|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia's dead. The maneuvering begins! | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Admin Director Posts: 13038 From: EvC Forum Joined: Member Rating: 2.1
|
Big_Al35 writes: Ahhh gatekeeping at its finest. From what I understand, Scalia was pro-guns and pro-original intent. A few weeks ago you were insisting on discussing the Globalists in the Evolution. We Have The Fossils. We Win. thread. Now here in your Message 53 you were polling NoNukes on his opinions of the second amendment:
Big_Al35 in Message 53 writes: Well since you are open to interpreting the constitution, I would be interested to know what your thoughts on the second amendment would be. Because of your recent history of going off-topic I addressed this right away. If you instead would like to discuss Scalia's opinion on the second amendment and on original intent or textualism then that seems fair game. If I see any more exchanges like this in Message 60 I will take administrative action, with severity matching each member's history:
Big_Al35 in Message 60 writes: Theodoric writes:
You are an officer and a gentleman ("of the system") and I couldn't expect a more fitting response ("pure aggression"). Wouldn't it be easier if your brought your comment to the appropriate thread instead of being a whiny titty baby.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Theodoric Member Posts: 9197 From: Northwest, WI, USA Joined: Member Rating: 3.2 |
My apologies to Admin and all the members of the Forum. My response was born out of frustration, but I know better and should have restrained myself. I will try better to self moderate in the future.
Thank you Admin for the warning instead of a suspension.Facts don't lie or have an agenda. Facts are just facts "God did it" is not an argument. It is an excuse for intellectual laziness.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Ahhh gatekeeping at its finest. From what I understand, Scalia was pro-guns and pro-original intent. Yes, Big_Al. Have you read Scalia's opinion in DC v Heller? Do you understand why some people say that Scalia's pro-gun politics got in the way of his "Original intent" judicial philosophy? Percy and I have gone back and forth over this several times in this very thread. My position on Scalia with regard to DC v Heller is certainly clear by now. On the other hand, defending my own personal opinion on the second amendment is off topic here. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
... As of today, there are 269 days until election day. ... Obama is president until a new one is inaugurated, not just elected. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Hyroglyphx Inactive Member |
So was Scalia pro-guns or anti-guns? Did he believe in the constitution? I guess promoting attacks on 'original meaning' would include those who are anti-constitutional. Scalia seemed to advocate the notion of Judicial Restraint versus Judicial Activism wherein he didn't believe that much discretionary latitude was to be granted to judges. No, those advocating "original meaning" is in reference to the Constitution. It's not anti-constitutional, it's simply the different interpretation of what the Constitution means... Think: Spirit of the Law vs Letter of the Law. He was more a Letter of the Law kind of guy. Some of the Justices see the Constitution and their role in defending it is fluid, dynamic, and should be viewed in light of contemporary issues. That would be more in line with Judicial Activism. Scalia, being of the Original Meaning/Judicial Restraint camp would say that the Constitution is rigid, inflexible and uncompromising in its protections in the sense that you never go beyond what it is saying by taking contemporary beliefs in to account. "Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it" -- Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
Scalia seemed to advocate the notion of Judicial Restraint versus Judicial Activism That's only if you buy the myth that less conservative outcomes are activism. Scalia was just as likely as any Justice on the panel to oppose legislative action and executive branch regulation and to strike down statutes and regulation as passed by those branches. But it seems popular to consider such things activism only when Ginsburg is on the side that does it. Scalia was no respecter of the separation of Church and State regardless of how firmly that doctrine was part of the original intent of the constitution and his disrespect of the First Amendment both in his opinions and his out of court actions are well documented. Let's get this man in the ground and get on with picking his successor. Surely we can do better. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22502 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 4.9
|
In today's New York Times columnist Linda Greenhouse draws a distinctly critical portrait of Scalia: Resetting the Post-Scalia Supreme Court. Some excerpts:
quote: --Percy
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
One of Obama's greatest failures, in my opinion is represented by all of the open federal judge positions that he did not get filled. Not all his fault, but he gets some of the blame as do those of us who could not be bothered to vote in Senate races. Indeed. Personally I think the death of Scalia will -- if nothing else -- make people aware of the importance of picking a president that will be appointing judges, and that the senate races are important for getting those appointments approved. My personal favorite for an Obama nomination would be Loretta Lynch -- she was vetted and approved by this very senate on April 23, 2015.
quote: Obama could have made a recess appointment, but he specifically ruled that out. My impression is that he wants to hold the GOP delay tactics up in front of the nation to show their obstructionism and their willingness to skewer the constitution when it suits their regressive politics. And it appears that they are living in a bubble again if they think one of their clown candidates can win the general, especially against Bernie. As it stands it looks like the public is sick and tired of business as usual and massive campaign donations corrupting - or having the appearance of corrupting - the politicians to bend them to the will of big money. Two candidates are not accepting big money donations: Bernie and Trump. Couple this with what sector of the economy is still left out of the recovery after losing savings, homes, jobs and you have a set of voters looking for real change. Which one people pick depends on their base political views. And I think they will each win their nominations as a result. The establishment politicians and media don't see this - it is not on their radar because they were not badly affected by the recession: they may have lost some investment value at the time, but it has mostly recovered. The grass-roots people are off their radar, so they keep getting surprised by how well Trump and Bernie are doing. And Trump is technically not doing as well as Bernie, he just happens to be doing much better than each of the other GOP, but his numbers against a single opponent would be significantly different. Bernie has picked up some moderate (fiscal) republicans fed up with the current candidates, and a lot of independents, and that makes him more likely to win the election imho. I also think he will bring in more senate seats than Hillary because of his ability to attract new and young voters -- more voters usually benefits the democrats (which is why they lose off-year elections). Pick up 4 seats and the Democrats win back the majority of the Senate, but win back 14 seats and they get a supermajority that would be filibuster proof. Not likely to win back the House this year (especially with gerrymandered districts), but the senate is all you need to approve all those appointments. Can you imagine the GOP *dismay* if Bernie is elected and nominates Cornell West ... (heads explode) They should be careful what they wish for. Enjoy Edited by RAZD, : Loretta linkby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Two candidates are not accepting big money donations: Bernie and Trump. Trump is doing that for the primary race. Are any of the candidates going to tell PACs to butt out?
My personal favorite for an Obama nomination would be Loretta Lynch -- she was vetted and approved by this very senate on April 23, 2015. Perhaps the person chosen won't be achieve anything except being forced to withdraw from consideration after an uncomfortable, degrading, and ridiculous spectacle in the senate, and then being out of consideration even if Bernie or Clinton wins. I'm far too pessimistic about the chances for confirmation of an Obama pick to even want to have a favorite candidate.
And Trump is technically not doing as well as Bernie, he just happens to be doing much better than each of the other GOP, but his numbers against a single opponent would be significantly different. Interesting. I think getting 35% in a field of 8-10 candidates and coming close to tripling the next guy looks even better than Bernie's trouncing of Clinton in NH. And both Clinton and Trump seem set to do quite well in SC. Let's revisit this in two weeks. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
quote: In my view, this article is a bit tasteless this shortly after the good Justices death. On the other hand, I suppose there are other puff pieces being published in the same newspaper to balance this stuff out.
I’ve become increasingly concerned, as my recent columns have suggested, that the conservative majority is permitting the court to become an agent of partisan warfare to an extent that threatens real damage to the institution. Justice Scalia’s outsize role on and off the bench contributed to that dangerous development to an outsize degree. Well said. And almost certainly, Obama is going to get the blame for being divisive. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
subbie Member (Idle past 1282 days) Posts: 3509 Joined:
|
True. But I think it's a more compelling argument after the President is in fact a lame duck, so I framed the argument in the most favorable terms for the opposition to show how wrong-headed it is.
Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. -- Thomas Jefferson We see monsters where science shows us windmills. -- Phat It has always struck me as odd that fundies devote so much time and effort into trying to find a naturalistic explanation for their mythical flood, while looking for magical explanations for things that actually happened. -- Dr. Adequate Howling about evidence is a conversation stopper, and it never stops to think if the claim could possibly be true -- foreveryoung
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
RAZD Member (Idle past 1433 days) Posts: 20714 From: the other end of the sidewalk Joined: |
Perhaps the person chosen won't be achieve anything except being forced to withdraw from consideration after an uncomfortable, degrading, and ridiculous spectacle in the senate, and then being out of consideration even if Bernie or Clinton wins. I'm far too pessimistic about the chances for confirmation of an Obama pick to even want to have a favorite candidate. Another reason to pick Lynch -- she already has a federal position to fall back on -- is that she can wait out the process and let the people see their persecution as either racist, misogynist, or both. That would bring angry voters to the booths to elect senators as well as the president. Yes that is political maneuvering, but the GOP is already politicizing this -- they still resent Bork ...
Interesting. I think getting 35% in a field of 8-10 candidates and coming close to tripling the next guy looks even better than Bernie's trouncing of Clinton in NH. And both Clinton and Trump seem set to do quite well in SC. Let's revisit this in two weeks. Well I expect Dr Carson to be the next to drop out. I don't see his supporters going to Cruz but to Rubio (because of Cruz skulduggery re Carson ... and now Rubio). I expect Bush to keep hanging by his fingernails because he has the money and hopes to pick up in Florida and other "Bush-family-loving" states, especially now that brother Schrubia is welcomed into the campaign ... Kasich may also drop out; I can see his supporters going to Rubio or Bush, as "best establishment" candidates. And as the field narrows I see voters clustering to "establishment" Rubio and Bush or to "anti-establishment" Cruz and Trump. We'll see. Tomorrow Nevada for Dems, S.Carolina for GOPs. Enjoyby our ability to understand Rebel☮American☆Zen☯Deist ... to learn ... to think ... to live ... to laugh ... to share. Join the effort to solve medical problems, AIDS/HIV, Cancer and more with Team EvC! (click)
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
Scalia was particularly strident about the viability of the death penalty. Scalia ended up in the minority on a case that the Supreme Court decided that makes it essentially impossible to execute a man with an IQ less than 70. Scalia acknowledged that the original intent allowed men who were 'idiots' to escape execution, but he balked on the use of any modern technique to establish mental incompetence.
quote: Here, the difference between 'originalism' and 'textualism' is readily apparent. Scalia digs through history to find what 18th century history could discern regarding mental illness and insists on using that archaic medical position as definitive on how we ought to read the constitution. In my view that's patently ridiculous. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams |
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member |
I don't see his supporters going to Cruz but to Rubio (because of Cruz skulduggery re Carson Ah, RAZD. Ever the rational one. I don't think people really care about that stuff. Carson's complaints about that stuff have been decreed to be whining. ABE: Or maybe not! Ted Cruz let his number one spokesman go today after yet another dirty trick. Rick Tyler was forced to resign after he posted a video showing Rubio stating that there were no answers to be found in the Bible, when in fact Rubio had stated that all of the answers were there, and in particular citing the book of Proverbs as being replete with wisdom. I think that is about four or so blatant lies that Cruz has had to acknowledge originated with his campaign. Edited by Admin, : Typo. Edited by NoNukes, : No reason given. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
NoNukes Inactive Member
|
Another reason to pick Lynch -- she already has a federal position to fall back on -- is that she can wait out the process and let the people see their persecution as either racist, misogynist, or both. That would bring angry voters to the booths to elect senators as well as the president. I've thought about this over the last few days, and I now agree with your choice of nominee. Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846) History will have to record that the greatest tragedy of this period of social transition was not the strident clamor of the bad people, but the appalling silence of the good people. Martin Luther King If there are no stupid questions, then what kind of questions do stupid people ask? Do they get smart just in time to ask questions? Scott Adams
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024