Perfect! If only the op-eds of major newspapers were so succinct.

That Meade fellow just desperately wants it to be 1818 again.

So odd that guise like that write about how awful it is to have progressives shape anything, all the while living in a civilization where they enjoy great freedoms and ability to make money well beyond their work and worth. Never once seeming to realize that if all the controls and regulations came off then what would happen is that all there would be was a small number very huge wealthy individuals and corps. making sure that no one else made it to the top of the heap. But then, I’m sure, they would welcome their new, benevolent(sic) overlords…..

Best. Shorter. Ever.

Christ, I read the entire original. What a meandering piece of psuedo-intellectual fluff. As usual, I should have trusted your interpretation, sir.

I accept my ten lashes.

Anyone who claims that Antonin Scalia is an intellectual lightweight compared to Clarence Thomas needs their head examined.

Scalia is a lot of things, but a lightweight he is not. Even though I often disagree with his rubbish opinions, you cannot deny his oratorical skills.

Thomas is so far afield that former Chief Justice Rehnquist would go out of his way to avoid assigning a majority opinion to him because Rehnquist knew Thomas’ radical views would never hold a majority of the Court together. I can count on one hand (and have fingers left over) how many dissenting opinions of his I read in school. They’re not interesting in the slightest as they plod the same ground repeatedly, and often have all of the punch of a weak kitten.

Tbogg, you are doomed to be drunk-dialed tonight by Ginny.

(Also tonic, too.)

Clarence (I wonder if he was known as “Lumpy” as a kid) is undoubtedly all sorts of bad things, but based on this New Yorker article by Jeffrey Toobin, he is now — distressingly — the “intellectual leader” of SCOTUS.

If you thought Citizens United (among others) was bad, prepare yourselves — it’s going to get much, much worse. You may need a Clarence Thomas voodoo doll to cope.

You may need a Clarence Thomas voodoo doll to cope.

Does it come with its own can of Coke?

Who on earth made the argument that Scalia is a lightweight compared to Thomas? Scalia was not hired as a motivational speaker, he was hired to be a Supreme Court justice. If his intellectual heft in the form of eloquence just helps to mask or obscure his agenda of bigotry, prejudice and opus dei grade Catholic sadomasochism, then we’re still screwed with him on the court.

But then, we’re pretty much screwed anyway…

The author of the original piece made that argument. I got out of the boat to look.

And like it or not, Scalia’s opinions (both in majority and in dissent) are often required reading in law schools because he makes students analyze and think. Simply because I find his opinions to be rubbish does not mean that they are devoid of substance or depth. His majority opinion in Heller, for example, rejects an absolute Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. And his concurrence in Raich protects the Commerce Clause more than any other conservative jurist on the Court.

Don’t forget, this guy replaced Thurgood Marshall. Ugh.

Forget Mead. How the fuck does Jeffrey Toobin arrive at the word “vindication” for Clarence Thomas scratching his initials on everything Fat Tony has stuck in front of him for 20 years?

You know, I’ve got nothing for Scalia. I figure that his opinions are primarily legalistic rationalizations for his ideologically-based decisions, but a couple things. First, at least he takes some trouble over it – Scalito and Smoothboy don’t really bother, and Thomas just pumps out ‘Our Megan’-style rants dressed up as erstaz-legal opinions. Second, Scalia may be smarter than Smoothboy, but probably not by much, but Scalito is really not too bright, and Thomas is just opaque. I can’t tell whether he’s really thick as a brick, or just doesn’t give a rat’s ass now that he’s got a lifetime sinecure. Either way, he and Scalito are an embarrassment to America, the Republican Party, the Supreme Court and the Human race. You can clearly tell that they neither of them have any integrity, morality or sense of shame, or they would have long since resigned in embarrassment.

The Toobster is scared.

Shorter Thomas:
Fucking? Hell to the Yes!
Genius? Not so much . . .

I can’t tell whether he’s really thick as a brick, or just doesn’t give a rat’s ass now that he’s got a lifetime sinecure

With all the under-the-table money going to NASCAR/WallyWorld Claure, I’m seeing your “lazy” and raising you a “you can’t fire me”.

But it’s not his fault, you see, because “they” GMO’d him during his Monsanto days and, like any RoundUpReady Super Weed, he cannot be killed, except by a hoe (and that’s when Ginny starts drunk dialing).

Someone should check if he’s still breathing, because this picture would suggest otherwise.

David Brock still has a shitload of atoning to do for his role in elevating Clarence Thomas to the Supreme Court.

Thomas’ silence during oral argument before the Supreme Court is taken as obvious evidence that he has nothing to say and is perhaps a bit intimidated by the verbal fireworks exchanged by the high profile lawyers and his more, ahem, ‘qualified’ colleagues.

I have never seen a taller straw man in my life. I have been a media HOUND since well before that dark day Thomas was confirmed and I honestly have never, EVER heard it suggested (or even implied) that Thomas was “intimidated by the verbal fireworks” etc. (he went to fucking Yale Law – I think he’s familiar with scary big words). What Thomas’ notorious silence during deliberations has suggested to Thomas’ detractors is that he has already made up his mind (i.e. that he is an ideologue).

So where does this author get the idea that lefties think a black man on the Supreme Court could be intimidated by big words? Hmmm . . . . hmmmm . . . project much, Mr. Mead?

Mead calls Thomas “the only Black man in public life that liberals could safely mock” – I guess he’s never heard of people like Michael Steele, that crazy Florida congressman (the one who hates Wasserman-Schultz – what’s his damn name again?) and yes, Colin Powell . . . and who can forget Kenneth Gladney? LOL

His majority opinion in Heller, for example, rejects an absolute Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms. And his concurrence in Raich protects the Commerce Clause more than any other conservative jurist on the Court.

Oh yeah! How can we forget Heller . . . and Reich??? (j/k – snark) :)

What, is he kidding? Is there no Alan Keyes, no Herman Cain in his world?

Thanks for the short cut and chuckle. Yep to bad about the job for life that he complains about but that’s what happens when owe the man.