Scalia, hack

So much for originalism.

Look, the Founders anticipated situations where the will of the electorate might not be conclusive. In such a case the election would be determined by Congress. It happened in 1800 and 1824. It also happened in 1876, but Congress punted and let a commission decide and we were saddled with almost 100 years of Jim Crow, as Reconstruction was nixed so that the GOP of 1876 could hold on to executive power just a little longer (the Democrats of 1876 weren't any better, so this isn't partisan griping).

For a Justice so volubly adverse to innovative interpretations of the Constitution, Scalia's public reasoning for why the Supremes intervened in 2000 is mighty thin.

Originalism=big-ass convenient lie. But of course we already new that.

Frappr!

Hey, all two people who read this blog from time to time. Where do you live? Let me know by jumping on this Frappr doo-hickey.

More blogging

Okay, here's the deal I've made with myself. I put my blog address as my signature in my gmail account. But I can't entice people to come look at a blog I never update. So there will be a lot more posting around these parts.