Antonin Scalia isn't an evil genius, he's just plain old evil.

[spotbird]

There is some sort of meeting on CSPAN now, I'm shocked that Scalia isn't in any way compelling. He is just a fat guy full of himself who makes it up as he goes along.

I honestly didn't know.

[A-Schwarzenegger]

1. Looks like Lou Costello.

[rwenos]

2. Scalia's No Genius

But he is intellectually powerful, and unafraid to buck the tide. For example, he isn't afraid of spouting off about "Creation Science" in dissenting opinions. He's VERY sure of himself, even when he's completely wrong. He's the leading figure in the "Original Intent" school of interpreting the Constitution -- i.e., the conceit that we can determine what the Framers meant, about things like cloning, the Internet, automobiles, world wars. (Stuff the Framers didn't even dream of.)

He's radically conservative, and tells Clarence Thomas when Thomas can go to the bathroom.

[bobbieinok]

3. he's said several times that the constitution is a 'dead document'

[unblock]

4. correct. his talent is creating the ILLUSION of genius

he espouses a logically consistent philosophy that, aside from a few inexcusable exceptions such as bush v. gore, he is willing to carry to its logical conclusion, no despite the obviousness of being wrong.

true geniuses recognize it as a "reductio ad absurdo" fallacy -- if your argument takes you to an absurd result, then something is wrong with either the logic or the premises.

case in point is his argument that the government can put to death people it KNOWS are innocent, provided they had a fair trial. you see, if they had a fair trial, then right after the trial, new evidence emerges (dna evidence, typically) that clears the convict, well, gee, it's just too bad that it didn't come out at trial. if the trial wasn't fair, then you MIGHT get a new trial, but the mere unavailability of exonerating evidence is insufficient to prove an unfair trial.

this isn't genius. this is an extremist who cannot recognize that his SIMPLISTIC logic took him to an absurd conclusion.

[spotbird]

5. Watch how the justices interact.

These guys hate each other. Neither will dignify the other with even a glance while the other is speaking.