Holy Sh*t! Scalia Has Died

[Scorpio64 5,156]

I'm just going to throw this out there.  You know those commercials where they say " ask your doctor if you are healthy enough to take this little blue pill"  Well, Scalia was not healthy enough to take the little blue pill but did anyway.  I'm thinking he died with a smile on his face. He may have been a hunter, but I think a beaver ultimately took him down.

 

It pretty much explains everything.  The family is not eager to have his death investigated because they pretty much already know what (and who) went down.

[Zeke 5,504]

I'm just going to throw this out there. You know those commercials where they say " ask your doctor if you are healthy enough to take this little blue pill" Well, Scalia was not healthy enough to take the little blue pill but did anyway. I'm thinking he died with a smile on his face. He may have been a hunter, but I think a beaver ultimately took him down.

 

It pretty much explains everything. The family is not eager to have his death investigated because they pretty much already know what (and who) went down.

Oh my

[Handyman 5,682]

Only reason for a guy his age to be taking blue pills is so he doesn't accidentally roll out of bed at night.

[Handyman 5,682]

Why are you guys feeding the troll? If you are too weak to avoid the urge to get down into the whale shit, put it on your ignore list. This is silly.

 

Please. "Troll" implies at least some baseline level of sophistication. "Chew toy" might be more germane.

[Newtonian 453]

I'm just going to throw this out there.  You know those commercials where they say " ask your doctor if you are healthy enough to take this little blue pill"  Well, Scalia was not healthy enough to take the little blue pill but did anyway.  I'm thinking he died with a smile on his face. He may have been a hunter, but I think a beaver ultimately took him down.

 

It pretty much explains everything.  The family is not eager to have his death investigated because they pretty much already know what (and who) went down.

Holy shit what insane conjecture. So he died like Nelson Rockefeller, in the arms of some nice looking broad?

 

Wowowow. Totally off the wall, 99.999% conjecture. But not a bad idea. Wanna take 1000:1 odds? 

[Arthur Kill 0]

 

 

 

Spoken like a true mental defect, uh, I mean liberal.

 

 

 

Like the good liberal you are, you're certainly not a lover of the Constitution nor the Founding Fathers, huh?

 

 

 

It's the height of irony that in the same sentence as "founding fathers" you use the word "liberal" as an insult -- the way you have been conditioned to by today's radical right-wing media -- without the slightest notion that our founding fathers themselves, were liberals.

 

Rush should be required to read from a history text for an hour each day so that his audience could actually gain some knowledge and stop consistently making jackasses out of themselves every time they open their traps.

 

So funny, you can't make this shit up!!

 

 

PS - no I am not a liberal.  I am beholden to no party affiliation, only the truth.

[njpilot 671]

You can be a liberal and not be beholden to any party. Liberalism is an ideology just as conservatism is. There are liberal republicans as there used to be conservative democrats.

 

You say the Founders were liberal. I would say not at all by today's definition of liberal. Liberalism was hijacked by the progessives in the beginning of the 20th century. The Founders stood for Liberty. Small, limited government. Today, liberals, both democrat and republican believe in big, all encompassing government, telling the people how to live their lives.

 

That was not the beliefs, nor the intention of the Founders when they went to war to throw off a ruling and oppressive gov't, as we again have today.

 

If you don't see the difference, then you are a liberal in the modern sense and don't believe in the Founding Principals.

 

You made a comment earlier expressing that you hope the next justice wouldn't be another Scalia. What did you dislike so much about Scalia? That he tried to follow the intent of the Founders rather than using his own"feelings" as the liberal justices do?

[PK90 3,570]

Why is he still here. He is Anti-2A, Anti-NRA, Anti-SelfProtection and clearly for the other side. You can not change a pure leftist view, as he will not change ours.

 

Sent from an undisclosed location via Tapatalk.

[Malsua 1,422]

Why is he still here. He is Anti-2A, Anti-NRA, Anti-SelfProtection and clearly for the other side. You can not change a pure leftist view, as he will not change ours.

 

Sent from an undisclosed location via Tapatalk.

 

Agreed, although I just have him on ignore.  He's a troll, unworthy of even reading.

[Zeke 5,504]

Why is he still here. He is Anti-2A, Anti-NRA, Anti-SelfProtection and clearly for the other side. You can not change a pure leftist view, as he will not change ours.

 

Sent from an undisclosed location via Tapatalk.

you can't place people on an island because they are wrong.

[siderman 1,138]

[bhunted 887]

Agreed, although I just have him on ignore. He's a troll, unworthy of even reading.

What sux is Tapatalk doesn't recognize that function unfort.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Zeke 5,504]

What sux is Tapatalk doesn't recognize that function unfort.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Can't you go to the full version from your phone, if " mechanical " blocking is necessary for you?

[bhunted 887]

Can't you go to the full version from your phone, if " mechanical " blocking is necessary for you?

Yep, I can block him via my desktop or from a browser. But most of the time I'm here via Tapa on my ipad or iphone. Especially when I am away from my desk which these days is most of the time.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[Zeke 5,504]

Yep, I can block him via my desktop or from a browser. But most of the time I'm here via Tapa on my ipad or iphone. Especially when I am away from my desk which these days is most of the time.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I just use the mobile browser.

 

Anyway, a good man has past. It's truly a shame how political a man's death has become. My condolences to his family and friends. God speed

[bhunted 887]

I just use the mobile browser.

 

Anyway, a good man has past. It's truly a shame how political a man's death has become. My condolences to his family and friends. God speed

For sure.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[bzer1 15]

I'm not sure why you would block him. If, as you surmise, and his language would suggest, he is a liberal/anti 2A, and so on, wouldn't it be best to hear him out and understand where he's coming from? Isn't that what the anti constitution crowd does to us? listen, engage, understand? How do you think they keep getting their warped agenda through? They know their enemy, they understand that we are their enemy, and they treat us as such. They don't block us, they listen, and counter which is how we end up compromising and they consider not getting their entire agenda all at once a compromise. Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer, and let there be no doubt, progressives are the greatest enemy of liberty.

[Old Glock guy 1,127]

I'm not sure why you would block him. If, as you surmise, and his language would suggest, he is a liberal/anti 2A, and so on, wouldn't it be best to hear him out and understand where he's coming from? Isn't that what the anti constitution crowd does to us? listen, engage, understand? How do you think they keep getting their warped agenda through? They know their enemy, they understand that we are their enemy, and they treat us as such. They don't block us, they listen, and counter which is how we end up compromising and they consider not getting their entire agenda all at once a compromise. Keep your friends close, but your enemies closer, and let there be no doubt, progressives are the greatest enemy of liberty.

 

Well said bzer!  I heartily concur.

[bhunted 887]

There is no winning with him. Not worth my time anymore.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

[bzer1 15]

There is no winning with him. Not worth my time anymore.

 

 

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

I'm not trying to win the discussion, I'm trying to win the war. The greatest tool in winning any war is intelligence. I certainly understand your frustration, after all trying to talk sense to a leftist is like trying to reason with a 2 year old, they want what they want in spite of the damage they cause to get it.

[BaconPancakes 3]

http://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2016/02/did_justice_scalia_already_give_us_the_solution_to_the_problem_of_filling_his_seat.html

 

Good perspective on the issue

[njpilot 671]

Just reported that Obummer won't be going to Scalia's funeral. Such a worthless, disrespectful douche. probably planning to go golfing instead. Jan 2017 can't get here fast enough.

[JohnnyB 4,326]

Just reported that Obummer won't be going to Scalia's funeral. Such a worthless, disrespectful douche. probably planning to go golfing instead. Jan 2017 can't get here fast enough.

THIS Times 1,000,000. What a scumbag!

[AVB-AMG 530]

I think that too many of you are acting or sounding like the principles of our country are about to come to an end because US Supreme Court Justice Scalia died.  Get a grip.. We will survive this.

 

The Republican Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell has stated that the American people are entitled to be part of this choice.  Well hello… Like it or not, Barak Obama has been elected President, twice…., by the American people.  The Republican Party is already heading off the deep end and they really cannot afford either the perception or the reality of being obstructionists, preventing what our Constitution calls for in this situation.

President Obama will do his Constitutional duty and nominate someone to fill the vacancy on the SCOTUS.  We have no idea at this point who he will nominate so why make the blanket assertion that our country should wait for the next POTUS to make the nomination? 

 

While it is unlikely that whomever Obama nominates will be a true conservative, I for one think there is a good chance that it will be a solid, proven jurist who may even be acceptable to some Republican Senators.  I have to believe that there must exist somewhere in our country a judge or scholar with impeccable credentials and impartiality who, in rational times, would have an easy road through the confirmation process. This would be an individual acceptable to both parties.Maybe in his last act of attempted bi-partisanship, President Obama could invite Senators McConnell and Charles E. Grassley, the Judiciary Committee chairman, to the White House for a discussion of potentially acceptable qualified candidates to attempt to see if they can find any common ground.  Yes, this would require courage on everyone’s part, but I have not given up hope that it is still possible.  They all could present lists of distinguished lawyers who might be acceptable to the other side.  What a concept…!

 

If I am wrong and Obama nominates someone inappropriate, then the Senate can and will vote to deny his or her ratification.  They all will then have performed their Constitutional duties, without delay or obstructionism.  At that point, Obama can try again with another candidate or if time is running out on his Presidency, then it will most likely be postponed for the next President to nominate someone else.

 

AVB-AMG

[leahcim 680]

The Republican Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell has stated that the American people are entitled to be part of this choice.  Well hello… Like it or not, Barak Obama has been elected President, twice…., by the American people.  The Republican Party is already heading off the deep end and they really cannot afford either the perception or the reality of being obstructionists, preventing what our Constitution calls for in this situation.

President Obama will do his Constitutional duty and nominate someone to fill the vacancy on the SCOTUS.  We have no idea at this point who he will nominate so why make the blanket assertion that our country should wait for the next POTUS to make the nomination? 

 

While it is unlikely that whomever Obama nominates will be a true conservative, I for one think there is a good chance that it will be a solid, proven jurist who may even be acceptable to some Republican Senators.  I have to believe that there must exist somewhere in our country a judge or scholar with impeccable credentials and impartiality who, in rational times, would have an easy road through the confirmation process. This would be an individual acceptable to both parties.Maybe in his last act of attempted bi-partisanship, President Obama could invite Senators McConnell and Charles E. Grassley, the Judiciary Committee chairman, to the White House for a discussion of potentially acceptable qualified candidates to attempt to see if they can find any common ground.  Yes, this would require courage on everyone’s part, but I have not given up hope that it is still possible.  They all could present lists of distinguished lawyers who might be acceptable to the other side.  What a concept…!

<sarcasm>I am sure Obama will invite McConnell and Grassley for discussion.</sarcasm>  If he did, it would probably grease the skids, but he does not believe in bipartisanship.

 

The people also elected a majority R senate in 2014, giving them the power to defer something like this.  Just like Senator Obama tried (and failed) with attempting to filibuster Justice Alito.

[Arthur Kill 0]

You can be a liberal and not be beholden to any party. Liberalism is an ideology just as conservatism is. There are liberal republicans as there used to be conservative democrats....

 

 

Fair enough.

 

Let me rephrase;  I am not a liberal.  I am beholden to no political ideology or party affiliation, only the truth.

 

[Zeke 5,504]

Like X files?

[raz-0 1,259]

Fair enough.

 

Let me rephrase;  I am not a liberal.  I am beholden to no political ideology or party affiliation, only the truth.

 

 

 

I'll note facts manage to not show their head in the list of things you are beholden to. 

[Kevin125 4,772]

I think that too many of you are acting or sounding like the principles of our country are about to come to an end because US Supreme Court Justice Scalia died.  Get a grip.. We will survive this.

 

The Republican Senate majority leader Mitch McConnell has stated that the American people are entitled to be part of this choice.  Well hello… Like it or not, Barak Obama has been elected President, twice…., by the American people.  The Republican Party is already heading off the deep end and they really cannot afford either the perception or the reality of being obstructionists, preventing what our Constitution calls for in this situation.

President Obama will do his Constitutional duty and nominate someone to fill the vacancy on the SCOTUS.  We have no idea at this point who he will nominate so why make the blanket assertion that our country should wait for the next POTUS to make the nomination? 

 

While it is unlikely that whomever Obama nominates will be a true conservative, I for one think there is a good chance that it will be a solid, proven jurist who may even be acceptable to some Republican Senators.  I have to believe that there must exist somewhere in our country a judge or scholar with impeccable credentials and impartiality who, in rational times, would have an easy road through the confirmation process. This would be an individual acceptable to both parties.Maybe in his last act of attempted bi-partisanship, President Obama could invite Senators McConnell and Charles E. Grassley, the Judiciary Committee chairman, to the White House for a discussion of potentially acceptable qualified candidates to attempt to see if they can find any common ground.  Yes, this would require courage on everyone’s part, but I have not given up hope that it is still possible.  They all could present lists of distinguished lawyers who might be acceptable to the other side.  What a concept…!

 

If I am wrong and Obama nominates someone inappropriate, then the Senate can and will vote to deny his or her ratification.  They all will then have performed their Constitutional duties, without delay or obstructionism.  At that point, Obama can try again with another candidate or if time is running out on his Presidency, then it will most likely be postponed for the next President to nominate someone else.

 

AVB-AMG

With all due respect.... there is nothing in Obama's past that indicates that he would nominate anyone acceptable to conservatives.  Acceptable to Juan McCain and Lindsay Grahamnesty?  Maybe...

 

He nominated Sotomayor and Kagan.  Neither of these people has any respect for the Constitution.  They vote with their ideology.... not with the Constitution.  Only when they can find no cover whatsoever for their vote, will they even consider Constitutionality.    This is a demonstrable fact. Obama will only nominate someone who puts LGBT, Open Borders and the expansion of the Welfare State as their first allegiance.  Because that's his first allegiance.

 

You can see a demonstration of who he is by his refusal to attend Scalia's funeral on Saturday.

 

The Libs have been playing hardball for a long time ...while the right has been playing with themselves....    It's time the right tells Obama to "stick it".. and stops worrying about reports of political fallout announced by people like George Stephanopolous.  Play for keeps.  Shoot to kill.  Metaphorically...

 

If in fact Obama and the other socialists in our Gov't got control of the Supreme Court, you can bet your ass and everything else it would mean the end of this country as we know it.  The left has been using (and stacking) the courts to execute their agenda for a long time.  To have control of the highest court is their wet dream.  What would they do?

 

Second Amendment?  It would be rendered irrelevant.

 

Free Speech?  Only speech they like.

 

Religious Freedom?  Only if your religion kills Christians.

 

Freedom of Choice on yours and your kids education?  Ha....  You'll learn what they tell you to learn.

 

Border Sovereignty?  What's left of it....  Gone.  Wanna be here?  Just stroll in and sign up for entitlements.

 

I could go on..... but when these things are done.... there's not much left to discuss.

 

So yeah... it's a big deal.   But I believe even the squishy republitards know they will be rendered irrelevant if they screw this up.  So they will hold the line.  For us?  Hell no.... They'll do it for  for themselves. Because that's all they give a sh*t about.

[njpilot 671]

Just reported that Obummer won't be going to Scalia's funeral. Such a worthless, disrespectful douche. probably planning to go golfing instead. Jan 2017 can't get here fast enough.

Well, a reporter asked the liar-in-chief's mouth piece, Josh Earnest, if he'd rule out the golfer-in-chief golfing on Sat instead of going to Scalia's funeral and he wouldn't say he wasn't golfing, only that he didn't know the schedule.

 

If it's a nice day in DC on Sat, be assured that worthless, low-life scumbag will be on the course.