cubeless
Diamond Member
- Sep 17, 2001
- 4,295
- 1
- 81
it's normal... he's the kind of asswipe who says there's no blacks on the sc now so we need bo to appoint one...
it's normal... he's the kind of asswipe who says there's no blacks on the sc now so we need bo to appoint one...
IGBT
Lifer
- Jul 16, 2001
- 17,974
- 140
- 106
She is a pure academic elitist radical. She comes from the faculty lounge. She is a utopian theoretician.
Senators should vigorously question Kagan. determine whether she is truly committed to the rule of law. Nothing less should be expected from anyone appointed to a life-tenured position as one of the final arbiters of justice in our country.
Senators should vigorously question Kagan. determine whether she is truly committed to the rule of law. Nothing less should be expected from anyone appointed to a life-tenured position as one of the final arbiters of justice in our country.
Yeh, I forgot "academic elitist radical" and "utopian theoretician"...
Sorry about that...
zinfamous
No Lifer
- Jul 12, 2006
- 111,855
- 31,344
- 146
so I guess you know nothing about judicial appointments to SCOTUS?
comparing an "inexperienced" judge to a surgeon in training is, well....something a fool would do.
Why do I have the feeling that the coming Senate confirmation hearings will be a complete waste of time? All Democratic Senators will ask softball questions to highlight all her strengths, while all the Republican Senators will ask weak questions and never get anything remotely to a substantial answer in response. And she'll get confirmed in due time.
Just hold a show trial to satisfy the pesky constitutional requirement for "checks and balances" as if that means anything anymore.
That's about it. She is the next court justice. End of discussion.
Just hold a show trial to satisfy the pesky constitutional requirement for "checks and balances" as if that means anything anymore.
That's about it. She is the next court justice. End of discussion.
Last edited:
zinfamous
No Lifer
- Jul 12, 2006
- 111,855
- 31,344
- 146
the current confirmation hearings are only a very recent phenomenon. SCOTUS nominations used to sail through after a single, short question and answer session, that was almost never public. Or, at least, not televised and only mentioned in passing.
I think the modern version of these circuses started after the Bork debacle. (Seuter?)
If you think the questions now are softball, well, they barely scratched the surface before.
dud
Diamond Member
- Feb 18, 2001
- 7,635
- 73
- 91
Haven't read the whole thread ... but how can you say that she will be confirmed "easily"?
She has never been a sitting judge!
It's like me piloting your jet to LA ... I've flown a 747 on Flight Simulator ... so that means that I can now fly a real plane.
CADsortaGUY
Lifer
sciwizam
Golden Member
- Oct 22, 2004
- 1,953
- 0
- 0
Forget Marshall, what about that arrogant 'unqualified' turd Rehnquist. Had the nerve to be appointed Chief without ever sitting on the bench.
That doesn't matter, she will be confirmed very easily. This close to the coming elections this fall, the Democrats will feel they must maintain a unified team with President Obama to save their asses in the voting booths. They know if they show wavering support, the "progressive" plans to fundamentally transform this country will be over with.
Last edited:
xj0hnx
Diamond Member
- Dec 18, 2007
- 9,262
- 3
- 76
WhipperSnapper
Lifer
- Oct 30, 2004
- 11,442
- 32
- 91
Didn't he kick ass at Harvard Law School against the best of the best? He graduated magna cum laude (according to his Wikipedia entry) and was the president of the school's law review journal. Perhaps Affirmative Action helped him gain admission, but he proved that he belonged there. I'm not sure it's possible to prove one's intellectual prowess above and beyond that.
Last edited:
WhipperSnapper
Lifer
- Oct 30, 2004
- 11,442
- 32
- 91
I wonder if the most obvious answer occurred to her. By and large, in the past the U.S. had one of the world's best economies and a relatively strong and growing middle class. As a result the populace felt no reason to advocate socialism or any strong deviation from current economic policy.
Pulsar
Diamond Member
- Mar 3, 2003
- 5,224
- 306
- 126
I'm not sure - strike that - I'm reasonably sure I don't want someone who has spent her entire life in Academia and not in the real world sitting in that courtroom making decisions that affect me.
I've known hundreds of college professors over the years, and frankly as a group I wouldn't classify most of them as common-sense normal people. They generally have very odd viewpoints of the world and have very little experience in real world situations.
Perhaps I'm out of touch with what the Supreme court is for. However, I think that the United States would be better served putting someone in that position who has spent time dealing with the real world - trying cases, defending cases, judging over cases. Or, failing those tests, at least someone who has held a job where utilizing common sense and rational decision making was a regular event.
I also find it very, very troubling that this is a person who had personal ties with Obama. We've already seen a slew of people getting appointed both by Bush before this and by Obama now who have had personal ties to the presidents. It hasn't worked well. That represents a conflict of interest and certainly call into question any rational decision making process that was involved in this choice.
Realistically, however, I think she's going to get approved no matter what. Let's get a move on with it so that we can see her standpoints and judge Obama's actions before the next election cycle. Is he playing extreme partisian politics, or picking the best person for the job.
I've known hundreds of college professors over the years, and frankly as a group I wouldn't classify most of them as common-sense normal people. They generally have very odd viewpoints of the world and have very little experience in real world situations.
Perhaps I'm out of touch with what the Supreme court is for. However, I think that the United States would be better served putting someone in that position who has spent time dealing with the real world - trying cases, defending cases, judging over cases. Or, failing those tests, at least someone who has held a job where utilizing common sense and rational decision making was a regular event.
I also find it very, very troubling that this is a person who had personal ties with Obama. We've already seen a slew of people getting appointed both by Bush before this and by Obama now who have had personal ties to the presidents. It hasn't worked well. That represents a conflict of interest and certainly call into question any rational decision making process that was involved in this choice.
Realistically, however, I think she's going to get approved no matter what. Let's get a move on with it so that we can see her standpoints and judge Obama's actions before the next election cycle. Is he playing extreme partisian politics, or picking the best person for the job.
werepossum
Elite Member
- Jul 10, 2006
- 29,873
- 463
- 126
This.
It's downright scary that this possibility doesn't even occur to some people.
Not sure if this is sarcasm or lack of meds, but either way, WTF? The only qualification to be Dean of the Harvard Law School is a law degree and an appeal to the lefties at Harvard.
LOL
+1 Danube, that was exactly what I was going to post! Dick Morris in drag. I hate to evaluate "her" on appearance, but dang! First transsexual justice?
I too wonder when the last time a SCOTUS nominee had NO judicial experience - Rehnquist in '72, right? (BTW, Rehnquist was NOT made Chief Justice without having been a judge, he had been an Associate Justice since '72 and became Chief Justice in '86.) The obvious point though is that if you are going to appoint a radical activist of either ilk, experience is a negative (much as in the presidential election evidently.) Can't attack what doesn't exist, only the lack of existence itself which isn't enough to keep our MTV/sound bite society interested. I'm surprised that Obama supporters find Nixon a good role model, but Kagan does have more "experience" than did Rehnquist. I totally agree with Pulsar about the inadvisability of appointing people from academia, though.
Last edited:
guyver01
Lifer
- Sep 25, 2000
- 22,135
- 5
- 61
Well.. JAG needs to get its members from somewhere.
Judge Advocate General's Corps, also known as JAG or JAG Corps, refers to the legal branch or speciality of any of the United States Armed Forces including the Air Force, Army, Coast Guard, Marine Corps, and Navy. Officers serving in the JAG Corps are typically called Judge Advocates. The Marine Corps, Coast Guard and Air Force do not maintain separate JAG Corps per se and judge advocates in those services maintain their line officer-status. In the Army and Navy, JAG officers only serve in legal positions.
Judge Advocates serve primarily as legal advisors to the command to which they are assigned. In this function, they can also serve as the personal legal advisor to their commander. Their advice may cover a wide range of issues dealing with administrative law, government contracting, civilian and military personnel law, law of war and international relations, environmental law, etc. They also serve as prosecutors for the military when conducting courts-martial. They are charged with both the defense and prosecution of military law as provided in the Uniform Code of Military Justice. Highly experienced officers of the JAG Corps often serve as military judges in courts-martial and courts of inquiry.
Besides prosecuting, defending, and presiding over courts-martial, military attorneys advise commanders on issues involving a number of areas of law. Depending on the service, these areas may include the law of war, the rules of engagement and their interpretation, and other operational law issues, government contract law, administrative law, labor law, environmental law, international law, claims against the government (such as under the Federal Tort Claims Act), and information law (such as requests for information in the possession of the military under the Freedom of Information Act). Military attorneys also advise individual servicemembers, military retirees, and their families regarding personal civil legal problems they may have, including drafting wills, fending off creditors, and reviewing leases.
Red Dawn
Elite Member
- Jun 4, 2001
- 57,529
- 3
- 0
You really know nothing abiout this except the BS "Obama did it so it must be bad..." from faux.
So you want someone that "has spent time dealing with the real world - trying cases, defending cases". How about someone whos job it is to conduct all litigation on behalf of the United States in the Supreme Court, and to supervise the handling of litigation in the federal appellate courts.. That would be called the Solicitor General, which she does now.
And again Marshall and Rehnquist were both never judges before the SC. Maybe you should go back and learn a little about US history you would see the SC was never supposed to be a stepping stone from lowwer courts to rise to.
WhipperSnapper
Lifer
- Oct 30, 2004
- 11,442
- 32
- 91
They really don't need to go on campus for On Campus Interviews to recruit students to become JAGs. Because our nation's law schools have been producing about two or three times as many lawyers as what the nation's economy can absorb for at least two decades, the JAG core receives more than enough applications from desperate JDs to fill its ranks. Getting a JAG job is actually pretty competitive (think 100 applicants per job and probably more like a couple hundred per job today).
Last edited:
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
The Kagan input in the decision to bar military recruiters from Harvard has little if anything to do with any US constitutional issues and everything to do interpreting a local Harvard rule that bars organizations that discriminate on a sexual basis from recruiting on campus.
And when the US military policy on don't ask don't tell clearly did not pass the Harvard rules test, the decision became easy.
How Kagan would rule on the constitutional issues of don't ask don't tell is entirely a different question.
As for Kegan hiring policies, she offended many of her very very liberal colleagues at Harvard by hiring mainly conservative legal scholars, so Harvard law students got a fuller perspective of the entire gamut of legal thinking.
As a mainly Liberal poster on P&N, I would have liked to see Obama nominate someone more Liberal, but unless the GOP tries a full court filibuster of Kagan, it looks like Kagan will be confirmed. Maybe no one will be totally thrilled by Kagan, but hopefully no one can say she is totally offensive to their side.
Just like the previous Obama pick which sailed through easily, Kagan will not change the overall existing balance of SCOTUS. But if Obama ever gets a chance at replacing Alito, Thomas, Roberts, or Scalia, then we can all expect a hell of a fight.
And when the US military policy on don't ask don't tell clearly did not pass the Harvard rules test, the decision became easy.
How Kagan would rule on the constitutional issues of don't ask don't tell is entirely a different question.
As for Kegan hiring policies, she offended many of her very very liberal colleagues at Harvard by hiring mainly conservative legal scholars, so Harvard law students got a fuller perspective of the entire gamut of legal thinking.
As a mainly Liberal poster on P&N, I would have liked to see Obama nominate someone more Liberal, but unless the GOP tries a full court filibuster of Kagan, it looks like Kagan will be confirmed. Maybe no one will be totally thrilled by Kagan, but hopefully no one can say she is totally offensive to their side.
Just like the previous Obama pick which sailed through easily, Kagan will not change the overall existing balance of SCOTUS. But if Obama ever gets a chance at replacing Alito, Thomas, Roberts, or Scalia, then we can all expect a hell of a fight.
werepossum
Elite Member
- Jul 10, 2006
- 29,873
- 463
- 126
Very interesting article in the Wall Street Journal about this nominee states that Democrats plan to highlight in her hearing "rulings that they say show conservative justices have stacked the deck against citizens and favor big corporations." If true, her utter lack of a judicial background would go hand in hand with this tidbit as the Democrats abandoning the concept that justice should be blind and establishing the concept that "justice" should favor some litigants over others. This is of course just another step in our march from the rule of law toward the rule of men, but it's an outstandingly blatant one. (Of course with 59 seats in the Senate and the prospect of losing big in November anyway he can be blatant.) But then Obama did promise to "fundamentally transform" our country and he'd be hard pressed to deliver a change more transformational than this.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...112.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsTop
Aside #1: Mainly liberal, Lemon? As in the sun is mainly warm?
Aside #2: How the heck is "Obama" not in the spell checker?
Aside #3: Those expounding her experience as Solicitor General might want to check how long she's been doing that. It would count as real world experience only in light of her utter lack of real world experience.
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB100...112.html?mod=WSJ_hpp_MIDDLENexttoWhatsNewsTop
Aside #1: Mainly liberal, Lemon? As in the sun is mainly warm?
Aside #2: How the heck is "Obama" not in the spell checker?
Aside #3: Those expounding her experience as Solicitor General might want to check how long she's been doing that. It would count as real world experience only in light of her utter lack of real world experience.
Last edited:
Lemon law
Lifer
- Nov 6, 2005
- 20,984
- 3
- 0
To werepossim, just for chuckles and grins I decided to google your listed location of the sage of Chhattanooga, TN location that needs a wee bit of spell checking.
I invite you to follow the google hit I got, " Search instead for Chhattanooga, TN.
Meanwhile back at the ranch, in a word, Obama is not going to appoint an activist conservative judge in the Scalia mold, no matter how how hard you wish Obama would.
Earth to werepossim, the GOP forgot to deliver the bacon, and an arch conservative is no longer POTUS. The groundhog has done spoken, at least 30 months or more of GOP winter remains. And if the GOP does not grow a brain soon, it will be at least 78 more months of GOP winter.
I invite you to follow the google hit I got, " Search instead for Chhattanooga, TN.
Meanwhile back at the ranch, in a word, Obama is not going to appoint an activist conservative judge in the Scalia mold, no matter how how hard you wish Obama would.
Earth to werepossim, the GOP forgot to deliver the bacon, and an arch conservative is no longer POTUS. The groundhog has done spoken, at least 30 months or more of GOP winter remains. And if the GOP does not grow a brain soon, it will be at least 78 more months of GOP winter.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 384
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
Facebook
Twitter