Mrs. Clinton - Supreme Court?

Moderator: Super Moderators

User avatar
SquidInk
________________
Posts: 5865
Joined: 03-15-2007 03:48 PM

Post by SquidInk » 04-21-2010 10:20 AM

We scream incessantly about "democracy" (where appointment is based solely on popularity), and we back up our rhetoric with our guns & bombs around the world.

But what all of you are advocating for here is meritocracy - that is very different from what this nation claims to be.

Sounds wonderful. It also sounds like justification for a tyranny of the "educated", or those worthy of "merit". It's proof of a naturally gifted aristocracy that all of you believe exists, a convenient way to identify the elite class of born leaders to which we all owe our allegiance - right? Of course, that notion is fundamental to the conservative mind (& social dominance theory).

Who has determined the criteria of merit in your world?
Last edited by SquidInk on 04-21-2010 10:30 AM, edited 1 time in total.
For if it profit, none dare call it Treason.

User avatar
Corvid
Anchors Aweigh
Posts: 5678
Joined: 12-31-2002 03:00 AM

Post by Corvid » 04-21-2010 11:00 AM

I see what you mean, SquidInk.

If it came to a choice between, let's say, Will Rogers or John Bolton for Ambassador to the UN.... who would better serve?

BTW Welcome back rumike!

User avatar
SquidInk
________________
Posts: 5865
Joined: 03-15-2007 03:48 PM

Post by SquidInk » 04-21-2010 02:11 PM

Interesting question, Corvid...

If it were put to a direct vote by the people, who would gain more votes?

The fact is, if we want to continue our democracy, we need to accept the possibility that Oprah might be appointed - she's popular, and Bolton might be rejected again. Or, vise-versa. Personally, I think that an Oprah appointment would be outrageous, just as I thought the idea of Arnold S. as governor of California was an outrage (and without merit).

We have the means within our system to change all of that, and to ensure that only people of a certain ilk are placed on the court, or in the operating room. It would require amendments and/or conventions in my estimation.

Until then statements like...
No non-Attorney will be confirmed to the Supreme Court of the United States EVER again!


...are nothing but absurdities, uttered by contemptuous class supremacists. :D
Last edited by SquidInk on 04-21-2010 04:24 PM, edited 1 time in total.
For if it profit, none dare call it Treason.

User avatar
lazarus long
Pirate
Posts: 621
Joined: 03-16-2008 10:51 PM

Post by lazarus long » 04-21-2010 05:39 PM

my good friend squid! it's so nice to share a forum with you again! your points are right on, as always, and irrefutable. that's why they're often danced around or outright ignored. DON'T GIVE UP THE FIGHT!

User avatar
SquidInk
________________
Posts: 5865
Joined: 03-15-2007 03:48 PM

Post by SquidInk » 04-21-2010 10:15 PM

lazarus long wrote: my good friend squid! it's so nice to share a forum with you again! your points are right on, as always, and irrefutable. that's why they're often danced around or outright ignored. DON'T GIVE UP THE FIGHT!


Hello, lazarus long - and thank you for your kind words!

By the way, I'm way too stupid to give up...
Last edited by SquidInk on 04-21-2010 10:18 PM, edited 1 time in total.
For if it profit, none dare call it Treason.

User avatar
racehorse
Pirate
Posts: 14976
Joined: 01-04-2003 03:00 AM
Location: Commonwealth of Kentucky

Post by racehorse » 05-07-2010 11:06 AM



May 07, 2010

Signs Point to Kagan for Supreme Court

Mike Allen: "Look for President Obama to name his Supreme Court pick Monday, and look for it to be Solicitor General Elena Kagan, a former Harvard Law dean. The pick isn't official, but top White House aides will be shocked if it's otherwise. Kagan's relative youth (50) is a huge asset for the lifetime post. And President Obama considers her to be a persuasive, fearless advocate who would serve as an intellectual counterweight to Chief Justice Roberts and Justice Scalia, and could lure swing Justice Kennedy into some coalitions The West Wing may leak the pick to AP's Ben Feller on the later side Sunday, then confirm it for others for morning editions."

Another sign: Salon reports the White House is circulating pro-Kagan talking points.
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/ ... court.html
racehorse
Image

User avatar
racehorse
Pirate
Posts: 14976
Joined: 01-04-2003 03:00 AM
Location: Commonwealth of Kentucky

Post by racehorse » 05-10-2010 10:49 AM


May 10, 2010

Kagan Vote Likely Before July Recess

Roll Call says the timing of the announcement of Elena Kagan to fill the Supreme Court vacancy means she "will be confirmed before the Senate adjourns for the July Fourth recess in about seven weeks."

Kagan "is expected to begin meetings with Senators as soon as this week. Kagan won bipartisan support for her confirmation as solicitor general last year; Senators voted 61-31 in favor... Still, GOP Senators aren't expected to let Kagan walk onto the bench uncontested. GOP Senators plan to use the confirmation debate to wage a broader political war against Obama over the future of the judiciary."
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/ ... ecess.html
racehorse
Image

User avatar
racehorse
Pirate
Posts: 14976
Joined: 01-04-2003 03:00 AM
Location: Commonwealth of Kentucky

Post by racehorse » 05-10-2010 10:55 AM


May 10, 2010

Even Friends Not Sure of Kagan's Views

Jeffrey Toobin writes that he's been friends with Elena Kagan since they met on the first day of law school in 1983. Nontheless, he is "somewhat at a loss" when it comes to understanding how she'll be as a Supreme Court justice.

"Clearly, she's a Democrat. She was a highly regarded member of the White House staff during the Clinton years, but her own views were and are something of a mystery. She has written relatively little, and nothing of great consequence... But on the Court, Kagan will have to do something she's not done before. Show her hand. Develop a clear ideology. Make tough votes. I have little doubt she's up to the job, but am less clear on how she'll do it."
http://politicalwire.com/archives/2010/ ... views.html
racehorse
Image

User avatar
Psychicwolf
Pirate
Posts: 5999
Joined: 12-31-2006 12:47 AM

Post by Psychicwolf » 05-10-2010 12:05 PM

There is some info on her positions.
The Michigan vs Jackson ruling in 1986 established that, if a defendants have a lawyer or have asked for one to be present, police may not interview them until the lawyer is present.

Any such questioning cannot be used in court even if the suspect agrees to waive his right to a lawyer because he would have made that decision without legal counsel, said the Supreme Court.

The Justice Department, in a brief signed by Elena Kagan, the solicitor general, said the 1986 decision "serves no real purpose" and offers only "meagre benefits".


http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldne ... g-law.html
During her '09 confirmation hearing, the New York Times notes that there was no daylight between her and GOP Sen. Lindsey Graham. "Graham … led her through a six-minute colloquy about the president's broad authority to detain enemy combatants. "Do you believe we're at war?" Graham asked. "I do, senator," Kagan replied. (New York Times 5/17/09)

http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/ ... 98210.aspx

And some interesting blood ties to some arch neo-cons and, what else, teabaggers.:D
http://docudharma.com/diary/21063/morni ... e-supremes
Dance to heal the earth. Not just when you're dancing, but always. Live the dance, whenever you move, in all you do, dance to heal the earth.

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 05-10-2010 12:18 PM

Hmm...a career academic with almost no relevant job experience...who does that remind you of?

cherry
Pirate
Posts: 5704
Joined: 05-28-2004 05:15 PM

Post by cherry » 05-10-2010 03:38 PM

Obama can choose whomever he wishes. He's President.

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 05-10-2010 03:57 PM

Is that kinda like The Decider?

HB3
Moderator
Posts: 11919
Joined: 11-02-2000 03:00 AM

Post by HB3 » 05-10-2010 04:11 PM


cherry
Pirate
Posts: 5704
Joined: 05-28-2004 05:15 PM

Post by cherry » 05-10-2010 04:24 PM

Obama's a constitutional lawyer. I trust him.

Post Reply

Return to “Politics and Government 2010-2013”