The SuperHeroHype Forums  

Go Back   The SuperHeroHype Forums > SHH Community > Politics

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-10-2010, 05:19 PM   #51
Paradoxium
Making Your Head Explode
 
Paradoxium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 22,485
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

Anyone read firedoglake? A progressive blog site:

Elena Kagan Will Be The Most Unqualified Justice In History

SUPPORT HER!!!!

Save your energy for the Scalia retirement you moron Republicans!

__________________
.
.
Paradoxium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 05:22 PM   #52
Paradoxium
Making Your Head Explode
 
Paradoxium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 22,485
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

Quote:
Originally Posted by SentinelMind View Post
Is she really a moderate conservative? She seems reliably liberal to me.
The only exception I see she may be more sympathetic to defending military practices of going after terrorists. On domestic and social issues, I'd assume she's reliably liberal, especially since she even gave the military a hard time with Don't Ask Don't Tell.


I agree with Matt, not liking this choice. I don't like her philosophy, but that's not the biggest thing that bothers me. I think Obama chose her because she'd have a harder time being Borked (no paper trail...). He knows her heart-worldview so she'll carry out Obama's judicial view on the Court while being able to defend herself against accusations of being an activist since she has no record. I think this is different from Miers in that I genuinely think Bush was doing an old friend from Texas a favor and didn't care about his base or her legacy on the Court - the move was straight cronyism. I think Obama's making a more calculating move with this decision.
Her vote is already a non-Balance of Power, so views are not as important as execution. If she is a lightweight that can't compel, convince or articulate, it is meaningless. This is why she must absolutely be appointed.

__________________
.
.
Paradoxium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 05:22 PM   #53
SentinelMind
Banned User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: North FL
Posts: 4,078
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

I'm not following, can someone show me links how she'd swing the Court to the right?
What is the basis for this decision? Keep in mind, she's now currently serving as Solicitor General...so she has to argue any decision President Obama or his administration makes in front of Supreme Court (which may include military, CIA, executive branch issues, etc...). That doesn't mean she's going to push for moderate positions in a life-time position as Supreme Court Justice.

What worries me is that I think the temptation for an "unqualified" judge would be to latch on to opinions of more experienced judges. She may choose to align herself with Ginsburg since Ginsburg will have more experience discussing judicial precedent than she does. She'll be tempted to advance other Justice's talking points any may just rubber stamp them.

I think I'd have been slightly happier with a justice with more experience because I know at that point she can think for herself. A justice who hasn't demonstrated that may feel overwhelmed and be more prone to make emotional decisions or bandwagon decisions.

SentinelMind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 05:23 PM   #54
bell110
Drunk on Capitol Hill
 
bell110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,103
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

I really hope she is gay.

bell110 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 05:26 PM   #55
Marx
Pixelated
 
Marx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ohio
Posts: 55,034
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

Quote:
Originally Posted by bell110 View Post
I really hope she is gay.
I would like to see an openly gay Supreme Court justice...but I don't think Kagan is really qualified for the position. As far as I know, she has continually denied being gay.

__________________
It can't rain all the time.
Marx is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 05:29 PM   #56
Paradoxium
Making Your Head Explode
 
Paradoxium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 22,485
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

Quote:
Originally Posted by SentinelMind View Post
I'm not following, can someone show me links how she'd swing the Court to the right?
What is the basis for this decision? Keep in mind, she's now currently serving as Solicitor General...so she has to argue any decision President Obama or his administration makes in front of Supreme Court (which may include military, CIA, executive branch issues, etc...). That doesn't mean she's going to push for moderate positions in a life-time position as Supreme Court Justice.

What worries me is that I think the temptation for an "unqualified" judge would be to latch on to opinions of more experienced judges. She may choose to align herself with Ginsburg since Ginsburg will have more experience discussing judicial precedent than she does. She'll be tempted to advance other Justice's talking points any may just rubber stamp them.

I think I'd have been slightly happier with a justice with more experience because I know at that point she can think for herself. A justice who hasn't demonstrated that may feel overwhelmed and be more prone to make emotional decisions or bandwagon decisions.
Why the hell do you want another leader that could shift power and opinions? Her opinion doesn't matter mathematically. You want a lightweight follower who can't think for herself.

Why? Because the Scalia retirement will be the most detrimental. If you get a left version of Scalia taking up Steven's post and get a moderate lightweight replacing Scalia, you effectively shift the Balance of Power!

__________________
.
.
Paradoxium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 05:48 PM   #57
Hobodeluxe
Banned User
 
Hobodeluxe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Posts: 2,006
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paradoxium View Post
Her vote is already a non-Balance of Power, so views are not as important as execution. If she is a lightweight that can't compel, convince or articulate, it is meaningless. This is why she must absolutely be appointed.
in the Citizens United case Stevens was schooling her from the bench trying to tell her which tact to take on the case. She wanted to go the route of "it's not fair for the stockholders to electioneer with their money" angle.

nah she may be an okay law teacher. but all her experience is in Academia and not litigation or the bench.

Hobodeluxe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 05:53 PM   #58
SentinelMind
Banned User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: North FL
Posts: 4,078
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

Quote:
Originally Posted by Paradoxium View Post
Why the hell do you want another leader that could shift power and opinions? Her opinion doesn't matter mathematically. You want a lightweight follower who can't think for herself.

Why? Because the Scalia retirement will be the most detrimental. If you get a left version of Scalia taking up Steven's post and get a moderate lightweight replacing Scalia, you effectively shift the Balance of Power!
I see what you're saying, but my worry is the danger to judicial philosophy/stability/integrity of Supreme Court Decisions when you have someone untested on the highest Court of the land. In the beginning she will be a lightweight follower who will be a quick rubberstamp for a Ginsburg or Breyer, but she can join in decisions of other justices and create her own precedents, no matter how ridiculous or unfounded they are.

I think a Justice with more experience would be more likely and be more confident in his or her ability to stray from the pack once in a while. Look at Alito, the only dissenting opinion in a a recent 8-1 case on constitutionality of outlawing visual depictions of killing/harming animals. I disagreed with Alito's opinion for record but the point I'm making is that I don't think a Justice with little judicial perspective will try to stray from pack so early on. I think she'll be tempted rubber stamp Ginsburg and Breyer while they are still on the bench. After she serves on the Court for several years, her decisions will create precedent and as other justices retire, she will gradually have more power to shape the Court's agenda (sort of the same way moderate O'Connor became a huge power broker on the Court).
What bothers me is Kagan personality (sort of like O'Connor's 'practicality' philsophy) will be making/breaking decisions that have huge implications on this country and they may be founded on weak judicial philosophy or this sort of "cultural moderation" or "popularity". I'm looking at this decision long-term, not just short-term in current electoral politics period we're living in.

I don't think Obama chose her simply to create cronyism, I think she chose someone who is ambitious, people-person, who is a reliable liberal who may not be respected at first on the Court in world of Scalia's and Ginsburg's, but will be able to broker power and convince future justices how to vote as she learns more about the Court dynamics in her potentially long Justice career.

SentinelMind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 05:56 PM   #59
SentinelMind
Banned User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: North FL
Posts: 4,078
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

Quote:
Originally Posted by Hobodeluxe View Post
in the Citizens United case Stevens was schooling her from the bench trying to tell her which tact to take on the case. She wanted to go the route of "it's not fair for the stockholders to electioneer with their money" angle.

nah she may be an okay law teacher. but all her experience is in Academia and not litigation or the bench.
I think Hobo has highlighted some of my worries about her. In a room filled with Scalia, Ginsburg, Breyer..she's going to keep her mouth shut and probably align with Justice who produces the results she likes the best. As time progresses, and some of these justices retire, she'll try use her seniority to influence other justices who were probably more qualified than her before she even made it to the bench.

SentinelMind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 06:14 PM   #60
Kelly
#RESIST
SHH! Administrator
 
Kelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 68,946
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

Quote:
Originally Posted by bell110 View Post
I really hope she is gay.
Why, what does that have to do with interpreting the law?

__________________

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.
Faith is taking the first step even when you don't see the whole staircase.
~Martin Luther King Jr.~
Kelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 07:46 PM   #61
Matt
IKYN Guy Groupie
 
Matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 80,737
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

Quote:
Originally Posted by bell110 View Post
I really hope she is gay.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marx View Post
I would like to see an openly gay Supreme Court justice...but I don't think Kagan is really qualified for the position. As far as I know, she has continually denied being gay.
This is such a ridiculous train of thought. I don't want to see a gay Supreme Court Justice. I don't want to see a black Supreme Court Justice. I don't want to see a Latino Supreme Court Justice. I don't want to see a woman Supreme Court Justice. Don't want to see a Jewish Supreme Court Justice or or an Islamic one. Don't want to see an Eskimo Supreme Court Justice or an Indian one. I just want to see the BEST candidate become a Supreme Court Justice, regardless of what their race, gender, religion, or sexual affiliation is.

Funny how people claim to want equality until they can no longer enjoy the perks of inequality. This whole, "we need historical candidates," mentality is a load of ****. Especially with our country going down the toilet we need the best candidates. Sadly, Kagan is not the best candidate for this job. She's no better than Arne Duncan, a crony who is being rewarded for her loyalty. And unlike 'Dox, I don't want to see her get it on the merit of her not being the best candidate.

Matt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 07:53 PM   #62
Paradoxium
Making Your Head Explode
 
Paradoxium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 22,485
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt View Post
This is such a ridiculous train of thought. I don't want to see a gay Supreme Court Justice. I don't want to see a black Supreme Court Justice. I don't want to see a Latino Supreme Court Justice. I don't want to see a woman Supreme Court Justice. Don't want to see a Jewish Supreme Court Justice or or an Islamic one. Don't want to see an Eskimo Supreme Court Justice or an Indian one. I just want to see the BEST candidate become a Supreme Court Justice, regardless of what their race, gender, religion, or sexual affiliation is.

Funny how people claim to want equality until they can no longer enjoy the perks of inequality. This whole, "we need historical candidates," mentality is a load of ****. Especially with our country going down the toilet we need the best candidates. Sadly, Kagan is not the best candidate for this job. She's no better than Arne Duncan, a crony who is being rewarded for her loyalty. And unlike 'Dox, I don't want to see her get it on the merit of her not being the best candidate.
We are going to hell, we might as well have some comedy gold thrown in

__________________
.
.
Paradoxium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 08:16 PM   #63
Paradoxium
Making Your Head Explode
 
Paradoxium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 22,485
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

Matt who are we kidding ourselves. You actually think Obama and McCain were the best two choices the entire United States of America has to offer as "THE" President? The notion of meritocracy is foreign to (defacto democratic) politics.

It doesn't exist.

It's mixing the unmixable, like oil with water... good writing and Smallville.... fire and ice... Tom Welling and acting...

__________________
.
.
Paradoxium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 08:19 PM   #64
Matt
IKYN Guy Groupie
 
Matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 80,737
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

True, but to admit defeat and quit seeking the best is unforgivable.

Matt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 08:21 PM   #65
Addendum
Banned User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Memphis
Posts: 22,139
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

But when the politicians we have are the best we can produce?

Addendum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 08:25 PM   #66
Paradoxium
Making Your Head Explode
 
Paradoxium's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2002
Posts: 22,485
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

Qualified ones prefer to keep their spines.

__________________
.
.
Paradoxium is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 08:31 PM   #67
Addendum
Banned User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Memphis
Posts: 22,139
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

But "qualified politicians" are similar to "business ethics", a "brief speech", "fresh from concentrate", "gourmet fast food", "human evolution", "kosher ham", "mild pms", "military peace", "stationary orbit", "synthetic natural gas", a "xenophobic foreign secretary"...

I think you'll get the point.

Addendum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 09:06 PM   #68
SentinelMind
Banned User
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: North FL
Posts: 4,078
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

A history lesson as to why Presidents are so desperate to nominate candidates without a paper trail and how the term "Borked" came into being:

Late Senator Ted Kennedy's response to President Ronald Reagan's nomination of Robert Bork to the US Supreme Court.

"Robert Bork's America is a land in which women would be forced into back-alley abortions, blacks would sit at segregated lunch counters, rogue police could break down citizens' doors in midnight raids, schoolchildren could not be taught about evolution, writers and artists could be censored at the whim of the Government, and the doors of the Federal courts would be shut on the fingers of millions of citizens for whom the judiciary is—and is often the only—protector of the individual rights that are the heart of our democracy... President Reagan is still our president. But he should not be able to reach out from the muck of Irangate, reach into the muck of Watergate and impose his reactionary vision of the Constitution on the Supreme Court and the next generation of Americans. No justice would be better than this injustice."

SentinelMind is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 09:46 PM   #69
bell110
Drunk on Capitol Hill
 
bell110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,103
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kel View Post
Why, what does that have to do with interpreting the law?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt View Post
This is such a ridiculous train of thought. I don't want to see a gay Supreme Court Justice. I don't want to see a black Supreme Court Justice. I don't want to see a Latino Supreme Court Justice. I don't want to see a woman Supreme Court Justice. Don't want to see a Jewish Supreme Court Justice or or an Islamic one. Don't want to see an Eskimo Supreme Court Justice or an Indian one. I just want to see the BEST candidate become a Supreme Court Justice, regardless of what their race, gender, religion, or sexual affiliation is.

Funny how people claim to want equality until they can no longer enjoy the perks of inequality. This whole, "we need historical candidates," mentality is a load of ****. Especially with our country going down the toilet we need the best candidates. Sadly, Kagan is not the best candidate for this job. She's no better than Arne Duncan, a crony who is being rewarded for her loyalty. And unlike 'Dox, I don't want to see her get it on the merit of her not being the best candidate.
I just want to see Republicans pitch a fit.

bell110 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 09:53 PM   #70
Matt
IKYN Guy Groupie
 
Matt's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2000
Posts: 80,737
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

And we wonder why the country is in the ****ter. Democrat, Republican, its the equivilant to a sports team for people.

Matt is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 09:59 PM   #71
Addendum
Banned User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Memphis
Posts: 22,139
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

At least sports is enjoyable to watch

Addendum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 10:03 PM   #72
Kelly
#RESIST
SHH! Administrator
 
Kelly's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Houston, Texas
Posts: 68,946
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

Quote:
Originally Posted by bell110 View Post
I just want to see Republicans pitch a fit.
Here on this forum?

So, you are baiting?

__________________

Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that. The ultimate measure of a man is not where he stands in moments of comfort and convenience, but where he stands at times of challenge and controversy.
Faith is taking the first step even when you don't see the whole staircase.
~Martin Luther King Jr.~
Kelly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 10:18 PM   #73
Addendum
Banned User
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Memphis
Posts: 22,139
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

Isn't that what politics is?

Addendum is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 10:38 PM   #74
bell110
Drunk on Capitol Hill
 
bell110's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Posts: 3,103
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kel View Post
Here on this forum?

So, you are baiting?
No, I'm talking in general. If they are going to make a big deal about her being gay, and starting whisper campaigns, I might as well have fun when they lose their **** over a gay person being on the bench.

bell110 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2010, 10:59 PM   #75
Marx
Pixelated
 
Marx's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Ohio
Posts: 55,034
Default Re: Discussion: The Supreme Court

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matt View Post
This is such a ridiculous train of thought. I don't want to see a gay Supreme Court Justice. I don't want to see a black Supreme Court Justice. I don't want to see a Latino Supreme Court Justice. I don't want to see a woman Supreme Court Justice. Don't want to see a Jewish Supreme Court Justice or or an Islamic one. Don't want to see an Eskimo Supreme Court Justice or an Indian one. I just want to see the BEST candidate become a Supreme Court Justice, regardless of what their race, gender, religion, or sexual affiliation is.

Funny how people claim to want equality until they can no longer enjoy the perks of inequality. This whole, "we need historical candidates," mentality is a load of ****. Especially with our country going down the toilet we need the best candidates. Sadly, Kagan is not the best candidate for this job. She's no better than Arne Duncan, a crony who is being rewarded for her loyalty. And unlike 'Dox, I don't want to see her get it on the merit of her not being the best candidate.
I believe the highest court in the nation should represent the makeup of the nation. Diversity is a good thing.

As far as Kagan goes, I said in the post you quoted that I'm not sure she is the one for the job. The more I learn about her, the more unsure I am.

__________________
It can't rain all the time.
Marx is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 01:53 PM.

monitoring_string = "dee460792f24517621e3ca080805de7e"



Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SuperHeroHype.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2017 All Rights Reserved.