When asked in the debate to name a current or former SC Justice he admires, Reid picks...Scalia!

[Ter]

At about 26:30, the question is asked to Harry Reid. He says Scalia. He also completely dodges the question of "Name a current or former SC Justice who should never have been approved by the Senate."

Video here:

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/296018-1

[DFLforever]

1. So? You don't actually think he meant, do you?

He's pandering for votes at the moment.

[WillParkinson]

2. I admire people of questionable character...

I admire the fact that they were able to maintain their relevancy in the world. I admire that they can be so far out of touch with the realities of the world around them as to think themselves above the rest of us 'peons'.

What's not to admire. It's like watching a dinosaur who still continues to live. You have to admire it, even if you don't care for it.

[WyLoochka]

4. K & R this Post n/t

[OmahaBlueDog]

3. People who know Antonin Scalia personally tend to like him

Scalia & family are famously good friends with Ruth Bader Ginsburg & family. They vacation together and attend the opera together.

[Art_from_Ark]

5. Yeah, what's not to like about this guy?

After all, this is the "justice" who is proud of the fact that the Court “has never held that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who has had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is actually innocent.”

He's also a swell guy if you're his duck hunting buddy and you just happen to have a case coming up before him that could put you in the Vice President's residence, and he conveniently finds a heretofore unknown clause hidden between the lines of the 14th Amendment that allows for a favored presidential candidate who is going to lose the election to actually win it because losing it would violate his "rights to equal protection". And to make sure that opposition party cannot use this decision to their advantage in the future, he makes sure to note that the decision is a one-time deal, no-precedent-here sort of affair, and doesn't even sign the decision.

[Ter]

6. Yes, but was there no other Justice to cite?

He could have said someone long gone, like Marshall.

[BootinUp]

7. He also said he disagrees with him

and he mentioned several Justices from the past. I took it to mean he respects certain Justices intellect, or abilities similar to how we "admire" Rove's genius.

[Ter]

8. That's fine, I just think there were better choices to say first

He also didn't say who he wouldn't have confirmed. I really would have liked to have known.