When you think Antonin Scalia, you think squishy liberal, right? Who doesn't? He of the Throw Everyone Out Of The US But Whitey Decision and the distressingly narrow view of the 14th Amendment — he is our go-to guy for feel-good law! That's why, according to Larry Pratt, prez of the Gun Owners of America (we think they are like the NRA's younger, even stupider, brother, but we do not care enough to actually look it up), tells us that Scalia is
<em>South Dakota vs Dole</em> is probably useful here (upholding the constitutionality of conditioning Federal highway funding on the state&#039;s legal drinking age, an area of authority traditionally reserved to states)
Yes, the Medicaid part of the Obamacare ruling did undermine this, although the way it did it could easily be circumvented with the meaningless formalism of repeal &amp; replace vs modify (which is why that part of the ruling was fucking stupid). So, repeal and replace Federal grants to states for law enforcement with something conditioned on an insurance requirement.
However did Shakespeare find a gentleman there?
Where they were <a href="http:\/\/www.alternet.org\/civil-liberties\/thom-hartmann-second-amendment-was-ratified-preserve-slavery\?paging=off" target="_blank">always intended</a> to be, then.
A <a href="http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Fuel_tax#United_States" target="_blank">Federal excise</a> on bullets, also too.
These days, I only see Wonkville in a tiny box which is far too much trouble to scroll through, so I&#039;m afraid I miss many of your lapidary effusions. Plus the &quot;next post&quot; link seems to have disappeared for good. Does anyone running this site ever read the bloody thing?
Perfect. There&#39;s a much stronger relationship between homeland security and gun safety than there is between building highways and legal drinking age.
For the purpose of discussing the level of protection the 2nd Amendment offers, I find it much more useful than the libel exception (which is very narrow ever since <em>New York Times vs Sullivan</em>) to talk about the obscenity exception, which remains quite broad, and <em>apparently</em> would allow one to not have to describe what an assault weapon actually is to ban it because &quot;I know one when I see one&quot;.
Also too, there&#039;s nothing more obscene than a kindergarten full of dead kids.
&quot;He was not speaking from a constitutional perspective&quot; when exercising his constitutionally granted authority to rule on a constitutional question.
I&#039;m impressed Pratt managed to reach around his head to extract that turd.
&quot;Would you blow this man?&quot;
These Pratts. The other was Erich. Presumably they share the same wholly deficient DNA.
I, for one, have never seen Nino and the Kingpin in the same room together...
Maybe you should&#039;ve taken that good advice about not having an outdoor wedding in fall...
<em>Way</em> more Aussie than Joe Bugner.
(Yeah, at college I had to listen to an Aussie complaining that in the British press he was &quot;Joe Bugner&quot; when he won, and &quot;Aussie Joe Bugner&quot; when he lost, as he noted the same writers suddenly stopped mentioning that Lennox Lewis represented Canada at the Olympics after he beat Holyfield)
&quot;That&#039;s the Brit in him.&quot;
Stuart Varney&#039;s naughty bits?!
Remember, Murdoch&#039;s English rag <em>The Sun</em> endorsed Tony Blair once it became crystal clear that the Tories were going to get absolutely routed in &#039;97. Murdoch cares more about his bottom line than about right wing causes.
I am going to hate myself for saying this, but I hope Cheney recovers enough to go duck hunting with Scalia again.