John Adams Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 I guess she has a soft spot in her heart for socialists, unions and radicals. Probably a kook. Go figure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 I guess she has a soft spot in her heart for socialists, unions and radicals. But that was 1981. And she probably just misspoke. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 But that was 1981. And she probably just misspoke. Given Barry O's previous nominations, we should all get a look-see at her tax records. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Given Barry O's previous nominations, we should all get a look-see at her tax records. Why do you hate black people? Do you enjoy being a racist? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Why do you hate black people? Do you enjoy being a racist? That's nice, Mock. When did you stop beating your wife? I keed, of course. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 But that was 1981. And she probably just misspoke. How much should we judge your life's accomplishments based on an undergraduate thesis or final paper you wrote almost 30 years ago (or more, or less if you're younger)? College is important, but so is 30 years of live lived since then. I know that by accident of birth she would become the third woman on the court and thus send the still-majority-Conservative court slip-sliding into the fiery gates of liberal Hell on a Norse warship, Ronnie James Dio style [/JSP], and maybe she's Karl Marx's long-lost lesbian grandchild, but... Context, please. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 That's nice, Mock. When did you stop beating your wife? I keed, of course. You criticized Obama. Clearly, you're a racist. You hate America. You're selfish. Just admit it. How much should we judge your life's accomplishments based on an undergraduate thesis or final paper you wrote almost 30 years ago (or more, or less if you're younger)? College is important, but so is 30 years of live lived since then. I know that by accident of birth she would become the third woman on the court and thus send the still-majority-Conservative court slip-sliding into the fiery gates of liberal Hell on a Norse warship, Ronnie James Dio style [/JSP], and maybe she's Karl Marx's long-lost lesbian grandchild, but... Context, please. Actually, my statement was meant more as sarcasm toward the upcoming hearings, not as criticism of the pick or of Kagan. This is the purest proof of the phrase "Elections have consequences." The president gets to pick his Supreme Court nominees, period. There is little chance she won't get confirmed. During the course of the hearings, I'm sure some hard right Senator will ask her about this paper, just like Sotomayor was asked about her "wise Latina" comment, and she'll just say something like "It was a long time ago. I probably could have chosen better words," and that'll be that, and in a month or two it won't be mentioned again. Let's move this along quickly so the WH can get back to addressing real problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Actually, my statement was meant more as sarcasm toward the upcoming hearings, not as criticism of the pick or of Kagan. This is the purest proof of the phrase "Elections have consequences." The president gets to pick his Supreme Court nominees, period. There is little chance she won't get confirmed. During the course of the hearings, I'm sure some hard right Senator will ask her about this paper, just like Sotomayor was asked about her "wise Latina" comment, and she'll just say something like "It was a long time ago. I probably could have chosen better words," and that'll be that, and in a month or two it won't be mentioned again. Let's move this along quickly so the WH can get back to addressing real problems. I disagree with nothing you've got to say here. Probably quoted the wrong guy (would be interested to hear Magox's opinion on it). Bush got two cracks and picked two very qualified justices (and one not very qualified personal lawyer). They fall very hard right and they are also proof that elections have consequences. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
/dev/null Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 How much should we judge your life's accomplishments based on an undergraduate thesis or final paper you wrote almost 30 years ago (or more, or less if you're younger)? College is important, but so is 30 years of live lived since then. Unless you were a Republican running for Governor of Virginia in 2009, then it was a campaign issue Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RuntheDamnBall Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 Unless you were a Republican running for Governor of Virginia in 2009, then it was a campaign issue Well, sort of, except it was a Master's thesis and the guy was 34 and not 22; I think it's pretty safe to say these are more likely core beliefs than they are when you're reflecting on someone who's not yet finished college. Also whatever cloth you're cut from, Princeton >> Pat Robertson's Regent University. I'm not budging on that one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 You criticized Obama. Clearly, you're a racist. You hate America. You're selfish. Just admit it. Au contraire, my friend behind the Orange Curtain. I'm as kind and loving a soul you'll ever meet. Except when it comes to nanny-state leeches. Or tax-happy politicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Magox Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 I disagree with nothing you've got to say here. Probably quoted the wrong guy (would be interested to hear Magox's opinion on it). Bush got two cracks and picked two very qualified justices (and one not very qualified personal lawyer). They fall very hard right and they are also proof that elections have consequences. I don't see a major problem that I know of any way that would lead me to believe that she isn't qualified to be a supreme court judge. Everything that I've read states otherwise. The main negative for me is that she doesn't have any trial experience, which I believe is fair game to question, however considering that Roberts had virtually the same issue, and he got through, then there really isn't too much ground to use as the basis of denying her nomination. What worries me a little bit is that she appears to have some views (like the thesis), that have the makings of possibly accepting an ideaological supreme court judge. We really don't have too much to judge her by, she has done a remarkable job of leaving a very scant paper trail, as if she had carefully crafted her career with her eye on possibly one day becoming a supreme court judge, and I can see the concern there. I'm not implying that there is anything wrong with aspiring to be a supreme court judge but more so what we don't know about her. But, one could make just as strong of an argument for some of the supreme court judges chosen by Bush. So if the GOP can do it then so can the Democrats. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDBillzFan Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 So if the GOP can do it then so can the Democrats. That's such a crappy justification for doing things. It's true, I know, because it's all I hear out of Obama. But it's crappy. Even if it were the other way around. At the youngest of ages we're challenged by our parents, "If you friends all jumped off a bridge, would you do it?" Little did I know the correct answer would be "Are my friends Republicans?" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeviF Posted May 17, 2010 Share Posted May 17, 2010 That's such a crappy justification for doing things. It's true, I know, because it's all I hear out of Obama. But it's crappy. Even if it were the other way around. At the youngest of ages we're challenged by our parents, "If you friends all jumped off a bridge, would you do it?" Little did I know the correct answer would be "Are my friends Republicans?" My answer was always, "Well, how high is the bridge?" My parents hated me Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Adams Posted June 11, 2010 Share Posted June 11, 2010 My issue with her being a woman is the fact that she's a woman who likes women. Last thing I want is a pro-homosexual and pro-abortion agenda vote on the SC for the next 20+ years. I know it's not the most popular stance, but I believe it's the right one. Turns out your homophobia has you hating one of your own ilk. WASHINGTON—As a counsel to former President Bill Clinton, Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan blasted a California court for rejecting a landlady's claim that a state anti-discrimination law violated her religious freedom. In a 1996 memo, Ms. Kagan suggested that the case should be taken by the Supreme Court and that the justices should side with the landlady, who refused to rent to unmarried couples. The memo is part of a roughly 40,000-page trove of documents released Friday that shed more light on what kind of justice Ms. Kagan might be. The papers also reveal that Ms. Kagan helped draft an executive order detailing federal employees' rights to express their religion in the workplace. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405...IDDLETopStories Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pine Barrens Mafia Posted June 14, 2010 Share Posted June 14, 2010 Turns out your homophobia has you hating one of your own ilk. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000142405...IDDLETopStories I wouldn't say she's one of "my ilk," but that's encouraging if she supports the public expression of belief. Thanks for the info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts