Comments

  1. TANK says

    republicants truly are the party of no. No to anything…but no to progress…and definitely no to america.

    Ben Nelson’s really not a democrat. Just a useless DINO…who should be considered just as much of an enemy as the republicans.

  2. says

    @Aaron A: For the time being, yes. But one can never be too sure once time has passed. Remember it’s gonna take a few years for the gay marriage issue to be brought to the Supreme Court. It has to go through the appelate court first. And then the Supreme Court has the option of whether or not they will hear the case. Let’s hope that if they do hear the case, Kagan will still be in our corner.

  3. DR says

    Gotta say I oppose. Limited real-world legal experience, too much academic and government entrenchment. Not liking that at all. Like Brown said, “The best umpires, to use the popular analogy, must not only call balls and strikes, but also have spent enough time on the playing field to know the strike zone,” and she’s lost more cases than she’s won in the high courts has has been chastised by Kennedy for her utter lack of respect for the Court during oral argument. Not happy with this pick.

  4. Steve says

    I (for one) appreciate a liberal elitist on the bench – at least she has an education, which is far more than can be said for all the right-wing-nuts against her.

  5. Brian in Texas says

    If she is gay, which we don’t know for sure, I wouldn’t mind if she withheld that to further her legal career. Especially to get on the Supreme Court. It’s the world we live in. She wouldn’t have been confirmed or even selected by Obama because of the contentious nature of LGBT issues in this country. I’m confident she will be a great liberal justice.

  6. says

    My real disappointment is that she’s no liberal lion that we need to have someone can argue with the same kind of intellectual capacity as the conservative “lions” on the right in the court. She certainly has the intelligence and is a like-able person, but she’s no liberal lion. This after another centrist pick in Sotomayor. Every Republican pick pushes this court to the right — if we don’t push the damn thing to the left when we have the shot, do we have much right to complain about things like Citizen United?

    Well, “we” do, the President and national party doesn’t. /sigh.

    Why does Obama have to be such freaking milk toast? It’s going to cost us a lot of seats this coming election. People don’t want milk toast, they want real leadership and action. Obama needs to stop fearing pushing “liberal” things.

  7. epic says

    but the argument is not really about same sex marriage.. really its about states making laws that create a system of discrimination according to the constitution…and that can’t be allowed… in California the state declared it legal for same sex couples to marry…then the voters passed a law that not only took away a right they had been granted they created an inequality, thus being against the constitution…i know its an argument of semantics but this is how it works…once states starting creating these inequalities they opened themselves up to a “rational bias” assessment…i know its all very silly but the american legal system can be very silly…i can’t identify any other country in the world that defines their judges in there tops courts by their political bias/leanings its simply absurd, this jockeying ever time there is a new appointment to SCOTUS is well juvenile and very unsavory to those of us that believe in justice being blind

Leave A Reply