tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-135951432012-01-09T03:57:18.257-05:00<strong>A blog devoted to correcting the mistakes, omissions, and downright nonsense on www.SCOTUSblog.com and www.sctnomination.com/blog</strong>The Conservative Cowboyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18021472116875931511noreply@blogger.comBlogger61100tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13595143.post-1119758537497555322005-06-25T23:57:00.000-04:002005-06-26T00:27:26.850-04:00

Without belaboring the topic too much (it's been beaten or nearly beaten to death in the comments on my last post) here's why I think Tom Goldstein posted on Lexmark.I don't think Goldstein was subjectively motivated by a desire to embarrass Lexmark or its attorneys, even though that was a foreseeable result of his posting. Adopting the suggestion of Goldstein defender "Jack Elsehow," I think

The Conservative Cowboyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18021472116875931511noreply@blogger.com362tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13595143.post-1118894707398272462005-06-16T00:36:00.000-04:002005-06-16T00:36:18.886-04:00

For my first substantive post I begin with what is, to me at least, a genuine mystery: why is SCOTUSblog posting about Lexmark and its attorneys having missed the deadline for filing a cert. petition in a $100 million case? It recently did so here.Before reading this on SCOTUSblog, I had not heard of them missing the deadline nor, I suspect, had more than a handful of lawyers heard of it. Because

The Conservative Cowboyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18021472116875931511noreply@blogger.com199tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13595143.post-1118890265122393982005-06-15T22:33:00.000-04:002005-06-15T22:51:26.203-04:00

Nice try, Goldfinger. You're very clever in attempting to link the "Goldstein is an idiot" theme into something relevant to this blog.Logically, you may well have a point. But personally, I'm not interested. I'm interested in blogging about the substance of the SCOTUSblog posts.

The Conservative Cowboyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18021472116875931511noreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13595143.post-1118728180115407972005-06-14T01:42:00.000-04:002005-07-14T22:49:52.833-04:00

Thanks for the many initial comments. I'm not going to try to justify this blog, or my anonymity. Anyone who objects should pass on reading it.Nor am I going to try to summarize or react to all of the comments, positive and negative. Some of them react to earlier comments, and there's a running debate among some of them, so I'll leave it at that (unless I later pick some points out of them to

The Conservative Cowboyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18021472116875931511noreply@blogger.com7tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13595143.post-1118517161846969282005-06-11T18:12:00.000-04:002005-06-15T01:02:55.036-04:00

This blog is intended to be a community blog. At least one main post each week will be dedicated to something posted on SCOTUSblog or its "sister blog" devoted to Supreme Court nominations (which is promoted on SCOTUSblog).Anyone who catches any mistake or omission in any post (either currently or in the past) on either blog is invited to comment under the most recent post on this blog that

The Conservative Cowboyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18021472116875931511noreply@blogger.com19tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-13595143.post-1118516525679118112005-06-11T17:46:00.000-04:002005-06-15T01:00:18.216-04:00

This blog is inspired both by "The Anti-Becker-Posner Blog," recently launched by "The Crit Cowboy," and by Tom Goldstein's recent statement on SCOTUSBlog's sister blog, The Supreme Court Nomination Blog, that Howard Bashman of "How Appealing" raised "a valid concern" in suggesting it might be unwise for a law firm such as his, which focuses on U.S. Supreme Court litigation, to attempt a "neutral

The Conservative Cowboyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/18021472116875931511noreply@blogger.com5