Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TimF who wrote (157983)	1/13/2003 7:55:54 PM
From: i-node	Respond to of 1580041

Re: Pickering If you watch Brit Hume's show rerun tonight, he interviews a reporter who has thoroughly researched the cross-burning case and explains fully what happened. It was clear, to me at least, that Pickering acted properly with respect to the matter. The essence of the problem was that the 17-year old who was clearly the "leader" of the group walked on the charge, and Pickering believed that sentencing a man to 7 years for cross burning when he was a first-time offender, had no history of hate speech or hate crimes, and basically was just going along with the other kid was inappropriate. In particular, the 17-year old who walked on a plea had several previous violations, including firing a weapon into the home involved. First you have to get past the notion that 7 years is an appropriate sentence for burning a cross in someone's yard (this is a longer term then that served by the man who killed my brother). But it was clear that Pickering was merely trying to make the sentence comport with those received by the other participants. This guy was Borked, and Bush is trying to right that wrong. I certainly hope he succeeds.

To: TimF who wrote (157983)	1/14/2003 12:25:08 AM
From: tejek	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1580041

Who said I would be unconvinced? The main question would be did he actually do what he was accused of. If the answer is yes I would say he is probably a racist. If you define racist loosely enough I would say he would definitly be a racist but if you define it very strictly I would still say he is more likely to be a racist then not just from once use of the word. Why is it that conservatives have strict standards on some issues and loose standards on others? In any case, I have much stricter standards and feel that Mr. Pickering has shown enough questionable behavior on this issue and does not have the proper attitude to be a judge. I would hope that the GOP has better judicial candidates than he and will not let nepotism rule their nominations. ted