Aw: White House issues Kagan propaganda video

posted at 7:41 pm on May 11, 2010 by Allahpundit

Impressively slick and impressively quick: Obviously, they didn’t finish filming this until yesterday afternoon. Something about it doesn’t sit quite right with me (possibly the emphasis on schmaltzy biography during what should be an analytical process), but I think I’m just jealous at what a good idea it was. And needless to say, the next Republican president will take full similar advantage. You know what would have been an even better clip? Kagan as the second coming of the Messiah:

In Elena Kagan, who is just one year apart from him in age, Obama has found somebody whose biography, temperament, and values (as far as they are known) closely resemble his own.

Like Obama, Kagan graduated Harvard Law School and taught law at the University of Chicago. Look into the backgrounds of Obama and Kagan, and you’ll find evidence of radicalism that was tempered by personal ambition. Obama served as the first black president of the Harvard Law Review and Kagan was the school’s first female dean, and they both had a reputation for treating conservatives fairly, despite ideological disagreements. Just as Obama ran for president on a thin public record, Kagan doesn’t offer much of a paper trail, leaving her views on many key issues open to speculation…

In announcing the nomination on Monday, Obama praised Kagan’s “temperament — her openness to a broad array of viewpoints; her habit, to borrow a phrase from Justice Stevens, ‘of understanding before disagreeing’; her fair-mindedness and skill as a consensus-builder.” He spoke of her recruitment of conservative professors and her encouraging students to “to respectfully exchange ideas and seek common ground…”

All of those are qualities that, coincidentally, Obama’s admirers see in him.

Yeah, and look what a centrist pragmatist he turned out to be. Serious question: Is the Kagan battle a battle worth fighting? Oh, I know that we are going to fight it — tea-party fee-vah demands nothing less of the GOP — but isn’t it just, in Evan Bayh’s words, “sad kabuki theater”? Gabe Malor makes the case that she’s a mortal lock to be confirmed (“Kagan’s the best we’re likely to get out of Obama’s short list”) and Jenny Erikson wonders what the point of a protracted fight would be (“This isn’t going to change the make-up of the court”). The answer, I guess, is that it’ll give the GOP a chance to make its case about differences in right/left judicial philosophy, but since (a) Kagan doesn’t have much of a paper trail with which to frame her as a consummate left-wing judge and (b) she’s bound to be evasive and run through ye olde “I will apply the law as written” reassurances anyway, what’s really to be gained? Apart from pressing her on Harvard’s policy towards military recruiters, it’ll be mostly song and dance for the base, no?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

Comment pages: 1 2

Handsome fella.

rightside on May 11, 2010 at 7:43 PM

Why fight it? I think she’s just fine, frankly. One academic in the bunch is OK, although the Ivy League stuff is a legitimate roll-your-eyes moment.

Other than that, she’s fine.

AnninCA on May 11, 2010 at 7:44 PM

You fight to set up rules of engagement. You fight for your veiwpoints.

You fight to defend the constitution. You dont give it a pass just to placate a President.

The GOP does a horrible job fighting on issues and this is one of them. Obama can be painted with a leftwing brush if it is done right.

William Amos on May 11, 2010 at 7:44 PM

Tis was a good idea and makes me go hmmmm why didn’t they do this for the wise Latina?

I just don’t have that great of a feeling about her.

deidre on May 11, 2010 at 7:45 PM

Oh, please, change the picture! I’m tired of having to wince every time I refresh HotAir.

FloatingRock on May 11, 2010 at 7:46 PM

AnninCA on May 11, 2010 at 7:44 PM

You’d think margaret sanger was fine too.

rightside on May 11, 2010 at 7:46 PM

Run down the clock to November.

redeye on May 11, 2010 at 7:48 PM

Reminds me of the mini-series Rome. While all the regular people were too busy raising children and earning a living, the rulers pulled their advisors from the ranks of fringe esoteric freaks. I remember the episode where the Roman armed contingent arrives in Egypt and is greeted by the child king and his crew of queers and freaks advising him. Not a healthy development when we find ourselves being lead by the fringe 7%.

pc on May 11, 2010 at 7:48 PM

They sure did rush it out.

There’s a typo in the closed captioning.

She says: “..trying to install my love of the law”

It reads: “..trying to install my level of the law”

At 0:57 in the video.

aquaviva on May 11, 2010 at 7:49 PM

If she is grilled by Repubs with the right questions,
if Repubs do not vote for her ,
will it be a net loss for the GOP ?

macncheez on May 11, 2010 at 7:49 PM

Actually, because of her thin record, I think the confirmation hearings should be longer than usual. Because vetting a nominee is their freakin’ job! The whole point of confirmation is to vet the choice. I don’t know a darn thing about her and she has little or no record to speak of. It would be nice if my elected representives did their Constitutional duty.

trubble on May 11, 2010 at 7:50 PM

Switch hitter?

faraway on May 11, 2010 at 7:51 PM

“Are you now or have you ever been a wise lesbina?”

Akzed on May 11, 2010 at 7:52 PM

Repeating myself from the headlines…

Kagan’s everything we could ask for in an Obama nominee. Seriously. She’s a blank slate. Get 41 votes behind her STAT, Mitch.

What’s the worst that can happen? She turns out to be a huge lib. That’s what you’d expect from an Obama nominee. She’s replacing a huge lib. Net loss? Zero.

What’s the best that can happen? She’s a blank slate. Maybe she makes some decent decisions, in essence, becoming to Obama what Souter was to Bush the Elder. Net gain? Oh yes.

Let the Democrats hem and haw over her credentials. Maybe they’ll try and make her another Harriet Miers. They’ll be the ones with egg all over their face. Meanwhile, the “Party of No” garbage suddenly gets much more difficult to pin on the GOP.

For god-sakes… support this man woman.

(Seriously, though, if SNL ever wants to do a skit with Kagan, they need to give Kevin James a call and put him in a dress)

Red Cloud on May 11, 2010 at 7:52 PM

Now, why would we believe one single word out of this bho, team, and any person they are involved with? Has one single truth come out of their mouths?
L

letget on May 11, 2010 at 7:53 PM

Her kicking recruiters off-campus is enough for me to insist that she not be allowed anywhere near the court.

Sorry Allah – ya just don’t know how many who did serve in the military will feel about this.

ElRonaldo on May 11, 2010 at 7:55 PM

Lou Costello in drag!

grapeknutz on May 11, 2010 at 7:55 PM

Clean, well spoken..not a lot of experience, but packed full of educated goodness (really packed full). Consensus builder. Never really had a job….

Where have I heard this before????

The only problem is we can’t get rid of her in 2 years unlike President Rock Star.

BigWyo on May 11, 2010 at 7:56 PM

ElRonaldo on May 11, 2010 at 7:55 PM

I have to agree.

upinak on May 11, 2010 at 7:58 PM

I think you should attack her credentials. Say she’s unqualified. This will not backfire. Also, these are not the droids you’re looking for.

Proud Rino on May 11, 2010 at 7:58 PM

You never know what might pop up during the fight…

d1carter on May 11, 2010 at 7:58 PM

CUTE of Bambi to be so besotted with Kagan to reach into his own pocket to pay for that…no, you say…uh…

Whose money paid for THAT, huh? Enquiring minds want to know.

marybel on May 11, 2010 at 7:58 PM

The more time they spend bickering over this the less time they have to do other things. Then BOOM. November.

Gatsu on May 11, 2010 at 7:59 PM

this MALL COP needs to be kicked to the side of the road….sorry but any IDIOT who fights to keep military recruiters off a PUBLICALLY funded college should not even be cleaning toilets at the Supreme Court…..

Sorry, but this whimpy compromise crap is what got us John McShame as a candidate….time to prod the big dogs and let them loose…..now calling all Republicans with a spine? HELLO???? anyone out there?

SDarchitect on May 11, 2010 at 7:59 PM

The Cato Institute suggested on FB that someone ask her “now that ObamaCare has passed, is there anything the federal government can’t force people to do?”

That would be an interesting, and telling response.

NTWR on May 11, 2010 at 8:00 PM

“Is the Kagan battle a battle worth fighting?”

I’ll get back to you after I review her extensive experience on the bench…

Oh, wait!

Seven Percent Solution on May 11, 2010 at 8:00 PM

Kabuki theater! But do we have to dress up for it? Can we bring rotten tomatoes?

rbj on May 11, 2010 at 8:00 PM

They forgot to mention her work on ‘ The King of Queens ‘ .
She was hilarious .

DeweyWins on May 11, 2010 at 8:01 PM

I’ll get back to you after I review her extensive experience on the bench…

Oh, wait!

Seven Percent Solution on May 11, 2010 at 8:00 PM

Yes, yes, perfect. Keep this up. You want to go down this route.

Proud Rino on May 11, 2010 at 8:01 PM

Someone who is a lawyer please explain to me why, when Bush put up Harriet Myers, who was a crony and had no paper trail the left and the right howled and screamed, but when Obama puts a similar candidate up there is no thoughtful analysis about why he/she is a horrible candidate? Hugh Hewitt had a Harvard Law professor on yesterday and the best thing she could say about Kagan was that she was well liked on Capitol Hill and she was very very nice. WTF? Did Morpheus slip me a blue pill again? Any lawyers out there want to help me out with this one?

alohapundit on May 11, 2010 at 8:01 PM

If she’s a mirror image of Obama, then use this as an example to expose his radicalness and far left ideology. Draw out the process. Find out what she really believes. I think Mark Levin’s question from yesterday’s QOTD would tell us all we need to know.

I dream. The Republicans will never do this. They’ll do one of two things: 1) fight her and the MSM will make them look like idiots and “obstructionists.” Again. 2) Roll over and confirm her with a smile and handshake, losing the opportunity to contrast liberal and conservative ideologies.

How someone with her paltry resume and record could be nominated (and most likely confirmed) to the highest court in the land is unreal. Other than government jobs and nepotism, who gets this sort of job with those qualifications in the private sector? No one.

conservative pilgrim on May 11, 2010 at 8:02 PM

The more time they spend bickering over this the less time they have to do other things. Then BOOM. November.

Gatsu on May 11, 2010 at 7:59 PM

Exactly. Keep the Marxists occupied until November.

conservative pilgrim on May 11, 2010 at 8:05 PM

OH, the 29% of Obama admirers? Gag me.

This WH is dangerous, slimey and frightening. It’s one big gigantic PR machine that needs to be stopped. Why doesn’t Obama just place himself on the Supreme Court and step down?

Key West Reader on May 11, 2010 at 8:06 PM

I’ll get back to you after I review her extensive experience on the bench…

Oh, wait!

Seven Percent Solution on May 11, 2010 at 8:00 PM

You guys didn’t give a cr*p about Sotomayer’s extensive experience as a judge.

Oh, and William Rehnquist wasn’t a judge prior to being nominated either.

crr6 on May 11, 2010 at 8:06 PM

It’s a man, baby!!!

Hening on May 11, 2010 at 8:07 PM

She sounds a little like Kyle Brovlovsky’s mom.

Not that there’s anything wrong with that.

Rhinoboy on May 11, 2010 at 8:07 PM

Not a healthy development when we find ourselves being lead by the fringe 7%.

pc on May 11, 2010 at 7:48 PM

Just try to relax…

(cue the “snap” of the surgical glove)

Seven Percent Solution on May 11, 2010 at 8:08 PM

Kagan is a Stealth Progressive Socialist!!

Torpedo this nomination,and expedite!!

canopfor on May 11, 2010 at 8:10 PM

If Kagan cannot adhere to the laws of nature, how can we expect her to adhere to the Constitution?

BigAnge on May 11, 2010 at 8:10 PM

Verne Troyer has a sister?

alexwest on May 11, 2010 at 8:11 PM

crr6 on May 11, 2010 at 8:06 PM

Theodoric Of York is expecting you…

Seven Percent Solution on May 11, 2010 at 8:12 PM

Kagan Music Thread Theme
===========================================

KD Lang – Constant Craving

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oaHZNTd-YVY

canopfor on May 11, 2010 at 8:13 PM

You have to remember that these confirmation hearings are an opportunity to educate new voters in Conservatism/Constitutionalism.

Fight tooth and nail, and EDUCATE, EDUCATE, EDUCATE….

mockmook on May 11, 2010 at 8:14 PM

Kagan as the second coming of the Messiah:

I thought Obama was supposed to be the second coming. Kagan would have to be the third.

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on May 11, 2010 at 8:14 PM

So all Harriet Miers needed was a propaganda video?

Rude on May 11, 2010 at 8:16 PM

I’m sick of the personal story crap. When a Republican nominates a justice, the focus is laser-like on his or her knowledge of Constitutional law. When a democrat nominates someone, we get these silly personal stories that typically start with something like “Raised by a single mother….” I couldn’t care less how many conservatives Kagan “allowed” onto Harvard’s faculty (I assume they needed some professors who could read and think, after all). Has she read the Constitution? Does she understand that its full focus is on LIMITING federal powers? Will she faithfully uphold that, or, like her fellow liberals on the court, will she pretend the Constitution doesn’t exist and make law from the bench? Her personal story is entirely irrelevant if she plans on doing her job. These personal stories are only relevant as preemptive explanations for why these people will execute the office of Justice of the United States Supreme Court unfaithfully.

Rational Thought on May 11, 2010 at 8:16 PM

reminds me of a Mike Myers interview….

ted c on May 11, 2010 at 8:17 PM

Too much information. Our President has just warned us about too much information and the threat of too much information on our democracy. I am going to turn everything off now, and do as the President says… I want to be emancipated and I want it right now!

kringeesmom on May 11, 2010 at 8:17 PM

Handsome fella.

rightside on May 11, 2010 at 7:43 PM

Hahahaha! You know, I have had a really rough day, so I thank you for a good hearty belly laugh. I needed it.

Key West Reader on May 11, 2010 at 8:18 PM

Heres what Kagan said after Reagan won!!!
==============================================

Another hit from the Elena Kagan archive: an article she wrote for the Daily Princetonian a week after Ronald Reagan’s victory in the 1980 election. The final graph of that piece contains her hope that the 1984 election will bring in a “more leftist left” than the Carter administration:
=====================

Looking back on last Tuesday, I can see that our gut response — our emotion-packed conclusion that the world had gone mad, that liberalism was dead and that there was no longer any place for the ideals we held or the beliefs we espoused — was a false one. In my more rational moments, I can now argue that the next few years will be marked by American disillusionment with conservative programs and solutions, and that a new, revitalized, perhaps more leftist left will once again come to the fore. I can say in these moments that one election year does not the death of liberalism make and that 1980 might even help the liberal camp by forcing it to come to grips with the need for organization and unity. But somehow, one week after the election, these comforting thoughts do not last long. Self-pity still sneaks up, and I wonder how all this could possibly have happened and where on earth I’ll be able to get a job next year.”
==============================

Bonus quote dripping with condescension toward pro-lifers:

“Even after the returns came in, I found it hard to conceive of the victories of these anonymous but Moral Majority-backed opponents of Senators Church, McGovern, Bayh and Culver, these avengers of ‘innocent life’ and the B-1 Bomber, these beneficiaries of a general turn to the right and a profound disorganization on the left.” The scare quotes on innocent life are in the original, though I’m not quite sure what they’re meant to convey.
=================================================
http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/05/young_elena_kagan_hoping_for_a.asp

canopfor on May 11, 2010 at 8:18 PM

Yes, yes, perfect. Keep this up. You want to go down this route.

Proud Rino on May 11, 2010 at 8:01 PM

Why not…?

… Why is it not a “fair” question to ask?

Would you expect the pilot of the biggest plane to have at least some air time, and not have just read about flying, wouldn’t you?

How about a Doctor? Reading a book and actually having practiced medicine are two totally different things…

What about our police, fire fighters, and military? Class room instruction is one thing, being in the field and learning wisdom by experience is another.

… We are talking about the Supreme Court of the United States of America, aren’t we?

Seven Percent Solution on May 11, 2010 at 8:19 PM

Dang, this is the 3rd fighter jet flying overhead in the last 3 hours. Loud and low.

Key West Reader on May 11, 2010 at 8:19 PM

Would you expect the pilot of the biggest plane to have at least some air time, and not have just read about flying, wouldn’t you?

How about a Doctor? Reading a book and actually having practiced medicine are two totally different things…
Seven Percent Solution on May 11, 2010 at 8:19 PM

Sitting in an office and writing about law and sitting in an office and writing about law are two totally different things.

crr6 on May 11, 2010 at 8:21 PM

Obama has found somebody whose biography, temperament, and values (as far as they are known) closely resemble his own.

They look a lot alike too…/

canditaylor68 on May 11, 2010 at 8:24 PM

Dang, this is the 3rd fighter jet flying overhead in the last 3 hours. Loud and low.

Key West Reader on May 11, 2010 at 8:19 PM

Key West Reader: What state are you in,and lucky you,I
wish I heard GE turbines aroar’n!!!:)

canopfor on May 11, 2010 at 8:26 PM

Sitting in an office and writing about law and sitting in an office and writing about law listening to petitioners and defendents, arguements of law, viewing eviedence, deciding what objections are worthy or not, giving instuctions to jurys and dealing with the consequences of your decisions on other people’s lives are two totally different things.

crr6 on May 11, 2010 at 8:21 PM

Fixed it for ‘ya, champ…

Seven Percent Solution on May 11, 2010 at 8:27 PM

Oh, I know that we are going to fight it

Really? What gives you that idea? Because my guess is the Washington R’s will zip her right through.

clearbluesky on May 11, 2010 at 8:31 PM

Why is Obama choosing unmarried, unreproductive, overweight women to the court?

I guess at least they don’t have a long life-expectancy.

missl on May 11, 2010 at 8:31 PM

Yet another example, amongst legions, of odumbo’s amateurish, arrogance.

ultracon on May 11, 2010 at 8:32 PM

Sitting in an office and writing about law and sitting in an office and writing about law listening to petitioners and defendents, arguements of law, viewing eviedence, deciding what objections are worthy or not, giving instuctions to jurys and dealing with the consequences of your decisions on other people’s lives are two totally different things.

crr6 on May 11, 2010 at 8:21 PM

Fixed it for ‘ya, champ…

Seven Percent Solution on May 11, 2010 at 8:27 PM

haha yeah Supreme Court justices don’t deal with juries. And as an academic I’m sure Kagan dealt with “arguments of law”.

You’d have a bit more of a point if she were being nominated to be a district court judge or something, but the job of an appellate court judge really is relatively academic.

Chump.

crr6 on May 11, 2010 at 8:33 PM

Off the official transcript:

“Hello, I’m Elena Kagan, and I’m a big fat lesbian who doesn’t like the military.”

Captain America on May 11, 2010 at 8:35 PM

Elena Kagan, Radical?
==============================

What were Kagan’s own ideas?
—————————-

Exerpts from her thesis: The title of the thesis: “To the Final Conflict: Socialism in New York City, 1900-1933″
=====================================================

“In our own 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?”(pp. 127)

“Through its own internal feuding, then, the SP exhausted itself forever and further reduced labor radicalism in New York to the position of marginality and insignificance from which it has never recovered. The story is a sad but also a chastening one for those who, more than half a century after socialism’s decline, still wish to change America. Radicals have often succumbed to the devastating bane of sectarianism; it is easier, after all, to fight one’s fellows than it is to battle an entrenched and powerful foe. Yet if the history of Local New York shows anything, it is that American radicals cannot afford to become their own worst enemies. In unity lies their only hope.” (pp. 129-130)

Her political sympathies (at the time) seem quite clear — and radical.
========================================

http://www.weeklystandard.com/weblogs/TWSFP/2009/05/elena_kagan_radical.asp

canopfor on May 11, 2010 at 8:36 PM

I’d like to know if Kagan’s parents and grandparents, and great-grandparents, had ties to the communist party.

wiki:
At Princeton, she wrote a senior thesis under historian Sean Wilentz studying the socialist movement in New York City in the early 20th century.

Yeah, I bet that subject was near and dear to her heart. I couldn’t understand why she majored in history until I read what sort of history was important to her.

I wonder how similar Ginsburg’s family history is to Kagan’s. Gee, you’d think there would be some conservative journalist who could bring us that, or are they terrified by murrowism?

Buddahpundit on May 11, 2010 at 8:38 PM

You’d have a bit more of a point if she were being nominated to be a district court judge or something, but the job of an appellate court judge really is relatively academic.

Chump.

crr6 on May 11, 2010 at 8:33 PM

I was referring to the experience that judges in lower courts get on a day to day basis that gives them the gravitas to be on the highest court in the land, but your favorite she-male doesn’t have…

… You are so stupid that you made my point for me.

Thanks!

Seven Percent Solution on May 11, 2010 at 8:39 PM

Oh, I know that we are going to fight it

What do you mean “we”, Kemosabe?

Dr. Carlo Lombardi on May 11, 2010 at 8:41 PM

Off the official transcript:

“Hello, I’m Elena Kagan, and I’m a big fat lesbian who doesn’t like the military.”

Captain America on May 11, 2010 at 8:35 PM

Captain America:)
=======================================================
In 2003, Harvard University president Lawrence Summers appointed Kagan to be the dean of Harvard Law School. It was in this role that Kagan expressed her most infamous criticisms of the U.S. military. Specifically, she filed a brief with the Supreme Court seeking to overturn the so-called Solomon Amendment, a law that denies federal funding to any university that “has a policy or practice … that either prohibits, or in effect prevents” military personnel “from gaining access to campuses, or access to students … on campuses, for purposes of military recruiting …” This Amendment had been enacted in 1996, in response to a trend where many law schools, as gestures of protest against a federal law barring open homosexuals from military service, were discouraging and/or prohibiting military recruitment on their campuses.
=====================================================
http://97.74.65.51/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=34854

canopfor on May 11, 2010 at 8:42 PM

I was referring to the experience that judges in lower courts get on a day to day basis that gives them the gravitas to be on the highest court in the land, but your favorite she-male doesn’t have…

Seven Percent Solution on May 11, 2010 at 8:39 PM

Well that’s even dumber. How many SCOTUS justices were trial-level judges prior to being nominated? Sotomayor was but I don’t think many others were…

Alito wasn’t, Roberts wasn’t, Ginsburg wasn’t, Thomas wasn’t…

crr6 on May 11, 2010 at 8:44 PM

is that algore’s sister?

winston on May 11, 2010 at 8:44 PM

Well that’s even dumber. How many SCOTUS justices were trial-level judges prior to being nominated? Sotomayor was but I don’t think many others were…

Alito wasn’t, Roberts wasn’t, Ginsburg wasn’t, Thomas wasn’t…

crr6 on May 11, 2010 at 8:44 PM

Breyer wasn’t, Scalia wasn’t and Kennedy wasn’t either. So yeah, epic fail there Seven Percent.

crr6 on May 11, 2010 at 8:47 PM

Why not…?

… Why is it not a “fair” question to ask?

Would you expect the pilot of the biggest plane to have at least some air time, and not have just read about flying, wouldn’t you?

How about a Doctor? Reading a book and actually having practiced medicine are two totally different things…

What about our police, fire fighters, and military? Class room instruction is one thing, being in the field and learning wisdom by experience is another.

… We are talking about the Supreme Court of the United States of America, aren’t we?

Seven Percent Solution on May 11, 2010 at 8:19 PM

Yes, seriously, you’re totally right. Push this. It’s going to work out great.

Proud Rino on May 11, 2010 at 8:49 PM

Apart from pressing her on Harvard’s policy towards military recruiters, it’ll be mostly song and dance for the base, no?

Don’t we deserve to be entertained?

The Dems would never, ever decline to put up a fight.

SlaveDog on May 11, 2010 at 8:49 PM

Kagan needs to get into Michelle’s obesity program. In fact, Kagan’s obesity should disqualify her.

Ricohoc on May 11, 2010 at 8:52 PM

Kagan to the highest court, parley-voo?
Kagan to the highest court, parley-voo?
She can garner a peso, a drink, a deal
But it isn’t because of sex appeal
She can guzzle a barrel of sour wine
And eat a hog without peeling the rind
She has a form like the back of a hack
If she cries the crocodile tears will run down her back
If she will just change her underwear
The RINO frogs in the senate will probably give her the Croix-de-Guerre
The Marxists and Fascists will get the pie and cake
But all the Constitutionalists will get is a bellyache
Hinky, dinky, parley-voo

InkyBinkyBarleyBoo on May 11, 2010 at 8:54 PM

Kagan needs to get into Michelle’s obesity program. In fact, Kagan’s obesity should disqualify her.

Ricohoc on May 11, 2010 at 8:52 PM

Yeah how could a fat person be a good judge, with all that fat there? That’s why our finest Supreme Court Justice was Karen Carpenter.

Proud Rino on May 11, 2010 at 8:54 PM

So Berry and the bums nominate this mutt because, what, they forgot about Rod Blagojevich? Or me? Some hometown loyalty, Rahm, and I sure do hope dat youz is stayin’ out of trouble in dat der D.C., if ya know what I mean. All roads lead back to Chicago.

MayorDaley on May 11, 2010 at 8:55 PM

Well, I leave it to you guys to worry. I honestly think she’s a pretty good pick.

I don’t have a problem with her at all.

AnninCA on May 11, 2010 at 8:55 PM

Kagan was so angry at Bill Clinton for writing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” that she went to work for him. And had him deliver Harvard’s Class Day speech.

And Joe Biden says she was right to throw recruiters off campus because DADT is so horrible–so horrible that he voted for it.

I understand now.

Noel on May 11, 2010 at 8:56 PM

Kagan was so angry at Bill Clinton for writing “Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell” that she went to work for him. And had him deliver Harvard’s Class Day speech.

And Joe Biden says she was right to throw recruiters off campus because DADT is so horrible–so horrible that he voted for it.

I understand now.

Noel on May 11, 2010 at 8:56 PM

Epic history fail. Clinton wanted to lift the ban on gays in the military, but couldn’t thanks to the pushback of Republicans and some conservative Democrats. DADT was a compromise decision – it was giving homosexuals more rights than they had before.

Proud Rino on May 11, 2010 at 8:58 PM

What? Of course we gave a cr*p. We discussed many of Sotomayer’s terrible decisions at length.

Did you somehow forget about her Second Circuit Ricci opinion?

blink on May 11, 2010 at 8:59 PM

Which other ones did you discuss?

Proud Rino on May 11, 2010 at 9:01 PM

Allah,

PLEASE use the “softball” picture from now on… PLEASE!!

Thanks!!

Khun Joe on May 11, 2010 at 9:03 PM

This White House produced video falls under the too much information is a distraction, no?

TN Mom on May 11, 2010 at 9:04 PM

Then why didn’t he? He was CinC and had the power to dictate enforcement.

blink on May 11, 2010 at 9:01 PM

Congress passed a law affirming the 1982 ban imposed by Reagan before Clinton actually lifted the ban. It’s unpopular to stick up for the rights of the minorities sometimes, and Clinton caved to conservative pressure and went back on his campaign promise.

Still, being able to serve closeted is better than not being able to serve at all, I guess.

Proud Rino on May 11, 2010 at 9:07 PM

Which other cases, blink? Where did you discuss them here?

Proud Rino on May 11, 2010 at 9:08 PM

Why fight it? I think she’s just fine, frankly. One academic in the bunch is OK, although the Ivy League stuff is a legitimate roll-your-eyes moment.

Other than that, she’s fine.

AnninCA on May 11, 2010 at 7:44 PM

Kagan is laughing behind your back. Dunce.

Kagan: Speech is free if government decides it has more value than ‘societal costs’

selias on May 11, 2010 at 9:11 PM

InkyBinkyBarleyBoo on May 11, 2010 at 8:54 PM

*applauds*

Dark-Star on May 11, 2010 at 9:13 PM

Clinton didn’t cave to conservative pressure. Clinton caved to popular pressure.

blink on May 11, 2010 at 9:08 PM

It wasn’t liberals who wanted gays out of the military.

Are you serious? You find the threads.

blink on May 11, 2010 at 9:09 PM

Yeah right. You said you talked about all the Sotomayor cases = nonsense. It was just a bunch of stuff about Ricci that was totally uninformed, as per usual.

Proud Rino on May 11, 2010 at 9:14 PM

crr6 on May 11, 2010 at 8:47 PM

I never said anything specific about only “trial-level judges”, but they were judges…

… Why do you always want to put people in the highest positions of power without any real world experience?

Seems to have worked out just keen with Obowma…

Oh, wait!

Seven Percent Solution on May 11, 2010 at 9:15 PM

Yes, seriously, you’re totally right. Push this. It’s going to work out great.

Proud Rino on May 11, 2010 at 8:49 PM

Don’t worry…

… It is only one of many arguments against her.

Seven Percent Solution on May 11, 2010 at 9:16 PM

I never said anything specific about only “trial-level judges”, but they were judges…

… Why do you always want to put people in the highest positions of power without any real world experience?

Seven Percent Solution on May 11, 2010 at 9:15 PM

Well now you’re just squirming around. First you said judicial experience is important and I said “well not really because appellate judges don’t get much practical experience, they just sit around and write all day, so you must be talking about trial judges”. Then you said yeah, you’re talking about trial court judges and “thanks for making my point for me”. And now you’re saying you actually weren’t referring to trial-level judges. So we’re back to square one.

Either way you don’t seem to have a cogent point and either way you’re clearly confused. Which is fine, but it’d be nice if you just admitted it.

crr6 on May 11, 2010 at 9:19 PM

Uniformed? You’re uninformed.

blink on May 11, 2010 at 9:17 PM

OK, now that you’ve moved onto the “No *you* are” part of the “argument”, I’ll take my leave. Have a good one.

Proud Rino on May 11, 2010 at 9:19 PM

Comment pages: 1 2