|
I'm really hoping he left something he considered important unfinished so that his last moments were filled with all-consuming regret.
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 00:33
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 00:58 |
|
|
I agree, reading a scalia dissent was like hearing michele bachmann read a shakesperean sonnet. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=T_q4DakaujA
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
Pomp posted:he failed to stop gay marriage No, I mean something small in his personal life like not seeing an upcoming grandchild or leaving a stew on the stove.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 00:57
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/TheOnion/status/698659911400448001
|
|
#
¿
Feb 14, 2016 01:14
|
|
|
White Genocide posted:Is it true that judge scalia once argued for the constitutionality of putting an innocent man to death? Yes, under the reasoning "he got a fair trial so who gives a gently caress about his innocence"
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2016 05:17
|
|
|
Absurd Alhazred posted:Sinners Sandwich did say AI. Associate Iustice. Worked for the Romans, just how Scalia would have liked it.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2016 06:55
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:Delaying the nomination until after the election makes the most sense from a functional perspective to be honest. It brings at least some level of democratic control over the least democratic branch of government. That democratic control was exercised in 2008 and again in 2012 and it's loving shameful that there are people in this country that believe the voting populace can't look at a loving calendar and count to 4.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2016 07:42
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:It was also exercised in 2014, giving Republicans control of the Senate. But more to the point it would be the first time in my lifetime where the Supreme Court was an actual election issue that people could base their vote on, rather than having the court's composition decided by strategic retirement or happenstance. So you think the American people aren't aware that the SCOTUS is appointed by the executive with the advice and consent of the Senate? I don't know where you're going with this - first you tried to insinuate the voting public doesn't know when January 20th is, now you're trying to paint us as so drat stupid that we can't tell the difference between the executive and the legislature. Going to try talking poo poo about the parties being no different next?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2016 07:52
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:You need to calm down and stop thinking so emotionally. Says the guy so butthurt about the constitutional separation of powers that he's demanding they be curtailed until he gives the all clear. Thug Lessons posted:It would constitute significantly more political control than the 0% they currently have. Short of national referenda on justices I think delaying appointments until after the next election (including by-elections) would probably be the best way to give the public some sway over the Court. They're lifetime appointments specifically so they aren't governed by "popular control."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2016 07:58
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:No idea what this is even supposed to refer to. 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2016 07:59
|
|
|
It's like they aren't even aware that there are lower-level judicial positions subject to public elections, let alone that those positions have all devolved into contests of how "tough on
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2016 08:12
|
|
|
Say hello to Chief Justice Hector Elizondo Mountain Dew Camacho
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2016 08:20
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:You were flipping out ten minutes ago about how I was supposedly "painting the American public as stupid" and now you are, quite literally, doing that. Nah, I'm still giving people credit for knowing who they're voting for and how long they're granting them power, but you're still over there assuming nobody knows what the president does or how long he's in office.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2016 08:43
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:However I would prefer a democratic system to the one in the Constitution. And so it boils down to the old man yells at cloud argument. No rational basis, no valid reason to call the constitution wrong, just "my opinion, maaan."
|
|
#
¿
Feb 15, 2016 15:35
|
|
|
Sydin posted:Still easy to spin, just have to say that unlike W, Obummer is exerting executive tyranny with the overreach of his power and it's the Senate's prerogative to be the bulwark against it in all things, even SCOTUS noms. The right will eat that poo poo up like candy. Basically this scene: 
|
|
#
¿
Feb 16, 2016 04:36
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:Sort of. I said that I thought a system with more democratic input would be better than leaving it entirely to politicians as it is in the current system, but also that an independent judicial board would be my preferred system. So you would have the pool of candidates limited by an unelected council of experts or something?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2016 00:13
|
|
|
Thug Lessons posted:Yes, if you're not particularly fond of democracy and believe rule by elites is preferable, you aren't going to want election of Supreme Court justices. I don't share that view. Elites like the bar association?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
I'm wondering if that guy is making a run for the title of smartest child on the internet.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2016 02:29
|
|
|
El Scotch posted:You're rubbish at arguing. I need a flow-chart to follow your twisting logic. The whole point is to be bad but voluminous in argument. It's what he does.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2016 02:45
|
|
|
Everyone is actually pretty happy with the method of filling the SCOTUS bench because it provides a fair balance of public determination and electoral insulation.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2016 02:58
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Usually when people die you say nice things about them idk. So what was his Autobahn?
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2016 22:03
|
|
|
Nenonen posted:How dead is Scalia atm and has his deadness remained stable? 1: As all hell 2: Yes according to every available indicator
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2016 22:07
|
|
|
Shot through the heart, the POTUS to blame / he gave law a bad name
|
|
#
¿
Feb 17, 2016 22:56
|
|
|
euphronius posted:Hamdi v Rumsfeld iirc Okay I'll grant you that.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2016 02:00
|
|
|
Ceiling fan posted:I didn't feel the need before to post the obvious, but here goes. Reading that article, yeah, gently caress him with a rake. Not only a nakedly lovely move on his part, he took the effort to twist the loving knife by "noted national concern over the abuse of class-action lawsuits in state courts" because it's the people harmed by decades of interference who are the villains here, not the fuckers who actively curtailed public disclosure of medical science for 40 years resulting in millions of preventable deaths.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 18, 2016 05:14
|
|
|
Platonicsolid posted:Nope, Congress would never allow that. Congress already loves loving around with the District, Mayor Obama would probably get them to toss home rule and bring back the Commissioners. Correct. IIRC, they voted to legalize weed and congress was like "LOL gently caress YOUR SELF-DETERMINATION WE OWN THIS BITCH" https://www.washingtonpost.com/loca...0beb_story.html FAUXTON fucked around with this message at 00:45 on Feb 19, 2016 |
|
#
¿
Feb 19, 2016 00:42
|
|
|
VitalSigns posted:Are you basing your entire argument on pretending to not know the difference between an election and an inauguration? It's arkane.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 23, 2016 01:45
|
|
|
Al! posted:Scalia based his entire judicial career on his claim on the ability to read the thoughts of dead men, so this isn't entirely out of line with his character. Coincidentally in both cases it turns out the deceased agree with the erstwhile medium.
|
|
#
¿
Feb 24, 2016 16:31
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 15, 2024 00:58 |
|
|
pangstrom posted:It's looks like a fraternity for old rich conservative catholics who like hunting. Basically a snootier moose lodge. One might call it a deuce lodge
|
|
#
¿
Feb 25, 2016 12:59
|
|