Tom the Dancing Bug by Ruben Bolling for February 26, 2016

  1. Missing large
    InColorado  about 8 years ago

    Reminds me of the Robin Williams joke where a jihadist arrives in the afterlife expecting his 72 virgins and instead gets his ass kicked by 72 Virginians.

     •  Reply
  2. Koala
    buzzkillington  about 8 years ago

    Rather kind of Ruben to depict Scalia in what would appear to be the prototypical representation of “heaven”, instead of elsewhere…

     •  Reply
  3. 3dflags usaal1 5
    Alabama Al  about 8 years ago

    Scalia was unquestionably a learned jurist. However, being consistent in his “originalist” view regarding the U.S. Constitution doesn’t hold up to even cursory scrutiny. It is not hard to find examples where Scalia unhesitatedly ignored precedence, legislative history, and even seemingly clear language in the Constitution to justify his world view.

     •  Reply
  4. Missing large
    Dr.Otter  about 8 years ago

    Scalia’s opinion on Obama’s lame duck status is correct for an originalist. The strict interpretation of the original wording indicates that Obama is only 3/5 of a president.

     •  Reply
  5. Missing large
    meetinthemiddle  about 8 years ago

    The irony is that the constitution is vague on what exactly the powers of the judiciary are. Chief Justice Marshall asserted for decades that the court had the power to invalidate “unconstitutional” law, but it took a long time for that to be accepted. Andrew Jackson, for example, said “John Marshall has made his decision; now let him enforce it!”

     •  Reply
  6. Missing large
    cipactli77  about 8 years ago

    By definition he’s not a lame duck because his successor hasn’t been elected yet.

     •  Reply
  7. Wcfields
    Funny_Ha_Ha  about 8 years ago

    Common sense doesn’t apply anymore. For the majority of Americans it’s tantamount to taxation without representation. Where have I heard that before?

     •  Reply
  8. Kw eyecon 20190702 091103 r
    Kip W  about 8 years ago

    Scalia failed to recuse himself on glaring conflicts of interest. (I’d add, “So did Thomas,” but that’s kind of automatic.)

     •  Reply
  9. Missing large
    mgrossberg  about 8 years ago

    Conservatives should be just as nervous about a Justice nominated by Trump as we are! “The Art of the Deal”…

     •  Reply
  10. Missing large
    ChrisV  about 8 years ago

    Actually you’d think the founding fathers would agree with his view that only rich white men should be allowed to vote.

     •  Reply
  11. Missing large
    markjoseph125  about 8 years ago

    The sixth panel also applies to biblical interpretation.

     •  Reply
  12. Missing large
    William Powers  about 8 years ago

    Nothing is preventing the President from appointing a Justice. He just needs to do so. Then Senate can’t stop him nor has anyone suggested he cannot. There are no rules that the Senate must confirm his nomination, it is the reason for the advise and consent clause. Nor is there a requirement to even take up a vote on the successor before the next President is sworn in. This dust-up is political on both sides. to get the ideologues fighting back and forth over nothing.

     •  Reply
  13. Missing large
    mgrossberg  about 8 years ago

    In case you didn’t catch it, Scalia isn’t appearing as an angel, but a “spirit”. An evil and hypocritical spirit.

     •  Reply
Sign in to comment

More From Tom the Dancing Bug