Rest in Peace Justice Scalia
February 16th, 2016, 09:04 AM
#44
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: southeastern Michigan
Posts: 14,203
Questions are being asked:
Detectives question lack of autopsy in Scalia death
http://nypost.com/2016/02/15/detecti...-scalia-death/
Conspiracy theories swirl around the death of Antonin Scalia
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ntonin-scalia/
Detectives question lack of autopsy in Scalia death
http://nypost.com/2016/02/15/detecti...-scalia-death/
Conspiracy theories swirl around the death of Antonin Scalia
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/...ntonin-scalia/
February 16th, 2016, 10:18 AM
#46
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,620
February 16th, 2016, 12:02 PM
#47
Connoisseur d'Junque
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: The Hudson Valley
Posts: 21,183
Here's a nice tribute from one of his former clerks in the Times:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/16/op...ce-scalia.html
- Eric
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/02/16/op...ce-scalia.html
- Eric
February 16th, 2016, 12:03 PM
#48
Connoisseur d'Junque
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: The Hudson Valley
Posts: 21,183
- Eric
February 16th, 2016, 12:47 PM
#52
Connoisseur d'Junque
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: The Hudson Valley
Posts: 21,183
Number 1 is:
That's not an article. It's a long headline.
Why did you link to a brief list of five things if you only wanted us to look at one thing, especially when Jaunty already posted a link to an actual article, in the Washington Post, on the subject?
- Eric
Conspiracy theories swirl over Justice Antonin Scalia's death
Justice Antonin Scalia was suffering from "a host of chronic conditions" when he was found dead at the age of 79 on Saturday. The county judge pronounced him dead over the phone, and did not order an autopsy — prompting some conspiracy theorists to suggest foul play. One theorist, Alex Jones, said that his "gut" told him Obama was behind Scalia's death and that the president was seeking to obtain "unprecedented power... during his last year in office." Even Donald Trump has gotten on board: "It's a horrible topic, but they say they found a pillow on his face, which is a pretty unusual place to find a pillow," the Republican presidential candidate said Tuesday.
Justice Antonin Scalia was suffering from "a host of chronic conditions" when he was found dead at the age of 79 on Saturday. The county judge pronounced him dead over the phone, and did not order an autopsy — prompting some conspiracy theorists to suggest foul play. One theorist, Alex Jones, said that his "gut" told him Obama was behind Scalia's death and that the president was seeking to obtain "unprecedented power... during his last year in office." Even Donald Trump has gotten on board: "It's a horrible topic, but they say they found a pillow on his face, which is a pretty unusual place to find a pillow," the Republican presidential candidate said Tuesday.
Why did you link to a brief list of five things if you only wanted us to look at one thing, especially when Jaunty already posted a link to an actual article, in the Washington Post, on the subject?
- Eric
February 16th, 2016, 01:00 PM
#53
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,620
This is a headline:
Conspiracy theories swirl over Justice Antonin Scalia's death
This is an article:
Justice Antonin Scalia was suffering from "a host of chronic conditions" when he was found dead at the age of 79 on Saturday. The county judge pronounced him dead over the phone, and did not order an autopsy — prompting some conspiracy theorists to suggest foul play. One theorist, Alex Jones, said that his "gut" told him Obama was behind Scalia's death and that the president was seeking to obtain "unprecedented power... during his last year in office." Even Donald Trump has gotten on board: "It's a horrible topic, but they say they found a pillow on his face, which is a pretty unusual place to find a pillow," the Republican presidential candidate said Tuesday.
Conspiracy theories swirl over Justice Antonin Scalia's death
This is an article:
Justice Antonin Scalia was suffering from "a host of chronic conditions" when he was found dead at the age of 79 on Saturday. The county judge pronounced him dead over the phone, and did not order an autopsy — prompting some conspiracy theorists to suggest foul play. One theorist, Alex Jones, said that his "gut" told him Obama was behind Scalia's death and that the president was seeking to obtain "unprecedented power... during his last year in office." Even Donald Trump has gotten on board: "It's a horrible topic, but they say they found a pillow on his face, which is a pretty unusual place to find a pillow," the Republican presidential candidate said Tuesday.
February 16th, 2016, 01:07 PM
#55
Connoisseur d'Junque
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: The Hudson Valley
Posts: 21,183
That's a lede: The introductory short paragraph of an article, as distinct from the full article itself.
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lede
- Eric
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/lede
- Eric
February 16th, 2016, 01:21 PM
#56
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2009
Posts: 2,620
February 16th, 2016, 02:47 PM
#58
Registered User
Join Date: Sep 2012
Location: Grove City, Ohio
Posts: 375
February 16th, 2016, 04:43 PM
#60
I did not agree with every vote that Scalia made, but I did agree with many, and I do respect him as having been a man of principle, and a Justice who believed, as I do, that interpreting the Constitution as meaning what it meant when written (seemingly a simple concept) is the only honest way to interpret it.
Our Supreme Court has gotten away from the actual meaning of the Constitution that they are duty-bound to interpret, and Justice Scalia helped to keep them focused honestly on their task.
The Constitution includes a mechanism for amendment, and if it is the will of the nation that its rules be changed, then those changes should be enacted honestly, through amendment, rather than through the back door, by "reinterpretation."
- Eric
Our Supreme Court has gotten away from the actual meaning of the Constitution that they are duty-bound to interpret, and Justice Scalia helped to keep them focused honestly on their task.
The Constitution includes a mechanism for amendment, and if it is the will of the nation that its rules be changed, then those changes should be enacted honestly, through amendment, rather than through the back door, by "reinterpretation."
- Eric
Our local paper published a story on his life and his journey to the Supreme Court, a very good read.
February 16th, 2016, 09:32 PM
#62
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Evansville, IN
Posts: 10,305
I agree with reading the Constitution as it was written. Best thing to do is get the Founding Fathers' comments on the same subject from their writings, it makes it crystal clear what they meant.
The only excuse then is for them to be accused of being racists since they owned slaves, and thus nothing of theirs is of any value today. Comparing the USA to any African nation in retort is then not considered a valid argument.
The only excuse then is for them to be accused of being racists since they owned slaves, and thus nothing of theirs is of any value today. Comparing the USA to any African nation in retort is then not considered a valid argument.
February 17th, 2016, 06:30 AM
#63
Moderator
Thread Starter
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Medford, Oregon
Posts: 13,696
OK, people are upset with me as they think I broke the rules about political posts. The other day I was working on the computer when the news in the background said Justice Scalia had died. It shocked me as I'd not heard any hints that he was frail. So, to honor a man whom by all reports was loved by all who knew him I posted his passing. We've done that repeatedly on this site, a well know person passes and those who want to acknowledge it comment on the thread. That was my intent, end of story.
If I had meant to make a political statement and get people riled up there's so much more to work with in the 2016 campaign. Both sides of the political aisle have candidates who've said some colorful things. So please, don't focus on divisiveness, join hands with Justice Ginsberg and honor the man who gave much of his life for our country. If you can't do that, then please just ignore the thread. If people stop posting to it, it will fade away.
If I had meant to make a political statement and get people riled up there's so much more to work with in the 2016 campaign. Both sides of the political aisle have candidates who've said some colorful things. So please, don't focus on divisiveness, join hands with Justice Ginsberg and honor the man who gave much of his life for our country. If you can't do that, then please just ignore the thread. If people stop posting to it, it will fade away.
February 17th, 2016, 08:19 AM
#64
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Evansville, IN
Posts: 10,305
I'm just speaking for myself here, but I disagree with the whole no politics or religion thing. I don't believe that Classic Olds has the right to censor, although they do have the power to do so. Usually, when I mention this, some infuriated old man will say something like "This is so-and-so's HOUSE; you wouldn't respect the wishes of the owner of the HOUSE?!?!" while totally failing to realize that their analogy is worthless, and that all areas of the internet are public domain. A better analogy is that of a bar; the owner of the bar would not restrict speech in the bar beyond what is required for public decency because he has no right to do so, and does not want to lose sales.
Many people think that the owner of a forum is the owner of the content and the worth of the site, when, in reality, it is the individual posters who are the value, and who own the worth of the site collectively. In a small community such as ours, we cannot afford to lose people with onerous rules, nor knee-jerk conformity to them when politely questioned. I mention the last because I know someone, at least someone, will respond with "if you don't like it, leave."
Fine, but my retort is, does anyone here think the country is in good shape? Anyone? The American government model depends on involved, informed citizens who care, and by having rules on this forum that we cannot discuss politics here, we are shirking our duty as Americans. If you don't understand that that is part of your duty, or if you don't even think you HAVE a duty as an American at all, then you are part of the problem.
However, I fully understand the necessity to keep the political discussion to its own arena, which is why I suggest a separate sub-forum for politics, religion, or whatever else, subject only to rules of common decency. This is a method used on most online communities, and it works well. This allows people who want to discuss things with their peers a place to do it, and those who don't can stay out, and it might generate more site traffic.
Many people think that the owner of a forum is the owner of the content and the worth of the site, when, in reality, it is the individual posters who are the value, and who own the worth of the site collectively. In a small community such as ours, we cannot afford to lose people with onerous rules, nor knee-jerk conformity to them when politely questioned. I mention the last because I know someone, at least someone, will respond with "if you don't like it, leave."
Fine, but my retort is, does anyone here think the country is in good shape? Anyone? The American government model depends on involved, informed citizens who care, and by having rules on this forum that we cannot discuss politics here, we are shirking our duty as Americans. If you don't understand that that is part of your duty, or if you don't even think you HAVE a duty as an American at all, then you are part of the problem.
However, I fully understand the necessity to keep the political discussion to its own arena, which is why I suggest a separate sub-forum for politics, religion, or whatever else, subject only to rules of common decency. This is a method used on most online communities, and it works well. This allows people who want to discuss things with their peers a place to do it, and those who don't can stay out, and it might generate more site traffic.
February 17th, 2016, 08:25 AM
#65
Registered User
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: southeastern Michigan
Posts: 14,203
Classic Olds has every right to censor. This is not a government site. Only governments can censor. Classic Olds is a private company. It can do whatever it wants, period. If people are unhappy with what Classic Olds does, they're free to leave.
People grossly misunderstand the concept of censorship and what it means with respect to the First Amendment. The First Amendment protects us from censorship by the government, period. It makes no mention of private entities. People think that freedom of speech means any time, anywhere, and it does not.
People grossly misunderstand the concept of censorship and what it means with respect to the First Amendment. The First Amendment protects us from censorship by the government, period. It makes no mention of private entities. People think that freedom of speech means any time, anywhere, and it does not.
Last edited by jaunty75; February 17th, 2016 at 08:28 AM.
February 17th, 2016, 10:21 AM
#66
'87 Delta 88 Royale
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Margate, England
Posts: 2,513
No.
There are fundamentalist radicals, conservatives, liberalists, communists, socialists, as well as from all religious faiths. I dare say there is such a thing a a fundamentalist atheist.
But if the cap fits.....
Roger.
There are fundamentalist radicals, conservatives, liberalists, communists, socialists, as well as from all religious faiths. I dare say there is such a thing a a fundamentalist atheist.
But if the cap fits.....
Roger.
February 17th, 2016, 01:05 PM
#68
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Evansville, IN
Posts: 10,305
Classic Olds has every right to censor. This is not a government site. Only governments can censor. Classic Olds is a private company. It can do whatever it wants, period. If people are unhappy with what Classic Olds does, they're free to leave.
People grossly misunderstand the concept of censorship and what it means with respect to the First Amendment. The First Amendment protects us from censorship by the government, period. It makes no mention of private entities. People think that freedom of speech means any time, anywhere, and it does not.
People grossly misunderstand the concept of censorship and what it means with respect to the First Amendment. The First Amendment protects us from censorship by the government, period. It makes no mention of private entities. People think that freedom of speech means any time, anywhere, and it does not.
I made no mention of the government, nor the first Amendment. Rather, I was speaking of decency between common men. No one has the right to censor me, just like no one has the right to censor you, as we are both free American men.
February 17th, 2016, 03:08 PM
#71
Administrator
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Poteau, Ok
Posts: 40,581
February 17th, 2016, 03:18 PM
#72
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Evansville, IN
Posts: 10,305
February 17th, 2016, 04:39 PM
#74
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Brazil Indiana
Posts: 11,503
We had that on an old 3 wheeler forum. They called it the "Fight Club" and was very much enjoyed by most members but from time to time would create problems. You could not join it without a password. If you did not have the password it was locked and you could not see anything in there. I am sure the moderators don't want something else to police.
I know a couple years back the subject of guns came up here and that had some people really riled up. Not sure how well it would work out here.
February 17th, 2016, 06:05 PM
#75
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 642
Originally Posted by rustyroger 
Advanced, sophisticated societies are no place for fundamentalists to be in positions of power.
Originally Posted by Blackpage
Are we to equate fundamentalists to conservatives ?
[QUOTE=rustyroger;896448]
No. There are fundamentalist radicals, conservatives, liberalists, communists, socialists, as well as from all religious faiths. I dare say there is such a thing a a fundamentalist atheist.
But if the cap fits.....
"But if that cap fits....."
Is it your position that I have no business aspiring to a position of power because I identify myself as a conservative which lives and prospers in an advanced sophisticated society or is your decree only reserved for radical fundamentalist conservatives?
Advanced, sophisticated societies are no place for fundamentalists to be in positions of power.
Originally Posted by Blackpage
Are we to equate fundamentalists to conservatives ?
[QUOTE=rustyroger;896448]
No. There are fundamentalist radicals, conservatives, liberalists, communists, socialists, as well as from all religious faiths. I dare say there is such a thing a a fundamentalist atheist.
But if the cap fits.....
"But if that cap fits....."
Is it your position that I have no business aspiring to a position of power because I identify myself as a conservative which lives and prospers in an advanced sophisticated society or is your decree only reserved for radical fundamentalist conservatives?
February 18th, 2016, 11:39 AM
#76
'87 Delta 88 Royale
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Margate, England
Posts: 2,513
Radical fundamentalist (insert political/religious persuasion here). That's my view (not a decree).
I do agree with Mark Twain's comment that anyone who aspires for high office should for that very reason be precluded from it.
Roger.
I do agree with Mark Twain's comment that anyone who aspires for high office should for that very reason be precluded from it.
Roger.
February 18th, 2016, 02:46 PM
#77
Registered User
Join Date: Aug 2011
Location: Connecticut
Posts: 642
Radical fundamentalist (insert political/religious persuasion here).
Growing up and living in New England as a conservative I am in the minority politically. This compels me to become keenly aware of surreptitious phrases or figures of speech which are veiled repudiations of my political persuasion. Radical fundamentalist strikes me as prototypical. Are my antennae in need of calibration? If so, I will capitulate.
That's my view (not a decree).
Fair enough.
I do agree with Mark Twain's comment that anyone who aspires for high office should for that very reason be precluded from it.
That begs the question ... Who will ascend to these high offices and by what virtue ?
Roger.
Growing up and living in New England as a conservative I am in the minority politically. This compels me to become keenly aware of surreptitious phrases or figures of speech which are veiled repudiations of my political persuasion. Radical fundamentalist strikes me as prototypical. Are my antennae in need of calibration? If so, I will capitulate.
That's my view (not a decree).
Fair enough.
I do agree with Mark Twain's comment that anyone who aspires for high office should for that very reason be precluded from it.
That begs the question ... Who will ascend to these high offices and by what virtue ?
Roger.
February 18th, 2016, 06:53 PM
#80
Registered User
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Chinook Mt
Posts: 110
