HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Justice Scalia must resig...

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 12:54 PM

Justice Scalia must resign - E.J Dionne

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ej-dionne-jr-justice-scalia-should-resign/2012/06/27/gJQApkO06V_story.html

So often, Scalia has chosen to ignore the obligation of a Supreme Court justice to be, and appear to be, impartial. He’s turned “judicial restraint” into an oxymoronic phrase. But what he did this week, when the court announced its decision on the Arizona immigration law, should be the end of the line.

Not content with issuing a fiery written dissent, Scalia offered a bench statement questioning President Obama’s decision to allow some immigrants who were brought to the United States illegally as children to stay. Obama’s move had nothing to do with the case in question. Scalia just wanted you to know where he stood.


I hope this is the start of a more general discussion.

141 replies, 17426 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 141 replies Author Time Post
Reply Justice Scalia must resign - E.J Dionne (Original post)
Inuca Jun 2012 OP
TeamPooka Jun 2012 #1
Cosmocat Jun 2012 #31
TeamPooka Jun 2012 #53
Cosmocat Jun 2012 #80
The Wielding Truth Jun 2012 #104
Volaris Jun 2012 #117
AlbertCat Jun 2012 #57
hifiguy Jun 2012 #2
Inuca Jun 2012 #12
Drale Jun 2012 #26
Plucketeer Jun 2012 #93
AverageJoe90 Jun 2012 #115
RufusTFirefly Jun 2012 #34
hifiguy Jun 2012 #36
JDPriestly Jun 2012 #55
MADem Jun 2012 #139
tomp Jun 2012 #121
DearAbby Jun 2012 #3
SoCalDem Jun 2012 #4
Comrade Grumpy Jun 2012 #5
progressoid Jun 2012 #11
EFerrari Jun 2012 #39
freshwest Jun 2012 #73
EFerrari Jun 2012 #74
freshwest Jun 2012 #81
EFerrari Jun 2012 #82
tblue Jun 2012 #94
EFerrari Jun 2012 #111
AlbertCat Jun 2012 #58
progressoid Jun 2012 #65
Bake Jun 2012 #59
Shagman Jun 2012 #61
dotymed Jun 2012 #67
freshwest Jun 2012 #72
Dan Jun 2012 #112
Volaris Jun 2012 #119
progressoid Jun 2012 #130
Volaris Jun 2012 #132
progressoid Jun 2012 #133
jeff47 Jun 2012 #122
progressoid Jun 2012 #131
aquart Jun 2012 #45
struggle4progress Jun 2012 #6
IDemo Jun 2012 #7
Liberal_Dog Jun 2012 #8
randome Jun 2012 #9
stubtoe Jun 2012 #32
progressoid Jun 2012 #10
Puzzledtraveller Jun 2012 #23
progressoid Jun 2012 #70
Doctor_J Jun 2012 #108
surrealAmerican Jun 2012 #13
madashelltoo Jun 2012 #14
monmouth Jun 2012 #18
crazylikafox Jun 2012 #24
Chorophyll Jun 2012 #15
DeSwiss Jun 2012 #16
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #17
leftyohiolib Jun 2012 #41
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #68
Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2012 #78
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #79
Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2012 #91
chervilant Jun 2012 #97
sabrina 1 Jun 2012 #99
WillowTree Jun 2012 #88
Swede Atlanta Jun 2012 #19
treestar Jun 2012 #22
abolugi Jun 2012 #42
aint_no_life_nowhere Jun 2012 #20
clang1 Jun 2012 #21
PearliePoo2 Jun 2012 #25
lpbk2713 Jun 2012 #27
hue Jun 2012 #28
just1voice Jun 2012 #29
limpyhobbler Jun 2012 #30
DFW Jun 2012 #33
clang1 Jun 2012 #35
clang1 Jun 2012 #37
kiranon Jun 2012 #38
clang1 Jun 2012 #40
sinkingfeeling Jun 2012 #43
clang1 Jun 2012 #44
clang1 Jun 2012 #69
Rain Mcloud Jun 2012 #86
onenote Jun 2012 #92
Iwillnevergiveup Jun 2012 #46
RainDog Jun 2012 #47
clang1 Jun 2012 #48
vanboggie Jun 2012 #62
NewJeffCT Jun 2012 #49
clang1 Jun 2012 #50
Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2012 #51
clang1 Jun 2012 #63
Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2012 #77
clang1 Jun 2012 #87
Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2012 #90
MADem Jun 2012 #141
tkmorris Jun 2012 #83
MADem Jun 2012 #140
rhett o rick Jun 2012 #52
JDPriestly Jun 2012 #54
Initech Jun 2012 #56
graham4anything Jun 2012 #60
Doctor_J Jun 2012 #109
graham4anything Jun 2012 #134
liberalmuse Jun 2012 #64
wilt the stilt Jun 2012 #66
Blue_Tires Jun 2012 #71
hifiguy Jun 2012 #76
BootinUp Jun 2012 #114
Rex Jun 2012 #75
Demeter Jun 2012 #84
marias23 Jun 2012 #85
clang1 Jun 2012 #95
clang1 Jun 2012 #96
ProfessionalLeftist Jun 2012 #89
HelenWheels Jun 2012 #98
patrice Jun 2012 #100
femmocrat Jun 2012 #101
spooky3 Jun 2012 #102
BlueCheese Jun 2012 #103
MrMickeysMom Jun 2012 #105
Kablooie Jun 2012 #106
GreenStormCloud Jun 2012 #123
Doctor_J Jun 2012 #107
lonestarnot Jun 2012 #110
BootinUp Jun 2012 #113
Live and Learn Jun 2012 #116
polichick Jun 2012 #118
myrna minx Jun 2012 #120
GreenStormCloud Jun 2012 #124
Bucky Jun 2012 #126
mvd Jun 2012 #125
joanbarnes Jun 2012 #127
hifiguy Jun 2012 #128
FightForChange Jun 2012 #129
Doctor_J Jun 2012 #135
FightForChange Jun 2012 #136
IguanaVerde Jun 2012 #137
MADem Jun 2012 #138

Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 12:55 PM

1. can I second the motion?

please?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeamPooka (Reply #1)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:11 PM

31. It applies in nearly every instance - is this was one of the "liberal" judges

there would be a VERY LOUD CALL from the right and the MSM to have him impeached.

If any of the left leaning justices pulled ANY of the crape he and the dimwit Thomas pulled they would be totally slammed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmocat (Reply #31)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:25 PM

53. It's not hypocrisy if you're Republican right?

according to them

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeamPooka (Reply #53)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:26 PM

80. They can do whatever the heck they want

and the now fully KNOW it ...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeamPooka (Reply #53)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 09:06 PM

104. Even if they think it's not.... it is! They are lousy selfish hypocrites.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to TeamPooka (Reply #53)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 08:52 AM

117. You got it. Remember, IOKIYAR..

Actually, is that something that we can put in the DU dictionary, if it made the transition over to here? I think it should be there in some kind of official-ly like capacity, or something (if it's there already, nevermind and I'm lazy this morning.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cosmocat (Reply #31)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:38 PM

57. pulled ANY of the crape

Black crape... like for mourning

or crepe chiffon?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:04 PM

2. Scalia is more a Mafia don in a black robe

than an actual jurist. The man is human sewage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hifiguy (Reply #2)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:14 PM

12. The 2 are not mutually exclusive

As far sa I know, he is considered to be a great legal mind. Also, sewage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Reply #12)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:00 PM

26. I would trust a Mafia Don to do the right thing

before I trust Scalia to do the right thing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Drale (Reply #26)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:55 PM

93. There's certainly more honor

amongst the dons than there is within the Right wing of the SCOTUS!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Plucketeer (Reply #93)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 02:30 AM

115. Then again, if Scalia were a Mafia don.....

He'd be 10x worse than John Gotti, 'Whitey' Bulger, and Manuel Noriega combined!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Reply #12)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:13 PM

34. Indeed. Intelligence and ethics don't have to go together

Scalia is quite smart. And he's occasionally very funny. But he has no moral compass.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Reply #12)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:17 PM

36. When I was barely out of law school I worked with a senior partner

who knew Scalia fairly well from their days on the Harvard Law Review. He told me that Scalia is extremely bright - bright enough to twist the law in whatever direction he wants it to go while providing himself scholarly and precedential cover.

The discussion came about in the context of a case he was going to be arguing before the SCOTUS. I got the distinct impression even then - 1989 - that this man did not trust Scalia any farther than he could throw him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Reply #12)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:34 PM

55. It isn't just what Scalia writes or decides. He lacks what is called a "judicial temperament."

He has lots of temperament, but there is nothing judicial about it.

Justice is supposed to be blind. Scalia wears Republican-colored glasses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to JDPriestly (Reply #55)

Fri Jun 29, 2012, 08:57 PM

139. That's right on point, there! Well said. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hifiguy (Reply #2)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 09:06 AM

121. not a don, a soldier. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:04 PM

3. HACK

His worries about Arizona's right to protect their citizens & borders from invasion of undocumented workers...Montana's right to defend their state from the invasion of Corrupt SuperPacs, didn't get the same consideration.

I suppose to Antone Scalia, Undocumented workers bad....money corrupt Political Pacs...good.

Too Bad Montana. Too bad America...Fucking HACK.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:06 PM

4. How's-about-a-Dairy-Queen-Hemlock-Blizzard

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:07 PM

5. Seriously, how do you remove a sitting Supreme Court justice?

Impeachment?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade Grumpy (Reply #5)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:13 PM

11. here...

The Legislative Branch (Congress) has the power to impeach and convict a US Supreme Court justice if he or she commits wrongdoing, but no one has the power to "get rid" of a member of the Court simply because they don't like his (or her) decisions or ideology.

If Congress believes a judge or justice has done something to merit removal, the US House of Representatives files articles of impeachment (like a grand jury indictment), and the Senate conducts a trial to determine whether the justice is guilty. If convicted at trial, the justice will be removed from office.



I'm not holding my breath.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #11)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:25 PM

39. You shouldn't hold your breath but if we mounted an impeachment campaign

he would have to deal with it whether we succeeded or not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #39)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:00 PM

73. With the speaker and rule committee in GOP hands, there is no way to mount a campaign in the House.

It would have to be done on the front steps, then the Democrats would be accused of running away or not doing their jobs. A lot of people are dependent on their voting and working there. The real work is, as always, in the states that elected the representatives. We're in charge of that, as usual.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #73)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:03 PM

74. Not in the House, on the net.

They don't control that, yet, anyway.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #74)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:28 PM

81. There is some influence on the net, but the voter choose the representatives.

We would not be having this if the Tea Party had not mobilized their base from the net and media to elect these SOBs. If they get away in the states with their gerrymandering and voter ID = poll tax schemes their elected state officials put into place, there will be no Democrats to kick around anymore. They will have achieved their goal they've worked on for a generation, a permanent GOP majority. There is no law saying we must have more than one party in this nation, or that we even need one party, either.

I grew up in a one-party state, it was all Democratic. There were about as many Republicans in the state as there are Communist party members now, and they never won a seat. Reagan changed that and now it has again turned to a virtually one party state again, GOP.

A lot of people vote on that basis, per the individual, but representation depends on coalitions between groups that cannot get along in real life. If we do not morph our online activities into changing the minds of real life voters, well...

2010 will be repeated until it's not even noticed anymore. Got to go, splitting head ache all day. Have a good one, E.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to freshwest (Reply #81)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:30 PM

82. Take good care.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to EFerrari (Reply #39)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 07:02 PM

94. Can we throw Clarence in there too?

His Siamese twin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to tblue (Reply #94)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 12:04 AM

111. And Scalito, too!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #11)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:43 PM

58. The Legislative Branch (Congress) has the power to impeach

So... let's say a chief justice declares in his confirmation hearings he will not let personal ideology or feelings interfere with his rulings and then he makes a ruling that is clearly unconstitutional as well as not even in the scope of the issue before the court but very very beneficial to his fellow conservatives everywhere. Could we get him impeached too?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AlbertCat (Reply #58)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:12 PM

65. Sure, he could be impeached...if he was a Democrat.

I doubt the current House would even entertain the idea of bringing charges against a conservative justice.

Hell, even if we had control of the House, I'm not sure we could count on our "Democrats" to do it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #11)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:44 PM

59. Articles would never get past a Repub House of Representatives.

Yet another great reason we need to re-take the House (and hold the Senate) this November! And Scalia's impeachment should be a top priority in a new Dem House.

Bake

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #11)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:58 PM

61. if he's mentally imcompetent they'll do it

There ought to be some provision for removing a justice who is incapable of performing his duties. If you dig hard enough, you can usually find something.

The comments on Dionne's piece have a particularly shrill tone. They get louder and snarkier as they get more defensive.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #11)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:28 PM

67. It seems to me that the

the obvious partiality shown by Scala, hunting with Cheney while "deciding" a case brought against him and many other judicial improprieties by Scala, would be quite adequate to bring impeachment proceedings against him
As for Thomas, his 20+ years of illegal IRS filings and his open support of tea-party groups while deciding cases they were involved in have tarnished any illusion of justice that the SCOTUS ever had.
Scala is openly biased while Thomas has proven that an actively criminal person(?) is "fit" to serve on the highest court in America.
Nothing short of impeachment could restore the illusion of justice that the SCOTUS is (at least) required to maintain.

Even if all of the other branches of our government functioned adequately, "our" SCOTUS would still be the epitome of political corruption.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #11)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:57 PM

72. +1

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #11)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 12:14 AM

112. impeachment is a political act

If you have the votes, he can be as innocent as a saint,

and still removed from office...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #11)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 08:56 AM

119. Is that something that's EVER happened in our history? Impeaching Presidents is rare enough..

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Volaris (Reply #119)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 11:51 AM

130. Samual Chase in 1805. Impeached but acquitted by the Senate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #130)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 12:51 PM

132. thanks=), was too lazy this morning to go wiki that for myself..(sad, I know...)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Volaris (Reply #132)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 12:56 PM

133. That's what were here for!

Sometimes you just want to sit back and soak it in!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #11)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 09:12 AM

122. That's not 100% correct

Congress can impeach and remove from office for anything.

That's part of why the barrier is so high. So that it is too difficult to use "just because".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jeff47 (Reply #122)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 11:53 AM

131. Maybe if he got a blowjob from an intern.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Comrade Grumpy (Reply #5)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:46 PM

45. How about a note from his doctor?

Why is no one asking about this man's health issues?

He's lost his filters. What causes that?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:08 PM

6. Asked for comment, Justice Scalia, whom supporters often fondly call "Uncle Vaffunculo,"

scratched his chin and said Quack! Quack! Quack!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:08 PM

7. Here's what fat Tony thinks of judicial restraint:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:09 PM

8. Scalia Is A Fucking Disgrace nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:11 PM

9. I hope his little rant came from a childish petulance...

...because he wasn't able to convince the others to overthrow the health care law.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to randome (Reply #9)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:12 PM

32. That's a silver lining I could cling to

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:12 PM

10. We can discuss all we want but it won't make him step down.

He needs to be impeached and convicted to be removed otherwise he's there till he dies (fingers crossed that happens sooner than later).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to progressoid (Reply #10)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:54 PM

23. Yes, wishing death, a progressive quality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Puzzledtraveller (Reply #23)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:47 PM

70. heh...

Wishing death, not so much. But ironically the consequence of his death would likely remove a huge roadblock toward a more progressive country.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Puzzledtraveller (Reply #23)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 10:36 PM

108. Being unable to do a fucking thing about blatant criminal corruption

another progressive quality.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:15 PM

13. If only public shaming worked.

Sadly, this man has no shame. Being exposed (yet again) as a partisan hack won't cause him to resign, nor would a massive public outcry.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:17 PM

14. Scalia has gone the way of the coo coo

The man is entering senility, plain and simple. So, is America supposed to follow judgements rendered by a man wearing a foil hat who sits in his chamber blowing bubbles and calling out insults? There should be something in place to address this kind of madness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madashelltoo (Reply #14)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:30 PM

18. I do wonder if he and Chris Christie are related somehow. Cousins???..n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to madashelltoo (Reply #14)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:57 PM

24. I agree. Do we have to wait until he starts throwing feces in the court to do something about it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:20 PM

15. Hell yes. The man has no business being on the bench.

Conflicts of interest up the wazoo, and a decided lack of respect for the American system of governance.

I wish we could make this happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:25 PM

16. Here's my contribution to the general discussion.....



- Plus, it's fun for the whole family...

K&R

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:25 PM

17. It's too late, the time to remove him and his co-conspirators from the court was after they

interfered in the 2000 election. Once they got away with that most serious crime, they knew they were free to do whatever they wanted for their real bosses, and they have.

Scalia is FOR overturning Roe V Wade, but he is also for Orgies and thinks the American people should engage in more of them 'to relieve stress'. I guess he's speaking from experience.

Since he repeated his support for stress-relieving Orgies a few times, I often wondered what his advice would be to women who might become pregnant during those orgies.

Scalia is above the law. Our judicial system is a mockery of what the ideals we claim to uphold intended.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #17)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:30 PM

41. that election burns me up - what , constitutionally, allowed the scotus to inject themselves in

state politics. why was it allowed?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftyohiolib (Reply #41)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:29 PM

68. That's a good question. It was a total violation of the Constitution so why at least Democrats

let it pass, will always remain a mystery. That decision should have been fought until they were forced to get out of the way and allow the actual laws that govern elections, proceed. Then those who who tried to interfere with an election should have been impeached.

But we would have to be living in a country that respected the rule of law for that to happen. They are above the law and at a time when we so badly needed heroes, we had only appeasers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #68)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:15 PM

78. Hell, Scalia went duck hunting with Cheney just before a case involving,...Cheney

Laugh line of this article:

"I do not think my impartiality could reasonably be questioned."

http://www.cbsnews.com/2100-250_162-588582.html

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spitfire of ATJ (Reply #78)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:21 PM

79. I remember that. An outrage. But I'm wondering if this is all a test, to see how much

BS the people will overlook. That Scalia keeps getting more and more outrageous, testing the limits, seeing how much they can get away with. And so far, there seems to be no limit.

We just keep looking the other way no matter how outrageously they act.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #79)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:52 PM

91. We don't

The so called "Liberal Media" does.

To top it off, if you point out even the IDEA that he should even be QUESTIONED it causes them to look at you like you just said you saw a UFO.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sabrina 1 (Reply #68)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 07:29 PM

97. It's not a mystery to me.

The Corporate Megalomaniacs who've usurped our media, our politics, AND our global economy wanted Dubyah in the White House. They got what they wanted...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to chervilant (Reply #97)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 07:54 PM

99. You may be right. I don't think this could have happened 30 years ago, but over the past several

decades the far right has been busy and the political landscape was far more conducive to a coup like this in 2000.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to leftyohiolib (Reply #41)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:11 PM

88. Who had the power to stop them?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:37 PM

19. Here, here EJ......

In our judicial system, the court sits as an arbiter, not a fact finder or the source of personal opinion. They are to consider the case presented before them based on the arguments of the plaintiff(s) and defendant(s). They may rely on court precedent, legal theories, etc. in support of their decision. But the decision is to be limited to the facts presented, arguments actually presented before the court, and relevant legal analysis.

We know courts do issue dicta but Scalia's rant was not dicta. It was extraneous demagoguery from what is supposed to be an independent judiciary.

Scalia, resign or retire. You are not fit to sit as a Supreme Court Justice. You are better suited as a court jester.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Swede Atlanta (Reply #19)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:52 PM

22. Spot on, I wonder if that can be ground for impeachment

On the ground he is not doing the job - determining the law, without regard to his personal political opinions.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Swede Atlanta (Reply #19)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:33 PM

42. Supreme Court Jester...

Perfect name for him!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:46 PM

20. Justices Scalia and Kennedy would both turn 80 in a second Obama term

Scalia is 76 and Kennedy turns 76 next month. Here's to hoping they decide to retire soon and don't intend to die on the bench.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:47 PM

21. He needs to, but he will not. He is not on the side of the people

 


He sides with the ELITES, and he is not one of them either....He made his choice. He would not resign. PERIOD.
Why even think about it? A waste of time to do so...





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:57 PM

25. He needs to resign

and take his inept, pathetic pal Clarence "WhatTonySaid" with him.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:01 PM

27. I'm all for that.




Let him at least make room for a Justice who is unbiased.






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:04 PM

28. Obviously Scalia is biased, impulsive/lacks restraint and demonstrates very poor judgement...

He has tainted the high court with his lack of professionalism. Indeed Scalia is USING the Supreme Court as his personal platform to broadcast his not so sacred opinion!
Wisconsinites have seen this type of "shot gun" behavior from their own State Supreme Court when Prosser
strangled Justice Ann Walsh Bradley in Her own office after She asked him to leave. He also has called
Chief Justice Abrahamson a bitch.
So far, although there has supposedly been an investigation into Prosser's behavior, nothing has been done about it.

This is the legacy/history of judges appointed by Repukes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:08 PM

29. The U.S. is corrupt, he's corrupt, it's actually fitting

 

If we had a system that held criminals responsible, such as torture camp creators, then we might be able to address a corrupt court justice but we don't.

It's worthless to discuss Scalia's violations when other, ever worse violations are routinely ignored. The only way to address any of it is to change the system and to simply start putting these criminals on trial and expose all of their crimes to the public.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:08 PM

30. The man is totally corrupt and drunk with power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:13 PM

33. We've known where Scalia stands for many years.

He stands with money, with privilege, with those who consider themselves more important than the masses, indeed like he obviously does.

An friend's son was in college in Chicago several decades ago. He was renting his room. When he moved out, his landlord tried to keep the security deposit, which was only returned when the young student was about to instigate legal action against the landlord. The landlord's name? Antonin Scalia. Later on, some idiot thought he was Supreme Court material.

Supremely something, anyway. You fill it in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DFW (Reply #33)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:17 PM

35. re: He stands with money, with privilege,

 

'He stands with money, with privilege, with those who consider themselves more important than the masses, indeed like he obviously does. '


That is correct. Nor is he one of them either. He only stands with them.


FOR THIS MONEY AND TEMPORARY POWER......He does what he does.


Simple..


Why don't people see the danger? When you are LIVING it.

People need to understand what AMERICA is about. IT IS NOT about these people.








Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to clang1 (Reply #35)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:22 PM

37. People need to understand what AMERICA is about. IT IS NOT about these people.

 

IT IS ABOUT US. NOT THEM.







YOU ALREADY SEE HOW THEY ABUSE DEMOCRACY AND FREEDOM.....




WITH YOUR OWN EYES.






Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:24 PM

38. Perfect example of a man who lived long and learned nothing. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kiranon (Reply #38)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:26 PM

40. Yes

 

He has learned nothing about Humanity









Or his country. He is NO Patriot. AND He does not need to be one in this system. That is BROKEN.

He stands with the ELITES. They do not need to be Patriots either.

Fail to understand that at your own demise.


You are living it. RIGHT NOW.


At the end of the day, all this man is, is a judge. He is not one of the elites. He should be a Patriot. But he is not.














Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:34 PM

43. If the Democrats could sweep the election, we might be able to impeach. But

without Dennis, there might not be anybody with enough gumption to do it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sinkingfeeling (Reply #43)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:40 PM

44. So far as the overall state of the country

 

There is treason going on. It needs to be dealt with.

Then you can deal with Scalia..


This is Neo-America people....Wake up to it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to clang1 (Reply #44)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:34 PM

69. Voter purge can continue with different list

 


Voter purge can continue with different list
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=153381


Put the whole picture TOGETHER.


DO IT if you value Democracy. DO IT NOW is my advice....


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to clang1 (Reply #69)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:48 PM

86. Nice Job!

 

Here(Hopefully)is a link to the history of voter suppression starting with William Rehnquist in 1964(not the Jump Jim Crow era post abolition) from the GOP strategerie,code named operation Eagle Eye up to the present day.
I Hope this adds some flavor to the background analysis of the crooked fu(k3rs en their fascist takeover of the Constitution and BOR.



You know, comrades," says Stalin, "that I think in regard to this: I consider it completely unimportant who in the party will vote, or how; but what is extraordinarily important is this — who will count the votes, and how.
-Boris Bazhanov Memoirs of Stalin's Former Secretary

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to sinkingfeeling (Reply #43)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:53 PM

92. And with Dennis it wouldn't happen either

Sure, he might introduce articles of impeachment. But they'd be DOA. Even if we "sweep" the election, the Democrats, having lived through attempts to impeach Earl Warren and William O. Douglas, aren't going to launch one against Scalia. Not a chance.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:46 PM

46. I agree with chloe


chloe14 wrote:

11:39 AM PDT


Why don't all you so-called constituionalists take a time-out and read it? Remember when you all were decrying activist judges? Now you defend the worst of the worst. Not another single one of you has the right to voice your opinion until you can testify under oath that you've read the Constitution and understand its clear intent for objective judges. Until then, just shut up!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:47 PM

47. He and the rest of the "Supreme Court 5" should have been impeached afte the 2000 selection

Vincent Bugliosi started an online petition to do just that - and all of that just disappeared after the WTC attacks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RainDog (Reply #47)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:48 PM

48. They already took one election

 

See what they will do next.

It is that simple.

To think otherwise...Is ludicrous and is fodder for fools and dead men. I just say this: People should not forget their American histroy....

Do not let others tell you what isn't true about it either.... Never forget that. And this has been going on for 50-60 years now. Think about that.....you will not like the answers either.


So far as the elections, we need PATRIOTS first, then lawyers..... It is that simple.

Some of the founding fathers were lawyers, and judges...BUT They Were Patriots First.

Right now, people who are NOT Patriots are trying to decide our futures by stealing our elections.


It is ALL obvious.. I say think about that when you consider what some of our fellow citizens are doing.



















Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to clang1 (Reply #48)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:59 PM

62. More than one

Many more. With Rover on the loose, expect vote flipping in November. And it won't be talked about and no one will do anything about it - again.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:11 PM

49. Nice thought, but it won't happen

and, he won't be impeached, either.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NewJeffCT (Reply #49)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:12 PM

50. You, have already given up. Not on my side

 

Everything, is ALWAYS, an option. Anything can happen in life. Don't give up, they win then. See the future we NEED, then fight for it. It is simple.

Why do you think America exists in the first place??????? A dream, and ACTION.







Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:21 PM

51. Let's not forget that he's Opus Dei

There are many who joke about his wearing barbed wire under his robes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spitfire of ATJ (Reply #51)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:02 PM

63. Leave this sort of stuff OUT of it

 

it is not NEEDED. It is a distraction, whether or NOT it is true. SIMPLE

It is not relevant to YOU or I. If it even exists, it is relevant ONLY to the elites.





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to clang1 (Reply #63)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:09 PM

77. They're the ones that make this decision

They could care less about what the majority of America thinks.

As a matter of fact, they KNOW this is a VERY Liberal country. If it were as Right Wing as they claim then they wouldn't need to spend a DIME on the Right Wing Think Tanks and FOX "News". Think about it. These people are cheap as hell. They wouldn't want to spend the money if America already agreed with them.

America lost faith in the Supreme Court after Bush v Gore and it was Fat Tony (Mike Malloy's pet name for him) that has repeatedly and openly defied any efforts to regain even the illusion that the Supreme Court is an unbiased sentinel of justice.

I say, hit him with everything. None of this "Fight Fire with Water" crap Democrats always do and no more of this believing there is some kind of universal judge out there to appeal to. Too often, Democrats act like they can hold their heads up high for not getting into the fight and take pride in their having kept everything on an intellectually appealing and reasoned nature.

The Right Wing declared war on us a long time ago and it's high time we stopped taking casualties and launch an offensive instead of half-assed counterattacks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Spitfire of ATJ (Reply #77)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:49 PM

87. America IS a very liberal Country

 

THAT is a fact.... Americans are good people. We do not do this stuff, THEY do. America has NOT always been this way like it is now. Never let anyone make you think that it has been. They WANT you to think that... Because then, YOU think that there is really nothing to be changed about it. Think about that.... They DO NOT want you to know even what must be changed....Why do you think they TWIST American History like they DO? People NEED to THINK about that.

THIS IS A FACT THAT YOU ALL KNOW. YOU JUST DONT UNDERSTAND WHY THEY DO IT. NOW YOU DO I HOPE.



THE THING IS, WHETHER YOU EVEN AGREE WITH ME AS TO ALL THEIR REASONS FOR DOING IT, THIS IS WHAT IS HAPPENING. PEOPLE NEED TO ASK THEMSELVES WHY THEY SAY THOSE THINGS, THEY ARE NOT STUPID. I ALREADY KNOW WHY, SO I DON'T NEED TO THINK ABOUT IT MUCH.. IT IS THE WORLD AND HISTORY. WHY WOULD PEOPLE WANT TO REWRITE HISTORY? WHY DO PEOPLE USUALLY TRY TO DO THIS? ASK THAT...

WHEN I HEAR THOSE PEOPLE, OUR FELLOW CITIZENS, TALK ABOUT AMERICA AND HISTORY, WHAT THEY SAY IS A SORT OF THEOCRATIC, AUTHORITARIAN STATE. NOT THE AMERICA THE FOUNDING FATHERS ENVISIONED OR CREATED. THINK ABOUT THAT, BECAUSE I KNOW YOU ALL HEAR IT TOO. NOW WHY DO THEY SAY THOSE THINGS THAT THEY SAY?

WHAT IS GOING ON ALL AROUND YOU?



The progression continues....





Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to clang1 (Reply #87)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:45 PM

90. You must live in a Red State

Here in Southern California the Right Wing is composed of overpaid jerks that drive SUVs like they're sports cars and who avoid contact with the public.

I've always said that if you want to attract an Irvine girl,...stuff a sock in your wallet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to clang1 (Reply #87)

Fri Jun 29, 2012, 09:14 PM

141. You really need to QUIT WITH THE ALL CAPS--IT IS SHOUTING.

THE WORDS ALL RUN TOGETHER AND I WILL WAGER MOST PEOPLE STOP READING WHEN THEY SEE THEM.

It really is impolite.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to clang1 (Reply #63)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:35 PM

83. I THINK it IS relevant

It AFFECTS the WAY he makes DECISIONS. My TWO cents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to clang1 (Reply #63)

Fri Jun 29, 2012, 09:12 PM

140. If it even exists? Members are very proud of their affiliation. They don't hide it at all.

The founder has been canonized as a saint. It is a very politically involved religious organization. It has offices and schools all over the USA and the world.

http://www.opusdei.org/

Scalia, though, has never said he's a member of OD, though his son, Paul, is a priest in an order that has tight affiliations with the group.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:23 PM

52. He is getting bolder. He knows there is nothing we can do about it. nm

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:31 PM

54. Scalia is more a politician than a judge.

I remember hearing him speak and somehow he managed to get in an underhanded smear at Robert F. Kennedy. That is how desperate he was to make sure he made his speech political.

He is quite extreme.

Of course, judges have political opinions. But it is really inappropriate for a judge to be so extremely political -- especially on the level of personalities. A judge needs to be able to weigh the various aspects of an issue and separate himself from his own political opinion.

I question whether Scalia can do that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:37 PM

56. Scalia, Thomas and Alito all must go - they do not side with the people.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 03:49 PM

60. The answer is simple- vote DEMOCRATS in and the court will again be liberal

 

It's as simple as that

Those that are democrats, or vote with the democrats stop picking on every little thing that Obama did not do on your wedge issue list, and just STFU and vote for Obama in 2012, and then make sure and vote for the democrat in 2016 and 2020

that will insure a favorable democratic/liberal court with most likely being 7 to 2 or 6 to 3 at that point just from retirements

and vote for only those straight down the line who are either democrat, or will caucus with the democrats

and never believe the Ralph Nader's or others who say there is no difference between parties, because just on SCOTUS alone, there is, and that is enough.

Mitt Romney or Jeb Bush ain't gonna give any of us here any part of anything we want.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to graham4anything (Reply #60)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 10:39 PM

109. this is patently false

repukes will not allow Dem-appointed judges to be sworn in.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #109)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 04:07 PM

134. the nutjobs need to be voted out, then they can't stop a vote

 

when all of the nutjobs on the right are voted out, or the smallest minority, they will not be able to stop it, like all the times in the past.

All it takes is voting, having the votes count, and the far right do nothings will no longer exist.
Someone eventually will not listen to Grover or Rush or Sean, if they want to be reelected.

And remember too- when actually was the last time Rush Limbaugh won anything major?
His constant whining and unhappiness show it has been a long long time that he won anything good.
Mitt Romney as the candidate on his side, shows how little power he actually has. (Same with John McCain in 2008). They talk big, but have no actual power.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:11 PM

64. He ought to be impeached.

He is unfit for the USSC.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 04:23 PM

66. Funny thing is he was a crappy lawyer

he was at a really big firm yet he never made partner. He was there 6 years and was probaly asked to leave. 6-7 years is when you are on the partner track or you are asked to leave. he left. He really couldn't make it in his chosen profession.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Blue_Tires (Reply #71)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:07 PM

76. That article nails it.

So does this:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Blue_Tires (Reply #71)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 12:22 AM

114. Written by a Professor of Law too

Scalia has gone to far methinks. The other Justices are not going to let him forget this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:03 PM

75. He won't, tyrants don't have to resign

and there is no way Congress is going to impeach him (sorry don't know the proper word for it). Face facts...Scarface is going to be on the bench for a long time and commit all kinds of 'breach of trust' and 'conflict of interest' acts...because who is going to stop him? You? Me? Congress?

LOL

We allowed the tyrants to take hold and will pay the price until they leave the bench.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:46 PM

84. You and What Army, EJ?

Let me hold your coat.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 05:47 PM

85. More Bush Legacy

I hope the Bushies all live to see what havoc in some cases perhaps treason they have reaked on this country - a country with the potential to show the world that a representative government can work.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to marias23 (Reply #85)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 07:09 PM

95. There is NO LEGACY here....it is CONTINUAL...

 











Meanwhile, The progression continues.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to clang1 (Reply #95)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 07:22 PM

96. The ONLY Legacy here is this

 

CORRUPTION...

and the latest corruption being used to affect an election and it is MORE than just simple corruption. THE FUCKING CORRUPTION IS EVERYWHERE and people are LOST in it.

REASON THAT OUT....IT IS NEARLY IMPOSSIBLE. UNTIL YOU SEE THE FOREST FOR THE TREES. UNTIL THEN, YOU ARE GRABBING AT SLITHERING SNAKES.

AND I SEE SNAKES EVERYWHERE, AND SO DOES EVERYONE ELSE.



THE FUCKING CORRUPTION=TREASON
One American has died directly because of this corruption, how many Mexicans? How many are not DEAD YET?


POLITICAL CORRUPTION...






Meanwhile....The progresssion continues....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 06:19 PM

89. And Thomas ought to be right next to him as they are shoved off the bench. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 07:34 PM

98. Stephen Colbert says

Scalia looks like four racoons in a black plastic bag.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 08:40 PM

100. K&R and Shared.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 08:44 PM

101. +1000

He should have been shown the door after duck hunting with Cheney while Cheney was involved in some case before the court.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 08:46 PM

102. this has nothing to do with his age -- many of his decisions have been political for years

He has behaved inappropriately for a long time.

And I have never understood why some people think he's so smart, even if they disagree with him. When one's legal opinions are so twisted and flawed, in order to reach a conclusion he wants, that is no indication of intelligence--in fact, it's an indication of the opposite. And of character weaknesses.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 08:48 PM

103. Unfortunately, there are lots of things that should happen that won't. n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 10:25 PM

105. OCCUPY FAT TONY

Seriously, I don't know that the United States would get far by the impeachment process, or by starting a shit storm of words. What I think is that a general protest movement such as Occupy should mic check every thing this activist supreme has said to hurt the court.

Of course, I'm more angry at the Democratic members of the Senate who allowed this court to become what it is, thus giving this fat turd unmitigated gall do say what he says, hunts with whom he hunts, and generally votes with whom he votes, all the while, dirtying the SCOTUS by his presence!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 10:29 PM

106. That's silly. No one can insist he resign. He's invulnerable...

unless he blatantly commits a clear cut crime.
Otherwise he can do whatever he fucking wants.

He IS the law you know.
If he wants to write all his papers swearing at people he doesn't like that's his privilege.
It's not against the law.

There are no real rules for SCOTUS.
There are assumptions based of past performance of judges but he is not limited by them.

Face it.
You've got several partisan assholes in the Supreme Court and they are there for life.
No ifs ands or buts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Kablooie (Reply #106)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 11:00 AM

123. Congratulations on having a clear view of reality.

Sometimes reality sucks but it is better to face it than to do a bunch of wishful daydreaming.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 10:34 PM

107. but he won't

and Pelosi declined to impeach him during the 4 years she was speaker.

Columns like these are good to read, but aggravating, since nothing will ever be done, and Fat Tony will continue his corrupt reign, and real Americans can't do anything about it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Wed Jun 27, 2012, 10:46 PM

110. Were you around when the discussions re conflict of interest were had here?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 12:17 AM

113. Couldn't have said it better. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 05:49 AM

116. Can he actually like himself?

He is so contemptuous and hateful, it is hard to imagine that he enjoys anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 08:54 AM

118. He'd have to resign - Dems will never move to impeach.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 09:00 AM

120. K&R n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 11:04 AM

124. He will not be impeached.

All the calls for impeachment that are in the thread are nothing more than wishes to the tooth fairy.

The Republicans control the House. They will not allow a bill of impeachment to even get to the floor.

Even if we do gain control of the House and impeach him it must be for actual felonies, not because we don't like his ideology. The Senate must convict by a 2/3 majority and Democrats won't have 67 seats in the Senate.

So a successful impeachment just isn't going to happen.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GreenStormCloud (Reply #124)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 11:08 AM

126. I loathe the voice of reason when I'm getting my hate on

This reality you speak of is not welcome here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 11:06 AM

125. Given that he is acting like a politician instead of

a judge, I'm all for that! Even impeachment.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 11:27 AM

127. And, I overstate the obvious (it's been said before): CLARENCE THOMAS MUST RESIGN!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to joanbarnes (Reply #127)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 11:35 AM

128. Uncle Thomas and his wife belong behind bars

for running a judicial influence peddling scheme. That is all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 11:37 AM

129. It's best to just show he's a blatant partisan to more people

Because he's not going to get impeached. But hopefully if we have more people realize he's a right-wing nut we can make sure nobody treats his opinions as anything more than Republican propaganda. These days I wonder if he even thinks for himself or if he just spits back what he's told to say.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to FightForChange (Reply #129)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 04:17 PM

135. Ah, yes, the old "it's good that he's so radical" canard

"It's good that Fat Tony's so corrupt - people will ignore his opinions"

"It's good that Walker is so radical - people will vote to recall him"

"The nuttier Glen Beck gets, the more people will tune him out"

we never seem to learn that these propositions are ridiculous

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Doctor_J (Reply #135)

Thu Jun 28, 2012, 07:40 PM

136. I guess you're right

Maybe it was just wishful thinking to think all these idiots who already support his ideas will suddenly change. Oh well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Inuca (Original post)


Response to IguanaVerde (Reply #137)

Fri Jun 29, 2012, 08:54 PM

138. No-not "by any means necessary." We don't advocate violence on this board.

We need to get a few more appointees in Obama's last term who prioritize social justice. Then Scalia and Thomas can go see the USA in Thomas's refurbished passenger bus if they'd like, because their votes that favor the wealthy and ignore the Constitution will be irrelevant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread