Recent Posts
Recent Comments
- Mask Hysteria: Politicians and Moral Hazard - Street Politics on Mask Hysteria: Why the “science” is invalid.
- Trump's Fatal Errors: Not for Him, But for the Country. Pt. 1 - Street Politics on Is All This Tariff Talk Real? I hope Not!
- Why Everyone Is Wrong About "Tax Reform" - Street Politics on A Fun and Easy Lesson: Boris and Ivan
- Smirky Head Shakers II - Street Politics on A Fun and Easy Lesson: Boris and Ivan
- How Worthless is a Harvard Education - Street Politics on Universal Welfare: Is Zuck Actually Evil?
Archives
- May 2022
- July 2021
- June 2021
- November 2020
- October 2020
- August 2020
- May 2020
- April 2020
- March 2020
- December 2019
- October 2019
- August 2019
- April 2019
- February 2019
- January 2019
- November 2018
- September 2018
- August 2018
- July 2018
- June 2018
- January 2018
- November 2017
- October 2017
- September 2017
- August 2017
- July 2017
- June 2017
- May 2017
- April 2017
- March 2017
- February 2017
- January 2017
- December 2016
- November 2016
- October 2016
- September 2016
- August 2016
- July 2016
- June 2016
- May 2016
- April 2016
- March 2016
- February 2016
- January 2016
- December 2015
- November 2015
- October 2015
- September 2015
- August 2015
- July 2015
- June 2015
- May 2015
- January 2015
- December 2014
- November 2014
- October 2014
- September 2014
- August 2014
- July 2014
- June 2014
- May 2014
- March 2014
Categories
Nino: The Kind-Hearted Communicator
Unlike many “conservatives” I am not a doctrinaire advocate of Antonin Scalia. Unlike constitutional deconstructionists, I don’t chose on whim to disagree with him.
More on that in a bit.
But we must first recognize the weight of the loss this country faces today. The literary loss easily matches that of Hitchens or Buckley. Scalia had the ability to cut through a legal quagmire to deliver the nut of an argument, eschewing the ornate for the direct, and to do so eloquently.
The personal and professional loss is only measurable in as much as it can be measured. Who loved him best? By the sheer weight of his personal dynamic, he unassumingly gained and held the respect of most thinking people. I mix the personal and the professional because it is here he demonstrated his humanity on a scale that some of us can only envy. Nino vacationed with Ginsberg and took Kagan shooting and hunting. One is known for the company he keeps, but most admired by the company that seeks his, despite strongly held disagreement.
On the yearly dispensation of rulings from the high court, I have held opinions apart from Antonin Scalia. But I am honest enough to know that unless I read both court opinions ( I don’t) I disagreed from a purely personal standpoint, armed only with my own world view. I don’t discount that view, but I don’t hold it sacrosanct. I have listened with more than a little disdain to my own friends who excoriated him personally for opinions he held based on a studied understanding of our Constitution. An understanding better informed than mine or theirs. It is acceptable in this day and age to do so.
If you’d like a better grasp of the value of the American Experiment, I would suggest reading Scalia Dissents (Scalia/ Ring, Regenry, 2012) or Reading Law: Interpretations of Legal Texts (Scalia/Garner, West, 2012). These books will surely rankle those who don’t understand the difference between politically conservative and constitutionally conservative. Even armed with such understanding, you may find yourself wishing he had or hadn’t said one thing or another.
Anyway, you’ll come away better educated than you are right now.
Predictably, the long knives have come out. The body has hardly cooled. Disgusting. I’ll let it do so before joining the fray.
Matt Jordan is a travel writer, political commentator and author of 16 20 24. Get your SIGNED copy here!
Find 16 20 24 on Amazon.
Find 16 20 24 at Barnes & Noble
Find 16 20 24 at Books-a-Million