We've heard lots of praise for this nominee for the Supreme Court, Elena Kagan - what to make of it?
She is Jewish and from Harvard - so what? Does that mean Jewish people and Harvard principles, as delineated by Cass Sunstein will prevail regardless of the detrimental effects felt by the United States and her allies? Does this woman have the guts to face off anti-Israeli sentiment that is about to erupt as the truth regarding who actually pulled off 911 becomes public? I doubt it - but as the old cliche goes: "Hope springs eternal." And we all know what "hope" got us last time.
I don't see any signs of Constitutional life coming out of Harvard - so her position as dean of that dump doesn't impress me much. What will she do to interpret the law - so that I won't go to jail for writing the most unpopular things I can think of on this blog? Is she a Zionist? If so I don't want her occupying any position in the Federal government of the United States - or at the knitting club down the street - if that position has anything to do with the protection of the rights of Americans.
Obama has broken every promise he made during his campaign. This means he has no credibility whatsoever. If you disagree - that's great - just explain this SLAUGHTER
of Pakistanis via the typical "missile strike" today. Pretty disgusting - inhuman - and just plain sick. Thanks for the death Barack. By the way - I'd double the reported number of casualites - and I didn't read anything about the wounded screaming in pain on the ground - so throw a coupla' more stiffs in there.
Getting back to Barack: I trust ZERO he does. For that reason I'm willing to bet his nominee is a worthless tool ready to ensure the predominance of Israeli influence over American policy - foreign and domestic. And I'm sure that will carry over to preventing the prosecution of the enemies of the American people(CLICK) and the Constitution: foreign and domestic.
But - please - make up your own mind. I don't get in trouble much so am a stranger to the ways of the courts here in Amerika.
Read entire article Kagan has decent public backing, says Gallup
" As Elena Kagan prepares for Senate hearings on her Supreme Court nomination, she goes in with a decent amount of public support."
Read entire article here:
"In her 1993 University of Chicago Law Review piece, she wrote that proposed regulations on hate speech and pornography failed to adhere to the fundamental First Amendment principle of viewpoint neutrality — that the government cannot favor certain private speakers or viewpoints over others"
" Harvard law professor Laurence Tribe — who has published extensively on the First Amendment and argued numerous First Amendment cases before the Supreme Court — told the First Amendment Center Online: “Elena Kagan’s First Amendment scholarship has been both insightful and influential. As with every other topic she touches, this one has been brightly illuminated by her examination of it.”"
" May 10, 2010 "Information Clearing House" The Wall Street Journal reports: "The White House said Friday that Elena Kagan's membership on an advisory panel for the securities firm Goldman Sachs Group Inc. wouldn't disqualify her for a position on the Supreme Court. ... From 2005 to 2008, Ms. Kagan was a paid member of the Research Advisory Council of Goldman Sachs Global Markets Institute, according to financial-disclosure reports she filed after being appointed to her current job. The form shows she was paid $10,000 in 2008, when she was dean of Harvard Law School.""
" Finally, it will be nearly impossible to criticize Obama’s pick because it is rumored she is a lesbian. If you point out her Wall Street connections, you will be called homophobic the same way any criticism of Obama is deemed racist and dismissed as the hateful ravings of white supremacists."
Read entire article Kagan: ‘Disappear’ Free Speech If The Government Deems It Offensive
" President Obama’s Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan is perfect in every way – perfect that is if you think the role of the highest judicial body in the United States is to ban free speech, indefinitely detain Americans without trial, resurrect command and control socialism, while urinating on everything the Constitution stands for.
We already discovered Kagan’s penchant for treating Americans as guilty until proven innocent, or in fact just plain guilty without even the chance to be proven innocent, when she was quoted as saying, “That someone suspected of helping finance Al Qaeda should be subject to battlefield law — indefinite detention without a trial — even if he were captured in a place like the Philippines rather than a physical battle zone.”"
UPDATE MAY 11, 2010
Read entire article The case against Elena Kagan
" It is far from clear who Obama will chose to replace John Paul Stevens on the Supreme Court, but Elena Kagan, his current Solicitor General and former Dean of Harvard Law School, is on every list of the most likely replacements. Tom Goldstein of SCOTUSblog has declared her "the prohibitive front-runner" and predicts: "On October 4, 2010, Elena Kagan Will Ask Her First Question As A Supreme Court Justice." The New Yorker's Jeffrey Toobin made the same prediction. "
pic borrowed from here
UPDATE MAY 11, 2010 Explosive report shows Kagan supports censorship of TV, radio, posters, and pamphlets
UPDATE MAY 12, 2010
SOLON of Athens insisted that people CHOOSE A SIDE - it is time for the people claiming to be victimized by this subject to pick a side as a commenter mentions below:
UPDATE MAY 12, 2010
Elena Kagan Abortion Memo Offers New Look at Nominee
UPDATE MAY 13, 2010
Read entire article here:
" The New York Times this morning reports that "Mr. Obama effectively framed the choice so that he could seemingly take the middle road by picking Ms. Kagan, who correctly or not was viewed as ideologically between Judge Wood on the left and Judge Garland in the center." That's consummate Barack Obama. The Right appoints people like John Roberts and Sam Alito, with long and clear records of what they believe because they're eager to publicly defend their judicial philosophy and have the Court reflect their values. Beltway Democrats do the opposite: the last thing they want is to defend what progressives have always claimed is their worldview, either because they fear the debate or because they don't really believe those things, "
---Note on above---Greenwald is probably in a bind - where his ability to speak truth is limited - that's why there is no mention of the 911 connections. She's anti-free speech, anti-gun, and helped protect the culpable Saudis from the 911 families when they tried to sue. She's got a record all right.
UPDATE MAY 15, 2010 here
UPDATE MAY 17, 2010 Religious Affiliation of the U.S. Supreme Court