Can you impeach Supreme Court Justices? Start with Scaly.
Posted by jwrjr at April 25, 2008 08:42 PMDidn't he go duck hunting with Cheney? Wonder what he did so's Cheney wouldn't shoot him in the face. Such a fowl business.
Posted by Sharon at April 25, 2008 09:50 PMSharon - I believe that is referred to as professional courtesy ... you know, like skunks not spraying other skunks.
Posted by jwrjr at April 25, 2008 10:59 PMGreat post, and simply jawdropping----THIS is the suppposed great intellectual supernova of "conservatism"---vomiting lame ass GOoPer talking points that peter pinhead does a better job shitting out.
I simply shake my head at such psychological stubborness and extreme intellectual dishonesty---the issue "wasn't close", "so old by now", "Get over it", "Gore's to blame", etc. etc. This is a very revealing "interview" with someone who I'm coming to understand is a sociopath, and who exhibits all the traits of Conservative White Male Syndrome (denial of reality, extreme obstinacy, massive egomania). A pity Stahl was (of course) too afraid and too uninformed to humiliate and infuriate him on national TV.
What history will record, Nino Scalia, is that you are a conservative activist masquerading as a "judge", just as your fellow RATS are. You may be unaware that later counts of all the votes (both undervotes AND overvotes, which the FL trial court would almost certainly have agreed to look at) showed that Gore won FL under any "method" the independent reviewers chose to use.
So, Nino, you 5 conservative Repubs installed the man who unquestionably lost the election----you voted against democracy. And you think it's "old news" and the nation should "get over it". Sorry, we never will, and history will record that you are to blame for Worst President Ever and his unbelievable lawbreaking regime---which also doesn't likely trouble our fine "Justice".
Posted by euzoius at April 26, 2008 05:51 AMCan you impeach Supreme Court Justices?
Sure can. And trust the Democ-rats, Pelosi/Ried/Hoyer/Clinton, to get right on it. Oh wait...they're busy telling you you can't have healthcare reform because only activists and the grassroots want it.
Posted by phidipides at April 26, 2008 08:53 AMScalia is just another corrupt reactionary.
And it wasn't that long ago that people like Nino Scalia would have been treated as "white" southern European trash. Some people never learn.
Posted by gay veteran at April 26, 2008 10:17 AMGV, exactly.
That's what these turds are oblivious to with their "personal responsibility" shitola.
Posted by euzoius at April 26, 2008 10:23 AMscalia is an intellectually dishonest republican political operative who has been given a seat on the supreme court. his loyalty is party first, nation second.
but
for despicable bush admin actions, few can match this story about a possible bush effort to crush an israeli-syrian deal on returning the golan heights.
the one certain thing about the middle east is that the nations there have to become involved in their own effective and productive negotiations in order for theri to be peach in the region.
that the bush admin would try to quash one effort, if that is what they did,
that really despicable.
this from kevin drum's political animal:
[ SYRIA FOLLOWUP....Here's more on the Syrian/North Korean nuclear reactor thing. One of the big questions floating around is: Why now? The intelligence community has kept quiet about it for a full seven months since Al Kibar was bombed, so why did they finally decide to brief Congress (and the press) this week?
.
.
.
However, there's another possibility: there have been some very credible reports recently that Israel and Syria are serious about trying to work out a deal of their own that basically exchanges peace for a return of the Golan Heights. The Bush administration is dead set against it. So maybe that explains the timing of the briefing. Maybe Bush figured it would stir up renewed hostility toward Syria and scuttle any attempts to pressure him into brokering a deal, but not stir up so much hostility that it would also scuttle ongoing talks with North Korea. ]
Maybe. It's just a guess. Daniel Levy has more along these lines over at TPMCafe
You're still rehashing the 2000 Florida vote debacle without mentioning media sponsored recounts proved Bush had indeed won. Who's being mendacious? Perhaps you should be more concerned with the current situation wherein the DNC is disenfranchising millions of Florida voters by denying them the right to participate in their party's primary.
Posted by rlm at April 27, 2008 08:11 AMrlm, you're a flat out LIAR
Posted by Gay Veteran at April 28, 2008 09:25 AMActually, rlm, the second independent review, which looked at overvotes as well the litigated undervotes, showed Gore won FL under EVERY standard chosen.
The FL trial court was going to rule on the parties' motion to add overvotes to the recount when the US S Ct shut the whole thing down, thus electing Bush by a 5-4 ruling.
Bush lost FL and was improperly awarded the presidency, Gore won FL and the election. That's what history will show. The MSM of course refused to cover this second recount.
Posted by euzoius at April 28, 2008 04:38 PM