interesting contention in a recent column on SCOTUSblog, by Tom Goldstein, who was second chair for the Inventor of the Internet in Bush v. Gore. http://www.scotusblog.com/wp/thoughts-on-this-term-and-the-next/print/ excerpting just the relevant observation: [rquoter]Changing gears to another topic entirely, I think that the most interesting Justices, by far, were Justices Scalia and Thomas. Both remain the most principled members of the Court. They joined the defendant-favoring majorities in [26] Gant and [27] Melendez-Diaz, as they consistently have done in the recent lines of jury-right and confrontation cases. Justice Scalia joined the left to provide a majority in [28] Cuomo and [29] Spears. Justice Thomas did the same in the maritime punitive damages case, [30] Atlantic Sounding. There is no counter-example in which a member of the left joined the Court’s four most conservative Justices to provide a majority. Justice Thomas, in particular, remained willing to front new theories on critical questions, often writing only for himself, as in NAMUDNO. No other member of the Court is so independent in his thinking. The irony of course is that there remains a public perception, rooted in ignorance, that he is the handmaiden of other conservative Justices, particularly Justice Scalia. I disagree profoundly with Justice Thomas’s views on many questions, but if you believe that Supreme Court decisionmaking should be a contest of ideas rather than power, so that the measure of a Justice’s greatness is his contribution of new and thoughtful perspectives that enlarge the debate, then Justice Thomas is now our greatest Justice.[/rquoter] Sam, I take it you would not agree?
That's not relevant, what I want to discuss is the fact that you started this thread to make fun of malnourished one-eyed babies in order to further your own nefarious plans. It is clearly stated in the post above. Please post a link to definitively prove that you did not intend otherwise. TGIFIA.
unless it's a successful female republican. but, back on topic, Sam, you have been particularly disdainful of Justice Thomas' intellect, reasoning, and opinions. Do you think Goldstein is wrong, and if so, why?
Please, for the love of all that is good and holy, stop this bull**** post-haste, it's embarrassing to watch. What the hell happened to you? Unlike TJ, it seems that you actually believe the things you are posting. This is not healthy, take a break, go enjoy life, find *something* else to occupy your time. The rest of you, stop egging him on. Just my .02
Wow, I haven't come to the D&D in ages, and by god that thread you linked to is entertaining. Thank you. Must be a good day. I think I'll quit while I'm ahead.
The answer will be forthcoming, when you prove that you didn't start this thread to poop upon brilliant hard working diabetic near-sighted puerto ricans from the South Bronx projects. For that matter, prove that you didn't start it to insult all hispanics to imply that they are stupid and poopupon them too. Prove that you didn't. With links. MG chico.
I could give a rats ass on what's good and holy, this back and forth is amusing. Let the war continue till the other side dies a slow painful death!...
Cut TJ and Basso some slack. First their beloved Dubya and Cheney were deligitmized to the point that they were banned from the GOP campaign, then McCain lost and now their big hope Palin is self destructing.
I'm a (half) minority who has generally voted Republican (establishing my bona fides to avoid the "liberals hate successful minority Republicans" line of argument). Now that that's out of the way: I've always thought that for a "strict constructionist" Justice Thomas seems to have a strong dislike for the Fourth Amendment.
