Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
Latest Breaking News
In reply to the discussion: Obama ‘amused’ by ‘strict interpreters of the Constitution’ inventing ways to block Scalia replaceme [View all]DirkGently
(12,151 posts)33. Nothing strict about "strict constructionism."
No one ever gets to the precise original meaning of a text, nor are most of the people claiming to do so even trying, really. They're "strict" when it suits; more interpretive when that doesn't point in the direction they want.
Scalia, rest in peace, never seemed to me to be at all interested in getting to any kind of true, original meaning of the Constitution. He wanted it to say what he wanted it to say, and worked backwards accordingly.
To me whenever anyone claims to be adhering to some super-disciplined approach to the truth, it's a dead giveaway their intention is just the opposite.
Case in point: Ayn Rand's "Objectivism," which actually espouses a determinedly ultra-narrow subjective view of the world.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
43 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
Obama ‘amused’ by ‘strict interpreters of the Constitution’ inventing ways to block Scalia replaceme [View all]
bemildred
Feb 2016
OP
Scalia was not a strict constructionist. He could twist his opinions like a pretzel to support
Skwmom
Feb 2016
#2
They should run Reagan's words in a commerical on Fox about him letting him nominate a judge in his
kimbutgar
Feb 2016
#10
Of course the president is correct. And after all if the Republicans could elect a president then
totodeinhere
Feb 2016
#11
Yes, understated, I considered "baffled" and "confused" but "amused" is better.
bemildred
Feb 2016
#37