Skip to comments.Newt Gingrich: Elena Kagan ‘Should Be Disqualified From the Very Beginning.’
Posted on 05/15/2010 7:10:40 PM PDT by Steelfish
Newt Gingrich: Elena Kagan Should Be Disqualified From the Very Beginning. May 15, 2010
By Jim Geraghty Newt Gingrich instantly became one of the most prominent opponents to the nomination of Sonia Sotomayor as a Supreme Court justice when he tweeted, Imagine a judicial nominee said my experience as a white man makes me better than a Latina woman new racism is no better than old racism.
Tonight at the NRA Convention, he offered a similarly bold and uncompromising criticism of Elena Kagan: For a potential Supreme Court nominee to attempt to bar military recruiters from campus during a time of war, she should be disqualified from the very beginning
Mr. President, youre entitled to nominate a liberal. But cant you nominate a liberal who respects and works for our military, not someone who has contempt for them and opposes them?
(Excerpt) Read more at nationalreview.com ...
Silly Newt: there’s no such thing as a pro-military liberal. Unless you’re talking about the military of Iraq, of course.
I think Lieberman would probably qualify.
I fully expect senators from all sides to do their jobs of 'advise and consent' and to tell Pres. Obama do come back when he has a qualified candidate. A "law degree" from Haaavaaard doesn't cut it!
in for the obligatory post of:
“go away, Newt”
I hope someone asks her how she would have rules on that case (since it is done, she can comment.) She would have either rules against herself, or ruled against EVERY sitting justice (even the most leftie ones.)
She should have to explain why she thinks she is smarter that ALL of the current justices.
If Newt were a current Senator he would spout the standard RINO talking points, then make a deal and if he had to vote for her. He and his like are as responsible for what is wrong with this country as any group of liberal or progressive Democrats. He repulses me.
What was it that candidate Obama said about putting lipstick on a pig?
I’ll have to agree with Newt here, 100%. No communists for the SC.
The chief problem...which she will have to come to admit...is that any Goldman Sachs case that arrives at the Supreme Court...she has to step aside for each of cases that come up. Then there’s the cases she worked on for the administration...which she’d have to step aside for those as well. So in two years...figure at least twenty cases which she might have to step aside on, and just let the eight judges render judgement. You can see the issues involved here.
If they had picked a plain old judge, then there’s no connection to companies or the build-up of cases...but then this isn’t the smartest crowd in the world...or they simply won’t accept the idea of her stepping to the side for any case whatsoever.
Looks like he's been reading this website. WTG Newt. Maybe you'll come around once again.
Hold off Newt. This administration has good reasons to belittle the need for “qualifications” for office.
Hmm.. Your search for “a liberal who respects and works for our military” does not match any documents.
I wish the Republicans had brass ones; but they seem to be in cahoots with the libs. I guess they all have invested in the scam.
Something is strange in Denmark when I find myself agreeing with Newton Gingrich.
It’s careerism, instead of constitutionalism. It will destroy the American people, and they will never know what hit them.
Absolutely, you are right. It’s all about their careerism. And the American people don’t have the intelligence to understand. They have been “dumbed down” for decades.
I don't understand what it is that qualifies Kagan in the first place. Never been a judge. No legal scholarship. So she's what? The first lesbian on the court?
Surely there is someone more qualified.
Beyond the college thesis written back in 1980, there's no paper trail. She's a blank slate. She hasn't contributed to society beyond advancing a repugnant liberal and secular agenda.
She's a dope who is not qualified to spitshine the shoes of Thomas, Alito, Roberts and Scalia.
Forget this Kagan Commie. I am your man.
I have a ton of excellent, hands-on judicial experience. (Twice voted in as JP and I still have the robe) I am a Republican. I have never drowned anyone in my car. I am eminently qualified to join SCOTUS. And I am available with two weeks notice*.
*The other VFW barkeep is in durance vile on a DUI for the next six months, so I 'll have to find a replacement. I don't smoke. I went to state judge training for two weekends and since I wrote an article about it for the local paper, I am "Law Review." I also got a really high mark on my insurance agent exam, and am a "Natural Born Citizen of the US" I also qualify for Affirmative Action because I believe my grandmother was part Passamaquoddy Indian. (Well, she did have really black hair, anyway. And if my grnadfather was late for dinner, she went on the warpath.)
Why, because she isn’t as committed to stopping global warming as Newt is?
Even more disturbing than her lack of experience is her statement that the government should be able to ban speech that is deemed “anti government”.
This woman would do away with the first amendment if she could!
She should never be on the supreme court!
Those appointed should have a solid philosophical grasp of what the position entails.
I am of the opinion that those with a legal background should never exceed more than a simple majority of the total.
One final point, Newt Gingrich would be an excellent supreme court justice.
Where have you been? Those are exactly the cases Magic wants her for.
Samuel P. Chase sat in Lincoln's cabinet for most of the Civil War, an ardent Abolitionist and certified, card-carrying sectionalist (i.e. South-hater). Lincoln made him Chief Justice in 1864, and in five years he had the case Lincoln put him up there for, in which he wrote as the Court's opinion that secession had been illegal, all the acts of the People, the States, and their conventions and legislatures had been null and void -- because he said so.
He was sent up to deliver the goods for his political boss, and he did it.
Not necessarily. The late William Rehnquest, perhaps the best Chief Justice of the 20th. Century, had no judicial experience.
Disagree. She should be disqualified because she doesn't cherish the U.S. Constitution that serves as a guide in deciding cases before the court.
The U.S. Constitution is a document that any member of the government, be they mayor of your town to the military on the battleground are to defend and protect.
Kagan is a Communist and her ideology should be the disqualifying mark.
Furthermore, disqualifying on the basis of sexual orientation is unconstitutional because it violates federal statute.
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.