the conventions loom large this cycle

MajGenl.Meade · Post by **MajGenl.Meade** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 12:29 am

So, Guin.... are you saying that there isn't room in the sig line to write "not Ginsburg in her fabulous blah blah but actually somebody else in some other case"?

dales · Post by **dales** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 12:38 am

Speaking of sig lines: I might glance at one or two.

Who cares?

wesw · Post by **wesw** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 12:41 am

the plagiaristic RBG?????

she would not be amused, would she , guin? naughty girl, fix it before she sees it....

Guinevere · Post by **Guinevere** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 12:49 am

OFFucksS:

The full blue book citation (or as close as I can recall without my blue book in front of me) is: "The ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives.” Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 573 U.S. _____ No. 13-354 (slip op. June 30, 2014) (Ginsburg, J. dissenting) (quoting Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U. S. 833, 856 (1992)).

But this isn't a brief or a law review, and as I said before, there isn't space for the full citation (there is a 255 character limit). So no, I'm not changing it.

wesw · Post by **wesw** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 1:08 am

as quoted by justice Ginsberg in her hobby lobby dissent? there, easy peasy.

Joe Guy · Post by **Joe Guy** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 1:23 am

This would be much more efficient - "The ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives. ~Justice Ginsburg, in her fabulous Hobby Lobby dissent"

BoSoxGal · Post by **BoSoxGal** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 2:05 am

Seriously?

You can't be bothered to show Patrick Henry the respect of capitalizing his proper name, wesw. You are hardly one to judge signature content.

wesw · Post by **wesw** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 2:14 am

I was gonna, but I know that it annoys you

wesw · Post by **wesw** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 2:26 am

there, at least it has symmetry now....

MajGenl.Meade · Post by **MajGenl.Meade** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 3:16 am

Guinevere wrote:OFFucksS:

The full blue book citation (or as close as I can recall without my blue book in front of me) is: "The ability of women to participate equally in the economic and social life of the Nation has been facilitated by their ability to control their reproductive lives.” Burwell v. Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc., 573 U.S. _____ No. 13-354 (slip op. June 30, 2014) (Ginsburg, J. dissenting) (quoting Planned Parenthood of Southeastern Pa. v. Casey, 505 U. S. 833, 856 (1992)).

But this isn't a brief or a law review, and as I said before, there isn't space for the full citation (there is a 255 character limit). So no, I'm not changing it.

So it really wasn't Justice Ginsberg's brilliant genius original dissent? Is that it?

It was some other dude?

RayThom · Post by **RayThom** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 5:59 am

I, for one, feel the quote sounds so much better when attributed directly, and singularly, to the Notorious RBG rather than some group opinion rendered years ago involving a chain of retail arts and crafts stores. Besides, it's just a simple quote, right? Do you think every "Confucius Says" was actually said by that Chinese philosopher and teacher? NO!

Case in point, look at my sig below. It's one of my favs because it was one of George Bush's best quotes. It crystallized so much and so succinctly. However, I'm sure he probably wasn't the first one to say it -- just the most appropriate. Anyway, back off on the cyber-bullying, Guin likes her attribution and that's all that matters to me.

Women would be doing so much better in this world if they weren't criticized for every little thing they say or do. It's criminal the way they're treated sometimes.

MajGenl.Meade · Post by **MajGenl.Meade** » Sat Dec 12, 2015 8:44 am

OK, Fredo. Your connections are what worry me. So, OK man. OK

oldr_n_wsr · Post by **oldr_n_wsr** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 2:34 pm

What's a "sig line"?

Lord Jim · Post by **Lord Jim** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 2:37 pm

It's that thing you don't have...

oldr_n_wsr · Post by **oldr_n_wsr** » Mon Dec 14, 2015 2:48 pm

I don't miss what I never had.

Fafhrd · Post by **Fafhrd** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 3:14 pm

I'm a member of another Forum where it is possible to not display any sig lines. Easy reading!

Crackpot · Post by **Crackpot** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 3:27 pm

You can do that here too

TPFKA@W · Post by **TPFKA@W** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 3:29 pm

It is equally possible here.

Go to user control panel-board preferences-edit display options-display signatures-OFF

Guinevere · Post by **Guinevere** » Tue Dec 15, 2015 3:55 pm

Cheery *and* helpful.

Who are you???

Plan B Forum

the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

HEY, FIGHT NICE

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle

Re: the conventions loom large this cycle