February 15, 2016

Shorter Left: We are giddy Scalia is dead and you had better shut-up about our glee [Darleen Click]

I have been angered and disgusted by the outpouring of glee on the death of Justice Scalia from the Left. Social Media has been filled with the vilest of insults. While so-called mainstream media has tempered the language, it has still engaged in headlines & articles that can be paraphrased as “About time this relic who had the audacity not to rewrite the Constitution is as dead as those slave-holder Founding frauds.”

This headline was on WaPo “A brilliant legal mind — and a frequent civil rights opponent” In other words, such a smart man, too bad he was a racist…

Jonah Goldberg

The division of blame for the ugliness of these fights is not equal. Yes, there’s hypocrisy on all sides of the aisle as the tables spin around and around. But philosophically this is a world liberals created. They have invested in the courts’ having power the Framers never intended. Their doctrine of the living Constitution has given, in theory, an open-ended warrant for courts to do whatever they want. People lament the rush of money into politics, but that money is made necessary by a government that has evermore control over the economy and peoples’ lives. Similarly, when we turned justices into monarchs, we increased the incentives for people to care much more than they should. If Scalia’s interpretation of the Constitution held sway in the land, the Court and the government would have much less power over our lives. And that, more than anything else, explains why the Left hated him so much.

Now, the Left has turned its wrath on anyone daring to support the Senate’s right, under the Constitution, to say “no” to an Obama nomination.

Left-fascists gonna fascist and Americans should not shut-up because they demand we do.

Posted by Darleen @ 3:07pm
43 comments | Trackback

Comments (43)

  1. I don’t know if Gabriel has blown his horn, but Heimdall sure as hell has.

  2. I’m also a little disturbed at some of the rhetoric on the right, lamenting it could be the end of the second amendment for example. It’s like an admission the court has authority to rewrite the constitution however they see fit.

    The times, they have moved on from interesting to terrifying.

  3. Lee

    we ARE just one justice away from negating Heller, Citizens United and Hobby Lobby.

    It ain’t just rhetoric when it’s the truth.

  4. “It’s like an admission the court has authority to rewrite the constitution however they see fit.”

    … What? If a man runs into a restaurant waving a gun and screaming that he wants to kill people, me stating “He’s going to shoot someone” has absolutely no bearing on whether his doing so would be legal. Same thing here. Libs and their pet justices (and ain’t that a misnomer) would love to rule the 2nd Amendment right out of the Constitution via the courts, so recognizing that another of their ilk on the SCOTUS gives them the ability to do just that has no bearing on whether they have that authority. None of us would agree that the court is authorized to do so, but we’d be idiots to think that will ever stop the statists. It certainly hasn’t stopped their Changer-in-Chief.

  5. if Rs keep insisting on nominating McCain Romney style trash then they kinda get what’s coming to them

  6. >they kinda get what’s coming to them<

    !jeb!

  7. Well Darleen, that being the case, we are doomed. Who your county sheriff is will be more important than who the next president is, for what’s coming. The country is lost already.

    I’m glad we have an excellent one, and he lives almost in shouting distance from me. Because the fuse has been lit…

  8. Lee

    I support Gov Abbott’s call for a convention of States. The Fed must be brought to heel.

  9. What will that matter if five SCJ’s can just “write out” what they don’t like?

  10. I support Gov Abbott’s call for a convention of States. The Fed must be brought to heel.

    I’m becoming more and more of the opinion that the only reason for an Article V convention is to enact a single amendment – one that establishes and codifies the mechanism for states to leave the Union if they so wish.

  11. We don’t need that Amendment, eC.

    ‘…That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness….’

    Besides, methinks offering such an Amendment would derail the whole COS process.

    Since this whole Article V question was raised, I’ve been advocating that we try it, but that we must understand there is a good chance that, even if we get the Amendments we need implemented, it probably won’t work because the national government is so riddled with the Statist Cancer [Stage IV] our efforts will be thwarted by the Despots.

    However, we must, I believe, seek such a non-violent Redress of our grievances, as a last step before we seek other means that are within our Rights as Free Men to do [and our Sacred Duty to seek for our Posterity]. We must exhaust all non-violent means before we resort to whatever graver measures become necessary.

  12. Bob is correct. Idiots may argue that the outcome of the Civil War somehow negated the Declaration, but they are, after all, idiots.

  13. Further evidence that God hates us and wants us to die a slow and painful death — He takes Scalia and leaves Sotomayor; takes Breitbart and leaves Wasserman-Shultz; takes Tony Snow and leaves Rahm Emmanuel; takes Ric Locke and leaves Charles Johnson (both of them).

  14. Maybe He just wants us to get off our butts and apply the lessons we should have learned from those He let us have among us for a while.

  15. If everybody I know on the ‘net is going to have synchronized depression cycles this week, maybe I should unplug until next Monday.

  16. Pingback: On The #COS And The Redress Of Our Grievances | The Camp Of The Saints

  17. if Rs keep insisting on nominating McCain Romney style trash then they kinda get what’s coming to them

    My guess is this time Rs will nominate a candidate who will dress up McCain Romney style policy & personnel in Perotista populist tough-guy trash talk.

    After which, they will indeed get what’s coming to them, as voters always do in a democracy.

  18. Dicentra, maybe think of it as a slow motion rapture.

  19. If they start overturning cases then they are admitting stare decisis means little.

  20. “After which, they will indeed get what’s coming to them, as voters always do in a democracy.”
    You ultimately get what you accept.

  21. If they start overturning cases then they are admitting stare decisis means little.

    Which, in New Latin, translates to “They chose…poorly.”

  22. SEYOOO SEYMEEEE
    a song by:
    -Whiney Al Bitchy-

    Snow you, snow me
    Snowing me always
    That’s the way it must be
    Snow you, Snow me
    Snow covers every
    damned word I see

    I had a dream I had an absurd dream
    People on the net seeing just how far they get
    And every word was a game of wits
    And from behind the walls of sense a voice sighed ‘damn you’re dense’

    Shade you, shade me
    Dump the feces around
    To cover completely
    Shade you, shade me
    Shade the whole stinking world
    Demoniacally

    As we go down time’s twisted rock fall
    Seems the rarest thing to do is to find a word that’s true
    A simple thing – that is what it seems
    That will keep its promised shape
    As the wind and water scrape, the way that stones used to…

    Blind you, blind me
    No point in looking
    Can’t trust a thing you might see
    Blind you, blind me
    Live in a fog
    Of calumny

    So you think you’ll find the answers? – good news!
    This whole world has got you spinning
    Questioning your views
    It’s time to rebuild trust. Oh yes.
    Clear away this mess, so we aren’t forced to guess

    Be true, be real
    Be it no matter
    How you happen to feel
    Be true, be real
    Defy this maelstrom
    with the strength of steel.

    Defy this maelstrom
    with the strength of steel.

  23. My guess is this time Rs will nominate a candidate who will dress up McCain Romney style policy & personnel in Perotista populist tough-guy trash talk.

    After which, they will indeed get what’s coming to them, as voters always do in a democracy.

    you’re very pessimism

    i think it’ll be fun to have food stamp out of office

  24. somebody’s gotta pick up Carter’s slack

  25. That reminds me.

    Barack Obama. ~ Now available in white.

  26. I guess the Senate should just ignore all nominations made by any president of the opposing party. They have the right, after all.

  27. >I guess the Senate should just ignore all nominations made by any president of the opposing party. They have the right, after all. -<

    ax chuck schumer and get back to me – bork!

  28. In another thread, I implied that mileytroll was a cockroach.

    I apologize.

    Dung beetle seems more apropos.

  29. A dung beetle with severe hygiene issues [if such a thing is possible].

  30. In all seriousness, why should the opposing party ever be allowed to appoint someone to the Supreme Court?

  31. In all seriousness, why should nine unelected lawyers get to make the rules we all have to live by?

  32. In all seriousness, when the judicial branch behaves as politically partisanal as the executive and the legislative branches, why should it to left in the hands of unelected lifetime appointees?

  33. > By the way, Guy Benson found this in the NY Times’ archives from 1987, urging the Senate to fillibuster the hell out of any Reagan nominee until after the 1988 presidential election:

    The President?s supporters insist vehemently that, having won the 1984 election, he has every right to try to change the Court?s direction. Yes, but the Democrats won the 1986 election, regaining control of the Senate, and they have every right to resist. This is not the same Senate that confirmed William Rehnquist as Chief Justice and Antonin Scalia as an associate justice last year.

    Hm… gee who won the 2014 election, I wonder?<

    http://acecomments.mu.nu/?post=361582

  34. Besides, if we’ve learned anything from the Borke and Thomas fights, it’s that if the party in control of the Senate makes it as painful as possible for the party in control of the White House, the party in control of the Senate is more likely to get a more agreeable outcome in future nomination battles, regardless of the outcome of the current nomination fight.

    And by “we,” I don’t mean Republican politicians & consultants.

    The proof of everything I’ve just asserted is demonstrated in the fact that Clarence Thomas isn’t Chief Justice.

  35. I’ll ask again, if the Senate majority is one party, and the president is a different party, why should the Senate *ever* vote to confirm?

  36. If Fed officials generally stuck to their constitutional duties, even the President’s party or previous politics would not matter much. The most you should have to worry about when appointing a justice is if the Prez is appointing a mediocre friend or crony rather than a bright legal scholar.

  37. You’ve been answered. But I guess Engligh is too complex for your underdeveloped troll brain. So I’ll try trollish instead.

    You reap what you sow. So take your whiny little question and shove it up your ass.

  38. Bright legal scholars are overrated bgbear. They’ve tended to find new and interesting ways to pull “emmenations and penumbras” from their overeducated asses.

  39. You’re right Ernst. I often say that many clever people are best at coming up with brilliant arguments to support stupid ideas.

  40. Or, as Orwell put it, some ideas are so stupid they can only be believed by an intellectual.

  41. I’ll ask again, if the Senate majority is one party, and the president is a different party, why should the Senate *ever* vote to confirm? – See more at: http://proteinwisdom.com/?p=58260#comments

    Depends a lot on what kind of relationship the president has cultivated with the leaders of the Senate. The current occupant seems to think that anyone who isn’t a fawning sycophant isn’t worth cultivating a relationship with. [cough]”I won.”[cough]

Leave a Reply