Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Two reporters ordered to erase tapes while covering Scalia speech

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU
 
Purveyor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 07:41 PM
Original message
Two reporters ordered to erase tapes while covering Scalia speech
(04-07) 17:16 PDT HATTIESBURG, Miss. (AP) --

Two reporters were ordered Wednesday to erase their tape recordings of a speech by U.S. Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia at a Mississippi high school.

<snip>

During the speech, a woman identifying herself as a deputy federal marshal demanded that a reporter for The Associated Press erase a tape recording of the justice's comments. She said the justice had asked that his appearance not be recorded.

The reporter initially resisted, but later showed the deputy how to erase the digital recording after the officer took the device from her hands. The exchange occurred in the front row of the auditorium while Scalia delivered his speech about the Constitution.

<snip>

Link to entire AP article
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bobbieinok Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 07:42 PM
Response to Original message
1. don't want to let Scalia's views get any publicity
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fearnobush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 07:46 PM
Response to Reply #1
6. Not surprising coming from the Judge, juror, and executioner of
what we once used to call an election.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
saigon68 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 08:42 PM
Response to Reply #1
26. Except to say he is one scary out of control human being
He could be compared to a Tasmanian Devil thoough, if a sheep gets near one of these creatures only the plastic ear tag is left. They will even eat the hoofs of cattle.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KissMyAsscroft Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 07:43 PM
Response to Original message
2. I say fuck them.


I wouldn't have erased a damn thing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
w13rd0 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 07:46 PM
Response to Reply #2
5. digital recorder with
SD backup, wireless upload...

watch the watchers
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shanti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 09:20 PM
Response to Reply #5
32. ahhhhh
the joys of modern technology! :evilgrin:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benfranklin1776 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 09:22 PM
Response to Reply #2
33. Neither would I.
Every time people cave to such brazen trampling of their rights emboldens them to go further.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
tom_paine Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-08-04 02:21 PM
Response to Reply #33
50. I'm with you, Ben! Part of me (a small but aggressive part) wants to
be confronted by these Bushevik Scum!

One can never be certain whether or not how one will behave in "Crunch Time" sitautions, but I hope it would be as imagined.

I've always wanted to tell some Totalitarian to "Fuck off!", like a Nazi bastard or a Soviet Commie Punk. While Bushevik Swine are not (YET) as bad as either of those two, they would have to do.

God only knows what that Monster Fat Tony Scalia said to those youths as he was preparing for them to be the FIRST generation of Amerikan Imperial Slaves!

He was probably wise, the Totalitarian Piece of Shit, to make sure no one ever heard what he told those Bushevik Slaves of the Future.

And you are correct in that is is LONG past due to tell these Bushevik Orwellian Totalitarian Tyrants a LOUD "NO! FUCK, NO!!!!"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
struggle4progress Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 07:44 PM
Response to Original message
3. Gutless reporter ?

Following what precedent does a reporter comply with a request like this?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
MSgt213 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 08:01 PM
Response to Reply #3
15. They are following the lead of Fox and CNN the Passion of the gutless
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Media_Lies_Daily Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 08:27 PM
Response to Reply #3
20. Who wants to end up dead in an "accident"? Don't forget who we're...
...dealing with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fla nocount Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 09:34 PM
Response to Reply #3
39. They're not reporters anymore.........
they're bible-thumpin, homophobic, neo-conservative journalism majors now, trying to work off their college loans. Get with the program...please. Don't you know who Leo Strauss is for krist sake.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Backlash Cometh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 07:45 PM
Response to Original message
4. the tape was censored "while Scalia delivered his speech about the
Constitution"

I swear, I'm not making this up!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
benfranklin1776 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 09:10 PM
Response to Reply #4
31. It is indeed a dark travesty.
Edited on Wed Apr-07-04 09:32 PM by benfranklin1776
This is just too rich to behold.
From the article:

"Scalia, who was appointed to the bench by
President Reagan in 1986, told students that the
Constitution's true meaning must always be
protected."

Indeed Antonin it must be protected, from small minded, bootlicking, petty mandarins like you who trash it with every stroke of your judicial pen and who mockingly trample the sacred freedoms that document protects with naked displays of unbridled ego-driven tryanny such as this. Did you ever bother to read the First Amendment Tony, as your behavior here strongly indicates need for remedial instruction in freedom of the press? Note Tony it is Freedom OF the PRESS not freedom to suppress.

"The Constitution of the United States is
extraordinary and amazing. People just don't
revere it like they used to," Scalia told a full
auditorium of high school students, officials,
religious leaders.

He said he spends most of his time thinking about
the Constitution, calling it "a brilliant piece of
work."

No Tony, We the People revere the Constitution's brilliance and recognize its vital role in protecting us from authoritarianism. It is people like you, who spend their time and careers busily thinking of new and better ways to thwart the provisions in it that protect the people, that are the ones undermining its legacy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DrWeird Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 07:47 PM
Response to Original message
7. It can be recovered, can't it?
It's not like something goes away when you hit delete. I wonder what Scalia said.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BattyDem Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #7
25. I bet the reporter has already contacted ...
a data recovery firm. :evilgrin:

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalFighter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-08-04 04:42 PM
Response to Reply #25
55. I hope so... would love to smack that scum
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
reprehensor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 07:47 PM
Response to Original message
8. Quack, quack. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
fearnobush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 07:50 PM
Response to Original message
9. Scalia = the age of our new Demockery.
"Last year, Scalia was criticized for refusing to allow television and radio coverage of an event in Ohio in which he received an award for supporting free speech."
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Art_from_Ark Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 07:55 PM
Response to Reply #9
12. So who gave him the award for "free speech"?
The Censors Association of America?
:crazy:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Purrfessor Donating Member (463 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 07:53 PM
Response to Original message
10. A suggestion for Scalia:
Why stop at barring cameras and audio recorders? Why not simply ban the audience and give his speeches to empty auditoriums?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BR_Parkway Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-08-04 02:03 AM
Response to Reply #10
44. Or stop making speeches n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Laughing Mirror Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 07:54 PM
Response to Original message
11. Scalia can "ask" all he want, but that does not make it law
People have got to start resisting these mobsters in charge, resisting and fighting back. It is the only solution at this point.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
maggrwaggr Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 08:31 PM
Response to Reply #11
21. If scalia didn't like it, he didn't have to talk
he could have shut the hell up if he didn't want his precious voice to be recorded.

Fuck this guy!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Muddleoftheroad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 08:50 PM
Response to Reply #11
29. If it is the rule of the event
And a reporter violates it, then the reporter can be barred from all future events, coverage, etc. It is much the same as violating an embargo and the reporter's actions could have devasting repurcussions for his/her news outlet.

That said, I wouldn't have surrendered the data and would have immediately called my editor to contact the lawyers.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PartyPooper Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 07:57 PM
Response to Original message
13. Nixon redux!
:evilfrown:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
JohnOneillsMemory Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 07:59 PM
Response to Original message
14. The anti-democracy judge. See my sig. quote. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
markses Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 08:03 PM
Response to Original message
16. Doesn't like precedent, doesn't like recordings
Doesn't like the light of day, like most cockroaches.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leesa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 08:04 PM
Response to Original message
17. Interesting. What does the fascist not want us to hear about his
interpretation of the constitution? He might have to take those reporters out "duck hunting" with them as the quarry.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
harrison Donating Member (916 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 08:07 PM
Response to Original message
18. This is absolutely outrageous. Just another example of these
evil hypocrites. Good God Amighty.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Rex Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 08:22 PM
Response to Original message
19. Scalia = traitor
Just like his buddy Bush.

Rot in Hell you turncoat!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
RainDog Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 08:37 PM
Response to Original message
22. Here's a Scalia speech
please take the time to read the whole thing, and then worry about Bush's ability to appoint more and more theocrats to the Supreme Court if he wins a second term.


http://www.firstthings.com/ftissues/ft0205/articles/sca...

Gods Justice and Ours
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Antonin Scalia

------------------------------------------------------------------------

Copyright (c) 2002 First Things 123 (May 2002): 17-21.

Before proceeding to discuss the morality of capital punishment, I want to make clear that my views on the subject have nothing to do with how I vote in capital cases that come before the Supreme Court. That statement would not be true if I subscribed to the conventional fallacy that the Constitution is a living documentthat is, a text that means from age to age whatever the society (or perhaps the Court) thinks it ought to mean. (cut for copyright)... As a Roman Catholicand being unable to jump out of my skinI cannot discuss that issue without reference to Christian tradition and the Churchs Magisterium.

(here he quotes Paul about killing people...deleted to comply with copyright restrictions)

These passages from Romans represent the consensus of Western thought until very recent times. Not just of Christian or religious thought, but of secular thought regarding the powers of the state. That consensus has been upset, I think, by the emergence of democracy. It is easy to see the hand of the Almighty behind rulers whose forebears, in the dim mists of history, were supposedly anointed by God, or who at least obtained their thrones in awful and unpredictable battles whose outcome was determined by the Lord of Hosts, that is, the Lord of Armies. It is much more difficult to see the hand of Godor any higher moral authoritybehind the fools and rogues (as the losers would have it) whom we ourselves elect to do our own will. How can their power to avengeto vindicate the public orderbe any greater than our own?

So it is no accident, I think, that the modern view that the death penalty is immoral is centered in the West. That has little to do with the fact that the West has a Christian tradition, and everything to do with the fact that the West is the home of democracy. Indeed, it seems to me that the more Christian a country is the less likely it is to regard the death penalty as immoral. Abolition has taken its firmest hold in postChristian Europe, and has least support in the churchgoing United States. I attribute that to the fact that, for the believing Christian, death is no big deal. Intentionally killing an innocent person is a big deal: it is a grave sin, which causes one to lose his soul. But losing this life, in exchange for the next? The Christian attitude is reflected in the words Robert Bolts play has Thomas More saying to the headsman: Friend, be not afraid of your office. You send me to God. And when Cranmer asks whether he is sure of that, More replies, He will not refuse one who is so blithe to go to Him. For the nonbeliever, on the other hand, to deprive a man of his life is to end his existence. What a horrible act!

Besides being less likely to regard death as an utterly cataclysmic punishment, the Christian is also more likely to regard punishment in general as deserved. The doctrine of free willthe ability of man to resist temptations to evil, which God will not permit beyond mans capacity to resistis central to the Christian doctrine of salvation and damnation, heaven and hell. The postFreudian secularist, on the other hand, is more inclined to think that people are what their history and circumstances have made them, and there is little sense in assigning blame.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
kera Donating Member (294 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 03:24 AM
Response to Reply #22
58. his speech makes execution or death penalty
sound like a rapture , I would assume he must be eager to go meet with HIM now himself

his reasoning is typical to intellectually dishonest people it is amazing how so universally, by trying to force the dosage of persuasion on students, he just forgot he was talking about death

he reminds me of a religious Fundy once while survivors from a destructive earth-quack still in chock , was bashing from the comfort of TV studio , survivors for deserting their houses and spending the night in the street, telling them that they should be happy to meet their death in the rubbles because this would hasten their appointment with God . and by trying to scape this wonderful prospect, they were showing their disregard for god

I still vividly remember this speech which had been though recorded in studio although not by reporters because at the time they were under the rubbles
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Zhade Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 03:40 AM
Response to Reply #58
59. Lord willing, Scalia may meet "Him" soon.
Through completely natural causes, of course.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
justjones Donating Member (596 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 08:38 PM
Response to Original message
23. Talking to a high school yet won't let the public know what he said. WTF?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
rfkrocks Donating Member (846 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 08:40 PM
Response to Original message
24. I'm missing something here-
You are a supreme court justice-you salary is paid for by the citizens you are supposed to serve-you give a public speech-your words are recorded and you get a federal law enforcement person to take a reporter's tape recorder so as to destroy a recording of what you said-you could have turned down the event if you don't want to speak-it is not a requirement of your job-what the hell is going on here? This cannot be legal! Also Scalia speaking to high school kids must be a treat-kinda of like Judge Smeals in Caddyshack-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blasphemer Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 08:46 PM
Response to Original message
27. Despicable...
And this man wants to be Chief Justice of the SCOTUS? I can only imagine what was in that speech. Under the cover of darkness, he wants to undermine the law of the land and corrupt our youth.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
orthogonal Donating Member (424 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 08:48 PM
Response to Original message
28. Jawohl!
Since when is it the job of a deputy federal marshal to enforce the personal wishes of a federal official?

What the reporter was doing wasn't illegal.

What would the marshal's response have been if the reporter had refused? Arrest? Guantanamo?

Although, in sympathy, I understand the motivation behind this: it's so much easier to stuff things down the memory hole if no recordings exist.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
shanti Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 09:26 PM
Response to Reply #28
34. ok
is somebody going to go out on a limb and do this again, but this time, not relinquish the recorder? i want to see to what lengths these clowns will go. the veil is being ripped away.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
truthspeaker Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-08-04 01:26 PM
Response to Reply #34
48. better yet, use a hidden recorder
I think reporters need to start acting more like spies. The technology to do so is cheaper than ever.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
amber dog democrat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 09:01 PM
Response to Original message
30. What is he afraid of?
Being held accountable for what he says?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Enraged_Ape Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 02:09 AM
Response to Reply #30
57. That his voice doesn't show up on tape
Sort of the way that Dracula doesn't photograph.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wabeewoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 09:26 PM
Response to Original message
35. Interesting line....
told students that the
Constitution's true meaning must always be
protected." And I'm sure he is the only one who knows the true meaning.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
PragMantisT Donating Member (893 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 09:28 PM
Response to Original message
36. If he doesn't want to be recorded in a public place,
do it surreptitiously.

Some kid in high school, knowing that recording is prohibited, was bound to flaunt authority and record it.

I know I never recorded a Van Halen concert I attended.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
teryang Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 11:32 PM
Response to Reply #36
43. Van Halen is copyright protected
Edited on Wed Apr-07-04 11:33 PM by teryang
I don't think a public official speaking at a public function is.

I've noticed public schools becoming dictatorial about this. If my daughter performs at a public school, I am not permitted to record it. I must pay $27.95 for a copy of the official video. They use the school police officer to enforce this no pictures rule. I can understand why they don't want flashes during a performance but what is wrong with snapshots with no flash?

I don't think the government gets the copyright to the children's public performance on public property. But they do and they use the police to enforce it. I think the choreographer who is paid both by the parents and the state has no copyright as a hired agent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Judi Lynn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 09:30 PM
Response to Original message
37. He surely sounds a little strange.....
"The Constitution of the United States is extraordinary and amazing. People just don't revere it like they used to," Scalia told a full auditorium of high school students, officials, religious leaders.

He said he spends most of his time thinking about the Constitution, calling it "a brilliant piece of work."


I wonder if he spent most of his time shooting with Dick Cheney thinking about the Constitution.

From the speeches he made before he became so publicity shy:


Maybe he's worried that he says things which become contradicted by the way he lives, and he doesn't want it on tape. Maybe he's worried that he sounds melodramatic and stupid. Maybe he's worried he's unphotogenic.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
yardwork Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-08-04 03:48 PM
Response to Reply #37
52. Well, he is unphotogenic, and it looks like he's gained a lot of weight...
I would think a Supreme Court Justice would have more self-confidence.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eric J in MN Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 09:33 PM
Response to Original message
38. For people wondering about Scalia's motivation, I've heard that he
For people wondering about Scalia's motivation, I've heard that he gives the same speech over-and-over, and figures that as long as it isn't recorded, no one will mind.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Blue_Tires Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 09:38 PM
Response to Original message
40. Clarence Thomas did the same thing!!
back in 99 or 2000 he came to speak at the law school at the University of Kansas...I was working at the school paper at the time, and Thomas' people said under no circumstances was he going to answer any questions to the media...and we were all like, WTF?!?!

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Democat Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 11:01 PM
Response to Original message
41. Right wing media assholes allow right wing judge to run over them
Edited on Wed Apr-07-04 11:01 PM by Democat
What a bunch of right wing ass kissing reporters.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
GoddessOfGuinness Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Apr-07-04 11:09 PM
Response to Original message
42. "People just don't revere it (The Constitution) like they used to,"
No kiddin'?

Especially the bit about freedom of the press...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
wicket Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-08-04 12:13 PM
Response to Original message
45. kick!
:kick: :kick: :kick:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hiphopnation Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-08-04 01:05 PM
Response to Original message
46. Brownshirts on parade. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
gottaB Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-08-04 01:18 PM
Response to Original message
47. As it happens, the Constitution provides a mechanism
for kicking his butt to the curb.

Impeach Scalia

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
BlueEyedSon Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-08-04 02:12 PM
Response to Original message
49. WTF?!?!? *kick*
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
KamaAina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-08-04 03:38 PM
Response to Original message
51. I'd nominate him for Top Ten Conservative Idiots, except...
the vile slimeball belongs in the Top Ten Fascist Idiots!!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
indypaul Donating Member (896 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-08-04 03:51 PM
Response to Original message
53. Once Again Sieg Hiel n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
young_at_heart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Apr-08-04 03:53 PM
Response to Original message
54. Isn't he a "public servant"?
Why all the secrecy?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bozita Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 12:58 AM
Response to Original message
56. Olbermann BLISTERS Scalia on feature on MSNBC's Countdown
Edited on Fri Apr-09-04 01:07 AM by Bozita
Keith really ripped him.

Jonathan Turley agreed.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DavidFL Donating Member (236 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 04:03 AM
Response to Original message
60. I heard Scalia speak in person when I was in grad school
Edited on Fri Apr-09-04 04:04 AM by DavidFL
Come to think of it, I don't remember seeing cameras or tape recorders being in the auditorium. But I'm sure his speech to us and to this high school is nothing like the ones he gives to the Federalist Society. He pretty much spent a lot of time discussing the history of the Constitution and the Federalist Papers and complained that the latter work is not required reading in schools anymore and encouraged everyone to read them. He then took questions at the end and the only "controversial" one he was asked was his opinion on affirmative action.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mobuto Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 10:41 AM
Response to Reply #60
61. He's a brilliant man
an evil, brilliant man, but brilliant nonetheless.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ImperialPolkDemocrat Donating Member (2 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Apr-09-04 06:19 PM
Response to Original message
62. A Slap In The Face To The First Amendment He Claims To Respect
Scalia is such a hypocrite, it isn't even funny.

Being from Hattiesburg, I can guess that Scalia probably felt that the media would be simply a small group of small market lackeys fresh out of college that would pack out and move out on orders. Little did he realize that there would be an AP reporter present, and that the Hattiesburg American is owned by Gannett, which also owns the Jackson Clarion-Ledger, the state's largest newspaper. Stories from the Pine Belt area written for the American of regional or statewide interest often also appear in the C-L. The local television station, NBC affiliate WDAM, was booted by Scalia, but they are filled with kids just out of the University of Southern Mississippi's broadcasting and journalism programs and likely didn't raise a stink being young and naive. Besides, the station GM is a conserative Christian Republican...the story isn't even on their Web site.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ImperialPolkDemocrat Donating Member (2 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Apr-10-04 08:00 AM
Response to Original message
63. Top US Marhall In MS Defends Deputy's Action
But he says the incident could have been handled a little better.

Hey, just because he's a Justice of the SCOTUS does'nt make him any different from any other public official. When he accepts an invitation to speak at a public event, he should expect to be recorded and photographed by the media. If he doesn't want the attention, become a recluse and retire.

From this morning's Hattiesburg American:
<http://www.hattiesburgamerican.com/news/stories/2004041... >
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Sep 23rd 2014, 10:06 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Latest Breaking News Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC