Looks Like Justice Kagan
The Associated Press is reporting that President Obama will announce the nomination of Solicitor General Elena Kagan to the Supreme Court at 10AM Monday morning, replacing the retiring John Paul Stevens. Kagan will be the third woman on the Supreme Court, and only the fourth overall.
Tags: Elena Kagan, President Obama, Supreme Court
This will turn out to be Obama’s Harriet Miers.
Matt: I hope you’re right. We don’t need another Chicago crony who will want to dictate the radical socialist agenda by judicial fiat.
LG: A little premature to call her “Justice,” don’t you think?
Just what we need, another centrist.
Here’s a little reading on Kagan.
From Fivethirtyeight: Kagan’s diversity hiring record
From SCOTUSblog: 9750 Words on Elena Kagan
From Glenn Greenwald
“This will turn out to be Obama’s Harriet Miers.” Or so the right wing needs her to be in order to hold off irrelevancy.
… Obama’s Harriet Miers, Obama’s Katrina… It seems people are desperate for Obama to have the same colossal failures as Bush did. Considering health care was his “Waterloo”, I’m willing to take my chances. The right wing just has to accept that Obama wont be the left’s Bush.
Continue to wish… no, in your cases, pray for the failure of the nation all you want, Right Wing… in fact, wish for it really hard in one hand. You know what to do in the other. See which fills up first.
Just what we need, another Harvard academic in the supreme court.
All justices will be either from Harvard or Yale now. Doesn’t represent the populace much does it.
By the way all justices will be either Jewish or Catholic and the majority of the populace is Protestant.
you’re right. we should decide SCOTUS justices based on religious background. It is also a good idea to hand the toughest decisions in the country to people with less than superior education.
It is a real talent you have, FBH for saying things that would made Rush say “dude, that was kinda dumb”.
There has been some fear among liberals that she may be the reverse Souter.
“There has been some fear (mongering) among liberal (teabags) that she may be the reverse Souter.”
Only in that it has happened before. There is no basis for that argument other than disgruntled liberals who consider Obama a traitor for not being a left wing dictator. The media NEEDS her to be a reverse Souter so they have a story. Sotomayor was supposed to be this loose tempered fiery latino (who burns down houses, right FBH?) she sure was a let down for the vultures.
Basically a1, link please.
“All justices will be either from Harvard or Yale now.”
Heaven forfend. Better they should be from Peckerwood Preacher University, right conservaboy?
link to what? personal conversations?
“Doesn’t represent the populace much does it.”
Yes, let’s nominate somebody with an Associate degree from their local community college to the SCOTUS. That’s the sort of rigorous jurisprudence the founding fathers had in mind.
You have to wonder what would happen if a conservative’s child got accepted into Yale or Harvard. Would this be praiseworthy, or would they decline the acceptance letter? This attack on intellectualism – from people who proudly display their My child is an honor student at (fill in the blank) school – is, imo, one of the biggest threats to the future of our country.
These are also the same people who bemoan and criticize certain groups of kids for not excelling in school.
personal conversations? so you are backing up your charge that she will be “Obama’s Souter” with “i heard it from some guy”? very credible. WIld speculation is not a valid form of debate.
“You have to wonder what would happen if a conservative’s child got accepted into Yale or Harvard. Would this be praiseworthy, or would they decline the acceptance letter”
UI, they would BARELY pass with C’s. They would also do coke, drunk drive, and later become president.
I think the anti-intellectualism is a backlash against liberal intellectual elitism. Both points of view are wrong-headed.
“Yes, let’s nominate somebody with an Associate degree from their local community college to the SCOTUS. That’s the sort of rigorous jurisprudence the founding fathers had in mind.”
hey bub, what’s wrong with an Associate’s degree from one’s local community college?! (for the record… i DO plan on obtaining a higher degree and by no means think i’m qualified to be a SC justice 🙂 … good to see ya again, X)
The best cast against Kagan from the left is articulated by Glenn Greenwald; he also contains links to various left-based anti-Kagan articles.
there is no such thing as “liberal intellectual elitism” that is a myth dreamed up by the right wing media to make themselves feel better about the fact they are uneducated nimrods.
Nothing’s wrong with such a degree. What’s wrong with one from HArvard or Yale?
Kagan 2010 = Miers 2005
….or so the king of the lefTeabags hopes. a1, I’m really starting to be convinced you are in line wit Rush in that you hope Obama fails. After all, if he doesn’t you will have been wrong…. and we CANT have that.
a.price, speaking of grades, you must have failed reading. Certainly your reading comprehension could use some work. Let’s recap exactly what I wrote:
“Comment by anon1 on 10 May 2010 at 8:42 am:
There has been some fear among liberals that she may be the reverse Souter.”
You asked me for a link. I responded :
“Comment by anon1 on 10 May 2010 at 9:02 am:
link to what? personal conversations?”
Your response to that:
“Comment by a.price on 10 May 2010 at 9:30 am:
personal conversations? so you are backing up your charge that she will be “Obama’s Souter” with “i heard it from some guy”? very credible. WIld speculation is not a valid form of debate. ”
Now, let’s take that apart, because MY reading comprehension is excellent. “so you are backing up your charge that she will be “Obama’s Souter””….
Where did I make any charge that she would be “Obama’s Souter?” Let’s remember exactly what I said:
“Comment by anon1 on 10 May 2010 at 8:42 am:
There has been some fear among liberals that she may be the reverse Souter.”
See, I was conveying a very specific point. I never said I believed she would be “Obama’s Souter.” I very clearly said:
“Comment by anon1 on 10 May 2010 at 8:42 am:
There has been some fear among liberals that she may be the reverse Souter.”
Now for the last part of your second post:
“…with “i heard it from some guy”? very credible. WIld speculation is not a valid form of debate. ”
We’ve already shown that you don’t even know which is the issue at hand. I never attempted to debate the charge I made of her being “Obama’s Souter,” because as shown above, I never made any such charge. Moreover, “i heard it from some guy.” is absolute proof of the claim I did make. See, what I actually said was:
“Comment by anon1 on 10 May 2010 at 8:42 am:
There has been some fear among liberals that she may be the reverse Souter.”
So, “i heard it from some guy.” is the only kind of evidence I needed to show, which is exactly why I pointed to your ridiculous request for a link and said,:
“Comment by anon1 on 10 May 2010 at 9:02 am:
link to what? personal conversations?”
Things can exist AND not be on the Internet. The personal conversations I’ve had with liberals, expressing the sentiments I mentioned, fall into this category.
To sum up, a.price, try to stick to the facts. You look like a jackass when you try to point out flaws in someone’s debating technique, when in fact, you have no idea what the debate is. Shut up and pay attention.
“Anyone who observes American politics even casually knows that if Barack Obama deems Elena Kagan to be a good replacement for Justice Stevens, then there will be numerous progressives who will immediately agree, get behind her and cheer for her confirmation [LIKE A.PRICE WHO CHEERS FOR ANYTHING OBOMBA DOES, NO MATTER WHAT]. But they’ll be doing so without having the slightest idea what she thinks, what she believes, and what she’ll do on the Court. They’ll be doing that knowing (and not caring) that there’s a substantial risk that she will move the Court to the Right. They’ll be doing that in the face of this hiring record while at Harvard. And they’ll be doing that based on their willingness to place blind faith in the assurances of her Decorated Friends and their President that they know deep in their hearts that she’s the Right Person and no further evidence should be needed.”
http://www.salon.com/news/opinion/glenn_greenwald/2010/04/27/lessig
“You have to wonder what would happen if a conservative’s child got accepted into Yale or Harvard.”
I’m pretty sure it happens thousands of times a year. Most people applying to expensive private colleges come from families pretty high up the wage scale, which means a pretty fair percentage of those families are conservative. I’ve heard plenty of conservative parents speak with pride of acceptances to such universities.
But then, most families with higher incomes also have a good bit of education, so they’re not Frank Knotts, Proud-to-Be-a-Moron conservatives. Remember, the Tea Parties have a tiny bit above average education levels.
we have SO many a1s now that it impossible to keep em all in line. to answer the one who seems to have their knickers in a twist at me…. let’s try what you did
There is concern among some people that micro chips implanted in elephants may cause AIDS to spread by eye contact
I did exactly what you did. I said something and provided nothing to support my statement… but at least i said it. Sadly, that is what passes for contribution to the discussion in blog land. It is no different from Glen Beck saying “now SOME PEOPLE are saying Obama is the Anti-Christ… no ME mind you, but people i’ve talked to.
“Things can exist AND not be on the Internet. The personal conversations I’ve had with liberals, expressing the sentiments I mentioned, fall into this category.”
However, providing links is the equivalent of citing your source. I’m sorry i didn’t use the language you would prefer. please cite your source….. If “some guy i talked to” doesn’t fly in a school report, or news article, it doesn’t fly here.
Sure, she COULD be a reverse Souter. she could also be a psycho who kills all the other justices and uses their souls for power.
I hope Obomba fails in drilling for oil off the east coast. I hope Obomba fails in his attempt to restore the republickins to power. I hope Obomba fails in his attempt to roll back Constitutional rights such as Miranda warnings, right to a speedy trial, and privacy rights. I hope Obomba fails to murder more civilians in Afghanistan and Iraq and Pakistan. I hope that he fails to get right-leaning Supreme Court justices confirmed. I hope his insurance company enrichment scheme fails.
So, yes, there are a number of things I hope Obomba fails at.
Kagan 2010 = Miers 2005
Anyone who says Obama is trying to “restore [Republicans] to power” isn’t going to be taken seriously anywhere, let alone here.
“I hope Obomba fails in his attempt to roll back Constitutional rights such as Miranda warnings,”
dont take this as me joining your LefTeabag revolution anonone, BUT i have to agree with you on this one. I heard about the developments and i have to say…..
Strike One, Obama.
by the way, your new bumper sticker is a lot less offensive than the Oil spill one… making political bumpersticker light of a tragedy is SO Right Wing.
Well, Geezer, what do you think “bipartisan” means”? The fact is that Obomba has been bending over backward since January 21, 2009 to appeal to conservatives, not progressives.
“Hope and change” has turned into “nope and same.”
Kagan 2010 = Miers 2005
You still don’t get it, a.price. You really ought not argue when you really have no idea what’s going on. Here, I’ll try to help you.
“There is concern among some people that micro chips implanted in elephants may cause AIDS to spread by eye contact”
Assuming you have heard from some people that they are concerned “that micro chips implanted in elephants may cause AIDS to spread by eye contact,” then that statement is absolutely true.
Do you see the difference? The statement you made is true, even if the microchip elephant thing is completely and demonstrably false.
When you asked me for a link, the only logically consistent reason you could have done so was because you did not believe what I said to be true. Remember, I did NOT say she was “Obama’s Souter.” What I actually said was that some people were afraid she might be. Since I had heard these fears from personal conversations, there is no way I could have given you a link to a personal conversation.
BUT, you later showed that you weren’t being logically consistent AT ALL. You had made the leap from my statement to one that had me trying to “back up my charge that she would be “Obama’s Souter.”” Remember, I NEVER made that claim.
Again, assuming there are actually people worried about the elephant microchips, then THE STATEMENT: There is concern among some people that micro chips implanted in elephants may cause AIDS to spread by eye contact
Is ABSOLUTELY TRUE.
Media Matters has gathered a lot of sources about Kagan. Perhaps the reflexive anti-Obama folks (on the left and right) should read all this before bashing the nominee.
you are Glenn Beckin’ it up again. Do YOU think she will be a reverse Souter? Are you a mouthpiece for your compatriots who think she is?
I wasn’t questioning the fact someone told you something. I was questioning their reasoning for making that statement. A sentiment that you connected yourself to by airing it in a public forum. Is there anything you can provide … OTHER than hearsay to support the charge that she will be a reverse Souter? OR, and FAR more likely, will you just continue to attack my intelligence for lack of anything more constructive to say?
Well, I think it’s unfortunate that she’s from Harvard, because that does look totally cliquey. Maybe Obama so strongly identifies as being from Hawaii that this east coast court looks more geographically representative to him than to other people, I don’t know.
I’m concerned that her legal opinion seems to be a little further right than I’d like, but seeing that she has no rulings behind her there’s probably no way to tell until she’s in.
And a friend brought up to me that this is another opportunity missed to appoint a Native American justice … which I think is a valid point.
“Do YOU think she will be a reverse Souter? ”
No, I don’t.
“Are you a mouthpiece for your compatriots who think she is?”
In the sense that I related their fears to this board, then I guess so?
“I wasn’t questioning the fact someone told you something. I was questioning their reasoning for making that statement. ”
Maybe you were, but it was incorrect for you to project that onto me.
“Is there anything you can provide … OTHER than hearsay to support the charge that she will be a reverse Souter?”
I do not feel obligated to support that charge since I never made it.
This is another missed opportunity to appoint a liberal justice, regardless of race, gender, ethnicity, or anything else. He is nominating someone who’s judicial philosophy is unknown at best but tends to lean right.
Another Obomba fail.
Kagan 2010 = Miers 2005
“The fact is that Obomba has been bending over backward since January 21, 2009 to appeal to conservatives, not progressives.”
Congratulations. You have now proved you’re a hysterical fool — not that there was much doubt. A politician moving to the center is trying to claim that center for his own party, not the opposition. This is politics 101. You fail.
The mindless repetition of an untrue meme, by the way, is a proven Republican strategy. You have already spoken of your admiration for the way they operate, and now you’re proving it.
so to recap. You had nothing to add. You just threw out an opinion…. not even your own, and when called on it you became belligerent.
There has been some fear among liberals that she may be the reverse Souter….[ this is not my opinion, but it is worth looking in to.] there. I fixed your original comment. i will now respond
I dont think so either anon1, where did you hear this? They are clearly speculating with nothing to back it up.
Obama screwed progressives again! This woman was a supporter of Bush foreign policies. She supports indefinate detentions without a trial? Why would Obama overlook great candidates like Diane Wood who had amazing qualifications and a great track record. Both right and left will oppose her! Literally all progressive blogs I read this morning are appalled at this choice. She will take the Court all the way to the right. Thanks hope and changey! At 50 years old she will be serving for many years, so the only thing left is for progresives to join the right and oppose this woman.
a.price: The big knock on Miers was that she had no judicial experience. Neither does Kagan.
I’ve heard that idea expressed by a few of my friends. I think that’s the point, no one can point to anything, so speculation runs rampant. You might also read this article: http://nymag.com/news/politics/powergrid/65620/
Geezer, abandoning the democratic base to advocate for the positions of the far right-wing is not “moving to the center.” Even you should recognize that.
Kagan 2010 = Miers 2005
Let’s not get into the argument that one needs judicial experience to be a supreme court justice. HIllary Clinton’s name has come up many times and she has never worn robes. Neither have many SC justices. Kagan will be the first since 1971. The problem with Miers was that she was an un educated crony of W… so obviously that not even his rubber stamp joke of a congress couldn’t pretend otherwise.
Matt – Lack of judicial experience was just one knock on Miers. She also lacked basic Constitutional knowledge and fared poorly when discussing her nomination with Senators. By all accounts, Kagan has a good grasp on the Constitution. We can bicker about whether or not we agree (and we will), but she is quite a bit more qualified than Harriet Miers was ever going to be.
Kagan has also already been through a confirmation process, something Miers had not. Where they are the same is in the lack of any substantial paper trail of legal opinions.
anonone, im sure you were as upset as i was that GWB seemed to only be the president of the far right. Everything he did, he did for his base. (which was actually the minority)
Obama is the president of the entire united states. Keep in mind, the right wing wanted NO health care reform…. we got it. And for as much as you want to deny it and hold your breath and stamp your feet, it WILL help people. My sister will now have assured health care until she is 26…. a DIRECT result of the president’s leadership.
That is only one example, i know… let me guess your response “well im glad YOUR sister is doing better, there are still millions of liberals who havent gotten their pound of conservative flesh you selfish bastard” (did i get it right?)
The point is, Barack Obama never gave any indication at any point (and i followed the entire election process more closely than my own health from ’06 on) that he would be the left wing autocrat you wish he was.
Give.
It.
Up.
a.price, Obomba lied repeatedly throughout his campaign and since he has been in office. I understand that you believe that he can do no wrong, but the facts are facts. In regards to your sister, there are also many dead and maimed people in the world now, as “a DIRECT result of the president’s leadership.”
Have fun at your Obomba alter today.
I know.that wasn’t the only strike against her, but that was biggest (at least portrayed by the media)
He never said he wouldn’t send troops to kill people. you can have a problem with it, just don’t pretend you didn’t see it coming. if you didn’t, you are a blind fool
matt, the media is a bunch of idiots.
I really don’t think she’s a horrible choice, I’m just saying I don’t think she will get the confirmation because of the lack of judicial experience, the fact she isn’t liberal enough for many Democrats, and she’s an Obama pick (for the GOP).
ok, I can buy that argument.
I’m not sure she wont be confirmed. They will need more dirt on her to block an nomination, and public opinion of the “just say no” republican strategy is starting to fade. There are still many examples of SCOTUS justices with no prior judicial experience who went on to have highly respected rulings on big cases.
“abandoning the democratic base to advocate for the positions of the far right-wing is not “moving to the center.” Even you should recognize that.”
You’re wrong once again. Pushing the agenda of the left would not be “moving to the center.” Advocating SOME positions of right-wingers — and even a blind, hysterical person can see he doesn’t advocate all of them — is. This is reality. You can act immature about it, but it won’t change anything — though, by continually repeating Republican-spawned memes as you do, you increase the chances of accomplishing the very thing you claim to be working against.
point of note: Rehnquist was never a judge. Neither was Taft. He did, however, get stuck in a bathtub, which should qualify him for something.
I think you’re wrong Matt. Republicans aren’t going to mount much of a fight (Graham’s already praising her) and she’s been confirmed by the Senate before. Unless they find some smoking gun somewhere she’s in. Republicans will only offer token resistance I think.
Wasn’t O’Connor also a state legislator?
Geezer, i think we are the fools for continuing to argue and be pulled into fights with this joke.
True dat.
“He [oBOMBa] never said he wouldn’t send troops to kill people.” – a.price
That’s not much of a reason to be enthused about someone.
When it comes to mastering diminished expectations, obomba exceeds bush.
actually troll,
you’re right. It is not a reason to be enthused. If you took 3 seconds to read before you reacted like a teabag, you would see i was telling you, or a1 or whoever that the shock and sense of betrayal at the fact we still have troops fighting is completely unfounded. You actually cut off the rest of my post to make your point, twit. Say goodbye to any remaining credibility you had. bye bye…. LOOK there it goes.