Talk:Four Horsemen (Supreme Court)/Archive 1

Hugo Black's book is hardly a resource worthy of quoting regarding these four brave Americans who actually took their Oath to the Constitution seriously. It is the equivalent of quoting Adolf Hitler to discuss Jewish contributions to German Society. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.52.206.222 (talk • contribs)

Disagree. Hugo Black is one of the greatest Supreme Court justices of the 20th century, not a dictator. Besides, George Sutherland had a productive career, but a 1970 poll of Supreme Court experts shows the other three horsemen were considered "failures." Blaustein and Mersky, The First One Hundred Justices, Page 40. In any case, you are welcome to add cited material to the article.RafaelRGarcia (talk) 05:00, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

There is no book by Black quoted on the article, though there is a book about Black. The references are to early in the book (as the events took place before Black took his seat). Most of the material can also be found in Lazarus's book. As to taking "their Oath to the Constitution seriously", the Four Horsemen are generally considered excellent examples of conservative judicial activism. Magidin (talk) 13:54, 27 October 2008 (UTC)

I would suggest that the author/editor of this stub delete that unsigned assihine initial statement. I can't imagine a more offensive string of fecal material about the Supreme Court. Anyone who would equate Justice Hugo Black with Hitler is too dumb to know how to pour urine out of a boot, even with instructions printed on the sole. But the fact that moron calls the Four Horsemen of the Apocolypse "Brave Americans" who took their "oath seriously"--no one with an IQ in at least the upper two digits would believe that...especially given the open Anti-Semetic attitudes of the Horsemen. I'm so mad, I can hardly type. Oh--and Magidin is incorrect to say that the Horsemen are "excellent examples of conservative judicial activism." The Horsemen are not good examples of anything. Most lists rating Supreme Court Justices give that gang the lowest rating. If you need sources, I'll look some up. Bill Abendroth (talk) 15:42, 5 November 2008 (UTC)

Take a deep breath... Feeling better? Yes, I know the Horsemen generally receive the lowest ratings. Their rampant judicial activism is one reason. Being an "excellent example of X" does not mean you are a good thing, it means that you exemplify X. In this case, the Horsemen are the example par excellence of conservative judicial activism; this is not a good thing: it's a bad thing. Don't get confused by the use of the word "excellent", which is qualifying "example". As for deleting comments from talk pages, that is not usually done, though we should include an ID tag. I'll do that shortly. Magidin (talk) 16:35, 5 November 2008 (UTC)