Supreme Court Justice Scalia Dies

Well, I didn't read every post but it's a pretty long thread already so here's my 2 cents.

My initial gut feeling when I heard about this was that this is fishy. I know the man was 80 years old and it isn't all that unusual for people that age to keel over unexpectedly. But the timing is....interesting, to say the least.

originally posted by: GrantedBail
Scalia was a pig and an afront to any kind of democracyl I will piss on his grave.

A lynch mob is pure democracy.

a reply to: Gryphon66

This reeks of desperation, when an atheist starts quoting the bible telling us to OBEY our rulers.

First, let me enlighten you that we live in a representative republic and our representatives represent their constituents. They will get voted out of office if they don't properly represent the desires of their constituency. (or at least that is how its supposed to work!)

What we don't live under, is a totalitarian regime. There is no single ruler who all laws come from. We have a voice in government, and we must therefore, tell our representatives what we would like them to do in our names. We DO follow the laws in this nation, even the crappy ones we don't like. The only time that would change would be if we were told of a new law that said we could no longer worship God, then we would have a problem because we cannot do that. But since that is not now nor has ever been made a law, we have no conflict with them.

I support many things as a Christian that others may not. I support gay marriage as state sanctioned marriages are not a conflict with a God centered religious marriage - the two are completely different and separate things; and I think you all should be given over to your desire to murder your own unborn children, if you want to kill them so badly I don't figure its my place to stop you - so long as you stay away from my children.

Therefore God gave them over in the sinful desires of their hearts to sexual impurity for the degrading of their bodies with one another. They exchanged the truth about God for a lie, and worshiped and served created things rather than the Creator--who is forever praised. Amen.

(as a side note God forgives too, but as he also allows people to be given over to their desires I don't argue with HIM)


So my stances are often different, but I am a Christian. I do believe that having a voice in government is a good thing and we have a right to refuse a nomination in this country - LEGALLY. So this is not disobeying our rulers as we live in a country where our voice can be heard.

However, if Obama finds another originalist to nominate to the supreme court who is also vocal in his oral arguments and brilliant in mind, then I would have no problem saying yes.

Do you think he will find one? I don't.. but in the off chance he does, then I am all for the nomination. But remember, he has to nominate an originalist who is also good with oral arguments.

You have more faith in Obama than I do.

originally posted by: Gryphon66

Back to SCOTUS though ... do you have anybody in mind that you'd like to see appointed to replace Scalia?

If you could ... who would be your choice? John Ashcroft? Franklin Graham?

I know a guy ...

Ding Dong the witch is dead! The witch is dead! The witch is dead. Ding Dong The Wicked Witch is dead!

The Scotus just got a little better. And it will get even better when Obama replaces him with someone who doesn't eat evil for breakfast, lunch, and dinner.

So in addition to watching Hillary and The DNC lose their minds as the nomination slips through their fingers, this spring will also now include a conservative tantrum. I need to buy stock in popcorn.

a reply to: Kitana

Desperation? What, I can't quote the Bible? If you don't like what it says, that's somehow MY fault?

Are you a Christian that only OBEYS the Bible when it tells you something you like? Hmmph.

Further, you have absolutely nothing to "enlighten" me on. Going on-and-on with an utterly off-topic sermon about your take on Civics 101 and pretending like you're informing me of something is ridiculous if I may say so.

Yes, we are a democratic republic. Where the People have (twice) elected a President with the Constitutional power to appoint Supreme Court Justices with the advice and consent of the Senate ... and we deserve better from the Majority Leader than a purely partisan announcement that the Senate majority will thwart any duly nominated appointee MERELY because of party affiliation.

Fifty percent of fertilized human ova end in natural abortion. Seems that your "God" is also an abortionist, eh?

Who cares that you want a Scalia-clone on the Court? You are one of 223 million people, the majority of which have elected President Obama to make these appointments.

Faith is irrelevant. I believe in facts, and the fact is the President is given the power to appoint Justices in the Constitution.

However, you've already shown that you want to pick and choose what you follow from your Bible; I guess you want to do the same with our Constitution.

Fine. Let the Republicans stand in the way of the will of the People and the Constitution, and come January, we'll have a Democratic President and a Democratic Senate, and the nominee will be a lot further Left than would be presently.

... maybe even Supreme Court Justice Barack Hussein Obama ...

a reply to: VictorVonDoom

I'm surprised you aren't suggesting this lady ... too Moderate, I assume?

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: Kitana

Desperation? What, I can't quote the Bible? If you don't like what it says, that's somehow MY fault?

However, you've already shown that you want to pick and choose what you follow from your Bible; I guess you want to do the same with our Constitution.

Fine. Let the Republicans stand in the way of the will of the People and the Constitution, and come January, we'll have a Democratic President and a Democratic Senate, and the nominee will be a lot further Left than would be presently.

... maybe even Supreme Court Justice Barack Hussein Obama ...

No, I don't just obey God when it is convenient, however it seems you only want to follow the constitutional checks and balances when it is convenient for you. It seems you don't like others to have a voice in government and instead prefer a totalitarian regime.

In this country we are allowed a voice, and I will have mine as well. That is what this country is about. You can have yours, and I can have mine, and we will see how many support either you or I.

The thing about God, is that he didn't create a theocracy on earth, His Kingdom is of heaven. But I was born in the land where we have a constitution, that the left is trying to rewrite and reinterpret according to their own desires and not according to the vision of the founders. With my voice, I stand against it.

As to the rest, when God gives people over to their desires, eventually my voice will be drowned out, even here. But I will stand for the constitution until my dying breath, in the founders vision. It is my duty and my right as a citizen of this country.

a reply to: Kitana

But you just took exception above to me quoting from your Book about God's command to obey the government!

Are you saying that the Book of Romans is not a part of God's Holy Word???

And you're advocating for the Republican Senate to unconsitutionally block ANY appointee to the Court made by the duly elected President of the United States ...

Of course you "have your voice" ... just as I have mine.

Just as the majority of the American people did when they elected President Obama, the ONLY National office that is elected by all the People* ... not a plurality of folks in Kentucky like Mitch McConnell.

The rest of your post is mere self-indulgence and baseless chest-thumping, in my opinion.

You don't "stand for" our Constitution any more than I do ... in fact, the irony here is not only do I, a leftist atheist, support our Constitution, I even support your Bible to a greater extent than you do, at least in terms of what it actually says.

/shrug

*President and Vice President are elected as a ticket, of course.

a reply to: Kitana

My apologies if I find your passionate stance misguided and propaganda-driven.

The Left and Right may disagree on certain issues, but that disagreement does not mean the Left is trying to rewrite or reinterpret the Constitution to fit their own desires.

In fact, one of the organizations that has stood-up and protected constitutional rights for all people, regardless of political affiliation, has been labeled a Leftist group. That would be the ACLU.

So I can't help but laugh when I see posts such as yours. It's incorrect and ignorant.

Tasteless.

Dems Fundraise Off Scalia Death

Supreme Court justice Antonin Scalia died today and already the Democratic party is fundraising off his death.

In an email sent out by the Democratic National Committee, supporters are asked to chipping in some money for the coming Supreme Court nomination fight.

The fundraising email reads:

Breaking news from the GOP debate stage:

In tonight's debate, the Republican presidential candidates were asked whether or not President Obama should nominate a new justice to the Supreme Court. They said Congress should block, delay, or otherwise refuse to allow the President to fill this vacancy.

There's no excuse for this, You. It's putting partisan politics above the Constitution and the rule of law, and it's appalling to hear from any public official -- let alone someone who thinks he should be the next President of the United States.

And they're not alone. Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell -- who is responsible for scheduling votes in the Senate -- has already said that "this vacancy should not be filled until we have a new President."

But no matter what Mitch McConnell says, President Obama is going to fulfill his constitutional obligation to nominate a successor to fill the vacant seat on the Supreme Court -- and that nominee deserves a fair hearing in the Senate.

Add your name to call on Republicans to follow the Constitution instead of obstructing the confirmation of our next Supreme Court justice.

---Petition website---(removed for decorum)

Thanks,
Democrats

www.weeklystandard.com...

a reply to: IAMTAT

First of all, there's no link to the actual email text.

Second of all, the email as presented doesn't ask for donations.

Third of all, are you against free speech?

Fourth of all if there's anything disgusting, it's the Republican announcement of the same-old obstructionism before Scalia was even properly cold.

a reply to: IAMTAT

Just as tasteless as all the other politicizing of his death.
What the GOP is doing is tasteless to the left and what the left wants is tasteless to the right.
In the mean time we the people are the ones that get screwed since now the SCOTUS has the possibility to deadlock for two whole sessions.

ETA: Ah the next page after the info ask's for a donation.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
. . . it's the Republican announcement of the same-old obstructionism before Scalia was even properly cold.

The obstruction is getting "really, really, old".

There has to be some Republicans that are sick of it too.

a reply to: IAMTAT

The Democrat Party is so desperate.

They are unraveling to the point they will do just about anything.

All they have is a half-cooked criminal running ahead of a half-baked Socialist for President.

They will milk this SCOTUS thing until it's dry.

Watch for the usual smear tactics amplified x1000.

originally posted by: Gryphon66
a reply to: IAMTAT

First of all, there's no link to the actual email text.

Second of all, the email as presented doesn't ask for donations.

Third of all, are you against free speech?

Fourth of all if there's anything disgusting, it's the Republican announcement of the same-old obstructionism before Scalia was even properly cold.

Because you wanted to see it:

my.democrats.org...

Thanks,
Democrats

Clicking on link brings one to a fundraising page on the Democratic party's website.

www.weeklystandard.com...

a reply to: IAMTAT

I saw it. There's still no link to the actual text of the email.

And still no requests for fundraising within the email.

But, are you saying that McConnell didn't make Scalia's death a political issue first?

Are you equally disgusted with him and the Republican party?

a reply to: IAMTAT

Ok went past the email part, and ya they do ask for some $.

I don't agree with it at all, but that is standard for these parties.

Now when the GOP starts talking about how it is now more important than ever to elect one of them are we not going to call that politicizing his death? And you know those same folks are going to be asking for money, they always are

originally posted by: SeaWorthy
a reply to: IAMTAT

Interesting timing!
West Tx Bush country, wonder if there will be a list of the 40 guests released...doubt it.

He was definitely my ideological opposite, but a really neat man all the same.

Would it surprise anyone to know that his best friend was Justice Ruth Bader Ginsberg? The courts leading Liberal?

Or that when a vacancy came up on the court Scalia told Obama advisor Axelrod that he wanted

Justice David Souter, Scalia's longtime colleague on the court, had just announced his retirement, creating a vacancy for President Obama to fill. Scalia figured that as senior adviser to the new president, I might have some influence on the decision.

"I have no illusions that your man will nominate someone who shares my orientation," said Scalia, then in his 23rd year as the court's leading and most provocative conservative voice. "But I hope he sends us someone smart."

A little taken aback that he was engaging me on the subject, I searched for the right answer, and lamely offered one that signaled my slight discomfort with the topic. "I'm sure he will, Justice Scalia."

He wasn't done. Leaning forward, as if to share a confidential thought, he tried again.

"Let me put a finer point on it," the justice said, in a lower, purposeful tone of voice, his eyes fixed on mine. "I hope he sends us Elena Kagan."

www.cnn.com...

How to reconcile one of the nations most influential conservatives seeking the company and friendship of Liberals?...He enjoyed being challenged by smart people and was able to disagree while still respecting and yes even "liking" those that disagreed with him.

He and Ginsberg were as close friends as any two justices have been....and on polar opposite sides of most rulings.

Neat man...and though he was ideologically different than I, we could all learn from the way he lived his life, not letting his ideology ever get in the way of his humanity, friendships and the more important things in life.

* Back to your question of who might of been on that hunting trip?"

Possibly Obama Appointee Justice Kagen

During her confirmation meetings with senators, Kagan had vowed to go hunting to allay their concerns about her cultural awareness on the issue of guns. When she joined the court, she asked her friend, Scalia, to take her.

The two, who occasionally shot intellectual darts at each other on paper, became regular, if unlikely, hunting partners.

originally posted by: xuenchen
a reply to: IAMTAT

The Democrat Party is so desperate.

They are unraveling to the point they will do just about anything.

All they have is a half-cooked criminal running ahead of a half-baked Socialist for President.

They will milk this SCOTUS thing until it's dry.

Watch for the usual smear tactics amplified x1000.

Keep up the chant, or rant or wishful thinking. The facts are completely different.

Democrats are 34% of the population Republicans 23% and Independents are at about 43%. In poll after poll.

No, if you want to see a party imploding, that would be your Republicans.

TRUMP ON THE INDEPENDENT TICKET 2016!