Justice Scalia: O.J. did it

Far be it from this Swamp blogger to argue with a columnist of the Chicago Tribune, but wasn't O. J. found liable in the civil suit?

Anton Scalia is by far one of the worst appointments to the High Court ever. Not only does he not possess the mental capacity to sit in ultimate judgement of others, he lacks the tinyist bit of common sense. He and Judge token, are two of the most blatently right wing biased idiots to ever put on a robe. This writ of cert that Scalia wrote this opinion on is a racial bias suit, saying that the judge was a biased redneck, cracker in Louisiana, it's that simple, but the republican braintrust of Scalia and Uncle Thomas can never see color bias in any litigation that should ever come across their collective desks. They only know what the rich 1%ers want. I guess Scalia never heard the joke about Sicily only being a backstroke from Africa. Although if you bother to dig into this case a little deeper, no one ever really questioned the guys guilt, not even his lawyer in arguements ever made the effort to call his client innocent. This case was always about the racist behavior still alive and lynching in the south and a fair part of the rest of the country.

I love how the class warriors like "the other Bruce" always feel the need to attack Justice Scalia's intelligence and common sense while simultaneously crying poor mouth.

Anyone who knows the law knows that Scalia's intelligence is beyond question. He accomplished more in the arena of law by the age of 40 than most do in a lifetime.

He's a graduate of both Georgetown and Harvard Law and is known for the intricate conservative law theory he's crafted from the bench. He's been a Law Professor at Stanford, Georgetown, and the University of Chicago.

I might've been inclined to agree with the poster about a lack of questions during court and articulate opinions and dissents from Justice Thomas, but you certainly can't make the argument that Justice Scalia is lacking in either.

Such an assertion just blatantly shows "the other Bruce" to be what he accuses a sitting Supreme Court Justice of being: an idiot.

p.s. I certainly hope that one day "the other Bruce" has his home taken from him via eminent domain, the law that famously allows an individual's property to be seized by the federal government for private development. Wasn't it the "critical mind" of Justice Souter that came up with the justificatio for this blatant constitutional violation masquerading as law?

Justice Scalia absolutely has enough intelligence to be on the Supreme Court. His record is exemplary. However, he seems to have been successful for too long. Scalia no longer recognizes his own bias as being what it is; a bias that should have no place in the role of the Judiciary.

Far be it from this Swamp blogger to argue with a columnist of the Chicago Tribune, but wasn't O. J. found liable in the civil suit?

Posted by: Bruce | December 4, 2007 2:42 PM

Bruce = Zzz...broken record

Why are we not surprise that Antonin Scalia plays the ignorant card? The trial is not whether a man killed his wife or not. The trial is about getting a fair trial by having un-biased juries.

It should never be an all white jury or all black jury regardless who commit the crime. It should be a well composed and balanced jury without predetermined judgments or prejudices.

Too many times, innocent victims become convicted because of an unfair trial due to a prejudice jury. There are hundreds of cases like this. Some dating back 20 or so years. They were finally released on DNA evidences.

Antonin Scalia should be concern about Citizens getting fair trials; and not worry about his opinions on whether O.J. is guilty or not!

Whether O.J. was a killer or not, we don't know for sure. Justice is blind. Nobody was there at the crime scene except the victim and the killer.

I repeat: the important thing is not the crime, but that a fair trial consisting of a jury that is not biased.

Antonin Scalia should be ashame of himself for not understanding the basics of the Constitution. What I fear is that he understands it but plays ignorant.

This is the guy who joined shotgun Darth, on the taxpayers dime, for a duck hunt on property owned by some oil baron in Louisiana. This, just weeks after the S.C. had agreed to hear a case regarding Cheney's alleged conflict of interest issues for allowing an energy consortium to (secretly) write U.S. energy policy.

When this cozy encounter was brought to light, Scalia couldn't think of any reason to recuse himself from the case, none at all, yet 28 U.S.C. 455 clearly states:

"Any justice, judge, or magistrate [magistrate judge] of the United States shall disqualify himself in any proceeding in which his impartiality might reasonably be questioned." Want to take a guess at who delivered the opinion on the "extra-judicial source rule" in Liteky v. United States, 1994? Yeah, it was Justice Scalia.

Conflicts of interest aside, why anyone would want to share a "sportsman's" experience which Cheney is puzzling to me. You see, Cheney prefers a rigged game, rather it be crafting energy policy or hunting fowl. Are you familiar with the term "canned hunt"? It's kind of like "shock 'n awe", Texas style:

The Humane Society of the United States rips Dick Cheney on "canned hunting": "This wasn't a hunting ground. It was an open-air abattoir, and the vice president should be ashamed to have patronized this operation and then slaughtered so many animals," states Wayne Pacelle, a senior vice president of The Humane Society of the United States. "If the Vice President and his friends wanted to sharpen their shooting skills, they could have shot skeet or clay, not resorted to the slaughter of more than 400 creatures planted right in front of them as animated targets." According to another news source, "five-hundred pheasants were released in front of Cheney and his men; and the ten-man hunting party killed 417 of the birds. Vice President Cheney alone shot over 70 pheasants. The birds were then plucked and vacuum-packed in time for Cheney's afternoon flight back to Washington, DC."

Scalia is an ultra right-wing literalists who doesn't believe in separation of Church and State. Cheney is...Scary.

Has EVERYONE lost his mind about the Simpson case?

First, Scalia makes up a story about OJ "feign(ing) mental illness," which never happened.

Then James Oliphant and blogger "Bruce" whiff on this point by arguing whether Scalia was referring to the criminal or civil case.

The biggest point here, bloggers, is that Scalia said it's okay for an all-white jury to convict a man because he's black like OJ and it's okay for a prosecutor to compare a suspect to OJ - urging the jury not to let OJ get away again.

The righted winged fascists on the Supreme Court will argue that a state has the right to be racist & it's not for the federal government to infringe on a states rights.

Of course, they won't word it that way.

And like, duh, of course OJ is guilty, but that's not the point of this case in front of the Supreme Court now, is it?

Alt Caption;

'All I really want are my Graham Crackers and milk....'

Justice Scalia also lacks the basic common sense to understand the word "recuse" when he was hearing cases from the Labor Department while his his son Eugene was the Solicitor of Labor.

His remarks are proof of his incompetence and lack of wisdom
He should resign or be impeached

i love you

Scalia and Alito are great judges,
ones that respect the original
intent of the Constitution--unlike
the liberal idiots before them who
tried to reinterpret everything.

Are you even an American citizen,
'harish tekchandani' or did you
sneak across the border?