Bucket Guild | FUBU BH Forums

Boy, this revelation was a shocker! For those of you don't read, watch the news, live in the US, or don't care, Elena Kagan is the lesbian Barack Obama has nominated to replace retiring justice John Paul Stevens on the US Supreme Court. Conservatives are attacking her sexuality... her camp is saying she likes dick... yadda yadda yadda. I just don't get it. Look at her picture. Gay. But, who cares if she hides the sausage or eats at the Y? Of just a smidge more importance might be that this woman is only 50, and no one knows much of anything about her positions on... well.... ANYTHING. really. And, why is this? Can't we just look at her record of rulings from years on the bench for some clues? Uh, that would be a big NO, because she has no rulings because she's never been a judge. All we really know is that she's liberal (no problem there because she would replace a liberal and I think the Supreme Court needs balance), she's smart (cum laude Princeton, Oxford, Harvard), and a rich kid.

Who cares?, you might ask. I did mention that she's 50. When you consider that most of you are in your 20's, and that this appointment is for life, and that justices generally serve into their 80's, this means that most of you will be nearing retirement age before she steps down. Basically, this under-qualified non-judge will be interpreting laws that all of us in the US live by for pretty much the rest of your lives.

This, my friends, will be Obama's legacy. Health care? Nope. The war on terror? Nope. Immigration? Nope. When these issues are long forgotten, and Obama is just a footnote as the first half-white president of the US, Sotomayor and Kagan will be sitting on the highest court in the land making decisions that affect all of you. Let's just hope he doesn't get to seat any more.

Too heavy for FUBU? I'll put my soapbox away. Maybe I should have saved this for a doojnews.

Boredalt - 80 Dwarf Priest - Dissension

Gay.. or a man with earrings..?

Obama himself is an inexperienced person in a high place.

not surprised he's spreading the love.


EDIT:

Scalia and Rogers were 50 when they were appointed. Not that they've really benefited the bench as they're both hard-line conservatives.

And saying she's untested/had no experience is a load of crock. As Solicitor-General she is the White House's rep to the court, not to mention she's served in both the council's office and clerked for the supreme court. She taught at University of Chicago, and is Dean of Harvard Law. Yah, that's damn unqualified. She's a lawyer, tried and true, and like it or not, so are her peers on the bench now - all have served at some point and time in either a public or private law firm.

You know what? I'm glad he's appointing non-traditional (women/minorities/lesbians) people to the bench. This 50+ christian while male complex America has gets old.

So your main problem with her is lack of experience or that she's a Lesbian?

Didn't John Roberts only have two years of judicial experience before becoming Chief Justice?

The experience issue just seems like the best thing naysayers (Fox News/GOP) could come up with to bash an otherwise intelligent, diverse, and well-rounded candidate.

And if you like the Supreme Court having balance, it seems like adding a dash of Lesbian would be a welcome addition.


Edit to one-up USD:

quoted myself instead of editing my post -_-

Firstly, I've never hear someone call going down on a woman "eating at the Y".

Secondly, I don't care either way as to this borderline butch (not like anyone should care as to who she shares her bed with). Frankly, after the Court decision that made corporations people in the eyes of the law, I stopped respecting that institution. Roberts and Scalia are just making it a neocon cirlcejerk anyways.

PS: I wouldn't really equate anything Obama does with being "liberal", including this judge. He's remarkably moderate (ex. his health care reform is basically what the republicans rolled out during the Clinton administration).

RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]

American liberals are hardly the AMGSOCIALISTS that Fox makes us out to be, especially compared to our European counterparts.

My favorite is how Vermont's Bernie Sanders is a self-claimed socialist and he doesn't get any shit for it, whereas the 1990's moderate republican Obama is the next incarnation of Stalin, Hitler, and Ted Bundy all rolled up into one gigantic ball of fuck.

RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]

I know. And it never ceases to amaze me that people eat it up. Fear is a powerful tool.

edit: jk, everything i said was mentioned above me

█▀█ █ █░█ █░█ █ █░ █▀█ █░█ █▀▀
█▀▄ █ █▀▄ █▀▄ █ █░ █▀█ █▀▄ █▀▀
▀░▀ ▀ ▀░▀ ▀░▀ ▀ ▀▀ ▀░▀ ▀░▀ ▀▀▀
sunshine.kittens.bubblegum.happythoughts

I love this country. It pisses me off when people who live here act like it's something other than the greatest place to live on the planet.

Rather than string some quotes, I'll just say that I clearly said who cares if she's straight or gay? I certainly don't think it matters, and that was my initial point of this... questioning why this would be one of the big arguments against her when there are so many other doubts. It's comical that her supporters have produced a former classmate who is defending Kagan as straight. Honestly, who cares? I also don't question her education which I also cited. However, I can't help but think that even if you exclude all white men because they're white men, that there must be many women and men who can bring more experience to the table than Kagan.

This shit is too important, imo, to pick someone based simply on diversity. It's funny that her supporters are citing her lack of experience as a positive thing, but when Bush nominated Harriet Miers, all hell broke loose from the left for this very reason. Justices are supposed to interpret the law. They don't have to like them. Her banning of the military from Harvard because they were obeying the law pretty much said it all. The point is not whether she agreed with the law, but her retribution against those who were abiding by it.

I certainly hope she gets the confirmation process she championed in 1995. Kagan: “it is an embarrassment” that the president and Senate do not always insist that a nominee’s accomplishments provide evidence of “an ability not merely to handle but to master the ‘craft’ aspects of being a judge.” In the end, none of this means she won't be a great justice, but I think she's been chosen because she's close to Obama, not because she's the most qualified he could find.

BTW... thanks to you all for knocking this around. This is the kind of thing that would have been nuked very quickly. Glad FUBU is here.

Boredalt - 80 Dwarf Priest - Dissension

We still live in a time where homosexuality is taboo. I mean, imagine the political fallout that would happen if Obama nominated a gay person to the Supreme Court in middle-class white america. I also don't question her education which I also cited.

I'm not claiming to know why Obama nominated her, but chances are it wasn't because she has a poonanner.


Kind of like how Obama's "big government" is going to destroy us according to the same people that backed the Patriot Act and Medicare Part D (iirc). Everything's ok once someone you agree with is in office.


Np

EDIT: I've been thinking about her rather butch appearance and now that I think about it, chances are she looks like that so she's taken seriously. I imagine that if she looked like a model she wouldn't be taken seriously at all, so she has to look one of the guys to play the part. I mean, look at Albright and Reno. Butch haircuts and pantsuits.

RETIRED.
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Mayonaise[/armory]
[armory loc="US,Bleeding Hollow"]Jerkonaise[/armory]

It's must be me, then. I never agree with ANYBODY who is in office. /sigh ... I'm old.

Boredalt - 80 Dwarf Priest - Dissension