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: tejek who wrote (242382)	7/20/2005 2:43:56 PM
From: d[-_-]b	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1585184

tejek, re:Bush could have chosen a woman...instead he picked a man. The message it sends to women in this country is a negative one. When all things are equal, a man will be picked over a woman. That's the message Amy is criticising...........and its not an unreasonable one. Head fakes and messages - I don't read tea leaves either. There is no message here - there's a person who's been appointed for a lifetime and whatever today's issues are pale in comparison to what this guy may have to decide for the country in the future. I wish I knew more about the person and less about the fact he's a white male - we can all see that. re:In fact, why don't you simply voice your criticism and move on instead of trying to make everyone who disagrees with you look to be the fool. Its not working, and more and more, you look like an asshole. You mean like you? <g>

To: tejek who wrote (242382)	7/21/2005 2:32:34 AM
From: Elroy	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1585184

There are 9 Justices on the Court and just one woman out of nine. There is no law that there has to be an even split or even a split dependent on the ratio/formula you suggested. However, given that half the population is women in this country, Amy thinks it would have been reasonable to replace the second woman Justice with another woman. And give the vast pool of judges, both male and female, the odds very much favor that there are several men and women with the same impeccable credentials and equally qualified to be a Justice. What's the point? Amy and I went over this with no progress. Lots of commentary with zero information. It makes sense to me that the sexual makeup of the Supreme Court matches the sexual makeup of the qualified applicant pool. Do you know the approximate sexual makeup of the qualified applicant pool (say, highly placed judges with 10-30 years experience)? If so, what is it? If not, how can you claim their is a bias in the sexual makeup of the Court? Just start with the data before you start with the whining, that's all I ask! PS - The fact that 50% of the population is women does not mean that 50% of the applicant pool is women. This is obvious to most normal people, but I point it out to help you along.