You changed a headline dishonestly, and you're telling me to "relax?" To use your example, Justices Kennedy and Souter didn't "skip" the ceremony as kids would "skip" science class to go fishing, they were out of town (out of the country, in Kennedy's case) and couldn't get to the ceremony. There's enough to attack Kennedy and Souter for without simply making up stuff out of whole cloth.
"You changed a headline dishonestly"
How so? I posted the actual headline and added my commentary in parenthesis. I am new here, but that seems to be a standard practice. Recent headline examples:
"Hurricane fallout hurts Bush, could hurt Republicans (BARF and PUKE from Roto-Reuters)"
"Indonesia - Three Christian women jailed for ‘proselytising’ (Religion of Peace Alert!)"
"Five questions for Judge John G. Roberts Jr. [Brilliant, proper questions]"
"Listening to the Times? (NY Times opposed flood-control projects in New Orleans!)"
"Rasmussen: Cindy Sheehan: 31% Favorable (From the Hey Remember Me DustBin of Liberal Media Failures)"
But for future reference, please let your pal Souter know that there are these things called "airplanes". They are great for traveling long distances quickly. Now get back to un-bunching those panties. I ban you from reading any of my future posts!!!