Members banned from this thread: BRUTALITOPS, Truth Detector and canceled.2021.1


Page 11 of 13 FirstFirst ... 78910111213 LastLast
Results 151 to 165 of 191

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

  1. #151 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    64,628
    Thanks
    65,477
    Thanked 38,196 Times in 25,727 Posts
    Groans
    5,817
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,498 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    LMAO... so her problem with Scalia is he is just 'too mean'??? Wow... riveting analysis.
    It's a "him", not a "her." And it's another example of the problems people had with Scalia. Not surprised that you're evading the point.


    “What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
    ― Charles Dickens

  2. #152 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    49,801
    Thanks
    1,830
    Thanked 7,353 Times in 5,599 Posts
    Groans
    238
    Groaned 801 Times in 749 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    Another judge's opinion.

    "A federal appeals judge harshly criticized U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia during a recent interview with lawyer and author Joel Cohen, published by the American Bar Association.

    Richard Posner, a renowned judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago, spoke about his "frayed" friendship with Scalia and an ongoing feud between them. On the topic of how he reacts to criticism from other judges, Posner said he didn't let it bother him when Scalia called him a liar for criticizing his 2012 book "Reading Law: The Interpretation of Legal Texts."

    "He's excitable and prone to anger," Posner said of Scalia's reaction to his book review, which was published in New Republic under the title "The Incoherence of Antonin Scalia." Posner told Cohen the magazine's editors picked the "adversarial" title without his knowledge, although he accepted responsibility for it.

    Posner had this to say in defense of his book review:

    "He [Scalia] writes a book about judicial interpretation. His book has errors. I connect that in part to the fact that in the front of the book there are acknowledgments of assistance from more than 90 people, including a number of law students. My guess is that much of the book was written by research assistants and was not adequately checked. I'm not saying the authors are bad people — that they're greedy or that they're lying. I'm saying that it's an inaccurate book."

    Cohen asked if he was concerned his writings could influence Scalia's views when reviewing Posner's legal decisions in court. Posner said he doubted that, since Scalia just affirmed a decision a few weeks ago that Posner had written. "I imagine he has a bad opinion of me, but I wouldn't expect that to affect his decisions," Posner said. "The stakes are too high. I would be very surprised if he'd allow a personal dislike for a judge to influence his views."

    In another article published in Slate, Posner wrote that "Justice Scalia is famously outspoken." Posner elaborated on that comment in his interview with Cohen. "I think from a public relations standpoint it would be better for the Supreme Court justices to take a lower profile — talk less on the bench and participate less in mock trials and other celebrity-type activities," he said.

    Posner and Scalia's feud is largely based on some conflicting core beliefs about judging, according to FedSoc Blog. Posner emphasizes the importance of making pragmatic legal opinions that apply to the real world and criticizes Scalia for following legal text too closely while neglecting practical consequences. Scalia is a proponent of the originalism method for judging cases, based on the view that the Constitution should be interpreted according to its original meaning at the time of enactment. "I ... disagree with Justice Scalia's philosophy of originalism," Posner said in the interview.

    Posner's relationship with Scalia has suffered as a result of their feuding comments. "We're actually old friends, although the friendship has been frayed somewhat," Posner said, "at least on his side."

    http://www.businessinsider.com/judge...-scalia-2014-7
    LMAO... so again... nothing regarding the intelligence of Scalia. Just a difference in opinions on what a judge should do. Do you even read the shit you post?
    Quote from Cypress:
    "Scientists don't use "averages". Maybe armchair supertools on message boards ascribe some meaning to "averages" between two random data points. And maybe clueless amatuers "draw a straight line" through two random end data points to define a "trend". Experts don't.

    They use mean annual and five year means in trend analysis. Don't tell me I have to explain the difference to you. "

  3. #153 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    49,801
    Thanks
    1,830
    Thanked 7,353 Times in 5,599 Posts
    Groans
    238
    Groaned 801 Times in 749 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    It's a "him", not a "her." And it's another example of the problems people had with Scalia. Not surprised that you're evading the point.
    Whatever... again... It isn't the fact that people have a problem with Scalia or how he felt a judge should act. Your OP questioned his intellect. Now YOU are the one evading, not me. YOU have not shown one single piece of evidence that suggests he wasn't brilliant as RBG stated. Instead you simply post one hacks opinion, a person who thought Scalia was 'too mean' and another judge who differed in opinion on what a judge should do.

    You fucking moron.
    Quote from Cypress:
    "Scientists don't use "averages". Maybe armchair supertools on message boards ascribe some meaning to "averages" between two random data points. And maybe clueless amatuers "draw a straight line" through two random end data points to define a "trend". Experts don't.

    They use mean annual and five year means in trend analysis. Don't tell me I have to explain the difference to you. "

  4. #154 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    49,801
    Thanks
    1,830
    Thanked 7,353 Times in 5,599 Posts
    Groans
    238
    Groaned 801 Times in 749 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

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

    The above is what I called you out on.
    Quote from Cypress:
    "Scientists don't use "averages". Maybe armchair supertools on message boards ascribe some meaning to "averages" between two random data points. And maybe clueless amatuers "draw a straight line" through two random end data points to define a "trend". Experts don't.

    They use mean annual and five year means in trend analysis. Don't tell me I have to explain the difference to you. "

  5. #155 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    64,628
    Thanks
    65,477
    Thanked 38,196 Times in 25,727 Posts
    Groans
    5,817
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,498 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    LMAO... so again... nothing regarding the intelligence of Scalia. Just a difference in opinions on what a judge should do. Do you even read the shit you post?
    Do you? "He [Scalia] writes a book about judicial interpretation. His book has errors. I connect that in part to the fact that in the front of the book there are acknowledgments of assistance from more than 90 people, including a number of law students. My guess is that much of the book was written by research assistants and was not adequately checked."

    It's not an example of brilliance to publish a book full of errors and if Scalia let it go to press without fact-checking, again that wasn't brilliant.

    Posner says Scalia was "excitable and prone to anger." Scalia used meanness, invective and hyperbole in his dissensions instead of rational explanation. You and Scalia are two of a kind in that way and god knows you're as dumb as a stump so why should invective be seen as a sign of brilliance?


    “What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
    ― Charles Dickens

  6. #156 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    64,628
    Thanks
    65,477
    Thanked 38,196 Times in 25,727 Posts
    Groans
    5,817
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,498 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    Whatever... again... It isn't the fact that people have a problem with Scalia or how he felt a judge should act. Your OP questioned his intellect. Now YOU are the one evading, not me. YOU have not shown one single piece of evidence that suggests he wasn't brilliant as RBG stated. Instead you simply post one hacks opinion, a person who thought Scalia was 'too mean' and another judge who differed in opinion on what a judge should do.

    You fucking moron.
    Where is your refutation of the three examples Campos gave in the article, you brain-dead toady?


    “What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
    ― Charles Dickens

  7. The Following User Says Thank You to christiefan915 For This Post:

    moon (02-23-2016)

  8. #157 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    64,628
    Thanks
    65,477
    Thanked 38,196 Times in 25,727 Posts
    Groans
    5,817
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,498 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    "Scalia was an intellectual phony: Can we please stop calling him a brilliant jurist?"

    The above is what I called you out on.
    Where is your refutation of the three examples Campos gave in the article, you brain-dead toady?


    “What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
    ― Charles Dickens

  9. #158 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    49,801
    Thanks
    1,830
    Thanked 7,353 Times in 5,599 Posts
    Groans
    238
    Groaned 801 Times in 749 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post

    Posner says Scalia was "excitable and prone to anger." Scalia used meanness, invective and hyperbole in his dissensions instead of rational explanation. You and Scalia are two of a kind in that way and god knows you're as dumb as a stump so why should invective be seen as a sign of brilliance?
    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.
    Quote from Cypress:
    "Scientists don't use "averages". Maybe armchair supertools on message boards ascribe some meaning to "averages" between two random data points. And maybe clueless amatuers "draw a straight line" through two random end data points to define a "trend". Experts don't.

    They use mean annual and five year means in trend analysis. Don't tell me I have to explain the difference to you. "

  10. #159 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    49,801
    Thanks
    1,830
    Thanked 7,353 Times in 5,599 Posts
    Groans
    238
    Groaned 801 Times in 749 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    Where is your refutation of the three examples Campos gave in the article, you brain-dead toady?
    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.
    Quote from Cypress:
    "Scientists don't use "averages". Maybe armchair supertools on message boards ascribe some meaning to "averages" between two random data points. And maybe clueless amatuers "draw a straight line" through two random end data points to define a "trend". Experts don't.

    They use mean annual and five year means in trend analysis. Don't tell me I have to explain the difference to you. "

  11. #160 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    64,628
    Thanks
    65,477
    Thanked 38,196 Times in 25,727 Posts
    Groans
    5,817
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,498 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    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.
    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.


    “What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
    ― Charles Dickens

  12. #161 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    64,628
    Thanks
    65,477
    Thanked 38,196 Times in 25,727 Posts
    Groans
    5,817
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,498 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    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.
    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.


    “What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
    ― Charles Dickens

  13. #162 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    49,801
    Thanks
    1,830
    Thanked 7,353 Times in 5,599 Posts
    Groans
    238
    Groaned 801 Times in 749 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    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.
    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?
    Quote from Cypress:
    "Scientists don't use "averages". Maybe armchair supertools on message boards ascribe some meaning to "averages" between two random data points. And maybe clueless amatuers "draw a straight line" through two random end data points to define a "trend". Experts don't.

    They use mean annual and five year means in trend analysis. Don't tell me I have to explain the difference to you. "

  14. #163 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    64,628
    Thanks
    65,477
    Thanked 38,196 Times in 25,727 Posts
    Groans
    5,817
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,498 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    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?
    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.


    “What greater gift than the love of a cat.”
    ― Charles Dickens

  15. #164 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    49,801
    Thanks
    1,830
    Thanked 7,353 Times in 5,599 Posts
    Groans
    238
    Groaned 801 Times in 749 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    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.
    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.
    Quote from Cypress:
    "Scientists don't use "averages". Maybe armchair supertools on message boards ascribe some meaning to "averages" between two random data points. And maybe clueless amatuers "draw a straight line" through two random end data points to define a "trend". Experts don't.

    They use mean annual and five year means in trend analysis. Don't tell me I have to explain the difference to you. "

  16. #165 | Top
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Denver, CO
    Posts
    49,801
    Thanks
    1,830
    Thanked 7,353 Times in 5,599 Posts
    Groans
    238
    Groaned 801 Times in 749 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    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.
    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.
    Quote from Cypress:
    "Scientists don't use "averages". Maybe armchair supertools on message boards ascribe some meaning to "averages" between two random data points. And maybe clueless amatuers "draw a straight line" through two random end data points to define a "trend". Experts don't.

    They use mean annual and five year means in trend analysis. Don't tell me I have to explain the difference to you. "

Similar Threads

  1. SCALIA fAMILY says stop the lies......sociopathic party?
    By evince in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 02-18-2016, 06:52 PM
  2. Obama: Stop Calling me "Bush"
    By signalmankenneth in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 06-11-2013, 05:09 PM
  3. Stop calling it the 'Fiscal Cliff'.
    By hazlnut in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 20
    Last Post: 11-15-2012, 12:20 PM
  4. Stop Calling the "Unemployed" Lazy!
    By signalmankenneth in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 4
    Last Post: 08-14-2010, 08:25 PM
  5. War critics suffering from moral and intellectual confusion
    By MasterChief in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-30-2006, 01:49 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •