Mr. Jonathan Turley aka "The Constitutional Scholar", is now dead to me.

[FrenchieCat]

I didn't necessarily care for Mr. Turley's approach with his critiques on difficult decisions Pres. Obama has been making in reference to Gitmo or torture investigations, but so it goes....he saw things differently in his reading of the constitution than some, and that's worth listening to, at least the first or even the second time around.

HOWEVER, Mr. Turley has just crossed over the line of my type of reasonability, and did so on something that has nothing to do with the constitution.

When one believes themselves to be so superior as to insult the intellect of the late Thurgood Marshall, First Black Justice to sit on the Supreme Court; or the new SCOTUS pick, First Hispanic American nominated to the highest court; and holds up Scalia, number 1 asshole of the court, as a paragon of juditiousness, then the coffin in terms of giving him further hearing is nailed shut, far as I'm concerned!

But all is not lost, as I'm sure he'll get his Newsweek/Time covers sometime soon!

Must feel great to be so smug and so perfectly ready and able to deliver judgment on the intellect of others who have achieved so much more than he could ever dream of!


Goodbye Mr. Turley. I will be changing the channel anytime I hear you are coming on....
you and your arrogant smirk.

[jkshaw]

1. This One Tune Charley has been dead to me

for a long time. I wish Keith and Rachel would get some other "expert" to pontificate on the Constitution.

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

2. I've been saying it for awhile...

I think he's pushing for his own Fox show.

The anti-Obama hysteria, the racism, the sexism, it all fits.

[kaiden]

3. Isn't he a Republican anyway?

I seem to remember he was gung ho about Clinton's impeachment.

[FrenchieCat]

6. He is said to be a "libertarian" from what I have heard and read.....

Meaning...."What-E-ver"! :shrug:

[Clio the Leo]

8. Well then that explains it........

..... as I'd take 14 Republicans over ONE Libertarian any day.

[Jennicut]

42. LOL. I have a special dark place in my heart full of hatred for libertarians.

Glen Beck and Lou Dobbs are "libertarians"....need I say more?

[Clio the Leo]

49. Joe the Plumber. NT

[question everything]

17. These days, libertarians are conservatives who do not want to be associated

with a losing group, like the Republicans. This is what I am trying to explain to my spouse, who does not believe that only 21% are Republicans. Only 21% identify themselves as Republicans, I explain, but many more consider themselves "non-Democrats."

[Raster]

21. Libertarian = republican that smokes pot.

[CBR]

22. LOL! Yup! nt

[ObamaKerryDem]

27. That fact alone should discredit him greatly with progressives...

Don't know why Keith and Rachel have him on so much. Surely there are other experts in his field out there? Probably better ones at that.

[jenmito]

4. Same here. And along with his smug smile, I'll be happy to say goodbye to his

pressed, plastered and dyed hair wave on the front of his head. :D

[Clio the Leo]

5. And not only that, but he insults the first African American President on a nightly basis.....

.... using the most twisted and hyperbole-filled BS I've seen this side of the political spectrum.

It's disgraceful. Your Marshall is my Obama.

And for crying out loud! Quit SMILING all the time Turley while you're spoutting all of this mess in a manner that causes me to question just what exactly your hands are doing under the table.

GRRRRRR!!!!

Anyway, welcome to the party Frenchie!!! We're glad to have ya!

[Captain Hilts]

13. He was VERY rough on Prez Clinton also. He's a strict constructionist. nt

[Clio the Leo]

19. lol, ya think?

I was just reading about what happened with the Clinton impeachment after seeing several comments about it here....

http://media.www.gwhatchet.com/media/storage/paper332/news/1998/11/16/News/Turley.Calls.Clintons.Impeachment.Unlikely-15315.shtml

Apparently testified that the question HAD to go to the Senate and then sighed, off the record, "dont worry, he wont be impeached."

Grrr!

[Cha]

18. lol! That's

the first time I've seen him in that picture of Frenchie's ..now I all I can think of is your plausible explanation for why he's smirk-smiling.

[Clio the Leo]

20. I'm tellin' ya! He's enjoying this WAY too much. NT

[jefferson_dem]

7. Anyone who comes out of the gate like that doesn't deserve a seat on the "sanity circuit"

of teevee commentators.

I'm with you, Frenchie. The channel changer will serve as my "ignore" button whenever this buffoon is projected on the screen.

[Thrill]

9. Yes he was disgusting today

.

[scrappydo]

10. Turley lost any credibiilty with me long ago....

I either hit the mute button or switch channels.

[southern_belle]

11. kick

[girl gone mad]

12. lol..

throw him right under the hopemobile with the rest of them.

[FrenchieCat]

15. Well, I imagine that Thurgood Marshall is under the "Turley says he smarter cause he said" Bus

I'm sorry, but when it comes to who goes under my bus, which is not called the Hopemobile....but rather the "You ain't necessarily smarter than me, just because you seem to think so" Mobile, then ye-Ah....he's under there.

In fact, I'm about to back up, and then go forward some more.

[Uzybone]

14. Fucking idiot Turley is

its no coincidence that he reached deep into the bag of 110 SC justices to pull out the first black justice Thurgood Marshall as another example of "lacking intellectual depth" right next to the 1st Hispanic nominee.

[rug]

16. Here, tell him directly.

Email
[e-mail]

Telephone
202.994.7001

Fax
202.994.9811

Regular Mail
The George Washington University Law School
2000 H Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20052

Overnight/Courier
The George Washington University Law School
716 20th Street, N.W.
Room 502
Washington, DC 20052

[Vattel]

23. The problem with Turley

is that he's big on stating his opinions, but he is very weak on serious arguments in defense of his opinions.

[merh]

76. And he offers no suggestions

he only offers absolutes

[uponit7771]

24. His comments seem overtly critical relative to Scalia or Roberts

[Peacetrain]

25. All I can say to Turley is... Don't let the door hit ya!

Seriously.. Scalia.. when I read that this AM, I just could not believe it..

[ObamaKerryDem]

26. I concur. He's been quite irritating lately. n/t

[Liberal_Stalwart71]

28. What happened, FC? I'm out of the loop...

[FrenchieCat]

33. Turley ran his mouth on MSNBC as soon as Sotomayor was announced as the nominee.....

Questioned her "intellect" and cited Thurgood Marshall lackthereof....among other things.

[jillan]

29. I have already begun to change the channel when he comes on.

He has become the official whiner.

[LSK]

30. What did he say ?????????????????????

[babylonsister]

31. Here:

He says Sotomayor has a "lack of intellectual depth" and she won't be "the equal of Scalia". He continues and says "Thurgood Marshall's decisions did not have massive intellectual impact on the Court" but he "understands liberals' joy at her being a woman and an Hispanic." What patronizing arrogance. He might as well as said it's an affirmative action pick by President Obama.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=132x8432306#8432695

[LSK]

35. thanks

And what the hell is he talking about???

:wtf:

[babylonsister]

36. I think he's showing his true colors, and they're not pretty. nt

[AspenRose]

73. Well, in so many words, that's exactly what he said.

And that's what he was inferring with Thurgood Marshall as well.

Odd, though, that he didn't mention Clarence Thomas at all. I guess the affirmative action "token" picks count only if you're liberal. :sarcasm:

[Lugnut]

32. I nearly choked when he said it.

Scalia, indeed. x(

[TomClash]

34. I agree 100% and think about this . . .

Marshall, who Turley basically called an intellectual lightweight, was lead counsel in and argued Brown, one of the most famous cases in the history of the Court, the seminal civil rights case in the last century, twice for the plaintiffs at the Supreme Court. He won a unanimous reversal.

Turley is a commentator on MSNBC and a law professor at GW and he lost the Area 51 case.

Do you see something wrong with this picture?

[redqueen]

37. Hahaha...

nicely put. :)

[Jennicut]

43. Brown was a huge case. Why is that not showing smarts?

Its makes it seem like he has stuff against those of a different race being on the Supreme Court.

[TomClash]

48. That's exactly right

It seems like he doesn't like blacks and hispanics.

[Karenina]

54. From where I sit, he may just as well

have shouted a racial epithet.

[Jennicut]

55. I am a white woman but I am really picking up on this dislike of blacks and hispanics

Its like a little antenna went off in my head. Something is definitely up.

[AspenRose]

75. Because we're taking over, muahahahahahahaha!

:sarcasm:

Blacks + Hispanics = Ethnic majority in the very near future

Which scares neocon racist white men in this country shitless. Just ask Lou Dobbs or Bill O'Reilly.

(I'll also add black and hispanic conservatives get a temporary free pass on the hate, since they're doing the GOP's bidding. The minute they start going off-script, it's Colin Powell time.)

[HopeOverFear]

38. You and me both, Frenchie

TurDley can suck it.

[Phx_Dem]

39. Agreed, Anyone can strongly disagree with anyone about anything,

but when that's all you do, you lose your credibility and objectivity.

And that also applies to many of the posters on DU who have done nothing but piss and moan about one thing after another since Obama won in November. :silly:

[Cha]

41. You start coming across as a paid

mouthpiece with an agenda.

[firedupdem]

40. Rec'd and I agree 100%. What an arrogant and racist asshole..

Him even thinking of Thurgood Marshall this morning let me know that race was on his mind...and not in a nice way. Fuck him and the horse he rides in on. I hope Keith won't continue to have him on...but I'm sure that's just wishful thinking. He's forever a piece of shit in my book.

[Karenina]

45. Maybe Keith and Rachel need some e-mail...

Rachel Maddow [e-mail]
Keith Olberman [e-mail]
Chris Matthews [e-mail]

:evilgrin:

I question Turley's intelligence and his "performance" today has put him on my ignore list. Attacking Thurgood Marshall? Yeah, THAT'S the ticket! :eyes:

[PopSixSquish]

44. I Had the Priviledge of Seeing Thurgood Marshall on the Supreme Court

I watched him question lawyers, I watched the deference paid to him by his breathern and the everyone in the courtdown and Jonathan Turley CAN KISS MY ASS....

[LittleBlue]

46. Was he really saying Scalia was a paragon of judiciousness?

I got the impression he was saying that Sotomayor didn't have the intellectual firepower to debate him on even ground, not that Scalia was correct. Nobody should doubt that Scalia is very intelligent, despite his regressive and disgusting views.

BTW, I'm a big Sotomayor supporter. She was my first choice.

[zeos3]

50. Not having seen the clip myself,

I could easily see that being the implication. It doesn't necessarily mean that Scalia is the ideal to which all Supreme Court Justices should aspire. It could mean that Turley thinks he's a shifty sneaky bastard that's good with using twisted logic and fancy two dollar words to push through his regressive agenda. It's not necessarily a slam to imply one needs a keen intellect to go verbally toe to toe with Scalia.

[Spazito]

53. Turley likes Scalia's "coherent philosophy" even if that philosophy is wrong....

that, imo, doesn't say much about Turley's 'intellectual' judgment. As long as a Supreme Court judge has a mindset regardless of the facts before them, they have a greater 'intellect' than those who actually weigh the facts?

"I do not agree with Scalia on many things, but he has been able to maintain a coherent philosophy."

Here is the link to Turley's words, and, damn, the man must believe the greater number of words one uses, no matter how extraneous they are, the greater their own gravitas:

http://jonathanturley.org/2009/05/26/white-house-to-announce-court-pick-at-10-am/

[SpartanDem]

47. K&R

Turley praising Scalia while dissing Marshall just makes me :puke:

[IndianaGreen]

51. I agree with Turley and John Dean on their concern about our Constitution

and the way it has been trampled by Bush.

It is long overdue to decapitate the imperial presidency begun under Nixon and restore the separation of powers.

BTW, the largely libertarian Turley supports marriage equality for gays and lesbians.

[avaistheone1]

69. I do too.

Turley has it right on these constitutional issues no matter who wants to shut the coffin.

[vaberella]

52. He's been dead to me when he said..O was passing the buck to AG Holder.

I was like, he's following a legal process...you fool.

[Canuckistanian]

56. Dead. Dead I say!

Never more. My Teevee is now a Turley-free zone.

Absolutely Turleyless.

[scheming daemons]

57. Turley's an asshat that led the charge against Bill Clinton in '98/'99

He's been dead to me for a decade.

[Number23]

58. Hell yes. I have been cussing all morning.

I can't believe what that FOOL, that closed minded cretin said about Thurgood Marshall.

I have been interested in his perspective before, but that officially CEASES after today.

Bye bye, Turley! You dumb fuck.

[Rowdyboy]

59. The cheap shot at Thurgood Marshall really pissed me off .....Turley is a "legend in his own mind"

Thurgood Marshall was a real American hero, as Sonia Sotomayor will eventually be. Turley is nothing more than a frustrated academic, unable to do more than criticize the real players in politics. More to be pitied than disliked....

[Tarheel_Dem]

60. Welcome to the light. Because of this asshat, I now have to TIVO Countdown...

so I can FF past his segments. Me thinks Jonathan may have a little issue with race?

[Karenina]

67. Methinks he has a BIG issue with race.

His mouth wrote a check that his persona cannot cash. I truly hope that in the next days his claims of being an "expert" are sliced, diced and shredded.

[opihimoimoi]

61. Lemme add the Opi's name to this list of Visine3 Recipients

Good to among peeps who can see clearly.....pass the coffee from Kona....

K&R

[falcon97]

62. I have enjoyed his thorough condemnation

of Bush on domestic eavesdropping and torture. So, I feel it's only fair to hear him out on whatever issue he is speaking about.

[Political Tiger]

63. His nose is so stuck up high in the air one wonders how he can breathe.

When I heard his snotty remarks I wanted to punch him. He's so in love with himself it's sickening.

[Honeycombe8]

64. He did? Then I agree...that goes beyond the pale. Mr. Turdey is dead to me, too.nt

[democracy1st]

65. K & R

[Boomerang Diddle]

66. Agreed! K&R!

:kick:

[Time for change]

68. He held up Scalia as a paradigm of judiciousness?

I didn't hear that. Does anyone have a link?

[annabanana]

70. It seemed to me to be more a remark about

Scalia's intellectual quick wittedness, not his probity or his judicial correctness..

[Time for change]

80. Yes, I don't think that Turley's remarks were even remotely complementary to Scalia

See post # 77 for my explanation of that, and post # 79 for Turley's opinion of Scalia.

[Karenina]

71. Video and transcripts here:

http://www.skypilot.zexxnet.com/

[Time for change]

77. Thank you Karenina

I remember that now. I don't believe that Turley's comment about Scalia was in any way meant as any kind of compliment at all:

But in terms of long term satisfaction she does not naturally suggest that she is going to be the equal of Scalia and I think that was the model for liberals. They wanted someone who would shape the intellectual foundations of the court. Her past opinions do not suggest that she is like that. They actually suggest that she will be a great justice like Thurgood Marshall. She’ll be the first Latina. But I’ll remind you Thurgood Marshall’s opinions did not have a lasting intellectual impact on the court.

My opinion of Scalia is similar to Vincent Bugliosi's opinion of him. I think he ought to be impeached and then tried for treason for his lead in the Bush v. Gore decision.

The operative word in the comment by Turley on Scalia is "satisfaction". What he appears to me to be saying is that the extreme right wing is very "satisfied" was Scalia, moreso than he believes that the left wing will be satisfied with Sotomayer. On that account, I believe he is correct about Scalia. The extreme right wing is very satisfied with him, as well they should be. I don't recall Turley ever commenting on Scalia before, but my belief is that his opinion of Scalia is similar to mine.

Nor did Turley say that he thought his intellect was superior to Marshall's. In fact, one could interpret his statement on Marshall as agreeing that Marshall was a great justice. The only thing remotely negative about Marshall that Turley said here is that he did not have a lasting intellectual impact on the court. I don't know if that's correct or not, but it's undoubtedly something that could be said about the great majority of our USSC justices.

[Karenina]

82. Thurgood Marshall's opinions had a lasting effect on American society.

I find Turley's attempts to diminish him or his legacy offensive.

[Time for change]

89. I like and agree with the opinions of Marshall that I am aware of

He was a steadfast voice for liberalism on the court, and that's what is important to me. Whether or not his opinions had a lasting effect on the USSC (which is what Turley disagreed with) is not something I feel qualified to comment on. But if they didn't, that is not necessarily a reflection upon Marshall.

I appreciate Turley mainly because he was one of the loudest voices in our country against the abuses of the Bush administration for a long time.

[Karenina]

91. I appreciated him for that, too

although recently I became uncomfortable with some of the overtones coming out of his whistle.

[RetroLounge]

72. I'm sure he'll lose sleep over that.

:eyes:

RL

[FrenchieCat]

78. I'm sure that he won't....

because for some...righteousness is more powerful than facts.

[RetroLounge]

81. Oooh, more aphorisms from FrenchieCat...

Better bookmark this for future laughs...

RL

[FrenchieCat]

83. How old are you?

[RetroLounge]

84. Old enough to recognize patterns...

Please, continue...

RL

[FrenchieCat]

85. Joe, is that you?

[cadmium]

74. He shows his true self. It annoys me that

so many liberals/progressives have idolized this guy. Randi Rhodes and Rachel seem to consider him the first and last word on the Constitution--possibly because he provides easy access or because they dont feel democratic Constitutional experts are good enough for them. Screw this guy.

[Time for change]

79. Turley's opinion of Scalia

More than any other justice, Scalia has helped forge this new model of the celebrity justice. He has long been the enfant terrible of the court: precocious, unpredictable, brilliant. But his apparent inability to restrain himself in public forums has caused no end of problems...

In 1996, he denounced theories of a constitutional right to die when there were two cases on that very question pending before the court. In 2003, he appeared at a "religious freedom rally" sponsored by the Knights of Columbus in Virginia to denounce attacks on the Pledge of Allegiance when a challenge to the pledge was pending before the court. Rather than wait for the oral arguments, Scalia pumped up the audience by declaring that the effort to remove God from the Pledge of Allegiance was "contrary to our whole tradition." On that occasion, Scalia had to recuse himself.

The latest public proclamation from Scalia is even worse. In Switzerland, Scalia responded to a question about the claims of detainees like Salim Ahmed Hamdan by saying "give me a break." Hamdan -- Osama bin Laden's former driver -- is arguing that the federal courts should have jurisdiction over his case, but Scalia dismissed the premise of his claims and emphasized that "if he was captured by my army on a battlefield, that is where he belongs...

Scalia's statements are a textbook example of an improper public statement by a jurist. He should clearly withdraw from the case. Not only did he indicate that he had already made up his mind on the subject before Hamdan made a single argument, but he expressed a personal interest that affected his decision...

Jurists are barred from speaking publicly about the merits of pending cases because they are supposed to be impartial and open arguments from all parties. But Scalia has reinforced the view of this court as pre-wired for certain results. The trend is now obvious, but the direction should disturb lawyers and non-lawyers alike...

http://articles.latimes.com/2006/mar/28/opinion/oe-turley28

[Spazito]

86. Hmmm, it seems Turley's opinion of Scalia has 'changed'...

"I do not agree with Scalia on many things, but he has been able to maintain a coherent philosophy."

This tidbit is from his blog written just yesterday.

I do not agree with Scalia on many things, but he has been able to maintain a coherent philosophy. This may indeed be a case of a judge who took a minimalist view of her appellate role and will speak more fully as a justice. I believe she should be given that chance despite the fact that I favored Wood and Koh. I prefer not to take the chance and would go with a proven demonstration of deep philosophical and legal reasoning. I raised the same concerns over Alito’s decisions. In his case, I opposed the nomination because I believed that his decisions were not only unremarkable but showed a certain bias to the government. I do not see the bias here. However, we should be able to objectively discuss this record o

[Time for change]

95. I quoted four paragraphs from Turley that blasted the hell out of Scalia

And you quoted a part of one sentence in which he said that Scalia has been able to maintain a coherent philosophy -- hardly a ringing endorsement.

I disagree that Scalia has maintained a coherent philosophy, unless corporatism and bigotry and unlimited presidential powers are philosophies. But come to think of it, they are philosophies, so maybe that's what Turley meant. Anyhow, I think that the four paragraphs that I quoted from above say a lot more of what Turley thinks of Scalia, than a portion of one sentence.

[Spazito]

96. My point was the 4 paragraphs say, in effect, he has NO coherent philosophy...

and yet here he is saying he does. Turley tends to lack consistency it seems.

[autorank]

87. oops

[uberllama42]

88. I do so love our daily Two Minutes' Hate

It won't make much difference if you change the channel every time you see Turley, since you don't seem interested in what he actually has to say. First of all, Turley did say that we should all be happy to finally have a Hispanic nominee for the Supreme Court. You seem to be saying Turley thinks Sotomayor and Marshall are both affirmative action appointees who are not really up to service on the Supreme Court.

If he thought they were unfit, would he have said this?

"She'll be a great justice, like Thurgood Marshall."

Furthermore, his point is not that Scalia is admirable or a "paragon of judiciousness" that other justices should aspire to. His point is that Scalia has been effective in moving the Court to the right, and that Thurgood Marshall didn't do the same thing for the left. Turley's priority, and I definitely agree with him on this, is to have a justice who has the wherewithal to act as a foil to Scalia. I want someone who can undo Scalia's twenty-plus years of damage on the high court.

I can't read your mind or anything, but it seems like your priority is to be personally offended on behalf of public figures you like. If that's the case, I guess there's nothing I can do to stop you. But I do think your priority is misplaced.

[proud2BlibKansan]

90. +1

Well said indeed :)

[BlooInBloo]

92. I feel good at least that I wasn't the *last*.

:rofl:

[depakid]

93. When he talks sense- people should listen

That applies DOUBLY to folks who aren't wont to criticize anything the administration does.

The guy had a take- a fairly honest one from his (and more than a few others' perspectives). You may not like it- and it may have been impolitic, but hey I give the guy just a bit of credit for calling as he saw it (and taking the heat).

[SoxFan]

94. His biggest clients are Bush supporters