Skip to comments.AP source: Obama chooses Kagan for Supreme Court
Posted on 05/10/2010 3:36:45 AM PDT by Biggirl
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Barack Obama will nominate Solicitor General Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court, a person familiar with the president's thinking said Sunday night. The move positions the court to have three female justices for the first time in history.
The source spoke on condition of anonymity because the decision had not been made public. Obama will announce his choice at 10 a.m. Monday in the East Room of the White House.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
Oh boy....a Kaganaroo court...
Odd that there is no discussion of her personal life at all. “In the closet” with a “life partner”?
FIGHT satan’s PICK... satan’s SON PICKS DEMON FOR HIGH COURT.
“Odd that there is no discussion of her personal life at all. In the closet with a life partner?”
They’re scared to death of this getting out. That simple.
By being a Lesbian and/or a Marxist, she’d lack a lot more than just judicial experience for the position. She’s missed out a many of the basic experiences of the average human being.
I don’t know that she is either of those.
Unattractive women often don’t get husbands. I don’t know that she is a Marxist.
Nor do you.
“A Lesbian Marxist with no judicial experience.”
Judicial experience isn’t necessary for writting one’s own laws. Just need a couple of #2 pencils and a yellow legal pad. It ain’t that hard...
Are we having sympathy for her because she’s simply a female? I know lots of unattractive, over-weight women who are mothers, wives, etc.
If Obama chose her......
I agree with you. I find it less and less interesting to read and join the discussions here lately. It just seems more juvenile and vicious and less constructive.
The perfect Democrat: Lesbian, socialist, anti-military.
Just also heard on the radio that this new appoinment hired conservatives to the teaching staff of Harvard.
Amen to it. Even in the religion thread, attacks are well known.
Tell me what good that does while the liberal marxists destroy from within using their positions of power?
"Future elections might undo some of the president's policies, but his more liberal views about the Constitution, the powers of the national government, and the role of unelected federal judges, are now being locked in securely," Garnett said in a statement.
I don’t particularly have sympathy for her as a woman,,I do feel pity for ugly people and think it is unkind to use that as a reason to bash them.
There is probably enough to object to without resorting to this tactic and without resorting to using fantasy as an objection.
Fight. Fight this like all hell unleashed. The Republican senators CANNOT allow a vote on this Communist for Supreme Court justice. It would be affront to all America stands for. The Dems stalled for years on Bush’s judicial appointments; what’s the big deal if one lib is missing from the court for a year or two until BHO is gone? So we’ll have 5-to-3 decisions instead of 5-4. So what?
Sympathy because she’s a female? Pleeaaasee.
As if any of the males on the court (with the possible exception of Roberts) are very pleasant to look at. Bork looked like some kind of retarded Colonel Sanders, which didn’t make him any less qualified. Sorry, I’m not generally one who makes comments like this, but if she were a man, ugliness wouldn’t be an issue.
THAT SAID, some lefty types joked that Roberts might be gay because he’s good looking. So maybe it’s because, for a woman, ugly = lesbian? Not sure when we reached that conclusion as a society, but if so, I guess maybe a male justice would be suspect if he looked gay? But not just because of ugliness.
And dittos to those who say there’s plenty of ammunition against her without getting into her looks.
For sometime now there have been whispers that it’s an open secret at Harvard that she has a female “lifetime” partner. And that she has hidden her private life because she wouldn’t be advanced if it was generally known. You might want to read some of the threads here on FR.
I’ve no doubt such whispers have followed her wherever she’s gone, throughout her life... I mean, look at her!
I think it’s natural to make these assumptions, I just think people should be aware of the assumptions they’re making, and the premises on which they base them—such as “ugly unmarried woman = lesbian”—which may or may not be valid.
My objection was to his assertion that she’s getting sympathy for being a woman, when everything I see suggests the opposite.
When we have her own words to define her, it’s difficult to understand some on this thread that defend her and say she’s not a lesbian (when it’s an open “secret”), and she’s not a marxist when she clearly is one.
Actually I think she’s probably a marxist and a lesbian.
Some on this thread aren’t calling her a marxist or a lesbian, they’re just calling her ugly. I have an aversion to that.
"In our times, a coherent socialist movement is nowhere to be found in the United States. Americans are more likely to speak of a golden past than of a golden future, of Capitalism's glories than of socialism's greatness. Conformity overrides dissent; the desire to conserve has overwhelmed the urge to alter. Such a state of affairs cries out for explanation. Why, in a society by no means perfect, has a radical party never attained the status of a major political force? Why, in particular, did the socialist movement never become an alternative to the nation's established parties?"
We are in deep trouble and I do NOT want to sing Kumbayah with this woman.
It is Os Harriet Meyers moment
Not worried about using her position on the court to advance the homosexual agenda?
Not all Lesbos are ugly by any stretch.
Seems no one considered that point.
I have already read Alinsky’s book and have been employing his tactics against the left. Fight fire with fire.