Anyone else watching this Scalia interview?

[BigDaddy44]

Is he the most hateful, arrogant SOB you've ever seen, or what??????

[bdamomma]

1. there are few threads posted about him

and everyone has described as ARROGANT. But aren't they all, that is why he hangs out with Cheney.

[PDittie]

2. Couldn't

Can't muster the hate today. In too good a mood to spoil it.

[JackBeck]

3. "I'm right. And anyone that disagress with me is wrong."

Sound familiar?

[napi21]

4. I'm watching it, and to be honest, I like the guy. I completely disagree

with his legal phylosophy, but as a person, I can understande why even Justice Ginsburg said he's really a friend and she enjoys being around him. I suppose you could say he's arrogant, but so are all the people I've ever known who've achieved a high and powerful position in life, wether in politics or in the business world.

[JackBeck]

5. People often refer to Bush as charming and enjoyable to be around.

Personally, I can't find one iota of good in those that make decisions disenfranchising millions of Americans.

[napi21]

7. I SAID I completely disagree with his decisions and his phylosophy, but

that doesn't make him a disgusting person. I have several BILs and my favorite is a staunch Pub. I really enjoy being around him, but we can't EVER get into a political discussion because they always turn into a terribly nasty fight.

On 60 Minutes, Scalia came across as a totally different person than the one I hear on the court. I still want him to retire and get off that court, but I don't HATE the person I saw tonight.

[JackBeck]

10. Uncomfortable with the Bush analogy?

Your family pleasantries aside, Scalia has for decades kept equality unattainable all in the name of Opus Dei.

The character makeover on 60 Minutes given by an obvious friendly was transparent, to say the least. I hope you reconsider and aren't fooled by this late-in-life attempt at creating an affable legacy for this man.

[dflprincess]

12. Ted Bundy was said to be quite charming as well

n/t

[MindPilot]

19. Not me. I can't imagine anyone enjoying his company.

It took me about 20 seconds before his arrogant holier-than-thou-demeanor made me want to reach though the TV and strangle the pudgy little prick.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

6. I want to smack the smirk right off his face

what a dick x(

[JerseygirlCT]

8. Oh no, no, no.

I just ate. Couldn't possbily digest food while watching that ass.

[Skittles]

9. I would rather poke my own eyeballs out n/t

[Clear Blue Sky]

11. I'd rather watch the Bozo the Clown show...n/t

[bighart]

13. I can

separate disagreement with someones ideology and point of view without hating the person.
To me to not do so is the very definition of bigotry and a personal superiority mindset.

[usaftmo]

14. I'd rather bait an alligator with my manhood

instead of hearing him!

[Pastiche423]

15. My throat hurts

Does that answer your question?

He is even more arrogant and disgusting that I originally believed.

[Goldfish]

16. I totally agree with you!

Such conceit and arrogance! I had to put the Mute button on
until it was over!

[JackBeck]

17. Something that's been bothering me all night:

When did Scalia and Thomas become Constitutional "originalists"? I thought they were "strict constructionalists"?

Did Frank Luntz run a SCOTUS poll and find the word "strict" too S&M for the Repugs' beautiful minds?

[MindPilot]

20. That bugs me too. "Originalist" seems to be a polite euphemism for

"making shit up"

This whole concept that if the Constitution doesn't specifically grant a right, you don't have it is not scholarship, it's an end run to prohibit things he doesn't agree with. The semantic gymnastics necessary to excuse torture because it is not "punishment" is something I would expect from a talking head on FOX, not a judge on the highest court.

[JackBeck]

21. Tonight's interview was conducted to soften his image.

Leslie Stahl gave him a total pass when she framed torture as a form of "punishment". And he parsed the hell out of the question to avoid answering, which makes me think she intentionally asked the question that way to give him an out.

The whole argument over whether the Constitution is a living or dead document was answered well by Ginsburg. There is no plausible way the original framers could predict what future rights should be granted in a democracy, which is why certain clauses are left open-ended.

You hit the nail on the head when you say "it's an end run to prohibit things he doesn't agree with". Stahl mentioned the number of Catholics on board, but failed (not surprisingly) to delve deeper and explore the influence of Opus Dei.

[Jamastiene]

18. I can't afford to buy a new TV just yet.

Something tells me I'd lose my patience/temper with whatever bullshit he's spewing. I'll pass this time on watching, although having a keyboard (being online) makes it a different story. I can type out a snarky response to whatever he says and the computer monitor can survive. Is there a transcript online?