I mean, people can talk about what they want, but I have a feeling this thread will not last long if it's just people celebrating his death or arguing about whether or not it's appropriate to celebrate his death.
The new SCOTUS is an area of discussion that's going to be more fruitful.
Do we have any idea who the new appointment might even theoretically be, though?
0
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
Rorus, I know you might have hated the man, but Scalia was a smarter man that you or I and actually had pretty good convictions for his beliefs that were well founded in the law. You could show the dead a little more respect, especially since Scalia was not a man of malice or ignorance on the SCOTUS.
Intelligence that only serves to promote suffering is no better than the deepest stupidity.
I have already said to not make the thread a Scalia is Dead Party, which is about as much respect as I care to give him.
His views we generally that the job of the courts were to interpret the laws as they were written and not to create new ones wholesale, and the proper course of action for fixing the law would be...to rewrite the law. It's not as if he promoted suffering, he was pragmatic and, unlike other conservatives on the bench, he actually validated his views with smart analysis.
The fact that you can't even say rest in peace regarding his death is disappointing, Rorus.
Munkus Beaver on
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
I mean, people can talk about what they want, but I have a feeling this thread will not last long if it's just people celebrating his death or arguing about whether or not it's appropriate to celebrate his death.
The new SCOTUS is an area of discussion that's going to be more fruitful.
Do we have any idea who the new appointment might even theoretically be, though?
I mean, people can talk about what they want, but I have a feeling this thread will not last long if it's just people celebrating his death or arguing about whether or not it's appropriate to celebrate his death.
The new SCOTUS is an area of discussion that's going to be more fruitful.
Do we have any idea who the new appointment might even theoretically be, though?
We might not, but I'm certain that Obama has had someone in mind the entire time, just in case.
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
Scalia probably hated Trump.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
+23
Options
Raijin QuickfootI'm your Huckleberry YOU'RE NO DAISYRegistered User, ClubPAregular
Trump is literally going to just nominate Satan.
+2
Options
David_TA fashion yes-man is no good to me.Copenhagen, DenmarkRegistered Userregular
I searched Twitter for Scalia when this broke, to see if there were any other sources, and one of the things that popped up was Trump saying, like, yesterday, how he thought Scalia and Thomas were great examples of Supreme Court Justices, so if you were looking for what he thinks...
0
Options
David_TA fashion yes-man is no good to me.Copenhagen, DenmarkRegistered Userregular
Scalia was an old conservative so I imagine like most he was not a fan of Trump.
0
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
I searched Twitter for Scalia when this broke, to see if there were any other sources, and one of the things that popped up was Trump saying, like, yesterday, how he thought Scalia and Thomas were great examples of Supreme Court Justices, so if you were looking for what he thinks...
Scalia: brilliant.
Thomas: less so.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
now I'm very interested in hearing what their reasoning is for that
not the real reason, I know that. I mean what they will say the reason is
Well, I mean, you can't let Obama do it.
I honestly don't think they'll present or feel a need for any further reason.
someone should ask them why, but you're right. american news media isn't going to do something like that!
Something to the effect of Obama being a left wing extremist who is more interested in furthering his own personal agendas than what's actually good for the nation, who the people have obviously turned against as evidenced by the conservative majorities in congress, and how dare he exploit the death of a brilliant and noble man to further the liberal agenda
great legal mind or not, Scalia stood against a lot of things I care about, and having a liberal in his place would be an immense step towards sanity
but at the same time...now? really? when we're in the middle of the most batshit insane election that there has ever been?
I am DREADING the next few months
+1
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
It is rare that I have as much respect for a guy that I disagree with as much as Scalia.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
I mean after seven years of this shit how do you not know what they're going to say
They're going to make unsubstantiated gestures toward Obama being to the left of Karl Marx, throw in some veiled racism, and criticize his words and actions based on absurd double standards
now I'm very interested in hearing what their reasoning is for that
not the real reason, I know that. I mean what they will say the reason is
Well, I mean, you can't let Obama do it.
I honestly don't think they'll present or feel a need for any further reason.
someone should ask them why, but you're right. american news media isn't going to do something like that!
Something to the effect of Obama being a left wing extremist who is more interested in furthering his own personal agendas than what's actually good for the nation, who the people have obviously turned against as evidenced by the conservative majorities in congress, and how dare he exploit the death of a brilliant and noble man to further the liberal agenda
I bet Marco Rubio has the perfect line for this.
+1
Options
Raijin QuickfootI'm your Huckleberry YOU'RE NO DAISYRegistered User, ClubPAregular
I mean after seven years of this shit how do you not know what they're going to say
They're going to make unsubstantiated gestures toward Obama being to the left of Karl Marx, throw in some veiled racism, and criticize his words and actions based on absurd double standards
The major thing is that this means the SCOTUS is going to shift to a liberal majority (well, kinda) which is pretty huge. I think that's incentive for republicans to try and break the record.
I wonder if RBG is going to step down before Obama's term ends.
that second one is a false quote, the real quote is
"There is no basis in text, tradition, or even in contemporary practice (if that were enough), for finding in the Constitution a right to demand judicial consideration of newly discovered evidence of innocence brought forward after conviction."
It'll be interesting to see, if the GOP does go full obstructionist (heh, "if"), just how much it will help/hurt them come November.
Especially with the big abortion case coming up in March; if that goes the liberal way will the GOP bet the farm, so to speak, and block everything hoping that they can paint the November election as a kind of super critical moral crusade, banking on increased turnout and motivation from the far right to finally Make America Great Again?
Or will they get killed for "continuing to do nothing while real working families need our help" or whatever talking point the dem nom eventually goes with?
That's a much better turn of phrase for being an inhuman monster
+2
Options
Munkus BeaverYou don't have to attend every argument you are invited to.Philosophy: Stoicism. Politics: Democratic SocialistRegistered User, ClubPAregular
how often does the SCOTUS actually rule on cases clearly along party lines?
They don't have party lines. They have ways of thinking. You can generally go with certain Justices to vote certain ways on certain issues. Scalia, for example, was a strict interpretationalist. If the language wasn't clearly there, he wasn't going to go for it.
Humor can be dissected as a frog can, but dies in the process.
But there is absolutely no way that's going to happen you guys
again, the longest EVER was just over 100 days
They really can't come up with any reason other than "because obama" and that's not going to fly right after almost shutting the government down twice
its DEFINITELY not going to take like, years into the next presidency
Yeah I cannot see them holding up a legit nominee for a full year
That's just nutso
They'll throw a tantrum but they'll stop holding their breath eventually
I'm not totally up on how this stuff works so I'm curious
What's to incentivize them to approve an appointee
Because with the right messaging it seems easy for them to present themselves as holding back a flood of liberal activist Supreme Court decisions, and then appearing weak to their constituency of they ever give into it
There's no government shutdown or fiscal cliff or other similar awful thing to pressure them into not holding things up indefinitely, and they stand to score points with the people who put them in office if they do so
Sooooo why not stall the appointment process for a record breaking length of time on the hope that a republican gets elected in november
Posts
Do we have any idea who the new appointment might even theoretically be, though?
His views we generally that the job of the courts were to interpret the laws as they were written and not to create new ones wholesale, and the proper course of action for fixing the law would be...to rewrite the law. It's not as if he promoted suffering, he was pragmatic and, unlike other conservatives on the bench, he actually validated his views with smart analysis.
The fact that you can't even say rest in peace regarding his death is disappointing, Rorus.
So in other words
The people most likely to actually respect him in death have taken less than an hour to turn this into a new political competition
Awesome
I hope to god that someone in the Republican party manages to have a cooler head about this because woof
Well, that took no time at all.
not the real reason, I know that. I mean what they will say the reason is
Eh, I'd bet everyone wanted to turn this into a political issue so soon sadly.
Oh god... I can't wait to see what Trump is going to say.
His nominee is going to be yuuuuuge!
The best nominee ever! He will make great deals! With China!
We might not, but I'm certain that Obama has had someone in mind the entire time, just in case.
Well, I mean, you can't let Obama do it.
I honestly don't think they'll present or feel a need for any further reason.
I'm very sad.
"Scalia was a pussy. Vote Trump and I'll fill SCOTUS with my Throbbing American Cock."
Or words to the same effect. I honestly expect Trump to pay so many backhanded compliments about Scalia that he might as well be playing Wimbledon.
someone should ask them why, but you're right. american news media isn't going to do something like that!
Scalia: brilliant.
Thomas: less so.
I honestly see this happening. And if a dem wins the presidency but the Senate stays Republican, I can see Scala's appointment dragging years.
Something to the effect of Obama being a left wing extremist who is more interested in furthering his own personal agendas than what's actually good for the nation, who the people have obviously turned against as evidenced by the conservative majorities in congress, and how dare he exploit the death of a brilliant and noble man to further the liberal agenda
http://www.audioentropy.com/
But there is absolutely no way that's going to happen you guys
again, the longest EVER was just over 100 days
They really can't come up with any reason other than "because obama" and that's not going to fly right after almost shutting the government down twice
its DEFINITELY not going to take like, years into the next presidency
great legal mind or not, Scalia stood against a lot of things I care about, and having a liberal in his place would be an immense step towards sanity
but at the same time...now? really? when we're in the middle of the most batshit insane election that there has ever been?
I am DREADING the next few months
They're going to make unsubstantiated gestures toward Obama being to the left of Karl Marx, throw in some veiled racism, and criticize his words and actions based on absurd double standards
The GOP playbook ain't complicated
http://www.audioentropy.com/
Yeah I cannot see them holding up a legit nominee for a full year
That's just nutso
They'll throw a tantrum but they'll stop holding their breath eventually
I bet Marco Rubio has the perfect line for this.
What if they run a flea flicker though?
I wonder if RBG is going to step down before Obama's term ends.
But they'd have to TRIPLE it to wait for the next presidency
I'm not sure if that second one's real but that first one alone, and also the second one if it's real
"There is no basis in text, tradition, or even in contemporary practice (if that were enough), for finding in the Constitution a right to demand judicial consideration of newly discovered evidence of innocence brought forward after conviction."
Especially with the big abortion case coming up in March; if that goes the liberal way will the GOP bet the farm, so to speak, and block everything hoping that they can paint the November election as a kind of super critical moral crusade, banking on increased turnout and motivation from the far right to finally Make America Great Again?
Or will they get killed for "continuing to do nothing while real working families need our help" or whatever talking point the dem nom eventually goes with?
They don't have party lines. They have ways of thinking. You can generally go with certain Justices to vote certain ways on certain issues. Scalia, for example, was a strict interpretationalist. If the language wasn't clearly there, he wasn't going to go for it.
I'm not totally up on how this stuff works so I'm curious
What's to incentivize them to approve an appointee
Because with the right messaging it seems easy for them to present themselves as holding back a flood of liberal activist Supreme Court decisions, and then appearing weak to their constituency of they ever give into it
There's no government shutdown or fiscal cliff or other similar awful thing to pressure them into not holding things up indefinitely, and they stand to score points with the people who put them in office if they do so
Sooooo why not stall the appointment process for a record breaking length of time on the hope that a republican gets elected in november
http://www.audioentropy.com/