Yesterday afternoon, shortly before 5 p.m., Evan – a friend of Megan’s with whom I exchange political texts- wrote: BIG political news today. Supreme Court justice Scalia reportedly found dead at his hotel. I immediately checked Huffington Post and CNN, but didn’t find anything. I wrote Evan: Murder would be my suspicion!
But Scalia, 79, died of natural causes in his sleep, at an exclusive lodge in west Texas where he’d gone to hunt. Here’s the synchro. In a post the other day, we’d written about the New Hampshire primary that Bernie Sanders had won and about how Sanders, 74, was not only the guy we would vote for, but was winning the youth vote all over the country. His idealism appeals to voters between the ages of 18-27.
One commenter, CJ, brought up the age factor:
My problem with having Sanders as President, and the ONLY problem, is his AGE.
That can’t be changed. His body is 74 years old, regardless of the great state of his mind. This means after his first term, he would be 78 years old, just two years short of 80. The statistics for a person of his age…remaining in sufficiently good health to run the complications of this country are dire. Then who would we have? Who would he choose as his VP? These are things we need to seriously consider, not just his platform. His age bothers me a lot.
Another commenter, Laurence, remarked: Funny, how folks are talking age here while we have an entrenched supreme court full of geriatrics. These folks can dictate federal policies for decades to come. Let’s not worry about age but getting involved and bringing everyone to the voting booth this November.
That evening after Laurence made his comment, I researched the ages of the supremes:
Scalia – nearly 80
Kennedy – 79 ½
Thomas – 67 ½
Ginsberg – nearly 83
Breyer – 77 ½
Roberts – 61
Alito – nearly 66
Sotomayor- nearly 62
Kagan – nearly 56
Then today after I received Evan’s text, it occurred to me it might be a synchro. Here we’d been talking about the relevance of age in politics – Bernie versus the supremes – and then the second oldest member of the court, Scalia, is found dead. His death may hurl this country into a constitutional crisis because the Republicans have already announced they will block any of Obama’s nominees.
The longest that Congress has delayed in voting on a supreme court justice is 125 days; Obama still has 340 days left in office. This evening, Obama commented on Scalia’s passing and said he would nominate a justice “in due time,” whatever that means.
So we’ve got two instances here about age and politicians and I suspect we’re going to see more that will eventually become a global cluster synchro.
Stay tuned…
And happy valentine’s day to everyone…
Term limits on Supreme Court Justices could take a long time to ratify, but I am more of a single 20 year plan. Why? Because of the intricacies of law, especially Federal level. There is a need for some one to have a grasp of such undertaking.
Anyhow the storm clouds of 2016 have shown up and folks are going to see some of the most belligerent, intransigent, vitrol spewed. But this is what the country needed. The fact that Trump called out the republicans on 9/11 especially the Bush faction on national TV is astounding. The shibboleth of Republican Dominion is shattered.
I think Trump’s call on Bush and Iraq and 9-11 was spot on!
Two six year terms sounds like a great plan! That way, the justices would have plenty of time to get their work accomplished, perhaps moving along with the many changes that occur, then allow for other seatings with new and hopefully fresh resolutions to existing issues. I notice that often that some of the truly long-term public officials seem to become stuck in ruts and it’s difficult to prod them along. Not just in Washington, but also in individual states and cities, such as judges and police chiefs, etc. So two six year terms for SC justices seems reasonable and very doable, imo! There’s no doubt that the world is undergoing very rapid and significant shifts in so many areas, and keeping up can be difficult.
Happy Valentine’s Day! As mentioned in an email following notice of Scalia’s death, I thought this was a true synchronicity….that we had been discussing this exact subject here on the blog and then Justice Scalia dies at the age of 79. My mother-in-law died at the age of 100. She was still plowing her own garden when she was 99, and her mind was still sharp as a tack!! Her mother was full-bloodied Cherokee, born on the reservation, and had also lived a very long life. My MIL’s heart just got tired of beating, It was like her heart said, “OK. I’ve done my job. I’ve worked for a century. Now it’s time to stop the clock.” She did just that….no disease. Just simply died . Maybe this is what happened to Justice Scalia, and I think to cross over during sleep is the most peaceful and beautiful manner of leaving this world for the next. Anyway….I am of the opinion that perhaps the SC justices should have a time limit imposed on their service, as does the President. Not necessarily two four-year terms, but a sufficiently limited time that would allow for new justices to address the ever-changing shifts in paradigms and fresh ideas and experiences as the world around us changes constantly. Seems like that might be a positive and progressive move in the national political machine. (In death, there is no favoritism and no division of ideologies. With this in mind…..am sending sincere sympathy to his family in their
grief and loss.)
How about two six-year terms…then over and out?