spursncowboys keeps referring to her lack of experience. what does the cons uion say in regards to qualifications? I'm sure SNC knows and will be willing to show me how dumb I am...
Here's a long list of lies, slander, myths, and pure bull from the old white southern/border/western Senators vomited during the Kagan confirmation:
Myths and falsehoods about Elena Kagan's Supreme Court nomination
Myth: Kagan banned military recruiters from Harvard
Myth: Kagan is "anti-military"
Myth: Kagan is "radical"
Myth: Kagan's praise for an Israeli Supreme Court justice shows she's a radical (NEW)
Myth: Kagan's thesis shows she's a socialist
Myth: Conservatives can credibly argue that Kagan's personal and political views are relevant to confirmation process
Myth: "Kagan Standard" means Kagan must answer questions about issues that will come before the Supreme Court
Myth: Kagan's Goldman Sachs role taints her nomination
Myth: Conservative opposition is based on the substance of Kagan's nomination
Myth: Obama used "empathy" standard rather than fealty to law in choosing Kagan
Myth: Kagan is unqualified because she hasn't been a judge (UPDATED)
Myth: Kagan has said judicial experience is an "apparent necessity"
Myth: Republicans would be justified in opposing Kagan because she lacks a judicial paper trail
Myth: Kagan is "Obama's Harriet Miers"
Myth: Kagan's record shows that she will rubber-stamp war-on-terror policies
Myth: Kagan's 23-year-old statements about the Establishment Clause suggest she's hostile to religion
Myth: Kagan's recusal obligations would be "extraordinary"
Myth: Kagan "can become" too "emotionally involved on issues she deeply cares about"
Myth: Kagan not "fair-minded, impartial" and doesn't have "proper temperament to be a judge"
Myth: Kagan is anti-free speech
Myth: Kagan supports banning books
Myth: Kagan wanted to "ban pamphlets" by individuals (NEW)
Myth: Kagan is anti-Second Amendment
Myth: Kagan compared the NRA to the Klan (NEW)
Myth: Kagan banned ROTC from campus
Myth: Kagan "cover[ed] up" plagiarism at Harvard Law
Myth: Kagan's citation of Marshall's statement that the original Cons ution was "defective" is controversial
Myth: Kagan's memos to Justice Thurgood Marshall prove she's outside mainstream (NEW)
Myth: Kagan's campaign donations are unusual
Myth: Kagan supported Saudi sponsors of terrorism
Myth: Kagan accepted a gift by Saudi prince that brought Shariah at Harvard (NEW)
Myth: Kagan acted improperly in Warner Creek case
Myth: As SG, Kagan indulged her own views rather than defending the law
Myth: Kagan is avoiding "traditional interviews" with the press
Myth: Kagan supports holding terror suspects "without due process" (NEW)
Myth: Kagan believes that foreign law trumps cons utional law (NEW)
Myth: Kagan wants to protect sex offenders in the Catholic Church (NEW)
Myth: Kagan supports cloning human beings (NEW)
http://mediamatters.org/research/201006270002
spursncowboys keeps referring to her lack of experience. what does the cons uion say in regards to qualifications? I'm sure SNC knows and will be willing to show me how dumb I am...
i am not saying Barry's appointment is uncons utional. It is def unethical. But who here who is ok with barry's pick and was honestly ok with bush picking his political buddy?
chump: You ass*u*me my opinion about rehnquist. Dummas.
You keep saying its unethical but you also just completely ignored how you got smashed by chump a few posts above. You should acknowledge how something with such a long line of precedent is unethical.
he won the election and he can nominate anyone he wants to. bush packed the court with activist right wingers and obama is ding the same. i am hopeful we lose a conservative in the next couple of yrs...
I got smashed by chump. That sentence could never correctly be used by anyone. I do play that "one side did it, nonsense." i don't have a team in it. I also have many time acknowledged that I was against bush trying to do. Chump is an idiot and tries to move the goal post just to be argumentative.
So you are ok with Bush doing it with Myers? I am talking about SCOTUS.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_..._controversiesDuring President George W. Bush's two term tenure in office, he nominated thirty-nine people for twenty-seven different federal appellate judgeships that were blocked by the Senate Democrats either directly in the Senate Judiciary Committee or on the full Senate floor using a filibuster.[1] Republicans labeled it an unwarranted obstruction of professionally qualified judicial nominees[2].Three of the nominees who were not processed (Paul S. Diamond, Loretta A. Preska and Philip P. Simon) were nominated after July 1, 2008, the traditional start date of the unofficial Thurmond Rule during a presidential election year. The Republicans claim that Senate Democrats of the 110th Congress on purpose tried to keep open particular judgeships as a political maneuver to allow a future Democratic president to fill them. Of the twenty-seven seats in question, nine were filled with the original Bush nominee, seven were eventually filled with different Bush nominees, seven have been filled with Democratic nominees by President Barack Obama and four are still open.
The Republicans claim that Senate Democrats of the 110th Congress on purpose tried to keep open particular judgeships as a political maneuver to allow a future Democratic president to fill them. Of the twenty-seven seats in question, nine were filled with the original Bush nominee, seven were eventually filled with different Bush nominees, seven have been filled with Democratic nominees by President Barack Obama and four are still open.
yes spursncowboys.. The President can nominate anyone he wants to.
On a side note, I actually would have preferred myers over scalito ....
Maybe chump should explain the precedent set with the appointment of Bork.
So we both are agreeing on the same thing. He can nominate anyone he wants.
http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-503544_1...82-503544.htmlKagan, if confirmed, would be the first justice in almost 40 years to join the high court without prior judicial experience.
I'm sure you don't know Bork received an up or down vote.
If you did, you are trying to move the goalposts.
Hypocrite.
Who was the last appointment without judicial experience?
Why didn't Kagan receive an up or down vote when she was first appointed to the judiciary?
Please state fully your opinion about Rehnquist.
And Warren.
"it damages the very judicial system"
wrapping their sorry, pitiful selves in the Cons ution, Bible, the flag, lies, slander, distortions, these Repug Senators are insults to the country and intelligence.
Except for the ing "force people to eat vegetables" question, Kagan owned their ridiculous asses.
Prof. Goldsmith seems to agree with you, but he also includes the Dems in his conclusion.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)