Don’t underestimate Putin. An (at least) trilingual lawyer who obviously has an extremely analytical mind. In case you hadn’t noticed, he’s winning in Crimea, he’s winning in Syria, and he’s doing it with a very tattered deck of cards. His nominee is talking to the Pope now as he builds a coalition of people who don’t much care for U S policy.
He would run rings round people like Trump, and if he couldn’t out-argue a Scalia he’d fix him a different way. Not necessarily with polonium, either.
4 Likes
Thanks for doing the research. I thought he did that, but I was too lazy to double check my memory. Sunday…T.V…
I thought Jake Weisman gave the most reasoned, sensible reaction to Cruz’s suggestion that Obama not nominate a new justice.
3 Likes
If you die and people, overwhelmingly, erupt with joy to the news and bile directed at you, that’s your legacy.
13 Likes
Well, we’re fucked then.
3 Likes
I don’t know, if he had a vast intellect (reading some of the examples from there doesn’t convince me of that at all) and he used it entirely to make complex justifications for stupid things, I think it’s fair to dismiss him as an idiot.
5 Likes
The level of hate and venom he expressed on the bench was likewise unfortunate.
23 Likes
Some members of Congress currently run on such platforms
10 Likes
Not at all, was referring solely to Putin’s grandstanding. He’s a 12-dimensional chess player all the way around - for all the negative press he gets one must consider that the underlying stories are being seen only because he wants them to be seen, or actually doesn’t care (or wishes to be seen as not caring - gah - turtles all the way down!)
I’d consider him the most dangerous man in the world right now, especially with the Saudis (synonymous with the West for all practical purposes) cutting his oil legs out from under him financially. He’s the type that will strike hard and fast if pressed into a corner, the only question right now is where and how.
The oil price shenanigans are primarily to give the Saudi’s the upper hand again and secondarily to get more conflict going to support the hawks. I’m sure there’s a backroom deal in place to indirectly reimburse the Saudis for what they’re losing right now. And America gets cheap oil for awhile, so a win all the way around! (Your results may vary, do not take conflict instigation more than once every three years, if symptoms persist celebrate all the way to the bank.)
2 Likes
I’m so sick of our government not working because of these people. They need to do their jobs, or GTFO.
7 Likes
Passed on via a friend on Facebook:
21 Likes
Somehow at first I read this as “constitutional onanism.” And I just got my eyes checked.
Edit:typo.
4 Likes
yeah. Very undemocratic. This mischievous aspect is also associated with the “Convention of the States”.
Well, that’s probably a better description of Scalia than “originalism” anyway.
4 Likes
I’ll assume that you’ve participated in both activities, and your analogy is apt, YOU MONSTER!
7 Likes
Rudeness in response to Scalia’s death is stupid. Critiques of his legacy are entirely valid.
Scalia made his mark on our society in part by being proudly, gleefully snotty in his words and his written opinions. ‘Venom’ and ‘hatred’ are words that can and should be liberally applied to his corpus (yeah, not his corpse you fools).
His ‘memory’ deserves very minimal regard. My biggest disappointment in those who speak out against him now – in any venue – is that they likely weren’t beating on him hard enough, often enough, when he was around to fight back. The Notorious RBG knew how to handle him, IMHO.
6 Likes
If you believe the government is evil, you’ll vote GOP to prove it.
5 Likes
Et tu?
2 Likes
Neither one, actually. I’m open to the possibility that quail hunting serves some purpose, though. And quails are good eating.
4 Likes
I saw a post somewhere detailing that, yes, he could somehow nominate himself and vacate the presidential seat early.
I don’t expect that to happen, but holy shit. That would be an amazing political move to pull off.
ETA:
http://www.democraticunderground.com/10024116547
Among dozens of articles discussing this, that there’s no wording in the constitution that prevents this.
And, of course, no originalists left on the SC to claim that the Constitution prevents it.
7 Likes
