Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

NBC: Obama to name Kagan for high court
msnbc.msn.com ^ | May 9, 2010

Posted on 05/09/2010 7:37:40 PM PDT by Free ThinkerNY

Edited on 05/09/2010 7:38:47 PM PDT by Admin Moderator. [history]

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-180 next last
To: Free ThinkerNY

She’s a FDRQ. She needs to be filibustered.


101 posted on 05/09/2010 8:45:35 PM PDT by freedomwarrior998
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MissDairyGoodnessVT

102 posted on 05/09/2010 8:47:31 PM PDT by restornu
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: plain talk

Although I’m sure there are innumerable reasons she’d make a lousy SCt justice, the majority of lawyers never try a case in court so I don’t think this should be much of a disqualification.


103 posted on 05/09/2010 8:47:38 PM PDT by cammie
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: BobL

It does not surprise me that Obama would nominate someone to the Supreme Court with no judicial experience. Her sex and sexual orientation are much more important when making a statement nomination. I doubt very much she is confirmed. This is a way for Obama to somewhat satisfy the progressives (but not all, as they think she is too moderate) and to get the GOP on record of voting against a woman. Whoever Obama nominates next is the real person he wants on the court and it will be very hard for the Republicans to stop two nominees in a row. The next nominee will be much more liberal.


104 posted on 05/09/2010 8:48:23 PM PDT by mcjordansc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

“served as the Dean of Harvard Law School from 2003 to 2009”

moonbat material


105 posted on 05/09/2010 8:48:31 PM PDT by Stephanie32
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: apillar

if you were on FR 5 yrs ago you would have seen all the freepers complaining that W wimped out by picking Roberts and how he’d turn out to be another Souter.

people jump to conclusions.


106 posted on 05/09/2010 8:50:14 PM PDT by jeltz25
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 91 | View Replies]

To: jeltz25

That is one of the greatest reasons why we need to not let amnesty happen.


107 posted on 05/09/2010 8:50:52 PM PDT by digital-olive
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: rwfromkansas

I’m sure Lindsey Graham will be so excited he’ll wet his panties!


108 posted on 05/09/2010 8:59:22 PM PDT by o2bfree (This president is giving me a headache!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 25 | View Replies]

To: restornu

Man. No question.


109 posted on 05/09/2010 9:01:52 PM PDT by DemonDeac
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 102 | View Replies]

To: mcjordansc

“The next nominee will be much more liberal.”

I agreed with you until the last sentence. This lady is ugly, a lezbo, and filled with hate. It is difficult to get much more liberal.


110 posted on 05/09/2010 9:01:58 PM PDT by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: mcjordansc

I fear you are correct. Worked for Bush to get Alito on the court.


111 posted on 05/09/2010 9:06:25 PM PDT by Jedidah (Character, courage, common sense are more important than issues.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 104 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake

Was it really necessary to post a pic?? I mean, I just ate for heaven’s sake!....uggghhhh...

More proof that being a liberal makes you ugly... ya know kind of like how Lucifer used to be beautiful then all the sin made him ugly....that’s liberalism...all the same


112 posted on 05/09/2010 9:11:15 PM PDT by DrewsMum (Somebody please put the Constitution on his teleprompter....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: BobL

You are kind of wrong here. Despite her sexual leanings, she has written some things and supported positions that are fairly moderate. She has argued for many of the Bush administration policies on how to treat suspected terrorists, she does not believe there is a constitutional right to same sex marriage and she is not opposed to the death penalty. Now, she is much further on the left that anyone I want to see on the Court, but she is not as radical as some on her are trying to portray her. The next nominee will be, almost guaranteed.


113 posted on 05/09/2010 9:13:18 PM PDT by mcjordansc
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 110 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

She looks like Mike Myers in drag.


114 posted on 05/09/2010 9:18:30 PM PDT by johnthebaptistmoore (If leftist legislation that's already in place really can't be ended by non-leftists, then what?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

Sotomayor was an insult to all Americans. She is dumb, fat and ugly. Kagan at least is an intellect, although she is also fat and ugly. This appointment is not insulting. That is an improvement for Obama.


115 posted on 05/09/2010 9:21:34 PM PDT by indianrightwinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ForGod'sSake

ROFL!!!


116 posted on 05/09/2010 9:45:29 PM PDT by luvie (DIMs?......start packin'--you're fired!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: Free ThinkerNY

I don’t have a problem with her being lesbian, anyone he picks will be a leftie. I do wish though Repubs treat his picks the way he treated Bush’s: with disdain. They give him faR TOO MUCH deference. I see this as a way to take energy away from gay protests against him, and Hillary supporters (who would be impressed with a woman and or a lesbian.


117 posted on 05/09/2010 9:49:02 PM PDT by PghBaldy (Like the Ft Hood Killer, James Earl Ray was just stressed when he killed MLK Jr.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: mcjordansc

“You are kind of wrong here. Despite her sexual leanings, she has written some things and supported positions that are fairly moderate. She has argued for many of the Bush administration policies on how to treat suspected terrorists, she does not believe there is a constitutional right to same sex marriage and she is not opposed to the death penalty. Now, she is much further on the left that anyone I want to see on the Court, but she is not as radical as some on her are trying to portray her. The next nominee will be, almost guaranteed.”

I hope you’re right, but I remember her when Clinton was prez, and (believe it or not) they were talking about her. So, since then, getting her credentials in shape for a nomination fight would make a lot of sense, of the SC is your goal.

We shall see.


118 posted on 05/09/2010 9:49:45 PM PDT by BobL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 113 | View Replies]

To: GOPsterinMA; fieldmarshaldj; Clintonfatigued; AuH2ORepublican; BillyBoy

No mention of a husband in her bio. I’m completely shocked.


119 posted on 05/09/2010 9:49:46 PM PDT by Impy (RED=COMMUNIST, NOT REPUBLICAN | NO "INDIVIDUAL MANDATE"!!!!!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: DrewsMum

Sorry. Duty called. Ain’t it a shame one needs a cast iron stomach to discuss things political... ;^)


120 posted on 05/09/2010 10:07:44 PM PDT by ForGod'sSake (You have just two choices: SUBMIT or RESIST with everything you've got!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 112 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 81-100101-120121-140 ... 161-180 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson