On Tue, 12 Mar 1996, jim bell wrote:
some people around here think is just fine. You might note that the same people who have been most critical of my stance on the Leahy bill are the same ones who vigorously opposed AP, suggesting that their motives are questionable and certainly a bit "predictable."
Or that your tone and method of delivery combined with your knowledge of the subject matter at hand is consistantly lacking.
You will notice, I assume, that I have been and can be tactful to most people; where exceptions exist, they are typically among anonymous posters (such as this "Black Unicorn") who has now admitted he's an elitist legal snob and doesn't want anybody who hasn't spent a few years in law ("mental reform") school to pass judgment on the judges, no matter how outrageous their actions become.
I believe my concern was with your review of legislation and the impact of cases without any legal background. Revise your statement to: "doesn't want anyone who hasn't spent a few years in law school to pass judgement on pending legislation and the effect of supreme court decision thereon..." and you'd be right on the money. And I confirm again that I'm an elitist legal snob. At least I know what I'm talking about.
Jim Bell jimbell@pacifier.com
--- My prefered and soon to be permanent e-mail address: unicorn@schloss.li "In fact, had Bancroft not existed, potestas scientiae in usu est Franklin might have had to invent him." in nihilum nil posse reverti 00B9289C28DC0E55 E16D5378B81E1C96 - Finger for Current Key Information