She has been widely rumored to be a lesbian, although the MSM has carefully avoided that topic. So we will have a far left, potential gay rights advocate on the Court. No doubt she has superb legal training and experience, at least in government and academia. She has no experience as a trial judge or appellate court judge and no private sector experience apparently . So much for Obama's claimed to desire to appoint justices who would have some knowledge of the real world impact of their rulings. One thing we do know about her, other than being a somewhat closeted lesbian, is that she participated as Dean of HLS in a lawsuit with other schools to try to bar military recruiters from campuses under the odd justification that the military discriminated against gays. The schools were objecting to a law that required schools that accepted federal funding to accept military recruiters. They wanted the money, but didn't want to allow the military to soil their campuses by offering careersa to students. I will be curious to see if the republicans dare get into any of this. We know the democrats left no stone unturned in trying to trash republican nominees. With democrat thugs likes Sen. Pat Leahy, it was not necessarily just about blocking a nominee. It was about wounding them so severely they would lack stature, see Clarence Thomas, and sending a message to other outstanding conservative judges that they would have to endure a slimefest to be confirmed. Obama has consistently attempted to force his radicalism on a resistant american public. Will they tolerate a Supreme Court Justice who values the homosexual agenda over the military?
1. Dyke 2. Broad 3. Jew 4. Leftist 5. No experience as a judge. Sounds like the perfect Obama nominee......
The scariest thing about Obama is his choices for judges (including at the federal circuit court level, not just the supreme court). We'll have leftist judges discovering all sorts of strange laws lurking in the penumbras and emanations of the "living Constitution" for decades to come.
If someone is nominated only because they contain those characteristics, then that act is also bigoted. It's bigoted against anyone who isn't gay, female, Jewish. What if an NBA owner said, "we need diversity. Our fans are turned off by all these black players. Even if the guy sux, I want a white guy playing center." Would that be fair? Or legal? Or moral? No. No. No.
And because she's not a white guy you assume she was not chosen on merit? You shaving mirror must be proud.
Merit? She's not even a jurist! I'd say one's record as a Federal judge is a pretty well regarded criteria. And I'm sure-if you were actually an American-that you supported Clarance Thomas. Are you as stupid in real life as you are on ET?
Yeah, clearly she has no credentials to speak of: http://www.answers.com/topic/elena-kagan As an aside, were you equally concerned regarding Rehnquist? And, if so, did you voice your displeasure?