Kagan Confirmation Hearings

[QuantumPion]

The 5 4 decisions of the Supreme Clowns, and always the same 5 and 4, tells you only one thing, that truth and justice are a complete and total joke. The truth is who can pack the court with the most conservative or liberal assholes and come up with intellectually fancy and compelling lies.

In this way 5 states rights advocates interfered in Florida law and elected the country's biggest President asshole in history.

A little offtopic but I'd thought I'd save you the trouble of browsing to wikipedia on this matter. It turns out Bush won the election originally, and Gore wanted to perform a recount in only strongly blue counties. It also turned out this was against the law, you either have to recount every county, or none but Gore continued to push for selective recounting. Bush took it the supreme court of florida, and they agreed that the law meant what it said (OMG?). Gore then opted to concede the election rather then go with a full state recount, because he knew he would not win.

You are right though that 4/5 of the supreme court is a total joke. I mean they actually argued with a straight face that a law didn't say what it said because they disagreed with it. They literally argued that "we don't think people should have the right to own guns, therefore we claim the 2nd amendment doesn't say it gives you the right to bear arms". Ludicrous.

 

[Lemon law]

In my mind, there are just two binary republirat decisions, the Filibuster Kagan or not?

Or will they do it by the daisy method, she loves us, she loves us not, she loves us, she loves us not, until the final pedal is picked off the flower, and then the answer will be apparent, no girl can like a republican.

 

[IGBT]

she's nothing more then a obama political operative. No substantive legal experience measuring up to the job beyond secular progressive agenda activist. A liberal slime ball.

 

[her209]

With the exception of Sen. Graham, all the Republicans so far sound bitter that Obama is President and that health care reform became law.

 

[IGBT]

With the exception of Sen. Graham, all the Republicans so far sound bitter that Obama is President and that health care reform became law.

when the waiting lines form and the real bill comes in, you and many others will be plenty bitter. The obama medical is "coverage" not service. Big difference.

 

[spidey07]

In my mind, there are just two binary republirat decisions, the Filibuster Kagan or not?

Or will they do it by the daisy method, she loves us, she loves us not, she loves us, she loves us not, until the final pedal is picked off the flower, and then the answer will be apparent, no girl can like a republican.

I wrote Sen. McConnel and told him if ANY republican votes for her and they don't stop this I will actively contribute against them in primaries. She is not fit to be a justice. Her argument that the gubment could ban books pretty much seals it.

 

[IGBT]

more then likely the pig will get the job. her allegiance to the obama seals it.

 

[spidey07]

more then likely the pig will get the job. her allegiance to the obama seals it.

It is not up to the president who gets put on the bench, that is reserved for the senate and the way it is supposed to be, The People through their Senator. The executive plays no role in this but to make nominations.

 

[Perknose]

The executive plays no role in this but to make nominations.

Uhhhhh, that's THE major role.

The President plays a bigger role than any other single person.

 

[Patranus]

Its nice to see that Kegan thinks it is within the power of the federal government to ban books and to dictate what people eat (though they would be stupid laws)

 

[spidey07]

Uhhhhh, that's THE major role.

The President plays a bigger role than any other single person.

Yes. But We The People hold the power through our representatives. At least we are supposed to.

 

[Perknose]

Uhhhhh, that's THE major role.

The President plays a bigger role than any other single person.

Yes. But We The People hold the power through our representatives. At least we are supposed to.

spidey, here's what You The Person said:

Originally Posted by spidey07
The executive plays no role in this but to make nominations.

He who controls the nominations is absolutely key.

The President is the ONE person who, by himself, controls who even gets considered!

 

[spidey07]

spidey, here's what You The Person said:



He who controls the nominations is absolutely key.

The President is the ONE person who, by himself, controls who even gets considered!

Mince words if you will. I understand your point. Please understand mine.

 

[werepossum]

Holy crapsickles! Coburn (R-Oklahoma) asked what to any reasonable person would be a remarkably easy question: "If Congress passes a law dictating that Americans must eat three vegetables and three fruits every day, by law, does that law pass Constitutional muster under the commerce clause?" Kagan's first response was that it was a dumb law, but that the courts should not strike down laws just because they are dumb. Coburn then rephrased to ask specifically if Congress has the right to tell people what they must eat. Kagan could not answer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSoWGlyugTo

Clearly this isn't Dick Morris in drag as I first thought. Morris is a smart cookie, too smart to fake such utter befuddlement. Nor is she Obama's Harriet Myers - Myers looks like Marilyn vos Savant compared to Kagan. Myers looks like Marilyn vos Savant times Einstein with a side of Nikola Tesla and Michio Kaku thrown in compared to Kagan. This may be the dumbest woman ever nominated for SCOTUS anything.

One bright side - at least when she is confirmed, people who rode the short bus will have one of their own to look after their interests. And she will be confirmed; at least Lindsay Gramnesty will vote for her, which gives the Dems a filibuster-proof majority to ease this inanimate object into ultimate power.

 

[Craig234]

Holy crapsickles! Coburn (R-Oklahoma) asked what to any reasonable person would be a remarkably easy question: "If Congress passes a law dictating that Americans must eat three vegetables and three fruits every day, by law, does that law pass Constitutional muster under the commerce clause?" Kagan's first response was that it was a dumb law, but that the courts should not strike down laws just because they are dumb. Coburn then rephrased to ask specifically if Congress has the right to tell people what they must eat. Kagan could not answer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DSoWGlyugTo

Clearly this isn't Dick Morris in drag as I first thought. Morris is a smart cookie, too smart to fake such utter befuddlement. Nor is she Obama's Harriet Myers - Myers looks like Marilyn vos Savant compared to Kagan. Myers looks like Marilyn vos Savant times Einstein with a side of Nikola Tesla and Michio Kaku thrown in compared to Kagan. This may be the dumbest woman ever nominated for SCOTUS anything.

One bright side - at least when she is confirmed, people who rode the short bus will have one of their own to look after their interests. And she will be confirmed; at least Lindsay Gramnesty will vote for her, which gives the Dems a filibuster-proof majority to ease this inanimate object into ultimate power.

She answered fine up to that point. But why was the clip cut off at that point? She did not yet finish her answer, which should say Congress does not have that power.

What's up with the idiot Senator? It's a ridiculous question, and he's just exposing his radical fixation on something by asking it. Holding up a bible!? Did I see that right!?

 

[Craig234]

With the exception of Sen. Graham, all the Republicans so far sound bitter that Obama is President and that health care reform became law.

That's what these guys run on, misguided rage. They go after good nominees to 'get even' for the radical Bork getting denied. They go after Clinton abusing impeachment to 'get even' for Nixon's likely impeachment. Electing Nixon himself was sort of 'getting even' for JFK beating Nixon before.

 

[BoberFett]

Kagan: "It's fine if the law bans books because the govt. will never enforce it."

I am comforted already. Thanks.
http://www.breitbart.tv/kagans-own-...ks-because-government-wont-really-enforce-it/

Ouch. She's horrible. But then, what about our federal government isn't?

I say, let's go for broke. Let the system destroy itself. Fuck the Constitution. We're going to have to hit rock bottom before anybody does anything about it. Americans are apathetic and we're getting exactly what we deserve. Enjoy the depression and ensuing totalitarian controls put in place to quell the angry population, mother fuckers.

 

[Craig234]

more then likely the pig will get the job. her allegiance to the obama seals it.

The only pig between you and her is you.

 

[Jhhnn]

Kagan was probably flabbergasted that Coburn would even propose such an absurdity, didn't recognize it as a rhetorical trap until she decided not to answer more about it.

The correct answer would have been "That's an absurdity, Senator. Whatever answer I give would be wrong, and we both know it."

 

[BoberFett]

She answered fine up to that point. But why was the clip cut off at that point? She did not yet finish her answer, which should say Congress does not have that power.

What's up with the idiot Senator? It's a ridiculous question, and he's just exposing his radical fixation on something by asking it. Holding up a bible!? Did I see that right!?

Epic fail.

Thats a leather bound copy of the Federalist Papers. Do you think every leather bound book is a bible?

 

[Craig234]

A little offtopic but I'd thought I'd save you the trouble of browsing to wikipedia on this matter. It turns out Bush won the election originally

No, he didn't. The initial vote count wrongly showed he very narrowly won.

, and Gore wanted to perform a recount in only strongly blue counties.

Which was exactly in accordance of the law in Florida. Gore suggested a statewide recount to Bush; Bush said no.

The Bush campaign said time was limited; it was a limited recount since a statewide would take more time.

It also turned out this was against the law, you either have to recount every county, or none but Gore continued to push for selective recounting.

You got it wrong. The law was for county-based recounts, as Gore followed.

Per Wikipedia:

Florida's election laws[4] allow a candidate to request a county to conduct a manual recount

Bush was welcome to push for recounts in any county, too.

Bush took it the supreme court of florida, and they agreed that the law meant what it said (OMG?). Gore then opted to concede the election rather then go with a full state recount, because he knew he would not win.

No, the Florida Supreme Court decided to order a statewide recount. Gore did not concede anything at this point, and had the recount continued, counting all votes where the intent was clear as was the standard in Florida, a later independent recount found Gore would have won (if just the 4 counties were recounted, Bush would still have 'won').

The Supreme Court came up with the ridiculous argument that the recount rules had to be exactly the same in all counties - a standard that has never been applied, and one that does not apply today anywher reportedly - and the Supreme Court itself, realizing it would invalidate every state and federal election in the country with the ruling, made the ruling apply only to this one election in this one state - ordered the recounted ended, and THEN Gore conceded.

 

[Craig234]

Kagan was probably flabbergasted that Coburn would even propose such an absurdity, didn't recognize it as a rhetorical trap until she decided not to answer more about it.

The correct answer would have been "That's an absurdity, Senator. Whatever answer I give would be wrong, and we both know it."

The correct answer would have begun with "Senator, you are an idiot and an ideologue", but not too likely, but I think she coudl have answered the topic.

And for all I know she did, given the clip was cut off.

It'd be easy for her to explain like to a child how the constitution would not allow for such a law.

 

[Moonbeam]

QuantumPion: A little offtopic but I'd thought I'd save you the trouble of browsing to wikipedia on this matter. It turns out Bush won the election originally, and Gore wanted to perform a recount in only strongly blue counties. It also turned out this was against the law, you either have to recount every county, or none but Gore continued to push for selective recounting. Bush took it the supreme court of florida, and they agreed that the law meant what it said (OMG?).

Hahahahahahaha, you don't have any idea what you are talking about. Bush lost in the Florida court. That was my point. The five states right justices voted against the state when push came to shove, because they were politically biased. And Gore won the state as was later determined by a consortium recount of all the ballots legal by Florida law.

QP: Gore then opted to concede the election rather then go with a full state recount, because he knew he would not win.

M: There was no time for a full state recount and Gore did win.

QP: You are right though that 4/5 of the supreme court is a total joke. I mean they actually argued with a straight face that a law didn't say what it said because they disagreed with it. They literally argued that "we don't think people should have the right to own guns, therefore we claim the 2nd amendment doesn't say it gives you the right to bear arms". Ludicrous.

M: Five assholes argued that the right to bear arms is an established tradition despite the fact that the matter has been contended forever.

 

[werepossum]

Kagan was probably flabbergasted that Coburn would even propose such an absurdity, didn't recognize it as a rhetorical trap until she decided not to answer more about it.

The correct answer would have been "That's an absurdity, Senator. Whatever answer I give would be wrong, and we both know it."

The correct answer would have been "No, Senator, obviously the Commerce Clause does not extend to Congress dictatorial powers, so your law would be struck down." It's quite simple. But then like Sotomayor she would be in the position of claiming a position when she knows that as a good progressive she will take the opposite position when seated.

It's hardly an absurdity either, given the flap with the Happy Meals in California. Now that we have seen Democrats establish a requirement under the Commerce Clause (if not just promoting the general welfare) that each individual purchase health insurance, why would we not logically expect further legislation in the near future to dictate what we eat for health reasons? After all, mandating a healthy diet for its property would go much further toward limiting health care costs than a mandate for insurance, and if printing nutritional information on the front in large letters doesn't make us eat right the government will have to take further steps. Purely for our own good of course.

 

[RedChief]

Per Wikipedia:

You realize you have NO credibility left now?