WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Monday ordered a federal trial court in Georgia to consider the case of Troy Davis, who is on death row in state prison there for the 1989 murder of an off-duty police officer. The case has attracted international attention, and 27 former prosecutors and judges had filed a brief supporting Mr. Davis..........  
 
“The substantial risk of putting an innocent man to death,” Justice Stevens wrote in a concurrence joined by Justices Ruth Bader Ginsburg and Stephen G. Breyer, “clearly provides an adequate justification for holding an evidentiary hearing.”  
 
Justice Scalia, in a dissent joined by Justice Clarence Thomas, said the hearing would be “a fool’s errand,” because Mr. Davis’s factual claims were “a sure loser.”  
 
He went on to say that the federal courts would be powerless to assist Mr. Davis even if he could categorically establish his innocence.  
 
“This court has never held,” Justice Scalia wrote, “that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is ‘actually’ innocent.”  
 
 
 
 
.
Horpy SpoonDigger: Justice Scalia wrote, "“This court has never held, that the Constitution forbids the execution of a convicted defendant who had a full and fair trial but is later able to convince a habeas court that he is ‘actually’ innocent.”" ...ahem...pardon me your honor....I'd like you to meet the 9th amendment of the constitution. 9th amendment, this is Justice Scalia. Justice Scalia, this is the 9th amendment. I'll just leave you two alone to chat in the corner so you can get aquainted.  
...
aktaeon: Border agents kill someone without a trial? That's okay. He was a Mexican. That's Christianity. Government about to sanction the murder of an innocent man? Well, that's okay. He's black. That's Christianity.  
 
Suggest improving the quality and availability of healthcare for Americans? Well, you're a Gay Nazi Jew like Barney Franks and you talk like a fag.  
 
Republican's, man. Shit.
Hugh2d2: The majority of Pubs can't believe some of the shit spewing out of their leaders, can they? I mean... someone tell me they DON'T buy this stuff... Please?
Horpy SpoonDigger: We don't buy this stuff. I often vote republican. No one party has a monopoly on crazy rabid people.
Hugh2d2: Good. Cause this... this is getting out of hand.  
 
aktaeon: Not a monopoly on the words crazy or rabid, per se. What is it that the wacky left believes that is analogous to killing abortion doctors, killing black holocaust museum employees, wanting to define homosexuals as second class citizens, birthers, truthers? And, compare the group size of those analogous groups.  
 
It still blows my mind the number of people who claim that the distinction is minimal. Absolutely blows my mind.  
 
I guess maybe it shouldn't.  
 
What are your positions re:  
* American citizens marrying each other (even homosexuals)  
* Executing innocent people  
* Evolution vs insane bullshit  
* Pro-choice vs insane bullshit  
* Citizenship status of the President  
* Socialized healthcare  
* Socialized military  
* Socialized military healthcare  
* Socialized law enforcement  
* Socialized highway system  
* Socialized voting system  
* Socialized Education  
* Socialized libraries  
* Socialized air  
* Publicly owned and maintained state and national parks vs the fatty-go-rounds in McDonald's parking lots
Horpy SpoonDigger: wow irrational much?  
 
aktaeon: What did I say that is irrational?  
 
"No one party has a monopoly on crazy rabid people."  
 
Clearly I'm one of the crazy rabid people. But, I don't see how my volunteerism or promoting my issues online is analogous to the extremism of mainstream Republicanism.  
 
I posted a series of questions. They're intentionally loaded. But, those issues are important to me. They're also issues where the mainstream position of the Republican party seems crazy to me.  
 
Maybe if I answer first, it will seem less irrational? Maybe not.  
 
* I believe it is wrong to discriminate based on sexuality.  
* I believe in running a fools errand if it attracts attention to an important issue. I believe the defense of human life trumps paper pushing.  
* While science is never finished, I believe evolution is a fact.  
* I am morally alarmed by abortion. I believe every child should get a chance. But, I think it is absurd to talk about throwing pregnant teens and doctors in prison.  
* Several agencies vetted him. It seems ridiculous that Obama's birth certificate is a mainstream issue among Republicans.  
* The dominant interests of the healthcare industry (insurance and pharma) work in direct competition against the best interest of the consumer.  
* Our volunteer military should not have to tolerate working with contract military.  
* I am against privatizing military health insurance.  
* I am against privatizing or contracting out local law enforcement.  
* I am against privatizing our national highway system.  
* I am against a private, closed source voting system.  
* I believe that we should be making enormous investments in education (including art instruction).  
* I believe libraries are a vibrant and relevant community space. They should be a primary focus of continuous over-funding and experimentation.  
* I believe we should be good stewards of natural resources. This is our country. Let's keep it beautiful.  
* We should not be closing state and national parks. Once vandalism and feral vegetation have overrun parks, trails and amenities will not rebuild themselves. Play areas at fast food restaurants are not a reasonable alternative to the 223 of 279 state parks that Republicans want to close in California.  
 
I don't think this or the previous comment constitute stone walling or attempting to shout anyone down.  
 
This is a community. I'm here. I'm using these facilities the way I want. We could exchange comments and learn about each other.  
 
Or, we could all learn, repeatedly, that I am irrational.  
 
Ball in your court.
j d ess: but has the crazy wing of the left ever gotten as close to the mainstream as the right seems* to be now?  
 
* granted, i could be looking for this stuff, but it's not like there was ever a Glen Beck of the left, let along a Rush Limbaugh**  
 
** okay, maybe Michael Moore, but even his stuff never was as wacked out*** as rush or beck  
 
*** imo