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


Page 7 of 13 FirstFirst ... 34567891011 ... LastLast
Results 91 to 105 of 191

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

  1. #91 | Top
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Steeler Nation
    Posts
    64,534
    Thanks
    65,163
    Thanked 38,094 Times in 25,664 Posts
    Groans
    5,815
    Groaned 2,614 Times in 2,498 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by NOVA View Post
    I looked through the dissenting opinions and saw no lashing out at anyone nor any insults by Scalia....

    I saw a well reasoned argument for his point of view according to law and his views about legislating from the bench.

    I didn't read the dissenting opinions of the other 3 judges......

    "The Court ends this debate, in an opinion lacking even a thin veneer of law. Buried beneath the mummeries and straining-to-be-memorable passages of the opinion..."

    "what really astounds is the hubris reflected in today’s judicial Putsch..."

    "They have discovered in the Fourteenth Amendment a “fundamental right” overlooked by every person alive at the time of ratification, and almost everyone else
    in the time since. They see what lesser legal minds—minds like Thomas Cooley, John Marshall Harlan, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., Learned Hand, Louis Brandeis,
    William Howard Taft, Benjamin Cardozo, Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter, Robert Jackson, and Henry Friendly— could not..."

    "Of course the opinion’s showy profundities are often incoherent..."

    "Really? Who ever thought that intimacy and spirituality [whatever that means] were freedoms?


    And my favorite. Irony was dead to Scalia.

    "The opinion is couched in a style that is as pretentious as its content is egotistic. It is one thing for separate concurring or dissenting opinions to contain extravagances,
    even silly extravagances, of thought and expression; it is something else for the official opinion of the Court to do so."


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

  2. #92 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Mid-Atlantic State
    Posts
    26,917
    Thanks
    3,256
    Thanked 5,373 Times in 4,319 Posts
    Groans
    1,505
    Groaned 2,440 Times in 2,029 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post

    "The Court ends this debate, in an opinion lacking even a thin veneer of law. Buried beneath the mummeries and straining-to-be-memorable passages of the opinion..."

    "what really astounds is the hubris reflected in today’s judicial Putsch..."

    "They have discovered in the Fourteenth Amendment a “fundamental right” overlooked by every person alive at the time of ratification, and almost everyone else
    in the time since. They see what lesser legal minds—minds like Thomas Cooley, John Marshall Harlan, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., Learned Hand, Louis Brandeis,
    William Howard Taft, Benjamin Cardozo, Hugo Black, Felix Frankfurter, Robert Jackson, and Henry Friendly— could not..."

    "Of course the opinion’s showy profundities are often incoherent..."

    "Really? Who ever thought that intimacy and spirituality [whatever that means] were freedoms?


    And my favorite. Irony was dead to Scalia.

    "The opinion is couched in a style that is as pretentious as its content is egotistic. It is one thing for separate concurring or dissenting opinions to contain extravagances,
    even silly extravagances, of thought and expression; it is something else for the official opinion of the Court to do so."
    Very eloquent I would say.... exercising the power of fluent, forceful, and appropriate speech....legislating from the bench and finding imaginary rights where none
    exist requires a certain about of incoherent logic and that needed to be pointed out.
    Akin to finding the freedom to kill unborn infants on demand hiding under the guise of privacy.....a stunning find that would have Madison and Jefferson gaping with open mouths.....

    Yes, who ever would think that that intimacy and spirituality were freedoms in the context of same sex marriage hiding in the Constitution....certainly not the
    "Founding Fathers"......the majority opinion was a
    coup d'état accomplished by bastardizing and corrupting the purpose and meaning of what they wrote so long ago....

    Yes....eloquent is way I would describe it.....
    Put blame where it belongs
    ATF decided it could not regulate bump stocks during the Obama administration.
    It that time," the NRA wrote in a statement. "The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semiautomatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations."
    The ATF and Obama admin. ignored the NRA recommendations.


  3. #93 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    134,855
    Thanks
    13,247
    Thanked 40,786 Times in 32,152 Posts
    Groans
    3,661
    Groaned 2,865 Times in 2,752 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    Why did it take until 2007 and a SCOTUS decision if it was a given from the beginning?
    because no one tried to stop them before.......

  4. #94 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Mid-Atlantic State
    Posts
    26,917
    Thanks
    3,256
    Thanked 5,373 Times in 4,319 Posts
    Groans
    1,505
    Groaned 2,440 Times in 2,029 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by christiefan915 View Post
    Why did it take until 2007 and a SCOTUS decision if it was a given from the beginning?
    Did you not notice the dates??
    The Treatise on the Law of Corporations, in by Stewart Kyd (1793–1794)
    Put blame where it belongs
    ATF decided it could not regulate bump stocks during the Obama administration.
    It that time," the NRA wrote in a statement. "The NRA believes that devices designed to allow semiautomatic rifles to function like fully-automatic rifles should be subject to additional regulations."
    The ATF and Obama admin. ignored the NRA recommendations.


  5. #95 | Top
    Join Date
    Feb 2016
    Posts
    57,638
    Thanks
    563
    Thanked 10,010 Times in 8,569 Posts
    Groans
    29
    Groaned 498 Times in 487 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Legion Troll View Post
    Dailykos? Really? You don't expect them to show how Obama himself did what he now says is wrong do you? You don't expect them to show how Democrats did to Robert Bork what they now say is wrong?

  6. #96 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    183,528
    Thanks
    71,923
    Thanked 35,503 Times in 27,049 Posts
    Groans
    53
    Groaned 19,565 Times in 18,156 Posts
    Blog Entries
    16

  7. #97 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    61,320
    Thanks
    7,144
    Thanked 8,821 Times in 6,166 Posts
    Groans
    5,805
    Groaned 1,532 Times in 1,444 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    Scalia always whined about substantive due process and incorporation via the 14th ammendment throughout his entire career, he wanted to tear down Roe v. Wade, Brown v. Board of Education, and all the cases that it was based upon. But then a gun case comes up to him, and in an act of total hypocrisy, he entirely reverses his position and bases his opinion on, guess what, substantive due process and incorporation via the 14th amendment. He's a hypocrite and twisted the constitution however he wanted to shove rightist ideology down the throats of the American people.
    "Do not think that I came to bring peace... I did not come to bring peace, but a sword." - Matthew 10:34

  8. The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to FUCK THE POLICE For This Post:

    christiefan915 (02-22-2016), Rune (02-22-2016)

  9. #98 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    61,320
    Thanks
    7,144
    Thanked 8,821 Times in 6,166 Posts
    Groans
    5,805
    Groaned 1,532 Times in 1,444 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    It isn't the fault of the court if people in the past were not smart enough to see the clear conclusions of their own words and violated their own laws. Any obvious reading of the 14th amendment precludes racial discrimination, but for the longest time the court upheld racial discrimination. Why? Because they were cowards. Because they bowed to the political pressure of the day. We are not bound by their lack of foresight.
    "Do not think that I came to bring peace... I did not come to bring peace, but a sword." - Matthew 10:34

  10. The Following User Says Thank You to FUCK THE POLICE For This Post:

    Rune (02-22-2016)

  11. #99 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    61,320
    Thanks
    7,144
    Thanked 8,821 Times in 6,166 Posts
    Groans
    5,805
    Groaned 1,532 Times in 1,444 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3

    Default

    They should pass a law abolishing corporations, and then pass a new law establishing a new form of legal contract that is equivalent in every sense except not having the rights of persons or being recognized as such.

    Corporations are creatures of the law, they have no right to exist outside of the laws strict legal bindings.
    "Do not think that I came to bring peace... I did not come to bring peace, but a sword." - Matthew 10:34

  12. The Following User Says Thank You to FUCK THE POLICE For This Post:

    Rune (02-22-2016)

  13. #100 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    183,528
    Thanks
    71,923
    Thanked 35,503 Times in 27,049 Posts
    Groans
    53
    Groaned 19,565 Times in 18,156 Posts
    Blog Entries
    16

  14. #101 | 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 PostmodernProphet View Post
    who is Paul Campos and why should we give a fuck what his opinion of Scalia is.....compared to Campos, Scalia WAS a brilliant jurist......and probably would have been a better journalist as well......
    He is a hack who practiced law for about a year, then realized he sucked at it, so he went to teach at the University of Colorado
    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. "

  15. #102 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    183,528
    Thanks
    71,923
    Thanked 35,503 Times in 27,049 Posts
    Groans
    53
    Groaned 19,565 Times in 18,156 Posts
    Blog Entries
    16

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    He is a hack who practiced law for about a year, then realized he sucked at it, so he went to teach at the University of Colorado
    and youre a nob polisher

  16. The Following User Says Thank You to evince For This Post:

    Rune (02-22-2016)

  17. #103 | 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
    "Over and over during Scalia’s three decades on the Supreme Court, if one of his cherished interpretive principles got in the way of his political preferences, that principle got thrown overboard in a New York minute."

    Your argument sucks. Unless YOU argued a case in front of SCOTUS, talked to Scalia or met him, your opinions are no different from the author's. You are doing exactly what the author is saying Scalia did, waffling because you don't like what was written. You're stooping to ad homs just like Scalia did in some of his dissents. And you are too dumb to understand how foolish you appear for doing so.
    But when even his greatest of opponents on the court say he was brilliant... you side with a nut like Campos over them? Is it because Campos tells you what you want to hear?
    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. "

  18. #104 | 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 evince View Post
    and youre a nob polisher
    Are you homophobic desh? You seem to think the above is an 'insult'???
    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. "

  19. #105 | Top
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    183,528
    Thanks
    71,923
    Thanked 35,503 Times in 27,049 Posts
    Groans
    53
    Groaned 19,565 Times in 18,156 Posts
    Blog Entries
    16

  20. The Following User Says Thank You to evince For This Post:

    Rune (02-22-2016)

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
  •