J'Acusse Scalia

What kind of perverse jurisprudence Justice Scalia advocates in the latest Gitmo ruling? According the judge, applying the basic right of habeas corpus to all individuals in U.S. custody and in U.S. permanent soil "will almost certainly cause more Americans to be killed." With all due respect to the soldiers who have died, what kind of intellectual vacuousness does this represent? The idea is repugnant to scholastic study. In no way or fashion can one ascertain a future condition based on a predicated past. What if could be shown that the respect of human rights would lead instead to less soldiers killed, would Scalia then have to reverse himself? Let's apply this "legal principle" to every issue- minds ponder whether buying oil leads to the unwarranted death of soldiers; better yet, going to war without provocation obviously leads to more Americans soldiers getting killed than would otherwise, so this war must be unconstitutional. The indolent mind here represents a repeat of lack of legal priciple shown in Bush v. Gore.  Scalia does not use reason in his opinions, he first come to a decision and then works backwards to justify it. Scalia is an intellectual thug. To be clear, the decision today is very similar to Marburry- essentially the Court is disabusing any notion that the other two branches of government can exclude it from weighing in on, of all things, judicial matters.    

There's more...

A Conservative Tells the Truth

With the continuing display of incompetence in the Bush administration, there's been a lot of talk, some of it even in liberal circles, about what happened to the "real" conservatives.  Where are those conservatives who are fiscally prudent and wary of foreign adventures?  I know the answer.  They were not hiding.  They were simply doing their job.  That job is to ignore problems.

There's more...


Reprinted from The Satirical Political Report http://satiricalpolitical.com

Within the past few days, both Vice President Cheney and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales have attacked critics of the Bush Administration's warrantless surveillance program, including a federal judge who ruled last August that the program was unconstitutional.

As Gonzales succinctly said, "we shouldn't let facts like the U.S. Constitution get in the way of our fight to defend freedom."

Gonzales also criticized judges who recognized such facts as the Enlightenment, the Geneva Convention, Congressional statutes, the New Deal, the Great Society and global warming.

Despite the Democrats' midterm election victory, the Attorney General insisted that the Administration would continue to push for federal judges who share the philosophy of a Scalia or Thomas: "We believe that judges should adhere to "original in-tent," that is, the norms of pre-Magna Carta feudal society, when most folks were living in tents."

CONTINUED at: http://satiricalpolitical.com/?p=420

There's more...


In a lawsuit that legal scholars are calling unprecedented, the Republican National Committee has filed suit against Diebold, the manufacturer of electronic voting machines, for breach of contract, negligence, fraud and breach of fiduciary duty - all arising out of Diebold's failure to "fix" the midterm elections in favor of the GOP.

The 189-page complaint, filed, naturally, in the Southern District of Florida, alleges that "Diebold reneged on its promises to deliver a majority of votes to Republican candidates in 49 states."

A footnote to the complaint explained that "no damages are sought regarding the Communistwealth of Taxachussets, which even elected a black guy as governor; as the GOP acknowledges that Diebold could only be expected to perform its contractual promises, not miracles."

Professor Alan Dershowitz of the Harvard Law School commented that this was the first time he could recall an action being brought against a party for failing to carry out a fraud. "Indeed," Dershowitz added, "it would be like O.J. suing a private investigator for not finding the real killer ... Oops!"

CONTINUED at: http://satiricalpolitical.com/?p=402

There's more...


Reprinted from The Satirical Political Report http://satiricalpolitical.com

Kudos to the excellent column and title by Newsweek's Howard Fineman, in describing the Rummy-dump and the partial restoration of the Regime of Bush the Elder, primarily in the form of James Baker and Robert Gates. And, most importantly, thank you Howard, for inspiring this Thin Lizzy song parody:

Guess who just got back today?
Them buttoned-down boys, from Poppy's Days
Haven't changed, now they're back in play
But man, I still think like foxes they're crazy

They were asking if Dubya was around
How you was, where you could be found
Told them you were living in fantasy-town
Driving your old man crazy

The boys are back in town
The boys are back in town ...
I said
The boys are back in town
The boys are back in town
The boys are back in town
The boys are back in town

You know that SECDEF used to "dance" a lot
Every night at the podium saying what the troops ain't got
Man when I tell you he was a fool, he shoulda' been shot
I mean he was dreaming

READ MORE at: http://satiricalpolitical.com/?p=405

There's more...


Advertise Blogads