General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsA great interview with Mike Dukakis exposing Scalia for the fraud he was
.....................
I didnt know who Scalia was until the last semester of my last year, when I took a class called Federal Courts and the Federal System, with a great man named Henry Hart. It is 1960. We are in the middle of the civil rights revolution. And theres this guy in class who begins engaging Professor Hart every day in these long dialogues over whether it was appropriate for federal judges to reach in and take cases away from Southern criminal courts, in cases where, as everyone knew, if you were a black defendant, forget it. And this went on for about three weeks. (Laughs.) I finally turned to the guy next to me and said, Who the hell is that guy? He said, Thats Scalia, hes on the law review. And I said, Does he know what its like to be black in the South?
He was no more an originalist than the man on the moon.
What was originalist about Bush v. Gore? What was originalist about the Second Amendment decision? What was originalist about Citizens United for Gods sake, Isaac? We have been regulating campaign contributions since the late 19th century. Where in the Constitution does it say that money is speech? Originalism? Are you kidding me?
http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/interrogation/2016/02/michael_dukakis_on_the_bush_family_antonin_scalia_and_donald_trump.html
spanone
(135,900 posts)Octafish
(55,745 posts)Scalia's "brilliance" was wasted in service of fascism.
Hydra
(14,459 posts)Even as he probably burns in hell, he is being touted as one of our national treasures, sorely missed. His worth to the cause of the Establishment was indeed, probably incalculable.
nichomachus
(12,754 posts)In the hopes that when they croak, people will say nice things about them, no matter what kind of corrupt douchebag they were.
Salviati
(6,009 posts)Because when push comes to shove there are no conservative heroes of the common man, there are no giants of conservative thought. There is no conservative FDR, no conservative Earl Warren. Any past republican that they could possibly put forward, would surely be derided as a RINO or Liberal today. The hallmarks of conservative thought include a selfish small mindedness that is the antithesis of heroism, and with their lack of actual heroes, they simply fabricate them from whole cloth.
Angry Dragon
(36,693 posts)MisterP
(23,730 posts)Feeling the Bern
(3,839 posts)Herman4747
(1,825 posts)...gave for the guy. Terrible Obama did that!! He also ordered flags to be lowered to half mast, when there are Nobel Laureates that that has not been done for.
malaise
(269,219 posts)Obama has handled this very well
Herman4747
(1,825 posts)...we shall just have to disagree regarding how President Obama handled the matter.
JI7
(89,279 posts)Herman4747
(1,825 posts)"President Barack Obama has ordered flags to be flown at half-staff at the Supreme Court, where Scalia served for three decades, and other federal buildings throughout the nation and U.S. embassies and military installations throughout the world." from http://www.nola.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/02/flags_at_half-staff_in_honor_o.html
nichomachus
(12,754 posts)Baitball Blogger
(46,769 posts)Maybe it would be pertinent to vet racist judges and lawyers out of the process.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)Just like most conservatives in power.
ronnie624
(5,764 posts)I'd sure like to hear him expand on Ukraine.
Duval
(4,280 posts)NoMoreRepugs
(9,480 posts)repeat a 1000+ times how Scalia was the greatest legal mind of his generation - no
different than the deification of Ronnie Raygun the mental midget
tabasco
(22,974 posts)how extreme the national corporate propaganda networks have become.
Turn off corporate propaganda. Turn on Free Speech TV and Democracy Now.
Faygo Kid
(21,478 posts)One of the worst and most intellectually dishonest justices in Supreme Court history. Worse than Rehnquist, if that's possible. For the sake of our nation, good riddance.
The Wizard
(12,552 posts)years ago. He should have been impeached for Bush v. Gore, his son worked for the firm representing Bush. He should have been impeached for ruling on the Cheney / oil executive secret meeting case. But now what does Clarence Thomas do without his brain telling him how to vote?
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)Do whatever Scalia does.
(That's a Betty Bowers joke, by the way)
thesquanderer
(11,996 posts)His comments on foreign policy in particular--ostensibly Hillary's biggest advantage in the race--would seem to indicate a different preference.
MariaThinks
(2,495 posts)I find it odd when any liberal says, oh but he was smart and funny. I have never seen any brilliance in any of his writings, only mischief, closed mindedness and lies.
MADem
(135,425 posts)was on the Court. Thomas keeps his mouth shut (to open it, I suspect, would remove any doubt).
Love me some Mike D. You can still see him riding the T. He teaches at Northeastern. He's a visiting prof at UCLA--avoiding the winter weather, perhaps?
http://www.northeastern.edu/cssh/faculty/michael-dukakis
It's the conservatives dirty little secret that they try to cover with lies. They want and got activist judges, not strict constructionists. They use that phrase as a fig leaf and hope people don't pay attention to the truth of raw unbridled political rulings. Citizens United, personal right to carry guns and Bush v Gore are totally the opposite of following the constitution, in fact they all show total disregard for the constitution.
True Blue American
(17,994 posts)Scalia answered," I do not follow the Constitution. I follow the Federalist papers in my decisions.."
Watched that on CSpan last weekend.
ProfessorGAC
(65,248 posts)If you listened to what he said, there is a clear implication that he used the Fed Papers to surmise what the framers were THINKING when they wrote them.
IOW, he interpreted the constitution by thinking he could read the minds of people who have been dead 200 years.
True Blue American
(17,994 posts)And It was an eye opener that Scalia disregarded the Constitution so completely and bragged about it.
That explains many of his disastrous decisions.
Rider3
(919 posts)I can confirm that Mr. Dukakis was a great governor and is a very down-to-earth, kind man. He would've made a great President, if Rove hadn't been at the helm of George Bush, Sr.'s campaign. Boy, did he get unfairly smeared.
Herman4747
(1,825 posts)...better than Bill Clinton, that's definitely for sure.
navarth
(5,927 posts)his campaign sucked. That picture of him in the tank just made him look like a pencil neck. So tragic because I remain convinced he would have been a great president.
LeftishBrit
(41,212 posts)Having been to Boston in the 80s, I was really impressed with him - especially in comparison with Our Own Dear Maggie Thatcher. I became a sort of one-woman Dukakis Fan Club of Great Britain, and was devastated when he lost. I suppose this was one of the factors that eventually led by a long route to my joining DU.
Was Rove already involved that long ago, or were you thinking of Atwater (horrible man!)
elleng
(131,197 posts)and I posted in Good Reads: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016144547
Ferd Berfel
(3,687 posts)good. The world became a better place that day.
...and WTF was he doing partying with a guy who had a case coming up before the Court?
something he apparently made a habit out of.
Enthusiast
(50,983 posts)Angry Dragon
(36,693 posts)but the conservatives love him because he gave them what they wanted
mountain grammy
(26,658 posts)I've always respect what Dukakis has to say. He would have been a good president, in my opinion.
Liberal_Dog
(11,075 posts)Scalia was an abomination on the Court. The damage he has caused to our Nation may never be fixed.
mdbl
(4,976 posts)There is no other explanation for his behavior on the SC. His decisions lacked compassion and common sense and had a complete disregard for precedent. If that isn't an activist judge, what is?
It is sad this does not seem to happen more in the mainstream media. So far most of the mainstream reporters have been saying Scalia was an originalist. Very few seem to have asked was Scalia really an originalist, or was he really a legal genius. Many have been claiming Scalia was a legal genius while pointing out that he said giggery pokery and applesauce in his decisions. How is saying giggery pokery and applesauce a sign that you are a legal giant? Where is all that great conservative legal reasoning?
roamer65
(36,747 posts)JDPriestly
(57,936 posts)You don't want to nominate a person to the Supreme Court, a life appointment, who will possibly retire or otherwise end his term within a decade or 15 years. You want someone who will serve on the Court a long time and develop a deep understanding of the history of the Court's decisions and the deliberative process.
So the ideal nominee should be as young as possible yet still be mature. It's not that easy to find a good candidate to fill a Supreme Court position.
mackerel
(4,412 posts)jpb33
(141 posts)He like many other conservative justices use the originalism argument as a way to inject their prejudices, bigotry, and elitism into their written opinions. They hide their prejudices behind the excuse they are constitutional originalists.
If you read his opinions he was no legal giant or great legal theorist.
Fast Walker 52
(7,723 posts)navarth
(5,927 posts)Thank you. kick
olddots
(10,237 posts)we haven't heard the last of Scalia.
Gabi Hayes
(28,795 posts)bottom of first page
IkeRepublican
(406 posts)I wish there were more resources on him that worked it's way into the mainstream. Very interesting fellow that cuts through the shit without being a blowhard.
Dr. Xavier
(278 posts)integrity, the man should have been president. Clearly, the country blew it, I really didn't like the 80's.
polynomial
(750 posts)Obviously Scalia had a Bloated Ego Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia has said, "You can't separate speech from the money that facilitates the speech. It's utterly impossible."
Yes, it depends on relativity, and the realm of the Gaussian science, lets start with a penny for your thoughts. We know Scalia would give us lessons back to both the Gospel of Mark and the Gospel of Luke.
Or, the extremely poor widow places just two small coins, her two cents, into the offering. She finds greater favor with Jesus than those Scalia supporters.
The old phrase a penny for your thoughts, but now I got two pennies' worth, seem out dated now that Scalia found a new proof in mathematics in the fascist most principle structure of the Gaussian conservative party called todays Republican.
Give me all the money for your thoughts. Isnt that exactly like a hold up. Isnt that as machination, a crafty artful design intended to accomplish an unusual evil end.
Sorry Mr. Scalia if you dont separate the money form the speech your Republican Party will choke.
47of74
(18,470 posts)I loved that line.