They get letters

Scalia responds to the Boston Herald's 'obscene gesture' article with a letter:

Your reporter, an up-and-coming “gotcha” star named Laurel J. Sweet, asked me (o-so-sweetly) what I said to those people who objected to my taking part in such public religious ceremonies as the Red Mass I had just attended. I responded, jocularly, with a gesture that consisted of fanning the fingers of my right hand under my chin. Seeing that she did not understand, I said “That’s Sicilian,” and explained its meaning - which was that I could not care less.

It pains me to even hint at defending this guy, but I've covered the Herald's fast-and-loose reporting about gay marriage (also here)and liberals. If Laurel J. Sweet is indeed taking some liberties with her coverage of Scalia, it's not out of character for Boston's tabloid rag.

Now I should stop to point out that I have no idea if that's an obscene guesture or not. I think we can all agree that it rises to the level of 'rude', no? But, really, who cares?

The more interesting story is the increasingly high-profile role Scalia seems to be playing in the public realm. He's playing with fire by making prejudicial remarks prior to an important case -- by no means the first incident which brings his impartiality into question -- and as an outside observer it seems to me like he wants to pick a fight.

Maybe that's his nature. Writing letters to the editor of crappy tabloids about sloppy journalism indicates he's a little testy. Or maybe there's a vast Opus Dei conspiracy to produce an impeachment showdown. Certainly the right is itching for some kind of action around the Supreme Court. It's really the last holdout against their desctructive politics. Maybe not for long.