Wed Jun 27, 2012, 01:46 PM
meegbear (24,632 posts)
The Rude Pundit: Dickish Statements You Might Not Have Heard ...
from Justice Scalia's Dissent on the Arizona Immigration Law Decision
Here's how Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia must compose one of his epically dickish dissents: He gathers his clerks, all male, in his chambers. He has them strip nude and personally greases each one down with oil from his family's ancient olive orchards in Sicily. Then he has them wrestle in one naked, slick, writhing pile while he lifts his robe and jacks off, cock head pointed towards the heaving mass of man flesh. When he comes, who ever first gets spooged on is chosen and that lucky clerk gets to sit alone, unclothed, shivering, lubed, while Scalia, hand still slippery with oil and semen, jacks him off while angrily dictating his latest haymaker to the pussies on the court who like things like "rights." If the clerk is lucky, he won't ejaculate because, hard or soft, Scalia's gonna keep on yankin' him, punching his balls if necessary, until the opinion is done.
In Arizona v. United States, Scalia's dissent from the majority on the three sections of the immigration law it overturned is a masterpiece of vituperation, a Picasso of aggression, a Beethoven of bitterness, and a Goya of grotesquely contorted logic. You might have heard about charming sections like his use of pro-slavery laws as a way of justifying a state's control of its own borders, but there's so much in his dissent that is dickish in that ripe Scalia way that, really, you should read the whole thing in order to get the full thrust of it down your throat. Barring that, here's a few more examples:
- "Four years ago, for example, the Government importuned us to interfere with thoroughly constitutional state judicial procedures in the criminal trial of foreign nationals because the international community, and even an opinion of the International Court of Justice, disapproved them. See Medellin v. Texas, 552 U. S. 491 (2008). We rejected that request, as we should reject the Executive’s invocation of foreign-affairs considerations here. Though it may upset foreign powers—and even when the Federal Government desperately wants to avoid upsetting foreign powers—the States have the right to protect their borders against foreign nationals, just as they have the right to execute foreign nationals for murder." Yes, the Medellin decision, which gave Texas the right to violate international agreements on prisoners, that model of restraint, in a death penalty case. One of the great things about Scalia is that he is fuckin' gleeful to execute the fuck out of people, no matter what, innocence, rights-denial, whatever. Kill 'em all. Christ, you can practically hear Scalia cackling at the sound of the death chamber door closing.
- "Arizona is entitled to arrest them and at least bring them to federal officials’ attention, which is all that (part of the Arizona law) necessarily entails. (In my view, the State can go further than this, and punish them for their unlawful entry and presence in Arizona.)" One might imagine that, in Scalia's deranged old mind, shooting's too good for 'em.
- "What I do fear—and what Arizona and the States that support it fear—is that 'federal policies' of nonenforcement will leave the States helpless before those evil effects of illegal immigration that the Court’s opinion dutifully recites in its prologue...but leaves unremedied in its disposition." Seriously, you can imagine Scalia like Mermaid Man on Spongebob, yelling, "Eeeevil" at everyone outside Home Depot.
- "The Court opinion’s looming specter of inutterable horror—'(i)f (the immigration law) of the Arizona statute were valid, every State could give itself independent authority to prosecute federal registration violations,'-seems to me not so horrible and even less looming. But there has come to pass, and is with us today, the specter that Arizona and the States that support it predicted: A Federal Government that does not want to enforce the immigration laws as written, and leaves the States’ borders unprotected against immigrants whom those laws would exclude." Yes, the federal government that has deported more illegal immigrants than any other in history isn't enforcing shit. Man, the Koch Brothers really get their money's worth with Scalia.
- "(Arizona's) citizens feel themselves under siege by large numbers of illegal immigrants who invade their property, strain their social services, and even place their lives in jeopardy." - Somehow, California and Texas, with higher rates of illegal immigrants, don't feel the need to go bugfuck insane, but, hey, Arizona's just tougher. Or just panicky little bitches.
- "Thousands of Arizona’s estimated 400,000 illegal immigrants—including not just children but men and women under 30—are now assured immunity from enforcement, and will be able to compete openly with Arizona citizens for employment." - See the Koch Brothers reference above. Add Roger Ailes.
Man, can't wait until tomorrow's health care law decision.
2 replies, 513 views
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Response to meegbear (Original post)
Wed Jun 27, 2012, 02:31 PM
Ship of Fools (1,453 posts)
2. I think he spews the bile of two men.
Clarence is STILL po'd about the Hill hearings, but because
he's taken some kind of vow of silence or something, Tony
releases the Kraken in both of their names. Heh.
I love the Rude Pundit.