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: Amy J who wrote (242334)	7/20/2005 12:25:56 PM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1578332

Elroy, the pool of female candidates is very high and the resulting ratio is sufficiently healthy. For someone who is supposedly a businessperson, you are very surprisingly unable to understand English descriptions of sufficiently large. Am getting the opinion you are biased against women, because you are more focused on trying to prove there is nothing wrong with having nearly all men on the Supreme Court. It makes sense to me that the sexual ratio of the members of the Sup Court should be similar to the sexual ratio of the candidates, which are probably judges with 15-35 years experience (I don't really know the candidate qualification list, that's just a guess). You claimed to know the sexual split of the candidate pool, but evidently you don't (or you would share the number with us). And my 1st focus was on initially on pointing out your gender bias because you wanted a woman candidate rather than the best candidate regardless of sex. My 2nd focus was trying to learn from you where you got the information that the sexual makeup of the Supreme Court is out of whack with statistics, but getting the statistics from you is worse than pulling teeth, so I gave up. Personally, I like women. I like them a lot. I wish there were more of them around. I don't really care that much who is on the Supreme Court, to tell you the truth.