Rising Hegemon
Joan Walsh is absolutely correct.
The slipshod result-driven "originalism" of Scalia in saying --- despite it's express language --- that the 14th Amendment provides no protection to women or gays means that should Congress or a State legislature pass a low allowing women to be beaten, the 14th Amendment would not protect them.
Want to prevent gays from being allowed to drive -- or hanging out in a public location? It's perfectly legal for the legislature to do so.
Want to pass a low outlawing women in the workplace?
No problem.
The man is not a brilliant jurist, he's a wretched scholar and a worse ideologue.
Of course, in Bush v. Gore he had no problem using the 14th Amendment to give George Bush the Presidency.
21 comments:
Bigot. What more can you say?
Scalia is a sophist, not a jurist.
Always has been, always will be.
The photo makes him look a little like the late actor/director Dom DeLuise, a genuine mensch who would have made a much better Associate Justice of the Supreme Court than "Whiplash" Scalia.
"...Scalia was part of the most shameful and flagrantly political use – it was abuse, really -- of the 14th Amendment in Supreme Court history, when he joined the majority in the Bush vs. Gore decision...."
George Bush is a black man? Who knew! The things you learn on these internets.
A.J.
As an originalist, he thinks deep-dish pizza isn't actually pizza, it is more like "tomato pie." You see the clever parallel they draw between his approach to pizza and his approach to law?
Except, of course, if we all had to dress up like Neopolitan peasants and survive on flatbread, and it was illegal to put cheese or tomato sauce on it because they didn't do that in the 16th century, well, that would be bloody stupid, wouldn't it?
Add to that Scalia's concept of the original intent of the founding pizzamakers is totally wrong -- not just a mistaken method of interpretation, but a bad application of the method. Seems like a decent parallel, after all.
What's most preposterous is that Scalia was part of the most shameful and flagrantly political use – it was abuse, really -- of the 14th Amendment in Supreme Court history, when he joined the majority in the Bush vs. Gore decision and stopped the Florida recount, brazenly using "equal protection" as one of the cornerstones. The pro-Bush SCOTUS majority argued that the white, wealthy George W. Bush would have his rights violated if if Florida counties used different procedures to recount votes and, in cases of some ballots, divine voter intent. Now, if Scalia really thought the 14th amendment only intended to make former slaves full citizens, he should have applied it to make sure black voters and black votes were treated fairly in Florida (and in fact, we know they were not.) What a joke.
full excerpt of that exchange AJ... not nearly as snark worthy, is it?
asshole. he has always been a lesser human. eon ago when pansypoo was a student and a PBS kid, she watched a series of round table discussions(Ethics in America) and scalia was on one or two and his logic way back then was the same asshole logic.
ppoo
Of course, in Bush v. Gore he had no problem using the 14th Amendment to give George Bush the Presidency.
* (cough) *
There was also the rather important detail that Bush had more votes in Florida than Gore had. A somewhat bothersome detail that's often purposely ignored by leftist ideologues.
Al Gore understood the simple fact that Bush had more votes. He moved on with his life and became the Goreacle of Global Warming.....ummm I mean... the Goreacle of Climate Change.
"* (cough) *"
Careful there OnAn, you might suddenly overinflate your colon.
Oh what a dreadfull mess it would be
If all the shit that Scalia shat were to Pass Through the Colon of O&A
And shower us with,instead of birds,
the putrid piles of scaly O &A
vox
Re: Bush got more votes.
O&A, drunk, stupid and denying reality is no way to go through life, little man.
Your idol stole the election with Scalia's help. Remember that little item with the deeply buried lede shortly after 9/11, that the independent analysis funded by a bunch of major newspapers determined that Gore would have won had the count been allowed to continue?
No, of course, you don't, because that would conflict with your hallucinations. Your buddy stole the election, and Scalia and Co. and your idol's own brother helped him do it, and their weapons in that robbery were the 14th Amendment and some jiggered-up voter registration lists that dumped nearly 100,000 qualified--and mostly Democratic--voters off the rolls just weeks before the election (done by claiming people were felons if their names vaguely resembled those of felons, even if they weren't spelled the same way).
Nope, George W. Bush and his ideological friends on the court and his family stole that election. That you think otherwise is immaterial to the known facts and the truth, and simply proves beyond a doubt that you're an ideological drone of doubtful intelligence with some profoundly anti-democratic tendencies.
But, we knew that already.
.
I'm not quite sure why Montag makes it so damned easy for me to pwn him here on the pages of Rising Hegemon? It seems quite strange.
Perhaps it's just a characteristic tendency that many leftist ideologues have for self-flagellation? (...no reliable statistics available.....)
"....some jiggered-up voter registration lists that dumped nearly 100,000 qualified--and mostly Democratic--voters off the rolls just weeks before the election (done by claiming people were felons if their names vaguely resembled those of felons, even if they weren't spelled the same way)."
Ridiculous ! (even if it was remotely factual)
Your stupid conspiracy theory predisposes a majority of the following:
That most felons are Democratic party supporters.
That most felons would bother with voting.
That people with similar names to felons tend to vote for the Democratic Party.
That massive voter fraud could be hidden in a country with an open press.
That a sensible person would believe anything you say.
......What an idiotic knob you are, Montag !
The projective identification is especially strong today. Must be the Kool-Aid?
Wow i almost want to piss on my hands just to feel clean.
>Your stupid conspiracy theory predisposes a majority of the following
No. Montag is talking about the people who were struck off the rolls because of a superficial resemblance to felons in certain counties that tend to vote D. Just enough voter fraud was committed to make it seem close (and Fox called the state for Bush early just to muddy the waters) and then Scalia's mob took care of the rest.
The NORC study found that even *after* that aforementioned vote fraud, if all counties were recounted, Gore would have won.
You say his arguments "predisposes a majority of the following". First of all, you mean "presupposes." Second, this is a classic fallacy -- you take an argument about a sample and generalize it to one about the entire population.
First of all, you mean "presupposes."
Negatory.
I fully intended on using the word that I typed. You're splitting hairs in assuming that one word is a better one than another. [although I do tend to agree that (your word) "presupposes" could have been more suitable]
predisposes 1. prearrange, prepare. 3. bias, incline.
presupposes 1. to suppose or assume beforehand; take for granted in advance.
The remainder of your comment is much of the same. All opinion and no evidence whatsoever. You provide a survey that you predispose (presuppose) as evidentiary, although even that organization is itself a social surveyor of...wait for it..... opinion.
(and Fox called the state for Bush early just to muddy the waters)
....an excerpt from 59 Deceits in Fahrenheit 9/11:
"In fact, the networks which called Florida for Gore did so early in the evening—before polls had even closed in the Florida panhandle, which is part of the Central Time Zone. NBC called Florida for Gore at 7:49:40 p.m., Eastern Time. This was 10 minutes before polls closed in the Florida panhandle. Thirty seconds later, CBS called Florida for Gore. And at 7:52 p.m., Fox called Florida for Gore. Moore never lets the audience know that Fox was among the networks which made the error of calling Florida for Gore prematurely. Then at 8:02 p.m., ABC called Florida for Gore. Only ABC had waited until the Florida polls were closed.
At 10:00 p.m., which networks took the lead in retracting the premature Florida win for Gore? They were CNN and CBS, not Fox. In fact, Fox did not retract its claim that Gore had won Florida until 2 a.m.--four hours after other networks had withdrawn the call.
Over four hours later, at 2:16 a.m., Fox projected Bush as the Florida winner, as did all the other networks by 2:20 a.m.
At 3:59 a.m., CBS took the lead in retracting the Florida call for Bush. All the other networks, including Fox, followed the CBS lead within eight minutes. That the networks arrived at similar conclusions within a short period of time is not surprising, since they were all using the same data from the Voter News Service. "
blah bla anton bl b
Tiresome troll living the fiction fed to it by TPTB.
I just scroll past.
.
???
TPTB ?
Holy fuckety fuck, Hedley, that sounds really dangerous. *{cue ominous sounding music}*
Is that like the VRWC ?
Wonder if Hillary is still as worried about the "vast right-wing conspiracy" as she was a few years ago?
We were all in danger because the dastardly villians had worked it so that her husband's knob was getting polished and he was moistening his cigars in a fat chick heater.
Speaking of knobs, Olives removes another from deep in his throat to yammer out another 'comment.'
You're really a predictable tool, OnAn.
Speaking of knobs, ....
What a stupid bag of hammers you are, Hedley! I seriously doubt that you even understand what you're typing anymore.
If you're supposedly scrolling past as you stated in your 5:40 PM comment, then how did you know that I was speaking of knobs (as you state in the subsequent 3:04 AM comment)?
Post a Comment