Althouse: "How likely is it Antonin Scalia will die in the next four years?"

January 14, 2013

"How likely is it Antonin Scalia will die in the next four years?"

Asks Slate jauntily, offering what it calls "The Supreme Court Justice Death Calculator."

21 comments:

Nonapod said...: And when the American public voted last November, they surely knew it, too.

I'm willing to bet a large chunk of the "American public" who voted for Obama even know who the eff Scalia is, why they should care, or possibly even what the Supreme Court is.; 1/14/13, 3:32 PM
rhhardin said...: He should subtract out the chances that Obama dies in the next four years, say in a fatal traffic accident with Biden, making Boehner President.; 1/14/13, 3:35 PM
edutcher said...: In that case, where's the "Vice Presidential Death Calculator"? Dementia is a killer.

Or the "Soon-To-Be-Retired-But-Not-Soon-Enough Secretary Of State Death Calculator"?; 1/14/13, 3:46 PM
jacksonjay said...: I would have to bet on Ruth Bader Buzzi!; 1/14/13, 3:50 PM
MadisonMan said...: I found that article in very poor taste.; 1/14/13, 3:53 PM
purplepenquin said...: I'm willing to bet a large chunk of the "American public" who voted for anybody even know who the eff Scalia is, why they should care, or possibly even what the Supreme Court is.

Fix'd that for ya.

And yeah, that is sad.; 1/14/13, 4:01 PM
test said...: A better question:

How likely is it leftists will abandon their earlier assertion that changing the ideological mix of the court is inappropriate if Scalia dies?; 1/14/13, 4:01 PM
test said...: lazyturtle

Most of us just dream. Its nice to know how likely our dreams are to come true.; 1/14/13, 4:08 PM
CWJ said...: Considering that in the left's collective mind, the right are a bunch of violent gun nuts, the left surely has much more than its share of death porn when it comes to their political opponents.; 1/14/13, 4:10 PM
n.n said...: This comment has been removed by the author.; 1/14/13, 4:10 PM
n.n said...: Interesting. Does this public pronouncement by a member of the press constitute motive to a crime? This is not an inferred motive. It is an explicit admission on record. Then again, it is a member of the press, and they are known to be subject to a selective interpretation of the law.

How likely will members of the press continue to enjoy the luxuries afforded by life in the ivory towers?; 1/14/13, 4:12 PM
I'm Full of Soup said...: I wonder if Slate will be around in four years?; 1/14/13, 4:14 PM
Fandor said...: Chris Kirk and Stephen Laniel "for the sake of grim fun" asked this inapporiate question. WHO ARE THEY? WHERE DO THEY LIVE? Let's look into it. I'm tired of these BAS***DS who say these horrible things without any consequenses. Where is the decorum? Where is the outrage? Let's find out who these sc*mbags are and send them to the obscurity they deserve!; 1/14/13, 4:30 PM
Chef Mojo said...: Classy, Slate. Classy...; 1/14/13, 4:30 PM
Kirk Parker said...: Marshal,

"A rhetorical question:"

FIFY.; 1/14/13, 4:32 PM
Guildofcannonballs said...: As Iowahawk has shown, Journos rape, kill, and plan genocide daily in large numbers.

The Slate boys and girls ought to fear themselves mightily. I know I do.; 1/14/13, 4:34 PM
ndspinelli said...: Why don't we start a death pool? My $ are on the incredible shrinking Justice Ginsberg. She may be the first person to die simply from shrinkage.

Death Certificate Cause of Death: Chronic Shrinkage.; 1/14/13, 4:51 PM
Tax Sage said...: Perhaps next Slate can give us a database map of where conservative judges reside together with notations showing where registered weapons might be found (or burgled) nearby. Why venture timidly past the boundaries of good taste and suppress expression of such sincere contempt?; 1/14/13, 4:57 PM
test said...: Since you sent us to Slate let me post something amusing:

Williams’ report treads familiar ground: Back in an arbitrary time period that predates our own, interactions between men and women were simple, the argument goes; advances in technology have led us astray of this most fundamental human relationship.

It’s true that dating used to be simpler, but not because our grandparents were spared from mining the flirtation potential of Words With Friends. No, dating was simpler then because men and women were both forced to conform to distinct gender roles and follow a preset romantic script with the mutual expectation of marrying and procreating as soon as possible.

Summary: The difference beween your ridiculously oversimplified assessment and my ridiculously oversimplified assessment is that mine is politically correct and therefore clearly accurate.; 1/14/13, 4:58 PM
Lem Vibe Bandit said...: I found that article in very poor taste.

You have to give 'aspiration therapy' a chance.; 1/14/13, 5:06 PM
insurance said...: Jeremiah. I see what you mean... Lee`s remark is shocking... last saturday I got a brand new Citroën DS when I got my cheque for $9142 this - five weeks past and over $10 thousand this past munth. this is definitely the coolest job I have ever had. I started this eight months/ago and immediately startad bringin in more than $85 p/h. I went to this website.... CLICK HERE; 1/14/13, 6:32 PM