Antonin Scalia

Discussion in 'The Thunderdome' started by kidbourbon, Mar 20, 2012.

  1. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    I avoid political/policy arguments like a female with crabs and a 70s bush, and this thread is no exception. And so I don't care if you love Scalia or hate him, but the guy is a humblingly good legal writer. I'm not necessarily sure that he is the best ever -- there have been some good ones: Marshall, Jackson, Kozinski is still kicking, etc. -- but nobody has ever accused Scalia of being a hack.

    The SCOTUS put out an opinion today and Scalia wrote a dissent that begins with "Let me get this straight..."
  2. volfanjo

    volfanjo Chieftain

    Debating that guy is a losing proposition. Only Milton Friedman was better on his toes than Scalia. Malcolm X wasn't half bad either.

    I enjoy reading his opinions as well, especially when he is in the minority which seems to be often.
  3. fl0at_

    fl0at_ Humorless, asinine, joyless pr*ck

    Dissenting opinions by Scalia are classic, but I don't understand half the words he uses.
  4. cotton

    cotton Stand-up Philosopher

    The guy is an engaging personality, and that is even more evident hearing him in person. I've had the opportunity to hear him lecture once, and it was a terrific experience. Agree with his originalist stance or not, but he is one find mind coupled with a colorful personality.

    A few years earlier, I also had the chance to hear Anthony Kennedy speak, and although vastly different in both style and philosophy, he did an excellent job as well.
  5. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    Yeah, those guys are rarely dumb*. For example, I don't necessarily agree with tons of Justice Breyer's opinions, but I've heard him speak and he is unquestionably a bright dude.

    *I do think Clarence Thomas is something below an intellectual heavyweight.
  6. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    I learned how to use the Em dash from Scalia opinions. The problem with that is that a man can fall in love with the Em dash, and I began to overuse it for a time. I've recently scaled it back quite a bit.
  7. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    I'd like to see a debate between Clinton and Obama. Both of those guys have mad skeelz on their feet, but if I'm taking bets, I'm setting Clinton as the favorite. We'll put the moneyline at -210.
  8. CardinalVol

    CardinalVol Uncultured, non-diverse mod

    Clinton would destroy him.

    The presser they did together a couple of years back that Clinton just took over was classic.
  9. golfballs03

    golfballs03 New Member

    Clinton would absolutely obliterate Obama in a debate. Clinton is an extremely smart guy. Obama is not. Without a teleprompter feeding him lines, he's actually pretty dull, IMO
  10. bigpapavol

    bigpapavol Chieftain

    you really think Obama is solid on his feet? I have yet to see him demonstrate any real ability to think through an issue without his teleprompter. He always defaults back to populist rhetoric when he isn't primed by someone smarter than he is.
  11. JT5

    JT5 Super Moderator

    Agree with others, Clinton would castrate Obama.
  12. JayVols

    JayVols Walleye Catchin' Moderator

    I am a Clinton fan. Can we get him back?
  13. Tenacious D

    Tenacious D The law is of supreme importance, or no importance

    I'm now a fan, KB.....thanks.

    I'll Rexy some snippets here, as I read it, for those who might not prefer to sift through it:

    I like him.
  14. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    I think Clinton is smarter than Obama. But Obama is definitely a smart guy.
  15. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    I think he is solid on is feet in the mold of Ronald Reagan.

    I'm making this up off the top of my head, but I imagine that going into a debate or event where he is going to have to answer questions, Obama has maybe 5 soundbytes (for lack of a better word) that he wants to work into the response or debate. He is sufficiently prepped to be able to speak intelligently and elaborate on these soundbytes.

    So then here is his protocol:
    1. Listen to question
    2. Deliver an answer that is essentially a segue to his soundbyte. But the trick here is to make the answer at least passably responsive. Make the person think you're responding to their question even though you are really just using the answer as a veiled excuse to transition into saying something that you are already prepared to say.
    3. Deliver soundbyte and elaborate.

    I think Obama is very good at straddling the line in #2 between responsiveness and redirection to prepared statements. This is what ALL politicians do, but I think Obama does it well.
  16. kidbourbon

    kidbourbon Well-Known Member

    Np, I like him as well.

    Even people that hate him -- and there are some that do -- will freely acknowledge that his writing chops are above reproach.
  17. volfanjo

    volfanjo Chieftain

    I would not include Clinton or Obama on a list of skilled debaters. Clinton was personable and good in informal settings, but wasn't exactly a policy wonk. (Still isn't and never was). Obama's goal is to convince everyone how a president can be both bookish and personable. I really think he wanted to redefine the presidency to be a "conversation" between the people and the presidency. Which isn't what I particularly want out of my president but I digress.

    Clinton's greatest strength was his ability to get elected. He was a great campaigner; great in one on ones. Clinton had the great fortune of running the first time against not only the worst debater in presidential history but someone who openly despised them in George H.W. Bush.

    Obama has some campaign skill too, clearly.
  18. droski

    droski Traffic Criminal

  19. droski

    droski Traffic Criminal

    i think you seriously underestimate ronald reagan. either that or overestimate obama.
  20. Tar Volon

    Tar Volon Me Blog

    Ain't that the truth

Share This Page