Scary Scalia

The justice has been explaining his positions publicly more and more, and even delving into some thorny issues, like torture.

“I don’t like torture,” Scalia says. “Although defining it is going to be a nice trick. But who’s in favor of it? Nobody. And we have a law against torture. But if the – everything that is hateful and odious is not covered by some provision of the Constitution,” he says.

“If someone’s in custody, as in Abu Ghraib, and they are brutalized by a law enforcement person, if you listen to the expression ‘cruel and unusual punishment,’ doesn’t that apply?” Stahl asks.

“No, No,” Scalia replies.

“Cruel and unusual punishment?” Stahl asks.

“To the contrary,” Scalia says. “Has anybody ever referred to torture as punishment? I don’t think so.”

“Well, I think if you are in custody, and you have a policeman who’s taken you into custody…,” Stahl says.

“And you say he’s punishing you?” Scalia asks.

“Sure,” Stahl replies.

“What’s he punishing you for? You punish somebody…,” Scalia says.

“Well because he assumes you, one, either committed a crime…or that you know something that he wants to know,” Stahl says.

“It’s the latter. And when he’s hurting you in order to get information from you…you don’t say he’s punishing you. What’s he punishing you for? He’s trying to extract…,” Scalia says.

“Because he thinks you are a terrorist and he’s going to beat the you-know-what out of you…,” Stahl replies.

“Anyway, that’s my view,” Scalia says. “And it happens to be correct.”

Scalia is one scary, scary man, and he’s going to be a Supreme Court Justice for a very, very long time … unfortunately.

4 thoughts on “Scary Scalia

  1. He desires not to think outside the dogma of his youth. An educated, Americanized Mussolini rationalizing class privilege and criminality. He’s ugly like Nixon/McCarthy and he avoided military service.

    Apropos of phoniness, today is Victory Day in Vietnam and as far as I can discern no media are making any mention. Significant in my estimation because it points out the shame-based ignorance which got us into this war and the economic fallout we will experience for too long to come. Bush would have us believe it is simply a matter of bad luck.

    Property taxes? Wait until Texas has to fight off all those Manhattan attorneys representing the 462 children removed from their parents and put into foster care. Sleazy state attorneys subverting due process and railroading black guys for murder is probably par for the course, but who was doing the thinking with the Mormons? Short of the war itself, that has to be the worst case of objectification in recent memory.

  2. Every time I hear Scalia say anything, he always just seems so disconnected from the reality I thought we lived in. Nothing he say shocks or surprises me anymore. I just expect him to say some crazy-assed stuff. It’s unfortunate we are going to be stuck with him for a while.

    I read one tiny little story in one tiny little town’s paper about Victory Day. I think the only reason they mentioned it was because they had a large Vietnamese immigrant population and there was a ceremony going on. Didn’t it used to get more coverage? Well, people don’t want to talk about Vietnam anymore. Might make people draw comparisons with current activities.

    Our property taxes aren’t outrageous, yet, but it is getting to the point where it does hurt to pay them. And that whole mess with the Mormons is, well, a mess, isn’t it? I haven’t been keeping up too closely, though you can’t really avoid it. While I do think some, if not many, of the kids have been abused in one way or another, I also believe the state has handled it very, very badly. I’d bet if they came in and just rounded up 400 kids out of any neighborhood, they’d find the statistics on this stuff running pretty close to what they are finding there (sadly). I don’t know. It’s just a real mess, and there’s too much talking head sensationalizing and not enough fact yet. But yeah … it’s going to be expensive alright.

  3. That may be obvious to you and I, Ekim, but Scalia seems to have a problem seeing that.