Who is Elena Kagan

[cj's dad]

and why did BHO nominate her to the Supreme Court ??

Her resume' includes:

1) - Zero private practice experience
2) - Zero judicial experience
3) - Unknown views on sensative issues

With all the eminently qualified persons available for this position, why is BHO nominating someone with such a thin resume and who so little is known about?

Oh wait, I get it, she's just like him !!!

[Robert Goren]

If she is compared to Roberts, she is a star. JMO

[jballscalls]

and why did BHO nominate her to the Supreme Court ??

Her resume' includes:

1) - Zero private practice experience
2) - Zero judicial experience
3) - Unknown views on sensative issues

With all the eminently qualified persons available for this position, why is BHO nominating someone with such a thin resume and who so little is known about?

Oh wait, I get it, she's just like him !!!

1) she worked private practice for two years, with a firm called Williams and Connelly

2) neither did Rehnquist or Earl Warren, both eventual Chief Justices, had no judicial experience before becoming justices. Findlaw.com says 40 of the 111 supreme court justices had no judicial experience before becoming justices.

3) to be determined :)

[GameTheory]

She's actually quite qualified, and be all accounts pretty sharp. She's probably a radical liberal, but Obama is only going to nominate people like that anyway so whaddya gonna do? Her record is obscured, at least at the moment, and I'm sure that's no accident. They should demand to see every last piece of paper from her White House years, just as the other side did with Roberts (and which was produced).

[ArlJim78]

She was chosen because she is a soulmate of Obama, loves Obama, worships Obama, and believes that the court is there to provide social justice. But the real reason she was nominated in my view is because of the Citizens United case that she argued and lost in front of the supreme court. In fact she was unprepared and made to look foolish by the more knowledgeable and experienced court. I think, knowing how thin skinned and petulant and vindicative Obama is, elevating Kagan to the Supreme court is his way of giving the finger Roberts. Remember how he took a cheap shot at them at the Stat of the union address.

there are many many more qualified people. she doesn't hold a candle to people like Roberts, Scalia, Alito, etc.

[ArlJim78]

1) she worked private practice for two years, with a firm called Williams and Connelly

2) neither did Rehnquist or Earl Warren, both eventual Chief Justices, had no judicial experience before becoming justices. Findlaw.com says 40 of the 111 supreme court justices had no judicial experience before becoming justices.

3) to be determined :)
yes but no one has had both so little judicial experience and such little law experience. she has done very very little, just like her soulmate Obama.

[DRIVEWAY]

yes but no one has had both so little judicial experience and such little law experience. she has done very very little, just like her soulmate Obama.

What about Bush's soulmate? Harriet Meirs was dissed by his own party.

[lamboguy]

i think they try to pick judges that no one knows anything about now. it really doesn't make one bit of difference these days in the larger scope of things. i don't think this judge is any better or worse than any of the others that are sitting on that bench like sutter and kennedy. they are all the same they are like heads and tails, it really doesn't matter any more.

[cj's dad]

1) she worked private practice for two years, with a firm called Williams and Connelly

2) neither did Rehnquist or Earl Warren, both eventual Chief Justices, had no judicial experience before becoming justices. Findlaw.com says 40 of the 111 supreme court justices had no judicial experience before becoming justices.

3) to be determined :)

As an associate !! There is no evidence that she ever tried a case.

[boxcar]

i think they try to pick judges that no one knows anything about now. it really doesn't make one bit of difference these days in the larger scope of things. i don't think this judge is any better or worse than any of the others that are sitting on that bench like sutter and kennedy. they are all the same they are like heads and tails, it really doesn't matter any more.

Unelected lifetime appointments make no difference anymore? I cannot believe you said that. :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: Suggestion: Read up on historic cases and see how they have changed this society. The SC justices comprise the most powerful branch of government in this nation because they have the final say on matters of law. The radical right with their "empathy-based" and "social justice-based" ideas of justice can literally change the direction of this country on a dime. They can legislate from the bench. They have no regard for the U.S. Constitution. They have no regard for their role as strict interpreters of law. Instead, they believe they have legislative powers just like Congress does! And this is what makes this body so dangerous. They legislate from the bench, making something law of the land with a stroke of the pen, without regard for the input, approval or disapproval of the people or from any other branch of the government. A radical majority on the court can actually assume a collective role of a monarch for all practical intent and purposes!

These lifetime appointments to the court is one of the main weaknesses to the Constitution.

Boxcar

[Greyfox]

Oh wait, I get it, she's just like him !!!

Exactly. You got it. She's just like him.

The "Age of Experience" is over.
The President had no experience whatsoever that would qualify him to lead the most powerful nation on earth. He never managed anything in his life.
He never met a pay cheque in his life. He never made any business decisions. Who needs experience?
Maybe he'll nominate me for the Supreme Court if another position comes open. I have no experience in that side of the law either.

[Robert Goren]

She was chosen because she is a soulmate of Obama, loves Obama, worships Obama, and believes that the court is there to provide social justice. But the real reason she was nominated in my view is because of the Citizens United case that she argued and lost in front of the supreme court. In fact she was unprepared and made to look foolish by the more knowledgeable and experienced court. I think, knowing how thin skinned and petulant and vindicative Obama is, elevating Kagan to the Supreme court is his way of giving the finger Roberts. Remember how he took a cheap shot at them at the Stat of the union address.

there are many many more qualified people. she doesn't hold a candle to people like Roberts, Scalia, Alito, etc. So you agree with Roberts that that corporations have the same constitutional rights as human Americans. That has got to be worst ruling in the history of the surpreme court. Even most of the conservatives on this board said so when the Roberts court made it last fall. JMO

[hazzardm]

The SC justices comprise the most powerful branch of government in this nation because they have the final say on matters of law. The radical right with their "empathy-based" and "social justice-based" ideas of justice can literally change the direction of this country on a dime. They can legislate from the bench. They have no regard for the U.S. Constitution. They have no regard for their role as strict interpreters of law. Instead, they believe they have legislative powers just like Congress does! And this is what makes this body so dangerous. They legislate from the bench, making something law of the land with a stroke of the pen, without regard for the input, approval or disapproval of the people or from any other branch of the government. A radical majority on the court can actually assume a collective role of a monarch for all practical intent and purposes!

:ThmbUp:

[jballscalls]

As an associate !! There is no evidence that she ever tried a case.

you said she had zero experience in private practice, i simply posted that she worked for a private law firm. pretty sure most lawyers start out as associates in private practice rather than moving right into partner, granted i dropped out after 1 year of law school

[DJofSD]

If you listen to Savage, you already know she's a Red Doper Diaper baby (or whatever that expression is that he's used).

[cj's dad]

The radical right with their "empathy-based" and "social justice-based" ideas of justice can literally change the direction of this country on a dime. They can legislate from the bench.

Quoting you in post #10

Didn't you mean to say "left" ??

[DJofSD]

The MSM is not going to tell you what you need to know about this nominee. It's the job of the MSM to promote this regime's agenda, not to inform or question authority. Besides, do you really think they'll be critical of one of their own? The MSM are enablers, act accordingly.

If you listen to the usual radical talk radio crowd, you already know she's a huge mistake -- at least that's my opinion.

[boxcar]

The radical right with their "empathy-based" and "social justice-based" ideas of justice can literally change the direction of this country on a dime. They can legislate from the bench.

Quoting you in post #10

Didn't you mean to say "left" ??

I did. :blush: :blush: This is what happens before I finish even a half of cup of coffee. :D

Boxcar

[cj's dad]

From the Orklando Sentinel

"Elena Kagan: Gay and Lesbian groups upset about Wall Street Journal softball photo of Elena Kagan (http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/sports-sentinel-sports-now/2010/05/12/elena-kagan-gay-and-lesbian-groups-upset-about-wall-street-journal-photo-of-elena-kagan/)"

From the Wall Street Journal:

snip>
The Wall Street Journal has come under heavy criticism (http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0510/Softball_question.html?showall)from gay and lesbian organizations after it published a 17-year-old photo of Supreme Court nominee Elena Kagan competing in a softball game under a front-page headline, “Court nominee comes to the plate.”

“It clearly is an allusion to her being gay. It’s just too easy a punch line,” Cathy Renna, a former spokesperson for the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, said in a statement. “The question from a journalistic perspective is whether it’s a descriptive representation of who she might be as a judge. Have you ever seen a picture of Clarence Thomas bowling?”

WSJ denies any gay undertones in its selection of the photo and headline while White House officials have denied that Elena Kagan is gay. <snip

Since when is playing softball by a woman an indication she is gay ??

Damn, I never knew my married sister was gay; and wait until her son finds out !!

[hazzardm]

I did. :blush: :blush: This is what happens before I finish even a half of cup of coffee. :D

Boxcar

Now I have to remove my thumbs up :lol:
Same major issue with rightie or leftie. IMHO, It is truly a shame CJ Roberts will not be around for many years to come.

[Robert Goren]

I did. :blush: :blush: This is what happens before I finish even a half of cup of coffee. :D

Boxcar You should drink less coffee.;)

[lamboguy]

Unelected lifetime appointments make no difference anymore? I cannot believe you said that. :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: :bang: Suggestion: Read up on historic cases and see how they have changed this society. The SC justices comprise the most powerful branch of government in this nation because they have the final say on matters of law. The radical right with their "empathy-based" and "social justice-based" ideas of justice can literally change the direction of this country on a dime. They can legislate from the bench. They have no regard for the U.S. Constitution. They have no regard for their role as strict interpreters of law. Instead, they believe they have legislative powers just like Congress does! And this is what makes this body so dangerous. They legislate from the bench, making something law of the land with a stroke of the pen, without regard for the input, approval or disapproval of the people or from any other branch of the government. A radical majority on the court can actually assume a collective role of a monarch for all practical intent and purposes! you ought to rewrite the constitution then

These lifetime appointments to the court is one of the main weaknesses to the Constitution.

Boxcaryou should rewrite the constitution then

[johnhannibalsmith]

...“It clearly is an allusion to her being gay. It’s just too easy a punch line,” Cathy Renna, a former spokesperson for the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, said in a statement.

...while White House officials have denied that Elena Kagan is gay. <snip


The GLAAD (former) spokeshuman uses the phrase "her being gay" in such a way that it arguably reads as though it is certainty, yet the everyone, including the White House denies that she is gay.

And the WSJ is irresponsible for using a photo of her playing softball?!??!?!

Really?

[GameTheory]

“It clearly is an allusion to her being gay. It’s just too easy a punch line,” Cathy Renna, a former spokesperson for the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation, said in a statement. I guess I don't get it either -- is "comes to the plate" a lesbian reference somehow? And why is the "former" spokesperson for GLAAD giving the statement?

Many years ago I was a courier in Los Angeles, and our company would do messenger work for GLAAD. They literally just sit around their little office pouring over stuff in the media looking for things to be offended by (and they get tips from people as well). That is their job, and if they don't find things to issue statements about, their funding will dry up and go to someone else more strident. So they tend to stretch any statement at all by any rightie as some sort of anti-gay comment. Is Al Rantell still on the radio in LA? He's a gay conservative talk-show host. His very existence drove them nuts.

[Greyfox]

You be the Judge....No I mean she'll be the Judge..

http://blogs.orlandosentinel.com/sports-sentinel-sports-now/files/2010/05/kaganwsj.jpg.

[johnhannibalsmith]

With any luck, the WSJ spokeshuman will issue a statement declaring that "...we intended to use a photo of her in a courtroom setting, but couldn't find any..."

[boxcar]

You should drink less coffee.;)

No, a thousand times! The more I have, the better I get. :D

Boxcar

[DJofSD]

No, a thousand times! The more I have, the better I get. :D

Boxcar
Switch to Jolt or Monster! You'll have to don a Superman suit after that!

[46zilzal]

If she is compared to Roberts, she is a star. JMO
hell compared to the old Bushie friend Harriet Myers, the same can be applied

[Robert Goren]

There is only one part of the Constitution that the right wing agrees with. That is the second amendment. Everything else is legislating from the bench. ;)

[boxcar]

Switch to Jolt or Monster! You'll have to don a Superman suit after that!

That's okay. I like to wake up gradually. :D You know...kinda ease into wake up mode.

Boxcar

[ddog]

not enough java.................... :D




in the world! :lol:



pagin Juan Valdez. :eek:

[46zilzal]

not enough java.................... :D




in the world! :lol:
methylated xanthines you mean

[johnhannibalsmith]

methylated xanthines you mean

By the way, Joe's Methylated Xanthine Shop off of 43rd really makes a good blend of Bolivian Methylated Xanthine. If I can't get enough Methylated Xanthines from my four cups of Methylated Xanthines out of the Methylated Xanthine maker, I generally enjoy my Methylated Xanthines from one of several Pepsi Methylated Xanthine products.

You know what I mean?

[DJofSD]

methylated xanthines you mean

OK, zz, what does the R1, R2 and R3 represent in the molecule? I don't remember any high school chemistry.


Selected Xanthines
Name R1 R2 R3 IUPAC nomenclature Found In
Caffeine CH3 CH3 CH3 1,3,7-trimethyl-1H-purine-2,6(3H,7H)-dione Coffee, Guarana, Yerba mate, Tea, Kola
Theobromine H CH3 CH3 3,7-dihydro-3,7-dimethyl-1H-purine-2,6-dione Chocolate, Yerba mate
Theophylline CH3 CH3 H 1,3-dimethyl-7H-purine-2,6-dione Tea
Xanthine H H H 3,7-dihydro-purine-2,6-dione plants, animals

[JustRalph]

she was nominated because she will be a mirror image of Obama

and her obvious connection to the Netherlands

[sandpit]

These lifetime appointments to the court is one of the main weaknesses to the Constitution.

Boxcar

Right up there with the lack of term limits for the House and Senate.

[newtothegame]

OK, zz, what does the R1, R2 and R3 represent in the molecule? I don't remember any high school chemistry.

:lol: And I hope you arent holding your breath waiting on that response lol

[PaceAdvantage]

So you agree with Roberts that that corporations have the same constitutional rights as human Americans.Yours is but one interpretation...

[ArlJim78]

the question isn't whether corporations have the same rights as human beings. unless there is some new development that I'm not aware of, corporations are still using humans to voice their opinions correct? therefore the question is why should government prohibit the free speech rights of humans whose ads happen to be paid for by certain corporations and not others? if corporate speech is bad and we must not allow it then I want to see all major media shut down, because of the corporate sponsorship of political opinions that you find everywhere.

[sandpit]

The conflict that I see is that corporations cannot vote. So, while corps giving money to candidates isn't vote-buying per se, it's basically bribery for future favors. Obama was low-brow calling out the SC in his State of the Union, but the Court didn't do anything to increase the voice of the people with their decision.

[cj's dad]

going to such lengths to deny that she is gay if in fact she is ?!?

I would think an approprite response would be to state that "being gay or straight is a personal choice best decided by the individual" !

I mean if she's gay, so what ? "not there's anything wrong with that"

How politically incorrect !

Shame ! Shame !

Proof:

From the Washington Post:



A White House official told Kurtz that Kagan is not a lesbian. That won’t matter, of course; the whisper campaign from the right is likely to continue. But the White House has now signaled that they’re prepared to go to war against it.



From AOL News:



Domenech's supposed "outing" of Kagan drew harsh criticism from the White House, which stridently denied she was gay.



From Media Matters for America :



As yesterday's speculation about whether Elena Kagan is gay reached a fever pitch, it was striking how little interest those who were most enthusiastically pushing the story seemed to have in the fact that the White House has already answered the question.

Last month, conservative blogger/plagiarist Ben Domenech wrote in a column that appeared on CBSNews.com (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2FCBSNews.com%2F) that Kagan is gay. In response, the White House indicated that she is not. As the Huffington Post's Sam Stein reported (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.huffingtonpost.com%2F2010%2 F04%2F16%2Fgay-rights-groups-slam-wh_n_540276.html) "The White House reacted strongly to the assertion, relaying that Kagan is, in fact, straight." The Washington Post's Howard Kurtz added (http://mediamatters.org/rd?to=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.washingtonpost.com%2Fwp-dyn%2Fcontent%2Farticle%2F2010%2F04%2F15%2FAR20100 41505658.html%3Fhpid%3Dtopnews):

An administration official, who asked not to be identified discussing personal matters, said Kagan is not a lesbian....A White House spokesman, Ben LaBolt, said he complained to CBS because the column "made false charges."

[johnhannibalsmith]

The conflict that I see is that corporations cannot vote...

Exactly. Why vote when you subsidize the campaign and script the policy?

[johnhannibalsmith]

going to such lengths to deny that she is gay if in fact she is ?!?

I would think an approprite response would be to state that "being gay or straight is a personal choice best decided by the individual" !


I've gotta say... no shit... what is the deal with the administration's response to all of this?

Why isn't GLAAD totally distraught by this forward thinking White House adamantly speaking in denials?

They can't just announce that... "we don't give a crap if she's a lesbian, we don't intend upon hooking her to a polygraph and asking her, and even if she is a lesbian, it sure as hell isn't as though we plan on sending her packing - so stop asking us about something that we consider irrelevant." ... ?

[ArlJim78]

The conflict that I see is that corporations cannot vote. So, while corps giving money to candidates isn't vote-buying per se, it's basically bribery for future favors. Obama was low-brow calling out the SC in his State of the Union, but the Court didn't do anything to increase the voice of the people with their decision.
the ruling doesn't change what corporations can give directly to candidates. it merely allows them to publish a book, pamphlet, documentary, commercial, etc.

This decision most definitely increases the potential for peoples voices to be heard.

Why should wealthy individuals like George Soros have a platform to influence elections with his opinions expressed in various ways, while certain businesses cannot do the same?

[Tom]

How can the administration make a statement about one's sexuality?
Either way, how can THEY say? They might THINK they know, but anyone who makes a statement like that is not very credibly.

Campaign contributions:

>citizens only
>max 1,000 per year, for ALL contributions
> SS # required and a database of all contributions kept so that money spent can be traced back to the dollar.

[46zilzal]

This person's sexual orientation is as relevant to her prospective job as being having attached or free ear lobes

[DJofSD]

This person's sexual orientation is as relevant to her prospective job as being having attached or free ear lobes
Oh. So, IOW, we don't need to have special considerations as a protected class for sexual orientation any more.

[cj's dad]

This person's sexual orientation is as relevant to her prospective job as being having attached or free ear lobes

Exactly, so why are White House spokespersons going to such great lengths to deny or affirm her sexual preference ??

looks like BO and the gang stepped in it again; "not theres anything wrong with that".

[DJofSD]

Exactly, so why are White House spokespersons going to such great lengths to deny or affirm her sexual preference ??

looks like BO and the gang stepped in it again; "not theres anything wrong with that".
Ya. Reminds me of a line from a Shakespeare play.

[hazzardm]

BO says additiional scrutiny is needed .....

http://www.breitbart.tv/obama-flashback-a-supreme-court-nominee-with-no-judicial-experience-requires-extreme-scrutiny/

[Greyfox]

Exactly, so why are White House spokespersons going to such great lengths to deny or affirm her sexual preference ??

".

Why?? Because she thought that Butch Cassidy was Hopalong's daughter??

[bigmack]

She banned military recruiters from Harvard because she disagreed with the military's "don't ask, don't tell" policy on gay soldiers.

That's weird. They recruit many outta Harvard over the years?

Why is BO & Co blocking access to the nominee’s family - A Nutty Aunt somewhere? :rolleyes:

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u70/macktime/images-1.jpg

[GaryG]

From Zimbio:

However, it's suprsingly difficult to find information about Kagan's personal life. According to one (very, very sketchy) Internet Message Board, Kagan is "with a female former partner of another leading legal academic."

Meanwhile commentators over at Daily Kos seem torn on the matter. If Kagan is a lesbian, she's never openly talked about it, though an Epinions Harvard law review does name her as a lesbian.

[PaceAdvantage]

Some of you may find this surprising, I don't give a rats ass whether she is a lesbian or not.

What I do give a rats ass about is her qualifications for a lifetime seat on the highest court in the land.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/05/flashback_obama_said_harriet_m.html

[sandpit]

the ruling doesn't change what corporations can give directly to candidates. it merely allows them to publish a book, pamphlet, documentary, commercial, etc.

This decision most definitely increases the potential for peoples voices to be heard.

Why should wealthy individuals like George Soros have a platform to influence elections with his opinions expressed in various ways, while certain businesses cannot do the same?

I see your point, it clarifies things for me from a legal perspective.

To answer your question, I don't see why corporations or any type of business should be promoting any candidate. It's fine to me if Bill Gates personally, for example, wants to donate tons of money to a campaign, but I don't think Microsoft should be doing it. When a company donates campaign money, there is often internal pressure to get their employees to vote for whomever they back; that's wrong (I speak from experience).

I guess anybody that gets on the radio, tv, etc. fits the agenda of the company that hires them, so in a way they are corporates shills too???

[Tom]

She is a pro-communist and a stepping stone to limiting free speech. Her history screams this.

[fast4522]

I agree with you Tom, and also think Charles Ellis "Chuck" Schumer will be her strongest supporter of her during conformation. To say that she is unqualified is a stretch, to say people will finally wake the hell up might also be one.

[boxcar]

The conflict that I see is that corporations cannot vote. So, while corps giving money to candidates isn't vote-buying per se, it's basically bribery for future favors. Obama was low-brow calling out the SC in his State of the Union, but the Court didn't do anything to increase the voice of the people with their decision.

No, but the court leveled the playing field, putting corporations on the same level as Big Labor. And that's fair and balanced.

Boxcar

[Lefty]

What worries me, is that she thinks the govt should control speech.
And when she kicked the miltary recruiters and the R.O.T.C. Off Harvards Campus she broke the law. Don't ask don't tell was her boss' Clinton's baby, anyway. Harvard takes taxpayer money, she had no right to kick the military off campus.
She is not qualified to be a judge of any sort, let alone a Supreme Court Judge.
Oh, my!

[Tom]

She is not qualified to be an American.

[DJofSD]

Some of you may find this surprising, I don't give a rats ass whether she is a lesbian or not.

What I do give a rats ass about is her qualifications for a lifetime seat on the highest court in the land.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/plum-line/2010/05/flashback_obama_said_harriet_m.html

...since her experience does not include serving as a judge, we have yet to know her views on many of the critical constitutional issues facing our country today.

Or, IOW, right back at you!

[ArlJim78]

one thing we do know about her, she has nothing short of a school girl crush (http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2010/05/video_elena_kag.php)on Obama. so it should be clear to anyone why she was appointed, even though she has no judicial experience and little trial experience, and is likely to be sitting on a court deciding the consitutionality of Obamacare. In 2005 while he was still only a state senator, she viewed him as one of the great political figures of our time.:rolleyes:

[DJofSD]

one thing we do know about her, she has nothing short of a school girl crush (http://www.hyscience.com/archives/2010/05/video_elena_kag.php)on Obama. so it should be clear to anyone why she was appointed, even though she has no judicial experience and little trial experience, and is likely to be sitting on a court deciding the consitutionality of Obamacare. In 2005 while he was still only a state senator, she viewed him as one of the great political figures of our time.:rolleyes:
Makes you think the dispassionate application of logic and understanding of the law would go missing if she were a justice. Too much heart, not enough head.

[jballscalls]

She is not qualified to be an American.

Born in New York City, went to school, got jobs, payed taxes, lives what seems to be a very solid life here in our country with family and friends,

your right, how unamerican of her :bang::bang:

[DJofSD]

Ya, if maybe she was a welfare mom, divorced, dependent upon the government for subsistence, she be more qualified, you know, more like the unwashed masses.

[Tom]

Born in New York City, went to school, got jobs, payed taxes, lives what seems to be a very solid life here in our country with family and friends,

your right, how unamerican of her :bang::bang:



....wants to control free speech and limit liberties of others. Yes, she's as American as Chairman Mao. and as welcome here. This is the kind of person we need to purge, not appoint.

[Lefty]

So, JB, DJ, the fact that she thinks free speech should be controlled by the govt doesn't bother you? The fact that she disregarded the law when she was at Harvard, doesn't bother you?
Hmmmmm....

[DJofSD]

It bothers the hell out of me.

Most think free speech means they can say whatever they want, whenever they want. It borders on license.

At the same time, they forgot their U. S. History. Protected speech first and foremost was meant to address political speech and criticism of the government and those in government. The nominee wants to change that.

[johnhannibalsmith]

... The nominee wants to change that.

Right up until the other party runs the show.

[Tom]

Saul Alynski...these are his students.
The enemy of America has never been more clear.

[jballscalls]

So, JB, DJ, the fact that she thinks free speech should be controlled by the govt doesn't bother you? The fact that she disregarded the law when she was at Harvard, doesn't bother you?
Hmmmmm....

sure that bothers me. did i somehow indicate that it didnt?? what bothered me more was Tom's comment that she's not qualified to be an American, because she clearly is

[Tom]

Legally only.
One thing America doesn't need is garbage like this POS.

[DJofSD]

what bothered me more was Tom's comment that she's not qualified to be an American, because she clearly is

That reminds me of a line from "Pulp Fiction": "Just because you are a character doesn't mean you have character."

[skate]

What about Bush's soulmate? Harriet Meirs was dissed by his own party.


And she was Dissed by "theBO "herself".

That was "her" (BOs) opinion on Meirs nomination, exactely. BO claims that Meirs had No experience.

BO is a fake and a pickpocket.:)

Meirs was withdrawn:kiss:

[fast4522]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FnkdfFAqsHA
Keep this thread alive, the real reason JFK ended up on the slab.

[skate]

Born in New York City, went to school, got jobs, payed taxes, lives what seems to be a very solid life here in our country with family and friends,

your right, how unamerican of her :bang::bang:


Ah, let me guess...ah... Alphonse Gabriel Capone, ya dats him


http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d0/AlCaponemugshotCPD.jpg/220px-AlCaponemugshotCPD.jpg (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:AlCaponemugshotCPD.jpg)
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/32/Al_Capone_Signature.svg/150px-Al_Capone_Signature.svg.png (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Al_Capone_Signature.svg)
Official mugshotBornJanuary 17, 1899(1899-01-17)
Brooklyn (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brooklyn,_New_York), New York, United States (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States)DiedCharge(s) (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indictment)Tax evasion...maybe, maybe not.Penalty10 year sentence in Alcatraz (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alcatraz)StatusDeceasedOccupation lawyer SpouseMae Capone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mae_Capone)
(1897–1986)ChildrenAlbert Francis Capone (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Albert_Francis_Capone)
Alphonse Gabriel "Al" Capone (January 17, 1899 – January 25, 1947) was an American (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States)

OH oh oh , yes sir, i want to see Elena Tax report...NOW.