Elena Kagan, the 112th Supreme Court Justice

by Ryan on August 6, 2010

in Election 2010,Health Care,Judicial Watch,Law,Politics

The Senate voted last evening to confirm Elena Kagan 63-37 as John Paul Stevens’ replacement on the Supreme Court.  She will be sworn in tomorrow and will preside with the others on October 1.

In the end, five Republicans voted for her and one Democrat voted against her (Ben Nelson, who’s on clean up duty with his constituents after the Cornhusker Kickback).  To put this in perspective, the ridiculously more qualified Samuel Alito received confirmation with a 58-42 vote.

The five Republicans who were willingly duped by this process were:  Susan Collins and Olympia Snowe (duh), along with Richard Dick Lugar, Judd Gregg, and of course Lindsey Grahamnesty (will someone please primary him!).  They hid under the qualifications/empty “pledges” banner, which is really weak without a realistic threat of impeachment.  But, what’s done is done, and these five boobs gave the President the satisfaction and cover of bipartisan approval of this leftist patsy.

{ 4 comments… read them below or add one }

Linda August 6, 2010 at 12:32 pm

Our President of the United States had a great couple of months;

1. Financial reformed passed, thanks to “Tea Party Approved” Senator Scott Brown (R-MA)
2. AZ SB1070 (written by Neo Nazi lover, Russell Pearce and private prison giant Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) lover, Jan Brewer, both “Tea Party Approved” ) fails in court when legally challenged.
3. CA Prop 8 (financially supported by San Diego businessman Terry Caster, owner of A-1 Self Storage, Company, San Diego businessman Doug Manchester owner Manchester Grand Hyatt Hotel and the Grand del Mar, Church of Latter Day Saint (LDS/ Mormons), Catholic Church, both “Tea Party Approved”) fails in court when legally challenged, the judge appointed by Ronald Reagan.
4. Elena Kagan Confirmed to Supreme Court, (63 to 37, with the help of Susan Collins, Olympia Snowe, Sen. Lindsey Graham, Judd Gregg, and Richard Lugar, could they all be “Tea Party Approved”? I wonder.
5. Another Birther lawsuit (Captain Pamela Barnett, V. Barack Obama) and “Tea Party Approved”, was dismissed.

Happy Birthday Mr. President, even though belated, keep going, you are doing great and I am personally enjoy that the so called “Tea Party” is taking it so well. Love it.


Ryan August 6, 2010 at 1:45 pm

Well Linda, then you would have no anxiety over November 2, since obviously the President’s successes will be so manifest to the electorate that the people will cast away Tea Party dabbling they’ve been doing and vote to keep this productive and competent Democrat Congress to assist the President’s “fundamental transformation” of this country.

If you truly think that this corporatist financial reform is good, that the Arizona law is bad, that the will of the people in California should be overturned by an openly gay activist judge, that Kagan is the best person Obama could have found, and that any true political mind takes the Birther phenomenon seriously, then I kind of get why you think these months have been “good.”


Linda August 9, 2010 at 6:49 pm

Slow down Chicken Little, the sky is no longer falling, thanks to our US President, even though the GOP set us up for failure. So you think you can foretell the future, wow, impressive? Whats next, Nancy Reagan tells you the future after she checks with her witch?

I know the proponents of these two laws say that the majority approves of these laws, but the majority is not always right. Would women or non-whites have the vote if we listen to the majority of the day, would the non-whites have equal rights (and equal access to churches, housing, restaurants, hotels, retail stores, schools, colleges and yes water fountains) if we listen to the majority of the day? We all know the answer, a resounding, NO!

We are a country that is ruled by the Constitution with all Bill of Rights (including the ones the Tea Party want to repeal) and the Declaration of Independence, not by the majority of the day. When you do not know the principles in these documents (like the Tea Party), therein lays the problem in losing when you are challenged in court. Win a case or you will continue to appear either dumb, crazy or racist, or maybe all three.


Ryan August 10, 2010 at 3:53 pm

I may not be an oracle with a smattering of tarot cards borrowed from my old witch pals, but you’re the one seeming very cocky about the Fall, as if you can see things no one else can. You’re posture also sounds very defensive, having to going back to civil rights and segregation and lying about the Tea Party organizations wanting to overturn any of the first 10 Amendments. Not good form.

Also, the Constitution says nothing about the executive branch acting with de facto legislative powers in terms of unconfirmed czars and bureaucratic dictates like those seen often from the EPA for instance — czars and the EPA, two of Obama’s favorites and the brain-children of Richard Nixon I might add. But you’re cool with them I’m sure.

But I get it — I thought the Republicans were going to keep Congress in 2006 based on conjecture and hopes, not statistical trends and my instincts. If you look into this website’s archives, I also “foretold” Obama’s victory too. Was I “dumb, crazy, or racist” then, too? No, I just didn’t allow my preference get in the way of the trends and what my head was telling me.

Anyway, this is all getting very tedious. Once the word “racist” gets thrown out there in an accusatory fashion, the intellectual side of an argument is over. Try a different flavor of Kool-Aid next time.


Leave a Comment

You can use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>

Previous post:

Next post: