If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(ScotusBlog)   Obama will nominate Elena Kagan to replace John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court   (scotusblog.com) divider line 719
    More: News, Elena Kagan, John Paul Stevens, supreme courts, President Obama  
•       •       •

10637 clicks; posted to Main » on 09 May 2010 at 11:31 PM (4 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



719 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all
 
2010-05-10 05:46:01 AM  
Dammit Obama, if you're going to nominate a fat gay Jew, how about Barney Frank? He's the one who should be on the court.
 
2010-05-10 06:04:23 AM  
Obama's not a big fan of white guys, is he? Oh, that's right, white guys are evil.
 
2010-05-10 06:15:26 AM  
log_jammin: Hobodeluxe: not replace the most liberal member with a moderate conservative one.

Honest question.

Other than he stance on "indefinite detention", what else puts her into the right wing camp?


the way she bungled the govt's position on Citizen's United for one thing.
and it's not so much that she's a "right winger" it's that she's well to the right of the man she's replacing.
this moves the court that already leans right even further to the right.
 
2010-05-10 06:18:44 AM  
Fat Matthew Broderick Lesbian What?

i44.tinypic.com
 
2010-05-10 06:29:25 AM  
Hobodeluxe: the way she bungled the govt's position on Citizen's United for one thing.
and it's not so much that she's a "right winger" it's that she's well to the right of the man she's replacing.
this moves the court that already leans right even further to the right.


I've always seen the Citizen's United ruling as just another in a long line of "we want this decision so we'll use the flimsiest of logic to get to that decision". I don't see her or anyone elses arguments changing anything.


I just wondered if she has said anything specific or gave any answers that caused people to view her as "the the right of" Obama. Like I said, the indefinite detention thing is the only one I'm aware of. But it's not like I've been looking.
 
2010-05-10 06:48:11 AM  
Lutz from 30 Rock will be a SNL star now to play her. Or maybe John Goodman?
msnbcmedia2.msn.com
 
2010-05-10 06:49:07 AM  
log_jammin: Hobodeluxe: the way she bungled the govt's position on Citizen's United for one thing.
and it's not so much that she's a "right winger" it's that she's well to the right of the man she's replacing.
this moves the court that already leans right even further to the right.

I've always seen the Citizen's United ruling as just another in a long line of "we want this decision so we'll use the flimsiest of logic to get to that decision". I don't see her or anyone elses arguments changing anything.


I just wondered if she has said anything specific or gave any answers that caused people to view her as "the the right of" Obama. Like I said, the indefinite detention thing is the only one I'm aware of. But it's not like I've been looking.


no they've been grooming her for this spot and she has made it a point to not give her opinion on anything political. and she has no bench experience
 
2010-05-10 06:50:30 AM  
Hobodeluxe: no they've been grooming her for this spot and she has made it a point to not give her opinion on anything political. and she has no bench experience

That's what I gathered.
 
2010-05-10 06:51:59 AM  
lilplatinum: No but I farked your mom!

With Kagan's penis!
 
2010-05-10 07:01:25 AM  
my .02 watched some fox news BS last weeks highlighting the Obama administrations connections to big oil. willing to bet they will stoop to any low to make sure she goes down in flames.
 
2010-05-10 07:03:50 AM  
She sounds like a heavyweight and a good choice.
 
2010-05-10 07:10:07 AM  
I think Kagan will turn out to be more liberal than Sotomayor, but they'll probably vote for her without a big fuss. If she's a lesbian, Obama he can say her objectors are anti-gay, much as Democrats have worked so hard to portray their detractors as universally racist.
 
2010-05-10 07:16:42 AM  
log_jammin: Hobodeluxe: no they've been grooming her for this spot and she has made it a point to not give her opinion on anything political. and she has no bench experience

That's what I gathered.


but if you go back and look at who she has appointed as her deputies and some of her past "associates" she doesn't appear to be anywhere near a liberal or progressive. at best she's a moderate conservative IMO.
 
2010-05-10 07:18:20 AM  
Animatronik: I think Kagan will turn out to be more liberal than Sotomayor, but they'll probably vote for her without a big fuss. If she's a lesbian, Obama he can say her objectors are anti-gay, much as Democrats have worked so hard to portray their detractors as universally racist.

The Republicans haven't helped themselves in this regard in Arizona
 
2010-05-10 07:29:55 AM  
POTUS to name nominee to SCOTUS. PENUS
 
2010-05-10 07:31:43 AM  
Glen Greenwald has been doing an excellent job over the last few weeks explaining just how unqualified this person is. She has only ever been in a courtroom once in her life; once(!) and that was before the SC where justice Stevens had to explain the case law to her from the bench because of how inept and unprepared she was. We're supposed to believe that this person, who's only jobs even related to law have been being the dean of Harvard and being Clinton's legal flack, who can't argue a case out of a paper bag, who beleives the president can do whatever the hell he wants to people he names terrorists, and who supports guilt by association as a legal concept as her comments regarding Hamas show, is qualified to be a Supreme Court judge?

Her nomination is ridiculous on its face, plain and simple. She is not qualified for this position; even Harriet Miers had more experience with litigation and the courts that Ms. Kagan. Nominating her only shows that, sadly, Mr. Obama is more interested in putting administration sycophants on the court than genuinely skilled and respected legal professional. If she is confirmed, Obama will have appointed the left's Clarence Thomas.
 
2010-05-10 07:32:39 AM  
POTUS names nominee to SCOTUS. PENUS
 
2010-05-10 07:51:00 AM  
Hick: Is she cute? I am guessing not.

Mike Myers in drag.
 
2010-05-10 09:12:15 AM  
i43.tinypic.com

You can put her in any kind of a robe you want. You know what you'll end up with?

A lesbian.
 
2010-05-10 09:13:31 AM  
i see the qualifications to be on the Supreme Court are now:

minority woman
lesbian woman

everything else is just ancillary. you know, like knowledge of law. judicial temperament. constitutionality. experience. expertize.
 
2010-05-10 09:16:35 AM  
NWO in effect.

Keep eating your soy products, supporting homosexuality, and loving the Jews.

This country is going straight to hell in a hand-basket.
 
2010-05-10 09:17:58 AM  
Can this please become a boobies thread?
 
2010-05-10 09:18:29 AM  
Animatronik: much as Democrats have worked so hard to portray their detractors as universally racist.

To be fair, it really wasn't that hard.
 
2010-05-10 09:24:10 AM  
People, there are a lot more similarities to GWB's SCOTUS nominations than you realize. For example:

John Roberts and Elena Kagan: Both in their 50s.
Samuel Alito and Elena Kagan: Both attended Ivy League colleges.
John Robers, Samuel Alito, and Elena Kagan: All 3 like sex with women.
 
2010-05-10 09:26:22 AM  
Is this the thread where Farkers who lambasted Bush for nominating persons with no judicial experience also criticize Obama for nominating someone with no judicial experience?

Or will those Farkers gloss over this issue in a hypocritical manner?

/Rhetorical
 
2010-05-10 09:28:48 AM  
"1999 judicial nomination

On June 17, 1999, President Clinton nominated Kagan to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, to replace James L. Buckley, who had taken senior status in 1996. The Senate Judiciary Committee's Republican chairman Orrin Hatch scheduled no hearing, effectively ending her nomination. When Clinton's term ended, she and Allen Snyder were unconfirmed nominees for the D.C. circuit court.[9]
In 2001, President George W. Bush nominated John G. Roberts to the seat to which Kagan had been nominated; Roberts was confirmed in 2003, and was elevated to the Supreme Court in 2005 upon his confirmation as Chief Justice of the United States."

They should just steamroll over the conservative fux on this. They played dirty pool, and they should pay the price.
 
2010-05-10 09:29:31 AM  
It's

Carousel Beast: Is this the thread where Farkers who lambasted Bush for nominating persons with no judicial experience also criticize Obama for nominating someone with no judicial experience?

Is this the thread where people who passionately defended Bush for nominating persons with no judicial experience criticize Obama for nominating someone with no judicial experience?
 
2010-05-10 09:32:14 AM  
It's a real shame that this whole problem with Kagan not having judicial experience could have been avoided had Orrin Hatch given her a "straight up and down vote" when Clinton nominated her to Court of Appeals in 1999. I guess you reap what you sow.
 
2010-05-10 09:34:05 AM  
twobux: John Robers, Samuel Alito, and Elena Kagan: All 3 like sex with women.

Hm. [Citation Needed]

Also, at the people whining that Kagan isn't liberal enough... come on. Obama has shown multiple times he knows what he's doing. You know how we mock FIs for swinging between "empty suit" and "aggressive dictator"? Well you guys are kinda swinging between "Obama is a political steamroller" and "WTF is this guy's problem".
 
2010-05-10 09:38:42 AM  
kronicfeld: It's

Carousel Beast: Is this the thread where Farkers who lambasted Bush for nominating persons with no judicial experience also criticize Obama for nominating someone with no judicial experience?

Is this the thread where people who passionately defended Bush for nominating persons with no judicial experience criticize Obama for nominating someone with no judicial experience?


Ah, the flames start. Nice of you to answer the question of your hypocrisy in such a way. Seems I hit pretty close to home.

/Notice I didn't give my opinion either way
//Because it's irrelevant
///An actual lawyer would have noticed that
 
2010-05-10 09:39:24 AM  
Rann Xerox: I wonder which asshole senator will be the first to ask Elena Kagan what is her sexual orientation.

Do they need to ask?

More likely they will ask, which is your favorite American Idol judge, Ellen or Paula? Who do you like more, Keith Olbermann or Rachel Maddow? Have you seen Oprah naked? If I had a fish and a bicycle, could you make the fish ride the bike? Are you more into carpet or hardwoods?
 
2010-05-10 09:42:45 AM  
kronicfeld: It's a real shame that this whole problem with Kagan not having judicial experience could have been avoided had Orrin Hatch given her a "straight up and down vote" when Clinton nominated her to Court of Appeals in 1999. I guess you reap what you sow.

Oh behave. Nominations and confirmations have nothing to do with qualifications or experience and everything to do with politics. I'm fine with whomever either party would nominate as long as they can finish their own sentences and can understand three syllable words. Life is too short to get worried about whether or not she likes pink, or the military, or wants to force abortions on unsuspecting women in back alleys.
 
2010-05-10 09:45:29 AM  
I_C_Weener: Oh behave. Nominations and confirmations have nothing to do with qualifications or experience and everything to do with politics. I'm fine with whomever either party would nominate as long as they can finish their own sentences and can understand three syllable words. Life is too short to get worried about whether or not she likes pink, or the military, or wants to force abortions on unsuspecting women in back alleys.

I don't care much for Kagan, as a SG or as a nominee for the Supreme Court. I just wanted to trot out a piece of trivia.
 
2010-05-10 09:45:57 AM  
davidphogan: This is bad news for Obama?

Seriously, people? It took an hour and a half for this meme to show up?

Farkers, I am disappoint.
 
2010-05-10 09:47:37 AM  
ThreeEdgedSword: Fuller: Why do they always have to be religious?

BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD!


Kinda a good point. I want to know (altho we can't, cause the fundies would start bombing buildings) who on the SCOTUS is an atheist/agnostic. That's the group I feel is the best legal representation for most Americans who aren't wearing their ass for a hat.

Then again, there is probably a definite difference between the Catholic and Jewish atheist/agnostic and a formerly Protestant agnostic. That viewpoint will stay unrepresented. Perhaps they tend to finish in the middle of their law school classes, and don't end up being heavy hitting intellectuals because neither the left nor the right can use them.

Confabulat: There is no grey for today's mainstream Republican.

Misread as "There is no ghey for today's mainstream Republican."

/heh
 
2010-05-10 09:48:27 AM  
kronicfeld: I_C_Weener: Oh behave. Nominations and confirmations have nothing to do with qualifications or experience and everything to do with politics. I'm fine with whomever either party would nominate as long as they can finish their own sentences and can understand three syllable words. Life is too short to get worried about whether or not she likes pink, or the military, or wants to force abortions on unsuspecting women in back alleys.

I don't care much for Kagan, as a SG or as a nominee for the Supreme Court. I just wanted to trot out a piece of trivia.


I'm okay with whomever, like I said. I liked Biden until his grandstanding on the committee during Alito et al. Its just a circus without elephants or trapeze artists and the chance someone might get trampled by a runaway clown posse.

She's going to be liberal. Big shock. Republicans put conservatives on the bench, Dems put liberals. HOW LONG HAS THIS BEEN GOING ON?

Meanwhile, oil continues to spill, the economy is on an even more dangerous precipice than before, and we have terrorists with faulty car bombs in Times Square. Lets devote lots of time on Obama's pick instead.
 
2010-05-10 09:51:24 AM  
kronicfeld: It's

Carousel Beast: Is this the thread where Farkers who lambasted Bush for nominating persons with no judicial experience also criticize Obama for nominating someone with no judicial experience?

Is this the thread where people who passionately defended Bush for nominating persons with no judicial experience criticize Obama for nominating someone with no judicial experience?


Well, it looks like another thread where all the partisan douchenozzles will argue over whose side is more hypocritical. Welcome to the politics of Fark and the new America.
 
2010-05-10 09:52:23 AM  
ThreeEdgedSword: Fuller: Why do they always have to be religious?

BLOOD FOR THE BLOOD GOD!


Kinda a good point. I want to know (altho we can't, cause the fundies would start bombing buildings) who on the SCOTUS is an atheist/agnostic. That's the group I feel is the best legal representation for most Americans who aren't wearing their ass for a hat.

Then again, there is probably a definite difference between the lapsed Catholic or secularly Jewish atheist/agnostic and a formerly Protestant variety. That viewpoint will stay unrepresented.

/Perhaps lapsed Protestants don't end up being heavy hitting legal intellectuals because they tend to finish in the middle of their law school classes and their upbringing tells them it's more important to MAKE MONEY FA$T!

//or maybe they end up all being libertarians with a slight gun-nut tinge?

Confabulat: There is no grey for today's mainstream Republican.

Misread as "There is no ghey for today's mainstream Republican."

/heh
 
2010-05-10 09:52:29 AM  
Good for her. She's a nice lady.
 
2010-05-10 09:54:11 AM  
I_C_Weener: kronicfeld: I_C_Weener: Oh behave. Nominations and confirmations have nothing to do with qualifications or experience and everything to do with politics. I'm fine with whomever either party would nominate as long as they can finish their own sentences and can understand three syllable words. Life is too short to get worried about whether or not she likes pink, or the military, or wants to force abortions on unsuspecting women in back alleys.

I don't care much for Kagan, as a SG or as a nominee for the Supreme Court. I just wanted to trot out a piece of trivia.

I'm okay with whomever, like I said. I liked Biden until his grandstanding on the committee during Alito et al.


Same here. Then I learned to like him again after he told the dude in the wheel chair to stand up.
 
2010-05-10 09:57:34 AM  
Mose: Same here. Then I learned to like him again after he told the dude in the wheel chair to stand up.

If he would do a VP rap song, I might like him.

I'm not here to make any trouble,
I'm just doing the Vice President shuffle.
 
2010-05-10 10:03:20 AM  
4chan Ambassador: Elena? Kagan? Those don't sound like American names.

And didn't she serve at Harvard Law School for a few years? What a surprise, Obama picked yet another crony of his. Where's that hopey changey stuff you voted for now, huh libs?


It's been pointed out that the current SCOTUS is the most northeast-biased court since the US expanded west of the Mississippi.

I believe the most western of the justices attended Northwestern, which is in Chicago (and barely into the Central time zone). Everyone else was from the I-95 corridor.
 
2010-05-10 10:03:58 AM  
Shes fat and ugly.
 
2010-05-10 10:05:11 AM  
Bagelox-99: /Perhaps lapsed Protestants don't end up being heavy hitting legal intellectuals because they tend to finish in the middle of their law school classes and their upbringing tells them it's more important to MAKE MONEY FA$T!

Or they tend not to be from the parts of the country that would point them toward Ivy League law schools, which seems to be a requirement for SCOTUS membership these days.
 
2010-05-10 10:05:55 AM  
AnotherDisillusionedCollegeStudent: Bagelox-99: /Perhaps lapsed Protestants don't end up being heavy hitting legal intellectuals because they tend to finish in the middle of their law school classes and their upbringing tells them it's more important to MAKE MONEY FA$T!

Or they tend not to be from the parts of the country that would point them toward Ivy League law schools, which seems to be a requirement for SCOTUS membership these days.


We need some hanging judge from out West. A Berkeley type. Anyone know what Judge Ito is up to nowadays?
 
2010-05-10 10:08:36 AM  
Anything that ticks off the far right or the far libs.

/She is a bush supporter though...
 
2010-05-10 10:08:54 AM  
So, let me sumarize this thread.
Left wing: OMG we hate her, she's so far right she's a nazi
Right wing: OMG we hate her, she's a Commie!

Nice pick Obama! No, I really mean that, she seems to be a lock for Senate aproval, and she seems to be moderate. She will probably be widely accepted by main stream Americans.

A good number of Republican senators will not be willing to openly oppose a moderate, gay, Jewish Women. And the Democrats will probably only lose a couple of the most liberal senators. In the end, I expect boring conformation hearings, followed by approval by a wide margin.

Intrade has her a 97% chance to be sworn in.
Link (new window)
 
2010-05-10 10:09:52 AM  
I'm The Foot Farking Master: Anything that ticks off the far right or the far libs.

/She is a bush supporter though...


I figured she's more Brazilian cut.
 
2010-05-10 10:11:04 AM  
Wonder what the price is for a spot on the Supreme Court?

/Blogo not involved... this time
 
2010-05-10 10:12:53 AM  
Serious intellectual pursuit is getting to be either
a) a regional taste, sort of like whether you like jazz or kraut on your dog,
or
b) just another ambition game, where you get only as far as who you can shmooz.
 
Displayed 50 of 719 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report