Square

right left brain

If a person is a ‘leftist,’ does that mean they’re controlled by the right or left side of the brain?  How does that work?  Most of the time I think my brain doesn’t know which side to choose from and just gives up!  😉

What’s everyone up to this long weekend?

fnord

22 Comments

Filed under The Public Square

22 responses to “Saturday, 05/23/09 Public Square

  1. frigginloon

    Sorry Fnord I am a fence sitter I don’t use any side of my brain! I am off to play golf in the rain and probably gale force winds…thanks Prairie P&P’s for sending your weather my way 🙂 . I think I just saw Toto fly past my window !!!!

    • jammer5

      Ahhh . . . golf, where a perfectly good walk is spoiled. I do that all the time. Here in kansas, we call playing golf in gale force winds normal.

  2. I always wanted to make a “Kansas Windchime”.
    That would be a very stout pole with some old-fashioned steel window counterweights hanging from chain.

    I had to spend all day yesterday at dad’s. Trying to get his computer straightened out again. He payed big bucks for the best warranties and support and we still got some crappy help this time. I get the feeling that the holiday weekend might of had something to do with this.

    6176 hang in there.
    Typing with one hand is STILL USING 3 more fingers than I use.

  3. Do you remember the Wichita Kansas aerospace engineers who made news around the world with a YouTube video titled “An Engineer’s Guide to Cats?” In a straight-faced dry humorous way they talk about things like his ugly apartment, his ugly sofa covered in cat hair and, of course, the videos feature three pet cats.

    He did a political version on YouTube titled, “An Engineer’s Guide to Voting (Ginger Cat for President).”

    They have a new cat-yodeling video out called, “Advanced Cat Yodeling.”

  4. I read an article this morning titled, “Next Supreme Court’s docket much broader than abortion.”

    It speaks to the kinds of cases the Supreme Court will be hearing beginning with next fall’s session.

    — snip —

    “Then there are the potential disputes on the outer edge of predictability, such as those that involve technology or government efforts to combat global warming.

    “A generation ago or even 10 years ago, these issues were not at all on the radar screen.”

    I don’t know the answer to a question rattling around in my empty brain since reading this article. So I’m asking ’cause if I don’t know I can’t think of a better way to find out then asking you guys.

    How can this bunch of old geezers address issues that weren’t on the radar screen 10 years ago?

  5. Do you know what I did 42 years ago today? I started the day with a high-speed drive wishing a police person would give chase (actually provide escort or assistance or something) and then soon I went on to giving birth to my youngest daughter in a car in the parking lot of the hospital.

    It gets less clear exactly what happened after that. But we were all well and happy! 😉

  6. 6176746f6c6c65

    fnord,

    The simple answer to your question about SCOTUS is that the factual issues are “new”, but the legal issues (statutory construction, e.g.) remain the same.

  7. Would it be true they have to ‘wing it’ a bit to apply those constructed statutes to new issues never before heard of thus not having laws applied to them? Or do the statutes get clearer in the courts that precede SCOTUS, and their job is to kinda oversee the lower courts?

    Am I just so ill informed about this whole deal that I would need way more remedial training than available outside law school?

  8. 6176746f6c6c65

    Sure, fnord, there are new factual issues to which the statutes are construed and applied which may well not have existed at the time the statutes were enacted. It is the job of the lower courts (primarily the District courts) to do the heavy lifting. The Courts of Appeal then determine initially whether the District courts correctly applied the law to the facts found to be true by the District court. SCOTUS then decides whether it will take the case (usually takes a “split of authority” among the Circuits that have considered the question, but not always) and, in so doing, acts as the ultimate overseer of the lower courts.

    So, by the time a case gets to SCOTUS, there has been quite a bit of history created, as well as a broad legal foundation laid upon which a decision may be made.

    There’s a lot more to this than what I briefly set out, but this should give you a feel for how it works.

  9. 6176746f6c6c65

    Forgot to mention that Brown v. Board was an example of the split in authority way a case is decided by SCOTUS. There were actually 3 cases decided that day; as Brown came first alphabetically, that’s how the case is known.

    Two Circuits had followed the Plessy v. Ferguson decision; one had distinguished it in its decision.

  10. That does help me understand, thank you.

    I didn’t mean it to sound like I thought this august bunch were simply ‘winging it’ without quite a bit of knowledge, experience and education behind them. Still I see such diversity in opinions handed down I know their perspective has an affect and would have to be more so with issues so new to our society that a clear understanding of them isn’t yet available.

    When you get to the point you’re able to type with both hands, I want you to give us a history lesson in Brown v. Board as you’ve made mention of a few tidbits that make it sound like a very interesting case. Didn’t you say recently it even involved luck?

  11. I’m sure all this is available someplace, but not in the way you would present it, and not where I can stop the lesson to ask questions (no matter how dumb they sound). You never make me feel a question is too dumb for an answer.

  12. 6176746f6c6c65

    Understand, fnord. IMHO, the only “dumb” question is the one that isn’t asked, especially where arcane subjects such as SCOTUS are involved.

    The reason I often mention Brown is that it was truly groundbreaking, in more ways than the obvious. For example, use of sociological data was allowed to reflect the malicious effects of school segregation. This type of evidence had never before been permitted, as it went to a general topic rather than dealing specifically with any damage suffered by the Plaintiff as the result of the wrongful acts alleged to have been committed by the Defendant against the Plaintiff.

    I also had the great good fortune to have the late Paul Wilson as a professor. He was the Assistant Attorney General who was tasked with making the argument before SCOTUS on behalf of the Topeka BOE, an argument he personally found distasteful. He used this to illustrate the duty owed a client by counsel, wryly noting that unlike a private attorney, he was not in a position to move the Court for an order allowing him to withdraw. 🙂

    • tosmarttobegop

      Have you seen the video of the “Doll test”? It broke my heart and opened my eyes to one of the sadest effects of racism. Never, ever should a small child see themselves as bad because of the color of their skin. It is during childhood where true innocents should be allowed to live.

  13. Tomorrow I want to get to Galway to meet the Volvo Oceans arrive there but seems I may not get there at all. Pissed off because of that. Maybe in a few days.

  14. Gotta go see the Night At The Museum sequal.
    Going with the whole famdamily.
    Son in law, grandkids, everything.

  15. Here’s some news I’ll bet not a single one of us had heard. 😉

    Guantánamo Closing Hands Republicans a Wedge Issue

    — snip —

    “In Kansas, home to the Leavenworth maximum security prison, Representative Todd Tiahrt, a Republican candidate for governor, said Democrats would welcome detainees from Guantánamo. “Not on my watch,” Senator Pat Roberts, Republican of Kansas, declared in another online video depicting frightening images of Guantánamo inmates.”

    http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/24/us/politics/24gitmo.html

    • lilacluvr

      This is called NIMBY – not in my back yard.

      Republicans are very good at creating Frankenstein but don’t have a clue as to what to do with the monster once he is created. As usual, they always look to someone else to fix the problem.

      I heard on MSNBC about the city of Hardin Montana that is officially asking for Gitmo detainees to be sent to this brand new prison that was recently built but is not being used. The guy from the city said the previous governor wanted it built, then the new governor came in and does not want to use it- go figure.

      Anyway, these city officials are actually wanting the Gitmo detainees to be sent there and it is a perfect place to send them – out in the middle of Montana and real close to Cheney’s backyard (ha,ha)

  16. You missed the error in the NYT report, Lilac. They call Tiahrt a candidate for governor. I laughed and wondered what else they get wrong.

    Yes, I’ve seen that NIMBY acronym. You nailed that one correctly!

    Mainly, they just want to deflect from those who authorized the torture. They call it torture when they’re criticizing Pelosi, but when they’re defending their own it isn’t torture.

    Makes me dizzy trying to keep up with their defense of the indefensible.

  17. tosmarttobegop

    Ahhh Liberals let me down!!!!! I was on youtube looking for the video of Republicans saying that the CIA lied to Congress or in the NIE. There were every other video about Republicans and every slip up. But not one of leading Republicans saying the CIA lied. Boehner when the N.I.E. said that Iran has stopped their nuclear program in 2003. Boehner accused the CIA of lying for political reasons. Hoekstra accused them of lying about when a Christian missionary was killed. When the plane she was in was shot down mistaken for a drug smuggler by D.E.A. and CIA agents.