Main Menu

Sauce for the goose and gander

A comment mentioning the old saying, “what’s sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander,” led me to do an Internet search that found a gem of an essay at the Wikipedia: “Sauce for the goose is (not) sauce for the gander.”

The essay is about consistency. The context is editing the Wikipedia, Wikipedia rules, and disputes that arise between individual Wikipedia editors; however, much of the content is applicable to our digital life and to our real life.

I would think that nearly all of us desire to be consistent in our conversation and in our ethical decisions—I certainly do. More difficult is actually being consistent and objectively judging our success in doing it.

 

,

29 Responses to Sauce for the goose and gander

  1. avatar
    bgansel9 July 23, 2015 at 1:07 pm #

    I would like to say that the Quote of the Day that is currently up is Awesome Sauce. 😛

  2. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy July 23, 2015 at 2:10 pm #

    It is interesting that you pointed that comment from drdebdrdeb out because it (and my response to it) is a subtext of this article.

    bgansel9:
    I would like to say that the Quote of the Day that is currently up is Awesome Sauce. 😛

  3. avatar
    Bonsall Obot July 23, 2015 at 2:19 pm #

    I, too, hope they are paying you a lot to spy on Americans; it sounds like a sweet gig.

  4. avatar
    bob July 23, 2015 at 2:27 pm #

    Judy’s goose/gander comment is a tu quoque logical fallacy. Of course, Judy is nothing but a fallacy, and there’s nothing logical about him.

    Prosecutorial discretion is a time-immortal perogative of the executive. If Judy doesn’t like how that discretion is currently being exercised, he should become the executive. Oh, wait: He already attempted to do that. Twice. And received exactly no votes for his candidacy.

  5. avatar
    Reality Check July 23, 2015 at 2:50 pm #

    At this point CRJ has become a troll.

  6. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy July 23, 2015 at 6:40 pm #

    Dennis Montgomery allegedly got quite a bit of money for doing that.

    Bonsall Obot: I, too, hope they are paying you a lot to spy on Americans; it sounds like a sweet gig.

  7. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy July 23, 2015 at 7:06 pm #

    I think you mean ” time-immemorial”.

    bob: time-immortal

  8. avatar
    CRJ2016 July 23, 2015 at 8:40 pm #

    That Doc.., Sometimes Doc really does make me love him. I felt kinda good for a minute., then “Reality Check” checked in. (smile)

    Reality Check: At this point CRJ has become a troll.

    “I am not a Troll. I am a Man” https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7V4FoSdoF3E I am a contributing part of this community. When is the last time you inspired Doc to write a post?

    This is a very inspiring moment..this post is. Because in a nut-shelled round about way we have come full circle to the reason Judy v. Obama 14-9396 even really exists at all.

    Equality Under the Law.. Justice the Defender of Liberty

    All I wanted was the same ” Standard” applied to the Qualifications of the Office of the President. I as Petitioner called Defendant Obama as not qualified as a ‘natural born Citizen’, simply asking the Court to determine that the qualifications for Representatives and Senators was “Citizen”, and so it was for the President until after the time of the Adoption of this Constitution and thereafter it was “natural born Citizen”.

    It would really only take 2 minutes of the Court’s Time to simply recognize this.
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ITCr420K4i8

    And to answer your question Doc- I really do not like wasting anyone’s time or money. I don’t like mine wasted either.

    That is why, oh why, oh why… I have asked and asked and asked that you fellows file an Amicus Curiae . I don’t care what side your on. File one for Obama for heck sake.

    It says right on the Docket you can do so. Pull out the BBQ, and whip up a little fund raiser here. Your Doc doesn’t have to be 45 pages long, it could be 5 pages, so get it done!

    Help me…Help You. Help me..Help you. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l1B1_jQnlFk

    I mean really? How in the world do you guys, and all of your efforts and time not see a chance here to by-pass Congress’s eight attempts now since 2002 to change this definition of ‘natural born Citizen’ for the Office of the President to ‘Citizen’ the same as it is for Representatives and Senators?

    Its over if that happens!

    The SCOTUS can do it for you. I am the perfect rabbit to throw in the brier patch! And the SCOTUS Justices have a looooong leash to do it. I am no body anyone cares about.

    Get SCOTUS to change the definition officially! Can you imagine the joy and triumph for yourselves? Imagine ‘using’ me like one of those punching dolls?

    Its sitting right there for you to do it. PUNCH!

    14-9396
    Apr 27 2015 Consent to the filing of amicus curiae briefs, in support of either party or of neither party, received from petitioner.

    in support of ‘EITHER PARTY’, or even NEITHER PARTY that’s an invitation to the BBQ of your Choice Ladies and Gentleman.

    There isn’t much time to waste, I’ve delayed this about as long as I can for you.

    SMH .. I just don’t know why Rubio, and Cruz, and Jindal, and McCain, and Obama don’t SEIZE the moment I have carved out in history for them? They have tried in Congress 8 times since 2003 and failed.

    I cannot express my desire strong enough that here I am, dressed in red, wagging my fanny at the bull. Why in the world are you sitting around wasting time like this? Get your butt into the SCOTUS at my invitation and really put some cement in the hole your digging for the post to stand up.

    Do you reckon this opportunity will ever come your way again?

  9. avatar
    bob July 23, 2015 at 9:12 pm #

    Dr. Conspiracy:
    I think you mean ” time-immemorial”.

    Yes; mischievous autocorrector.

    * * *

    CRJ2016:
    When is the last time you inspired Doc to write a post?

    “Inspiring” a post is not necessarily a good thing, and certainly not a sign of correctness. Trolls can, often do, inspire posts that point out their incorrectness.

    All I wanted was the same ” Standard” applied to the Qualifications of the Office of the President.

    No: Your frivolous lawsuit sought monetary damages. A frivolous claim that the district court quickly dismissed. And the appellate court agreed it was frivolous, and affirmed the dismissal.

    And to answer your question Doc- I really do not like wasting anyone’s time or money.

    Yet you do it. All the time.

    I have asked and asked and asked that you fellows file an Amicus Curiae .

    SCOTUS can readily determine, without additional assistance, that your frivolous lawsuit should end. It would be a waste of time, money, and energy to advocate for the inevitable.

    Get SCOTUS to change the definition officially!

    A natural-born citizen is a citzen, but not all citizens are natural-born citizens. This has always been the case; birthers are ones trying to change these settled definitions through the courts.

    There isn’t much time to waste, I’ve delayed this about as long as I can for you.

    You’ve created delay for your own egotistical purposes, and for no one else.

    SMH .. I just don’t know why Rubio, and Cruz, and Jindal, and McCain, and Obama don’t SEIZE the moment I have carved out in history for them?

    The only thing you have carved is your perfect record of failure.

    Get your butt into the SCOTUS at my invitation and really put some cement in the hole your digging for the post to stand up.

    In case you have not noticed: every birther case has failed, and President Obama continues to enjoy the office to which he was lawfully elected. Twice.

    Do you reckon this opportunity will ever come your way again?

    As you have no shame, I reckon the opportunities to expose your lies will continue.

  10. avatar
    gorefan July 23, 2015 at 9:13 pm #

    CRJ2016: Why in the world are you sitting around wasting time like this?

    You still don’t understand. The Justices are not interested in an amicus brief in favor of President Obama. If they were than one of them would have requested a response from the him (it only takes one). So there is no point in any of us wasting time drafting a brief.

    Did you re-file by July 13th?

    If not than the time it took me to write this comment is probably more time than they will spend on your case.

  11. avatar
    Matt July 23, 2015 at 9:51 pm #

    bob:

    No: Your frivolous lawsuit sought monetary damages.A frivolous claim that the district court quickly dismissed.And the appellate court agreed it was frivolous, and affirmed the dismissal.

    Not only that, but he explained in his claim that compensatory damages are for “actual cost of loss, time, vehicle, expenses etc. $40,000,000 occurred over the last 7 years.” and then went on to say “Plaintiff intends to award each contributor to his ‘08 and ‘12 campaigns one hundred fold

    (emphasis mine)

  12. avatar
    Reality Check July 23, 2015 at 9:55 pm #

    My question is what happened to the donations he got to pay for the filing fee and printing costs that he didn’t use? He asked for an extension and was denied so the deadline came and went.

    I suppose it will go towards Happy Meals?

    gorefan: Did you re-file by July 13th?

  13. avatar
    Dr. Conspiracy July 23, 2015 at 10:20 pm #

    Not speaking of you particularly, but to birther eligibility cases in general–those individuals who filed those lawsuits, to the extent that they understood the law, argued that their issue was of such paramount national importance that the rules, such as the limited jurisdiction of the federal courts under the Constitution, or state timeliness requirements,or the rules of service, should not apply to them.

    The courts, on the other hand, have been very consistent. (I started to say “remarkably consistent” but a court being consistent shouldn’t be remarkable.)

    CRJ2016: All I wanted was the same ” Standard” applied to the Qualifications of the Office of the President

  14. avatar
    Reality Check July 23, 2015 at 10:20 pm #

    CRJ2016: That Doc.., Sometimes Doc really does make me love him. I felt kinda good for a minute., then “Reality Check” checked in. (smile)

    Glad to make your day.

    “I am not a Troll. I am a Man”

    The former has been established. The latter, not so much.

    When is the last time you inspired Doc to write a post?

    Actually it has happened a number of times.

  15. avatar
    Dave B. July 23, 2015 at 10:24 pm #

    For the open thread, from a comment by GregBuls over at The Federalist:
    “Of the billions of pieces of mail sent in the US in 1980, all carried the postal date stamp ‘1980’ except for one, Obama’s selective service card. It is stamped just ’80’. It may be the only piece of mail ever sent in the US with a two-digit stamp.”

    https://disqus.com/home/discussion/thefederalist23/donald_trump_and_the_medias_birther_myth/#comment-2153844431

  16. avatar
    Reality Check July 23, 2015 at 10:29 pm #

    I can think of four judges/administrators who in hindsight veered into the ditches in handling Birther cases. One was Judge Malihi who in the end ruled correctly but allowed Orly Taitz’s ridiculous subpoena to stand. The second was the Judge in Indiana who allowed Orly’s circus to go on far too long. I think we called her rubber stamp Reid. Finally, and not surprisingly was Judge Roy Moore in Alabama and his toadie whose name I don;t recall who wrote dissents in the McGinnis case.

    Dr. Conspiracy: The courts, on the other hand, have been very consistent. (I started to say “remarkably consistent” but a court being consistent shouldn’t be remarkable.)

  17. avatar
    Rickey July 23, 2015 at 10:40 pm #

    CRJ2016:

    That is why, oh why, oh why… I have asked and asked and asked that you fellows file an Amicus Curiae . I don’t care what side your on. File one for Obama for heck sake.

    It says right on the Docket you can do so. Pull out the BBQ, and whip up a little fund raiser here. Your Doc doesn’t have to be 45 pages long, it could be 5 pages, so get it done!

    If you’re going to file petitions with the Supreme Court, you should at least learn all of the rules first.

    Even if I wanted to file an amicus curiae brief, I am prohibited from doing so because I am not an attorney who is admitted to argue cases before the Supreme Court. It’s right there in Rule 37(1):

    An amicus curiae brief may be filed only by an attorney admitted to practice before this Court as provided in Rule 5.

    And if you read the rest of Rule 37, you will learn that it is too late for anyone to file an amicus curiae brief in your case, whether in support of you or in opposition to you.

    http://www.supremecourt.gov/ctrules/2013RulesoftheCourt.pdf

  18. avatar
    bob July 23, 2015 at 10:43 pm #

    Of the billions of pieces of mail sent in the US in 1980, all carried the postal date stamp ‘1980’ except for one, Obama’s selective service card.

    A little less hyperbole might be in order: The image of Obama’s selective service registration was not a piece of mail.

    Reading the comments, that thread is nothing but birther lies.

  19. avatar
    bob July 23, 2015 at 11:05 pm #

    Reality Check:
    I can think of four judges/administrators who in hindsight veered into the ditches in handling Birther cases.

    I would add Wingate. A relatively simple dismissal dragged on for years. Partially due to some obviously fake comment left on Taitz’s site.

  20. avatar
    CRJ July 24, 2015 at 12:48 am #

    That’s what the fund raisers for Rickey.. To get a qualified attorney to File it for you.

    And, it’s not to late.. They haven’t even finished the forma pauperis Motion as it’s up for Reconsideration. Why would it be to late?

    Of course if you fellas are ‘broke’ as I am right now, I understand.

  21. avatar
    bob July 24, 2015 at 1:58 am #

    CRJ:
    That’s what the fund raisers for Rickey.. To get a qualified attorney to File it for you.

    Earth to Judy: No one is interested in retaining a “qualified attorney” to advocate that a lawsuit twice expressly found to be frivolous ought to be again rejected by the court. The court can and will figure that part out on its own.

    Why would it be to late?

    Did the all big words in Rule 37 confuse you as to why it is now too late?

  22. avatar
    Rickey July 24, 2015 at 3:22 am #

    CRJ:
    That’s what the fund raisers for Rickey.. To get a qualified attorney to File it for you.

    You don’t need an attorney to read and understand the rules. You just need to read them. But if you really need an attorney to understand the rules, you should have gotten one before you filed your petition.

    And, it’s not to late.. They haven’t even finished the forma pauperis Motion as it’s up for Reconsideration. Why would it be to late?

    So you still haven’t read Rule 37.

    An amicus curiae brief in support of a petitioner or appellant shall be filed within 30 days after the case is placed on the docket or a response is called for by the Court, whichever is later, and that time will not be extended.

    Your case was docketed on April 30, and no response has been called for, so the last day to file an amicus curiae brief in support of you was May 30.

    An amicus curiae brief in support of a respondent, an appellee, or a defendant shall be submitted within the time allowed for filing a brief in opposition or a motion to dismiss or affirm.

    The last day for Obama to file a brief in opposition was May 20, so that was the last day that an amicus curiae brief in support of Obama could have been filed. And since Obama did not see any need to file a response, why would anyone feel the need to file a brief in support of him?

  23. avatar
    Rickey July 24, 2015 at 3:28 am #

    bob:

    Did the all big words in Rule 37 confuse you as to why it is now too late?

    CRJ doesn’t need to read no stinkin’ rules. Rules are for saps.

  24. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater July 24, 2015 at 5:54 am #

    Matt: Not only that, but he explained in his claim that compensatory damages are for “actual cost of loss, time, vehicle, expenses etc. $40,000,000 occurred over the last 7 years.” and then went on to say “Plaintiff intends to award each contributor to his ‘08 and ‘12 campaigns one hundred fold

    (emphasis mine)

    Judy seems to have a math problem; a hundred fold of $0 is still 0

  25. avatar
    Dr. Kenneth Noisewater July 24, 2015 at 5:57 am #

    Dave B.: Of the billions of pieces of mail sent in the US in 1980, all carried the postal date stamp ‘1980’ except for one, Obama’s selective service card

    This greg guy personally inspected billions of pieces of mail from 1980? It’s hard to take birthers seriously when they make such grandiose claims about what they “know”

  26. avatar
    Notorial Dissent July 24, 2015 at 9:04 am #

    Princess Judy, is well confused again, still!!!, The court is not going to retry or anything else his POS suit, the only thing they will be looking at is did the Appellate Court and the District Court properly shitcan that POS. The answer they would ultimately have come up with if the princess had followed the rules is a resounding YES!!!! That would have happened if the princess had actually read and followed the rules and the court would have affirmed what was already obvious to everyone else, that the suit was DOA. There are no grounds for any other action, but the princess seems to think that dressing up an already slaughtered pig in fancy clothes is going to make any more difference than it did the last two times he tried it. It’s still dead, it still stinks, and it’s still not going anywhere. In this case, though, the princess didn’t follow the rules, and while it hasn’t happened yet those actions guaranteed an ultimate and inevitable and well deserved dismissal for failure to follow the rules. No pay fees, no follow rules, buh bye!!! Seems to be the story of the princess’ life.

  27. avatar
    roadburner July 24, 2015 at 10:25 am #

    looks like it’s time for a recycling of long debunked memes over at BR again….

    http://www.birtherreport.com/2015/07/nyt-how-kenya-fits-into-obamas-identity.html

  28. avatar
    Rickey July 24, 2015 at 4:02 pm #

    Notorial Dissent:
    Princess Judy, is well confused again, still!!!, The court is not going to retry or anything else his POS suit, the only thing they will be looking at is did the Appellate Court and the District Court properly shitcan that POS. The answer they would ultimately have come up with if the princess had followed the rules is a resounding YES!!!!That would have happened if the princess had actually read and followed the rules and the court would have affirmed what was already obvious to everyone else, that the suit was DOA. There are no grounds for any other action, but the princess seems to think that dressing up an already slaughtered pig in fancy clothes is going to make any more difference than it did the last two times he tried it. It’s still dead, it still stinks, and it’s still not going anywhere. In this case, though, the princess didn’t follow the rules, and while it hasn’t happened yet those actions guaranteed an ultimate and inevitable and well deserved dismissal for failure to follow the rules. No pay fees, no follow rules, buh bye!!!Seems to be the story of the princess’ life.

    And he doesn’t seem to understand that SCOTUS doesn’t hand down verdicts. Even if his petition were somehow granted, and even if he somehow prevailed after oral arguments, the best that he could hope for is to have the case remanded to the trial court for further proceedings.

    Birthers have never taken the time to learn how SCOTUS operates. I remember back when the first birther cases were appealed to SCOTUS the birthers were convinced that the justices were going to force Obama to produce his birth certificate.

  29. avatar
    Notorial Dissent July 25, 2015 at 12:06 am #

    There does seem to be a great lot the princess doesn’t understand, but this is a real and expensive biggy. The only positive outcome for his efforts would have been if the court took up his appeal, which they won’t since he has no grounds for review let alone the initial appeal, and if they didn’t laugh too hard at it and sent it back to the district court, which still wouldn’t have any alternative other than to dismiss it, possibly with slightly different wording, since it is still a DOA POS.

    The Supreme Court doesn’t litigate or re-litigate anything, the only thing they are interested in is if the appellate or district court followed the rules or made an error in applying the law, which they didn’t here. If there is no question of law or procedure for them to review, they won’t disturb the original rulings.