Scalia was an intellectual phony: Can we please stop calling him a brilliant jurist?

Superfreak said:
Again... his three examples of what he DISAGREES with Scalia on. Again... Campos is a fucking idiot. Why would I care about his OPINION?

Campos thinks obesity is not a problem in this country. He thinks warnings about obesity are a scare tactic and grand conspiracy.
Click to expand...

Irrelevant. This is about his opinion as a LAWYER and PROFESSOR. I'm not surprised this simple point escapes you, given the shallowness of your thought process.
 
christiefan915 said:
Not sure why you won't post a RW refutation of Campos' examples but I suspect it's because you can't. Anything to do with research and rational response is miles above your intellectual pay grade.
Click to expand...
because his 'examples' have nothing to do with the intellectual capacity of Scalia. Campos simply disagrees with Scalia's position. Which I have no problem with. Why do you continue to pretend they have to do with his intellectual capability?
 
Superfreak said:
because his 'examples' have nothing to do with the intellectual capacity of Scalia. Campos simply disagrees with Scalia's position. Which I have no problem with. Why do you continue to pretend they have to do with his intellectual capability?
Click to expand...

Which of his opinions do you think highlights his supposed intellectual brilliance, and why?

This doesn't mean posting a c & p from RBG or the others.
 
christiefan915 said:
Irrelevant. This is about his opinion as a LAWYER and PROFESSOR. I'm not surprised this simple point escapes you, given the shallowness of your thought process.
Click to expand...

A lawyer and professor who pretends he knows more about medicine than the vast majority of doctors and scientists who study obesity? Yeah... that shows he is a fucking idiot. Which goes to show he is not capable of commenting on someone else's intellectual capacity. In this article in the OP, he calls Scalia an idiot, but then simply disagrees with opinions given by Scalia. He doesn't show evidence that Scalia isn't brilliant... something his long time rival (judicially speaking) and friend states that he is.
 
christiefan915 said:
Which of his opinions do you think highlights his supposed intellectual brilliance, and why?

This doesn't mean posting a c & p from RBG or the others.
Click to expand...

So other judges stating that it was his dissents that helped make their final opinions better are not acceptable? You simply want to comment on his DECISIONS... not his intellect. But you are too fucking stupid to realize that.
 
Superfreak said:
LMAO... you are once again projecting your own emotions on to me. Because you are a desperate piece of shit at this point.

You are a fucking moron. You know it, the rest of us know it. Not sure why you are trying to hide it.
Click to expand...

On the contrary- compared to you Christiefan is a lucid intellectual with a genuine sense of satire. Just sayin', as an observer.
 
moon2012 said:
On the contrary- compared to you Christiefan is a lucid intellectual with a genuine sense of satire. Just sayin', as an observer.
Click to expand...

awww... so cute... you get destroyed in your nonsense about guns so you come over to try and defend a fellow loser? That is truly nice of you. I am sure Christie appreciates your gesture.
 
Superfreak said:
awww... so cute... you get destroyed in your nonsense about guns so you come over to try and defend a fellow loser? That is truly nice of you. I am sure Christie appreciates your gesture.
Click to expand...

I do appreciate it. And it's pretty clear from your history on this forum that precious few people would do the same for you.
 
Superfreak said:
So other judges stating that it was his dissents that helped make their final opinions better are not acceptable? You simply want to comment on his DECISIONS... not his intellect. But you are too fucking stupid to realize that.
Click to expand...

You're too fucking stupid to understand that his intellect and his opinions go hand in hand. Now I wouldn't say that every single one of his opinions was either bad or wrong. But when he distorts precedent and the Constitution to fit his views, that is being intellectually dishonest.
 
christiefan915 said:
You're too fucking stupid to understand that his intellect and his opinions go hand in hand. Now I wouldn't say that every single one of his opinions was either bad or wrong. But when he distorts precedent and the Constitution to fit his views, that is being intellectually dishonest.
Click to expand...

LOL... try to get a handle on your rage. Disagreeing with an opinion doesn't make the opinion ignorant. Nor does it show the opponent isn't a brilliant person. Many people will disagree with Bill Clinton's policies and ideas. But that doesn't make him an idiot. But you are too ignorant to comprehend this.

Again... you cling to a known moron as evidence that your position is correct.
 
christiefan915 said:
I do appreciate it. And it's pretty clear from your history on this forum that precious few people would do the same for you.
Click to expand...

I am sure you do. It is all you have keeping you afloat. I don't need anyone to come and try to save me. Especially against an inferior opponent such as yourself.
 
Superfreak said:
LOL... try to get a handle on your rage. Disagreeing with an opinion doesn't make the opinion ignorant. Nor does it show the opponent isn't a brilliant person. Many people will disagree with Bill Clinton's policies and ideas. But that doesn't make him an idiot. But you are too ignorant to comprehend this.

Again... you cling to a known moron as evidence that your position is correct.
Click to expand...

^ So Campos' opinion disagreeing with, say, RBG's about Scalia's intellect doesn't make his opinion ignorant. Finally you've come around, dummy.
 
Superfreak said:
I am sure you do. It is all you have keeping you afloat. I don't need anyone to come and try to save me. Especially against an inferior opponent such as yourself.
Click to expand...

Lol. If only you didn't have the same opinion about all the liberals here, and constantly shoot off your big mouth about their inferiority. Here's a tip, when you insult everybody, your insults are meaningless.
 
Superfreak said:
awww... so cute... you get destroyed in your nonsense about guns so you come over to try and defend a fellow loser? That is truly nice of you. I am sure Christie appreciates your gesture.
Click to expand...

And there's me thinking that you're still lying over there wondering what the fuck you got hit with. Somebody's perceptions are skewed- and it ain't mine.
 
a03dd5a24cd0fc0bb4732306063a9bf5_L.jpg
 
IMT said:
Dear Christiefan915:

Can we please stop calling Scalia an intellectual phony? He was a crooked, corrupt judge.

'Scalia’s practice of slipping away from Washington, unannounced, all expenses paid, to socialize for days in private, intimate settings with selected people who have business either before or affected by the Supreme Court epitomizes how justice in the United States is dispensed. It highlights the role of a social layer that is profoundly hostile to democratic principles and feels itself in no way bound by traditional political methods or legal prescriptions.'

Antonin Scalia’s Death During Secret Junket Points to New Ethical Violations

IMT
Click to expand...

Awesome post is awesome. Piece of shit was a piece of shit.
 
christiefan915 said:
His book has errors.
Click to expand...

no....his book has things that liberal jurists don't like.....because they aren't textualists......they want to be free to make up law as they go......because he takes a different view point they say he isn't brilliant......those of us who agree with textualism say that his critics aren't brilliant.......it isn't his invective that is a sign of brilliance.....its the logical basis for his explanation of textualism in "Reading Law".......his invective doesn't make him brilliant....his invective makes him a liberal slayer.....we need more of those on the bench.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top