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

Skip to comments.

Why the Kagan hearings will be a charade
Los Angeles Times ^ | June 29, 2010 | Jonah Goldberg

Posted on 06/29/2010 4:36:58 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer

I have no desire to rehearse all the ways in which Bork was mistreated by Ted Kennedy and the usual liberal interest groups. Bork was the last Supreme Court nominee to give serious answers to serious questions.

Consider Monday's thunderclap from the judicial Mt. Olympus: The 2nd Amendment right to own a gun extends to state and local government.

The newsworthy opinion came from rookie Justice Sonia Sotomayor. She concurred with Justice Stephen G. Breyer's dissent, which held that there is no fundamental right to bear arms in the U.S. Constitution.

But when Sotomayor was before the Senate Judiciary Committee one year ago for her own confirmation hearings, she gave a very different impression of how she saw the issue. Senate Judiciary Chairman Patrick J. Leahy asked her, "Is it safe to say that you accept the Supreme Court's decision as establishing that the 2nd Amendment right is an individual right? Is that correct?"

"Yes, sir," she replied.

In fairness to everyone concerned, nobody is shocked to discover that Sotomayor is in fact precisely the dyed-in-the-wool liberal justice everyone expected her to be. But the fact that everyone is in on the lie is just further evidence of the sham Supreme Court hearings have become.

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: charade; elenakagan; hearings; kagan; scotus; supremecourt

1 posted on 06/29/2010 4:36:59 AM PDT by Oldeconomybuyer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

We knew Sotomayer was lying and would be a rubber stamp for Ginsberg and Stevens.


2 posted on 06/29/2010 4:41:35 AM PDT by BamaAndy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

The OP(formerly the GOP) wing of the socialist Republicrat party will roll over go along with the RATs.


3 posted on 06/29/2010 4:41:56 AM PDT by Man50D (Fair Tax, you earn it, you keep it! www.FairTaxNation.com)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Lying, Shmying....it’s all for the “good of the cause”....move on, nothing to see here.


4 posted on 06/29/2010 4:42:05 AM PDT by radioone ("The bigger the government, the smaller the citizen.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

A Suprem Court Justice who lies.

Just what the job requires.


5 posted on 06/29/2010 4:42:35 AM PDT by old curmudgeon
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Nothing like having a known perjurer on the Supreme Court.

And it isnt like everyone doesn’t know it.

It is a farce.


6 posted on 06/29/2010 4:45:04 AM PDT by Venturer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Good column by Jonah.


7 posted on 06/29/2010 4:46:20 AM PDT by 9YearLurker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
I pray daily for the good health of Justice Kennedy. He is the oldest of the five U.S. Supreme Court Justices who have up to now consistently upheld the individuals right to keep and bear arms.

I also pray for a conservative congress and president by the time any of the five(Kennedy, Scalia, Thomas, Alito and Roberts) decide to retire.

8 posted on 06/29/2010 4:48:31 AM PDT by wmileo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: old curmudgeon

“A Supreme Court Justice who lies.”

A Supreme Court nominee lying in front of a group of “elite” liars. This is news?


9 posted on 06/29/2010 4:50:14 AM PDT by bitterohiogunclinger (America held hostage - day 507)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
The Constitution requires that a Supreme Court Justice be appointed by a "President" of the United States. Zero is not eligible to hold that office and therefore was not able to appoint either Sotomayer or Kagan.

Any person who is the subject matter of an appeal to the Court would have the right to object to participation of either one on the panel deciding their case on the grounds of Zero's ineligibility to act as President.

They would have standing and a justiciable issue.

10 posted on 06/29/2010 4:50:50 AM PDT by David (...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

The robed ones can deliberate and bullsh!t all they want. The can rule however they please. Then let them enforce their law of tyranny. It-will-be-ON!


11 posted on 06/29/2010 4:52:18 AM PDT by subterfuge (BUILD MORE NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS NOW!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Either the senators are fools or they are actively participating in the charade.

Judges/nominees promise to ‘treat all cases impartially.’ No surprise there.

What the senators SHOULD ask is the nominee’s opinion on cases ALREADY HEARD. No weaseling out of those - they’ve already been decided! Eliminate the coward’s way out and you force the nominee to express a viewpoint! If they claim ignorance then they are unfit to serve!


12 posted on 06/29/2010 4:54:58 AM PDT by relictele (.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Man50D

Right on. Hatch and the rest of the weasles are just shilling . We gotta get rid of the RINOS and the Crats to have a chance. UTAH! Get rid of your old RINO!!!


13 posted on 06/29/2010 4:59:50 AM PDT by screaminsunshine (m)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer; All
"Why the Kagan hearings will be a charade"

Photobucket

14 posted on 06/29/2010 5:14:54 AM PDT by musicman (Until I see the REAL Long Form Vault BC, he's just "PRES__ENT" Obama = Without "ID")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

It isn’t “fair” (favorite Liberal word) that some people can obviously lie under oath and others go to jail for it. I don’t see why a list of questions can’t be drawn up which court nominees MUST answer clearly before being allowed on the bench. Questions which they can’t call either too general or too specific. It sometimes seems like the higher the job, the fewer the qualifications and proofs required. As long as you can pose and fool people, you get the job.


15 posted on 06/29/2010 5:15:04 AM PDT by Anima Mundi (My shadow is my graffiti)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
Isn't there a Muslim tenet that says, in essence, it is OK to lie to the enemy? Not to say she is Muslim, but I see some trends, and Shari'a Law will probably be a topic for the Supremes sooner than later. What role will she play in promulgating (or supporting) Shari'a concepts as they percolate up to the SCOTUS?
16 posted on 06/29/2010 5:25:40 AM PDT by SERKIT ("Blazing Saddles" explains it all.....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer
‘By any means necessary’ in the Liberal oath. We should swear them in before they answer questions and then, when they go against their sworn testimony, bring them up on perjury. But the Left knows exactly what's going on and Sotomayor is exactly who they knew she would be. Kagan will be even worse. I suspect she's smarter than Sotomayor.
17 posted on 06/29/2010 5:29:03 AM PDT by originalbuckeye
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Here’s how Supreme Court hearings work.
- if candidate is for abortion, talk a little, make out you care, and approve the candidate
- if candidate is against abortion, make noises like you’re talking and listening while you wait for the lying fabrications to come out of the woodwork - listen in hypocritical shock and then deny the candidate.


18 posted on 06/29/2010 5:40:22 AM PDT by Leftism is Mentally Deranged (liberalism: severe deterioration of the thinking apparattus)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

19 posted on 06/29/2010 5:48:57 AM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spirito Sancto.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

I guess we need to change Obamas description of her. Shes a wise lying two faced duplicitous latina.


20 posted on 06/29/2010 5:50:39 AM PDT by wiggen (Government owned slave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Leftism is Mentally Deranged

21 posted on 06/29/2010 5:51:40 AM PDT by combat_boots (The Lion of Judah cometh. Hallelujah. Gloria Patri, Filio et Spirito Sancto.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Oldeconomybuyer

Of course it’s a charade. Mark my words — Kagan gets confirmed 67-32 (assuming WVA doesn’t have a new Senator seated yet). Way too many Repubs don’t have the stomach for a fight.


22 posted on 06/29/2010 5:53:37 AM PDT by ScottinVA (The West needs to act NOW to aggressively treat its metastasizing islaminoma!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Anima Mundi

“It sometimes seems like the higher the job, the fewer the qualifications and proofs required. As long as you can pose and fool people, you get the job.”

This describes Obama to a T. If we lack the courage to inquire too deeply into the birthplace and ideological origins of our president, it’s a safe bet we’ll never do so with SC nominees.

On a related point, an administration bound and determined to lie if needed or bend the rules to enact health care reform surely will not abandon those tactics when it comes to placing a left-wing ideologue on the Court who may be there for 4 decades (Kagan is 50: Stevens was 90 when he retired).

The ends justifies the means with this crowd—a lesson reinforced daily with the administration’s crossing of ethical or legal lines in pursuit of an agenda opposed by the majority of voters.


23 posted on 06/29/2010 6:10:51 AM PDT by DrC
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

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