Why did Obama pick Kagen? It's simple SHE IS JEWISH!!!

The adminsitration denies she's gay, not that this is an issue, but according to them, she is being unfairly accused of that.

The charge that she's ugly must come from some pretty insecure or mean spirited people, because I don't think she's ugly at all.

The charge that she's unqualified is very wrong. She may be among the most imminently qualified people nominated for the high court. According to her peers that have spoken on her behalf, some of them pretty darn conservative, she is not given to uncareful or wacko positions on anything and will no doubt be no further left than Justice Stevens who was appointed by a Republican and probably will be even more centrist than him. As Dean of Harvard Law School, she recruited a number of conservative faculty which would tell us that she is no ideological extremist.

We would not expect a liberal President to appoint a conservative Supreme Court Justice any more than we would expect a conservative President to appoint a liberal one.

You all know I'm no fan of President Obama. But unless some serious flaw show up in the confirmation process, from all appearances he could have done a whole lot worse than he has done with this nomination.

She is a moderate liberal, which has pissed many liberals off. ;)
 
She is a socialist. I think that trumps everything else. He picks people becuase they have similiar viewpoints he does and she doesn't have a huge papertrail so he can sell her without a problem.

Not sure why everyones so fired up. It's not a surprise of a pick and she's going to get the seat.

LOL. "She is a Socialist".

Well, there's a pre-emptive unsubstantiated claim.

Yes, yes she's a socialist, just like Sotomayor, big O himself, and anyone else who isn't Samuel fucking Alito.

Really dumb guys, as a wise man once said I've seen more intelligent stuff scribed on the walls of a port-o-potty.

I hope you are joking.
 
Anyone who thinks a poster who starts out by calling Jews NAZIs is interested in meaningful discourse should call me about some oceanfront property I'm selling up in Phoenix, Az.
 
{atheist, but still Jewish)

impossible by definition


The race baiting Democrats will cry antisemitism... I probably would have been biased against any Jew selected, since they are usually overtly liberal and fall within open-border, pro-big government, pro-evironmental nazis and pro-entitlements!

:eusa_whistle:

Ironically, GHOOK will insist that being jewish is merely a matter of faith rather than genetic heritage. go figure.


And, if Jos made this thread we'd have been on page 17 by now hearing the likes of Ghook and Cmike crying about how antisemitic the premise of the thread is. I guess that is what being chosen is all about.

:cuckoo:
 
you believed alito? lol... none of us did.
Sorry I should of phrased that better. Not I believed Obama when he stated he would appoint a Centralist!

and no... i don't think kagan being jewish has anything to do with anything. in fact, if he wanted to appease any religious group politically, he'd have picked a protestant.
No one appeases Christians (other than prolifers), since they are such a fragmented voting bloc!
 
that must be it... he wants to pacify jews...

yeppers...

it's not like his chief of staff, press secretary and an awful lot of other people in high places in this admin are jewish or anything.

GH... silly thread... no offense, but seriously. It's absurd.

There were probably many reasons she was picked, but you can't tell me the fact she is Jewish wasn't one of them?

No doubt I overblow it, but I am shocked he would make another very controversial selection after picking a first very controversial figure in the Wise Latina member of the racist La Raza organization!
Quit lying, dude. Anyone he picked would be seen as a communist kenyan terrorist to the right wing. Or a gay, Jewish, female. :lol:

Come on now there are a lot of people he could have picked that wouldn't have been controversal. What he should have done was find a guy who was a Centralist on everything but Roe v. Wade and for god's sake he should have appointed a person with actually Federal judge experience!
 
The adminsitration denies she's gay, not that this is an issue, but according to them, she is being unfairly accused of that.

The charge that she's ugly must come from some pretty insecure or mean spirited people, because I don't think she's ugly at all.

The charge that she's unqualified is very wrong. She may be among the most imminently qualified people nominated for the high court. According to her peers that have spoken on her behalf, some of them pretty darn conservative, she is not given to uncareful or wacko positions on anything and will no doubt be no further left than Justice Stevens who was appointed by a Republican and probably will be even more centrist than him. As Dean of Harvard Law School, she recruited a number of conservative faculty which would tell us that she is no ideological extremist.

We would not expect a liberal President to appoint a conservative Supreme Court Justice any more than we would expect a conservative President to appoint a liberal one.

You all know I'm no fan of President Obama. But unless some serious flaw show up in the confirmation process, from all appearances he could have done a whole lot worse than he has done with this nomination.

All of the makes her a good selection for a State or Federal Judge! The Supreme Court should be reserved for candidates who have proven themselves as Judges first.
 
{atheist, but still Jewish)

impossible by definition
True, but I still self-identify as a Jewish, even though I am an atheist.


The race baiting Democrats will cry antisemitism... I probably would have been biased against any Jew selected, since they are usually overtly liberal and fall within open-border, pro-big government, pro-evironmental nazis and pro-entitlements!

:eusa_whistle:
I didn't call any Jews Nazis. I referred to the radical environmentalist as pro-environmental Nazis.
 
The adminsitration denies she's gay, not that this is an issue, but according to them, she is being unfairly accused of that.

The charge that she's ugly must come from some pretty insecure or mean spirited people, because I don't think she's ugly at all.

The charge that she's unqualified is very wrong. She may be among the most imminently qualified people nominated for the high court. According to her peers that have spoken on her behalf, some of them pretty darn conservative, she is not given to uncareful or wacko positions on anything and will no doubt be no further left than Justice Stevens who was appointed by a Republican and probably will be even more centrist than him. As Dean of Harvard Law School, she recruited a number of conservative faculty which would tell us that she is no ideological extremist.

We would not expect a liberal President to appoint a conservative Supreme Court Justice any more than we would expect a conservative President to appoint a liberal one.

You all know I'm no fan of President Obama. But unless some serious flaw show up in the confirmation process, from all appearances he could have done a whole lot worse than he has done with this nomination.

All of the makes her a good selection for a State or Federal Judge! The Supreme Court should be reserved for candidates who have proven themselves as Judges first.

I wish she had some experience as a judge first, too, but look how many really crappy Supreme Court justices we have had who were judges first. I think other considerations are more important than that; i.e. a thorough understanding of the letter and intent of the Constitution, a proven ability to assess a situation accurately and honestly, and an ability to set aside one's personal ideology and convictions in favor of a strict interpretation of the law. I am not hearing anybody with credibility say that Kagal does not fit that job description.

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist had no judicial experience and several others barely had judicial experience at the time they were nominated.

Again, would Kagal have been my first choice? No. But considering that the most liberal President that has ever held the office has the duty to nominate somebody, again, I think he could have done a whole lot worse.
 
She is a socialist. I think that trumps everything else. He picks people becuase they have similiar viewpoints he does and she doesn't have a huge papertrail so he can sell her without a problem.

Not sure why everyones so fired up. It's not a surprise of a pick and she's going to get the seat.

Some of the comments I'm seeing here seem to be copied from back when Sotomeyer was nominated. Since she was confirmed, there hasn't been a peep out of anyone. Listening to C-Span this morning was yet another morning of the most ignorant people in this country calling in with their version of gospel truths about Kagan. People must really enjoy being dumbed down is all I can say. Just shut up until she starts answering questions by the committee. I'm sure they will cover all aspects of her evil "socialist" bent.
 
I'm a Zionist Jew (atheist, but still Jewish) so I think I can speak honestly and freely on the subject.

With all the slack Obama has taken from the the American Jewish and non-Jewish supporters of Israel over his treatment or hard stance on Israel. He decided to make another political nomination and nominate a Jewish women. Just as he wanted to placate the Latinos by nominating a Latina, he did the same for the Jews. It pathetic.

He purposely picked an unqualified Jew, just as he picked a racist and overtly impartial biased Latina. That way the Republicans with JUSTIFIABLY and RIGHTFULLY bitch. The race baiting Democrats will cry antisemitism and the Jews who were thinking of living the Democrats will come back. The man has made a mockery of the Supreme Court election process and the liberals will defend him to the end.

Note: I probably would have been biased against any Jew selected, since they are usually overtly liberal and fall within open-border, pro-big government, pro-evironmental nazis and pro-entitlements!

-----and she is 50 years young and will be able to serve the progressive agenda for years to come, if she doesn't become a heart attack on a plate, sooner than later.....

The face of the court won't look any different than it did when Justice Stevens was there, with Anthony Kennedy being the lone centrist. It is as it should be, as long as the USSC is being politicized, that is. There was a time when it wasn't.
 
So that old wingnut talking point, that Obama is ANTI-SEMITIC,

when did that expire? Today?

But of course the rwingnuts are already trying to spin that to mean that Obama is sucking up to Netanyahu by this nomination. We finally have a president who doesn't intend to kow to Israel's demands, something most Americans (including, by the way, many Jewish Americans), and I don't think he changed his mind.
 
Last edited:
Eh, Obama didn't actually pick her. He was instructed to nominate her by Rahm.

obama-puppet1.jpg

You couldn't be further off the mark by implying that Rahm calls the shots, or haven't you heard the rumblings that he won't be around by 2012?
 
There were probably many reasons she was picked, but you can't tell me the fact she is Jewish wasn't one of them?

No doubt I overblow it, but I am shocked he would make another very controversial selection after picking a first very controversial figure in the Wise Latina member of the racist La Raza organization!
Quit lying, dude. Anyone he picked would be seen as a communist kenyan terrorist to the right wing. Or a gay, Jewish, female. :lol:

Come on now there are a lot of people he could have picked that wouldn't have been controversal. What he should have done was find a guy who was a Centralist on everything but Roe v. Wade and for god's sake he should have appointed a person with actually Federal judge experience!

It wouldn't have mattered WHO he chose, and you know it. Actually, ever since Stevens announced his retirement and the four potential nominees on the short list were named, they have ALL been scrutinized already. Ironically, even among the conservative talking heads, Kagan was seen as a fair-minded centrist who wouldn't be a bad choice. But now that she's actually there, it's a whole different ballgame. Good god, people are so easy to read it's pathetic. As I said, it wouldn't have mattered who Obama chose. He could have resurrected Rehnquist from the dead and the Get-Obama-At-All-Cost assholes would find fault.
 
The adminsitration denies she's gay, not that this is an issue, but according to them, she is being unfairly accused of that.

The charge that she's ugly must come from some pretty insecure or mean spirited people, because I don't think she's ugly at all.

The charge that she's unqualified is very wrong. She may be among the most imminently qualified people nominated for the high court. According to her peers that have spoken on her behalf, some of them pretty darn conservative, she is not given to uncareful or wacko positions on anything and will no doubt be no further left than Justice Stevens who was appointed by a Republican and probably will be even more centrist than him. As Dean of Harvard Law School, she recruited a number of conservative faculty which would tell us that she is no ideological extremist.

We would not expect a liberal President to appoint a conservative Supreme Court Justice any more than we would expect a conservative President to appoint a liberal one.

You all know I'm no fan of President Obama. But unless some serious flaw show up in the confirmation process, from all appearances he could have done a whole lot worse than he has done with this nomination.

All of the makes her a good selection for a State or Federal Judge! The Supreme Court should be reserved for candidates who have proven themselves as Judges first.

I wish she had some experience as a judge first, too, but look how many really crappy Supreme Court justices we have had who were judges first. I think other considerations are more important than that; i.e. a thorough understanding of the letter and intent of the Constitution, a proven ability to assess a situation accurately and honestly, and an ability to set aside one's personal ideology and convictions in favor of a strict interpretation of the law. I am not hearing anybody with credibility say that Kagal does not fit that job description.

Chief Justice William H. Rehnquist had no judicial experience and several others barely had judicial experience at the time they were nominated.

Again, would Kagal have been my first choice? No. But considering that the most liberal President that has ever held the office has the duty to nominate somebody, again, I think he could have done a whole lot worse.

I actually liked Merrick Garland, but he would have had too many points against him right out of the gate, even though he's a nice, clean looking white guy and probably a Protestant. He's from Chicago, and we can't have that. He's a Harvard grade, Strike Two, and he presides over the D.C. Court of Appeals, which we all know is librul--totally dude.
 
Quit lying, dude. Anyone he picked would be seen as a communist kenyan terrorist to the right wing. Or a gay, Jewish, female. :lol:

Come on now there are a lot of people he could have picked that wouldn't have been controversal. What he should have done was find a guy who was a Centralist on everything but Roe v. Wade and for god's sake he should have appointed a person with actually Federal judge experience!

It wouldn't have mattered WHO he chose, and you know it. Actually, ever since Stevens announced his retirement and the four potential nominees on the short list were named, they have ALL been scrutinized already. Ironically, even among the conservative talking heads, Kagan was seen as a fair-minded centrist who wouldn't be a bad choice. But now that she's actually there, it's a whole different ballgame. Good god, people are so easy to read it's pathetic. As I said, it wouldn't have mattered who Obama chose. He could have resurrected Rehnquist from the dead and the Get-Obama-At-All-Cost assholes would find fault.

That might have been true for some, but not me!
 
Eh, Obama didn't actually pick her. He was instructed to nominate her by Rahm.

obama-puppet1.jpg

You couldn't be further off the mark by implying that Rahm calls the shots, or haven't you heard the rumblings that he won't be around by 2012?

Obama is not a one man show. There are plenty of people assisting him in which shots to call. I despise this administration, not Obama. He is just their mouthpiece.
 

New Topics

Forum List

Back
Top