Lunatic Quote of the Day

‘‘The death penalty? Give me a break. It’s easy. Abortion? Absolutely easy. Nobody ever thought the Constitution prevented restrictions on abortion. Homosexual sodomy? Come on. For 200 years, it was criminal in every state,’’-Supreme Court Justice Scalia

From this quote alone it’s implied that Scalia loves the death penalty, would necessarily vote to overturn Roe v Wade, and thinks homosexuality should still be illegal.

And it’s easy! All easy! The death panalty? Bah! Bring it on!

Absolutely batshit.

And it’s worth repeating, Senator Scott Brown said Scalia was his favorite justice. You know, the “independent” Scott Brown.

Print Friendly
This entry was posted in Quote and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • http://twitter.com/wbtphdjd William B. Turner

    Well, and this comment only shows Scalia’s historical ignorance. Actually, sodomy statutes aimed specifically at same-sex couples are a product of the late 20th century. Before, sodomy statutes, as Georgia’s statute in Bowers v. Hardwick, only prohibited acts, regardless of who performed them.

  • http://drangedinaz.wordpress.com/ IrishGrrrl

    The fact that a Suprme Court Justice said something so assholish is worrisome.

    • nathkatun7

      Antonin Scalia is a right wing political hack masquerading as an impartial U.S. Supreme Court Justice. In my humble opinion, Scalia is the most partisan Supreme Court justice in history. His side kick, Justice Clarence Thomas, is no thatt far behind him in deciding cases based on pure political ideology.

  • Todd Cline

    Scalia seems to believe society can only remain what it was at the time of the founding, and cannot ever improve. Slavery remains, subjugation of women is A-Ok, only property holders can vote.

    • Nefercat

      Kind of makes you wonder why the founders included a means to amend the Constitution, doesn’t it?

      • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/GIQIFF7A7RFUB5SZVHTELINBLE oron

        Why would they have done that? They knew it was perfect and should be used to ensure that future Americans would conform to their behavioural norms.

  • http://www.facebook.com/yosha.bourgea Yosha Bourgea

    To be fair, Scott Brown also said every other justice was his favorite, too.

    • Draxiar

      Yeah, after he got a hail storm of boos from the audience.

  • LK3

    Batshit, Batshit, Batshit….
    I am sorry the Supreme Court alone is enough for any independent to vote for Obama.

  • LK3

    Bob
    How about tweeting that to John Cusack et al….- Seriously…they want to throw their vote away at risk of losing the SC to prove a point?! He is smarter than that (at least I thought he was)

    • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

      No he isn’t. None of those people are. They think it’s a game they’re playing. They are nothing but children with no concern for consequences.

      • Scopedog

        Exactly. They sure as hell didn’t care back in 2000. I remember some jerk on Democracy Now! arguing how the SC was, get this, a “scare tactic used by Democrats”.

        Well, we sure found out the hard way that it wasn’t true, I guess.

        (I wish I could remember the dude’s name….but what he said stayed stuck in my mind.)

  • Draxiar

    Scott Brown. He became senator mostly because Martha Coakley ran a bad camp. And really, with Elizabeth Warren running for the office now I’m glad Martha lost then.

    For Brown to try and hammer home his independence from the Republican party just tells you that he’s scared shitless of Warren, and Romney, bringing him down. At the end of the day he still has an “R” in front of his name and still voted pretty much along party lines (a club Warren is pummeling him with). His barn coat and beat up truck were endearing 2 years ago but the climate has changed dramatically and Massachuesetts is still one of the bluest states in the nation.

    Warren 2012!

    As far as Scalia is concerned, well, you have to question the quality of a judge that doesn’t read the legislation that he’s to rule on (ex. ACA). I can’t wait for him to survive a heart attack and be forced into retirement.

    • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

      Brown also begged the Koch bros. for money and got it. He is a lying snake, and I can’t wait to see him lose!

  • mrbrink

    Reagan’s legacy. The sick that keeps on sickening.

    Exhibit A in the case against right wing conservatism.

    He really is a sadistic fuck, and the pride of the Republican party.

  • http://twitter.com/Packy89 Patrick Malone

    “Come on. For 200 years, it was criminal in every state.”

    Bizarre logic for a justification of the banning of homosexuality.

    Interestingly enough, when Barack Obama was born, 16 (all southern) states still had anti-miscegenation laws on the books – his parents would absolutely not have been allowed to marry there, it was illegal.

    In Loving V. Virginia in 1967, the SCOTUS ruled the ban on mixed-race marriages unconstitutional, thus rendering those states’ laws moot (but the attitude never changed).

    His twisted logic seems to imply that Scalia would cheerfully return the US to the Jim Crow era as well.

    • nathkatun7

      Thanks for highlighting this most neglected major Supreme Court decision. The late Judge, A. Leon Higginbothom, reminded Clarence Thomas of this reality when Thomas was attacking the NAACP and the late Justice Thurgood Marshall. Without the 1967 U.S. Supreme Court decision in the Loving case, Justice Thomas would not have been able to marry his wife legally.

  • muselet

    And to think, Antonin Scalia is an Associate Justice of the Supreme Court of the United States.

    Scalia calls himself a “textualist” and, as he related to a few hundred people who came to buy his new book and hear him speak in Washington the other day, that means he applies the words in the Constitution as they were understood by the people who wrote and adopted them.

    In other words, Scalia’s presenting himself as a 21st-century spirit medium, listening intently and interpreting the moans and table-knockings of the dearly departed. Harry Houdini would have had a field day with him. Hey, Nino, what did the people who wrote and adopted the Constitution think about mobile phones? Quick, pull the curtains and get out the Ouija board!

    He contrasted his style of interpretation with that of a colleague who tries to be true to the values of the Constitution as he applies them to a changing world. This imaginary justice goes home for dinner and tells his wife what a wonderful day he had, Scalia said.

    This imaginary justice, Scalia continued, announces that it turns out ‘‘’the Constitution means exactly what I think it ought to mean.’ No kidding.’’

    Well done. Well done, indeed. You really knocked the stuffing out of that straw man. Of course, your “no kidding” Parthian shot was gratuitous enough to make other arseholes roll their eyes and take a step away from you.

    Antonin Scalia is an intellectual fraud.

    –alopecia

    • nathkatun7

      “Antonin Scalia is an intellectual fraud.”

      I feel exactly the same way as you do. I had bought into the meme that Scalia was an intellectual who favored Conservative interpretation of the Constitution. What woke me up was the stance he took during the 2000 Florida vote recount. Of all the Justices, Scalia was the most politically driven. He had absolutely no shame in making sure that the court ruled in favor of George W.Bush. He was even so cynical to invoke the 14th Amendment, which he had routinely trashed in other cases, to justify ruling in favor of Bush and stopping recounts. For me, the U.S. Supreme Court decision in Bush v. Gore made me lose faith in the impartiality of right wing justices on the U.S. Supreme Court.

      • muselet

        I don’t know if I ever bought into the notion that Antonin Scalia was an intellectual, but I did hope that being a Supreme Court justice would temper his ideological rigidity. If anything, he’s become even more rigid—and, as you rightly point out, cynical—in his thinking.

        Paul Krugman last year alluded to someone (I don’t know who, and if anyone does, please enlighten me) describing Newt Gingrich as “a stupid man’s idea of what a smart person sounds like,” a description that fits Scalia equally well.

        –alopecia

      • Scopedog

        When he clerked for Justice Stevens at the SC, my younger brother used to tell some rather….interesting stories about Scalia.

        And Bush v. Gore should have been the ultimate wake-up call to the “both parties are the same” blabbers. It showed that yes, it does freaking matter who sits on the bench and that what they do and what they decide has consequences for everyone. Forget this at your own peril.

    • incredulous72

      “Antonin Scalia is a fraud.”

      More accurate.

      • muselet

        Point taken.

        –alopecia

  • http://twitter.com/bubblegenius Bubble Genius

    The fact that Scalia thinks that any decision a Supreme Court justice makes is an easy one shows just how unserious he is.

  • http://www.politicalruminations.com/ nicole

    sorry, wrong place.

  • D_C_Wilson

    Of course it’s easy. When all of your views are predetermined by ideology, making them is always easy. The hard party is twisting history and the law so that you pretend that the founding fathers agreed with you.

    He probably reads a lot of David Barton.

  • bphoon

    For 200 years, it was criminal in every state

    And slavery was legal in half the states for over 200 years. Doesn’t make it right.

    Antonin Scalia, like Newt Gingrich, is a RW ideologue who thinks he’s smarter than anyone else and so is infallible. He’s a buffoon who takes himself way too seriously.

    • Scopedog

      “Antonin Scalia, like Newt Gingrich, is a RW ideologue who thinks he’s smarter than anyone else and so is infallible. He’s a buffoon who takes himself way too seriously.”

      And folks like that are dangerous in the long run. Just saying.

      Funny enough, you can apply that to Glenn Greenwald….

  • Victor_the_Crab

    You wanna know what else is easy, Scalia? A two by four right across you dense, cro-magnon skull, you partisan hack!

  • http://profiles.yahoo.com/u/GIQIFF7A7RFUB5SZVHTELINBLE oron

    We know for a fact that the founding fathers broke the constitution, Indian wars and slavery anyone? They had on the one hand, their ideal of a just society, the constitution, and on the other hand they had reality. According to Scalia, we should not try and achieve the ideal of the constitution, instead we should copy the reality of life in 1776, including all its bigotry and hypocrisy. If the founders broke the constitution that how they wanted it. Scalia is certain that, even though the constitution protected the rights of all people, the founders really didn’t mean that homos should have rights, I mean get serious.

    The remarkable thing is that even though the founders were all radicals who overthrew the established order, as well as being individuals who argued amongst themselves on most topics, they all just happened to all think exactly alike, and miraculously, what they thought was exactly what Scalia, a late twentieth century conservative, and defender of the status quo thinks.